These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Inventions destroy Empires and Alliances

Author
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-09-30 08:22:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Genoa
Hi, I'm new and this is my first post. so forgive any ignorance on my part..

I've read the sticky and other threads and I can't see this idea anywhere. Apologies if I've missed it.

I've picked up that there are some people who feel the strategic situation in null sec is stagnant and shuts solo players and small gangs out. That might or might not be an accurate characterisation of a situation I know nothing about personally yet, but if true it would reflect what we know about the dynamics that drive Empires (Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" remains a terrific read on this).

Empires rise and fall according to the resources they can

a) acquire,
b) transform into economic (and then military) resources
c) deploy efficiently

What disrupts the established pattern of power between Empires is changes to a, b or c; ie,

a) new resources become available to a party through exploration or conquest (eg the "discovery" of America by European nations)
b) new technologies that confer a multiplier effect become available to one or more parties (eg Britain's industrial revolution)
c) a party uses its resources better than its rivals to acquire, translate or deploy its resources (eg better military tactics, like Rome, or more successful mercantilism, like Venice)

What I'd like to suggest is that EVE adds something under item b, above. Invention - genuine invention - could be represented by discovery of a breakthrough technology in EVE that confers serious benefits that

1) a party can achieve through the acquisition and deployment of science, and
2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.

I've seen a sticky thread somewhere that suggests a science profession should be available. There are some great ideas in that thread (I didn't see this one). Combining these two suggestions would

a) make EVE closer to how real life works,
b) introduce a great new profession/way of earning isk
c) provide a means by which a small alliance could take down a dominant faction, changing the course of History

This game is brilliant, btw, and I hesitate to suggest changing it in any way. But hey, that's how humans progress, right?

Gabriel
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2 - 2014-09-30 09:42:15 UTC
Look up the term "Power creep", look at your idea, think about it.
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2014-09-30 09:50:40 UTC
Interesting, thanks.

But what you're calling "power creep" (from what I've just read) would in this case be an accurate modelling the march of scientific progress.

Machine guns are more powerful than flintlocks, and those who don't keep up, die.
Sara Tosa
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-09-30 09:53:06 UTC
watch under the term "game" and the premise where it says "it has to be fun to play".
fun >>>>>>>> realism.
Regatto
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2014-09-30 10:03:41 UTC
Problem with empires income is that it's very hard to do anything with income like renters. It's basically a willing slave force working for their overlord. You won't see this being taken away from them as long as there are 30thousand toons which preffer to pay couple a billions per month rather than having to deal with sov mechanics, politics and CTAs.
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2014-09-30 10:06:17 UTC
Sara Tosa wrote:
watch under the term "game" and the premise where it says "it has to be fun to play".
fun >>>>>>>> realism.


I agree.Realism isn't necessarily fun. But, um...mining on EVE......isn't realistic, and some would say it isn't fun. People make choices. Mining, pvp, building industries, inventing time travel.... are all optional.

The point of this is would be that it would introduce the possibility that one person can make a breakthrough that enables a corporation or alliance to radically change the landscape and force better resourced alliances catch up.

It's called disruptive technology, and it's usually how humanity makes sudden leaps and Empires rise and fall.

David vs Goliath.

Of course, if you're Goliath you might not appreciate the revolution...

But also muskets vs bows and arrows and tanks vs cavalry. It doesn't always favour the underdog. It's a two edged sword (now there's an innovation). Something (unpredictably, though far from random, of course)

Thanks for helping me explore the idea. It might be daft; I'm just interested in floating it and finding out what I (eventually) think. More importantly, what others think. So thanks.

Gabriel.
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2014-09-30 10:08:08 UTC
Regatto wrote:
Problem with empires income is that it's very hard to do anything with income like renters. It's basically a willing slave force working for their overlord. You won't see this being taken away from them as long as there are 30thousand toons which preffer to pay couple a billions per month rather than having to deal with sov mechanics, politics and CTAs.


A bit like real life then Shocked
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#8 - 2014-09-30 10:38:31 UTC
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2014-09-30 10:51:28 UTC
Gabriel Genoa wrote:
Hi, I'm new and this is my first post. so forgive any ignorance on my part..

I've read the sticky and other threads and I can't see this idea anywhere. Apologies if I've missed it.

I've picked up that there are some people who feel the strategic situation in null sec is stagnant and shuts solo players and small gangs out. That might or might not be an accurate characterisation of a situation I know nothing about personally yet, but if true it would reflect what we know about the dynamics that drive Empires (Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" remains a terrific read on this).

Empires rise and fall according to the resources they can

a) acquire,
b) transform into economic (and then military) resources
c) deploy efficiently

What disrupts the established pattern of power between Empires is changes to a, b or c; ie,

a) new resources become available to a party through exploration or conquest (eg the "discovery" of America by European nations)
b) new technologies that confer a multiplier effect become available to one or more parties (eg Britain's industrial revolution)
c) a party uses its resources better than its rivals to acquire, translate or deploy its resources (eg better military tactics, like Rome, or more successful mercantilism, like Venice)

What I'd like to suggest is that EVE adds something under item b, above. Invention - genuine invention - could be represented by discovery of a breakthrough technology in EVE that confers serious benefits that

1) a party can achieve through the acquisition and deployment of science, and
2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.

I've seen a sticky thread somewhere that suggests a science profession should be available. There are some great ideas in that thread (I didn't see this one). Combining these two suggestions would

a) make EVE closer to how real life works,
b) introduce a great new profession/way of earning isk
c) provide a means by which a small alliance could take down a dominant faction, changing the course of History

This game is brilliant, btw, and I hesitate to suggest changing it in any way. But hey, that's how humans progress, right?

Gabriel


THe idea work on theory but would need a massive overhoul of the game. It would need the game to have been created wit hthat in mind to work. If I was going to design a game it would be like that (among other things that would make numeric superiority less prevalent), but now is too late for eve.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#10 - 2014-09-30 10:52:04 UTC
How does this kill the blob?


You do know they'd do the same thing, right? Invention/indy alts are very common for 0.0 types. This char would be the bread winner when the combat char is in pvp and on campaign and not able to rat for example.


Now before you say the tech can't be shared outside of corp/alliance, remember there are many shades of blue and not all are an official "in the alliance for real" blue. Blob A has a few corps non-affiliated spam this. They can drop in fleet real easy. I have seen this with mercs. FC says clearly and repeatedly...there are no nuets in this system, we are bringing the some outside help in to fleet by hand. Do not shoot anything unless I say so. MInutes later...all those neut grey mercs are fleet colored (at least till node goes really bad in which case I have seen this trash ov to where all of us go grey, corp, alliance, fleet....fun times I tell you what). They don't drop fleet at a bad time....safe from NBSI but they aren't blue.



Well that and what technological marvels are you having come in game just out of the blue? That you know...won't be shot down in flames on Sisi (or where you bypassing ccp internal testing and then sisi as well?).

Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-09-30 11:06:08 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Nerf Goon space.


Makes it a possibility. Which makes it interesting, I think.
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2014-09-30 11:19:16 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
How does this kill the blob?


You do know they'd do the same thing, right? Invention/indy alts are very common for 0.0 types. This char would be the bread winner when the combat char is in pvp and on campaign and not able to rat for example.


Now before you say the tech can't be shared outside of corp/alliance, remember there are many shades of blue and not all are an official "in the alliance for real" blue. Blob A has a few corps non-affiliated spam this. They can drop in fleet real easy. I have seen this with mercs. FC says clearly and repeatedly...there are no nuets in this system, we are bringing the some outside help in to fleet by hand. Do not shoot anything unless I say so. MInutes later...all those neut grey mercs are fleet colored (at least till node goes really bad in which case I have seen this trash ov to where all of us go grey, corp, alliance, fleet....fun times I tell you what). They don't drop fleet at a bad time....safe from NBSI but they aren't blue.



Well that and what technological marvels are you having come in game just out of the blue? That you know...won't be shot down in flames on Sisi (or where you bypassing ccp internal testing and then sisi as well?).



Indeed. Resources confer benefits and they'd research the heck out of tons of stuff. The trick would be to introduce a sensible degree of unpredictability. Sometimes inventions flow from the deployment of heavyweight resources, sometimes from a stroke of genius or luck. The issue then is how well-kept and how well-exploited the secret is by those who hold it. The inventor will have had to work through a series of experiments or research, tried and failed a few times (perhaps that's the random element). Those trying to catch up would have to replicate that research path (which might have several possible forks and where the random element is still a factor on each path/experiment). Eventually EVE leaks the secret to those who are at least in the ball game. Finally, it can be bought on the market like any tech.

So yes, often the blob would prevail. But not always and never predictably. And that's interesting.

As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels?

Antidotes and inoculations, counters and upgrades at a shop near you soon?

I don't want to sound like I'm arguing for it. It's just fun to explore. Thanks.
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2014-09-30 11:20:45 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Gabriel Genoa wrote:
Hi, I'm new and this is my first post. so forgive any ignorance on my part..

I've read the sticky and other threads and I can't see this idea anywhere. Apologies if I've missed it.

I've picked up that there are some people who feel the strategic situation in null sec is stagnant and shuts solo players and small gangs out. That might or might not be an accurate characterisation of a situation I know nothing about personally yet, but if true it would reflect what we know about the dynamics that drive Empires (Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" remains a terrific read on this).

Empires rise and fall according to the resources they can

a) acquire,
b) transform into economic (and then military) resources
c) deploy efficiently

What disrupts the established pattern of power between Empires is changes to a, b or c; ie,

a) new resources become available to a party through exploration or conquest (eg the "discovery" of America by European nations)
b) new technologies that confer a multiplier effect become available to one or more parties (eg Britain's industrial revolution)
c) a party uses its resources better than its rivals to acquire, translate or deploy its resources (eg better military tactics, like Rome, or more successful mercantilism, like Venice)

What I'd like to suggest is that EVE adds something under item b, above. Invention - genuine invention - could be represented by discovery of a breakthrough technology in EVE that confers serious benefits that

1) a party can achieve through the acquisition and deployment of science, and
2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.

I've seen a sticky thread somewhere that suggests a science profession should be available. There are some great ideas in that thread (I didn't see this one). Combining these two suggestions would

a) make EVE closer to how real life works,
b) introduce a great new profession/way of earning isk
c) provide a means by which a small alliance could take down a dominant faction, changing the course of History

This game is brilliant, btw, and I hesitate to suggest changing it in any way. But hey, that's how humans progress, right?

Gabriel


THe idea work on theory but would need a massive overhoul of the game. It would need the game to have been created wit hthat in mind to work. If I was going to design a game it would be like that (among other things that would make numeric superiority less prevalent), but now is too late for eve.


I've probably already demonstrated that I know nothing about game development, so I'll bow to your superior knowledge about that.

Thanks,
Gabriel
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#14 - 2014-09-30 13:31:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Quote:
Nerf Goon space.

Grrrr, goons.

GRRR!!! GOOONS!!!

GRRRR!!! GOOOOOONS!!!!!!

But really, no. Power creep is bad and what you call "the march of technology" a game calls "power creep" and game balancing calls "bad".

To be fair, though, how many years did it take us to go from a flintlock to a modern-day machine gun? Now how long has EVE been up for? EVE time is realtime and so there you have that.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#15 - 2014-09-30 13:36:56 UTC
Gabriel Genoa wrote:
2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.


How, exactly, do you propose to enforce this?

Especially considering the meta of EVE.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#16 - 2014-09-30 13:40:02 UTC
Gabriel Genoa wrote:
As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels?

And how is the code for this stuff generated? What mechanism do you believe would allow this "real" invention without requiring a team of devs to drop whatever they're doing to cater to the newest group of players that want something new?

I mean, aside for the fact that it's a terrible game idea, I don't see how it's practical.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#17 - 2014-09-30 15:40:54 UTC
Gabriel Genoa wrote:

So yes, often the blob would prevail. But not always and never predictably. And that's interesting.

As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels?

Antidotes and inoculations, counters and upgrades at a shop near you soon?

I don't want to sound like I'm arguing for it. It's just fun to explore. Thanks.




we can brainstorm away....it be ccp internally testing first then seeing how people break it on SISI. Use any fitting tool that has the full data dumps and turn off the filtering to see the unreleased stuff. CCP has some nice shinies in those dumps....that probably summon the OP gods. Why they are not in game.

Stuff in game has to keep balance chief. Some semblance of it at least. Even then...meta of eve abuses what makes it through this sometimes.


Also you do know most comms go out of eve's software.....right? Mirc (others) for chat, ts (others) for voice. Not seeing ts devs thrilled if meta/rp has ccp breaking their stuff. And not seeing ccp even going that route....lawyers they would need, many of them.

Your other weapons....since seem kind of new there is rule when presenting ideas. It sadly brings up grrr goons but here it goes....

How will goons abuse this change.


Now it can fill in any blob, but the masses have put goons in by default lol.


Long story short....ccp (or any mmo maker single player games give the dev tools to mod away as they can, its only affecting 1 player, have your uber weapon of 1000000000 damage if you want) makes the items we use because they have a general sense of objectivity. Insert jokes about goon devs, pl devs, etc....but by and large they are objective. If only because many will recall what happened when a dev tried to hook up a (band of) brother(s) lol.

Players tend to lack this objectivity.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#18 - 2014-09-30 15:43:31 UTC
Komi Toran wrote:
Gabriel Genoa wrote:
As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels?

And how is the code for this stuff generated? What mechanism do you believe would allow this "real" invention without requiring a team of devs to drop whatever they're doing to cater to the newest group of players that want something new?

I mean, aside for the fact that it's a terrible game idea, I don't see how it's practical.


The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#19 - 2014-09-30 16:04:36 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:

The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.




and even with a success rate buried deep in improbability-ville....this doesn't even favor the small guy. Blob spamming invents on god knows how many pos'/station slots....rng will favor them most likely.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#20 - 2014-09-30 19:47:39 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.




and even with a success rate buried deep in improbability-ville....this doesn't even favor the small guy. Blob spamming invents on god knows how many pos'/station slots....rng will favor them most likely.



And then even the ones that don't go to the big groups will get bought out by them. Just like T2BPOs were.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

12Next page