These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

If you could change 3 mechanics in EVE...

Author
Karim alRashid
Starboard.
#101 - 2012-04-03 14:10:43 UTC
1. Remove local
2. Remove Concord
3. Don't care

Pain is weakness leaving the body http://www.youtube.com/user/AlRashidKarim/videos

Steel Wraith
#102 - 2012-04-03 14:15:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Steel Wraith
Ai Shun wrote:
Serena Wilde wrote:
I like your EDIT. I'm pretty sure that there would be no chance of that ever happening, but it would be nice. Although how do you prevent multiboxing/multiple accounts to bypass said restriction?


You pretty much cannot. With the move to virtualisation it is nigh on impossible to block this. Perhaps when the whole word is running IPv6 you may have a snowballs' hope in hell. But until then?

That aside - why? I have an Industrial pilot that I sometimes escort with my combat pilot. Meantime I have a trade alt on a different account that sits in Jita and runs my business empire. That is 3 accounts (Well, was 3 accounts until recent events) that provide CCP with revenue.

I liked giving them money Lol


It's the Single Character Slot mentality. The idea is to improve player cooperation by preventing the ability to keep playing by yourself while still taking on aspects of the game designed for multiple players by running multiple accounts. Skill points also become more important as you can't train multiple characters in parallel for different tasks.

Obvious cons are:
- Ruins/Injures the spy metagame.
- Can't scam/corp theft/whatever with alts.
- No monetary incentive for CCP; multiple accounts are multiple subs.
- Players might quit out of boredom while training non-combat skills.

It's a moot point anyway as you mentioned, it can't technically be enforced.
My Neutral Toon
Doomheim
#103 - 2012-04-03 14:21:17 UTC
1) Make it profitable to go into lowsec. As of now, there is no reason to go to lowsec aside from higher PI output and if you actually WANT to tank your sec status. I know CCP "claims" to have buffed the lowsec anomalies earlier this year/late last year...but I went to lowsec immediately after that to start scanning plexes....spent 2 days doing it and they were all horrible...

2) Be able to have either a- multiple Jump Bridges in the same system, or b- multiple destinations for a single jump bridge, making it possible to have larger logistic hubs in nullsec. Some people will call foul that this takes part of the risk out of doing nullsec logistics...when in reality...it doesnt... It would just make the JB's work much in the same way the cyno generators do...It wouldnt make the logi-routes any safer.. If anything, it would make certain systems even more valuable to an alliance and would cause greater harm to take down a JB-hub than just a normal one since you would be losing potentially several JB routes at once. This could also be accomplished by having a single-destination JB and then having a tech1 version that allowed for maybe up to 3 destinations...

3) Ship size/mass should = ship bumping ability

...Can't. Tell. If ...Troll? Or Serious....

Butt Hurt about Harrasment? Read first GM post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=88362&find=unread

Adunh Slavy
#104 - 2012-04-03 14:37:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Adunh Slavy
Simi Kusoni wrote:

What proposals do you have as an alternate method of hunting targets? Currently it is literally impossible to catch an aware and experienced pilot, non-consensual PvP in this game is literally down to just picking off the idiots. Removing gate camping as a viable tactic would even further reduce the PvP element of Eve.



Imagine for a moment that to leave a system, a player would have to wait for a time for a jump engine to charge up. They have to do it at any one of the planets or the local star. During that time they can't cloak, MWD or warp. Suppose it takes two minutes to do and they have to stay on that grid.

During this time the hunter will be scanning the planets, and checking them out. The person wanting to leave will have to keep aligned in case a hostile warps in. The defender would then need to warp off, this would reset that two minute counter, and they'd have to start over again at a different planet. A solo hunter and solo defender would give advantage to the defender, all he has to do is wait out the hunter till he gets bored. Not much different from today. But, gang v gang becomes a much more interesting situation. to lock down a system, a ship at each planet would be ideal, so that anyone trying to leave gets caught.

Once one of the two gangs gets a point on someone, they can all rush in from different directions and mix it up. Going to have to ask your selves, should we blob up, or spread out? What's the best choice for what we are facing and our goals? Right now the choice is always the same, blob.

Now add to this mix delayed local and instead of the directional scanner just telling you something is there, it also gives you a result to which you can warp. The closer you are and the more narrow you set your scan angle, the more likely you would be to land close to the target. Suppose the worst this scanner could do is give you is a 50% deviation of the current distance between you and the target. Each scan gets you closer at worst.

Also suppose that the more you mash the scan button, within some limited time, say 1 minute, your own signature radius doubles. You make your self an easier target as well if you're scan button happy. Likewise, some defender trying to evade a hunter better be careful how much he tries to find out how close the hunter is and trying to discover which planets are unoccupied at the moment. And the hunter needs to be sure no one else is around too. Is that T1 industrial bait? Should I mush the scan button one more time or not?

These are interesting tactical questions, there are no such questions with gates. Avoiding a gate camp right now means check map, and if you're a multi boxing hero, send alt in shuttle. Wee, so exciting, not.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Holy One
Privat Party
#105 - 2012-04-03 14:39:55 UTC
Karim alRashid wrote:
1. Remove local
2. Remove Concord
3. Don't care


4. Give every race all damage types ammo

**** lists of 3.

:)

Kisumii
Astral Acquisitions Inc.
#106 - 2012-04-03 15:04:41 UTC
Alot of calls to remove local. I can totally agree with this it would open up alot more mystery about low/null sec space and make stealth / scouting much more as it should be.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#107 - 2012-04-03 15:44:56 UTC
My Neutral Toon wrote:
1) Make it profitable to go into lowsec. As of now, there is no reason to go to lowsec aside from higher PI output and if you actually WANT to tank your sec status. I know CCP "claims" to have buffed the lowsec anomalies earlier this year/late last year...but I went to lowsec immediately after that to start scanning plexes....spent 2 days doing it and they were all horrible...

To be fair if you genuinely spent two days doing exploration and found nothing of value, you were probably doing it wrong. The risk free element of plexing in low sec, and the easy logistics, means that running them for a solo player is even more profitable than null sec and in some cases incursions.

Of course, if you genuinely meant you were doing anomalies, and not exploration, you really were doing it wrong :P Anoms are of terrible value wherever you go, the only reason people even run them still in null is because in SoV null they're easy, grind-able and relatively risk free for an attentive player. (They're still pointless in NPC null mind you)

My Neutral Toon wrote:
2) Be able to have either a- multiple Jump Bridges in the same system, or b- multiple destinations for a single jump bridge, making it possible to have larger logistic hubs in nullsec. Some people will call foul that this takes part of the risk out of doing nullsec logistics...when in reality...it doesnt... It would just make the JB's work much in the same way the cyno generators do...It wouldnt make the logi-routes any safer.. If anything, it would make certain systems even more valuable to an alliance and would cause greater harm to take down a JB-hub than just a normal one since you would be losing potentially several JB routes at once. This could also be accomplished by having a single-destination JB and then having a tech1 version that allowed for maybe up to 3 destinations...

Logistics in null is easy enough already. Allowing for multiple destinations would make it hard to scout if you are camping a JB, and they're already pretty difficult to camp. It would also let people create alternate routes if a JB is camped, further avoiding any danger.

If anything logistics in null needs to be made more difficult, as it stands any expensive ships or loot are moved via JF or carrier. And deploying to a new area for PvP can be done risk free in a matter of hours with enough carriers and a good cyno chain.

Also, what risk in null sec logistics? Camping and roams nowadays literally just pick off the idiots, the vast majority of competent players have never and will never lose anything of value under the current mechanics.

My Neutral Toon wrote:
3) Ship size/mass should = ship bumping ability

That's a start, but station games and aggression timers need a total rework IMHO.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Ackemi
The Gaming Avenue
Shadow Ultimatum
#108 - 2012-04-03 16:29:27 UTC
1. Make system local chat delayed in K-space and make regional (or constellation) chat immediate. It's debatable at which larger level local chat becomes immediate. The knowing is still there, just not as the super intelligence tool it currently is. Keep W-space local the way it is!



2. Make 2 levels of NPC corps (noob and freelance) you can be in noob NPC for a certain amount of gametime and then you get automatically moved to freelance level never to go back into noob. You can of course join another corp immediately if you wish, but you can't go back.

2A. Noob NPC corp cannot be wardec'd and freelance NPC corp is just a flat 50M/week to wardec (generally speaking easily wardecc'd). Noob NPC corp people can only post to the Noob forum channel.

2B. Noob NPC corp is 10% tax and freelance is 0%.

You can argue about the particulars of time, taxes, any other balancing and names but the idea is there...



3. Move this thread to "Features and Ideas Discussion"?
My Neutral Toon
Doomheim
#109 - 2012-04-04 17:03:53 UTC  |  Edited by: My Neutral Toon
Simi Kusoni wrote:
My Neutral Toon wrote:
1) Make it profitable to go into lowsec. As of now, there is no reason to go to lowsec aside from higher PI output and if you actually WANT to tank your sec status. I know CCP "claims" to have buffed the lowsec anomalies earlier this year/late last year...but I went to lowsec immediately after that to start scanning plexes....spent 2 days doing it and they were all horrible...

To be fair if you genuinely spent two days doing exploration and found nothing of value, you were probably doing it wrong. The risk free element of plexing in low sec, and the easy logistics, means that running them for a solo player is even more profitable than null sec and in some cases incursions.

Of course, if you genuinely meant you were doing anomalies, and not exploration, you really were doing it wrong :P Anoms are of terrible value wherever you go, the only reason people even run them still in null is because in SoV null they're easy, grind-able and relatively risk free for an attentive player. (They're still pointless in NPC null mind you)

My Neutral Toon wrote:
2) Be able to have either a- multiple Jump Bridges in the same system, or b- multiple destinations for a single jump bridge, making it possible to have larger logistic hubs in nullsec. Some people will call foul that this takes part of the risk out of doing nullsec logistics...when in reality...it doesnt... It would just make the JB's work much in the same way the cyno generators do...It wouldnt make the logi-routes any safer.. If anything, it would make certain systems even more valuable to an alliance and would cause greater harm to take down a JB-hub than just a normal one since you would be losing potentially several JB routes at once. This could also be accomplished by having a single-destination JB and then having a tech1 version that allowed for maybe up to 3 destinations...

Logistics in null is easy enough already. Allowing for multiple destinations would make it hard to scout if you are camping a JB, and they're already pretty difficult to camp. It would also let people create alternate routes if a JB is camped, further avoiding any danger.

If anything logistics in null needs to be made more difficult, as it stands any expensive ships or loot are moved via JF or carrier. And deploying to a new area for PvP can be done risk free in a matter of hours with enough carriers and a good cyno chain.

Also, what risk in null sec logistics? Camping and roams nowadays literally just pick off the idiots, the vast majority of competent players have never and will never lose anything of value under the current mechanics.

My Neutral Toon wrote:
3) Ship size/mass should = ship bumping ability

That's a start, but station games and aggression timers need a total rework IMHO.




I was scanning them, not running Anoms. I went out there b/c I was told that lowsec got a buff and people were making stupid isk... I'm notoriously the most unlucky person you'll ever meet when it comes to getting the signatures I'm looking for. If I want a grav site, i'll find everything else but a grav site. If im looking for a mag site, i'll find everything execpt for a mag site. Murphy's Law follows me everywhere I go.

The Hub idea is not made for Freighters, as a JF would use the cyno gen and not the JB. The JB Hub is more for moving fleets around. Why would it be bad to make it more difficult for an enemy to camping your JB? If anything it makes a single JB more profitable b/c you will get more activity. And IMO, I would like the idea of an enemy hitting a certain system b/c that is where a hug was and they knew it. It gives more of a reason to defend it....Unless you are IRC lol....

...Can't. Tell. If ...Troll? Or Serious....

Butt Hurt about Harrasment? Read first GM post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=88362&find=unread

Serena Wilde
State War Academy
Caldari State
#110 - 2012-04-05 12:43:25 UTC
Some great ideas in here guys and gals. Keep 'em coming. :)
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#111 - 2012-04-05 13:16:32 UTC
1. If you're corporation as a whole hasn't got enough standing, you're not allowed to KEEP a pos in high-sec. (So no longer a single person with excellent standing anchoring and then filling the rest of the corp with people with bad standings).

This would be a GREAT boost to FW because they are some of the few groups that can pull this off easily (together with groups of missionrunners that can then actually do something usefull with their bloated standings)

Wishlist;

2. Add a layer of components to be built from the current minerals, PI and moongoo (various degrees), between every final T1 (and T2) products. No longer easily building all T1 modules and ships with a single character simply from minerals. The more complex production is, the more people it involves, the harder it is for a small group of players to completely dominate the market.

3. Give more meaning and diversity between the NPC corporations. Yes the players are the content of this game, but the NPC are the flavour. More diversity means more spreading out of the players and more opportunities to make money and for conflict. Things like making most implants being sold only by the LP stores of Inherent Implants and such, POS charters only by the administration NPC corps like House of Records, reaction and moon-mining blueprints by mining corporations like the Minmatar Mining Corporatin, etc.

Don't achieve balance by making everything the same, but by giving everything something unique. Then balance will automatically come in the shape of an dynamic equilibrium of demand and supply.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!

Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#112 - 2012-04-05 13:17:12 UTC
1) Dynamic system security status, fueled by both NPC and player kills (and the killed players security status. Only affecting 0.4 and 0.5, which could swing both ways. Recently changed systems would retain their sec-status related resources for a limited time.

2) Cloak fuel. Cloaking device would consume Cloak Fuel capsules from your cargo bay. Manufactured from Jove crystal artifacts harvested from new ladar-type sites only found in lowsec.

3) Graduating or booting from NPC starter corps. New certificate system rewarding actual activity (not only mission grinding, but you would get certificates from player kills, completing your first DED rated plex, etc), completing certificates would give material rewards and would eventually lead to graduating. Graduates would have access to improved, ISD-lead factional corps, those who would not work towards graduation would be booted to wardeccable trashbin corps. Ideally this would make NPC corp alts less desirable, give recruiters more factual knowledge on the new player (what kind of certificates the applying player has been collecting) and also give incentives for players who like achievement-style of game-play.

BONUS IDEA:

Apply planetary interaction scanning mechanic to asteroid mining. You rotate the roid to find visually the best spot to place your miner beams, move it when the roid rotates slowly and the hotspot depletes.

.

X-Y -Z
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#113 - 2012-04-05 13:24:01 UTC


Killrights suck : if you gank someone in low sec killrights should only be abe to be collected in low sec.

and the person collecting killrights should only have 1 attempt if they fail and get blown up again that should be the end of it.

or make killrights last only 15 days instead of 30.

If you go to low sec you know the risk.

That is all.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#114 - 2012-04-05 13:38:30 UTC
My Neutral Toon wrote:
I was scanning them, not running Anoms. I went out there b/c I was told that lowsec got a buff and people were making stupid isk... I'm notoriously the most unlucky person you'll ever meet when it comes to getting the signatures I'm looking for. If I want a grav site, i'll find everything else but a grav site. If im looking for a mag site, i'll find everything execpt for a mag site. Murphy's Law follows me everywhere I go.

The trick to running sites in low sec is to only run angel and guristas rated sites ;) There's only one escalation site worth doing, I think it's called "angel pleasure gardens" or something. The thing never fails to escalate for some reason Lol

My Neutral Toon wrote:
The Hub idea is not made for Freighters, as a JF would use the cyno gen and not the JB. The JB Hub is more for moving fleets around. Why would it be bad to make it more difficult for an enemy to camping your JB? If anything it makes a single JB more profitable b/c you will get more activity. And IMO, I would like the idea of an enemy hitting a certain system b/c that is where a hug was and they knew it. It gives more of a reason to defend it....Unless you are IRC lol....

Freighters use the JB network, jump freighters use cyno gens or their own personal cyno alts. But what does that have to do with my comment on how easy logistics is in null? They've already nerfed the JB network in the past, and with good reason, CCP aren't going to move them back in that direction.

And of course it would be bad to make it more difficult to camp a JB, because null sec is already ridiculously easy to operate in.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#115 - 2012-04-05 15:18:44 UTC
Make the mechanic were you warp your pod out (or not) after your ship explodes reliable.
Make the mechanic were you warp your pod out (or not) after your ship explodes reliable.
Make the mechanic were you warp your pod out (or not) after your ship explodes reliable.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Goatfather
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#116 - 2012-04-05 16:13:54 UTC
1 ) Bring back warp to 15km or a variant even a warp to 2500 (put some sort of invisible bubble on celestials to prevent BM making)

2 ) Undock @ range not @ 0

3 ) increase station/gate/jump aggression timers


just reset the game pre-sov.
My Neutral Toon
Doomheim
#117 - 2012-04-05 18:52:23 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
My Neutral Toon wrote:
I was scanning them, not running Anoms. I went out there b/c I was told that lowsec got a buff and people were making stupid isk... I'm notoriously the most unlucky person you'll ever meet when it comes to getting the signatures I'm looking for. If I want a grav site, i'll find everything else but a grav site. If im looking for a mag site, i'll find everything execpt for a mag site. Murphy's Law follows me everywhere I go.

The trick to running sites in low sec is to only run angel and guristas rated sites ;) There's only one escalation site worth doing, I think it's called "angel pleasure gardens" or something. The thing never fails to escalate for some reason Lol

My Neutral Toon wrote:
The Hub idea is not made for Freighters, as a JF would use the cyno gen and not the JB. The JB Hub is more for moving fleets around. Why would it be bad to make it more difficult for an enemy to camping your JB? If anything it makes a single JB more profitable b/c you will get more activity. And IMO, I would like the idea of an enemy hitting a certain system b/c that is where a hug was and they knew it. It gives more of a reason to defend it....Unless you are IRC lol....

Freighters use the JB network, jump freighters use cyno gens or their own personal cyno alts. But what does that have to do with my comment on how easy logistics is in null? They've already nerfed the JB network in the past, and with good reason, CCP aren't going to move them back in that direction.

And of course it would be bad to make it more difficult to camp a JB, because null sec is already ridiculously easy to operate in.



Don't say this too loud. We don't want high sec carebears getting mad that highsec is more dangerous than nullsec P

...Can't. Tell. If ...Troll? Or Serious....

Butt Hurt about Harrasment? Read first GM post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=88362&find=unread

Nick Bison
Bison Industrial Inc
#118 - 2012-04-05 19:15:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Nick Bison
KrakizBad wrote:
1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.


Remove the ability of goon-pets to post.

But, seriously.
1. Replace all gates in null with truly stable wormholes with no mass restrictions (maybe individual ship size?). This maintains the warp in and out points for camping/defending your space and would give a logical reason to remove LOCAL from null as the gates are the "lore" behind local knowing who is in a system..

2. Make space big again. Remove all jump bridges ... go back to cyno alts. (this will not be popular)

3. I got nothing for #3

Nothing clever at this time.

Yvella
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#119 - 2012-04-05 20:09:29 UTC
1. E C M. Just end it pathetic idea

2. Delayed local in 0.0

3. No sec status gains from mission rats, or rats in 0.0. Low-sec ratting gains a purpose Cool
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#120 - 2012-04-05 20:17:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
1. Tax on any type of refinement as an ISK sink.

2. Tax rate increase for sales tax as an ISK sink.

3. Once the big boat spawns in an incursion, for each subcap that drops before it does another cap shows up and aggresses a logistics ship first. This continues to be true for the additional spawns, making incursions exponentially unfarmable and properly curbing Incursion income.

/thread.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom