EVE Search - New Dev Blog: The Nation strikes back

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: The Nation strikes back

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Nyphur Pillowsoft Total Comfort	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:04:00 - [61] Edited by: Nyphur on 10/11/2010 17:11:45 You want to interrupt people's current activity while the incursion is in progress, and the more I think about that idea the more I warm to it. It sounds great! Much more interesting than systems being static with not much ever going on. I'd love to see more stuff like this! What I have a problem with is the method used to disrupt people's activity. The system-wide effect has the following consequences for normal gameplay: 1) Reduction of all shield/armor resistances 2) Reduction of turret, missile, drone and smartbomb damage 3) Jamming of cynosural fields throughout the system 4) Reduction of 50% on all NPC bounties #4 will reduce income from missions and ratting by 50% while an incursion is in progress, encouraging pilots to tackle the scenario or hide out until it's over. This is a good idea. #3 prevents pilots from bringing a fleet of capships into an incursion constellation, which is good for pilots wanting to take part in lowsec as it helps stop the nullsec alliances from pirating the incursion areas. It also gives the added boost that capitals already in the system can be used, encouraging people to stake a claim to their lowsec home and defend it. These are all good things, and I can see it working out quite well. #1 and #2 might discourage pilots with sense from their everyday activities. What it will definitely do is kill oblivious mission-runners, which as I understand it make up a not-so-insubstantial portion of the playerbase. These are people who bring only enough tank to handle a mission. Although they'll get a warning that an incursion is about to happen, you can bet there will be some tears from mission-runners when this happens. Since the effect is balanced to ensure PvP remains unchanged, and the local belt rats are replaced with new Sansha NPCs during an incursion, the only difference between buffing the Sansha NPCs and penalising players is that it affects mission-runners and explorers. Literally, there are no other side-effects of the resistance and damage penalties. So why not use a more elegant solution for discouraging or stopping mission-running during an incursion? If the belt NPCs flee during an incursion, why not do something similar for missions? Maybe despawn mission complexes at the start of an incursion and prevent new ones from spawning until after it? Or maybe just block warps to missions during the incursion? Are these ideas not technically feasible for some reason? I understand that drone and navy NPCs mean that the bounty penalty isn't enough to discourage mission-runners. But surely there's a more elegant and effective way to discourage them than putting them at significant risk of death. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
Mykael Skychild Did I just do that Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:10:00 - [62] Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Edited by: CCP Ytterbium on 10/11/2010 16:41:52 System effects will affect both ship damage and resistances by the same amount while being synced up together when they are modified by the influence. This should prevent situations where two player fleets can't do much but throw pebbles at each other due to their damage capabilities being greatly reduced compared to their defense. So we can SBU and TCU a system while other people are handling the Incursion because they won't be able to do much to us? OMFG Corp's YouTube Channel
WisdomPanda Gallente Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:12:00 - [63] This is all a cunning plan from CCP to make us subscribe more alts. ----- Cheesecake, Natures ultimate weapon.
Nyphur Pillowsoft Total Comfort	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:13:00 - [64] Originally by: Mykael Skychild So we can SBU and TCU a system while other people are handling the Incursion because they won't be able to do much to us? No, he said that resists and damage are reduced by the same amount to prevent exactly this from happening. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
Wen Jaibao PAX AUGUSTA	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:16:00 - [65] Will these be harder than C6 wormhole encounters?
Vim Spiritus Draconis	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:16:00 - [66] My nipples, they are realy hard right now.
Mykael Skychild Did I just do that Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:20:00 - [67] Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: Mykael Skychild So we can SBU and TCU a system while other people are handling the Incursion because they won't be able to do much to us? No, he said that resists and damage are reduced by the same amount to prevent exactly this from happening. Quote: This should prevent situations where two player fleets can't do much but throw pebbles at each other due to their damage capabilities being greatly reduced compared to their defense. This means that fleets will have their damage nerfed. All we have to do is take some haulers in, drop some SBUs and the (former) owners of that system will not be able to jump caps in to destroy the SBUs or TCU, and they will do anemic damage against them with their subcap fleet. OMFG Corp's YouTube Channel
Faffywaffy Fremen Sietch DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:21:00 - [68] Quote: Finally, the last Sansha boss in each incursion will also drop Sansha sub-capital ship blueprint copies How about also boosting the ships in question to make it worthwhile? Pre-nerf Phantasm BPCs used to sell for 200mil - now they're 80mil. The Succubus is terrible and uninteresting compared to a Dramiel, Daredevil or even Cruor. Nightmare is decent, but also not in the Machariel category.
Draco Rosso Caldari Draconian Armada	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:22:00 - [69] This seems like the pve content Faction Warfare should had when it launched. : ( Anyway ccp could introduce some of these concepts to FW? Who ever said this will get in the way of player driven content then youÆre very wrong. This will add many strategic options to null sec alliances looking to harass/invade another null sec alliance. I can't wait! ------------------------------------------------ We are recruiting Website http://draconianarmada.com Recruitment Thread http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1316229
Niraia Gallente Starcakes ISK Six	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:23:00 - [70] "Participation in incursions grants rewards, of course." Unless you're on Sansha's side. Not that you give a **** about those players, of course. - eohpoker.com sanshasnation.net

Vyktor Abyss The 8th Order	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:23:00 - [71] I'm pleased that "group mission" type of content is being expanded, but I do have a lot of reservations that I'll hope you at CCP will forgive based on previous releases. Firstly my main concern is "Isn't this just a massive treadmill-type grind?" I admit that sometimes completing some group PVE stuff can be fun, but after it despawns and a new one spawns you do feel like you've just ran on a treadmill. What REAL impact does this have on the gameworld if players just left Sanshas to take over everywhere? Check Factional Warfare out for the pointless PVE grind (Plexes, Occupancy see-saw) you have delivered to us previously then left to fester like a boil in need of lancing. It has no impact because the Sansha "takeover" is not real - it wont effect System security ratings, sovereignty, end with stations exploding or any of the REAL impacts on players that we actually want (I only guess I'm in a majority here, could be wrong). Secondly it is all well and good saying "well PVP will happen in Incursion areas too", but then you must accept that that fact will probably deter most of the people from trying it that would actually like to do so. You made a game that makes trusting other players almost impossible, then expect us to all rally round sacrificing our own personal efforts and time invested in ships. It doesn't take a crystal ball to forsee carebears crying about having nearly just completed a 40 man Headquarters, only to find a cov ops nicked their mothership BPC by covert cyno-ing in masses of recons and making Bear-jam out of the bears hard efforts. Incursions will also spawn a bunch of players who either work the dodgy mechanics in Incursion with military precision to gain some game-breaking advantage and a large group of tears on the forum as a result. I mention this because it can actually ruin the experience for a lot of enthusiastic people only to find they got gazumped at some critical point by some poor mechanic. See again Faction Warfare / Deltole (COSMOS) / Static Plexes and other releases. Overall though my hopes are high for this, but it needs to be constantly monitored and developed and not left to stagnate like the other previously mentioned PVE content. Cheers.
Dmoney3788 THE DISC	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:23:00 - [72] Ok one huge plus, or at least hopeful plus to this is that if the hisec incursion belt rats are at least cruiser size, and warp scram, this means that there's gonna be a lot of dead macro miners. It sounds like there's ample warning signs for active players to get to safety. One problem I see, at least for a group actually trying to do the PVE sites in lowsec is 1) Ninjas. Although people in cloaky ships won't get any lp or isk rewards, nothing in the dev blog states that cloaky ships will be restricted from accessing the combat sites, which means that there's gonna be one (or several) cloaky ships waiting for the fleet to pop the final boss, and then a quick decloak and scoop a mothership BPC. If there are no restrictions to the sites for cloaky ships, it will completely undermine the point of forcing players to work together. Hell if there are no restrictions on cloaky ships I'll prolly go grab a recon and camp the sites myself One solution would be to maybe move any of the random drops at the end to the lp store, and instead of a random drop at the end, offer a random lp bonus. That way there's actually a reason to run the combat site instead of camping it and grabbing the phat lewts at the end. 2) In lowsec especially, I don't see much non-blue interaction to last, or last long for that matter. I mean if I have a fleet of 30, and some neut fleet of 10 showed up to help (that we invited to fleet), once the incursion is finished, all I see are 10 easy targets, and especially if one of them manages to snag the loot at the end. So I don't see any advantage of working with a non blue, except for ganking them after the site is finished and we already ran off with the bpc drops. Not that there would be any game mechanic to prevent this, however.
Manfred Rickenbocker Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:24:00 - [73] Odd Question: Can we expect Sansha incursions in already Sansha infested space? For example, we already have Sansha running wild in Providence and Catch. Second Odd Question: You say that Sansha rats will replace the belt rats and customs officials in incursion systems. Will destroying these belt rats and the Sansha "customs" officials net points/bounties or affect the system-wide incursion counter? Third Odd Question: Will the Sansha gatecamps have scram/web/neut/everything and engage quicker than the regular 0.0 gatecamps they put up today? The typical delay is around 20 - 30 seconds. I say this because this is a total killer to people who autopilot... (suckers, heh) Addendum to #3: Will there be an additional autopilot setting/checkbox to "avoid incursion systems"? ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times.
Nyphur Pillowsoft Total Comfort	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:25:00 - [74] Originally by: Mykael Skychild Quote: This should prevent situations where two player fleets can't do much but throw pebbles at each other due to their damage capabilities being greatly reduced compared to their defense. This means that fleets will have their damage nerfed. All we have to do is take some haulers in, drop some SBUs and the (former) owners of that system will not be able to jump caps in to destroy the SBUs or TCU, and they will do anemic damage against them with their subcap fleet. Re-bolded the important part. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
Kanuo Ashkeron Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:25:00 - [75] Looks great. Three things: I do not understand the reason for the resistance/damage reduction. How many incursions will happen at the same time and is there an immediate new incursion in a different constellation? How many sites (lets say the hard ones) have to be finished before the endboss appears? -- Destroyable Infrastructure
Captian Conrad Minmatar Empyrean Warriors	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:26:00 - [76] Cant wait for the sites For them hotdroping a mission runner hub...would be a sight seeing faction/marauders fighing the anonmlys :D The rewards The Expantion \o/ _________________________________ Looking for cool pilots, check our advert
Faolan Fortune	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:28:00 - [77] Looks really awesome, but nothing at all for Nation supporters except I guess cheaper Sansha ships. Still, will be cool to see
Nyphur Pillowsoft Total Comfort	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:30:00 - [78] Originally by: Faolan Fortune Looks really awesome, but nothing at all for Nation supporters except I guess cheaper Sansha ships. Still, will be cool to see Form a fleet and kill the players in a lowsec Sansha incursion area. Granted, the mindless Nation soldiers will probably still shoot you. But you can still support them in lowsec and nullsec. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
Kanuo Ashkeron Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:30:00 - [79] Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: Mykael Skychild Quote: This should prevent situations where two player fleets can't do much but throw pebbles at each other due to their damage capabilities being greatly reduced compared to their defense. This means that fleets will have their damage nerfed. All we have to do is take some haulers in, drop some SBUs and the (former) owners of that system will not be able to jump caps in to destroy the SBUs or TCU, and they will do anemic damage against them with their subcap fleet. Re-bolded the important part. I think the point of Skychild was, that a SBU has the same EHP as before the incursion, but the fleet trying to destroy it has less DPS (because of damage nerf while incursion and no caps). -- Destroyable Infrastructure
mechtech SRS Industries SRS.	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:37:00 - [80] This looks like a well executed concept. To everyone saying this is like "WoW", what are you smoking? This adds more life and dynamic content to the universe, hell it even spices up low-sec. Compare this content to lvl-4s, no comparison, this is way cooler! If the PI improvements are decent and it isn't too buggy, this looks to be more on par with Apocrypha rather than Dominion/Tyrannis, which is a good thing

gibdinn	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:39:00 - [81] "others are playing carousels with their ships inside stations" oh man, that made me laugh. CCP got such insight in my activities. its almost scaring
Terianna Eri Amarr Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:39:00 - [82] "+ Depending on the player numbers in the most contributing fleet. A ratio is calculated from the total number of active fleet players in the site and how many players this site is from. The closer, the better." Can you explain what you mean by this? The phrase "how many players this site is from" is kind of confusing to me. Aside from that, this looks SUPER COOL and I'm mad excited for it ________________ Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
Mynxee	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:43:00 - [83] Originally by: Mashie Saldana Originally by: TeaDaze Originally by: Mashie Saldana Will we get a security gain from shooting these NPCs? Considering nothing else is provided by killing them I hope they won't give a security boost either. AFAIK (and sadly for the -10 folks) you'll gain security status for shooting these NPCs. I really hope CCP will reconsider this. We made the point for no sec status gain rather strongly at both the June Summit and October Stakeholder Meeting. However, back in September, Soundwave answered my question directly in a way that makes it sound like sec status gains are going to be given from shooting these NPCs (quoted below). Originally by: CCP Soundwave Originally by: Mynxee Is shooting at these NPCs going to give a sec status gain? Will players be able to aid the NPCs directly? Not really a PVE fan but am lookin forward to the potential collateral profit opportunities the incursion events might provide. They should be behave like most existing NPCs, so there should be a sec status gain. There are no mechanics to take sides in currently, but on the upside, this should provide you with a target rich environment. Life In Low Sec
Nyphur Pillowsoft Total Comfort	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:45:00 - [84] Originally by: Kanuo Ashkeron I think the point of Skychild was, that a SBU has the same EHP as before the incursion, but the fleet trying to destroy it has less DPS (because of damage nerf while incursion and no caps). Edit: However, if nothing bad happens, SBU armor and shield resistances should also be affected by system affects. As you just pointed out, it depends how much an SBU's EHP is affected by resists. Any structure with HP that has 0 resists won't be affected, but anything with resists should be. If they're using the current system-wide effect mechanic though, I'd be wary about that because starbases in wormholes AREN'T affected by resist-modifying system-wide effects. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
Mashie Saldana Minmatar Veto Corp	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:50:00 - [85] Originally by: Nyphur I understand that drone and navy NPCs mean that the bounty penalty isn't enough to discourage mission-runners. But surely there's a more elegant and effective way to discourage them than putting them at significant risk of death. I think this is a very nice way of doing things. And what is wrong with ships exploding? Highsec is safer, not safe you know, consider the Sanshas to be suicide ganking griefers that you better get rid of instead of playing EVE in singleplayer mode..
Joe SMASH You Got A Purty Mouth	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:52:00 - [86] Does the supercarrier BPC req sov to build (ie a CSAA)? If so, why make it only drop in an area that cannot be claimed. The lowsec boost you were looking for is not going to happen by encouraging massive power blocs to move into and "claim" lowsec as part of their territory in order to get the print. Over all, this looks terrible. Forced PvE via cyno jamming and nerfing damage is not what happens in the sandbox that you, CCP, love to tout. This incursion mechanic is FAR more like Space WoW than Eve. Spring 2011 expansion will feature a name change to World of Evecraft when Incarna is released. How long before systems are instanced? How about a dungeon in a station that we have to clear in order to claim sov? Space Orcs and Space Elves might be lurking in stations, you must kill them all before you can talk to the agents!! ----------------------------------- Originally by: Kali Zero Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
Zaboth Garadath Amarr Ore Extraction Corporation	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:56:00 - [87] Will bombs also receive a damage reduction? _____________________________________________ 'If you really want to make someone hate you, explain to them, logically and politely, why they are wrong' - J. Baylock
Draco Rosso Caldari Draconian Armada	Posted - 2010.11.10 17:56:00 - [88] I think ccp should take it step futher. Have the Sansha npc's drop in the mission/complex site and gank them. I fully support npc warp scraming at belts. Will the "celestials" npc have bounties on them? ------------------------------------------------ We are recruiting Website http://draconianarmada.com Recruitment Thread http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1316229
Sloany1979	Posted - 2010.11.10 18:00:00 - [89] Is the damage and resistance reduction going to affect those of us that are fighting in the sansha incursions? Or is it affecting those who don't take part?
Cloned S0ul	Posted - 2010.11.10 18:01:00 - [90] Edited by: Cloned S0ul on 10/11/2010 18:01:46 Reduction of 50% on all NPC bounties Mission - isk income nerf ? scren in dev blog show us 25mil isk reavard and some lp where players risk 5 man fleet, for example comand, two bs, two logistic for 25mil average reawrd ? and probably one, two hours long battle in this site... sorry no thanks



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: 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.