These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Respecting Balance Perception

Author
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1 - 2012-02-01 17:28:34 UTC
I recently saw a thread pointing out how balance needs to be maintained, not thrown out in a desire to get the new shiny toy or changes.

I could not agree more.

More specifically, it is the PERCEPTION of balance that is needed.

Players abandon aspects of the game, where they feel they are not able to enjoy themselves.

This could be because they feel the risk and effort fail to justify themselves. It does NOT matter if they are correct. If they believe this, they leave that part of the game, if not the game itself.

Many parts of null sec, and low sec, are considered by many players to want more population.
Whether they are lonely for chatting buddies, or simply want more people to go pew pew with, it is the same effect to them.

What we need, is a perception of good levels of risk, as compared with, "i'll just get blown up at the first gate camp".

Maybe we need NPC ships to act as a defense force to protect them. They seem to like this in high sec, obviously.
Perhaps corporations can pay Concord, and have off duty officers protect carebears that are blue.
Maybe a mercenary equivalent should be used, so concord is not associated with a player corporation.

The main point, is that if you want more players in null and low sec, you have to give them something to feel good about playing there, and make them willing to move.

They have to want it.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#2 - 2012-02-01 18:04:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
no. In low/null you need friends, not NPCs.

Nerf CONCORD, make people not rely on them so much, and you'll see them venturing farther out.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#3 - 2012-02-01 18:32:11 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
no. In low/null you need friends, not NPCs.

Nerf CONCORD, make people not rely on them so much, and you'll see them venturing farther out.

I have two problems with your comment.

One, we need to cater to the opinions of the players still in high sec, that do not feel comfortable doing anything in low or null sec.

Two, many of the high sec players are solo. Telling them that their play style is not valid, is certainly not going to make them come around to your viewpoint.

And, it does not matter if they choose to be solo, or are just not socially interested in gaming with others.
They have demonstrated an interest in PvE, and a dislike for PvP, in their choice of playing style.

They are more likely to go play another game, not embrace changes like that. They already left the part of the game you described, assuming they were willing to try it in the first place.
Herold Oldtimer
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4 - 2012-02-01 18:52:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Herold Oldtimer
Velicitia wrote:
no. In low/null you need friends, not NPCs.

Nerf CONCORD, make people not rely on them so much, and you'll see them venturing farther out.


But no-one in low/null sec want to be friends. They either kill me or chase me back...

Over to Nikk

I agree with you on the player interactivity. If you want someone to do something you will have to make them want it themselves. I doubt a nerf to condcord will have the desired effect. One that could maybe work would be to add concord rats.

However I don't think it is only the mechanics of the game that is to blame. It is also to, some degree, the players currently living there themselves too. Take me for instance. One dream I have had for a long time is to be a travelling merchant. Going from system to system, selling and buying. With todays mentality that dream will sadly remain as sutch, a dream.

If the players living there could look beyond the easy killmail, it might open up the possibilities for more players coming out.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#5 - 2012-02-01 18:57:47 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
One, we need to cater to the opinions of the players still in high sec, that do not feel comfortable doing anything in low or null sec.


Not really. The "fear" that chronic high-seccers possess is more of a personal/preference issue than a game issue.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
Two, many of the high sec players are solo. Telling them that their play style is not valid, is certainly not going to make them come around to your viewpoint.


Solo play is valid. However, if any group of players organize their efforts and work together, why shouldn't they have an advantage over someone who is solo? After all, the group of players took the initiative and are pooling their respective "solo" resources to gain that advantage.
Giving a single solo player the ability to stand toe to toe (or even slightly competitively) against multiple players who organized calls into question whether the efforts of organizing players is even worth it at all. Why deal with the drama of another when you can simply buy an NPC that will give you 60, 70% effectiveness (just throwing out numbers here) with none of the backtalk?

Sadly... someone has to get the short end of the stick on this one. And on principle, the group that takes the time to work together should gain the upper hand against any single player.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
And, it does not matter if they choose to be solo, or are just not socially interested in gaming with others.
They have demonstrated an interest in PvE, and a dislike for PvP, in their choice of playing style.


... in a game whose mechanics and economy are specifically designed around player on player conflict.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
They are more likely to go play another game, not embrace changes like that. They already left the part of the game you described, assuming they were willing to try it in the first place.


Even the DEVs admit that EVE is not for everyone. Yeah, they are a business out to make money... but EVE is also their pet project. They envision a dystopia where the rules are sketchy and no one is ever completely safe.
Serge Bastana
GWA Corp
#6 - 2012-02-01 19:14:28 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:

Even the DEVs admit that EVE is not for everyone. Yeah, they are a business out to make money... but EVE is also their pet project. They envision a dystopia where the rules are sketchy and no one is ever completely safe.


And that's why a lot of the playerbase like the game so much, it doesn't hold your hand or pander to those who feel they need to be protected. Long may this vision of EVE continue since it is what made the game what it is before so many players from other MMOs came here and found it wasn't as safe as they would like it.

If people wish to play solo, fine, but I like the social aspect of working with a small team and making more of the resources we have.

WoW holds your hand until end game, and gives you a cookie whether you win or lose. EVE not only takes your cookie, but laughs at you for bringing one in the first place...

Velicitia
XS Tech
#7 - 2012-02-01 19:17:35 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
(stuff)


Said that a whole lot more eloquently than I could have Cool

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#8 - 2012-02-01 19:36:08 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
One, we need to cater to the opinions of the players still in high sec, that do not feel comfortable doing anything in low or null sec.

HIS RESPONSE: Not really. The "fear" that chronic high-seccers possess is more of a personal/preference issue than a game issue.


Ok, the point of this thread is how to address our interest in drawing more players from high sec, into low or null sec.
My own point is that perception of those in high sec is the key.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
Two, many of the high sec players are solo. Telling them that their play style is not valid, is certainly not going to make them come around to your viewpoint.

HIS RESPONSE: Solo play is valid. However, if any group of players organize their efforts and work together, why shouldn't they have an advantage over someone who is solo? After all, the group of players took the initiative and are pooling their respective "solo" resources to gain that advantage.
Giving a single solo player the ability to stand toe to toe (or even slightly competitively) against multiple players who organized calls into question whether the efforts of organizing players is even worth it at all. Why deal with the drama of another when you can simply buy an NPC that will give you 60, 70% effectiveness (just throwing out numbers here) with none of the backtalk?

Sadly... someone has to get the short end of the stick on this one. And on principle, the group that takes the time to work together should gain the upper hand against any single player.


And they will. Always.
Right now these solo types are teaming up with Concord, or one of the four primary races they start the game with.

If we want them in places beyond high sec, we need to get them possibly as a group. (Solo Player plus NPC support)

Nikk Narrel wrote:
And, it does not matter if they choose to be solo, or are just not socially interested in gaming with others.
They have demonstrated an interest in PvE, and a dislike for PvP, in their choice of playing style.

HIS RESPONSE: ... in a game whose mechanics and economy are specifically designed around player on player conflict.


No. A large part of the game is indeed centered on PvP, but not all of it, and certainly not all the parts in high sec. If you want more people to come live in the other areas, they want some of their goodies. Count on it.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
They are more likely to go play another game, not embrace changes like that. They already left the part of the game you described, assuming they were willing to try it in the first place.

HIS RESPONSE: Even the DEVs admit that EVE is not for everyone. Yeah, they are a business out to make money... but EVE is also their pet project. They envision a dystopia where the rules are sketchy and no one is ever completely safe.


And to make everyone happier, in particular players wanting to see more activity in low and null sec, you need more of your player base traveling there.
They won't do it, except on their terms. Meet these, or give up all hope of them trying this.
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#9 - 2012-02-01 19:38:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Wolodymyr
Velicitia wrote:
Nerf CONCORD, make people not rely on them so much, and you'll see them venturing farther out.

Yeah they get used to concord so much that they can't imagine life without it.[/quote]

I also think the hard border between highsec and lowsec keeps a lot of people out. On one side of a gate there are faction police and concord ready to blast anyone who gets out of line, in lowsec it's open season on carebears.

If there was a more gradual decline in safety with sec status then I think more people would be willing to ease themselves into more dangerous situations for more rewards

I know the concord response time drops off with sec status, but I think it needs to become a bit more pronounced than that. Scale down their DPS, gradually take away some of their ridiculous ewar abilities. Make it so that once you get down to 0.5 space concord are more like surly belt rats that spawn on top of lawbreakers.

Of course if we do this we'll also have to make 0.4 space a little safer in return. We could always beef up the gate and station guns, or make the red aggression timer last longer.

Velicitia wrote:
no. In low/null you need friends, not NPCs.

I'd like to see players be able to take over some of the roles usual filled by faction police or maybe concord. I have no idea how to make this happen though.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
many of the high sec players are solo. Telling them that their play style is not valid, is certainly not going to make them come around to your viewpoint.

Well this is an MMO designed to be played by multiple people. So yeah I think this means that their play style is a little invalid, or at least it shouldn't be nearly as effective as playing in a group.

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544

McOboe
Viscosity
#10 - 2012-02-01 19:39:32 UTC  |  Edited by: McOboe
ShahFluffers wrote:


... in a game whose mechanics and economy are specifically designed around player on player conflict.



Partially true. The source of all ISK in the game (out-side of the small Insurance ISK faucet) comes from Player vs Environment, which means solo play or Player WITH Player interaction. The market itself and PvP conflict in the game are enabled by the game's design, but initiated solely by players.

On another note, part of the high-population in high-sec includes the Indy/ISK making alts of low-sec/null-sec players. For them, their alts are in high-sec for a reason. Additionally, a lot of the solo-playing multi-account players stay in high-sec so that they can continue their style of play. For instance, those folks that own a trio or more of accounts for solo mining ops. Another major portion of high-sec players are folks that are leaf-eaters- they prefer non-combat PvP play. Then, there are of course the population of new players. Finally, there are the war-dec/gankers that like to take out weak/easy targets.

Getting folks into null-sec is likely going to require a great deal of propaganda, initiated by null-sec alliances. If Indy/non-combat folks knew the relative safety they could have under a null-sec alliance (for instance, if they were deep in their alliance space in an alliance that is NBSI), they would likely have no issues with moving there. And I would think that most alliances would have no issues with folks that rat and print ISK for the alliance's use. But generally, getting into one of those alliances takes a great deal of time investment. For instance, joining the Goons or Dreddit requires at least three months of active history on SomethingAwful or Reddit.

Bottomline, a good chunk of folks in high-sec are there to engage in PvE and/or "non-combat" PvP, meaning, they are fine fighting it out on the market, but not in their ships. If you want those folks to move to null-sec, you'd have to find a way to accommodate their playing style. Otherwise, they are quite happy with care-bearing it up in high-sec, as it provides the only environment that they know of that allows them to do nearly all of what they want to do.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#11 - 2012-02-01 19:40:26 UTC
Serge Bastana wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:

Even the DEVs admit that EVE is not for everyone. Yeah, they are a business out to make money... but EVE is also their pet project. They envision a dystopia where the rules are sketchy and no one is ever completely safe.


And that's why a lot of the playerbase like the game so much, it doesn't hold your hand or pander to those who feel they need to be protected. Long may this vision of EVE continue since it is what made the game what it is before so many players from other MMOs came here and found it wasn't as safe as they would like it.

If people wish to play solo, fine, but I like the social aspect of working with a small team and making more of the resources we have.



That's fantastic, and may you long enjoy it. Low and null sec are built around these ideas.

This thread is for the players who are trying to figure a way to coax out high sec players, at least enough to make low sec or null sec more active.
Feligast
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2012-02-01 19:45:58 UTC
Posting in another thread where the OP's definition of "balance" is "let me do whatever I want, but stop everyone else from doing what they want to me"
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#13 - 2012-02-01 19:48:42 UTC
Feligast wrote:
Posting in another thread where the OP's definition of "balance" is "let me do whatever I want, but stop everyone else from doing what they want to me"

You are clearly lost.

The thread to stop AFK cloakers is not here.

We are interested in testing whether we can coax high sec players into low or null sec, and what would that take.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2012-02-01 19:49:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Nikk - the entire concept behind 0.0 in all forms is that the only safety you enjoy is that which you make yourself, or with other players. Other secstatus areas merely mitigate this axiom that drives EVE (but never completely). Adding NPC 0.0 protection is not only against this concept, but it would also work against newbies. Example: So me and my roaming gang jump into a system that you and your friends have decided to try your hand in. You and your new corp getting the hang of things now not only have to compete with us, but the NPCs that defend us while we occupy your space, probing your hulks and ratting ships, bubbling the exits out, anchoring sbus, etc.


What's actually needed is an increase of risk in highsec, not a decrease in risk of nullsec; namely by making features work as intended (removing dec shields, corphopping, removing NPC corps as a 100% safe way for your alt to PvE/do 0.0 logistics etc) and make the idea of player-enforced security not seem like such a step down from living in a CONCORD coccoon.
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#15 - 2012-02-01 20:00:18 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
We are interested in testing whether we can coax high sec players into low or null sec, and what would that take.

Well one thing I have noticed is that a lot of lowsec systems are along a pipe that people travel frequently. If you want people to live in lowsec then they are going to need some quiet space somewhere to make a living. Take a look at any nullsec region map. There are lots of dead end pockets and little corners for people to hide out in.

Also earlier someone mentioned nullsec industry.

The reason nobody does nullsec industry is because nullsec stations have worse refining, and fewer factory slots than highsec stations. Also getting all the ingredients together to do T2 manufacturing is a pain.

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544

Mag's
Azn Empire
#16 - 2012-02-01 20:15:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Nikk Narrel wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
... in a game whose mechanics and economy are specifically designed around player on player conflict.
No. A large part of the game is indeed centered on PvP, but not all of it, and certainly not all the parts in high sec. If you want more people to come live in the other areas, they want some of their goodies. Count on it.
I have to pull you up on this, sorry.

Eve is PvP centric and has been shown many times, it's hard to even note three things that are not PvP within Eve. That alone, is what make Eve so different from every other MMO and the reason many misunderstand the games balance.

As far as your idea is concerned, no thank you. Null and lo sec should remain concord and faction police free.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#17 - 2012-02-01 20:46:05 UTC
Wolodymyr wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
We are interested in testing whether we can coax high sec players into low or null sec, and what would that take.

Well one thing I have noticed is that a lot of lowsec systems are along a pipe that people travel frequently. If you want people to live in lowsec then they are going to need some quiet space somewhere to make a living. Take a look at any nullsec region map. There are lots of dead end pockets and little corners for people to hide out in.

Also earlier someone mentioned nullsec industry.

The reason nobody does nullsec industry is because nullsec stations have worse refining, and fewer factory slots than highsec stations. Also getting all the ingredients together to do T2 manufacturing is a pain.


How about: Some of these dead end systems, or systems made for this purpose that are dead end systems, be made high sec.

Hear me out, before dashing to hit reply and then typing about how you have a right to PvP. YOU won't be affected.
Your greatest complaint might be that you are living in a system near carebears.

Mining Outposts:
That system, all by itself surrounded by lawless space,
where corporations make their own laws,
and shoot each other in the face.
(That rhymes, I realized after writing it)
A racial jump bridge connects it to high sec. Most PvE types use this exclusively.
It also has a gate to null or low sec, but most from high sec won't dare use that.
Mining is good in this system, enough so that null-sec players might venture in to mine.
Balance: May need faction requirements to use the NPC Jump Bridge. Possibly a toll bridge.
Ratting may also occur in this system, or others like it.

PvE types must earn the faction to use this bridge, giving them a goal to work towards. It can give them a taste of null sec rewards, but having to compete with so many others for it, they may be tempted to go past that gate looking for more....

Will it be defended by carebear protectors, or by killmail happy pirates? Or will both fight over it, in an ever shifting conflict?

I think this would be interesting.
Serge Bastana
GWA Corp
#18 - 2012-02-01 21:10:43 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Serge Bastana wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:

Even the DEVs admit that EVE is not for everyone. Yeah, they are a business out to make money... but EVE is also their pet project. They envision a dystopia where the rules are sketchy and no one is ever completely safe.


And that's why a lot of the playerbase like the game so much, it doesn't hold your hand or pander to those who feel they need to be protected. Long may this vision of EVE continue since it is what made the game what it is before so many players from other MMOs came here and found it wasn't as safe as they would like it.

If people wish to play solo, fine, but I like the social aspect of working with a small team and making more of the resources we have.



That's fantastic, and may you long enjoy it. Low and null sec are built around these ideas.

This thread is for the players who are trying to figure a way to coax out high sec players, at least enough to make low sec or null sec more active.


I don't know about null sec since it's never really appealed, but I've taken in a few new players, some of whom I feel certain will venture into low sec with the older players eventually. All they need is the confidence and some encouragement. Some new players may never get that since they spend too long in the NPC corps and don't take that step out of the cosy warmth of their starter corp and are invited along on mining ops or mission running, activities that become habitual. While there may be a social aspec to it, there's no sense of 'doing it for the corp' and making a contribution.

CCP can't force people out of the NPC corps, that wouldn't be playing fair, and as has been mentioned, a lot of those in NPC corps are alts of one sort or another, and who know how many are inactive, so part of the job is identifying the accounts that aren't sat in high sec as ornaments or to earn isk for null/low sec mains.

WoW holds your hand until end game, and gives you a cookie whether you win or lose. EVE not only takes your cookie, but laughs at you for bringing one in the first place...

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#19 - 2012-02-01 22:18:01 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Wolodymyr wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
We are interested in testing whether we can coax high sec players into low or null sec, and what would that take.

Well one thing I have noticed is that a lot of lowsec systems are along a pipe that people travel frequently. If you want people to live in lowsec then they are going to need some quiet space somewhere to make a living. Take a look at any nullsec region map. There are lots of dead end pockets and little corners for people to hide out in.

Also earlier someone mentioned nullsec industry.

The reason nobody does nullsec industry is because nullsec stations have worse refining, and fewer factory slots than highsec stations. Also getting all the ingredients together to do T2 manufacturing is a pain.


How about: Some of these dead end systems, or systems made for this purpose that are dead end systems, be made high sec.

Hear me out, before dashing to hit reply and then typing about how you have a right to PvP. YOU won't be affected.
Your greatest complaint might be that you are living in a system near carebears.

Mining Outposts:
That system, all by itself surrounded by lawless space,
where corporations make their own laws,
and shoot each other in the face.
(That rhymes, I realized after writing it)
A racial jump bridge connects it to high sec. Most PvE types use this exclusively.
It also has a gate to null or low sec, but most from high sec won't dare use that.
Mining is good in this system, enough so that null-sec players might venture in to mine.
Balance: May need faction requirements to use the NPC Jump Bridge. Possibly a toll bridge.
Ratting may also occur in this system, or others like it.

PvE types must earn the faction to use this bridge, giving them a goal to work towards. It can give them a taste of null sec rewards, but having to compete with so many others for it, they may be tempted to go past that gate looking for more....

Will it be defended by carebear protectors, or by killmail happy pirates? Or will both fight over it, in an ever shifting conflict?

I think this would be interesting.


Actually, when alliances start staging out of these to hit sov space, people will be affected. More highsec is the last thing we need, especially when it's little more than a place to store your invasion fleet with CONCORD protection, and thus complete and total safety.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#20 - 2012-02-02 01:56:59 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Mining Outposts:
That system, all by itself surrounded by lawless space,
where corporations make their own laws,
and shoot each other in the face.
(That rhymes, I realized after writing it)
A racial jump bridge connects it to high sec. Most PvE types use this exclusively.
It also has a gate to null or low sec, but most from high sec won't dare use that.
Mining is good in this system, enough so that null-sec players might venture in to mine.
Balance: May need faction requirements to use the NPC Jump Bridge. Possibly a toll bridge.
Ratting may also occur in this system, or others like it.

PvE types must earn the faction to use this bridge, giving them a goal to work towards. It can give them a taste of null sec rewards, but having to compete with so many others for it, they may be tempted to go past that gate looking for more....

Will it be defended by carebear protectors, or by killmail happy pirates? Or will both fight over it, in an ever shifting conflict?

I think this would be interesting.


Actually, when alliances start staging out of these to hit sov space, people will be affected. More highsec is the last thing we need, especially when it's little more than a place to store your invasion fleet with CONCORD protection, and thus complete and total safety.


You know what? Yes, that could happen. I am not going to BS you. Any number of things could happen.

But any place like this used by an alliance to stage out of, has drawbacks for it as well.
If you are war-dec'ed, it doesn't matter if it is high sec. Shoot em in the face.
You can obviously have out of corp alts watch them, with them unable to shoot back at these. They can't war dec NPC corps, so concord has their backs. Taunt away.
It is a dead end system, blockade the gate.

Your alliance would probably have a good amount of happy pew pew if anyone was trying this.
12Next page