Player Features and Ideas Discussion

You have *completely* missed the point here.

Nerfing insurance payouts would not make destroying ships an ISK sink. Also insurance is not a significant ISK sink, in fact it's just about at the bottom of the pile of ways ISK enters the game. It is not in need of a nerf. The point was simply that destruction of player owned ships is not an ISK sink so a massive wave of destruction of player owned goods does not remove any ISK from the game and is actually slightly ISK positive on the whole, even if it's not value-positive for the players involved.

As something of a side note here, if you don't care about something in general you should at least care enough make sure to get your terminology right. It avoids having your idea thread derailed because you've said something you didn't intend to say.

Citadels are plenty vulnerable at present, and they die every day in High, Low, and Null often in quite significant quantities, especially if not defended actively.

Also Sov Null owned by group size is just about at the smallest its been in Eve's history due to the mechanics of the current iteration of Sov and the changes to power projection. Also more different groups currently hold Sov than at any point in Eve's history.

In short, if that's your goal, then literally nothing is required to achieve it, we're already there.

I have no real agrument with this, as of course eve is and should be mostly a player driven ecosystem - after all that is what differentiates it from other (all?) mmo's. I will play a little devil's advocate though in pointing out that the NPC miners were not asked for nor required, and yet here they are in game. They actively mine ore that other players would have been trying to hoover up. Not apples to apples with this thread but shows CCP has a desire to add more dynamic NPC content.

The irony of self identifying 'only pvp' style players moaning about 'having to shoot NPC's" would be delicious though. XD

I assume you're American, and therefore do not understand what irony actually means?

How is there any irony in saying 'ratting is about as interesting as watching paint dry and I have zero desire to participate in this' an ironic statement?

This is a PVP game. Forcing PVP centric players to PVE if they want to keep their stuff does not exactly encourage them to hang around.

But it isn't going to be more interesting. It is going to be shooting a red chevron in a manner that is calculated to be the most efficient, the same as every other kind of ratting. There will be no difference between this ratting and running an incursion, or a burner mission, or a wormhole site, or any other example of CCP adding in rats that are supposed to be new and interesting, except that this ratting will be mandatory.

This is a pvp game. There is nothing you can do to avoid pvp in some form. The same is not true of pve, and nor should it be.

Your argument is assuming that this content would be more of the same content that already exists that puts off certain people. I am not saying that I have the silver bullet idea of how this new content would be structured, but that the advanced AI and the Drifter element would be my vote to implement it.

Cade - I expressly said 'player-spawned' for the purpose of not trying to sound like I was misrepresenting said content. You are stating the obvious.

I'm going to go with Danika on this one. The newer AI and content are certainly more fun, but they're not revolutionary, they're just a more interesting version of what we already have.

If you have some compelling way to use existing mechanics or some specifics of a new mechanic that could make PvE more fun while still being financially rewarding then by all means post it, but having Drifters going around wrecking stuff indiscriminately isn't a great one.

Also I was highlighting your own words to try and make my point about how having AI go after players runs counter to how Eve works and has always worked, and that comparing someone complaining about involuntary PvE to people complaining about involuntary PvP is a bit ridiculous. The player complaining about PvP happening to them is complaining about nuts in their peanut butter. The person complaining about PvE coming and happening to them is complaining that someone is trying to put pickles in their peanut butter. That combo might work for some people but Eve Peanut Butter has never had it, its not part of the inherent expectations players have for the game, and there's no reason for it to start.

Nah, not my vision.

I'm just here to analyze, poke holes in things, and argue for or against whatever I consider to be the more well presented view. When someone has a good idea with no obvious flaws, or has good responses to the flaws I can find in it, then I'm more than happy to support their idea or position.

Unfortunately the vast majority of ideas on this forum are either poorly thought out or the author's response to criticism and critique is to dig in their heels or engage in circular or just plain bad logic.

Still it's nice to get the writing and debate practice.