These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Technology and Research Center » Player Features and Ideas Discussion » Inventions destroy Empires and Alliances

Topic is locked indefinitely.

Previous page12

Inventions destroy Empires and Alliances
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#21 - 2014-10-01 11:09:39 UTC

Alvatore DiMarco wrote:

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.

I was really thinking about an "out of context problem". The introduction of advanced technology into a context that perhaps isn't prepared even to understand it., let alone ready to copy it. Gatlilng guns against Zulus by the British, Spy planes and then Stealth bombers by the US. Ebola by the aliens....that kind of thing..... (probably poor taste, sorry, but it makes the point)

It would be designed to "unbalance" the game. Deliberately. Just for a bit. It would be unfair by definition (other than that someone had invested time and energy and resources into gambling on such a breakthrough). It would shake Empires to the core now and again, and sometimes bring them to ruination. And then the secret would be disseminated and everyone would catch up.

All that said, I'm just exploring the idea. It seems most people responding either don't like it or don't think it's implementable. I'm learning, which is good. So thanks.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#22 - 2014-10-01 11:21:07 UTC

RubyPorto wrote:

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.

Let's say you invested time developing science skills (breakthrough inventions). Let's say you bought or stole a tech 3 laboratory. Let's say you'd acquired, through missions or Experimenting, the necessary Knowledge/Research points in the correct three branches of Knowledge and let's say Edison, the God of Breakthroughs, granted you success in your 34th experiment designed to freeze time. Let's say you then applied the necessary resources to building and fitting the Limited Time Dilation Device to your frigate.

No-one can build another one unless
1. they replicate what you have done in terms of acquiring skills and knowledge and equipment (Lab), and in terms of Experimenting AND
2. unless Edison, the God of Breakthroughs, allows them to make the same breakthrough with their Experiment that you did with yours. It might be easier for them because it's the second time around. Or it might be ten times harder, because breakthroughs are like that. So it's possible that for the first month/Quarter/Year you might be the only person with a Time Dilation Device. Of course, you could sell it. But there is only one until others catch up. Eventually, the system allows everyone to buy the kit on the basis that secrets eventually leak and that helps others invent it, so it becomes the norm. By then there's probably an a anti-time dilation module too, made available at the same time.

Now - as is clear - I'm completely ignorant about developing games. It sounds like this is not implementable, so I'm not arguing for it. I'm just addressing those questions or obstacles I can because I'm interested in ideas.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#23 - 2014-10-01 11:26:49 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.

It's a game idea you don't like, that's fine.

I'm not expecting anyone to do anything. I'm simply putting an idea up on a thread for ideas. I have no idea if it's implementable. I don't think this is a development thread and I'm certainly not telling anyone what to do. I'm describing something that models real, interesting and dangerous leaps in the development of human society that has seen Empires crash and burn while others rose triumphant and danced on their graves, and wondered if that might be fun to do in EVE. I think it would, you think it wouldn't. When I finally get my Mind Altering Device to work I suspect you will agree with me.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#24 - 2014-10-01 11:30:36 UTC

Zan Shiro wrote:

[quote=Gabriel Genoa]
So yes, often the blob would prevail. But not always and never predictably. And that's interesting.

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.

I don't really know enough about anything yet to be able to answer your points, but thanks for making them because it's all learning for me.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#25 - 2014-10-01 13:58:42 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.

If it was implementable, an algorithm that incorporated a random feature for success in one or more linked critical Experiments might deliver into the hands of a dedicated player a glorious prize. How he or she used that gift would be up to them. They might sell it to a massive Alliance, use it to build their own corporation or as a unique weapon within a small alliance. Yes, the odds are with the big players and their resources, as in real life, but at least there would be a chance that something would trigger far-reaching change.

The point is that in the real world disruptive technology is reshaping everything. It destroys stagnating industries and monopolistic institutions. Some players within a game like EVE might prefer that the rules support entirely predictable, calculable outcomes. Fair enough, I understand that. Some others might prefer to take their chances with a world in which sometimes the small guy/gal makes a significant difference.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#26 - 2014-10-01 14:02:21 UTC

RubyPorto wrote:

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

No, because the idea is that the invention isn't immediately replicable by people who haven't put in the time to train, invested in the necessary equipment and had the breakthrough in the lab. It's only operable by the person/people who discover it and translate it into tech. Only that combination of elements (including the unpredictable breakthrough experiment) unlocks the ability to make (and more importantly USE) the device or whatever it is.

RubyPorto

RubysRhymes

Likes received: 5,663

#27 - 2014-10-01 14:24:37 UTC

Gabriel Genoa wrote:

RubyPorto wrote:

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

So... the only one who can use it is my industry alt. Welp.

Also EVE doesn't do soulbound loot. One of the guiding principles is that you can sell *anything* if you can find a buyer.

"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

Owen Levanth

Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration

Likes received: 584

#28 - 2014-10-01 14:26:25 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

This idea is kind of neat, but runs into serious problems if you consider EVE is still a game, not the real world. Also CCP doesn't have infinite ressources to program all this crap, so it seems you're out of luck here OP.

At least you can have fun with typing furiously awesome answers, though.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#29 - 2014-10-01 15:38:26 UTC

RubyPorto wrote:

[quote=Gabriel Genoa][quote=RubyPorto][quote=Zan Shiro][quote=Frostys Virpio]

So... the only one who can use it is my industry alt. Welp.

Also EVE doesn't do soulbound loot. One of the guiding principles is that you can sell *anything* if you can find a buyer.

Yes, you could sell it, and if you do then the buyer would be able to use it (you pass on the necessary unique expertise you gained with your successful Experiment ). But making another one with your knowledge and equipment would require another successful Experiment.

Again, I don't know if it would work or is implementable. I'm just wondering if there's a way to represent breakthrough technologies because they have changed the game throughout Human History, and EVE seems suitably epic to warrant such cataclysmic upheaval now and again.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#30 - 2014-10-01 15:48:30 UTC

Owen Levanth wrote:

Ha! Thanks. I like playing with ideas - that's what I love about science fiction, in particular. I'm not expecting anyone to invest in this, I was just throwing it around.

I work from home, writing, so typing furiously about the things that change the course of History is a nice change from typing furiously about more mundane matters! As a new player I'm also wondering what degree freedom I'll be able to enjoy as I explore, and to what extent the existing superpowers will constrain it. In the real world superpowers rise and - inevitably - fall (Usually because their reach exceeds their grasp, and eventually they cannot acquire sufficient resources and loyalty to continue to control the territory they have conquered). Everything fades.....

RubyPorto

RubysRhymes

Likes received: 5,663

#31 - 2014-10-01 19:44:42 UTC | Edited by: RubyPorto

Gabriel Genoa wrote:

RubyPorto wrote:

So... the only one who can use it is my industry alt. Welp.

Also EVE doesn't do soulbound loot. One of the guiding principles is that you can sell *anything* if you can find a buyer.

So the large alliances buy the items off the market, or, analogous to how the T2BPO market operated before invention, they buy the character who has this unique ability (another thing that EVE doesn't do, but I digress).

By the way, the T2BPO lottery worked pretty much the same way as the mechanic you're suggesting. CCP replaced it with Invention for some very good reasons.

Quote:

Again, I don't know if it would work or is implementable. I'm just wondering if there's a way to represent breakthrough technologies because they have changed the game throughout Human History, and EVE seems suitably epic to warrant such cataclysmic upheaval now and again.

In EVE, they're generally called expansions. They change the game in quite significant ways. And there's hopefully going to be one coming soon to a Sov Mechanic near you.

Gabriel Genoa

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 1

#32 - 2014-10-01 19:58:56 UTC

RubyPorto wrote:

[

So the large alliances buy the items off the market, or, analogous to how the T2BPO market operated before invention, they buy the character who has this unique ability (another thing that EVE doesn't do, but I digress).

By the way, the T2BPO lottery worked pretty much the same way as the mechanic you're suggesting. CCP replaced it with Invention for some very good reasons.

In EVE, they're generally called expansions. They change the game in quite significant ways. And there's hopefully going to be one coming soon to a Sov Mechanic near you.

They can only buy from a willing seller. A small faction might prefer to wield it against them, gambling that they can wound the larger entity mortally before the advantage dissolves and the opportunity melts away. Human choices, always.

I'll read up on T2BPO, thanks. And thanks for your points; I've got a lot to learn and appreciate the insights.

Gabriel.

Previous page12