These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Project Nova, Fozzie Sov and capital ship engagements.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Upu Crendraven
Le DP
#1 - 2016-05-04 05:49:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Upu Crendraven
In a nut-shell, FPS warriors fight to defend or degrade module/ship/sov stats by responding to Eve pings of Fozzie Sov and capital ship engagements...

I've posted on the idea of making FPS matter in other forums when perhaps I should've posted here... My bad... Could they be merged...?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6472581

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6471627#post6471627

Cheers o7
Lugh Crow-Slave
#2 - 2016-05-04 06:50:50 UTC
Said it before I'll say it again ccp is bad at doing such things the last thing we want is them half assing a merger then getting ADD and abandoning it fir something else

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2016-05-04 08:04:45 UTC
Things in EVE should only be affected by things in EVE. I should not have to play an entirely different game to save my caps.
Upu Crendraven
Le DP
#4 - 2016-05-04 12:48:31 UTC
Degradation/nerfing could be capped at 5% just to create an element of interaction and linkage between the two. More symbolic though potentially decisive in close calls and it could create some interesting meta gaming/recruitment-drives.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#5 - 2016-05-04 13:41:28 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Things in EVE should only be affected by things in EVE. I should not have to play an entirely different game to save my caps.

I am in complete agreement with this so -1 to your ideas.
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2016-05-04 13:45:42 UTC
I dislike both ideas linked very very much. Why would I have to depend on a fps game?

If CCP did this, they'd be forcing fps down people's throats.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#7 - 2016-05-04 14:35:22 UTC
=.= it wouldn't be the first thing they forced us to swallow for their bottom line

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Upu Crendraven
Le DP
#8 - 2016-05-04 17:23:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Upu Crendraven
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
=.= it wouldn't be the first thing they forced us to swallow for their bottom line


Would a possible max of 5% nerf to a stat if hostile fps fighters had 99% control of their fps shooter grid truly be too much to bare?! Come on guys, open your minds to open the draw and appeal to Eve ^^. Fps players eventually graduate to Eve style fames and it's much better we guide this than not. Levels of influence are open to fine tuning. Wouldn't you like to garner or foster a a potential 5% edge over an opponent or ruin an attackers plans to have such...?

*fames = games and Eve-style = MMO

P.s. My computer blue screened this month so I'm unable to properly edit/reply-to things until...
Upu Crendraven
Le DP
#9 - 2016-05-04 17:41:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Upu Crendraven
Danika Princip wrote:
Things in EVE should only be affected by things in EVE. I should not have to play an entirely different game to save my caps.


And yet fozzie sov dictates that you have to accept the actions of other players for the robustness of your space. Would making fps marginally relevant be so damaging or a simple continuation of a theme?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#10 - 2016-05-04 20:00:28 UTC
Upu Crendraven wrote:

And yet fozzie sov dictates that you have to accept the actions of other players for the robustness of your space. Would making fps marginally relevant be so damaging or a simple continuation of a theme?

Yes it would be that damaging.
Linked effects is fine, i.e. sov/fw being impacted by ground control. Because it doesn't directly impact on ships in space (or other things individual players own). If it directly impacts on individual players ownership of things, it needs to be directly contestable inside EVE.
Nova is by all appearances going to be less linked to EVE than Dust was, not more linked, and much like they are showing in EVE right now they have failed to learn important lessons from previous events and updates, the Nova preview looked like they learnt the wrong lessons from Dust as to what is good and what is bad.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#11 - 2016-05-04 21:27:11 UTC
As someone who enjoys DUST I would not mind seeing the two integrated in some fashion. I doubt it would be effective to have the game integrated for small fleet fights to include Nova players simply because of the mechanics involved to organize the Nova players to get into the engagement. Fights that took place around fleets attacking structures would be more predictable - since you have definite time for the engagement to take place.

But as Lugh mentioned: there would be a serious issue if the job was half-arsed. Also, there is another issue: allowing traitors in competitive FPS the way they are allowed in DUST has been a serious detriment to the enjoyment of DUST as a FPS. While the idea has appeal: backstabbing your enemy, it only works when dealing with organized groups fighting each other. In PUGs it is stupid as heck - especially because doing anything about it was punishable.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Upu Crendraven
Le DP
#12 - 2016-05-05 01:35:59 UTC
So structure vulnerability windows and contests might be the best way to go. Wasn't this tried with Dust or wasn't fozziesov around to make such a thing feasible?
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#13 - 2016-05-05 08:26:06 UTC
Upu Crendraven wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Things in EVE should only be affected by things in EVE. I should not have to play an entirely different game to save my caps.


And yet fozzie sov dictates that you have to accept the actions of other players for the robustness of your space. Would making fps marginally relevant be so damaging or a simple continuation of a theme?



Well, fozzie sov contests don't require me to play an entirely different game in order to save my ships, so...yes?
Upu Crendraven
Le DP
#14 - 2016-05-05 13:34:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Upu Crendraven
Danika Princip wrote:
Upu Crendraven wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Things in EVE should only be affected by things in EVE. I should not have to play an entirely different game to save my caps.


And yet fozzie sov dictates that you have to accept the actions of other players for the robustness of your space. Would making fps marginally relevant be so damaging or a simple continuation of a theme?



Well, fozzie sov contests don't require me to play an entirely different game in order to save my ships, so...yes?


The suggestion wouldn't require it but in close calls it may benefit your character and its corp/alliance to have positive relations/policies. Ships may not be suitable as the duration of some cap battles could be annoying short for fps groups but I'm sure something be worked out if there was enough interest. Vulnerability windows and contests of sov/structures would perhaps make for a more acceptable start point. And, the affect could be graduated by flag capture/hold points and capped so the link is more symbolic than anything else. Perhaps defenders can get some kind of marginal defence bonus for their side once they control more than a certain percentage of the battlefield/flags. Still command ships giving fleet bonuses will out trump any gains or pains from what is being suggested here.
Upu Crendraven
Le DP
#15 - 2016-05-10 13:45:15 UTC
I would really like to raise the sense of linkage between the two. Does anyone have any better suggestions?