These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Closed-World structured PVP implementation?

Author
Deckel
Island Paradise
#1 - 2017-01-02 20:23:58 UTC
What view do you guys have towards implementing a battleground concept to Eve?
Sure open world pvp is great, but it is mostly about assessing target situations, baiting and ganking rather than structured even and competitive combat. The only real place to get into this type of game play is by joining formal and informal tournaments that occur periodically. Joining those tournaments though requires a dedication and commitment that is mostly impractical to casual gamer and so most rarely get to experience it.

I think there could be grid and system based battleground games that players can continually enter on a more casual basis.

Naturally there would need to be a variety of different BG games with different admission criteria and perhaps weekly scheduling. To enter you would simply assemble and sit in a ship that meets one of the criteria, perhaps while sitting in certain faction stations and meeting standings criteria. Then select and enter the chosen game, where you will then wait to be paired with opponents. For fleet combat, players must enter a fleet game and be pre-formed as a fleet that meets the entering criteria.

When the game starts players are warped to opposing stations within a system with their ship(perhaps in Jovian or even WH space) and will have a countdown to the start of the game and to get into position. Possible positions being set as beacon locations that players can warp to. Once the starting countdown reaches zero, the game starts and an ending countdown begins.

Getting kills and winning the BG game will earn you LP and the dropped loot of your enemy ships, should you loot/salvage their wrecks before the ending countdown timer ends, which requires each player to be back in the starting station. The LP you earn will either be for an NPC faction you are representing in the fight or for the organizing faction that any lore is based around for establishing this tournament format.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2017-01-02 20:27:47 UTC
Deckel wrote:
What view do you guys have towards implementing a battleground concept to Eve?
Instanced PVP in any form would destroy open PVP, it would also have a negative effect on the markets also which would be just as bad.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2017-01-02 20:28:19 UTC
Learn to search the forums, this come sup and is shot down every week.

no, you cannot have arenas in an open world game, go away.
Deckel
Island Paradise
#4 - 2017-01-02 20:44:53 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Deckel wrote:
What view do you guys have towards implementing a battleground concept to Eve?
Instanced PVP in any form would destroy open PVP, it would also have a negative effect on the markets also which would be just as bad.


Would it perhaps destroy open PVP for the sole reason that most people prefer Instanced PVP and it's convenience? And if most people prefer it, isn't it fair to say that it could make the game more popular? As all things It would all depend on how it is implemented.

If say it is implemented through a weekly schedule with a different game every day of the week, then those who do not qualify or dislike some games of the day then they need to do other activities for those days.

While some are no doubt very vocal against the idea, that is no reason to halt discussion about how it could be done so that gameplay and game experience is enhanced.
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2017-01-02 21:08:01 UTC
Deckel wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Deckel wrote:
What view do you guys have towards implementing a battleground concept to Eve?
Instanced PVP in any form would destroy open PVP, it would also have a negative effect on the markets also which would be just as bad.


Would it perhaps destroy open PVP for the sole reason that most people prefer Instanced PVP and it's convenience? And if most people prefer it, isn't it fair to say that it could make the game more popular? As all things It would all depend on how it is implemented.

If say it is implemented through a weekly schedule with a different game every day of the week, then those who do not qualify or dislike some games of the day then they need to do other activities for those days.

While some are no doubt very vocal against the idea, that is no reason to halt discussion about how it could be done so that gameplay and game experience is enhanced.



Here's the thing though. Every other mmo has some kind of instanced PvP and almost none of them are open world PvP. People come to eve knowing this and usually looking for this. If you want a instanced PvP experience, there are plenty out there. If however you would like to play Eve, you have to live with open world PvP because anything else breaks the world that Eve has created which is one controlled by the players. The closest you might get would be to form a corp that runs PvP events and likely try to hire another corp or alliance on as security.

It's either that or dueling with individuals and hoping they stick to the terms. Eve isn't a game of convenience, it's a simulation game. Weekly things like this would only detract from other things devs could be doing and it's not that we're halting discussion, it's just no one has a copy paste ready for each and every time this gets suggested and then shot down. This HAS been discussed, to death one might say, that's why they're shooting you down.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2017-01-02 21:18:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Omnathious Deninard
Deckel wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Deckel wrote:
What view do you guys have towards implementing a battleground concept to Eve?
Instanced PVP in any form would destroy open PVP, it would also have a negative effect on the markets also which would be just as bad.


Would it perhaps destroy open PVP for the sole reason that most people prefer Instanced PVP and it's convenience? And if most people prefer it, isn't it fair to say that it could make the game more popular? As all things It would all depend on how it is implemented.
It would destroy open PVP because some players who like it will only PVP there, which will lower the number of players in space causing less open PVP, which in turn will cause more players to move to instanced PVP simply to get a fight not because they like it.
Deckel wrote:

While some are no doubt very vocal against the idea, that is no reason to halt discussion about how it could be done so that gameplay and game experience is enhanced.

This topic has come up so often it might as well have a sticky, all times it is shot down because of the negative effect it will have on the structure of the game.
Once there was even a DEV that made a topic, just before he left the company, about instanced PVP structures for two players to use and it went down in a ball of fire also.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#7 - 2017-01-02 21:35:33 UTC
#fucknotodojo2017
Deckel
Island Paradise
#8 - 2017-01-02 21:50:49 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
It would destroy open PVP because some players who like it will only PVP there, which will lower the number of players in space causing less open PVP, which in turn will cause more players to move to instanced PVP simply to get a fight not because they like it.


Lowering the number of players in space causes less risk to players who use it and increases the value of items that are farmed. Players will take advantage of this new equilibrium and make lots of isk which will then attract more players back to the outside world. And if Instance PVP brings in more players world usage might even stay the same, however the value of items will increase making world ratting, pvp and exploration even more valuable.

Making changes like this will only ever shift the equilibrium of markets, not break the game, and not the gameplay. If anything giving players a platform to easily practice combat strats will only increase the skill level of players that actually do roam around space. Or are you just unhappy that you would lose so many easy kills?
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#9 - 2017-01-02 21:53:27 UTC
Deckel wrote:
While some are no doubt very vocal against the idea, that is no reason to halt discussion about how it could be done so that gameplay and game experience is enhanced.


There is no such way to implement this. Move on.
Atomeon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2017-01-02 21:59:11 UTC
Deckel wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
It would destroy open PVP because some players who like it will only PVP there, which will lower the number of players in space causing less open PVP, which in turn will cause more players to move to instanced PVP simply to get a fight not because they like it.


Lowering the number of players in space causes less risk to players who use it and increases the value of items that are farmed. Players will take advantage of this new equilibrium and make lots of isk which will then attract more players back to the outside world. And if Instance PVP brings in more players world usage might even stay the same, however the value of items will increase making world ratting, pvp and exploration even more valuable.

Making changes like this will only ever shift the equilibrium of markets, not break the game, and not the gameplay. If anything giving players a platform to easily practice combat strats will only increase the skill level of players that actually do roam around space. Or are you just unhappy that you would lose so many easy kills?


If you think this would help the game, organize yourself a small tournament , give prize to the winners and so on. Nothing is keeping you to not do so.
Deckel
Island Paradise
#11 - 2017-01-02 22:01:47 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Deckel wrote:
While some are no doubt very vocal against the idea, that is no reason to halt discussion about how it could be done so that gameplay and game experience is enhanced.


There is no such way to implement this. Move on.


Ya, and CCP alliance tournaments are impossible too ... Ugh

It's just about implementing such a format, or others, through automated means rather than manual ones. The question is not whether it can be done ... because it can ... the question is; is the effort worth it? and, how can it be done without affecting the rest of the game too much? and, What benefits/costs are associated with getting involved with it?
Deckel
Island Paradise
#12 - 2017-01-02 22:15:17 UTC
Atomeon wrote:


If you think this would help the game, organize yourself a small tournament , give prize to the winners and so on. Nothing is keeping you to not do so.


And if I was so inclined and took on all the work and responsibility to host monthly, weekly, bi-weekly tournaments and games, and if it became popular just how would I regulate cheaters? gankers? and griefers? And even if it becomes big enough that CCP offered safe system server space, that still leads to both them and me continually burdened with manual effort. Effort that could be automated to both allow game-wide player participation and freedom from error-prone and cumbersome manual labor, contributing to a game that I personally don't want my entire life to revolve around.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#13 - 2017-01-02 22:16:30 UTC
The difference between the AT and your idea is that

  1. the number of participants is insignificant compared to the overall EVE populace.
  2. it is a time limited event for a very tiny selection of players.
  3. it has significant entry fees that are unfeasible for your idea without reducing it to absurdity.
  4. other tournaments also have some kind of entry hurdle that you need to overcome (fees, pre-selection, etc.) and that they require effort in order to be put in place.

All these things and several more limit who and when people can take part in these tournaments and thus they have no impact on open-world PVP whatsoever (except for the prices ending up on the killboards in some ridiculous ways).

Your Arena idea (don't you dare to deny that you want an arena system!), however, removes all these limitations and provides people a means to PVP without them having to put effort into finding PVP activities. As a result, fewer and fewer people will see the need to roam around to find targets and they remove themselves from the pool of available targets for other people roaming around, which increases the drag towards the arenas and discourages flying around.

However, the arenas you are looking for are called Jita, Tama, Rancer, M-OEEB, HED-GP, NOL-, Asakai, B-R, N-RAEL, Poitot and so on. We already have instanced PVP because the individual star systems are your instances. Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#14 - 2017-01-02 22:33:11 UTC
If i can't interfere in your pvp then no. No magic barriers. Unworkable.

Go to sisi for gimmicky pvp without interruption.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Deckel
Island Paradise
#15 - 2017-01-02 22:42:39 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
The difference between the AT and your idea is that

  1. the number of participants is insignificant compared to the overall EVE populace.
  2. it is a time limited event for a very tiny selection of players.
  3. it has significant entry fees that are unfeasible for your idea without reducing it to absurdity.
  4. other tournaments also have some kind of entry hurdle that you need to overcome (fees, pre-selection, etc.) and that they require effort in order to be put in place.

All these things and several more limit who and when people can take part in these tournaments and thus they have no impact on open-world PVP whatsoever (except for the prices ending up on the killboards in some ridiculous ways).

Your Arena idea (don't you dare to deny that you want an arena system!), however, removes all these limitations and provides people a means to PVP without them having to put effort into finding PVP activities. As a result, fewer and fewer people will see the need to roam around to find targets and they remove themselves from the pool of available targets for other people roaming around, which increases the drag towards the arenas and discourages flying around.

However, the arenas you are looking for are called Jita, Tama, Rancer, M-OEEB, HED-GP, NOL-, Asakai, B-R, N-RAEL, Poitot and so on. We already have instanced PVP because the individual star systems are your instances. Roll


I don't deny that some of the games would be an arena system, but some could also be a game of tag within a system, capture the flag, hauling races blockade running and retrieval. I'm not necessarily saying to make it just a matter of repeatedly queuing up for a fight, only these events a possible options. It could even be implemented as a random daily or weekly achievement or recurring event that need to be signed up for.

There are just so many possibilities that just hearing a blunt "NO" seems rather unimaginative and short sighted.

Sure you are worried about the possible loss of open world pvp content, but what exactly is wrong about lowering the barriers and entry hurdles to engage in tournament style combat. Are you saying such content is worthless and not in demand? because you would be wrong. I'm not saying participation or qualification in this activity should be super easy and abundant, just accessible so that players can experience it in a more casual setting.
Deckel
Island Paradise
#16 - 2017-01-02 22:48:47 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
If i can't interfere in your pvp then no. No magic barriers. Unworkable.

Go to sisi for gimmicky pvp without interruption.



If I can't gank you then no... That's what I heard anyway.

But suppose these events do become interruptible by having the site spawned somewhere random across accessible eve. Just how much of a difference would that actually make?
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#17 - 2017-01-02 22:49:21 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Your Arena idea (don't you dare to deny that you want an arena system!), however, removes all these limitations and provides people a means to PVP without them having to put effort into finding PVP activities. As a result, fewer and fewer people will see the need to roam around to find targets and they remove themselves from the pool of available targets for other people roaming around, which increases the drag towards the arenas and discourages flying around.

This is the point that needs to be hammered, right here.

An Arena system in an "open world" PvP game will create a feedback loop that encourages people to use the Arena more than anything else.

After all... why go out and deal with the unpredictabilities of "open world PvP" when you can get your jollies off at an Arena where only a select few factors matter (tank, range dication, endurance... that is it) and there are no "X factors" you need to be concerned about.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#18 - 2017-01-02 23:02:08 UTC
Deckel wrote:
I don't deny that some of the games would be an arena system, but some could also be a...

- game of tag within a system,
- capture the flag,
- hauling races blockade running and retrieval.

- avoiding hunters while doing PvE
- Faction Warfare and 0.0 SOV warfare
- low-sec hauling and trading

And yes... all these things provide "rewards" of some kind.

Deckel wrote:
There are just so many possibilities that just hearing a blunt "NO" seems rather unimaginative and short sighted.

The feeling is mutual.

You are looking at your idea from the prism of "I want this" and not from a "what will this do for the already existing systems in the game and how will it affect them."

Deckel wrote:
Sure you are worried about the possible loss of open world pvp content, but what exactly is wrong about lowering the barriers and entry hurdles to engage in tournament style combat.

This is actually the interesting issue behind "Arena" ideas.

People say that it will be the "everymans" way of dong PvP.
The issue is that in tournaments require a different style of combat compared to "open world PvP." Only a few factors matter (as I mentioned earlier) and this leads to people min/maxing those variables to absurd levels... levels that no casual person would be able to match.
This will lead to increased barriers of entry.

At least in "open world PvP" you can use the inherent unfairness of the environment to stack the odds in your favor.
Example: have a swarm of month-old newbies mob a small group of veterans. The veterans may be able to nuke the group, but may also die due to being overwhelmed.

And no... do not start on "the system can be tiered by Skillpoints."
"Total Skillpoints" is a meaningless metric. What actually matters is how many skillpoints you have applied in certain specialties.

Deckel wrote:
Are you saying such content is worthless and not in demand? because you would be wrong.

No. We are saying that it would be damaging to the existing systems in the game at large.
Deckel
Island Paradise
#19 - 2017-01-02 23:04:07 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Your Arena idea (don't you dare to deny that you want an arena system!), however, removes all these limitations and provides people a means to PVP without them having to put effort into finding PVP activities. As a result, fewer and fewer people will see the need to roam around to find targets and they remove themselves from the pool of available targets for other people roaming around, which increases the drag towards the arenas and discourages flying around.

This is the point that needs to be hammered, right here.

An Arena system in an "open world" PvP game will create a feedback loop that encourages people to use the Arena more than anything else.

After all... why go out and deal with the unpredictabilities of "open world PvP" when you can get your jollies off at an Arena where only a select few factors matter (tank, range dication, endurance... that is it) and there are no "X factors" you need to be concerned about.


And what proportion of the player base rarely, if ever does this pvp roaming and would actually get involved in a structured pvp format? And how many would benefit from this structure format and then actually be more inclined and comfortable towards joining a pvp roam?

While those of you who live, sleep, and breathe Eve may see open world pvp as the quintessential aspect of Eve and dive right in, there are very large segments of the player base that are hesitant towards the uncertainties and in-game asset loss that corresponds to such inexperience and mind set. That is where an arena comes in, and even if access to it is infrequent. I think it would be beneficial.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#20 - 2017-01-02 23:11:23 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Arenas do not teach "open world PvP."

Period.


And since the whole game is basically an "open world PvP" conflict simulator, there are tools and tricks you HAVE to learn independent of your ship's fitting and character skills *(which is pretty much all that counts in a "closed system" such as an Arena).

This is why many veterans, including myself, tell people who want to get into PvP to strap themselves in a cheapo frigate and just do it.
A Frigate loss is meaningless in the grand scheme of things and will teach many, many invaluable lessons in survival and managing risk.

An Arena system is a closed loop that does not encourage people to leave. In fact, it does the opposite.


edit: And I WILL fight this idea to the death. It is the antithesis of what makes EVE, EVE in my opinion.
123Next pageLast page