Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Acquisition
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.15 16:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Expanding EvE with out adding space.
I had an idea but the more i thought about it the more it just seamed to be not enough, so how would you go about making EvE seam bigger with out adding in more solar systems?
1 - My first thought was reducing the speed ships warp at by a drastic amount, and reducing freighters and other hauling ships by even more, but then warping would just becomes a pain if it takes to long to get around.
But after a while everyone would get used to the lowered speed of warp and we would be right back the the hole SPACE is not big enough.
2 - Another way would be do away with the warping through Planets and forcing People to pick a route through Each system that's not a straight line from gate to gate.
So I wanna see your ideas for ways to make space bigger with out adding more systems.
|
Plyn
Three 6 MaFiA KRYSIS.
4
|
Posted - 2011.09.15 16:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Could go with a reversal of what they did in the past, which is to re-adjust the connections between systems to on average require more jumps between destinations, remove junctions, etc.
As a side note, why do you leave additional systems out of the running? What about an additional handful of k-space regions on the other side of some w-space? Come2Nullsec |
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Acquisition
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.15 17:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Because from past treads people are hard against adding more systems, that's most of the reason.
We have quite a few systems now, there's just no reason to go to most of them / There empty. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
9
|
Posted - 2011.09.15 21:05:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mirima Thurander wrote:
So I wanna see your ideas for ways to make space bigger with out adding more systems.
Take the useless systems and give people a reason to use them. |
tankus2
Endless Destruction Destructive OuTcaSts
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.15 21:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Mirima Thurander wrote:
So I wanna see your ideas for ways to make space bigger with out adding more systems.
Take the useless systems and give people a reason to use them.
I agree with this, there are currently too many systems that have no reason to be in other than for some mining or missioning. OR for fleet fights.
would be nice to see a no-warp though planets thing implemented. |
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 07:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
Mirima Thurander wrote: 2 - Another way would be do away with the warping through Planets and forcing People to pick a route through Each system that's not a straight line from gate to gate.
While I think the major "pipes" should prob have line-of-sight warp paths between gates, I DO think planets/moons/stars should have gravity wells that suck ships out mid-warp if their warp trajectory takes them "through" the planets. Also, this well should exist out to a range, so you have to slow boat out of it to enter warp again.
I'm not a big fan of slowing down warp, because when I need to just get to Jita, I really don't want it taking any longer. Also, when chasing a WT through a system, I would prob punch a baby if I was going the warp speed of a freighter in a ceptor... and even more so if I was actually in a freighter and making ANY distant travel. We have a blog, it is terrible. How to fix Bounty Hunting |
Khersei
Deimos Delivery Co
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 11:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
Gravity wells sound interesting - especially as planets are currently boring.
This would basically make planets act like Hictors though - which means Low and null sec planets would be extreme navigation hazards.
To make this work you would have to allow arbitrary warp to a point on the system map - to allow a pilot to warp around planets. Adding this mechanic would devalue warp disruption bubles.
On the plus side it would add an element of system geography |
Alberio
Lone Star Exploration Lone Star Partners
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 16:15:00 -
[8] - Quote
Space seems pretty big to me already. I think you need to define what you mean by "making space bigger".
Do you mean: "spread people out more"? Do you mean: "Make it so it takes longer to get from point-a-to-point-b"?
From the sounds of your proposals, it seems like you would like space travel to take longer. Personally, I disagree there: adding mechanics to make it take longer to get to a warp gate sounds tedious and annoying. I would hate to have to warp to a planet, re-align, warp, re-align, warp again every time I want to travel three systems away.
I think Danika Princip said it best: make the existing, 'useless' systems more useful, and people will go out there and populate them. This will spread people out, make space seem 'bigger', and make most travel take longer.
That said, I dissagree with the notion that there are too many systems that have no reason to be other than mining or some missioning. Their reason for being is to be populated and colonized. Grab your rag-tag corp of ruffians, set up a couple of POS's in a system and claim dominance. Start to build up your own little sandcastle empire in the sandbox.
You may die horribly in your pod, trying to scream bio-gel fluid out of your lungs. Or you may plant the seeds for a future, multi-system spanning alliance. Either way, it'll be a nice change from the standard. |
Plyn
Three 6 MaFiA KRYSIS.
4
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 17:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sure, there are plenty of systems that aren't being fully utilized. As it turns out, though, there are loads of people who would like to use those systems! The problem is these systems are being held by major powerblocks, and even though they aren't using them, if you move into them and start to take them over, you'll have more fight than you can likely handle on your hands.
These systems, in effect, are being used for something. They're being used for resource-denial. Unless you can find some way to change game mechanics to remove this as a viable strategy for keeping the little guys little, nothing is really going to change this. Come2Nullsec |
Elindreal
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 17:40:00 -
[10] - Quote
all great powers hold buffer states. eve is no different, alliances will hold buffer systems on their periphery for security. they in turn become under-developed, exploited, wastelands |
|
Baljos Arnjak
Dark Praetorian Order
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 23:10:00 -
[11] - Quote
Well, one thing that I think can be done is to add a sort of fog of war by limiting how far away the overview can see to something like 32 or 64AU or something. As it is right now, you can see just about everything in system except for signatures and anomalies.
I think one of the main problems that makes space seem small sometimes is that basic navigation is so dry. Warp to gate, jump, warp to next gate, jump, until you get to where you were going. There really isn't anything to see other than the occasional debris field around some gates, the billboard, and gate guns.
Using the fog of war idea, you'd have to actually find the next gate by either warping to another object close enough to see it on the overview, or by having a previously made bookmark. This would also give a little mystery in exploring areas of the map that you've never been to before. Just knowing that you don't see everything the second you load the system would be an improvement over what we have now, imho.
Another problem is that there simply isn't enough variation in the space we occupy. It's not just a matter of the limited number of backgrounds we have, we need other environmental effects that help us mark our position in the universe. Stuff like planetary nebula and dust clouds that give a system wide visual effect. This is why I like going through Incursion areas and doing Recon 3/3 (before they changed it to normal space), you get a different and interesting visual experience.
Heh, I could go on for an hour about this stuff . |
Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
63
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 02:33:00 -
[12] - Quote
move things slower? why....
highsec is fine, and lowsec seems to be fine ( for this issue anyways)
nullsec the issue is jump bridges and huge coalitions that blue the neighboring regions. |
BLACK-STAR
70
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 02:37:00 -
[13] - Quote
No and No. [img]http://www.imgbox.de/users/S7AR/star.png[/img] |
|
CCP Spitfire
C C P C C P Alliance
151
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 08:55:00 -
[14] - Quote
It's not exactly on topic, but there is still a lot of good ideas in the Smallholding brainstorming thread on the old forums.
CCP Spitfire | Russian Community Coordinator @ccp_spitfire |
|
inexistin
Rubbish and Garbage Removal Atlas.
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 09:21:00 -
[15] - Quote
Mirima Thurander wrote:Expanding EvE with out adding space.
I had an idea but the more i thought about it the more it just seamed to be not enough, so how would you go about making EvE seam bigger with out adding in more solar systems?
1 - My first thought was reducing the speed ships warp at by a drastic amount, and reducing freighters and other hauling ships by even more, but then warping would just becomes a pain if it takes to long to get around.
But after a while everyone would get used to the lowered speed of warp and we would be right back the the hole SPACE is not big enough.
2 - Another way would be do away with the warping through Planets and forcing People to pick a route through Each system that's not a straight line from gate to gate.
So I wanna see your ideas for ways to make space bigger with out adding more systems.
Start using the directional and probe scanner, and some systems will seems os big, they'll have you cursing for the rest of your stay in them.
|
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Acquisition
4
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 12:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
So, i kinda like the gravity well thing, but what about moons?
Would they have one to?
Would a sun have a larger well than say a earth sized planet?
|
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
33
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 19:35:00 -
[17] - Quote
I've been thinking about something like this:
* Reduce the acceleration time when going into warp (make it more snappy, like on the login screen). * Reduce max warp speed a little to compensate. * Make it so you don't warp through planets and other stuff by having the warp system pick out "redirection nodes" to where the ship will warp. A "redirection node" is like a road crossing where you slow down, realign in normal speed, and warp again, automatically. I imagine a typical station-to-gate warp to encompass 3-4 such realignments.
These realignment spots would be fairly similar for ships that travel the same route and would be a prime location to set up pirate camps (the camps can then be avoided by not taking the obvious route gate-to-gate).
I think this will give a feeling of a bit larger space, without necessarily making travel times very much higher, but instead you spend more time realigning at nodes. It will give you a better feeling for the space you are in instead of just blasting past it at max speed. |
Breaker77
Reclamation Industries
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 21:05:00 -
[18] - Quote
Baljos Arnjak wrote:Well, one thing that I think can be done is to add a sort of fog of war by limiting how far away the overview can see to something like 32 or 64AU or something. As it is right now, you can see just about everything in system except for signatures and anomalies.
I want an overview that can show ships, POSes, wrecks, NPCs, cans, deadspace gates, and drones that are not on grid!
Seriously, do you even know what you are talking about? The overview only shows gates, stations, planets, moons, active cynos, and beacons systemwide. Everything else is limited to the current grid.
So 6 out of a couple hundred items are available systemwide on the overview. I would not call that "just about everything".
|
Oberine Noriepa
84
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 21:20:00 -
[19] - Quote
Burseg Sardaukar wrote:Mirima Thurander wrote: 2 - Another way would be do away with the warping through Planets and forcing People to pick a route through Each system that's not a straight line from gate to gate.
While I think the major "pipes" should prob have line-of-sight warp paths between gates, I DO think planets/moons/stars should have gravity wells that suck ships out mid-warp if their warp trajectory takes them "through" the planets. Also, this well should exist out to a range, so you have to slow boat out of it to enter warp again.
tankus2 wrote:would be nice to see a no-warp though planets thing implemented. I want this now! |
Baljos Arnjak
Dark Praetorian Order
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 00:12:00 -
[20] - Quote
Breaker77 wrote:Baljos Arnjak wrote:Well, one thing that I think can be done is to add a sort of fog of war by limiting how far away the overview can see to something like 32 or 64AU or something. As it is right now, you can see just about everything in system except for signatures and anomalies. I want an overview that can show ships, POSes, wrecks, NPCs, cans, deadspace gates, and drones that are not on grid! Seriously, do you even know what you are talking about? The overview only shows gates, stations, planets, moons, active cynos, and beacons systemwide. Everything else is limited to the current grid. So 6 out of a couple hundred items are available systemwide on the overview. I would not call that "just about everything".
Ok, you got me there, but the basic premise is having things that are always visible on the overview takes from the sense of scale in a system and negates some of the mystery of exploring new areas. I think the difference between us here is that I'm talking about the overview from the context of navigation, and you're talking about it from the context of it being an intel gathering tool.
Maybe the overview should be split up into two distinct tools, one for intel gathering and one for navigation. I dunno, what would be your contribution to this thread?
|
|
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Acquisition
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 00:14:00 -
[21] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:I've been thinking about something like this:
* Reduce the acceleration time when going into warp (make it more snappy, like on the login screen). * Reduce max warp speed a little to compensate. * Make it so you don't warp through planets and other stuff by having the warp system pick out "redirection nodes" to where the ship will warp. A "redirection node" is like a road crossing where you slow down, realign in normal speed, and warp again, automatically. I imagine a typical station-to-gate warp to encompass 3-4 such realignments.
These realignment spots would be fairly similar for ships that travel the same route and would be a prime location to set up pirate camps (the camps can then be avoided by not taking the obvious route gate-to-gate).
I think this will give a feeling of a bit larger space, without necessarily making travel times very much higher, but instead you spend more time realigning at nodes. It will give you a better feeling for the space you are in instead of just blasting past it at max speed.
This sounds quite good really.
|
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 07:09:00 -
[22] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:I've been thinking about something like this:
* Reduce the acceleration time when going into warp (make it more snappy, like on the login screen). * Reduce max warp speed a little to compensate. * Make it so you don't warp through planets and other stuff by having the warp system pick out "redirection nodes" to where the ship will warp. A "redirection node" is like a road crossing where you slow down, realign in normal speed, and warp again, automatically. I imagine a typical station-to-gate warp to encompass 3-4 such realignments.
These realignment spots would be fairly similar for ships that travel the same route and would be a prime location to set up pirate camps (the camps can then be avoided by not taking the obvious route gate-to-gate).
I think this will give a feeling of a bit larger space, without necessarily making travel times very much higher, but instead you spend more time realigning at nodes. It will give you a better feeling for the space you are in instead of just blasting past it at max speed.
Now try that in a freighter, or even a BS, something that takes a while to align.
All you would do is make travel more annoying. This is a bad thing. |
Baljos Arnjak
Dark Praetorian Order
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 12:13:00 -
[23] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Daedalus II wrote:I've been thinking about something like this:
* Reduce the acceleration time when going into warp (make it more snappy, like on the login screen). * Reduce max warp speed a little to compensate. * Make it so you don't warp through planets and other stuff by having the warp system pick out "redirection nodes" to where the ship will warp. A "redirection node" is like a road crossing where you slow down, realign in normal speed, and warp again, automatically. I imagine a typical station-to-gate warp to encompass 3-4 such realignments.
These realignment spots would be fairly similar for ships that travel the same route and would be a prime location to set up pirate camps (the camps can then be avoided by not taking the obvious route gate-to-gate).
I think this will give a feeling of a bit larger space, without necessarily making travel times very much higher, but instead you spend more time realigning at nodes. It will give you a better feeling for the space you are in instead of just blasting past it at max speed. Now try that in a freighter, or even a BS, something that takes a while to align. All you would do is make travel more annoying. This is a bad thing.
I think his idea is the best presented so far. Maybe for freighters, give them a sort of micro jump drive that is used for in-system jumps that doesn't require a cyno and doesn't require as much capacitor as a normal capital (something like 50%) and no fuel. So instead of waiting to align multiple times, they wait for their cap to recharge once. They would probably need their cap recharge bumped up a bit to keep travel times the same, but that's just a stat. They would still spend a bit of time at gates recharging, so freighter ganks would still be possible.
It would be annoying for things like battleships but I'm not sure that can be avoided given the nature of the problem.
On a side note, his redirection nodes would be prime real estate to put interesting things to see. Stuff like derelict wrecks, wrecked stations, maybe NPC POS's with in-space agents, nebula, monuments, etc. It would be a good place to show life happening that doesn't take place at stations or gates. |
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Acquisition
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 15:41:00 -
[24] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:
Now try that in a freighter, or even a BS, something that takes a while to align.
All you would do is make travel more annoying. This is a bad thing.
I don't see how it would be that Big of a problem, yes its a freighter its MASSIVE and full of stuff, there for it moves like a brick. BS are not really that bad.
I see that you don't want it to take longer to get somewhere in a freighter but would it truly be a bad thing for freighter to go slower?
It would open up more markets for smaller people to move items and trade off the main freighter trading paths because no one wants to make 12 extra jumps to a dead end system to supply that small group of mission runners in a freighter because it takes so long.
Its all about expanding how big space feels, and that would go a long ways to helping make space feel bigger.
|
Raw Matters
KRAUTZ RULEZ KRAUTZ-FEDERATION
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 22:08:00 -
[25] - Quote
I am not sure about your preferences but I actually love to DO something while playing Eve, and watching the warp tunnel while flying somewhere is everything but interesting. Do that in a freighter and you know what "wasting time" actually means.
I am very much against stretching the time it takes to get somewhere even further. |
Juil
Phoenix Industries Pty. Ltd.
17
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 03:48:00 -
[26] - Quote
leave the Warp Times alone, it takes over a minute to warp a freighter through some systems.. that's right 1 AU a second compared the multi AU's of most ships..
Battleships are almost as slow but the Orca and Freighter would be killed by changes to the Warp Times.
Just because you think Space needs to be made bigger doesn't mean every one else thinks your way of doing it is right..
On the overview stuff.. of course it's going to show you the planets etc etc.. Visable light travels at 1 light second every second, that means that when you jump into a system your sensors immediately can lock onto the planets etc in the system because their VISABLE using a standard telescope on a mark one eye ball if you had to get that low tech. Plus the systems kinda have all those lovely charts etc.. because they are 'charted' systems. You'll notice the diffrence in W-space, it doesn't have the infrastructure in place, so no local, nothing but the planets on overview.
You want to make space seem 'bigger' and thus eve 'bigger' let us make stuff ourselves like discussed in the small holding etc.. I want a house of my own.. i make a deadspace complex of my own.. give the players the same 'tools' the NPCS apparently have. |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
35
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 08:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
If my idea were to be used, and we don't want to expand the time it takes for freighters and battleships to get from point A to point B, it's not that hard to just modify their warp speed to make the actual warping take a very short time, and having alignment being the primary time guzzler.
Say that it takes 2 minutes in a specific system for a freighter to get between two gates today. Then say that with my system it would require two realignments. Well then you knock off 30 sec * 2 (if it takes 30 sec to align) to the time it takes to warp, perhaps making it warp as fast as (or faster than!) any other ship, but align slower. End result; same time as today, but with more time out-of-warp realigning.
Edit: To simplify, just give all ships the exact same warp speed. Then the time it takes to get from point A to point B will be solely dependant on the alignment time (agility) of the ship. And as smaller ships are more agile than large ships, the end result will be the same as today, with small ships being quicker in warp. |
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 11:34:00 -
[28] - Quote
Juil wrote:Just because you think Space needs to be made bigger doesn't mean every one else thinks your way of doing it is right.. Correct, it needs a game mechanic reason. Something -- on a global game design level -- which makes it worthwhile. As I understand, these realignment spots would be additional places in space for camps. That is something to be considered as positive.
Then again, some 'dictor pilots know how to set up bubbles right in the warp vectors. These tactics would be severely hindered -- not good.
Personally, seeing our ships warp through planets and stations makes me just sick it is so awful !
Juil wrote:You want to make space seem 'bigger' and thus eve 'bigger' let us make stuff ourselves like discussed in the small holding etc.. I want a house of my own.. i make a deadspace complex of my own.. give the players the same 'tools' the NPCS apparently have. That is a good point, too. CCP Spitfire already noted the similarities. |
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Acquisition
6
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 13:42:00 -
[29] - Quote
so, so far we have
Warping through planets bad.
Freighters going to slow with changes bad. - debatable
Drop out points for realigning OK. |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.19 14:04:00 -
[30] - Quote
A better solution would be to give the players the option:
- Plan the warp route with the use of the system map from witch our nav. computer plots the arc of the warp (continuous warp no drop outs and re-aligning) These could be saved for later use. - Just target the other gate for example, but be prepared that if your path would lead through any solid object or strong gravitational field you will drop out of warp near them (for safety reasons). |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |