These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Merging 3 games into 1 Input requested

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cassandra Skjem
Big Sister Exploration
#1 - 2015-01-29 14:00:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Cassandra Skjem
With continued dev costs going towards 2 games that are
currently outside of Eve development someone has mentioned
that its not Eve so not worth doing. This Topic is meant
To bring together ways to integrate those games within Eve
and New Eden in general bringing about One Universe and one
game client.

This includes Dust/Legion as well as Valkyrie (which I know
nothing about). This isn't meant to be a critique about the ideas
but rather a place to contribute them.

Collection of Short Points:

-Suppressing Drones/NPCs Damaging Player PI
-Mixed Forces Fighting for Sov. needed to capture TCUs on ground
-Walking in stations, assasinations
-Combined NPC missions
-Contracts to remove player PI and increase Planetary PI production
by removing competition
-Recovery of drone alloys from drones roaming planetary surfaces
-New Player Market
-Harvesting PI in the shattered Wormholes where it is otherwise impossible
-Contracts for troop transport
-Capturing/Defending Stations
-Capturing Capital Ships
-Sov Warfare
-Reduced NPC POCO tax in highsec/(lowsec if it has NPC tax)
-Increased POCO yield at planets where you have both control and the POCO
-Siphoning part of a non owned POCO's Export Tax revenue.
-Increasing or decreasing the rate at which military/industrial/strategic indexes increase in nullsec
-Control rate increases in FW space if the system is by allied forces
-Decreased job installation costs when holding enough localized space
-Increasing bonus from ESS's when the area is help by freindly forces
-Hacking Data and Relic Structures

Suggestions are welcome as this is meant to draw ideas together
to allow mutual benefits for the gamers of all the games together.

Is it a tarp?
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2015-01-29 15:17:17 UTC
Yes, 16 people should be able to take out a TCU with no chance of defending it and losing your sov index.
pwlngs
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2015-01-29 16:37:59 UTC
I don't know about your specific suggestions, but I have been saying for a long time that all these games just need to be EVE.


EVE should be a Future/Sci-Fi/Space MMO, where you can be a ground soldier, a tank driver, a mech pilot, a space pilot (from fighters to titans), and go anywhere and do everything in between.

Dust/Legion should be integrated as our "walking in stations", but with shooting and not just walking.

Valkryie should be integrated into EVE as an option to pilot fighters (right out of the hangars of EVE carrier pilots), seamlessly and all in the same game/battle.

EVE should be a better, bigger game.
Cassandra Skjem
Big Sister Exploration
#4 - 2015-01-29 16:45:17 UTC
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Yes, 16 people should be able to take out a TCU with no chance of defending it and losing your sov index.

I believe this was suggested as a modification to Planetary conquest with multiple districts involved, in case you don't know that means there is warning and time to get your own mercenaries/corpies in place

Is it a tarp?
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2015-01-29 17:46:00 UTC
I say make DUST mandatory for SOV warfare, especially stations, you want to CAPTURE a station, send in the DUST teams to duke it out for control over station supplies and security, or if your too lazy, just keep pounding on the station in EVE until it explodes into space dust



pwlngs wrote:
I don't know about your specific suggestions, but I have been saying for a long time that all these games just need to be EVE.


EVE should be a Future/Sci-Fi/Space MMO, where you can be a ground soldier, a tank driver, a mech pilot, a space pilot (from fighters to titans), and go anywhere and do everything in between.

Dust/Legion should be integrated as our "walking in stations", but with shooting and not just walking.

Valkryie should be integrated into EVE as an option to pilot fighters (right out of the hangars of EVE carrier pilots), seamlessly and all in the same game/battle.

EVE should be a better, bigger game.

CCP already stated they dont really want this, because if the games are completely separate in every way except effecting % bars on eachother, its easy to cut them out entirely, or market them separately (such as DUST offering alot of ingame items for cash, they couldnt do that if it was attached to EVE)/

so regardless of whether or not we want one whole and unified Scifi Experience, CCP wants 3 separate games with only JUST enough interaction to be called "integrated" for marketing
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#6 - 2015-01-29 18:12:52 UTC
Cassandra Skjem wrote:
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Yes, 16 people should be able to take out a TCU with no chance of defending it and losing your sov index.

I believe this was suggested as a modification to Planetary conquest with multiple districts involved, in case you don't know that means there is warning and time to get your own mercenaries/corpies in place


It that sounds almost reasonable. At least I don't hide it very well when I drop (pun..) a little sarcasm here and there.

And that idea of everyone with a playstation removes everyone elses ability to do some PI stuff by playstation bunnies shooting their stuff from a position you cannot shoot back from also seems almost thought through.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Cassandra Skjem
Big Sister Exploration
#7 - 2015-01-29 18:20:48 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Cassandra Skjem wrote:
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Yes, 16 people should be able to take out a TCU with no chance of defending it and losing your sov index.

I believe this was suggested as a modification to Planetary conquest with multiple districts involved, in case you don't know that means there is warning and time to get your own mercenaries/corpies in place


It that sounds almost reasonable. At least I don't hide it very well when I drop (pun..) a little sarcasm here and there.

And that idea of everyone with a playstation removes everyone elses ability to do some PI stuff by playstation bunnies shooting their stuff from a position you cannot shoot back from also seems almost thought through.

Please read the rest of the initial post, no one is suggesting this be done on the playstation

Is it a tarp?
Cassandra Skjem
Big Sister Exploration
#8 - 2015-01-29 18:22:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Cassandra Skjem
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
I say make DUST mandatory for SOV warfare, especially stations, you want to CAPTURE a station, send in the DUST teams to duke it out for control over station supplies and security, or if your too lazy, just keep pounding on the station in EVE until it explodes into space dust



pwlngs wrote:
I don't know about your specific suggestions, but I have been saying for a long time that all these games just need to be EVE.


EVE should be a Future/Sci-Fi/Space MMO, where you can be a ground soldier, a tank driver, a mech pilot, a space pilot (from fighters to titans), and go anywhere and do everything in between.

Dust/Legion should be integrated as our "walking in stations", but with shooting and not just walking.

Valkryie should be integrated into EVE as an option to pilot fighters (right out of the hangars of EVE carrier pilots), seamlessly and all in the same game/battle.

EVE should be a better, bigger game.

CCP already stated they dont really want this, because if the games are completely separate in every way except effecting % bars on eachother, its easy to cut them out entirely, or market them separately (such as DUST offering alot of ingame items for cash, they couldnt do that if it was attached to EVE)/

so regardless of whether or not we want one whole and unified Scifi Experience, CCP wants 3 separate games with only JUST enough interaction to be called "integrated" for marketing

Can you explain why they couldn't, I have a hard time seeing it as an issue, by it I mean selling the in game items.

Is it a tarp?
pwlngs
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2015-01-29 18:25:01 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:

CCP already stated they dont really want this, because if the games are completely separate in every way except effecting % bars on eachother, its easy to cut them out entirely, or market them separately (such as DUST offering alot of ingame items for cash, they couldnt do that if it was attached to EVE)/

so regardless of whether or not we want one whole and unified Scifi Experience, CCP wants 3 separate games with only JUST enough interaction to be called "integrated" for marketing


This is despicable and disappointing.

CCP has the groundwork layed, 10+ years going, to have the best Sci Fi MMO (possibly overall game), but they "don't want to" for profits. Absolutely heart-breaking.

I've been subscribing to EVE for these 10+ years, holding out hope that it evolves into this type of game... that EVE's entire engine would eventually be updated past the warping/grid-based gameplay that was designed in 2002 or earlier. I just can't understand how the rest of EVE, and CCP, don't want that... every time I say these things, people tell me I'm an idiot and EVE should never be updated. I just can't understand you people.
pwlngs
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2015-01-29 18:29:25 UTC  |  Edited by: pwlngs
Cassandra Skjem wrote:

Can you explain why they couldn't, I have a hard time seeing it as an issue, by it I mean selling the in game items.


Also this.

They could still sell things for real money in game.

Edit: In fact, CCP, I will actually purchase several guns, and probably a mech, if you ever update EVE and make it the amazing game that it could be.... I will spend an extra $100 at least.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#11 - 2015-01-29 18:36:33 UTC
Copied over from he previous thread that got locked.

Integration should have benefits for everyone involved. Not motivated by penalties for the loser. Through attempts to create greater integration, so many DUST advocates support things that try to promote DUST by making losing a DUST match have significant penalties to the loser.

But as many people know, negative reinforcement is a really **** motivation for getting involved. If you want people to get involved in DUST, introduce benefits for controlling things through DUST/VALK, but not massive penalties other than losing control of the bonus for losing a match.

Some potentials benefits of controlling an area through DUST/Legion/Valk could include:

Reduced NPC POCO tax in highsec/(lowsec if it has NPC tax)
Increased POCO yield at planets where you have both control and the POCO
Siphoning part of a non owned POCO's Export Tax revenue.
Increasing or decreasing the rate at which military/industrial/strategic indexes increase in nullsec
Control rate increases in FW space if the system is held by allied forces
Decreased job installation costs when holding enough localized space
Increasing bonus from ESS's when the area is help by freindly forces.

Just a few examples.

But the long story short is that things like crippling PI on a loss does nothing to get EVE players actively involved in DUST other than attempting to hire defenders and pissing off EVE players. Same with all other "lose and _____ penalty" effects.

The stick is a ****** motivator, if you want EVE involvement, you show them the carrot for getting involved.
Cassandra Skjem
Big Sister Exploration
#12 - 2015-01-29 18:38:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Cassandra Skjem
Anhenka wrote:
Copied over from he previous thread that got locked.

Integration should have benefits for everyone involved. Not motivated by penalties for the loser. Through attempts to create greater integration, so many DUST advocates support things that try to promote DUST by making losing a DUST match have significant penalties to the loser.

But as many people know, negative reinforcement is a really **** motivation for getting involved. If you want people to get involved in DUST, introduce benefits for controlling things through DUST/VALK, but not massive penalties other than losing control of the bonus for losing a match.

Some potentials benefits of controlling an area through DUST/Legion/Valk could include:

Reduced NPC POCO tax in highsec/(lowsec if it has NPC tax)
Increased POCO yield at planets where you have both control and the POCO
Siphoning part of a non owned POCO's Export Tax revenue.
Increasing or decreasing the rate at which military/industrial/strategic indexes increase in nullsec
Control rate increases in FW space if the system is held by allied forces
Decreased job installation costs when holding enough localized space
Increasing bonus from ESS's when the area is help by freindly forces.

Just a few examples.

But the long story short is that things like crippling PI on a loss does nothing to get EVE players actively involved in DUST other than attempting to hire defenders and pissing off EVE players. Same with all other "lose and _____ penalty" effects.

The stick is a ****** motivator, if you want EVE involvement, you show them the carrot for getting involved.

The FW indicies currently in place are broken, much work needs to be done, if you have suggestions great, good to see you are contributing.

I noticed you stated before that youdon't do PI, as much as planets rebuild mats they seem to do so on a reduced rate for each additional pilot extracting resources. Killing off other colonies would benefit eve players sir.

Is it a tarp?
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2015-01-29 18:59:24 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Copied over from he previous thread that got locked.

Integration should have benefits for everyone involved. Not motivated by penalties for the loser. Through attempts to create greater integration, so many DUST advocates support things that try to promote DUST by making losing a DUST match have significant penalties to the loser.

But as many people know, negative reinforcement is a really **** motivation for getting involved. If you want people to get involved in DUST, introduce benefits for controlling things through DUST/VALK, but not massive penalties other than losing control of the bonus for losing a match.

Some potentials benefits of controlling an area through DUST/Legion/Valk could include:

Reduced NPC POCO tax in highsec/(lowsec if it has NPC tax)
Increased POCO yield at planets where you have both control and the POCO
Siphoning part of a non owned POCO's Export Tax revenue.
Increasing or decreasing the rate at which military/industrial/strategic indexes increase in nullsec
Control rate increases in FW space if the system is held by allied forces
Decreased job installation costs when holding enough localized space
Increasing bonus from ESS's when the area is help by freindly forces.

Just a few examples.

But the long story short is that things like crippling PI on a loss does nothing to get EVE players actively involved in DUST other than attempting to hire defenders and pissing off EVE players. Same with all other "lose and _____ penalty" effects.

The stick is a ****** motivator, if you want EVE involvement, you show them the carrot for getting involved.

by that arguement we should nerf everything into WoW


fact is, if their isnt a penalty for losing other than things being the same as they were before the bonus was introduced in the first place, then there is 0 reason for 90% of the playerbase to participate anyways.

having no "stick" waiting for the loser, and rewards for the winner, basically make the system pointless, because from the EVE perspective a loss becomes "meh" because it just means nothing permanent or at all bad actually happens, they just dont get to shave X days off whatever they were planning on doing for the full time anyways
Brutalis Furia
Hammer and Anvil Industries
#14 - 2015-01-29 19:02:48 UTC
Sov is about resources and supply lines more than just about planting your flag. That right there is an excellent theme to integrate the different games under. I think Dust should be a deciding factor in Eve Sov.

Planetary Command Centers (PCC) for corps to be fought over by Legion/Dust infantry as well as System Command Centers (SCC) at the alliance level for Eve pilots to fight over. I would have the PCCs allow automated transfers between them and SCCs automate interstellar deliveries with both needing command centers on both ends of the trip and with SCCs having a 1 hop range. A PCC on 1-GBVE V could link with a PCC on 1-GBVE VI, or with a pair of SCCs (in 1-GBVE and L8-WNE) could link with a PCC on L8-WNE I.


The problem I keep running into with integrating Valkyrie is that there’s not a new area that a fighter can go that a eve pilot can’t. With Dust, it was obvious. Planetary warfare is difficult in big spaceships. But what’s something that fighters can do that other eve ships can’t? The options are limited. Subsystems are the obvious choice, but I have (and will continue to do so) wracked my brain for something more original.

One way I thought of integrating Valkyrie (admittedly not a great one though) is to have a deployable that is essentially a valkyrie specific clone vat with a bay for valkyrie drones (infinite clones, finite ships). This could be anchored within a certain range of the SCC where the valkyrie pilots would need to fight and destroy specific subsystems on the SCC before it would become vulnerable to Eve pilots.

In both these cases, Eve Sov is determined either wholly or in part by actions in Dust or Valkyrie with the supply chain for these fights being supplied through Eve (if there’s not enough clones at the PCC, you can’t spawn in defenders, and likewise with the valkyrie drones). Within eve, the fights will be over the supply lines to these conflicts.
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Unreasonable Bastards
#15 - 2015-01-29 19:16:01 UTC
I've genuinely never understood why CCP keeps making EVE-related games that aren't viable to PC gamers (their main fan base) .
Cassandra Skjem
Big Sister Exploration
#16 - 2015-01-29 19:20:59 UTC
Murkar Omaristos wrote:
I've genuinely never understood why CCP keeps making EVE-related games that aren't viable to PC gamers (their main fan base) .

The plan as far as I can tell has been to port Dust to PC after finishing fixing it.

Is it a tarp?
Juan Mileghere
The Corporate Raiders
Safety.
#17 - 2015-01-29 19:22:52 UTC
Look I used to be a DUST bunny, but not only from the EVE side is that a bad Idea but from my experience in DUST and understanding the current state of the game that's a bad idea. Legion, that thing CCP hasn't talked about for a year? Just like the Vita App for DUST? Just like World of Darkness? Wonder how that will be?

Blobbing Explained
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#18 - 2015-01-29 19:27:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Nariya Kentaya wrote:

fact is, if their isnt a penalty for losing other than things being the same as they were before the bonus was introduced in the first place, then there is 0 reason for 90% of the playerbase to participate anyways.

having no "stick" waiting for the loser, and rewards for the winner, basically make the system pointless, because from the EVE perspective a loss becomes "meh" because it just means nothing permanent or at all bad actually happens, they just dont get to shave X days off whatever they were planning on doing for the full time anyways


My statement, if you bothered to read it, was meant to apply to EVE/DUST interactions where EVE players were dependent on DUST.

EVE vs EVE interactions can be harsh and crippling, knocking someone back to 0. That's perfectly ok.

So could Dust vs Dust, and Valk vs Valk for all I care. As long as it stays inside the family.

But in order to majorly effect an EVE player in a negative way, I believe you should have to be playing EVE.

And EVE has plenty of history over fighting over beneficial effects. Moons, Poco's, good WH's, good space.. These are all things that get fought over because they make things easier for the holder.

A large stick to beat the loser is unnecessary. Natural resource conflict drivers promote EVE/DUST/VALK interactions without pissing off EVE players by introducing penalties they can do little to avoid other than hiring Dust Bunnies and hoping they win.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#19 - 2015-01-29 19:30:06 UTC
Valkyrie fights will not happen in the same 'space' as EVE fights.
That's already been stated, for a start the server architecture simply won't support it.

This doesn't mean that those fights won't be capable of influencing EVE systems though, but that's different from one game universe.
pwlngs
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2015-01-29 19:33:58 UTC  |  Edited by: pwlngs
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Valkyrie fights will not happen in the same 'space' as EVE fights.
That's already been stated, for a start the server architecture simply won't support it.

This doesn't mean that those fights won't be capable of influencing EVE systems though, but that's different from one game universe.



HERE, perfect example. They SHOULD happen in the same space. That's what we should ALL want.

CHANGE the server architecture??? How about that CCP?
123Next pageLast page