|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Velicitia
Open Designs
296
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 15:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Atticus Fynch wrote:MMOs allow you to play with real thinking players, not hard coded repetitive responses like single player games. MMO does not mean you have to play with others...it's not a requirment. Not in MMOs in general, no. But in an integrated and interconnected game such as EVE, it pretty much is GÇö without other players, none of the things you do serve any purpose. Anyway, the real question here is: what is it solo players can't do now, and is there any reason they should be able to do those things on their own?
Hold Sov...
... oh wait, no, Chribba is solo and was holding Sov for about a year in 9UY until TEST decided to take it away. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
296
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 16:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velicitia wrote:Hold Sov...
... oh wait, no, Chribba is solo and was holding Sov for about a year in 9UY until TEST decided to take it away. GǪand at that point, we have to start discussing what qualifies as GǣsoloGǥ, since, not only does he have an army of alts, but another army (or four) of friendly factions who come to help whenever things are looking bad.
Only Four? I thought Otherworld Empire was blue to about half of New Eden?
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
296
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 16:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Then lets do away with Concord. That is NPC reenforcments for hi-sec right?
+1
(though you're wrong that they're "reinforcements") |
Velicitia
Open Designs
296
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 17:02:00 -
[4] - Quote
Atticus Fynch wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Atticus Fynch wrote: Then lets do away with Concord. That is NPC reenforcments for hi-sec right?
Of course they are not. Sometimes I wonder where you draw these wacky conclusions. Concord is not aligned to one side and does not re-enforce any player. They are NPC Guards that react when the law is violated within their designated Sector. They do not help you but if you are helped by coincidence from there actions against hostile targets then that is a win. You want people to to help you and not enforce Sector Security, Hire Players. Concord in hi-sec is aligned to you when you are attacked. They protect you. It would be no different than purchasing an NPC escort service from a BS when going on your mining session.
actually, they're only there to punish an offender. No protection is offered -- it just happens that not everyone can gank you before CONCORD shows up to spank them for being bad.
edit -- and Tippia, I think about the only thing TRUE solo players can't use are ganglinks. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
297
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 17:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Atticus Fynch wrote:Concord in hi-sec is aligned to you when you are attacked. They protect you. No. CONCORD in highsec is aligned with CONCORD GÇö they punish people who pull down a GCC, and that is all. They are opposed to criminals, not aligned with you; their job is punishment, not protection.
At best, they're "aligned" with you insofar as "the enemy (CONCORD) of my enemy (they guy that shot me) is my friend".
Soon as you do something bad, that "alignment" will change. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
300
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 19:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
MeestaPenni wrote:Tippia wrote:So the question remains: what is it solo players can't do now, and is there any reason they should be able to do those things on their own? If there's nothing in particular they can't do, why should we waste time giving solo players more stuff to do rather than everyone? How can you decide that this is the actual question when you insist you don't know how a solo player is defined?
it's not the "actual" question. It's a question Tippia raised to the OP that has yet to be answered...
@Tippia --> Ganglinks maybe. Don't see anything wrong with this though, as they're fleet support tools, and thus require a "fleet" in order to use (note, I'm discounting the possibility of a "solo" player and a boost alt).
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
300
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 20:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tippia wrote:MeestaPenni wrote:How can you decide that this is the actual question when you insist you don't know how a solo player is defined? GǪexcept, of course, that I'm not insisting any such thing. I'm asking you how you want to define Gǣsolo playersGǥ (or, perhaps more accurately, solo activities) so we can figure out if anything else is really needed and, if so, what. The answer will vary wildly depending on how you define the key concept, and it may even turn out to be the case that you're trying to solve a complete non-issue and that the efforts are better directed towards solving a more generic problemGǪ But really, at this point, one has to ask: why is the question so hard to answer? @Velicitia: yup. But as mentioned, that rather sounds like one of those Gǣhere's a bonus for grouping upGǥ things that are specifically designed not to apply to the single character, so it's hardly surprising that they get locked out of that one.
Missed the earlier reply where the links were commented upon then ...curse you forums ...
I agree, it is a "bonus" for flying with other people. Other than those (where it's obvious that the intention is "fly with friends"), I guess that caps fit the "no solo pilots allowed" idea to a degree (because, well, you're not moving them without a cyno). But a capship isn't exactly something that I'd want as a single player -- about 10x the cost of a BS, and will DIAF if 10 BS come and say hi.
so, so far: 1. Ganglinks -- "Fly with friends, and get bonuses" 2. Capships -- "You're not leaving here without friends" |
Velicitia
Open Designs
302
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 20:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
Inir Ishtori wrote:i always wanted a jump drive capable ship that does not require a cyno for a jump to its destination.
Anshar, Rhea, or... um... whatever the other two are. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
302
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 20:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
yup, they can travel through normal gates just like the other freighters. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
302
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 21:06:00 -
[10] - Quote
Xorv wrote: * Make Warp Scrams/Disruptors jam Cynos
They do. Or do you mean make them jam the beacon? |
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
366
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 16:24:00 -
[11] - Quote
Xorv wrote: Yes, Jamming the ability to lite the Cyno Beacon.
ah, personally I'd prefer that to be the domain of the hic bubbles rather than a targeted module, since by the time you can lock/point someone, the caps are likely already in system -- but that would also need some changes to the mechanics to allow hic bubbles in low.
Inir Ishtori wrote: it's pretty obvious that i meant a ship using its jump drive to travel around without having to use gates or rely on a another character to light up a cyno at the destination point.
You cannot leave a system without jumping to a cyno, or through a JB/gate/wormhole. Thus, there are no ships that fulfil your criteria of "ship that doesn't rely on gates or another player to move around".
edit for failing at quoting... |
Velicitia
Open Designs
394
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 16:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Velicitia wrote:Xorv wrote: Yes, Jamming the ability to lite the Cyno Beacon.
ah, personally I'd prefer that to be the domain of the hic bubbles rather than a targeted module, since by the time you can lock/point someone, the caps are likely already in system -- but that would also need some changes to the mechanics to allow hic bubbles in low. One idea CCP has been toying with is to make it so ships have to lock on to a Cynosural Field. Like a Jump Drive Scan Res.
in that case, a targeted solution is fine ... just maybe not a point. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
394
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 18:35:00 -
[13] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velicitia wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:[quote=Velicitia]One idea CCP has been toying with is to make it so ships have to lock on to a Cynosural Field. Like a Jump Drive Scan Res.
in that case, a targeted solution is fine ... just maybe not a point. Sensor damps, obviously, since they are already the general GÇ£mess with scan resGÇ¥ modules GÇö more Gallente buffs ftw! Also: wtf happened to the post I was actually going to respond to? It was a long and good answer as well.
Yeah, but I thought we were talking about the ship lighting the cyno (or the cyno itself), rather than the capship. So "Cynosural Field Destabiliser" that works similar to a point?
Also, I think the thread has been visited by Phantom... again. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
394
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 19:03:00 -
[14] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velicitia wrote:Yeah, but I thought we were talking about the ship lighting the cyno (or the cyno itself), rather than the capship. So "Cynosural Field Destabiliser" that works similar to a point? We are, but I suppose you could make some twisted argument about how damping the cyno (beacon) disrupts the signal it sends to the jumping / gating ships, increasing the time it takes for them to lock on / spool up and jump. A new module would be one way of doing it, but damps could use a bit of love as it is, and it would let people fit a module that actually has some every-day use and not let them feel like they're GÇ£wastingGÇ¥ a slot on a singular-use (and very-special-purpose) module.
OK, guess I'm a bit rusty on the lore then -- always understood the Cyno to be nothing more than a beacon for a capship's jumpdrive to lock on to? In that case, I guess the "warp scrambler" would be the better option ... though I could also see it being a module for 'dictors (hics would get another script for their bubble/infinipoint).
If the capship needs to lock on to the cyno beacon and/or spool the jumpdrive (i.e. not an insta jump as now), then the new module/script is just "added insurance" for your gang to pop whoever lit the cyno before the cap is able to engage the jumpdrive. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
395
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 19:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tippia wrote: GǪof course, you could always just go for the obvious alternative: if you can lock onto and blow up the cyno beacon before the jumping ships manage to get a lock, you've dodged the bullet (this time). Now, it becomes a race against time, and on the flip side, the hot drop ships might opt for fitting some new Gǣcyno resolution enhancerGǥ module to get through faster (but run the risk of being less capable in the field).
+1
Looks like we could really have this as a three-part thing:
1. Damps make it harder for an escaping capship (e.g. it's in deep structure, but it killed your point ... and is now spooling to GTFO) 2. Scrams (specifically) targeted on the Cyno beacon mess with the cyno, and make it harder to get a "good lock" for incoming caps 3. Blowing up the ship that lights the Cyno dissipates the beacon and no one can jump.
|
|
|
|