EVE Search - Is there anything that you would change about the mechanics of EVE?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Is there anything that you would change about the mechanics of EVE?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Portmanteau CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.10.03 22:45:00 - [31] Originally by: Dark Pony Personal secrut but destroyable outposts on asteroids with docking bays and a small training time multiplier when logged out there. so hulks are the new dreads ?
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.03 22:58:00 - [32] Originally by: Alyth Originally by: Rob Stager Originally by: Arachna - no such thing as hi sec pretty sure that would make better half of the population quit, you need diversity and if you're forcing PVP on people they'll quit. That's a rediculous statement. The only way to avoid "forced" PvP as you put it is to stay docked. The 'undock' button is actually shorthand for "by pressing this button I agree and consent to getting ganked at any time or place at the choosing of my aggressor". In all honesty Jita being bubbled now and again or fought over by alliances would make the game far more interesting imho. yet, he is totally right. Hi-sec atm, while not perfect, is much better than not having one at all. you have no idea how hisec is important to keep your T2 at the prices they're at. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Ghoest	Posted - 2010.10.03 23:28:00 - [33] Im Han Solo, seriously(although I have hardly got around to playing much the last few months.) It was my goal when I first started playing EVE the first year. I wasnt able to realize the goal though till the last 2 years. But it requires the right skills the right equipment and the right goals/playstyle. Im hard to kill but I dont do much kiling either. Wherever you went - Here you are.
Rob Stager	Posted - 2010.10.03 23:39:00 - [34] Edited by: Rob Stager on 03/10/2010 23:40:31 Originally by: Alyth Originally by: Rob Stager Originally by: Arachna - no such thing as hi sec pretty sure that would make better half of the population quit, you need diversity and if you're forcing PVP on people they'll quit. That's a rediculous statement. The only way to avoid "forced" PvP as you put it is to stay docked. The 'undock' button is actually shorthand for "by pressing this button I agree and consent to getting ganked at any time or place at the choosing of my aggressor". In all honesty Jita being bubbled now and again or fought over by alliances would make the game far more interesting imho. how many times outside of wars did you get blown up right after you undocked in high-sec? sure there's risks but 0.001% risk is better than 50% don't you think?
Alyth Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.10.04 00:09:00 - [35] Originally by: Rob Stager Edited by: Rob Stager on 03/10/2010 23:40:31 Originally by: Alyth Originally by: Rob Stager Originally by: Arachna - no such thing as hi sec pretty sure that would make better half of the population quit, you need diversity and if you're forcing PVP on people they'll quit. That's a rediculous statement. The only way to avoid "forced" PvP as you put it is to stay docked. The 'undock' button is actually shorthand for "by pressing this button I agree and consent to getting ganked at any time or place at the choosing of my aggressor". In all honesty Jita being bubbled now and again or fought over by alliances would make the game far more interesting imho. how many times outside of wars did you get blown up right after you undocked in high-sec? sure there's risks but 0.001% risk is better than 50% don't you think? About as often as I did in my home space in when I was living in 0.0, which is to say nearly never because of defence gangs, POS to flee to. watching local etc. Removal of CONCORD would make people gankhappy for a while, sure, but when they figure out they can't get stuff done it'll end up being policed by players anyhow. Think about it from an objective standpoint. How many of you would love to clear Privateers and suicide gankers from 4-4? How many would like to be able to defend your wrecks (not 'your' salavage mind) from ninja looters before they ransom your mission objectives back to you? From the other side though how many would like to be able to hunt missioners? etc etc etc. Disclaimer: I'm not saying it could or even should happen I just think it would be fun, and my statement about the undock button still stands as all PvP in EvE is forced. @Grimpak don't remind me about T2 production in a volatile environment please it makes me remember why my idea isn't a good one from personal experience
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.10.04 00:10:00 - [36] Originally by: Tippia Less protection in highsec. Yeah, that would be a fun month for a few people, then it would be as empty as lowsec and CCPs revenue would plummet. Try to think of ideas that don't kill the game. Mine would be removing gates and developing a new means of travel that doesn't create bottenecks, which would result in more people entering lowsec. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
THERisingPHOENIX Caldari Kaleidascopic Military Association	Posted - 2010.10.04 00:41:00 - [37] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Tippia Less protection in highsec. Yeah, that would be a fun month for a few people, then it would be as empty as lowsec and CCPs revenue would plummet. Try to think of ideas that don't kill the game. Mine would be removing gates and developing a new means of travel that doesn't create bottenecks, which would result in more people entering lowsec. +1 I posted a similar idea before for no gates but sub jump drive different from the cap jump drive that would enable small ships to hop system to system and appear at random spots at the system. Though expect many ppl to be with or against this idea
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.10.04 00:52:00 - [38] Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 04/10/2010 00:55:28 Originally by: THERisingPHOENIX I posted a similar idea before for no gates but sub jump drive different from the cap jump drive that would enable small ships to hop system to system and appear at random spots at the system. Though expect many ppl to be with or against this idea It's something i've been on about for quite awhile too. Even posted a big thing in suggestions and ideas awhile back with a way to tie it into the story, and possible mechanics. I think the main problem is many people don't want to work for targets by probing them down or looking around, even if it means more targets being around. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Grytok KL0NKRIEGER	Posted - 2010.10.04 00:54:00 - [39] 1. remove the sovereignity-system alltogether 2. switch 0.0 local-chat to delayed mode like in wormholes 3. remove player-outposts and turn Titans into mobile stations instead
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2010.10.04 01:01:00 - [40] Removal of gates, an overhaul of space mechanics. The Real Space Initiative - V6 (Forum Link)

IloveRickAstley	Posted - 2010.10.04 01:14:00 - [41] make it so all ships have crews and you have to feed them and when they are happy your ship will be better but if they get hungry your ship just floats around and they wont shoot the guns
Ira Theos	Posted - 2010.10.04 01:24:00 - [42] Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer on 03/10/2010 18:58:15 I would remove gates and instead there be a wormhole generator either fitted to every ship to jump from any point in a system to any RANDOM point in the target system, or make that a module so system defenders have a balance against intruders (this is a topic where the arguments can go in several directions). This would be the END of blobs and camps - the two things that are killing this game. I would also remove local and make hunters earn their prey. Area of effect means area of effect and so being too close to a ship that pops should have a chance of killing yours - this is another anti-blob move. Finally, make it so that clone vats need as much material going in as going out, meaning that corpses become important enough that smart bombs in blobs becomes expensive logistically. THIS... Give this man a reward. He understands the problem. Make it so next patch.
Wonton Tomato Minmatar Suicide Girls	Posted - 2010.10.04 01:30:00 - [43] Edited by: Wonton Tomato on 04/10/2010 01:34:23 Make the game less boring and more interactive. It's sci-fi man, nothing should be predictable. The only thing unpredictable in Eve is the players themselves, lag and bad patches like the recent one, but people can be found anywhere. Here's what I would want to see in Eve... Remove gates, cynos and autopilot - plot your own damn course, and if hit you a collidable, guess what? Bring in friendly fire, line of sight, area of effect and collision damage. PS, ammo can not shoot 'straight' through things harmlessly. Give us random natural disasters, and weather reports... Micrometeorites, Galactic storms, Gamma Ray Bursts, etc. Change market so items aren't generic. Let players sell inferior or superior versions of products. Like Ravens with no armor, 50% off. No more traders changing prices on generic 2D icons for +/- .01 isk, you call that a market? Make mining an activity that a macro can't do. Make it exciting and interactive, (see movie Armageddon for clues) The only safe haven during war, is not being logged in. Yeah, buh bye window licking and while we're at it, P.I. Warfare. Ability to outrun Concord. Wanna have some fun? Give haulers Cargo Launchers. Open the bay doors and start slinging yer cargo! "Your group of Cows hits Billy for 1369 dmg" No nerfs, only buffs. Quit wasting training time, and btw, training time in this game sucks a mean donkey.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.10.04 01:31:00 - [44] Originally by: Ira Theos THIS... Give this man a reward. He understands the problem. Make it so next patch. Why don't people like you spend more time in the ideas section? My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Sam Brockson Gallente	Posted - 2010.10.04 03:21:00 - [45] Warp Scramblers and Disrupters - I dislike the ability to be forced to "fight" in a scenario I have no chances of of remotely winning, i.e. me in an industrial caught at a gate camp. Even a full rack of warp core stabilizers won't prevent a group of dedicated guys with nothing better to do then waiting for something to come along. I would perfer it takes several seconds to warp (still at least giving them a chance to shoot). If I were to be engaged in any pvp combat and wanted to escape, I have to stop shooting and wait for a set amount of time before I was allowed to get away, much like docking/aggression counters already are.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2010.10.04 03:23:00 - [46] hehe mass limits on cynos sounds fun
Rock Vegas	Posted - 2010.10.04 03:43:00 - [47] One character per account. One account per human.
Herzog Wolfhammer Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2010.10.04 03:49:00 - [48] I put in my ideas because the OP asked and I had some time to murder without remorse. But I have yet to figure that CCP ever uses player ideas. Though the re-use of the Primae hull is not proving my point well, for many players liked that ship so much and wanted a new one like it - the design was very welcome. The "hive ship" thread in F&I had a lot of dev input and it appears that the future incursions will make use of that concept. But getting rid of local and putting an end to camping - I am not sure if CCP simply does not care, or if there is something in the game mechanics or field structures of systems in the database that prevents changes. There is hope for these ideas though, for even the Chronicles make an implication that we will eventually be able to use wormholes the way the Sansha do right now - but the backstory and how this ties into sleepers is a bit stalled. There is actually a riddle about the sleepers that, if solved, might open the door to use of a network of wormholes we can use, and gates become a memory of old players. Even now I can get across New Eden using wormholes, but with only little control of where I go. Past gank pipelines I have gone and farmed sleepers right under the noses of worm bears that were AFK or out of time zone. Been in 0.0 SOV systems deep into territory hitting radar sites without seeing a soul too, and then back to empire, without a scratch. Sometimes it take 20 minutes to get lucky and find a empire-0.0 bridge and sometimes it takes a week. Having to use a ship that is gimped mainly for being a Star Trek ship (swiss army knife of ships) means bad PVe fit, and something that might escape PVP if the tackler is stupid (or in my experience the people who put the bubble up are looking at a 4chan thread as my BC does 1500 m/s to get out).
Misanthra	Posted - 2010.10.04 04:05:00 - [49] Edited by: Misanthra on 04/10/2010 04:06:35 war dec mechanism could use an overhaul. At least make it so that to war dec 0.0 entities you at least have to live there. You know, so that the war dec'd could enjoy the free war targets you are giving them since even if jita could support the added traffic of a null sec alliance coming to jita....its just too damn far and impractical to go there.
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2010.10.04 05:02:00 - [50] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Ira Theos THIS... Give this man a reward. He understands the problem. Make it so next patch. Why don't people like you spend more time in the ideas section? I been after gates for five years, as my signature can point out. Lots of time spent in the ideas forum, doesn't seem to do any good. :) The Real Space Initiative - V6 (Forum Link)

Garia666 Amarr T.H.U.G L.I.F.E Talos Coalition	Posted - 2010.10.04 06:05:00 - [51] they way you manualy need to sight rights on members keeps being a pain in the ass. even tough the preset funtion is there.. i would change that in something more clear and workable. Do not click this ad.
Xorv	Posted - 2010.10.04 06:08:00 - [52] lets see just off the top of my head... Remove Local Chat from Null Sec and Low Sec. Remove Learning Skills (return SP invested). Change Gate Mechanics somehow Make Faction Standings Meaningful Reverse the P alliance Nerf Reverse the NOS nerf (at least for ships with bonuses to them) Yeah ok it would be a very long list, guess that will do...
Typhado3 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.04 06:11:00 - [53] change the clone cost, I'm just about to pass the 30 mil clone mark on my main =( ------------------------------ God is an afk cloaker
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.04 06:18:00 - [54] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Tippia Less protection in highsec. Yeah, that would be a fun month for a few people, then it would be as empty as lowsec and CCPs revenue would plummet. Try to think of ideas that don't kill the game. Why would it kill the game? Because you can't conceive of "less" in any terms other than "none"? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.10.04 06:27:00 - [55] Originally by: Alyth Originally by: Rob Stager how many times outside of wars did you get blown up right after you undocked in high-sec? sure there's risks but 0.001% risk is better than 50% don't you think? About as often as I did in my home space in when I was living in 0.0, which is to say nearly never because of defence gangs, POS to flee to. watching local etc. Removal of CONCORD would make people gankhappy for a while, sure, but when they figure out they can't get stuff done it'll end up being policed by players anyhow. Problem: We need an area of space that isn't governed by someone's juvenile nerd clique. In other words, we need an area of neutrality that is also somewhat safe. Player policing actually sounds good to me, because the corruption and payola would be hilarious, but it would be bad for the game.
Sverige Pahis Caldari Random Selection. Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2010.10.04 06:31:00 - [56] Not strictly on topic but what I want fixed is for the damned logout button to actually log your character out to the character selection screen instead of just restarting your client. If I wanted that I'd press the quit button :(
Abduakla	Posted - 2010.10.04 06:40:00 - [57] Make destroyer receive no sig radius increase for using MWD's, drop their RoF penalty and decrease them to 6 guns (keep pg and cpu the same). Add one low OR mid slot to each destroyer. Small counter balance - increase the sig radius of each destroyer to 90-100.
Autunite Caldari Firebird Squadron Terra-Incognita	Posted - 2010.10.04 08:04:00 - [58] Edited by: Autunite on 04/10/2010 08:10:15 I would like to see a couple of things: Addition of more tactical/twitch based combat. I would love to see formations for larger ships and WASD/joystick control for small ships like frigates and maybe fighters that way it won't be simply based on stats. Now this would be more memory intensive so reducing of blobs by having things like AoE from exploding ships would be neccesary also. I would also like to see the removal of jump gates (except maybe in core HS systems) to remove bottle necks add at a more tactical dimension in the game. And the addition of jumpengines on all ships instead. Most ships would have a limited range that would allow them at most to 'leapfrog' a system but maybe the addition of specialized BS class ships that have increased range and allow for a certain mass of other ships to piggy back along. Along with this theme pirate jump points that have special attributes such as less capacitor requirement, faster jump plotting, or longer range. But they have to be scanned out and have the risk of seriously damaging/destroying ships that are using it. Thats all I can think of since I am pretty tired. Oh and remove local and add constellation chat instead for null and low sec then people would have to watch their dscan more.
Typhado3 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.04 11:03:00 - [59] Originally by: Autunite ......then people would have to watch their dscan more. Not trying to pick on you as this sorta thing has been said countless times. But since when did repeatedly mashing the same god damn button every 5 seconds become a good thing? Hell it sounds like people wanna take the PI click-for-isk and put it into all 0.0 space except it's click-to-not-die and it's only 1 button. ------------------------------ God is an afk cloaker
MissyDark	Posted - 2010.10.04 14:29:00 - [60] 1. Remove local as an intel channel 2. You can warp anwhere - point your ship in any direction, press warp, stop when you click stop warp. Like a hyperdrive. 3. Warp to any object on the scanner. No more safespots. 4. Concord no more magically appears - it has to come from their base and hunt you down, just like peple do.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.