These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

PvE: The anti-social sport... and how to make it a team event in null.

Author
Soridar Ravencroft
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-01-06 12:26:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Soridar Ravencroft
While Coalitions and Alliances have plenty of group content when they are marauding and pillaging, but during those needed breaks between wars and skirmishes, they have to "rat" or some such to recover from losses or expand our personal fleet selections. This period is often marked by pilots going insane from monotonous hours of killing red +'s. This insanity can be partially helped by mundane conversation that slowly grows into the same topics covered over and over.


The solution to this mental illness causing issue is squad based sites, needing 5-7 pilots of avg skill to complete, or maybe even some larger. These sites would work best if linked to outposts (yes player made outposts). This could even be linked to the new Sov mechanics that are being thought over. The idea stems from incursions and how they can be great fun but irregular at best.

They would have a payout based on null equivalent sites (pilots needed * payout of a Haven) and then some kind of LP (possibly a Sov style currency that fits in with local type moduals or ship skins). The reward needs to be such that the incentives are worth the time and effort of forming squads and not sub-par to running solo.

The fact that this can be used as an index for Sov and even up gradable via Sov levels would make this a very functional way to instate this feature, increase small gang level PvE, and provide a much needed option in null where there is very little team PvE to enjoy.

The added benefit of this is it will also offer low skilled members to join in with higher skilled players, learn about squad play, and make much needed ISK so they can then participate more in the Sov warfare. This would make null a more friendly place for the new players who want to join Sov warfare but can't risk the losses inherent to the lifestyle.

Some key thoughts on these types of sites:

  • gated
  • limited ship types
  • sites that need specialist ships (hacking, *jamming*, logi, stealth, or speed)
  • a secondary payout system revolving around your local area
  • sites are spawned "mission" style so that you have to move around your local area
  • sites are linked to Sov
  • site types can be chosen, not the mission exactly, but the type
  • level of mission dictates number of pilots needed, possibly 5, 10 and 20 pilot missions


Thoughts on payouts:

  • payout options are items that have value
  • ship skins, local moduals or even better would be non-local moduals, like an option for armor in shield areas and vice vera
  • items like skillbooks and BPCs (not BPOs)
  • and most importantly the secondary payout system is redeemed locally


Yes some of these ideas are possibly a bit of a stretch, but hey never hurts to try!
Death Killer21
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#2 - 2015-01-06 12:29:37 UTC
+1 This idea. THis could also be tied into null sec sov - The more of these missions you run the 'index' level of the system goes up. So instead of having to rat to increase the index, you run these 'missions' if you may.

Death killer21

Caldari and amarr Mission service.  Contact me for more info

Lugh Crow-Slave
#3 - 2015-01-06 12:32:08 UTC
so me and my alts just run one site at a time rather than 5........


if you want more content between wars red some of your blues for the luz and have at it
Soridar Ravencroft
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2015-01-06 12:36:27 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
so me and my alts just run one site at a time rather than 5........


if you want more content between wars red some of your blues for the luz and have at it



honestly that is part of why i thought of having "special requirements" in these, to limit the multiboxing. yes some might be able to do it, but less than the amount who run 5-10 sites at once

as for turning blues red, most the pilots who will benefit from these sites have little to no say in that level of diplo
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2015-01-06 12:58:01 UTC
Buuut... If I do those sites over and over again, wouldn't it be the same monotonous grind as before? even more boring since NPC's are all super predivtasble?

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.

Ratchet Conway
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2015-01-06 13:14:38 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
so me and my alts just run one site at a time rather than 5........


if you want more content between wars red some of your blues for the luz and have at it



Biggest troll comment in eve. Even though it's allowed, it doesn't mean the game is designed around it, if it were ISBOXER would be part of the standard interface.

To the OP: You really have several ideas in this post, so they should be addressed independently. Please excuse me if I miss one, was too lazy to dual window your post and my response.

- I like the idea of PC Corp LP, but only for corp skins or other vanity paraphernalia (if ever developed). If MODs are to be sold for LP, then they should be linked to existing industry/loot--i.e. real mods/ships have to be donated to the program to keep stock up for sale. (1/2 support)

- I like the idea of linking them to corp/sov and the idea of being able to upgrade them if only to create another sink in the game. That said, my personal opinion is that they are linked explicitly to corp/sov with no high sec or NPC equivalent. I'd also add-since this is a sink- that they require an isk upkeep to maintain upgraded levels rather than SOV level. (+1 with comments)

- On the "mission style" payouts for "completing the sites" as I understand you. I'm unsure how this would help the game at all. My thinking is that the profit would come from the any drops on the site and really the more it's run between upkeep -the more profit. This might seem like it detracts from your objective, but this allows for the team level critical thinking to become second nature and muscle memory. --A distraction from the monotonous is really the heart of the matter/ not the rewards. (-1)


Feel free to correct me if I'm misunderstanding current mechanics or your suggestion.


Soridar Ravencroft
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-01-06 13:20:28 UTC
Ratchet Conway wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
so me and my alts just run one site at a time rather than 5........


if you want more content between wars red some of your blues for the luz and have at it



Biggest troll comment in eve. Even though it's allowed, it doesn't mean the game is designed around it, if it were ISBOXER would be part of the standard interface.

To the OP: You really have several ideas in this post, so they should be addressed independently. Please excuse me if I miss one, was too lazy to dual window your post and my response.

- I like the idea of PC Corp LP, but only for corp skins or other vanity paraphernalia (if ever developed). If MODs are to be sold for LP, then they should be linked to existing industry/loot--i.e. real mods/ships have to be donated to the program to keep stock up for sale. (1/2 support)

- I like the idea of linking them to corp/sov and the idea of being able to upgrade them if only to create another sink in the game. That said, my personal opinion is that they are linked explicitly to corp/sov with no high sec or NPC equivalent. I'd also add-since this is a sink- that they require an isk upkeep to maintain upgraded levels rather than SOV level. (+1 with comments)

- On the "mission style" payouts for "completing the sites" as I understand you. I'm unsure how this would help the game at all. My thinking is that the profit would come from the any drops on the site and really the more it's run between upkeep -the more profit. This might seem like it detracts from your objective, but this allows for the team level critical thinking to become second nature and muscle memory. --A distraction from the monotonous is really the heart of the matter/ not the rewards. (-1)


Feel free to correct me if I'm misunderstanding current mechanics or your suggestion.




You get the basics of the idea, as for the payouts and such, I only put out options which might get attention. Having the sights have decent drops would negate the need for LP based mods and such, but this also increases issues as for who gets them. Where as if you can save and buy them, with a cost based on a slightly lesser rate than the avg drop rate (to cover randomness and the fact you can select what you want). So either idea is valid, just the buying option removes conflicts.
Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2015-01-06 13:52:44 UTC
it would be nice if PVE was more engaging, right now I just see it as mining with guns. And I know simple changes could break, they way a lot people make the Iskies in this game,

Burner missions are a few steps in the right direction. I think PVE would be a lot cooler with a hand full of ships in each room that are every bit as good as player built ships.

they have boosters, RRs, webs, nuets, scrams, and jams but are also susceptible to all of these.
Soridar Ravencroft
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2015-01-06 14:10:21 UTC
Tusker Crazinski wrote:
it would be nice if PVE was more engaging, right now I just see it as mining with guns. And I know simple changes could break, they way a lot people make the Iskies in this game,

Burner missions are a few steps in the right direction. I think PVE would be a lot cooler with a hand full of ships in each room that are every bit as good as player built ships.

they have boosters, RRs, webs, nuets, scrams, and jams but are also susceptible to all of these.



That is exactly what I was meaning by needing special ships, to counter reps or hack ECM towers or a number of things that could make for engaging game play, and also fill the needed ISKies we want.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#10 - 2015-01-06 15:12:12 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Tusker Crazinski wrote:
it would be nice if PVE was more engaging, right now I just see it as mining with guns. And I know simple changes could break, they way a lot people make the Iskies in this game,

Burner missions are a few steps in the right direction. I think PVE would be a lot cooler with a hand full of ships in each room that are every bit as good as player built ships.

they have boosters, RRs, webs, nuets, scrams, and jams but are also susceptible to all of these.


Yes, it would be nice, but Burner missions suck: they require stupid, specialized fits that teach nothing useful in game. They could have been so much better. The idea of a few more powerful NPC's is better than hordes of weak ones. Incursions are a much better model, in my opinion. If there were Incursion missions where players could run an Incursion-type site on call, that would be a pretty good way to go.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Soridar Ravencroft
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2015-01-06 16:31:18 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Tusker Crazinski wrote:
it would be nice if PVE was more engaging, right now I just see it as mining with guns. And I know simple changes could break, they way a lot people make the Iskies in this game,

Burner missions are a few steps in the right direction. I think PVE would be a lot cooler with a hand full of ships in each room that are every bit as good as player built ships.

they have boosters, RRs, webs, nuets, scrams, and jams but are also susceptible to all of these.


Yes, it would be nice, but Burner missions suck: they require stupid, specialized fits that teach nothing useful in game. They could have been so much better. The idea of a few more powerful NPC's is better than hordes of weak ones. Incursions are a much better model, in my opinion. If there were Incursion missions where players could run an Incursion-type site on call, that would be a pretty good way to go.



Actually it was incursions that fostered this idea. The level of challenge, the need for more than 1 ship type and need for team work. To that you include a Sov mechanic, some interesting secondary payouts and on demand access through mission/agent system and you end up with something that enhances the game, builds more comradery and allows for something more than the isolationist ratting that goes on now. Honestly with some decent skills anyone in null can rat solo, and do so in a mostly AFK way. How is it fun to turn circles for hours looking at the same 5-6 sites. With this you have more options, better challenge and some actual reason to be social outside of PvP fleets and incursion fleets.
Bob Maths
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2015-01-06 16:44:31 UTC
harder NPCs that use genuine tactics expected in the world of space navy combat?
Ratchet Conway
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-01-07 11:29:07 UTC
Bob Maths wrote:
harder NPCs that use genuine tactics expected in the world of space navy combat?


Read this question last night, and again today..... I still don't understand it. Care to elaborate?

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2015-01-07 12:01:26 UTC
Aren't you basically just describing incursions?
Soridar Ravencroft
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2015-01-07 14:18:21 UTC
Incursions are what spawned the idea, yes. The thought here is that you have something like incursions, in difficulty and in the need for more than a single pilot. The major differences are not having to travel or wait for them to spawn close. Also you don't get near the same reward levels, in ISK, LP or BPCs.

The reason for having this is to allow for more team game play in the PvE arena. This would offer a legit way to for small gangs and to hopefully fight rats that offer a much higher challenge then what we see today.
Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2015-01-07 18:57:32 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Tusker Crazinski wrote:
it would be nice if PVE was more engaging, right now I just see it as mining with guns. And I know simple changes could break, they way a lot people make the Iskies in this game,

Burner missions are a few steps in the right direction. I think PVE would be a lot cooler with a hand full of ships in each room that are every bit as good as player built ships.

they have boosters, RRs, webs, nuets, scrams, and jams but are also susceptible to all of these.


Yes, it would be nice, but Burner missions suck: they require stupid, specialized fits that teach nothing useful in game. They could have been so much better. The idea of a few more powerful NPC's is better than hordes of weak ones. Incursions are a much better model, in my opinion. If there were Incursion missions where players could run an Incursion-type site on call, that would be a pretty good way to go.


at least the burners were a bit more engaging loading grid onto a hundred "baddies" and not have but a single concern of a failmail.

I mean really It's mining with guns.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#17 - 2015-01-07 19:54:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
FT Diomedes wrote:
If there were Incursion missions where players could run an Incursion-type site on call, that would be a pretty good way to go.

My thoughts exactly. Maybe mess with how incursions work in null. they dont shut down systems but they are a constant threat in every 0.0 constellation, always available for a willing group.
Lienzo
Amanuensis
#18 - 2015-01-08 23:32:53 UTC
I sort of assumed I needed a gang to run most of those signatures in null, especially those 10/10 DED complexes with the expedition and the X-Type loot, or most of the sites in WH space.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#19 - 2015-01-09 00:02:52 UTC
Lienzo wrote:
I sort of assumed I needed a gang to run most of those signatures in null, especially those 10/10 DED complexes with the expedition and the X-Type loot, or most of the sites in WH space.


Guristas and Serpentis 10/10's are easy to solo. Some of the Blood Raider complexes are somewhat challenging.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Soridar Ravencroft
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-01-09 09:38:49 UTC
Lienzo wrote:
I sort of assumed I needed a gang to run most of those signatures in null, especially those 10/10 DED complexes with the expedition and the X-Type loot, or most of the sites in WH space.


Most of the 10/10's and for that matter basically anything w/o a ton of nuets or Lv 5s are solo able by ships that take maybe 9 months max to train. Even the sites with heavy neuts can be solo'd with a bit of skill and trial and error.