Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I think it would be a really cool idea to introduce group PvE content that revolves around contested stations.

One of the options that I can think of in relation to how this encounter system would work;

A station in 0.1-0.5 security space (a hi-sec taster station set) is announced as contested in x hours. This allows players to form fleets and head toward the station.

Upon arriving at the station the server quickly checks the ships present on grid (like WH site capital escalations, but measured against the backdrop of ships in system) x frigates per frigate, x cruisers per cruiser / hac, x battlecruisers per cruiser / hac / bs, x bs per hac / bs, etc.. redeployment of x frigs / cruisers / bcs / bs when players on grid > y.

The station becomes contested at the alloted time and an engagement commences, this engagement can be solely pve in 0.5, and PvE / PvP in 0.4 and below.

The victory stage arises when x number of npc ships have been removed from the grid in glorious destruction.

During the victory stage the station ejects random cargo; T1 loot, industrial goods, other commodities, minerals or 'new loot' - at a total ISK value not exceeding the module/bounty value of sites like DED 3/10 or 4/10 for stations in 0.5 sec systems

Low-sec stations could eject similar loot to the above, not exceeding the module / bounty value found in 6/10-8/10 DED complexes.

Failure is to lose the involved ships.

Victory is the equivalent of running a DED complex - in a group / alongside the risk of open PvP for some stations, with the possibility for a T2 BPC relevant to the faction / NPC corporation the station belongs to. In respect of standings, for those that still feel standings are important you could either have an exemption to standings decrease for the destruction of NPCs, or a single time standing decrease (equivalent to abandoning a storyline mission) 'when the chaos clears'.

The station vulnerability could be limited by time (not same station twice in 1 week) or location (not same constellation per day) or stations in system (never the only station in a system)

Yes it would be difficult to code. It would be hella fun though, imo.

It could potentially include the use of an Entosis link equipped ship and/or hacking modules.

If WiS becomes a polished and finished product applicable to the EVE Universe the concept could also include a station boarding party that needs to get through the avatar based map to reach the cargo container controls with a hacking module.

If the risk of a supercapital fleet is too immense it's worth considering that the station would be in a contested phase, and that the contested station is announced ahead of time making an instant PvP beacon in low-sec sufficient to counterbalance the deployment of capital / supercapital fleets.

1000 pilots turning up for the equivalent of a DED site in terms of value would not be a saturation of ISK, it would change the dynamic of the encounter, even 100 ships in low-sec means a lot of pipeline activity and a high likelihood of PvP in the surrounding area (for the equivalent ISK value of a DED Complex).

The station would be able to survive the contested phase if no players aggress the grid. In this circumstance no loot is ejected.
The station would survive the contested phase if it leaves it's vulnerability window (if vulnerable for 1 hour the context can be that NPC agents aboard the station need to eject the cargo / need the grid clearing to bother).
In the WiS concept the NPC boarding party can fail alone or can defeat the player boarding party or an option to clear the map eject the cargo / clear the map defend the cargo.

It might be unachievable, it might be worth discussing, it may one day be worth implementing.

Thoughts?

hmmm, now mix it in with FW, or just plain old corp to corp rivalry and it would be fun an maybe immersive or at least start letting players get more involved in the RP side of things by interacting in things we normally just read about as lore.

A long time ago some if us thought up an idea for rogue drone incursions that would "infect" more systems the longer it too to clear them out. They also would start to disable different things from destroying asteroid belts to shutting down stations and replaced all signatures with drone sigs.

When Project Legion comes out, we could have boarding action as a line of attack: launch boarding pods at a target so your marines can stomp through the station, shoot things, and take it back. Or write it off as a lost cause, rig it to blow, and leave. It could definitely make lower hisec more interesting, but 0.9+ shouldn't have this problem ever. With the new starbases, this could be done against player-owned targets as well: you would have a list of possible objectives on the starbase worth attacking: all the component slots would be targets, and so would core components like shields, power, computers, life support, and positional controls in case the invading marines wanted to drop the starbase on the moon it was orbiting.

This is why I think it's reasonable to limit the amount of time and loot that could possibly be obtained by groups running 'contested stations'.

Incursions were meta-gamed into near permanent features avoiding the incursion ending spawn at the end, and for a while they were left untouched in some areas while people learned the encounters.

With a contested station, even NPC Null stations, there is the opportunity for a timed encounter like the sov vulnerability window. That way there would be no faucet.

If it became comparable to a DED complex in loot the loot is variable, like the Sleeper Cache sites but looting NPC stations instead of randomly generated deadspace pockets instead.

The underlying principle is the same the objective makes it combat focused.

It also creates a path to any further Project Legion developments instead of leaving ship vs ship in space by attaching the invading ships to the moorings to make them invulnerable.