These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Concerning NPC Spawns in Data/Relic Sites
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Diabolika Spook
Lucidus Ordo
Pandemic Legion
#1 - 2013-05-18 13:50:56 UTC
This topic really troubles me. The rumored NPC Spawns triggered in Data/Relic Sites are, as far as I know, still not on SiSi, and with Odyssey drawing closer there isn’t much time for proper feedback and polishing; so I’m writing here what I think about it.

First of all I find that exploration isn’t about PewPew but about well… exploring. The game has exploration ships that are in fact just probing ships, you need another ship to do the rest, or ironically fly Pilgrims or other non-exploration ships. The news that CCP wanted to get rid of NPCs in professions sites made me extremely happy, it makes sense, after all the spirit of exploration isn’t shooting things, but if you do enjoy that kind of content you can still find Combat Sites.

So I was really disappointed when I read about the NPC Spawn triggers still being present in the new revamped Data/Relic sites in Odyssey. I really hope that they don’t require a combat ship to be dealt with, and keeping that in mind I’ve come up with a few humble ideas on how NPC Spawn could be handled keeping the spirit of exploration intact.

When I think of NPCs in a Data/Relic Site, I’ve pictured it as some kind of automated defense system, drones or sentry towers, which activate if something goes sour. When this happen an idea could be to spawn also a kind of ‘defense core structure’ that you need to hack in order to disable the NPC, make it a few km away so that you have to move back and forth if you mess up too much. The other, even cooler idea would be to allow players to ‘shoot’ those NPCs with the Data/Relic Analyzer and disable them (random proc or constant %, depending on T1-2 and skills). Maybe introduce a new fancy module for the job (like an Auto-Defense Disabling Array of sorts). I always speak of disabling the NPCs, because you may still want to shoot them the traditional way, destroying them and allowing you to loot + salvage (+collect bounties) if you wish, rewarding effort of doing more than required.

So this are my thoughts, I hope you’ll keep my concerns in mind when the time comes.

I would also appreciate if someone at CCP could give us some baseline idea on what we can expect of those NPC Spawns. This way we may already give some feedback while waiting the implementation on SiSi.

Thanks for the great job, and pardon my grammar, I’m not a native English speaker.
Killua Zoldyeck
Lucidus Ordo
Pandemic Legion
#2 - 2013-05-18 13:52:12 UTC
I perfectly agree with you :)
Brainless Bimbo
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2013-05-18 14:03:08 UTC
iirc during the fanfest keynote on this the NPC rats would spawn on failure to hack, however i can confirm that in Incursion systems the incursion rats will spawn at any time, hence why i want the mini game window background to be transparent so you can see them arrive, i was at 50% armour before i realised i was under attack, i never knew an incursion had started when i was playing mini game because most of the screen is filled with mini game.

already dead, just haven´t fallen over yet....
Johan Toralen
IIIJIIIITIIII
#4 - 2013-05-18 14:17:39 UTC
Agree with you aswell. Wouldn't hurt to get a better idea what ships to fly before this goes life on Tranquility and if its worth it in the first place to run the sites seeing as the loot right now doesn't justify it. You're way better off doing ded sites in hisec... my idea of exploration is to find valuable stuff in the depths of nullsec and wormholes far away from "civilization", not farming 4/10 in hisec with no risk and sense of adventure. I really hoped and still hope Odyssey will be a step in that direction.

My idea would be to balance the profession sites in a way that they are relatively safe to run for specialized/skilled explorers regarding npc spawns but pose a great risk to anyone who runs them without the proper tools and skills. The hacking game should be a challenge where your own wits and selection of ship/mods/skill path(not random chance) make a difference between triggering a possibly deathly npc spawn and finding great treasures.
Sarmatiko
#5 - 2013-05-18 14:28:16 UTC
Diabolika Spook wrote:

I would also appreciate if someone at CCP could give us some baseline idea on what we can expect of those NPC Spawns. This way we may already give some feedback while waiting the implementation on SiSi.

IIRC currently in SiSi DB there is only Frigates/Cruisers/Battlecruisers NPC's in mini-profession site spawn groups.
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
#6 - 2013-05-18 14:46:53 UTC
Yea, I have to admit this was a really strange game design idea. First they acknowledge that most people are doing exploration in non-exploration ships, or having to use two ships (a probing and combat) so to make exploration more "accessible' they remove the NPCs so you can do these sites just in the probing ship. Great. But then they ad them back in if your hacking attempt fails, thus forcing you to back to either still using two ships and run the sites in the combat ship, or have to abandon the site if you fail. This is not solving the original problem or moving them toward the goal of making it more accessible. It just moves the NPC roadblock a bit further down the chain.

Now I'm positive CCPs response to this is just going to be "bring a friend" since this exploration expansion seem to be entirely focused on screwing over the solo explorer (who are the vast majority of people who do this) and "forcing" group play (very unsandboxy), while claiming they aren't screwing over the solo explore or forcing group play.

CCP "hey, you can still run the sites solo in a probe ship, but if you fail you will not get the rewards you might have with a friend in a combat ship with you. See more reward for them, less for you….sandbox or something".
Diabolika Spook
Lucidus Ordo
Pandemic Legion
#7 - 2013-05-18 14:57:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Diabolika Spook
Manssell wrote:

CCP "hey, you can still run the sites solo in a probe ship, but if you fail you will not get the rewards you might have with a friend in a combat ship with you. See more reward for them, less for you….sandbox or something".


More so if you bring a friend using this combo, i doubt it'll be fun. Probing ships are fast, sneaky, and versatile to hostile territories. Combat ships aren't. You'll end up warping all over the place alone and scanning down sites and wait while your friend keeps up with you, or he waits for you to scan down all the signatures in the system. If you encounter a gatecamp you're likely to be separated, indefinately. Does it sounds a fun and enjoyable co-op style? Not to me.
Blue Binary
Polychoron
#8 - 2013-05-18 16:16:53 UTC
Manssell wrote:
Yea, I have to admit this was a really strange game design idea. First they acknowledge that most people are doing exploration in non-exploration ships, or having to use two ships (a probing and combat) so to make exploration more "accessible' they remove the NPCs so you can do these sites just in the probing ship. Great. But then they ad them back in if your hacking attempt fails, thus forcing you to back to either still using two ships and run the sites in the combat ship, or have to abandon the site if you fail. This is not solving the original problem or moving them toward the goal of making it more accessible. It just moves the NPC roadblock a bit further down the chain.

Now I'm positive CCPs response to this is just going to be "bring a friend" since this exploration expansion seem to be entirely focused on screwing over the solo explorer (who are the vast majority of people who do this) and "forcing" group play (very unsandboxy), while claiming they aren't screwing over the solo explore or forcing group play.

CCP "hey, you can still run the sites solo in a probe ship, but if you fail you will not get the rewards you might have with a friend in a combat ship with you. See more reward for them, less for you….sandbox or something".

I can understand your viewpoint, but where is the risk factor?

If you fail an access attempt then there has to be some kind of penalty for that, no? To mitigate the risk of NPC's spawning you can bring a friend, or an alt as backup.

It's all very well investing the time in the skills and raising the capital to buy ships and equipment, but there has to be an element of risk to potentially gaining something valuable against losing everything.
Johan Toralen
IIIJIIIITIIII
#9 - 2013-05-18 16:57:53 UTC
Blue Binary wrote:
[quote=Manssell]
I can understand your viewpoint, but where is the risk factor?

If you fail an access attempt then there has to be some kind of penalty for that, no? To mitigate the risk of NPC's spawning you can bring a friend, or an alt as backup.

It's all very well investing the time in the skills and raising the capital to buy ships and equipment, but there has to be an element of risk to potentially gaining something valuable against losing everything.


Flying around solo in null/low is a risk in itself.
It's really strange to me that people can make a ton of isk a day running 4/10s with almost no risk in hisec but when you take the exploration profession more seriously you're supposed to fly the same combat focussed ships into null/low with much higher risk and longer travel time for way lower reward.

Something is seriously off about that. That said i wouldn't mind the additional danger of NPC spawns if the income would be balanced more in the favor of those who actualy take some risks for exploration.

And the whole exploration as group activity thing will be a flop imo. Complete disregard of what type of players chose to be explorers (hint: if i was into group activity i wouldn't enjoy the idea of flying alone deep into the hostile wastelands).
Not to mention that even in a group the loot pinata doesn't sound like a very enjoyable mechanic.

I would much prefer it if CCP instead focussed on making the hacking interesting and meaningful.
Diabolika Spook
Lucidus Ordo
Pandemic Legion
#10 - 2013-05-18 17:27:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Diabolika Spook
As Johan says roaming around lowsec/nullsec is a risk in itself.
As him, when i think of exploration it is not only ''flying deep into the hostile wastelands", but also you should be able to roam freely like a true wanderer, without just 'exploring' your little pocket because you have to fetch your combat ship or your base of operation/ammo stach is there. No wonder lowsec explorators love the pilgrim, which allows you just to do that (requiring only to dock at random stations for codebreaker/analyzer swap). Sure If you are in a nullsec corp you can farm with minimal risks your terriotory, but imho this isn't 'real exploration' by any means.
When I explore, by the very definition i should have no limits; if I feel to do 20-30, hell even 40 jumps in hostile nullsec I should be able to do so (and don't tell me it's risk free). The sites spawn are limited anyway (unlike anomalies and L4 missions), so you should be able to truely move freely. It would for sure make for a more adrenalinic experience to have players limit your ability to run sites, then brainless NPC.