Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Valandril
Caldari Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 08:27:00 -
[31]
Originally by: ArmyOfMe
Originally by: Valandril If you are spineless and scared to loose ship then arena won't make you all off sudden grow a pair.
ppl like you and me are some of the reason ppl dont go to low sec/dont join player corps etc etc, we fly around in high skilled gangs in well fitted ships and we kill them every chance we get. (yeah i can really see why the "so called carebears would risk their ships).
every chance we get to kill a target we do it. we dont give them fair chances do we? im sorry but you gotta get off that high horse of yours and smell the actual truth here.
most ppl i know that has left eve, left for the simple reason that they couldnt find fair fights anymore and they didnt wanna roam around in gangs all day looking for fights and having to hope to not be hotdropped.
areans would maybe finally give players a chance to get 1vs1's (wihtout the risk of one of the guys calling in backup). for me this would be the perfect thing to be able to do the days were i am limited to maybe 30min-1hour of playtime and dont wanna spend all of that spinning my ship in station.
Speak for yourself. I fly around looking for good fights, not for ganks (when it comes to lowsec, empire wars are different story). As for dead 1vs1, it is dead because its BORING. Jeasus how boring it is (i mean process of just fight, chasing around for it is still insane amount of fun) and thats main reason why it's dead. Also 1:1 actualy require more balls than X vs X because there you got no one to blame for your loss but yourself, and no one is coming to save your arse. Signature graphics that may only contain your character name, corporation logo, corporation or personal slogan or other text that is directly related to your in-game persona, or content directly related to Eve Online. All content must be in good taste.Applebabe |
Lear Hepburn
Caldari Ascendant Strategies Inc. The Transcendent
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 09:13:00 -
[32]
I could countenance an arena if you had to pay (ISK) to play. You could buy the fittings and the ship you want in the arena and if you lose then the money is lost; if you win you get the cost you paid for your ship plus half what the other player paid for his as winnings. All T1/named/T2 items/ships (sub-cap) should be available from NPCs for arena use only, but at a premium.
This would have several consequences: 1. ISK sink. Assuming the two players choose the same ship/fittings, 25% of the ISK paid in would be lost. Whatever the difference between player spend, half of one player's input is lost as "arena fees". 2. Consequences remain relevant. 3. The "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" principle would still apply. 4. New market hubs would be established at the arena locations, creating further opportunities for traders/industrialists.
|
oniplE
Point of No Return
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 09:14:00 -
[33]
This idea is against everything EVE stands for. I cant even imagine why a Dev would consider this as a valid option. This idea would remove all risk from pvp and it will kill lowsec/nullsec gangs. x |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 09:36:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Destination SkillQueue on 07/06/2009 10:13:24 The idea of an arena isn't god awful on its own, but there are some issues.
First - It has to have real losses. This is an issue I can't really see any reason to negotiate over. Ship losses are so integral part of the game and its economy, that you would have to be mad or just a really selfish carebear to want anything else.
Second - This is a dynamic world. Arenas will change the combat-PvP dynamic. The only issue is how much will that change be. The fact remains, that less people will participate in the "world PvP" after arenas are introduced. This can be seen in other MMOs, that have gone this route. With how things currently are lowsec can be largely removed from the game after arenas are implemented. It has nothing unique to keep it alive, if combat can be easily found in highsec.
Then there is the issue of CCP occationly being really dense about the dynamics of the game it made. With new features, the players have on several occations warned of the negative impacts of CCPs poorly planned features. By this I mean features that can't possibly achieve the intended purpose, because ratios/mechanics have been designed by people who lack the proper expertise to account for all the variables the players are using. This results in features, that have significant impact in theory, but are largely ignored as irrelevant in practise or they have huge unintended consequenses. This is compaunded by the fact, that solutions to these problems are slow to materialise, because CCP is then too afraid to interfere again. So we are left with broken/incomplete/imbalanced features and additions for years to come.
Third - This is sort of part of the second issue, but it is so important it deserves to be addressed on its own. What is it you are trying to achieve with arenas and are there alternative ways to tackle those issues? Is it just a solution to help find more easy fights? [sarcasm]Surely the solution isn't to fix wardecs or repair the damage done to lowsec by CCPs own design decisions. We must implement a arena system, so all but empire builders can stay in the safety of highsec forever and never have any reason to leave.[/sarcasm]
The only good reason for arenas I've seen is using it for tournaments. This could work, if nothing is provided by the NPCs. It is just a tool for players to arrange combat by specific rules, where the losses are real and rewards are provided by other players. Minimum reward could just be E-peening and the right to loot the losers wreck. The details would be a more difficult matter and personally I'm not convinced it is the right direction to take the game, since it seems to be a substitute for fixing real problems with game balance. It also doesn't remove any of the effects it has on the wider dynamic of the game, but giving players the tools to make their own tournaments seems like a reasonable feature to add to the game, so I'm not against adding the necessary tools per se. |
Reeno Coleman
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 12:53:00 -
[35]
Wasn't there a Blog or an interview about this topic?
When i remember correctly, it said, that they wanted to bring a simulator feature with Apocrypha, but their problem with that was, that the Tranquility code doesnt allow for things being not really destroyed. I think i remember something like this.
Anyway. Arena kind of gameplay would not be so horribly wrong, but taking the loss completely out would be a big mistake. Make sure the matchup is set from the start and noone can intervene. Maybe grant every player the right to retrieve his own shipwreck after destruction. Or allow warpout as sign of capitulation (but allow scramblers, too). |
Halycon Gamma
Caldari The Flying Tigers
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 16:48:00 -
[36]
A lot of this is why I wanted an instant fight type feature added to Factional Warfare. Not 1v1, but huge gang fights over complexes that are easy to get into, easy to pew, get pewed, and get back into very quickly after you've been pewed. No guarantee that the fight you're going to join won't be a one sided blowout, but with Tiers that allow only a certain ship class or lower to be involved. That way while you might be blown out by pure numbers, you know you won't be destroyed by some guy flying a ship way above you're chosen area of ability.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 19:57:00 -
[37]
And I thought factional warfare was supposed to bring 'easy' and 'instant' PvP into EVE
Wouldn't it be better and more obvious to adjust factional warfare instead of implementing arenas, which would very likely be a direct competition, thus reducing the participation?
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Qarthy
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 20:30:00 -
[38]
The major problem I see with the arena system. CCP will start trying to balance everything around it. CCP will start trying to balance the ships agenst each other in the smallest possible area of the game. It would just be horrible.
Say no to arenas. They are a bad idea no mater what game they have ever been put in.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 23:05:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Qarthy The major problem I see with the arena system. CCP will start trying to balance everything around it. CCP will start trying to balance the ships agenst each other in the smallest possible area of the game. It would just be horrible.
Say no to arenas. They are a bad idea no mater what game they have ever been put in.
You're taking the words right out of my mouth.
Deathmatches with real ship losses - ok. Cuddly Carebear PewPew - hell no.
What purpose would it serve? To attract enough people, it would have to have some meaning. Riches, fame, ISK. Otherwise players would just ignore that new feature. So that means major development time, instead of a nice little addition. Is it really worth the hassle?
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Grarr Dexx
Amarr Corp 1 Allstars
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 23:08:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Qarthy The major problem I see with the arena system. CCP will start trying to balance everything around it. CCP will start trying to balance the ships agenst each other in the smallest possible area of the game. It would just be horrible.
Say no to arenas. They are a bad idea no mater what game they have ever been put in.
You're taking the words right out of my mouth.
Deathmatches with real ship losses - ok. Cuddly Carebear PewPew - hell no.
What purpose would it serve? To attract enough people, it would have to have some meaning. Riches, fame, ISK. Otherwise players would just ignore that new feature. So that means major development time, instead of a nice little addition. Is it really worth the hassle?
Why does there need to be a reward? Isn't the reward getting a balanced set-up for PVP?
Anyways, I still vote no for this crap.
|
|
Cain m
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 23:31:00 -
[41]
The only reasonable Arena idea would to have areas marked by beacons in highsec & lowsec (Somewhat like SiSi FFAs). Difference is CONCORD wouldn't respond to ship combat. Maybe pod combat.
No rules on fleet limits, etc. It will probably be camped, but that is EvE GET OVER IT.
Sweet little sector of null sec coming to your local mission hub.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 09:10:00 -
[42]
Originally by: LoneLeader
... Just an idea =)
no. Actions without consequences suck, PvP has to imply loss of equipment.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Typo Corp
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 09:53:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Robert Caldera no. Actions without consequences suck, PvP has to imply loss of equipment.
no. Risk-free without reward is fine, PvP has to imply gain of equipment (from your foe's wreck). ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006. |
Valandril
Caldari Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 09:56:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Allen Ramses
Originally by: Robert Caldera no. Actions without consequences suck, PvP has to imply loss of equipment.
no. Risk-free without reward is fine, PvP has to imply gain of equipment (from your foe's wreck).
No its not Signature graphics that may only contain your character name, corporation logo, corporation or personal slogan or other text that is directly related to your in-game persona, or content directly related to Eve Online. All content must be in good taste.Applebabe |
Deviana Sevidon
Gallente Panta-Rhei Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 10:30:00 -
[45]
A PvP Arena could not be that bad. If the Ships are killed and the Player loses Ships and Modules then it would be a real loss and far from being Risk free. There no additional rewards needed, but perhaps Players could put bets on the Outcome of a Fight. |
Guru Saurfang
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 10:35:00 -
[46]
I see two different trends here, but the bottom line is that arena should not be in any form carefree. The limit of the losses should only be discussed in terms of allowing poding or not. Ships and modules should pop, isk sink and industry and market boost.
So if we argue arena or not I am for arena all the wayà now, talking about the rules of engagement and controlling potential exploits or aiming towards equality of chances that is totally a different discussion.
The ô realö PVP is 99% non consensual and that will never die.(pirates will still hunt and 0.0 people will still defend/conquer their space). How many of you had a challenging undisturbed equal fight with someone also looking for it lately? Well that is the only thing that would potentially disappear... but if you ask me it already did.
|
Valandril
Caldari Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 10:41:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Guru Saurfang The “ real” PVP is 99% non consensual and that will never die.(pirates will still hunt and 0.0 people will still defend/conquer their space). How many of you had a challenging undisturbed equal fight with someone also looking for it lately? Well that is the only thing that would potentially disappear... but if you ask me it already did.
GBTWOW if you want nice equal pvp with other ppl who want it. There everything is nice and even, no one is mean and after a fight you can get a hug. Ganking work both ways, today you gank tommorow they will gank you. Signature graphics that may only contain your character name, corporation logo, corporation or personal slogan or other text that is directly related to your in-game persona, or content directly related to Eve Online. All content must be in good taste.Applebabe |
Guru Saurfang
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 10:50:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Valandril
Originally by: Guru Saurfang The ô realö PVP is 99% non consensual and that will never die.(pirates will still hunt and 0.0 people will still defend/conquer their space). How many of you had a challenging undisturbed equal fight with someone also looking for it lately? Well that is the only thing that would potentially disappear... but if you ask me it already did.
GBTWOW if you want nice equal pvp with other ppl who want it. There everything is nice and even, no one is mean and after a fight you can get a hug. Ganking work both ways, today you gank tommorow they will gank you.
Taking your constructive criticism as a failing from my part to be explicit (language barrier and all): I just want to clarify that my point was that only the ones that are looking for fair encounters should be alarm that introduction of some kind of arena will limit their chances. For the true gankers like you and me, nothing will change.
And yes we are far better then people that play WOW !
|
Valandril
Caldari Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 11:01:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Guru Saurfang
Originally by: Valandril
Originally by: Guru Saurfang The “ real” PVP is 99% non consensual and that will never die.(pirates will still hunt and 0.0 people will still defend/conquer their space). How many of you had a challenging undisturbed equal fight with someone also looking for it lately? Well that is the only thing that would potentially disappear... but if you ask me it already did.
GBTWOW if you want nice equal pvp with other ppl who want it. There everything is nice and even, no one is mean and after a fight you can get a hug. Ganking work both ways, today you gank tommorow they will gank you.
Taking your constructive criticism as a failing from my part to be explicit (language barrier and all): I just want to clarify that my point was that only the ones that are looking for fair encounters should be alarm that introduction of some kind of arena will limit their chances. For the true gankers like you and me, nothing will change.
And yes we are far better then people that play WOW !
Speak for yourself, i'm not a ganker. Signature graphics that may only contain your character name, corporation logo, corporation or personal slogan or other text that is directly related to your in-game persona, or content directly related to Eve Online. All content must be in good taste.Applebabe |
Haks'he Lirky
Durgarnir
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 11:13:00 -
[50]
Jumpgate has/had a simulator where you could train for PVP, no consequences or anything, no goals either and no restrictions. This would be fun I guess for EVE (currently people can do this on the test server) as people will probaby get tired of it in the long run (with no consequences/rewards).
With a simulator it would be possible to setup player run events, tournaments and such as an additional tool for the community.
My problem with an arena as a feature (CCP adding Arena content and such) is that then it moves outside the realm of being a fun side thing to do while bored or training for Corporations into being a reason to play EVE. Being a reason to play EVE would mean people can use it to get their PvP fix and that would mean less 0.0, lowsec, factional warfare and empire war participation.
And I think less participation in those things would not be good in the long run for EVE.
Examples of where Arena based play spoiled other PvP can be found in DAoC as an example, WoW to a lesser extent (never had real world PvP) and in my opinion arena based PvP in Warhammer Online spoiled the whole idea behind Realm warfare for them.
My input, hope it was constructive.
|
|
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 11:57:00 -
[51]
By all means provide better support for what people already do informally on the test server or elsewhere. The last time I checked, the test server alone hasn't destroyed PVP on Tranquility, and neither has the alliance tournament. The tournament has always seen more teams apply to take part than there have been available slots, so a means of automating competitions ought to prove popular. The only reason we don't have more is that they're a lot of work to organise with things as they are.
I see no problem with this as long as any rewards are in line with the risks. Contests with tangible prizes should have entry fees and/or ship losses, but what's wrong with a no reward / no loss environment if people just want to test their setups? |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 14:42:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro By all means provide better support for what people already do informally on the test server or elsewhere. The last time I checked, the test server alone hasn't destroyed PVP on Tranquility, and neither has the alliance tournament. The tournament has always seen more teams apply to take part than there have been available slots, so a means of automating competitions ought to prove popular. The only reason we don't have more is that they're a lot of work to organise with things as they are.
I see no problem with this as long as any rewards are in line with the risks. Contests with tangible prizes should have entry fees and/or ship losses, but what's wrong with a no reward / no loss environment if people just want to test their setups?
The issue with no loss environment is, that the more people use it, the more steam EVE loses as a whole. Ship losses make the world go round, so you should be extremely careful when tampering with it. Allowing them to do this on the test server is fine though and I don't see a reason it could not be made more user friendly to connect to it.
The test server is a very different environment though and nothing you build there has any meaning for anyone on TQ and won't last, so it doesn't appeal to any significant number of players. The server is ONLY good for testing. The dynamic that makes EVE is missing there by design. It doesn't have markets or industry. Everything is practically free and most parts of the game that make it what it is are missing. The no loss nature of combat doesn't matter there, since everything that it could ruin on TQ is already ruined on the test server.
The tournaments don't effect anything, since there are real losses and the scale is insignificant. Few fights between a handful of people aren't going to make any difference. Allow that to be the norm and worst case scenario is, that it is the lvl4 missioning equivelant to lowsec ratting. It won't remove lowsec PvP, but it will shift the focus, so much it becomes insignificant compared to arena combat. How much the real effect is can be argued though.
This in mind it would be more approriate to develop the fitting window to allow basic simulations, so people could test their fittings without risk and without ruining the rest of the game. Just something like how long your tank will last against a specific DPS level or how long can you run all modules with you setup, would allow some basic testing to be done without losses.
|
Ironnight
Caldari x13 KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 15:21:00 -
[53]
Sadly the devs wants riskfree pvp for the masses, that is why the game puked out the code the first time, they couldnt get the game to accept the fact that losses does not count.
Riskfree pvp is pointless and against everything this game was build on. It will add nothing to the game and it could ruin the core of the game, pvp, so drop and go suck on some veldspar.
They're like 'oh **** son, its a trap *Doomsday* |
Alex Medvedov
Minmatar Black Sinisters YARRR and CO
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 11:13:00 -
[54]
In my opinion "arenas" are against everything I thought EVE is about. It was said by CCP that EVE is a harsh world where scams, piracy, wars are common and you cant hide from them - just like in "real world". No absolute regulation, you need to trust your opponent if you agree with 1v1 and because of that i like EVE very much. If you lose a ship no matter how rich you are you dont want to let it happen again. I can see the reasons why the devs wants to implement that "feature".
I know how hard finding targets could be, but thats the point! You need to plan ahead, quikly decide if engage or not - its almost like hunting. Thats what is makeing fun for me, theres no "teleport in arena" button in Eve as is in the most of other MMOs. And i would really prefere it to stay like that! On the other hand, it takes time for a new player to find out how to get good pvp in EVE. But since we have Faction Warfare getting pvp fights is more easy than it used to be so if you are looking for fight you know where to come now.
On the other hand if you in CCP would introduct some sort of arenas where the risk will be at the same level as anywhere else and players will need to be self-sufficient to enter, it should hurt EVE too much. But if you are planning to add any risk-free or risk-reduced combat, you are going against the spirit of EVe in my opinion. What about condidering adding the fourth server just for arena fighting without realy consequences on tranquinity?
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 11:41:00 -
[55]
I would not like any kind of riskless arenas, however, in what way would arenas affect the traditional gameplay as long as engagement is kept non-consensual??
Fine, there are some noobs bashing each other in an arena, as long as you can gank them as usual there would be no difference to current situation actually. Am I missing something?? |
Lavaa Diss
|
Posted - 2009.06.15 11:30:00 -
[56]
sry didnt read the whole topic, but what about a arena for low SP players only ? when you hit 5mil sp (or lower) you cant enter the arena
so it would be a good way to learn something for new players, which are afraid yet of open pvp
and it actualy would be a good opportunity to have some fun between endless missions/mining
|
Barbanikos
Amarr Alternative Routes
|
Posted - 2009.06.15 12:22:00 -
[57]
another step closer to WOW and Linage lmfao !
If you make arenas i want soulshots too!
Who looks for a victim in space and it might take him hours to find it from his game time (that is what the dev pointed mostly at) is at the same time a possible victim of anothers.
Arenas will cut out authentic PVP.
If u want a player to find easier and faster a victim make 0.0 and low sec either more attractive or a MUST for some reasons u can come up with. |
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari Endemic Aggression Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.06.15 14:06:00 -
[58]
If there was arena style of fighting possibility it should be made in kind of gladiator style so you fly your OWN ship against some other pre-arranged opponent(s) who's also flying his OWN ship. There could be bets and rewards placed, but the main principle should be that whenever you engage in combat you WILL have possiblity of losing some ISK.
I have yet to say that if you arrange 1 vs. 1 fight with t1 frigate it doesn't really cost anything. You can steal enough isk from wrecks etc. for fitting t1 frigate/cruiser with a noob alt in an hour.
NOT LOSING YOUR SHIP = BAD WORST HORRIBLEST TERRIBLEST IDEA EVER AND ALSO UNFAIR FOR THOSE WHO ARE ACTUALLY FLYING IN COMBAT AND LOSING THEIR SHIPS
|
Korbyn Dallaz
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 17:01:00 -
[59]
I find it funny that most of the posts in this thread make it seem as though PvP in this game has anything to do with fighting or competition . Look at the kill boards . The majority of kills in this game are of unarmed ships and/or ships that were killed by an overwhelming number of organized opponents i.e. gate camps . Look at all of the industrials and mining barges on the kill boards these ships do not even have guns . The type of combat that you are all arguing this would destroy almost never happens in this game . " Manly Men " that run around looking for combat as a test of strength to see who is the better player just does not happen . No one in this game gets involved in PvP by choice unless they have stacked the odds in their favor before hand . Further more not everyone is in this game for the PvP . I think that a dueling mode or some way to practice combat without ship loss would make a way for people who are industial/mining focused can actually gain some PvP skills to give them a fighting chance . I think that would actually lead to increased PvP but maybe that is what you are all afraid of that this might actually lead to some fair fights .
|
Uzume Ame
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 17:18:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek And I thought factional warfare was supposed to bring 'easy' and 'instant' PvP into EVE
Wouldn't it be better and more obvious to adjust factional warfare instead of implementing arenas, which would very likely be a direct competition, thus reducing the participation?
Indeed, just fix damn FW!
Also add mass restrictions (like WH) to some plexes gates so you can get that "fair fight" feeeling but without totally isolation from the rest of the universe (like instanced arenas on hisec would be).
No need to open that can of worms, just finnish your damn features at once CCP. Even if the loss was for real, the effects on the current universe could be terrible... yes I like some thigns about them, specially unofficial tournaments, bets, and all that sporting stuff that could even open to metagaming again with scams, etc. which is allways nice () but I don't see anyway to fix all the problems and effects this would have on open pvp. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |