Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bunyip
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 20:53:00 -
[1]
Hello all,
This is my eighth proposal to CCP for the Reykjavik meeting. This one will create a stronger appeal for all sections of space, giving all participants a chance to enjoy their sections of space.
Eve is marked by a great dichotomy of players. The following points describe small or great changes to these sections of space which allow the reputations to be modified slightly. These changes, in cooperation with other ideas from CCP and the players, will enhance each system, creating an area where people don't mind travelling to. Many of these ideas have already been discussed in other sections of this website, such as Ore Distribution and Enhanced Missions.
High Security Space
It's pretty apparent that high-security space doesn't need any advantages to be attractable to others, but some changes can still be made in this region to help it out. Ank already did us the imminent service of making suicide ganking harder to do, but it doesn't have to stop there.
Low Security Space
The first thing that needs improved in low-security space is it's reputation for gate camps. Sentry guns used to be vicious, but with the technology upgrades they have become easily resistable. I think the guns should start out doing the same damage that they do now, and gradually increase that by like 10% per minute. The guns should also 'remember' everybody on that grid, so they can't just warp away and return to reset the counter.
Also, they should remove the limitations for POSes in 0.4 space. No charter cost, and the ability to use the same modules as POSes in 0.3 space, will greatly open up other functions such as moon mining, without breaking the game as we know it.
These changes won't improve the security of low-security space too greatly, but it will reduce (without completely preventing) the camping of gates, giving more freedom of movement.
Null Security Space
Alliances tend to make their homes in what is called 0.0 space. In this, I plan to give them more options while still maintaining the core idea for this game.
The first change that I think deserves to be made is that NPC pirates should no longer give a boost to security status for killing them. Their rewards are already more than sufficient, and why would your security go up if it can't go down in this region. This would also serve to have player pirates remain in low-security space to boost their status, giving the other players more and juicier targets.
I also want to endorse the idea that sovereignty means more, eventually giving players the ability to react to threats to their domain better, while still allowing for guerrilla tactics. Once an alliance reaches Sovereignty level 2, they should be able to extract a tax for any NPC pirates destroyed in their system by other players. This will encourage them to open their doors to such players, creating a nation rather than a domain.
At Sovereignty level 3, I think Gate Guns should be purchasable for the alliance in control, which would fire on anybody with negative standings to the alliance. These guns could be destroyed, and would not be cheap.
At Sovereignty level 4, there should be a new option for the players called a System Scanner, which would detect people in the system with a 2 minute delay (meaning that ambushers would have to be constantly on the move to really annoy the opposition). Because of the already harsh penalty, the scanner should also be able to detect cloaked ships, but only within 20 km.
These ideas would bring out each area's strongpoints, without majorly affecting the way the game is played. Constructive criticism is always welcomed.
"May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table. |
ian666
Lamb Federation Navy
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 20:57:00 -
[2]
supporting except that part about not receiving security status boost when killing npc in 0.0
|
Berious
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 21:03:00 -
[3]
All your null sec ideas are terrible. Stick to what you know.
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 21:24:00 -
[4]
You had me willing to support you till I got to your 0.0 ideas, the answer is NO support from me. --
|
FunzzeR
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 21:45:00 -
[5]
Definite NO to the 0.0 ideas, sounds like you want a high sec with enhanced rewards.
|
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 21:49:00 -
[6]
High-sec is fine. It's a bit too safe though in some aspects.
I don't like your low-sec idea. It won't change a thing quite frankly.
Your 0.0 idea is not very good. The very first thing, 0.0 rats not increasing sec-status, is enough reasons for me to say no.
|
Annacron Adaptive
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 22:08:00 -
[7]
can some1 please tell me why every1 seems to want to make gate guns more powerful? how does decreasing the nuber of places in system where you can fight make lowsec more attractive? how does making it harder to deffend your whatever assets/miners/POS's in a lowsec system make lowsec more attractive?
I can see the positive side of this, fewer gate camps, but lowsec needs a complete overhaul anywhay so why not see what that is first
getting rid off all the stupid penalties in 0.4 is good
as for 0.0, I like all idTas except the no sec status thing |
Orogaldeo
Amarr Extreme Solutions Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 22:19:00 -
[8]
0.0 is just low-sec without security status loss and without sentries.
your ideas for both LS and 0.0 are horrible. ________________________________
|
Jason Edwards
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 04:21:00 -
[9]
Quote: It's pretty apparent that high-security space doesn't need any advantages to be attractable to others, but some changes can still be made in this region to help it out. Ank already did us the imminent service of making suicide ganking harder to do, but it doesn't have to stop there.
Corps with 8.0-9.0 standing for example have no basis. I propose the option of building high sec outposts.
You can only build outposts in systems without any current stations obviously. Have the 8.0 relate to 0.5 space and 9.0 to 0.6
With appropriate restrictions... such as you cant restrict docking to anyone and it's free to dock. Basically make it like normal high sec stations.
Quote: Low Security Space
My idea is somewhere here. It's basically the removal of gate guns because they are just burdens. Instead create concord navy spawns in low sec similar to that of high sec faction navy spawns. Tankable, destroyable, and not necessarily bad.
It creates the 2 sides.. Pirates vs antipirates who allow corps and such to join concord as anti-pirates and those interested can declare war on concord(for free) to be pirates.
The change would be increased security for those in asteroid belts and such for example... but wouldnt be overpowering.
Also creates a system like fail warfare for the pirates vs anti-pirates who then dont have to work with naps and such. they become a team who could organize the area. vs antipirates who organize.
Quote: The first change that I think deserves to be made is that NPC pirates should no longer give a boost to security status for killing them. Their rewards are already more than sufficient, and why would your security go up if it can't go down in this region.
This sounds like a nerf to 0.0. Not to mention it would be a bit game breaking. The sec status boost is a derived standing. If i'm doing missions in amarr space... why should i break my minnie standing if i dont shoot minnie?
Quote: This would also serve to have player pirates remain in low-security space to boost their status, giving the other players more and juicier targets.
Pirates vs pirates is rare; because pirates are shabby and worthless. Wont happen sorry.
Quote: I also want to endorse the idea that sovereignty means more, eventually giving players the ability to react to threats to their domain better, while still allowing for guerrilla tactics. Once an alliance reaches Sovereignty level 2, they should be able to extract a tax for any NPC pirates destroyed in their system by other players. This will encourage them to open their doors to such players, creating a nation rather than a domain.
they already do this in a roundabout way; even then... I'm not paying 10% tax to amarr empire if I kill a 10,000 bounty rat. So it sounds kind of odd.
Quote: At Sovereignty level 3, I think Gate Guns should be purchasable for the alliance in control, which would fire on anybody with negative standings to the alliance. These guns could be destroyed, and would not be cheap.
Sov 3 and 4 should be the 0.0 melding area. You have the option of paying concord to protect your sovereign space... and not the weak sort of concord... the instapwn kind. Would cost a fair bit. Probably something CVA would be interested in doing. Only way around it would be wardec obviously.
Brings wardec mechanics to 0.0
Quote: At Sovereignty level 4, there should be a new option for the players called a System Scanner, which would detect people in the system with a 2 minute delay (meaning that ambushers would have to be constantly on the move to really annoy the opposition). Because of the already harsh penalty, the scanner should also be able to detect cloaked ships, but only within 20 km.
Already exists ingame @ sov 2 ??? with delay of 1.5mins and minimum scan deviation of 15km. Originally im told it was planned to have it detect cloaked ships but I think it's not technically possible. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Jason Edward
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 04:22:00 -
[10]
constellation sovereignty should allow you to rename those stupid names out in 0.0; ccp probably has naming doctrine out there for things... to keep IWANNABANANA stations from existing... but whatever.
|
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 04:33:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Annacron Adaptive can some1 please tell me why every1 seems to want to make gate guns more powerful?
The logic that most ppl have for this has to do with Ship HP boost that occured with Revlations, and yet Gate Gun DPS remained the same. --
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 05:14:00 -
[12]
If I remember correctly, the HP boost was put into place to make combat last longer. A 25% boost to tech 1 battleship HP in the rev patch doesn't change sentry guns terribly. Rigs and boosters have made tanks fairly stronger.
But sentry guns are still a huge force. I have killed quite a few solo pirate BS with sentry aggro in my trusty BC, watch some eve videos and you will see sentrys being an incredible advantage, I mean for one if you have sentry aggro you cannot use anything fast or speed tanked or ewar within 150km of the gate; that is a huge disadvantage. If you must, maybe a +10-15% increase on gate gun DPS but really who cares.
I approve of the system scanner array for 0.0 alliances. Oh wait, that is already in the game? Riiiight, lol @ the OP. Have you even lived in 0.0 for an extended period of time? --
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
|
Haakelen
Gallente Cassandra's Light Caeruleum Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 05:55:00 -
[13]
No.
|
Jason Edwards
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 06:07:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Vaal Erit
I approve of the system scanner array for 0.0 alliances. Oh wait, that is already in the game? Riiiight, lol @ the OP. Have you even lived in 0.0 for an extended period of time?
to be fair... the array is fairly new and not in wide use in ALL sov systems; and u need to be in the pos(to which u may not have password for) if there is one anyway. I have a feeling he meant it more like something like directional scanners that all ships have except in sov 0.0 the owners have 999 au directional scanners that will lock on. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Dianeces
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 06:38:00 -
[15]
At least you didn't make yourself look like you have no idea what you're talking about.
Oh, wait....
|
Isaac Starstriker
Amarr Solaris Operations
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 08:01:00 -
[16]
No. Its pretty apparent you have no idea what 0.0 is all about with this post.
Thumbs down X2
--Isaac --Isaac Starstriker Diplomat of SOLAR
|
Ankhesentapemkah
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 14:25:00 -
[17]
If people cannot gain security status in 0.0, then how do the people that have become outlaws in empire get their sec status back up again? ---
NEW MOVIE! |
evilphoenix
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 16:11:00 -
[18]
I had a witty response. But how about ABORT!
/me thumbs down. --------
|
TimMc
Gallente Brutal Deliverance OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.26 22:12:00 -
[19]
I don't like the idea of turning 0.0 into a player controlled high sec... the wild west really appeals to me and alot of players.
I do think the security status system really needs to be reworked though.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |