EVE General Discussion

Indeed.

And the only thing that can ruin it is too much protest from the spergers. Just because they are not treating the game like a game, it's a game after all, and let the developers be peacocks and fly on this.

I understand some of your grudges. There is some controversial history, and you have had to take a lot of flak.
But specific issues like raised by Remiel in his OP also take flak, and adjustment to change is often painful.

As I pointed out in my previous post, this is a watershed/paradigm shift, and ultimately a sign that EVE is finally becoming ready to mature into a truly dynamic and interactive environment that I think it was always intended/destined to be.

If this really is finally happening now, open discussion is important, especially on specifics.

You should probably stop posting then. No mouth breathers needed here.

I agree.

CCP cant code smarter, more adaptive players, nor is that their business.
They can however code smarter, dynamic and interactive NPC/AI systems into the EVE environment.

What players do is up to players, what CCP does to develop the virtual environment, is up to them.

I dont understand this kneejerk reaction to this potential of a more dynamic systemic EVE environment.

Players will always be, regardless, the primary drivers as intelligent and adaptable actors.

It is irrational to say that "NPCs need to be dull and boring".
Dull and boring is NEVER a good thing, in any context, especially in a game.

Dynamic NPC systems still float on a permeating PvP surface, no matter what.

The potential of these changes does not change EVE as a player oriented sandbox.
It simply means the sandbox itself reacts to player behavior within it.

This is a natural, logical and heuristic progression.
EVE is coming ALIVE, on a systemic basis.
Player interaction is wonderful, but it gets even better if the ENVIRONMENT also interacts.

---

Ask any kid:

-Would you rather play with others in a sandbox of dead, inert grains of sand that just sits there like a cat's litter box
or
-Would you rather play with others in a sandbox of reactive, dynamic grains of sand that play WITH you too.

Dead sand vs Smart sand.

Its no competition.
A dynamic, reactive sandbox is immeasurably better than a dead and inert one.

When I stop seeing posts from you, then I will stop.

Thank you for taking the time to write.


The main problem I'd have with this being spread to all NPC corps is simply, just how much time does CCP think I have to go around running missions all over the place just to try and keep NPC standiings in some kind of balance?
I would have the same issues, but from years ago, because of the need to be able to go anywhere, I kept up faction with SoE and pretty much stayed friendly with the empires.

I'm not a "min/ max" player. I can, on this one character, partake in all kinds of activities..including ( but not limited to) mining ( High, low, Null, and wh's), missioning, Exploration (High, Low, Null and wh's), PvP when the mood takes me. PI, indy, trade etc.
There used to be more like you. They were driven off. Min/Max players are not really playing a game, they are carrying out... something... with them. They are a pain in the ass to play with.

I'm not specialized to the extent of being a professional in any given field, but I'm ok with that, because I love the freedom that comes from doing what I want , when I want.
Me neither. That's how I played. Before "improvements" to make things easier were made. Easier means more grind. Min/Maxers love grind.

However, if this is rolled out to all the NPC corps, I'd pretty much be screwed. I've spent enough time missioning that my pirate corp standings are trashed. I've spent enough time PvP'ing that several of my non-pirate standings are a little dicey as well.
If Serpentis starts dropping fleets in highsec I won't be able to go to Gallente space or do anything other than just go to gates and stations.


If I have to go around trying to fix all these standings I'd be doing absolutely nothing else except mission running for the foreseeable future, which would bore the hell out of me. Not to mention, how would I do it? Running combat missions of any kind will trash standings to someone. So locked into a circle of standing grind for ever? **** that.
Since the gankers can go get clone soldier tags and trade them in, I would hold hope that a similar thing can be done for pirate factions. Also it would be great to see pirate faction standards mean more than just the LP store. It would be great if for example poor sec status players could not use gates any more, but pirate gate networks opened to those who have standing, and the gates in highsec still sit in a deadspace pocket. This would also be a boon for the drug trade. But I'm pipe-dreaming here. Gankers are min maxers too and they hate any and all change.

Personally I think NPC standings should be related strictly to NPC activities. Killing a player should not have any effect on standings beyond security rating. The fact that I could lose standings just from successfully defending myself from a gank is utterly absurd.
If you could wave a magic wand and have it your way, then to be fair to all players, gates to mission rooms should only let the player who has the mission in. You see there is of "NPC activity" that players are involved in that gets interrupted by "content creators" against the will of the NPC-involved player. Why is one sacred and the other not?


The freedom to do what we want, when we want, however we want is central to the Eve that I have loved for the last 10 years. I'm 100% ok with players having the ability to mess with me wherever and whenever they want, I'm not ok with NPC's doing it. If I wanted that I'd go play Skyrim.
I used to play like that too before wormholes started spitting larger ships out farther from the hole, interceptors became immune to their own bubblefcked gate camps, and recons stopped showing up on D-scan.

If CCP want to make it so that all players get booted out of NPC corps after the first month into a "unaligned" state, then maybe I'd be ok with it, as it would be a relatively minor "safety net" for rookies (as long as they only met PvP'ers who cared about standings).
And those corps would get wardecced in 2 minutes. This is why I think that navy starter corps should all be at war with each other and other NPC corps, the ones you get shunted to when you leave a player corp, should occasionally declare war on each other. Note that some of the most virulent pro-ganker forum warriors hate that idea because while they say they are pro-PVP, they don't want more players to actually be involved in real PVP from real experience. They want players to get ganked. Which is not PVP any more than no-consequence warp scrambling in highsec - known as bumping - is real ship tackling.

You keep calling me a griefer, and a ganker, but I'm talking about all kinds of PVP in the belts, including real fights where two people go at it and shoot at each other. This is why I'm calling you out for trolling, which is all you're doing, and spiteful misrepresentation of my position, which is all I've ever seen you be capable of on these forums. You can project on me all you want, it doesn't change the fact that you haven't argued against anything I've said, Zoubidah, only trolled.

Yes, I tried to refrain and failed. I was attempting to angle my response to this specific set of mechanics in question, with limited success I grant you.



Define the mechanics of assisting a player in an NPC corp that would result in a standings gain? Beyond group mission running that is. Remote repping perhaps? What about when I help concord out by shooting a -10 flashy? Still deserve a standings hit?
I'm being serious here, I'd hope that CCP put very serious thought into this if they do it, as standings can get very messy, very quickly.



And this I think is where we will never agree. There is to my mind no point whatsoever in trying to draw a comparison between NPC corps and Player corps. Player corps will always have to respond to player aggression within the limits of the will, skill, discipline and resources available to them through their membership.
NPC corps have unlimited resources, a war of attrition cannot be waged against NPC's. One cannot even war dec NPC corps. If you want to allow War decs vs. NPC corps then that's certainly something to discuss....however I don't ever see CCP allowing that to happen.



I disagree. I cannot engage a player mining barge in low sec that has the support of an NPC fleet if I am solo and in a frigate. It is essentially suicide. (assuming for the moment that the OP, who has more experience with this particular mechanic was being truthful in his opening post). That is NPC's directly impacting on the interaction between players, and in a way that could very easily ruin a particular style of PvP.

Sure, I could bring friends, tank the response fleet and gank the miner.....but as I asked in an earlier post, does ganging up really need more encouragement? Is solo play to be made even harder than it already is?

And to reiterate, I mine in low sec. I could take advantage of this. I do not think it is right that I could take advantage of this. When I mine in low, it's my wits, knowledge and awareness against the wit's, skill and knowledge of those who would kill me. I screw up, I lose my ship. They screw up, they lose a kill ( or get killed, because "bait" happens). Why exactly does this need NPC involvement? What is it about NPC's being involved in this that makes it more exciting? That's the question I'd like to see answered. I still to this day get a rush from PvP, attacker or defender, it's the same feeling.....no NPC's are going to change that rush, they are just going to make it less likely to find it.

We all have our opinions and views on how the game should be. This is mine, for better or worse....I think interference from NPC's in PvP is to be discouraged across the board.
However, I am 100% in favor of improvements to NPC activities such as missioning for example. Better AI, greater scope for randomization within missions/ encounters that makes for less predictable outcomes are something I would happily support.

This is ridiculously easy to refute.

Remiel, if you want "dull and boring" NPCs, quoting you, you are welcome to play any other non-PvP game that has them.

Minecraft comes to mind.

Take a break and regroup. You are not handling this well. You are either tired or short on time.
I say this as someone who respects your impetus, but you are not delivering on it atm.