Player Features and Ideas Discussion

As the game currently is there are two main respawn mechanisms in Incursions.

1: Mothership Cleared: When the Mothership (The boss of the Incursion constellation) is dropped, all sites in every system in that Incursion despawn immediately and the Sansha Incursion ships warp off. If you are not finished with the site, tough cookies, it's gone. All beacons dissapear.

2: Site Cleared: This is when a site's objectives have been fulfilled. For example in a True Power Provisional Headquarters, killing the tower at the very end. If you are in a site where it's possible to finish the objective without killing the remaining rats (such as a True Creations Research Center), they do stick around for a while after the site is 'ended' and the victorious fleet recieves their pay from CONCORD. Like the Mothership clear though, the beacons to warp to the site from anywhere else in the system dissapear, making it impossible to find that spot again without scanning down wrecks/occupants/remaining rats.

However, one of the biggest differences is when Case 1 happens (The Mothership is destroyed) the game follows it's normal mechanics for spawning a new Incursion. But when Case 2 happens, a new site in that system will not spawn unless everyone who was in that site leaves grid. This includes both in the site with the rats, and on grid with the acceleration gate. This leads to two problems.

AFK

If for some reason someone goes AFK due to being forgetful, or family problems, or just simply fell asleep and it doesn't happen to be a dangerous site upon completion then it's quite possible if you're not able to squad/wing/fleet warp the person out for them to keep that site from respawning. They will drift about in grid until they disconnect or return to their computer, meanwhile preventing everyone else in system from having access to the site that should have respawned.

Intentional Site Holding

Originally considered to be a form of piracy/ransom, there are people who will create days old character to simply go sit on acceleration gates in heavily Incursioned systems and demand a payment per site they allow to respawn. Both their Rookie Ship and Capsule are sufficient to keep these sites from respawning. And due to CONCORD's swift reaction time always when you don't want it, it can take 2 suicide ganks to fully remove a day old character in a free ship from a gate.

However I said originally considered to be a form of piracy because Piracy in EVE generally involves a few things. Risk and Isk mostly. This person takes no risk. I can literally do the same thing they do on alts I created seconds ago. There is no cost in what they do. And as far as Isk goes, I've spoken with a GM and been advised to not pay.



Still with me? Awesome. I swear I'm getting to the suggestion.

Simple as this. Why can't Case 1 respawn be applied to Case 2 respawn? The Mothership doesn't care who's on what grid. When the site is over, despawning is applied. Respawn of new Incursion goes through the appropriate mechanics. Same can be done for the individual sites. Mission objective completed and pay out is given? Despawn what is necissary and begin respawn mechanics. I'm not alone in this thought either.



This will not unbalance the game in any way it wasn't already unbalanced before. This simply unifies mechanics and prevents respawn problems caused both by intentional and unintentional issues.

Edit: If GM Cloudy has issue with me quoting him, or if for some reason there is an issue with me quoting him, I will edit it out. I am not trying to say his opinion represents that of the GM staff or CCP in general.

9. Private communication between the Game Masters, Eve Team members, moderators and administrators of the forum and the forum users is not to be made public on these forums or by any other venue. If GM Cloudy's statements were made in a thread then please link that post rather than reproducing quotes -CCP Dolan

well said, bringing the gates in line with other examples within the game and its mechanics seems like a sensible solution that has been thoroughly petitioned

↑ This. Totally this.

One point to add. This is by no means piracy. Is Eve not a roleplaying game? How is abusing the way the game works by any means playing the role of a pirate?

Example:

Sansha see's a small rookie ship. They are just gonna laugh and stomp the little rookie to the ground. A single small ship that couldn't even scratch their shields would not stop them from invading a new site in the system.

So fix the problem.

Risk for reward is everywhere in EVE. I have no problem with that. I've seen friends in shiny Incursion ships get popped just for going through the wrong 0.5 Maybe Incursion runners get killed 10x less often but they lose 10x as much, so there's that.

But a site blocker or AFKer can risk free prevent sites from respawning at minimal or zero profit, most often net negative profit to the whole of the peoples involved. This isn't piracy, it's not part of how the game was intended, it's simply an issue that needs to be addressed.

I've heard it be said that this is Piracy in EVE, intentionally holding sites open. If that's the case then shouldn't people who hold open completed sites be flagged yellow? You cannot have it be Piracy and not Piracy at the same time.

Granted I don't want complications to Crimewatch. I want to keep that system as clear and simple as possible. Best solution seems to be a unification of the despawn mechanics from Case 1 to Case 2, making a completed site force full despawn and initiate respawn timer.

This could cause other problems.

When would these ships spawn. Would ending the site due to timer earlier then the objective is completed mean that the people in site won't get paid? Or will they get paid early? If you're going to put a timer despawn on it, why not make the timer start once payout is given?

This is definitely a flawed mechanic. The only site that has any legitimate reason to be "held open" at all is the TCRC and that's only if the fleet wants to take out the rest of the rats before leaving. As far as I'm aware, though, there are essentially no fleets that do that. It's inefficient, with nothing but risk and no reward. There being a delay before it despawns is fine so that we still have to take the "risk" involved in warping out with enemy ships still on grid.

However, sites being kept open by the presence of ships just makes no real sense. Does Sansha have to salvage all the structures from a previous site before they have the resources to set up a new site? Are they that desperate for resources?

+1

+1

Very well thought out idea.

It is ridiculous that an unpaid trial can totally disrupt the game play of 100's of paid accounts by simply being afk in a free rookie ship

this really needs to be fixed.

and if you sucide gank these trial account alts that dont care if they die they sell the kills rights and just warp back in a brand new FREE noob ship. this is not only excessive greifing it's abuse of trial acocunts.