| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
66
   |
Posted - 2011.10.19 01:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ya, the moonmining system is a ******* disaster.
They were on the right track with dominion, which is the idea of requiring people to be actively "farming" their space to extract value from it, especially with team-oriented and organized efforts, which would also require the need to constantly defend it against roaming gangs and other aggressors. Instead of following through with what was essentially a blank slate expansion in need of huge detailing and elaboration, they've just left dominion to rot as simply a different way for massive dogpile and elite alliances to grind through structure hitpoints.
If you can design that active, dynamic, vulnerable, and team-oriented value creation system in nullsec, then you will draw people down. Furthermore, the same system can be scaled backwards through lowsec and even into hisec, thereby allowing a clear transitions for groups from hi through to null based on taking greater risks and facing bigger challenges with a gradually improving skillset and growing promise of rewards. That's the ******* game right there. |
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 01:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:I simply have no desire to be a pet or a slave to some monolithic 0.0 mega alliance. The only way I'd ever consider null is if it got shattered into lots of little pieces and large blocs were impossible to hold onto. Until that day, I'll stay in wormholes.
Absolutely. I think even nullsec pilots want this.
Also, pulling people out of WHs seems counterproductive to me. The problem isn't people going to WHs, it's that people aren't leaving level 4 mission hubs or hisec belts because the barriers are too high and the incentives too low. If Eve was suddenly reduced to WHs Online, it would probably still have a future; a similar reduction to Hisec Online would almost certainly lead to its prompt collapse. |
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 16:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sarina Berghil wrote:An addition to that could be to make it possible for corps to get some kind of 'light' sovereignity, not adding jump bridges or Outposts, but simply with the benefit of doing slight upgrades to the system.
I love that term "light sovereignty", it's perfect.
As I've posted a couple of times in here and elsewhere, the incentive (value-creation) needs to be tied to some kind of system that requires coordination and regular (fun) effort, which also then makes it vulnerable to disruption and outright expropriation. This system can even start in hisec with limited risk, rewards, effort required, and vulnerability, then scale up through to nullsec where it peaks at huge rewards for accumulative coordination, but also extremely vulnerable and in need of vigilant protection. Right now it's "elites take moons, install renters, go play another game, failcascade because no one plays anymore" all while the little guy (ie 99% of players) have a generally ****** game experience compared to its potential.
|
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 16:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
It's important to remember that the vast majority of reasons people are giving for not living in nullsec are a list of things people who live there don't like about it  . We're all in this boat together. The downside of a sandbox game is that devs need coherent feedback about what they need to do to make it better, which puts some responsibility on the players themselves for coordinating and articulating experiences and ideas. No one has ever done before what CCP has done with Eve, which is why it's so fragile but also so ******* great. |
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 17:06:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lharanai wrote:and why should I pay for a game which forces me to a play style I don't like, why should I play that game overall?
No one's going to force you to do anything.
|
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
"1" is mostly correct. You are absolutely right that the vast majority of wealth creation should require regular coordinated activity from people in space.
Moon goo is fine in its most basic form, just its wealth generation just needs to be lower and far more spread out among moons.
"2" will never work.
|
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:Why wouldnt it work? I have no problems with you saying it,
The ingame corp and alliances size have little effect on players' ability to coordinate huge coalitions. You'd have to eliminate the ability to set set standings. |
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:29:00 -
[8] - Quote
Manssell wrote:Anyone who thinks the main reasons so many choose to stay in hi-sec are because it's too lucrative/they are too scared/they are ignorant/don't want to socialize/ect, needs to go back and read Freyh's excellent post 2 or 3 times.
Great post. As someone who lives in nullsec, I couldn't agree with you more. I think a lot of us would agree with you. It's just too easy to project power over huge swathes of space and the income is too easily controlled by these small but hyperinfluential power groups. Everything just needs to be spread out.
|
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kengutsi Akira wrote:or talk on comms or have friends etc...
You're right, I'm doubting even eliminating standings would really hamper massive coalitions that much. It would be harder, but far from impossible
|
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 19:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
Guttripper wrote:While there are numerous grand comments and ideas on how to alleviate this problem, unless there is a way to... I do not want to say "mature", but unless there is a change of the players' mentality, anything added or altered will boil down to one mind set: how can this be abused, controlled, destroyed, or griefed. Unless the core aspect to this game is changed, the only reason to create is to have it destroyed, not to flourish and grow. And even if CCP changed aspects to have concrete rules (such as x players in a corporation as a maximum), players as a whole will still attempt to circumvent them to their benefit.
That's the whole point of the game.
|
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 20:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kengutsi Akira wrote:Which is the point and in fact the problem
and why this will never be fixed
Then "Eve" is your problem with Eve. Fortunately the vast majority of people just need the right transitioning for them to break the mold of their ideas of what a video game should be and come to appreciate the utterly unique value of Eve.
The remaining small percentage of you can continue to play an absolutely awful version of space warcraft....for some unfathomable reason.
|
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
79
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:11:00 -
[12] - Quote
Muammar al-Amarr wrote:Death to null sec. Instead, give the solo player more interesting stuff to do. More storyline missions (with better rewards) and branching plot. More reasons to go out and explore. More and better designed solo complexes.
This is the way to save EVE.
That is the surest way to kill Eve. Jade constantine made a fantastic post about this point, but I can't find it now.
Basically, Eve only exists because it is niche, take away that niche and it is just an absolutely horrible spaceship game. |
Elise DarkStar
DarkCorp Capital Group
DarkCorp Imperium
79
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:04:00 -
[13] - Quote
I agree with the above. You shouldn't be able to project power nearly as far as you can. |
| |
|