Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This is the kind of thing I was hoping to see when I advanced the idea of rats having recognizable fleet doctrines.

Some rats could have dedicated tackle and "death from afar" battleships (afar in this case is not terribly far, just outside of tackle range). With e.g., Serpentis and Angels, who have a general SR doctrine, it makes more sense for ships of all sizes to fit for tackle, because they're going to close in to that range regardless. With Sansha, not so much.

When LR doctrine battleships lose all their tackle, they could just call for reinforcements, safe up and wait for another spawn of tackle. I like the idea (can't remember where it was posted) that fleeing rats can be scanned down, because that encourages training and practice in another extremely valuable PVP and exploration PVE skill.

ganking is not considered pvp by its main meaning with the culture around in eve, its just like scamming,compared to trading

Ok, I'm getting pretty fed up of people who can't get their head around the concept of where isk comes from, where it goes and inflation.


So, PvE is an ISK faucet. It's pretty much the biggest of them all. Trading is not a faucet:

Remind me, where does ISK go again?

All of these COMBINE TO BALANCE the flow of ISK in and out of the game world. Too much in and not enough out results in inflation. Please note the word BALANCE. We need ISK Faucets the same as we need ISK Sinks. We also need transfers, because the more there is to buy, the lower the price will get. (If anything, you could also attribute the rise in prices to Botminers being banned left right and centre - good job btw CCP, keep up the good work - thus reducing the supply of minerals without reducing the demand. Someone should look into that...)

So, we NEED PvE as a source of ISK. So, getting rid of rat bounties would cut off a huge supply of ISK and would cripple the market. So can we please drop that whole discussion. Reducing the amount paid out, certainly on BS's, could have the desired effect.

As far as I can tell, everyone agree's that PvE would be better if it had more in common with PvP, both in fittings and combat styles. I want to see how CCP's take on this for pans out in faction warfare. Maybe some of those principals can be used as a basis for changing the current PvE system. I would also suggest rolling it out slowly, allowing alternative mission running options so people who have skilled up for and paid for PvE ships wouldn't just be left with a lot of wasted ISK and SP.

Maybe each system could have a mission hub in the infocom. Just select a local NPC entity you want to do work for, select the mission type and payscale and choose from a list offerd to you. All do-able from space?

Not that im disagreeing with anything youre saying, but you realize that based on this chart, you could set bounty prices to 0.0 isk and the ISK supply would actually be balanced right? especially since this would push the mission runners and ratters to find other ways of making isk which would push them into other faucets.

Now of course im not saying that all bounty prices should be set to 0, but something clearly needs to be done, and, no, as demonstrated, bounty prices are not completely necessary to the system.

You almost got what I said right. What you didn't get is that I never suggested to remove faucets entirely. Now that would be a very silly idea, wouldn't it?

What happens when deflation (the so much needed deflation!) starts is that the market prices go down, ISK becomes harder to come by. The activities that generate ISK become more profitable, as result of which people start running missions (and incursions if those aren't dealth with as well) more, partially compensating for the lost ISK influx from bounties. This will compensate deflation untill it stabilizes somewhere where ISK generating activities will be just profitable enough to make people actually engage in those.

And that, my friend, would take care of inflation untill any further changes to faucet-sink system are made.


You were making sense untill this point. What you call "cripple" is actually the cure for the ugly inflation that we are experiencing right now. It is easily visible in the markets that are not affected by mineral prices.

You can, and by stopping making sense you actually did.

I, at the other hand, will point out that bounties are not the only faucet, yet one of the biggest. Taking that out will do nothing but bring balance and take care of the inflation.

And I'd also like to say once more that I'm not proposing to just remove bounties, I propose to replace them with increased item drops, so that mission running does not become any less profitable than it already is.

I think a lot of the problem is lack of a profitable group activity for small corps in high sec.

One might say incursions, however, for those to be worth running it requires more than a small group.

I'm talking missions that you can run with a 5 man fleet in t1 ships including t1 logistics.


My problem isn't that pve is boring, but rather that it's too boring with more than one person, and not at all profitable with more than one person.


Like I've mentioned already, due to incursions being introduced and being more profitable than lvl 5's, I'd like to see lvl 5's brought back into high sec.

However, with a few adjustments.

1) Target swapping npcs so that it requires more involvement than a solo player with multiple accounts could accomplish.

2) Reduced LP payout by a good amount, reduced mission payout by a reasonable amount, and reduced bounty payout by a reasonable amount

3) Ensure that high sec lvl 5's don't drop high end items, unless they're on rare spawns, however, increase high end item drops in low sec lvl 5 missions.


This not only helps increase the profit for those willing to risk running low sec lvl 5's, but also brings lvl 5's back to high sec(not just low sec bordering high sec), and balances them so they can't be run solo or by a player managing multiple accounts.
It would also give a location where t1 logistics would be valid.

tbh, i don't think missions need randomness, well, at least not lvl 4 and below.

The reason why I say this is because players rely on predictability in order to survive.

For instance, t1 ships, and in some cases t2, faction, and pirate bs's can't survive a mission without knowing what ships cause triggers, how many ships would be triggered, and which ships will be hitting the hardest.

Sometimes they would be too much for a solo ship to survive, yet being unpredictable, you'd never know when you could or couldn't survive until it was too late.

I'll agree PvE is horribly predictable. I mean anyone can go out online get the mission set up of the site they're about to run and not have to worry one bit. You have access to every little detail about the mission before actually entering it

I wonder which one of us didn't get the other more?

Well, my sarcasm makes my point harder to understand, that's for sure.

1) Why would deflation be needed?
Apart from the PLEX prices, the last month, consumer products did, in fact, see a deflation!
Or are you complaining about bounties because it got harder PLEX for your game? So has it for me.

2) Activities that generate ISK will become more profitable if isk is harder to come by?
For a new player, yes. For an old player with considerable buffer of ISK?
He will just laugh and never bother with them.
Also, how many months would the market take to balance out due to wallet buffers? I cannot even begin to predict it.
How would the game be during those times?
Do you claim you can?
Also, when I was running missions last time, the payout was a joke compared to the rest.
I suggested a few posts back mission rewards to be buffed (with or without a bounty nerf), but apparently no one liked the idea.
And since there are no missions in null... would still screw them over.

PVE content.

Are Wormholes dull? I would say not but this is more due to the environment than the fact that sleepers have advanced A.I.
The problem with content like mission is that it feels quite isolated, you can be in system with a hundred players and only see people on the undock.

Even the Epic arcs although having a better U.I and story still feel linear and predictable, just harder level 4 missions.
Mission dialogue is bad, not just the mission descriptions but the RP messages that appear in local I understand that the language needs to be fairly clean but it is like CCP took lines from the worst Sci fi B movie ever. More named characters and NPC's are also more interesting.

How many times have we seen the debate regarding which ship is best for missions? Missions should have alternate ways of completing them to promote differing ship types/playstyles whether that is tailored spawns to ship types, spacial effects, short cut gates for smaller vessels or alternate methods of dealing with the objectives.

My favourite PVE content has to be the COSMOS arcs. (I would like to be able to re-run these please even if it is yearly) the COSMOS sites give their systems geography and bring players into the same zones even if they are playing separately. It also felt like genuine exploring with discovery of new sites with a more unknown factor. It was only the fact that the missions were easily failable and could not be re-run that caused me to do research prior to completion otherwise this would have much more enjoyable.

It also contained location specific crafting materials and module rewards which are so much more interesting to receive (and less Faucet) than just more ISK or LP. Expand on this static content and wrap it up in the journal format. Even spread this form of content more into low sec to replace the popular static DED complexes you removed.