These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: A new Era of Clones

First post
Author
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#141 - 2014-12-02 22:40:08 UTC
How about this: remove the clone mechanics, but, to make death actually MEANINGFUL, when you get podded, you are back in hisec.

This idea will be loved by all the lowsec pirates...all that traffic they'd be getting...
Proddy Scun
Doomheim
#142 - 2014-12-02 22:46:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Proddy Scun
Udonor wrote:
OK I missed it. What is the NEW death penalty?





Maybe it time to eliminate the use of pods.

If pods exist only so you can BM your wreck and save your implants, I am sort of torn.

On one hand its nice to save implant ISK.

But on the other it seems CCP could say that increasing Sansha compromise of the cloning system means implants have just become another subsystem in the ship fit.


If we keep free pods & clones How about automating a true ejection system?

to include dropping a BM and taking off toward the next waypoint or a user selected BM?
BM could be set in same system or any other in EVE without messing with route. Route doesn't make sense in wh anyways.
Plofkip Arji
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#143 - 2014-12-02 22:46:36 UTC
As a new player I like the thrill of losing skill points. It's actually one of the most interesting and discussed features whenever I talk to somebody curious about EVE.

While I understand the points made in the post, I can not deny disappointment in the complete removal of death penalties ( beside losing your ship that is ), getting podded for a veteran means basically nothing, since they are capable to jump back in a brand new T2 ship as soon as they are cloned, and trying to escape in your pod is a lot less tense now.

What I would personally like to see is a temporary post death penalty, which increments based on how long you have been alive. I like the idea of a beaten up player waiting to be able to pilot his T2 again and get revenge, or a group of pirates trying to corner a penalized player even more ( I know that sounds negative, but ganking in World of Warcraft was actually what sparkled most of the player interaction, and yes I mentioned WOW on EVE forums ).

That said I am sure you will come up with something interesting, but I wish you would have pushed a more flashed out death mechanic for this patch.

P.S.
Would it be possible to see the numbers that have brought to this design decision? Stuff like how many people get podded for example?
Beledia Ilphukiir
Proffessional Experts Group
#144 - 2014-12-02 22:48:02 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Hardwire implants are a phenomenally useful tool, they provide a real benefit in combat and at a risk and price to discourage casual, illconsidered use, true risk and reward, though that phrase gets used to justify so many bad suggestions. Roll
learning implants, not so much. Crippling your learning to engage in PVP simply encourages risk evasion, the very behaviour that they should be preventing.

They really need to be seperated.

Suggestion,

1. learning implants are purchased through the life of a character, and become a permanent part of their clone contract. Just like the golden Pod.

To encourage the decision to upgrade to have a real magnitude, Upgrading to a new, better, learning implant destroys the original implant.

A tiered system with increased bonuses on all levels and no negatives is not a real decision. It's a no brainer and pointless no-choice. If you're going to go down that route, you might as well just give everyone +5 to all attrributes and delete all attribute bonuses from the game. That way you get the same end result, but new players don't have to waste time doing the learning implant grind before starting to play the game properly.

epicurus ataraxia wrote:
2. Hardwirings however including the additional functionality of genolutions, slaves etc (seperate their functionality from the learning functions in new slots), are occasionally dropped on death, for players to loot according to the loot fairy and are not replaced during rebirth and need replacing if required. Buying a slave set will now only equip slot 15-21 for example, the learning element is removed.
No intact implants should ever drop. At the minimum there needs to be a miniprofession for corpse harvesting in the hopes of recovering those implants or recovering implant components, that can be manufactured into implants. Maybe even to totally new ones, that can only be gained this way.


epicurus ataraxia wrote:
3. Seperate clone jumping from Implant switching. Clone jumping transfers the current hardwire implant fit. The clone always retains the learning implants purchased.

4. Allow the SWAPPING of implants, any item in slot 6 for example needs to be replaced by another slot 6 implant. naturally people will purchase and have multiple stocks of implants,for different roles at various locations where their clones reside.
Wouldn't this just encourage the use of cheap ass implant sets to in practice allow implant removal? Implant set swithing is definitely a nice idea, but I think there has to be a better way to do it. Sort of making your clones act like ships in this sense. You can have multiple sets of them in station and quickly switch to the one you need at the moment. Basically separate clone jumping(teleport with a long timer) from clone switching(local with a session change timer).

epicurus ataraxia wrote:
5. Allow implant fitting plans to be saved, just the same as ship fittings for fast re-equipping.


That is all.

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#145 - 2014-12-02 22:51:54 UTC
Udonor wrote:
Querns wrote:
Udonor wrote:
OK I missed it. What is the NEW death penalty?
Loss of implants and removal from the area of space you were in isn't good enough?
Implants in battle -- maybe none.
Not very likely.

I suspect that most of the players here will say that if you are not using some set of implants in battle, then you are doing it wrong.
Proddy Scun
Doomheim
#146 - 2014-12-02 22:52:35 UTC
Plofkip Arji wrote:
As a new player I like the thrill of losing skill points. It's actually one of the most interesting and discussed features whenever I talk to somebody curious about EVE.

While I understand the points made in the post, I can not deny disappointment in the complete removal of death penalties ( beside losing your ship that is ), getting podded for a veteran means basically nothing, since they are capable to jump back in a brand new T2 ship as soon as they are cloned, and trying to escape in your pod is a lot less tense now.

What I would personally like to see is a temporary post death penalty, which increments based on how long you have been alive. I like the idea of a beaten up player waiting to be able to pilot his T2 again and get revenge, or a group of pirates trying to corner a penalized player even more ( I know that sounds negative, but ganking in World of Warcraft was actually what sparkled most of the player interaction, and yes I mentioned WOW on EVE forums ).

That said I am sure you will come up with something interesting, but I wish you would have pushed a more flashed out death mechanic for this patch.

P.S.
Would it be possible to see the numbers that have brought to this design decision? Stuff like how many people get podded for example?



Still got implants loss if any are equipped.

While its true veterans often move to a jump clone equipped with less expensive combat/fitting skill oriented implants -- its still a loss they can avoid. Some of those sets are pretty expensive in absolute terms, if probably not compared to their wallet.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#147 - 2014-12-02 23:03:35 UTC
Counterpoint: keep pod deaths (other than implants) worthless so people won't target pods in fleet fights and make pilots wait for 20 minutes in 10% tidi for their self destruct timer to finish.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#148 - 2014-12-02 23:06:46 UTC
Don't forget — it's part of the lore of Eve that capsuleers have a cavalier attitude towards death, and that their deaths are fairly meaningless. Conflating skill loss to be some sort of penalty for death is just not that apt of a comparison, given how trivial it is to avoid it. This triviality still makes it eligible for removal, bear in mind.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Proddy Scun
Doomheim
#149 - 2014-12-02 23:07:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Proddy Scun
Sizeof Void wrote:
Udonor wrote:
Querns wrote:
Udonor wrote:
OK I missed it. What is the NEW death penalty?
Loss of implants and removal from the area of space you were in isn't good enough?
Implants in battle -- maybe none.
Not very likely.

I suspect that most of the players here will say that if you are not using some set of implants in battle, then you are doing it wrong.


Yes a well-chosen set of cheaper implants for combat is wise for most toons.

Implant value is often a lot less than during "safe" training times. Combat skill implants are cheap at the low end and not very cost effective or significant at the upper end. Same for fitting implants except what you are required to have is driven by your fit and/or lack of skills. Capital pilots are a frequent exception to the absolute cost of implants in combat of course.

But overall I suspect that when expecting combat only the filthy rich players equip implants worth more than their ship. That probably applies to most capital pilots too.


Bottom-line: lots of players may run around in "safe" space with a full set of +5 attribute implants or insane mining boost implants. But in potential combat situations very few veterans have that level of ISK in their head-pod. Veterans are usually pretty good at judging when those rules apply. If they fly around with huge sums in their head under all conditions then they are probably insanely rich or on PLEX to ISK as needed and those folk do not care about th implant loss issue.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#150 - 2014-12-02 23:10:33 UTC
Proddy Scun wrote:
Udonor wrote:
OK I missed it. What is the NEW death penalty?





Maybe it time to eliminate the use of pods.

If pods exist only so you can BM your wreck and save your implants, I am sort of torn.

On one hand its nice to save implant ISK.

But on the other it seems CCP could say that increasing Sansha compromise of the cloning system means implants have just become another subsystem in the ship fit.


If we keep free pods & clones How about automating a true ejection system?

to include dropping a BM and taking off toward the next waypoint or a user selected BM?
BM could be set in same system or any other in EVE without messing with route. Route doesn't make sense in wh anyways.

the biggest difference between lowsec and nullsec is in lowsec you won't get podded if you're competent and in nullsec you are toast because you're bubbled

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#151 - 2014-12-02 23:48:23 UTC
i always felt it would be a good idea to put the pod in focus when you redesign clones.

- fittable like a ship where the only allowed modules would be implants interfacing between you and the pod (reuses fitting screen)
- drugs would work like temporary modules and would be also displayed in their slots.
- clonejumps between pods in stations should not cause a huge cooldown, instead, the cooldown should be jump distance dependent.
- jumpclones would be pods and would display in your assets list as if it would be a ship

once you have a cool ingame representation of the pod you can improve on it with custom pods etc etc. "Golden pod" would be an actual pod type, not a strange implant.

a pod would come with a clone of course. Its just about how you represent it in the game.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#152 - 2014-12-02 23:50:49 UTC
Bienator II wrote:

- clonejumps between pods in stations should not cause a huge cooldown, instead, the cooldown should be jump distance dependent.


Clonejump Fatigue Pirate
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#153 - 2014-12-02 23:56:20 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Bienator II wrote:

- clonejumps between pods in stations should not cause a huge cooldown, instead, the cooldown should be jump distance dependent.


Clonejump Fatigue Pirate

not needed. we already have 24h cooldown. all i am saying is that you get less cooldown when the distance is shorter

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#154 - 2014-12-03 00:05:28 UTC
I feel people are making a mountain over a molehill here.

If you need a 30 million ISK clone, you are a high skillpoint player. Probably 30 million is utter chump change to you, but let's say it isn't - let's say you are legitimately broke and down to your last three billion because you just got scammed hard or something like that. 30 million isn't trivial if your assets are only 3b.

Even then, the cost of going on a frigate roam isn't just the 3 million frig plus the 30 million pod. It's the 100 million you'd have made if you spent the time you used roaming instead ishtar ratting, or scamming a trade/mission hub, or suicide ganking autopiloting Iterons in highsec, or trading, or hell even running highsec missions. (I'll assume, because you are broke, that you aren't doing these activities in a very efficient manner).

That 2 hour roam goes from a 33 million cost and 100m opportunity cost down to a 3m cost and 100m opportunity cost.



So my two cents is - who really cares?

If a tax on high skillpoint characters is desired (and IMO it is), reducing all insurance payouts by an amount of ISK equal to your skillpoint total would achieve the goal much better than the clone costs do.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Commissar Kate
Kesukka
#155 - 2014-12-03 00:34:51 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
i always felt it would be a good idea to put the pod in focus when you redesign clones.

- fittable like a ship where the only allowed modules would be implants interfacing between you and the pod (reuses fitting screen)
- drugs would work like temporary modules and would be also displayed in their slots.
- clonejumps between pods in stations should not cause a huge cooldown, instead, the cooldown should be jump distance dependent.
- jumpclones would be pods and would display in your assets list as if it would be a ship

once you have a cool ingame representation of the pod you can improve on it with custom pods etc etc. "Golden pod" would be an actual pod type, not a strange implant.

a pod would come with a clone of course. Its just about how you represent it in the game.


I have a strong feeling that this is sort of the route that CCP wants to take from everything they have said over the past few weeks about clones.

We will probably have to fit our capsules with 'hardwires' instead of the actual clone here in the near future. Which would also allow rapid 'refitting' of implants depending whats needed for whatever ship you are flying and negating the need of jump clones for swapping out implants.

I can't remember exactly where I saw or read it but I could have swore I saw a dev say something like this "Flying an empty clone might soon be like flying an unfitted ship." If that's true, fitting capsules seems like it could be very plausible.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#156 - 2014-12-03 00:40:40 UTC
100,000 ISK is trivial
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#157 - 2014-12-03 00:43:49 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
100,000 ISK is trivial
I crap 100,000 ISK

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#158 - 2014-12-03 00:58:31 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
100,000 ISK is trivial
I crap 100,000 ISK

Perhaps this should be raised to 100M ISK?
Rick McCormick
Doomheim
#159 - 2014-12-03 01:04:18 UTC
Im actually writing this as a character whos going to be biomassed in couple of hours.

For me paying the clone upgrade has never been issue when being podded, but it has been nasty 'must remember' issue.
Today one alt got podded and lost 100M implants and 150M ship, thats part of the game and the risk.

I really do welcome the removal of 'must remember'.

Someone mentioned the reusability of implants and it got me thinking and I realized, I have never been much to Impants, other than +3 and +4 training 'boosters'...

Personally I would get excited if impants could be plugged in and and removed.

Thoughts:
1. If EVE engineers are so clever that they can clone ppl, they can not remove implants...
2. What kind of effect would it actually have on implant market (ccp could probably simulate it?)
3. Would it make a new exciting decision making process to prepare for battle, when deciding which implants to take to battle?
4. New profession: Implant hauler - head full of expensive implants delivered to remote location.
5. Collecting implants on your station, for different purpose, nice?
6. Would you buy more implants then?

All this comes from solo-player, so I probably dont think it wide enough. Im actually in process of biomassing 2 characters (used for tradehubs). Closing 2 subscriptions and selling 5 characters. Leaving only my main and one trader. im most likely terminating 3 jump-clones from my main leaving only one with maxed training implants somewhere in hi-sec for holidays.

All this to make the experience 'being there' stronger, I have missed that with all jump-clones and alts and their jump-clones.

-Rick (r.i.p.)
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#160 - 2014-12-03 01:19:59 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Karl Hobb wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
100,000 ISK is trivial
I crap 100,000 ISK
Perhaps this should be raised to 100M ISK?
Skillpoints/10 ISK.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.