These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dont change the 2/10 plexes!

First post First post
Author
Tavisturus
Screaming Hayabusa
Neo-Bushido Movement
#441 - 2013-01-23 01:47:46 UTC
I just want to make it known that I still support everything in this thread even though I haven't logged in or undocked in about a month. I still exist!
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#442 - 2013-01-23 03:45:31 UTC
What about using the Incursion site spawning mechanism for these DED sites: that is, the beacon shows up in local, but the site despawns after being completed only to appear elsewhere in the same system. This allows a gathering point, doesn't require two ships or a poorly fitted single ship, and eliminates the possibility of camping the end room for profit.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#443 - 2013-01-23 03:56:54 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
What about using the Incursion site spawning mechanism for these DED sites: that is, the beacon shows up in local, but the site despawns after being completed only to appear elsewhere in the same system. This allows a gathering point, doesn't require two ships or a poorly fitted single ship, and eliminates the possibility of camping the end room for profit.


Simple solution, requires no new coding, doesnt require obliterating a vibrant pvp community
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#444 - 2013-01-23 04:14:46 UTC
low-sec only, keep them on overview, but shuffle them around like normal plexes (so that the booster-faggots have to make SOME effort to camp them)

if that's not feasible, then I think the change is better than the former status quo
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#445 - 2013-01-23 06:29:07 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
What about using the Incursion site spawning mechanism for these DED sites: that is, the beacon shows up in local, but the site despawns after being completed only to appear elsewhere in the same system. This allows a gathering point, doesn't require two ships or a poorly fitted single ship, and eliminates the possibility of camping the end room for profit.

Or maybe have it like the FW mechanism where the sites appear as anomalies on system scan and pop on overview as soon as someone warps to them, and change the timer to run out and despawn when no one is in the site. Smile
Sylvous
Bigger than Jesus
#446 - 2013-01-23 06:32:55 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
What about using the Incursion site spawning mechanism for these DED sites: that is, the beacon shows up in local, but the site despawns after being completed only to appear elsewhere in the same system. This allows a gathering point, doesn't require two ships or a poorly fitted single ship, and eliminates the possibility of camping the end room for profit.


I love the idea for the same reason that Michael does, but I have to ask (because I have no idea how incursion sites work), won't that mean that as soon as the site is complete, or shortly there after it will disappear entirely and no longer appear on the overview? Because if that's the case it won't work for what we desire, which is a PVP hotbed.

Depending on the ship being used it takes 2-5 min to run those, and that is too narrow a window for PVP to occur reliably (I am obviously going under the assumption that it disappears here). Should it disappear after being run and only appear when it is ready to run, someone will run the site as soon as it shows up, thus eliminating the beacon, meaning that for the hour and a bit between spawns there will be no place that acts as a PVP hotbed. It is the static nature of these beacons that is one of the key aspects here. Even when the complex is not spawned, in fact especially when the complex is not spawned it attracts people to it to check it out and PVP ensures, and if it disappears the whole point of having it is defeated. Yes the PVE aspect would be appreciated, but that is the minor part of bringing them back.

Sadly to avoid third room camping I feel that new coding is required in order to make the complexes viable if they are to be brought back. Making it so that as long a player remains inside the plex all the gates remain unlocked would help for most campers, and preventing cloaking in the second and third rooms would stop the cloaking campers (should there be no player in the third or second rooms all the gates lock again making a key required to get back in).

This would keep the PVP happening and in all likelihood given the scarcity of the 2/10 complexes in high sec be a HUGE boon to PVP in these systems (I get chills just thinking about it).

Sylvous
Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
#447 - 2013-01-23 13:58:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Minmatar Citizen160812
Mara Rinn wrote:
What about using the Incursion site spawning mechanism for these DED sites: that is, the beacon shows up in local, but the site despawns after being completed only to appear elsewhere in the same system. This allows a gathering point, doesn't require two ships or a poorly fitted single ship, and eliminates the possibility of camping the end room for profit.



Great idea with just one problem. You're asking them to design something different which will take forever. Sure, make something better and I'm certain this same number of people will be interested in testing it. In the mean time, as a good faith measure, can we just get the old stuff back until this theoretical new hotness is ready?

I imagine CCP Julie Anderton isn't busy with anything but then again she is the first one to get a pink slip if they downsize.
(sorry if you don't get that joke but it made me laugh so screw yas)
Patches Esq
NULLCorp Ltd.
#448 - 2013-01-23 17:13:52 UTC
So, CCP Bettik ganked my Venture :P

In all seriousness, being destroyed and then having my pod blown up didn't really bother me much. I did read the Bio of the person who killed me (Turgesson), and was curious as to what he was talking about in it, so I opened a conversation with him.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't a crybaby post. I didn't lose much. I'm not upset, and have no reason to be upset. I don't even do Low-Sec yet, as I'm still pretty new to the game. After talking to him (He killed me, so what? He is a pretty nice guy) about it, and reading this thread, I can say that it's kind of crummy to take this away from the players.

People obviously enjoy this feature, and it seems neat. A place with ship restrictions that is marked and known to be a PVP spot where you can fight over loot/resources? It seems like EVE is built around PVP, and taking away the hotspots for PVP seems like it goes against what I originally got interested in the game for.

As I said, I'm not whining. I know full and well that when I undock from a station I am consenting to being trashed in PVP, be it in High-Sec or somewhere else. This is part of the game. At most, I'm thankful that I learned about something in the game I knew nothing about, and met a guy who AFTER he killed me actually gave me some advice on how to fit my ship properly to give myself a chance next time.

So, even though I'm a victim of being molested in High-Sec by Turgesson, I still support this thread. Why would you take away something that keeps your players coming back? It sounds like fun.


Does anyone care what new players think? Lol.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#449 - 2013-01-23 21:04:07 UTC
Well, CCP say they care but they also say pvp is a core value in Eve so... meh...

And you seem to have great attitude so I hope you will stick around long enough to experience all activities Eve has to offer.

As for Turgesson and your convo after gank, this is exactly where you can see how much of bullsh!t NPC corp chat channels are. Hisec gankers, lowsec pirates, null dwellers - they all interact with you and gank is just a way of saying hello. Talk to them, ask what could you do to avoid losing ship or how to fight back and in most cases you will learn sth and maybe even will gain one more friendly contact. There are asshats that will point and laugh but more often than not you will meet nice people.

Ok, let's not make this thread into newbie appreciation fest :)

Invalid signature format

Turgesson
Gorillaz In The Mist
#450 - 2013-01-24 15:38:17 UTC
For every Patch there are 500+ Ereeres. I edited his name so he doesn't turn into a punching bag.

I don't really know what he's talking about either...the kill?...the 100k bounty for spamming KR notes at me? All I know is if you extend acts or Sutoka him he gets really really mad and rage logs.




I will not fight!
From: Eemere XXXxxxXXX
Sent: 2013.01.21 17:45
To: Turgesson,

Please remove the bounty from you within a week,

If you do not it will submit a report to the management "as a" psychological harassment ".

If you would extend to acts or Sutoka increase the bounty is

I will mail to each case management,
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#451 - 2013-01-24 16:22:32 UTC
Turgesson wrote:

I will not fight!
From: Eemere XXXxxxXXX
Sent: 2013.01.21 17:45
To: Turgesson,

Please remove the bounty from you within a week,

If you do not it will submit a report to the management "as a" psychological harassment ".

If you would extend to acts or Sutoka increase the bounty is

I will mail to each case management,


This whine is fuelled by google translation. Full win!

Invalid signature format

Sylvous
Bigger than Jesus
#452 - 2013-01-24 18:50:41 UTC
@ Turgesson & Schmata Bastanold

Try to keep this thread on topic guys. As I mentioned in a previous post people seem to have a tendency to read only the last page or two of posts on any given topic and thus miss out on a lot of good conversation about said topic (hence why CCP Fozzie and others brought up ideas that we had all ready discussed at length within the first 15 pages). The bad part about this is that if we let this thread degrade and move off topic we make it very hard to promote good conversation about what is in fact a very important topic that is currently being ignored by CCP (or maybe just not acknowledged would be a better way to describe it).

Sylvous
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#453 - 2013-01-24 20:38:38 UTC
This thread is on life support already, at this point it doesn't matter what we post, nobody cares and nobody will. FW is poster child for lowsec and it is thriving so devs can do hi5s all around and move on to fcuk with somebody else's playground.

In 10 days will be 2 months since Retribution went live and all we got was some gibberish from dev not even responsible for this change. Time to grind sec status and got ready for hisec honorable duels.

Invalid signature format

Turgesson
Gorillaz In The Mist
#454 - 2013-01-25 00:38:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Turgesson
Yep,there is no discussion left just a bumped thread so we may as well have fun with it. We're getting what they are giving and can pound sand if we don't like it.

Thank god they did bring back the can flipping mechanic with some hero text pop up! Can you believe they said "with no interference"? Roll


Edit: Either I read that blog post wrong or they edited it after everyone laughed at it. Honorable combat that is about to ensue! is still there though. Lol
Robinton Jax
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#455 - 2013-01-25 01:21:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Robinton Jax
F*ck faction warfare....give Molden Heath back somthing unique.
Ellente Fervens
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#456 - 2013-01-25 04:14:58 UTC
Awwww....you lost a static farmable resource.



Good!

The sooner they take belts out as well the better.

Move all the things into the exploration system.
Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#457 - 2013-01-25 06:20:23 UTC
Ellente Fervens wrote:
Awwww....you lost a static farmable resource.



Good!

The sooner they take belts out as well the better.

Move all the things into the exploration system.


And again, the thread not read.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
#458 - 2013-01-25 14:06:55 UTC
Sugar Kyle wrote:
Ellente Fervens wrote:
Awwww....you lost a static farmable resource.



Good!

The sooner they take belts out as well the better.

Move all the things into the exploration system.


And again, the thread not read.


A bump is a bump. One look at their killboard will show ya their skills stop at hitting a button and saying something dim-witted.
Vincent R'lyeh
Screaming Hayabusa
Neo-Bushido Movement
#459 - 2013-01-25 18:05:29 UTC
Sugar Kyle wrote:
Ellente Fervens wrote:
Awwww....you lost a static farmable resource.

Good!

The sooner they take belts out as well the better.

Move all the things into the exploration system.


And again, the thread not read.


Although this does rather neatly emphasise Sylvous's comment about keeping the thread on topic as dimwits only read the last couple of posts and immediately leap to an assumption.....

I have deliberately developed an air of cynicism that I originally intended to make me appear somewhat louche and caddish but actually comes across as irritable hostility combined with the unspoken threat of sudden violence.....

Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#460 - 2013-01-25 18:13:11 UTC
Well, not much of substance we can provide here unless we start copy/paste previous "on topic" posts. Thread has to be bumped to be visible for public but 20 more pages full of empty bumps won't do much better than our merry derailing.

Hmm, is that an example of catch 22 by any chance?

Oh, and bring static plexes back because pvp in lowsec fell into coma outside FW areas. And FW is lame, mkey?

Invalid signature format