These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

My Sandbox is Becoming a Themepark

First post
Author
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#401 - 2014-03-01 11:12:49 UTC
Just read the initial post and not the rest to not colour my response. The only point I can agree with is on changing missions. I would much prefer random mission with random NPC's (tuned to the mission level of course) that then require more than reading eve-survival and fitting the specific resists.

Missions that behave more like PvP players in a limited and controlled engagement would be great too as they would introduce players to PvP concepts and make them more likely to fly to losec etc as they have a better understanding of what is required. As it stands currently you learn PvP by jumping right in and being killed a lot which will put many people off even trying. Being blown up in seconds by someone who knows what they are doing just isn't fun. Learning in tough missions (and losing ships on the way) would be very good preparation for this playstyle, and if combined with higher level missions that cyno you into losec and leave you to fight your way clear afterwards would be another good stepping stone.

I can't understand peoples opposition to WCS though, surely if somebody fits them to avoid combat that is also PvP since they are thwarting the plans of those who wish to stop them by selecting the appropriate fit for the job?
Loki Feiht
Pathfinders.
#402 - 2014-03-01 11:19:37 UTC
I'm of the persuasion that added NPC content could actually increase risk taking, after all if all the really interesting content is in lower security areas players will want to see it, as well as multiple ways of gaining suspect and limited engagement timers through missions and/or incursion type AI (Non sanshas major/minor) and so on.

More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#403 - 2014-03-01 11:33:04 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

No, and your deliberate mischaracterization aside, there is a difference between doing something right, and not doing it wrong.


Care to explain? Because "doing it right" and "not doing it wrong" is very ample and, as I've learned in this forum, allows for very broad interpretation.

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.

BrundleMeth
Black Parrot
Sylvanas Super mercenary
#404 - 2014-03-01 13:14:21 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
...or your desire to remain anti-social by refusing to ask others for help.
Yep... I fly alone...
Damien White
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#405 - 2014-03-01 13:30:55 UTC
Changing missions would just push PvE more into 0.0 space ,where you can already make a fortune without any risk at all, especialy since there are even more specialized fitts possible than you could ever field in Highsec.


But yes, we need a complete overhaul of the PvE system, it is kind of broken right now but not exclusevly in Highsec.

97% of girls would die if Justin Bieber were about to jump off a cliff. Post this in your sig if you`re part of the 3% yelling,

"DO A BARREL ROLL!"

Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#406 - 2014-03-01 14:03:44 UTC
Original poster, you can't even imagine how much I identify with your problem.

I've been playing *your* game for years and noticed the downfall of creative ways to play this game.
Too much bubble wraps for carebears.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

hellokittyonline
New Order Mining Authority
Safety.
#407 - 2014-03-01 15:24:59 UTC  |  Edited by: hellokittyonline
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Highsec is safe enough as it is. It may even be 20% too safe. However, Crimewatch 2.0 isn't to blame for highsec's supposed safety - it didn't really make things safer; it simply untangled the crime system and made it more straightforward and accessible. The safety switch system may feel like it's making things safer, but in reality it keeps people like me who actually bother to answer new player questions from having to repeat the same long and drawn-out explanation of things 20 times. Saying "just keep your safety green if you don't ever want anyone to be able to legally attack you" is so much easier than what I'd have to say otherwise.

With regards to ships blowing up or not, please don't quote information from 2011 when it's now 2014. That's just silly and you know it. Additionally, be sure that you aren't misquoting the line about exhumers and barges blowing up at historic low levels, deliberately saying "ships" to be generic when CCP and the CSM were specific about it being mining ships.

As for nerfing highsec's profitability, don't confuse highsec incursions with highsec income as a whole. With the sole exception of Incursions (since nobody runs nullsec Incursions, which would level out the data) nullsec is much more profitable than highsec. If nobody in nullsec wants to capitalize on that profitability, it's not anyone else's fault but their own.

Okay, so I agree with you to a degree on the green safety thing, it makes things easier and more straight-forward (though I think the system by itself already took care of the straight-forward part, giving people an easy-button just discourages players from having to become informed).

Your second point is moot.

Nullsec should be far more profitable than high-sec. If it were to the right degree so, more people would be out there, and it would also be more risky. The problem is that high-sec has become too profitable, so null sec is empty, and subsequently has less risk. High-seccers love to make the argument that "WELL NULL SEC IS SAFE TOO AND THEY MAKE MORE ISK". Null sec is safe only because there isn't enough incentive, to bring enough people, to make it dangerous.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#408 - 2014-03-01 15:38:54 UTC
hellokittyonline wrote:
Null sec is safe only because there isn't enough incentive, to bring enough people, to make it dangerous.


i'd add local to that

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

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#409 - 2014-03-01 15:50:52 UTC
Roll

Really? Ok, let's tear this apart:

Quote:
Nullsec should be far more profitable than high-sec. ... The problem is that high-sec has become too profitable, so null sec is empty, and subsequently has less risk.


How much more profit do you want from ratting and other 00 activities? You only need a couple of hours/days to gather the money for a carrier, ie. billions of ISK in a very short amount of time. That is only rivaled by Incursions, although you need more effort and invest more ISK in getting started in certain cases. With ratting you make 30M/20 minutes or even less time.

Quote:
If it were to the right degree so, more people would be out there, and it would also be more risky ... and subsequently has less risk. High-seccers love to make the argument that "WELL NULL SEC IS SAFE TOO AND THEY MAKE MORE ISK". Null sec is safe only because there isn't enough incentive, to bring enough people, to make it dangerous..


You are ignoring again, as so many people before you, that a lot of people simply don't want to go to 00 for various reasons, be it RL, time constraints, no interest in the volatility of 00 politics. That cannot be changed with more incentives to come to 00. And you contradiction yourself by saying that people do not go to 00 because of risk, but want it to be riskier by more people being there.

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.

Damien White
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#410 - 2014-03-01 15:59:12 UTC
0.0 space risky?

For PvE Carebears?

lol... you have no idea how PvE in 0.0 space works, do you?


I can, at any given time, tell exactly how save it is to do PvE in a system, as long as I keep an eye on the local. Is it empty or all blue, nothing to fear about. Is there a neutral or red, lets go to the POS.

In the empire everyone may be a possible ganker, griefer or both.

97% of girls would die if Justin Bieber were about to jump off a cliff. Post this in your sig if you`re part of the 3% yelling,

"DO A BARREL ROLL!"

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#411 - 2014-03-01 15:59:47 UTC
Its not about risk or the lack of risk.

Its about tools and hassle to manage that risk. EVE PvP is very binary when it concerns PvE players... Options are to either stop playing or die to provide content for the PvP player. There is almost zero chance of even damaging your opponent.

To make Low and Null sec worth its risk/reward ratio with the current state of PvP you would have to make those areas worth millions per minute, because as soon as a potential hostile is in system you have to stop playing until he decides to go away(possibly for hours), or start playing an entirely different playstyle that most are simply not in any way interested in, and even that becomes mind numbing as the pirate usually wont engage a fight, just an easy kill. I am not interested in playing grabass with some mouth breather all night just to finish a single mission, so I just dont go there.

Its not about the money, its about the fun. I am not interested in victimizing anyone, nor in playing the victim in someone elses domestic abuse fantasy. You dont get to slap me around just because I dont want to play like you.
Damien White
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#412 - 2014-03-01 16:10:43 UTC
Well, and you can get two stupid missions in a row, forcing you to either stop or look for another agent.

97% of girls would die if Justin Bieber were about to jump off a cliff. Post this in your sig if you`re part of the 3% yelling,

"DO A BARREL ROLL!"

DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#413 - 2014-03-01 16:15:35 UTC
Well you know what happens when a sand box becomes popular don't ya.......MEOW!
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#414 - 2014-03-01 16:25:54 UTC
Damien White wrote:
0.0 space risky?

For PvE Carebears?


Risk is not only limited to PVP gangs ruin your day. It's a large concern, but if you look at the recent trend in dead-zoning stations, your valuable assets can be unreachable just like that. Or sov just drops, alliances get disbanded and suddenly you are stuck in a station you cannot access anymore or are neutral and free to shoot, or you lose your stuff due to awoxxers (also a risk in other sec levels, but it can be a lot more hampering in 00). Not to speak of the logistical efforts living in deep 00 requires.

@Mike Voidstar

That's the attitude that I'd like to see in more people, but it's not going to happen. Roll

@rysonBennington

Requests to allow duckfaces in the portraits?

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.

Dr Sraggles
The Covenant of Blood
#415 - 2014-03-01 16:29:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Sraggles
hellokittyonline wrote:
PREFACE FOR PERSPECTIVE: I have made (and continue to make) all of my isk PvPing by baiting high-sec mission runners and stealing their ships. I use this isk to fund hellokittyonline's endless rampage in low-sec and PLEX my 3 accounts.

SKILLS MY PROFESSION REQUIRES THAT PVE DOESN'T:

1. People Skills - the socio-path-like ability to talk someone into doing something completely stupid

2. Knowledge of Game Mechanics - pinning a battleship with a frigate while tanking his entire lvl 4 mission (though this is much easier than it sounds... most of the time)

3. Creativity - because only an idiot would fall for that... right?

4. Risk Management - training 3 accounts and making a large initial investment so that you can execute a ridiculous scheme with no guarentee that this scheme will pay-out enough to plex said accounts or even pay for your initial investment.

THE PROBLEM: Far too many players are mindlessly farming NPCs in an all-but-0-risk environment and there is no longer any incentive for those players to enter a risky environment because they can make far too much bank with little-to-no knowledge about combat or game mechanics. Now this in and of itself wouldn't be a problem in your typical MMO but in EvE these actions slowly but surely dilute the sandbox aspect of the game as players are not required to use any creativity, knowledge, or people skills to move forward in the game. One merely has to play by themselves (IN AN MMO) for a few hours a day in order to afford pretty much anything they desire. Furthermore, the longer players have access to the I-Win button(s), the more subscriptions CCP stands to lose by taking it away (ie: balancing their game becomes a conflict of interest).

CCPs STANCE: Has been to continuously bubble-wrap the risk-averse making it increasingly difficult (in extremely superficial ways) for us content-creators to inject risk into their environment. EXAMPLES: Swapping ships with an orca was nerfed because we were killing too many mission runners, EHP of miners was buffed because we were suiciding too many miners, CONCORD was buffed because we were suiciding too many industrials, mission NPCs aggro mechanics were changed because we were stealing too many LEWTS, crimewatch (and the green safety) was added because too many players were dying inadvertently (even though it was already completely avoidable by simply understanding aggro mechanics). Even when CCP decides to throw us PvPers a bone (Faction Welfare) it all-but-immediately devolves into a cloaked, stabbed, farm-fest. Furthermore, when they add content for the PvEers (Incursions) the isk/hr is completely out of hand, liquid, and 100% riskless.

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS:

1. NPCs need to be DIFFICULT. Make the NPCs fight like a seasoned PvPer would. Neuts, scrams, webs, transversal, and the utilization of range control. These NPCs should only target the aggressors and they should encourage your average carebear to actually learn how combat works.

2. Remove bounties. Rewards should 100% be in the form of a tangible item in the game that one can trade to another player for that players isk (or even, god-forbid, STEAL). Bounties inflate currency and line the lazy-mans pocket as no processing is required to get the value out of their time.

3. Incentivise risk-taking. Whether it be a risky market endevour or a trip to low-sec for those "o so juicy ores" there needs to be incentives that involve risking an engagement with another player for our lovely sandbox to remain as such. Furthermore, the rewards for said endevours need to fall in line with the risk involved.

4. Remove safety nets. The green safety, gate guns in low sec, warp core stabs on ships already small enough to escape almost anything, all need to go. The idea should be to incentivise knowledge of game mechanics, and player interaction, not solo-farming.

TL;DR - Make players have to learn about the game and its mechanics in order to be successful.



ROFL OP HAS NEVER BEEN TO WH SPACE. Sleeper AI. No Safety Net. Complicated mechanics. Rivers of Isk.

Everything you ask for is there and available to every single Eve player at anytime. Why aren't more there? Because we like other people to play with and WH space is empty.

All the OP is, is another cry for nerfs so that he can Role Play GTA4 the bad man space pirate while exploiting game mechanics with more individual people for victims, more easily, while enjoying the protection of Concord.

"Nerf Concord!" Yet he depends on Concords protection and Station Guns every single day.

"Nerf Mission Bounties!" Because he cannot steal them. O wait. He can do the damn mission himself. O wait. Too Lazy.

"Nerf Complicated Green Buttone!" ROFL?

"Nerf Stabs!" Get some faction points and friends you pussy.

Hey OP, why don't you target L5 Mission runners or Plexers in Low Sec ? The ships have bling and the lewts are better. O wait, that actually takes some skill and people are prepared to shoot back and can even shoot first. It is precisely what you pretend to want but you don't do it.

Why?

Every single thing you pretend to want is in Low, Null or WH space. The amount of ISK that can be earned builds Titans as fast as the station can make them. You are just too much of a lazy care bear to go out there, have no friends and don't want a fleet of Dreads dropped on your Golem. You won't go out there because you get owned solo. You are lazy. You depend on Concord. You, are a Care Bear.

CCP has given you every incentive to go outside of High Sec but you simply are too risk adverse.

Someone else said it best: Sociopath tears are the best tears.

Cry moar tough guy.
Dr Sraggles
The Covenant of Blood
#416 - 2014-03-01 16:38:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Sraggles
double post
Evilishah
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#417 - 2014-03-01 17:46:34 UTC
Mentioning Null as a problem is just bringing up a new issue. It doesn't affect this issue ie they are not mutually exclusive.

I think most of us can agree that Null has become the new high sec in some sense and that the blue ring is bad for all of us. Hopefully this is something being considered by CCP.

That said, it still doesn't change high sec profit to risk ratio which is ******* high... really high. There are a few threads that have crunched numbers to show that high sec is one of the most profitable activities in the game. Add to that the safety of high sec, and in many cases you are risking nothing for said profitability.
Dr Sraggles
The Covenant of Blood
#418 - 2014-03-01 18:07:01 UTC
Evilishah wrote:
Mentioning Null as a problem is just bringing up a new issue. It doesn't affect this issue ie they are not mutually exclusive.

I think most of us can agree that Null has become the new high sec in some sense and that the blue ring is bad for all of us. Hopefully this is something being considered by CCP.

That said, it still doesn't change high sec profit to risk ratio which is ******* high... really high. There are a few threads that have crunched numbers to show that high sec is one of the most profitable activities in the game. Add to that the safety of high sec, and in many cases you are risking nothing for said profitability.



This is a thread about a can flipper that is complaining that can flipping in high sec is too hard, no more, no less.

If you think Null is the new high sec tell it to Pandemic Legion or Test. They found it more risky than we can dream of.

Have this little can flipper who made this thread go deep into Goon Space and try flipping some cans.
Damien White
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#419 - 2014-03-01 18:24:16 UTC
Well, he doesnt need to flip cans in Lowsec or 0.0, he can start shooting right away.

The problem is he doesnt have the protection either and will most likely be killed and that is something he wants to avoid at any cost.

97% of girls would die if Justin Bieber were about to jump off a cliff. Post this in your sig if you`re part of the 3% yelling,

"DO A BARREL ROLL!"

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#420 - 2014-03-01 19:28:22 UTC
hellokittyonline wrote:
Choosing to remain ignorant about game mechanics is not a "play style". The fact of the matter is, whether you like it or not, learning how to defend yourself (ex: dont shoot flashies in a PvE ship and don't autopilot shineys in an untanked industrial) is (and should be) a basic requirement of every profession.

Claiming that you should be able to make poor decisions and not face the consequences is extremely selfish. You are playing a multiplayer game. Remember other players contribute to your game by buying your goods and conversely selling you the items that you need in order to be successful. So you should be able to play by yourself and not return the favor? I support industrialists every day by literally BLOWING isk on ships. The only reason you can even sell goods is because myself and others like me either blow up someone elses goods, or lose our own.

Now with this being said is it really fair for you to be able to reap the rewards of a thriving multiplayer environment and in turn not contribute?

No where have I said that players should not receive consequences for their actions or inactions. I don't know where you're getting that.

Yes defending yourself is a basic skill most people need to learn. There are exceptions like station traders and industrialists, who are capable of staying stations for very long periods of time (some people find that stuff fun or necessary).

Using your example of highsec ratters (the ones who don't fall for your bait) I fail to see where they have gone wrong. And so what if someone wants to play by themself and avoid other people as much as possible? Isn't that the "sandbox" at its finest? No one is forced to cooperate with anyone they don't want to. Freedom of choice. If I want to go do solo things in some backwater system that only sees traffic maybe once or twice a week, that's up to me.

I would like to see an example of some rule a player breaks, that doesnt have consequences. Or show me something a player does wrong that will cannot be take advantage of by another player. All actions have consequences and sometimes the same action doesnt get the same consequences and thats either really good playing or luck.

I'm especially interested to see an example that's tied to your OP since this whole thread seems to be a little off-topic right now.