Player Features and Ideas Discussion

1. The problem here tracks back to a smaller corp not having enough members to defend with.
I doubt either of us would suggest that the larger corp is likely to value ISK over player time, regarding such campaigns.
They often have ship replacement programs already.
It should be worth noting, that both sides would have this equally available to them.
One side having more members is not going to change because of this.

2. Your friend sounds awesome. Such an accomplishment makes a great story to inspire with.
That being said, this sounds like an exception to the normal course of events.
I feel safe in saying there are good reasons why NPC ships in missions have a reputation for losing.

3. I haven't heard anything convincing that demonstrates abuse here.
I feel you can't effectively argue that players won't use this idea, then suggest they will abuse it, all while doing nothing they would not have done were the idea to not exist.

Giving players the incentive to try something new, is being accomplished by this idea that the ship and fittings won't be the price.
Their time will be.
And as I have heard spoken in the past, you did not waste your time if you enjoyed yourself.

I can think of no wiser view, when judging something like a game.

We are expecting players who already have the ISK, to invest their time.
It is foolish to suggest that they could not earn back any ISK that they lost, but that takes far more time than they would spend enjoying the experience.
They do not enjoy themselves earning the ISK itself, compared to other game aspects. They consider that every time they think about how best to spend that ISK.

This idea is aimed at the players who are willing to invest the time playing, in a meaningful way to them, but not so much the time demanded to recover losses from such.
At least, not until they get a taste for the experience, and the confidence that they can make it worth the ISK & the time both.

Yes, that must be it

You're essentially asking for upgrades to the noobship. What improvements do you think would be needed to get players to take their noobships into risky space but won't be comparable to player-built ships?

If you need stats for NPC ships, they are found here:

http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/npc_ships.php?supergroup=9&return_to=

Keep in mind that most of the ships listed are overpowered compared to player-built ships in some way, even the frigates. They have unlimited lock range, capless weapons and tank, and zero inertia, which means they warp instantly. So if you're listing statistics, you'd need to list hislots, midslots, lowslots, sensor strength, lock range, inertia, mass, cpu, powergrid, armor, shield, hull, shield recharge time, capacitor recharge time, capacitor capacity, cargo bay, drone bay, ship bonuses, etc.

Putting actual statistics down would help resolve all these questions about economic impact and suicide ganking.

The hole point of the current ship replacement program is to prevent you from ending up with nothing.

What I mean is, imagine losing all your ships, modules, isk, etc. If the game didn't give you a ship, then you would have no way of doing anything in the game.

Trading: Takes isk to make buy orders and complete said buy orders
Mining: Requires a ship
Stealing: Pods don't have cargo holds
Mission running: Unless it's one of the recon missions where all you have to do is move through the gates, you're SOL.


You would basically have to get a hand out.

So the game gives you a ship so you can at least start again after losing it all.


If I were to suggest anything, it would be a way to change it so I get the ship upon request instead of automatically (although I never really looked for such an option so it might be there already).

I feel secure suggesting that many of the 'overpowered' aspects exist to make these NPC ships more challenging, as the ships were probably not considered challenging enough otherwise.

Player creativeness and adaptability required, in effect, that these ships be able to cheat in this manner.

Take out the cheats.
In many cases, outright reverse them.

As an example, instead of warping instantly, twice the required time of their T1 counterparts, etc.

Make the T1 hulls seem overpowered and amazing by comparison.

Make these the Rent-A-Wrecks of the EVE universe.

gankers balance the cost of the hulls used against the possible value of the tareget. Make it free to gank and it will rise exponentially as there is no cost to the gankers. I'll repeat that...*no* cost. So nothing to balance and therefore no reason not to simply gank everything and stifle any movement in eve. As you say it is one use case, I'm sure there would be many many more.

Three levels of upgrade from each faction, many of which have secondary options.

That is a lot of ships, so let me put out guidelines rather than specific details.

The ships would be copies of the NPC ships, which were fought either for or against during player missions.
(Maybe an option to use impounded hardware?)

Each faction would have the characteristic damage type locked in, but no option for rigs.
They would also have the familiar weaknesses to their defenses.
(Popping one of these should take no more time than the NPC would expect to survive)

Ammunition would have a rate of fire penalty, but offset partially by the need to lock in specific ammo usage.
(The ships would only fire specific provided ammunition, must be obtained from the station directly)

This will need some brainstorming, and I believe adjusting during testing for balance.

As an example: overheating.
Treat all activate-able modules as suffering from overheating damage?
(Stop the damage at a certain point, and have it slowly recover, perhaps up to a point?)

The current starter frigate would remain unchanged by this.
It would defeat part of it's purpose, (as an upgrade to the pod itself), if it were diminished further.


None of the above.

Player purchased goods will remain significantly better, in every way.

That being said, I believe that the best way to generate interest by certain groups, would be to let them have a free play with inferior ships.
They know these ships are a handicap, but being free, they still offer a light ISK way to get a taste for other play styles.

After all, they won't make much meaningful progress at their level of missions. Why not try the new toy in a new way?

Ok, quick clarification here:

To me, the noobship is the racial oriented frigate you get at no cost, when you are in an outpost with just your pod.
If you are using it in another context, then my responses may be misdirected.

The noobship, obviously, is not a player purchased item normally. In my view, any presence they may hold on the market is for sheer novelty.

I am comparing the upgraded replacement vessel to it's T1 counterparts of the same size class, available on the market.
Cruiser to cruiser, BS to BS, etc.

Only when facing targets of the same size class as the replacement ship.

The battleship will not out DPS a cruiser, when firing on a cruiser.

Part of the reason why players would have lower options, is that bigger is not always better.

For example, while the faction cruiser option for mission level 4, (upgrade level 3), would not be better than the player sold T1 ships, it would be better than the cruiser from mission level 3, (upgrade level 2).

The battleship from upgrade level 3 would still hit BS sized targets better than either of those cruisers, but those cruisers would hit cruiser sized targets more effectively than the BS.

This is, of course, assuming comparable player skill, and realistic levels of preparation.
(No fail-fit on the cruiser in the example)