Assembly Hall

Please upvote if you like this idea.

Problem: PVE fits for exploration are unsuitable for PVP because you must "waste" slots on hack/archeology modules.

Solution: Merge hack/archeology functionality into existing PVP modules such as webs, scrams, TPs, TDs, etc.

Implementation: Simply remove hacking and archeology modules and instead move their functionality into existing PVP modules.
Skills affecting hacking and archeology could affect the migrated function.

Container to hack? Scram or TD it.
Container to analyze? Web or TP it.
Someone attacking you? Use all the mids.

Whoa, PvE content is part of PvP!?!?!

Dude, whatever you've been smoking, you need to share.

Because PVP and PVE are inherently different things and ~choices~ and ~consequences~.

What about FW?

CCP wants people to move out of high sec and try low and null. Baiting them out there with PVE is a good idea. FW accomplishes this but if we want to go exploring, we must gimp our ships to PVP-fail level before going into what is basically a "PVP zone". It sends a mixed message. "Come to the PVP zones for the exploration PVE! (But first, gimp your ship's PVP effectiveness so that you won't stand a chance in a 1 on 1 fight against the same hull.)"

To participate in Exploration in something other than a T3 outside of high sec we can only bring "victim" fail-fits? Pass.

First, pirate frig. So much for exploration with a realistic PVP fit in a T1 frigate. Isn't exploration supposed to be new player friendly?

Second, mobile fitting hangar as an answer KILLS the idea of a fast-paced game. "Oh, a frigate on d-scan, landing on grid... Take the fight in seconds? Nope. I'll go refit, and hope this frigate is still on grid in a few minutes." *YAWN*

Your work-arounds are A) Buying a pirate faction frigate hull for 85 million ISK, and gimping it, but it can still (shockingly) beat 1 million ISK T1 frigs, even when gimped or B) losing fight opportunities to go refit. How are either of your alternatives to my suggestion better for the game?

A scram or point/web does more in a fight than just ensuring the other party does not warp away. For most frigate fights, range dictation is critical. Giving up range dictation means the chances of a win are extremely low, and as you said, even if things do still go your way, the enemy can just warp off. So you have little to no chances of winning the DPS race, and even if you do, you won't get the kill. That is nothing to huzzah about in my book.

Extra modules that gimp your ship's PVP ability are not required for FW site farming. And FW is the most successful mix of PVP and PVE in the game. Why should they be required for exploration? CCP should do away with PVP-useless mids and fold them into either the ship hull attributes or into PVP mids. For some reason this game feels we should offer ourselves up as hobbled sheep if we want to explore outside of high sec.

I disagree wholeheartedly. Exploration in low sec and null sec is PVP because jumping a ship into low or null is PVP. Even if your only goal is to avoid getting shot down by other players it's still PVP. Technically, just undocking in high sec is PVP as well.



You can have a large mining op with multiple ships, which implies multiple pilots, which means some of those players could be tasked with security. However, exploration is a solo activity. Bringing 2 ships in and splitting the (already minimal) loot between two pilots would be unrealistic. Does anyone do this? Requiring a pirate frig at an absolute minimum to protect yourself from even a single PVP-fit T1 frigate is exclusionary, and screws with the ISK/reward ratio. Right now, newer players wishing to venture into low or null for exploration face two choices: 1) Fly more than they can afford to lose or; 2) Bring a ship that literally any properly fit solo T1 frigate should be able to trounce.

If CCP wants new players to have fun and go exploring in low/null then they shouldn't require them to gimp their frigate before heading into "Dangerous Territory." Isn't that exactly when you want to arm up? Instead, they strip down, and put on a module that serves no purpose toward a ship's defensive or offensive capabilities. Isn't it enough of a disadvantage to have them distracted by the hacking mini-game and having to haul a probe scanner? Do we really need to strip them of 1, 2, or even 3 mid-slots (data analyzer, relic analyzer, cargo scanner) on top of that as the price of admission for engaging in exploration?

The disadvantages of engaging in exploration include being required to fit a probe launcher, data analyzer, relic analyzer, and cargo scanner. This proposal would free up 2 mids out of the 3 mids and 1 high currently required. So it hardly removes all disadvantages from exploration in terms of slot usage. If you want to do it in low or null, then it is also relevant that you are required to be unaligned, in a hostile PVP zone while engaging in a mini-game. Ghost sites are a good step toward reducing the overhead of modules required by allowing data OR relic analyzers. My proposal simply goes one step further and lets explorers keep an effective PVP fit while exploring in "dangerous space".

I have to wonder if those arguing against it are really just afraid of seeing their supply of kb padding ****fit explorers armed with a point.

First off, a cargo scanner isn't required. It's a choice. Secondly, most exploration ships have an extra high for a probe scanner specifically, so you didn't lose anything. Thirdly, you are stating relic and data analysers, so you are talking about a dual exploration fit, for exploring both types of site. So you want to be able to fit for both types of exploration AND you want to be viable in PvP.

No. Make your choices and live with those consequences.