These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Recurring Opportunities coming soon

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
johnhoward
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#461 - 2016-04-09 04:39:21 UTC
The whole reason I have remained subbed to this game for so long is precisely because I can play when I want to without missing out on skill point progression.

This change will substantially alter the equation and as many have said many people will find themselves compelled to log in. You already have the money from my subscription, for the love of god do not suck my time by making me mindless log in every character as well.

By all means offer SP as a reward for completing the newbean quests (or for characters with say less than 5M sp) but for goodness sake do not turn the game i love into space WoW any further.
Tesla Bismarck
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#462 - 2016-04-09 04:40:38 UTC
This is so stupid, every single alt that has a specific task and is UNABLE to kill a rat without significant gameplay interruption will greatly suffer. This kills immersion and sandbox and EVE ONLINE for me at least...

Scouting in a C6 with a ship that has to stay undiscovered for days, to metagame a certain alliance... how would this be any help for this char in a ship that would be unable to kill a rat in this C6 or hop out and kill a belt rat and maybe be seen on dscan for a very short time during this... this is beyong stupid and

DOES NOT FIT WITH THE SANDBOX THEME!
beakerax
Pator Tech School
#463 - 2016-04-09 04:43:44 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
The "answer" to the whole thread should be "sorry, don't know what we were thinking, please forget we ever mentioned it". Your reply sounds precisely like "we're going to do it regardless so we're preparing soothing statements".

CCP Rise wrote:
The blog sparked a really great discussion in the EVE community. We decided to be fairly hands off and see where it would lead without us trying to persuade anyone. We weren’t sure exactly what to expect but it quickly became clear that many of you were able to see the potential benefits and that you’re also ready for some big changes in EVE, especially when they might help bring in newer players or give you more freedom with your own characters.
Yoko Andrard
WH0RE SQUAD
#464 - 2016-04-09 04:45:27 UTC
Really bad idea, we wont playing in another korean mmo
Bobb Bobbington
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#465 - 2016-04-09 04:48:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Bobb Bobbington
Hey, CCP Rise. Yes, you. I know you're going to be reading all of these. You said you would. You'll get all your PR responses ready for tomorrow. Etc etc. Let's be honest here. Your minds were already decided before you posted this, and only dropping sub numbers could stop it. But look. This is what I think you should do. Go around the office, show this post or just ask them...

Is this really what you want Eve to become?

This is a signature.

It has a 25m signature.

No it's not a cosmic signature.

Probably.

Btw my corp's recruiting.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#466 - 2016-04-09 05:01:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:
Having active and passive SP worked in Dust.

It worked in Dust because the game was built from the ground up with that system in mind and because it had a single activity that fed a single progression tree and a single, very different, passive scheme.

It cannot be implanted post-fact in a freeform sandbox such as EVE. In order for it to work in EVE, it must not be tied to a single activity. Indeed, it must not be tied to any activity at all. It must be properly balanced against the full range and every mode of passive SP acquisition. It must actually encourage the pre-existing gameplay. In other words, it must be none of the things suggested by this proposal to the point where it is wholly disconnected from SP altogether — that scheme is better served by simply increasing the training speed, if that's what they're after (it isn't).

Retrofitting a wholly incompatible progression mechanic from an unrelated game — and an entirely different game genre to boot — is so massively unintelligent and contrary to anything even remotely resembling coherent game design that it beggars belief.
Cara Forelli
State War Academy
Caldari State
#467 - 2016-04-09 05:04:42 UTC
SP for shooting other players or riot

Want to talk? Join my channel in game: House Forelli

Titan's Lament
Harkin Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#468 - 2016-04-09 05:05:49 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:
Having active and passive SP worked in Dust.

It worked in Dust because the game was built from the ground up with that system in mind and because it had a single activity that fed a single progression tree and a single, very different, passive scheme.

It cannot be implanted post-fact in a freeform sandbox such as EVE. In order for it to work in EVE, it must not be tied to a single activity. Indeed, it must not be tied to any activity at all. It must be properly balanced against the full range and every mode of passive SP acquisition. It must actually encourage the pre-existing gameplay. In other words, it must be none of the things suggested by this proposal to the point where it is wholly disconnected from SP altogether — that scheme is better served by simply increasing the training speed, if that's what they're after (it isn't).

Retrofitting a wholly incompatible progression mechanic from an unrelated game — and an entirely different game genre to boot — is so massively unintelligent and contrary to anything even remotely resembling coherent game design that it beggars belief.



Jesus, Tippia. You're on fire.
Helga Chelien
Doomheim
#469 - 2016-04-09 05:08:54 UTC
Very good idea.

Не надо расстраиваться, если вас кто-то обидел. Расстроенным хорошую месть не придумаешь.
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#470 - 2016-04-09 05:09:00 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:
Having active and passive SP worked in Dust.

It worked in Dust because the game was built from the ground up with that system in mind and because it had a single activity that fed a single progression tree and a single, very different, passive scheme.

It cannot be implanted post-fact in a freeform sandbox such as EVE. In order for it to work in EVE, it must not be tied to a single activity. Indeed, it must not be tied to any activity at all. It must be properly balanced against the full range and every mode of passive SP acquisition. It must actually encourage the pre-existing gameplay. In other words, it must be none of the things suggested by this proposal to the point where it is wholly disconnected from SP altogether — that scheme is better served by simply increasing the training speed, if that's what they're after (it isn't).

Retrofitting a wholly incompatible progression mechanic from an unrelated game — and an entirely different game genre to boot — is so massively unintelligent and contrary to anything even remotely resembling coherent game design that it beggars belief.


Well said and I would say it didn't work in Dust because Dust was a failure.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Furikanzan Chent-Shi
Mineski Infinity
Pandemic Horde
#471 - 2016-04-09 05:14:08 UTC
The problem that eve faces is the lack of new blood coming into the game. I have tried getting friends into the game and almost all of them never stuck around. This "Dailies" thing could help if the rewards were in ISK instead. Many new players are extremely risk averse. The concept of losing in eve is much more serious compared to many other MMOs. Lets say the daily takes about 10 minutes to complete for a brand new player and he gets about 8 mil to 10 mil. He is now more inclined to use that ISK to PVP. He could also maybe use the ISK to buy a new missioning ship if he enjoys doing missioning, even mining ships could work.

The use of dailies can create the feel of progress for a newer player. Back when I was a new player it took days, weeks and even months to feel like I'm progressing in the game. If we can reduce the burden of initial capital procurement for new players, they might actually stick around.

An even better idea I feel would be to let players choose between the 8 mil isk reward or the 10k SP reward. Newer players can tech up faster of they feel like it or get some ISK and PVP with it. The only way to keep alive for another decade is to get the new blood it desperately needs. The current players are already invested into the game and there are people who quit over time, the only way a game can sustain itself is to get more people interested and invested.
Cariq
EVE University
Ivy League
#472 - 2016-04-09 05:15:25 UTC
I don't think this is a good idea. Perhaps some fixed but exhaustible bonus for the Opportunities/'tutorial' makes sense, like others have proposed, could work...but I really enjoy not feeling like I have to do something in EVE to keep up. I like that when I go on vacation I don't feel like I've fallen behind at all, purely passive SP is really unique to EVE and daily quests seem rather alien to it.

I also don't understand why, in a sandbox, you'd want to tie it to ratting specifically.

Why is this necessary? Is this trying to increase the overall level of SP in the game, or get SP to ratters?
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#473 - 2016-04-09 05:20:00 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
I'm not sure how Logging in to shoot a rat then logging back out because there's still nothing to do is going to create content in any way whatsoever.

Shooting NPCs doesn't promote player interaction in any way and player interaction is what creates content.


The could set it at more rats in a row for example. The real problem isn't there. The real issue is everybody seeing it as mandatory because they would cry themselves to sleep if they ever missed out on the potentital of 10k SP. This mean that if it is designed to help newbie get to train something faster, it's completely broken because they are the one with the most chance to "miss out" on it because they don't know yet how much of a deal those 10k SP/day are.

If they really want to to help newbie, then they should really target newbie plain and simple. Making stuff available to everyone in EVE just make sure everyone profit from it except those damn newbies because they might not even know it's there. Make them train flat out faster for a period of time if need be. Putting some SP across some hurdle only mean vets will do it because it's trivial for them to do it anyway while the newbie actually have to make sure they never miss out if they ever want to just break even with it and potentially not get even further behind in the "SP race" they see when they can't fly much of what vets can.



I would have absolutely no problem with CCP's proposal if it only applied to characters with less than 5m SP. I mean, except for the fact that it would be encouraging new players to engage in pointless, boring tasks every day.

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

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#474 - 2016-04-09 05:26:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
Well said and I would say it didn't work in Dust because Dust was a failure.

There's that too, but I wouldn't place the failure at the feet of the progression system. Well… not entirely, at least.

Cariq wrote:
I also don't understand why, in a sandbox, you'd want to tie it to ratting specifically.

Why is this necessary? Is this trying to increase the overall level of SP in the game, or get SP to ratters?

• Because their most critical stat for attracting investors is the appearance of lots of active players.
• Because ratting, in its various forms, is an activity that probably involves the most number of players, making it an easy target market.
• And because offering a 20–30% boost in SP acquisition is such an insanely good hook that no-one in their right mind will ignore it.

Large target market + irresistible bait → lots of takers → inflated activity numbers → appearance of healthy customer base → easier investment sales pitch. Never mind that something as peculiar and strange to EVE as a large-scale conflict very recently pushed the PCUs into the 40k:s for the first time in almost a year, demonstrating neatly that bribery isn't necessary to give rise to that appearance.
Aioi Yukko
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#475 - 2016-04-09 05:28:37 UTC
This is how eve dies.

TEST Damage Control Team of Forum Warrior.
Mr Mac
Dark Goliath
#476 - 2016-04-09 05:38:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mac
Daily/Weekly - Player will decide to do or do not.
SP reward - Please no. EVE is unique, keep "level up" mechanism as is. Skill injector has ruined the game. Enough.
Dave Stark
#477 - 2016-04-09 05:42:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
CCP Rise wrote:
The version of the feature we are planning to deploy first will be a simple 10,000 skill point reward that a character will receive the first time they kill an NPC ship every 22 hours. The skillpoints will go into your unallocated pool to be used however you like.


here's a long, but not complete, list of issues with this idea.

the reward itself:
there's no way to obtain SP other than training, which means there's no active way to obtain SP. this means if i miss a daily reward, that reward is lost to me forever. were the reward in isk, it wouldn't be much of an issue - i could just grind a bit more isk tomorrow. i can't just "grind a bit more sp" tomorrow.
you could argue injectors - to which i say, why do veterans get penalised more for missing a day compared to the rest? that's not only a kick in the teeth of missing your daily reward, you're then being kicked while you're down due to the diminishing returns on skill injectors.

suggestion:
change the reward to something that is otherwise obtainable by regular activity. give us some isk, some lp, some minerals, some meta modules, a blueprint copy - otherwise unobtainable rewards create an issue whereby "missed" days set you back and there is no way to recover, and that is bad.


the timeframe:
daily is an issue in itself. if you miss a day, you're set back. if you can't play every day, you're instantly at a 'disadvantage'. this makes it feel like you're being penalised for having a life, rather than rewarded for logging in to engage with the game.

suggestion:
increase the timeframe, and increase the task, and increase the reward. (bad reward aside) 70k sp, for killing 7 ships, every week. effort is the same, reward is the same, and nobody gets shafted for having to spend sunday at the in-laws, or with a sick child, or doing the groceries, or overtime at work.


the reset timer:
22hrs may sound pretty nice "you can do it once a day, and because it's not 24hrs there's not that creep as it gets later and later each day" however, you get home from work late one day and that'll **** your schedule for the next few days as you scramble to use that 2hr window to bring the reset timer back to a more "manageable" position (eg ready for you when you get home at 5:30). alternatively, you end up missing a day - already covered why that's bad.

suggestion:
create a uniform reset timer so it doesn't matter when you do your daily task, downtime is always a good time to reset things. this way i don't have to rush home from work, or mess up my weekend to keep the reset timer at ~5pm so it's not screwing my weekday schedule etc.


i'm sure there are more issues but those are the big 3, i feel. the idea itself isn't terrible, but the way you've chosen to implement it has a LOT of room for improvement.

edit: overall, the biggest issue that needs addressing most urgently is that in it's current iteration it's a penalty for not logging in, rather than a reward for logging in.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#478 - 2016-04-09 05:51:41 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
Well said and I would say it didn't work in Dust because Dust was a failure.

There's that too, but I wouldn't place the failure at the feet of the progression system. Well… not entirely, at least.

Cariq wrote:
I also don't understand why, in a sandbox, you'd want to tie it to ratting specifically.

Why is this necessary? Is this trying to increase the overall level of SP in the game, or get SP to ratters?

• Because their most critical stat for attracting investors is the appearance of lots of active players.
• Because ratting, in its various forms, is an activity that probably involves the most number of players, making it an easy target market.
• And because offering a 20–30% boost in SP acquisition is such an insanely good hook that no-one in their right mind will ignore it.

Large target market + irresistible bait → lots of takers → inflated activity numbers → appearance of healthy customer base → easier investment sales pitch. Never mind that something as peculiar and strange to EVE as a large-scale conflict very recently pushed the PCUs into the 40k:s for the first time in almost a year, demonstrating neatly that bribery isn't necessary to give rise to that appearance.


Except the current war won't last an eternity and everyone knows that including CCP. A spike in logins is useless. You need long term stuff. This war will maybe last a few months and then die out with either one side dead or stopping logging for various reasons. If large wars were not rare, they would not cause spikes like this.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#479 - 2016-04-09 05:57:51 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Except the current war won't last an eternity and everyone knows that including CCP. A spike in logins is useless. You need long term stuff.
Bribing people to do a dull grind is as short-term a solution as they come.
Bringing conflict back into the game is not.
Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
#480 - 2016-04-09 06:16:23 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:
Having active and passive SP worked in Dust.

It worked in Dust because the game was built from the ground up with that system in mind and because it had a single activity that fed a single progression tree and a single, very different, passive scheme.

It cannot be implanted post-fact in a freeform sandbox such as EVE. In order for it to work in EVE, it must not be tied to a single activity. Indeed, it must not be tied to any activity at all. It must be properly balanced against the full range and every mode of passive SP acquisition. It must actually encourage the pre-existing gameplay. In other words, it must be none of the things suggested by this proposal to the point where it is wholly disconnected from SP altogether — that scheme is better served by simply increasing the training speed, if that's what they're after (it isn't).

Retrofitting a wholly incompatible progression mechanic from an unrelated game — and an entirely different game genre to boot — is so massively unintelligent and contrary to anything even remotely resembling coherent game design that it beggars belief.

The introduction of extractors/injectors changes that paradigm significantly. SP acquisition is a production industry now. You're not forced to to play the SP production/harvesting game to benefit from it. Do activities you normally do to earn ISK and purchase SP on the market--use it, resell it, gift it, etc.

Passive SP is still available to you. The proposed and existing active sources of SP aren't placed behind inaccessible barriers. Again, skillpoints, don't determine player skill. That point has been beaten to death with the injector discussions.

Yes, the 'evolution' of the tribute system proposal to shoot one NPC every 22 hours is significantly underwhelming, but it's an interaction driver nonetheless. Awarding SP to some interaction driver activities isn't going to kill the sandbox.

'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4