Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 08:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hi, I'm new and this is my first post. so forgive any ignorance on my part..
I've read the sticky and other threads and I can't see this idea anywhere. Apologies if I've missed it.
I've picked up that there are some people who feel the strategic situation in null sec is stagnant and shuts solo players and small gangs out. That might or might not be an accurate characterisation of a situation I know nothing about personally yet, but it would reflect what I know about the dynamics that drive empires (Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" remains a terrific read on this).
Empires rise and fall according to the resources they can
a) acquire, b) transform into economic (and then military) resources c) deploy efficiently
What disrupts the established pattern of power between Empires is changes to a, b or c; ie,
a) new resources become available to a party through exploration or conquest (eg the "discovery" of America by European nations) b) new technologies that confer a multiplier effect become available to one or more parties (eg Britain's industrial revolution) c) a party uses its resources better than its rivals to acquire, translate or deploy its resources
What I'd like to suggest is that invention - genuine invention - is represented by discovery of a breakthrough technology that confers serious benefits that
1) a party can achieve through the acquisition and deployment of science, and 2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.
I've seen a sticky thread somewhere that suggests a science profession should be available. There are some great ideas in that thread (I didn't see this one). Combining these two suggestions would
a) make EVE closer to how real life works, b) introduce a great new profession/way of earning isk c) provide a means by which a small alliance could take down a dominant faction, changing the course of History
This game is brilliant, btw, and I hesitate to suggest changing it in any way. But hey, that's how humans progress, right?
Gabriel
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1558
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 09:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Look up the term "Power creep", look at your idea, think about it. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 09:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
Interesting, thanks.
But what you're calling "power creep" (from what I've just read) would in this case be an accurate modelling the march of scientific progress.
Machine guns are more powerful than flintlocks, and those who don't keep up, die. |
Sara Tosa
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 09:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
watch under the term "game" and the premise where it says "it has to be fun to play". fun >>>>>>>> realism. |
Regatto
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
Problem with empires income is that it's very hard to do anything with income like renters. It's basically a willing slave force working for their overlord. You won't see this being taken away from them as long as there are 30thousand toons which preffer to pay couple a billions per month rather than having to deal with sov mechanics, politics and CTAs. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sara Tosa wrote:watch under the term "game" and the premise where it says "it has to be fun to play". fun >>>>>>>> realism.
I agree.Realism isn't necessarily fun. But, um...mining on EVE......isn't realistic, and some would say it isn't fun. People make choices. Mining, pvp, building industries, inventing time travel.... are all optional.
The point of this is would be that it would introduce the possibility that one person can make a breakthrough that enables a corporation or alliance to radically change the landscape and force better resourced alliances catch up.
It's called disruptive technology, and it's usually how humanity makes sudden leaps and Empires rise and fall.
David vs Goliath.
Of course, if you're Goliath you might not appreciate the revolution...
But also muskets vs bows and arrows and tanks vs cavalry. It doesn't always favour the underdog. It's a two edged sword (now there's an innovation). Something (unpredictably, though far from random, of course)
Thanks for helping me explore the idea. It might be daft; I'm just interested in floating it and finding out what I (eventually) think. More importantly, what others think. So thanks.
Gabriel. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:08:00 -
[7] - Quote
Regatto wrote:Problem with empires income is that it's very hard to do anything with income like renters. It's basically a willing slave force working for their overlord. You won't see this being taken away from them as long as there are 30thousand toons which preffer to pay couple a billions per month rather than having to deal with sov mechanics, politics and CTAs.
A bit like real life then |
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
3283
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:38:00 -
[8] - Quote
Nerf Goon space. http://i.minus.com/ibeZ0sJewvDMBN.gif =˙ü |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1661
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:51:00 -
[9] - Quote
Gabriel Genoa wrote:Hi, I'm new and this is my first post. so forgive any ignorance on my part..
I've read the sticky and other threads and I can't see this idea anywhere. Apologies if I've missed it.
I've picked up that there are some people who feel the strategic situation in null sec is stagnant and shuts solo players and small gangs out. That might or might not be an accurate characterisation of a situation I know nothing about personally yet, but if true it would reflect what we know about the dynamics that drive Empires (Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" remains a terrific read on this).
Empires rise and fall according to the resources they can
a) acquire, b) transform into economic (and then military) resources c) deploy efficiently
What disrupts the established pattern of power between Empires is changes to a, b or c; ie,
a) new resources become available to a party through exploration or conquest (eg the "discovery" of America by European nations) b) new technologies that confer a multiplier effect become available to one or more parties (eg Britain's industrial revolution) c) a party uses its resources better than its rivals to acquire, translate or deploy its resources (eg better military tactics, like Rome, or more successful mercantilism, like Venice)
What I'd like to suggest is that EVE adds something under item b, above. Invention - genuine invention - could be represented by discovery of a breakthrough technology in EVE that confers serious benefits that
1) a party can achieve through the acquisition and deployment of science, and 2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.
I've seen a sticky thread somewhere that suggests a science profession should be available. There are some great ideas in that thread (I didn't see this one). Combining these two suggestions would
a) make EVE closer to how real life works, b) introduce a great new profession/way of earning isk c) provide a means by which a small alliance could take down a dominant faction, changing the course of History
This game is brilliant, btw, and I hesitate to suggest changing it in any way. But hey, that's how humans progress, right?
Gabriel
THe idea work on theory but would need a massive overhoul of the game. It would need the game to have been created wit hthat in mind to work. If I was going to design a game it would be like that (among other things that would make numeric superiority less prevalent), but now is too late for eve.
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
492
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 10:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
How does this kill the blob?
You do know they'd do the same thing, right? Invention/indy alts are very common for 0.0 types. This char would be the bread winner when the combat char is in pvp and on campaign and not able to rat for example.
Now before you say the tech can't be shared outside of corp/alliance, remember there are many shades of blue and not all are an official "in the alliance for real" blue. Blob A has a few corps non-affiliated spam this. They can drop in fleet real easy. I have seen this with mercs. FC says clearly and repeatedly...there are no nuets in this system, we are bringing the some outside help in to fleet by hand. Do not shoot anything unless I say so. MInutes later...all those neut grey mercs are fleet colored (at least till node goes really bad in which case I have seen this trash ov to where all of us go grey, corp, alliance, fleet....fun times I tell you what). They don't drop fleet at a bad time....safe from NBSI but they aren't blue.
Well that and what technological marvels are you having come in game just out of the blue? That you know...won't be shot down in flames on Sisi (or where you bypassing ccp internal testing and then sisi as well?).
|
|
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 11:06:00 -
[11] - Quote
Bagrat Skalski wrote:Nerf Goon space.
Makes it a possibility. Which makes it interesting, I think. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 11:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:How does this kill the blob?
You do know they'd do the same thing, right? Invention/indy alts are very common for 0.0 types. This char would be the bread winner when the combat char is in pvp and on campaign and not able to rat for example.
Now before you say the tech can't be shared outside of corp/alliance, remember there are many shades of blue and not all are an official "in the alliance for real" blue. Blob A has a few corps non-affiliated spam this. They can drop in fleet real easy. I have seen this with mercs. FC says clearly and repeatedly...there are no nuets in this system, we are bringing the some outside help in to fleet by hand. Do not shoot anything unless I say so. MInutes later...all those neut grey mercs are fleet colored (at least till node goes really bad in which case I have seen this trash ov to where all of us go grey, corp, alliance, fleet....fun times I tell you what). They don't drop fleet at a bad time....safe from NBSI but they aren't blue.
Well that and what technological marvels are you having come in game just out of the blue? That you know...won't be shot down in flames on Sisi (or where you bypassing ccp internal testing and then sisi as well?).
Indeed. Resources confer benefits and they'd research the heck out of tons of stuff. The trick would be to introduce a sensible degree of unpredictability. Sometimes inventions flow from the deployment of heavyweight resources, sometimes from a stroke of genius or luck. The issue then is how well-kept and how well-exploited the secret is by those who hold it. The inventor will have had to work through a series of experiments or research, tried and failed a few times (perhaps that's the random element). Those trying to catch up would have to replicate that research path (which might have several possible forks and where the random element is still a factor on each path/experiment). Eventually EVE leaks the secret to those who are at least in the ball game. Finally, it can be bought on the market like any tech.
So yes, often the blob would prevail. But not always and never predictably. And that's interesting.
As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels?
Antidotes and inoculations, counters and upgrades at a shop near you soon?
I don't want to sound like I'm arguing for it. It's just fun to explore. Thanks. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 11:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Gabriel Genoa wrote:Hi, I'm new and this is my first post. so forgive any ignorance on my part..
I've read the sticky and other threads and I can't see this idea anywhere. Apologies if I've missed it.
I've picked up that there are some people who feel the strategic situation in null sec is stagnant and shuts solo players and small gangs out. That might or might not be an accurate characterisation of a situation I know nothing about personally yet, but if true it would reflect what we know about the dynamics that drive Empires (Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" remains a terrific read on this).
Empires rise and fall according to the resources they can
a) acquire, b) transform into economic (and then military) resources c) deploy efficiently
What disrupts the established pattern of power between Empires is changes to a, b or c; ie,
a) new resources become available to a party through exploration or conquest (eg the "discovery" of America by European nations) b) new technologies that confer a multiplier effect become available to one or more parties (eg Britain's industrial revolution) c) a party uses its resources better than its rivals to acquire, translate or deploy its resources (eg better military tactics, like Rome, or more successful mercantilism, like Venice)
What I'd like to suggest is that EVE adds something under item b, above. Invention - genuine invention - could be represented by discovery of a breakthrough technology in EVE that confers serious benefits that
1) a party can achieve through the acquisition and deployment of science, and 2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.
I've seen a sticky thread somewhere that suggests a science profession should be available. There are some great ideas in that thread (I didn't see this one). Combining these two suggestions would
a) make EVE closer to how real life works, b) introduce a great new profession/way of earning isk c) provide a means by which a small alliance could take down a dominant faction, changing the course of History
This game is brilliant, btw, and I hesitate to suggest changing it in any way. But hey, that's how humans progress, right?
Gabriel THe idea work on theory but would need a massive overhoul of the game. It would need the game to have been created wit hthat in mind to work. If I was going to design a game it would be like that (among other things that would make numeric superiority less prevalent), but now is too late for eve.
I've probably already demonstrated that I know nothing about game development, so I'll bow to your superior knowledge about that.
Thanks, Gabriel |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2807
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 13:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
Grrrr, goons.
GRRR!!! GOOONS!!!
GRRRR!!! GOOOOOONS!!!!!!
But really, no. Power creep is bad and what you call "the march of technology" a game calls "power creep" and game balancing calls "bad".
To be fair, though, how many years did it take us to go from a flintlock to a modern-day machine gun? Now how long has EVE been up for? EVE time is realtime and so there you have that. |
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5614
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 13:36:00 -
[15] - Quote
Gabriel Genoa wrote:2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.
How, exactly, do you propose to enforce this?
Especially considering the meta of EVE. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
264
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 13:40:00 -
[16] - Quote
Gabriel Genoa wrote:As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels? And how is the code for this stuff generated? What mechanism do you believe would allow this "real" invention without requiring a team of devs to drop whatever they're doing to cater to the newest group of players that want something new?
I mean, aside for the fact that it's a terrible game idea, I don't see how it's practical.
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
492
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 15:40:00 -
[17] - Quote
Gabriel Genoa wrote: So yes, often the blob would prevail. But not always and never predictably. And that's interesting.
As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels?
Antidotes and inoculations, counters and upgrades at a shop near you soon?
I don't want to sound like I'm arguing for it. It's just fun to explore. Thanks.
we can brainstorm away....it be ccp internally testing first then seeing how people break it on SISI. Use any fitting tool that has the full data dumps and turn off the filtering to see the unreleased stuff. CCP has some nice shinies in those dumps....that probably summon the OP gods. Why they are not in game.
Stuff in game has to keep balance chief. Some semblance of it at least. Even then...meta of eve abuses what makes it through this sometimes.
Also you do know most comms go out of eve's software.....right? Mirc (others) for chat, ts (others) for voice. Not seeing ts devs thrilled if meta/rp has ccp breaking their stuff. And not seeing ccp even going that route....lawyers they would need, many of them.
Your other weapons....since seem kind of new there is rule when presenting ideas. It sadly brings up grrr goons but here it goes....
How will goons abuse this change.
Now it can fill in any blob, but the masses have put goons in by default lol.
Long story short....ccp (or any mmo maker single player games give the dev tools to mod away as they can, its only affecting 1 player, have your uber weapon of 1000000000 damage if you want) makes the items we use because they have a general sense of objectivity. Insert jokes about goon devs, pl devs, etc....but by and large they are objective. If only because many will recall what happened when a dev tried to hook up a (band of) brother(s) lol.
Players tend to lack this objectivity. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1263
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 15:43:00 -
[18] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:Gabriel Genoa wrote:As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels? And how is the code for this stuff generated? What mechanism do you believe would allow this "real" invention without requiring a team of devs to drop whatever they're doing to cater to the newest group of players that want something new? I mean, aside for the fact that it's a terrible game idea, I don't see how it's practical.
The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
492
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 16:04:00 -
[19] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.
and even with a success rate buried deep in improbability-ville....this doesn't even favor the small guy. Blob spamming invents on god knows how many pos'/station slots....rng will favor them most likely. |
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5614
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 19:47:00 -
[20] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.
and even with a success rate buried deep in improbability-ville....this doesn't even favor the small guy. Blob spamming invents on god knows how many pos'/station slots....rng will favor them most likely.
And then even the ones that don't go to the big groups will get bought out by them. Just like T2BPOs were. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
|
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 11:09:00 -
[21] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Grrrr, goons. GRRR!!! GOOONS!!! GRRRR!!! GOOOOOONS!!!!!!But really, no. Power creep is bad and what you call "the march of technology" a game calls "power creep" and game balancing calls "bad". To be fair, though, how many years did it take us to go from a flintlock to a modern-day machine gun? Now how long has EVE been up for? EVE time is realtime and so there you have that.
I was really thinking about an "out of context problem". The introduction of advanced technology into a context that perhaps isn't prepared even to understand it., let alone ready to copy it. Gatlilng guns against Zulus by the British, Spy planes and then Stealth bombers by the US. Ebola by the aliens....that kind of thing..... (probably poor taste, sorry, but it makes the point)
It would be designed to "unbalance" the game. Deliberately. Just for a bit. It would be unfair by definition (other than that someone had invested time and energy and resources into gambling on such a breakthrough). It would shake Empires to the core now and again, and sometimes bring them to ruination. And then the secret would be disseminated and everyone would catch up.
All that said, I'm just exploring the idea. It seems most people responding either don't like it or don't think it's implementable. I'm learning, which is good. So thanks.
|
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 11:21:00 -
[22] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Gabriel Genoa wrote:2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up. How, exactly, do you propose to enforce this? Especially considering the meta of EVE.
Let's say you invested time developing science skills (breakthrough inventions). Let's say you bought or stole a tech 3 laboratory. Let's say you'd acquired, through missions or Experimenting, the necessary Knowledge/Research points in the correct three branches of Knowledge and let's say Edison, the God of Breakthroughs, granted you success in your 34th experiment designed to freeze time. Let's say you then applied the necessary resources to building and fitting the Limited Time Dilation Device to your frigate.
No-one can build another one unless 1. they replicate what you have done in terms of acquiring skills and knowledge and equipment (Lab), and in terms of Experimenting AND 2. unless Edison, the God of Breakthroughs, allows them to make the same breakthrough with their Experiment that you did with yours. It might be easier for them because it's the second time around. Or it might be ten times harder, because breakthroughs are like that. So it's possible that for the first month/Quarter/Year you might be the only person with a Time Dilation Device. Of course, you could sell it. But there is only one until others catch up. Eventually, the system allows everyone to buy the kit on the basis that secrets eventually leak and that helps others invent it, so it becomes the norm. By then there's probably an a anti-time dilation module too, made available at the same time.
Now - as is clear - I'm completely ignorant about developing games. It sounds like this is not implementable, so I'm not arguing for it. I'm just addressing those questions or obstacles I can because I'm interested in ideas. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 11:26:00 -
[23] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:Gabriel Genoa wrote:As for inventions, let's brainstorm; I'm sure people here have hundreds of ideas. Temporal displacement? Genetic warfare? The ability to control other people's implants and mods? Gravitational weapons? Planet busters? Star busters? Clone wars and ships operated by semi-slaved AI? Viruses communicated via comms channels? And how is the code for this stuff generated? What mechanism do you believe would allow this "real" invention without requiring a team of devs to drop whatever they're doing to cater to the newest group of players that want something new? I mean, aside for the fact that it's a terrible game idea, I don't see how it's practical.
It's a game idea you don't like, that's fine.
I'm not expecting anyone to do anything. I'm simply putting an idea up on a thread for ideas. I have no idea if it's implementable. I don't think this is a development thread and I'm certainly not telling anyone what to do. I'm describing something that models real, interesting and dangerous leaps in the development of human society that has seen Empires crash and burn while others rose triumphant and danced on their graves, and wondered if that might be fun to do in EVE. I think it would, you think it wouldn't. When I finally get my Mind Altering Device to work I suspect you will agree with me. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 11:30:00 -
[24] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:[quote=Gabriel Genoa] So yes, often the blob would prevail. But not always and never predictably. And that's interesting.
Long story short....ccp (or any mmo maker single player games give the dev tools to mod away as they can, its only affecting 1 player, have your uber weapon of 1000000000 damage if you want) makes the items we use because they have a general sense of objectivity. Insert jokes about goon devs, pl devs, etc....but by and large they are objective. If only because many will recall what happened when a dev tried to hook up a (band of) brother(s) lol.
Players tend to lack this objectivity.
I don't really know enough about anything yet to be able to answer your points, but thanks for making them because it's all learning for me. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 13:58:00 -
[25] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.
and even with a success rate buried deep in improbability-ville....this doesn't even favor the small guy. Blob spamming invents on god knows how many pos'/station slots....rng will favor them most likely.
If it was implementable, an algorithm that incorporated a random feature for success in one or more linked critical Experiments might deliver into the hands of a dedicated player a glorious prize. How he or she used that gift would be up to them. They might sell it to a massive Alliance, use it to build their own corporation or as a unique weapon within a small alliance. Yes, the odds are with the big players and their resources, as in real life, but at least there would be a chance that something would trigger far-reaching change.
The point is that in the real world disruptive technology is reshaping everything. It destroys stagnating industries and monopolistic institutions. Some players within a game like EVE might prefer that the rules support entirely predictable, calculable outcomes. Fair enough, I understand that. Some others might prefer to take their chances with a world in which sometimes the small guy/gal makes a significant difference. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 14:02:00 -
[26] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Zan Shiro wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.
and even with a success rate buried deep in improbability-ville....this doesn't even favor the small guy. Blob spamming invents on god knows how many pos'/station slots....rng will favor them most likely. And then even the ones that don't go to the big groups will get bought out by them. Just like T2BPOs were.
No, because the idea is that the invention isn't immediately replicable by people who haven't put in the time to train, invested in the necessary equipment and had the breakthrough in the lab. It's only operable by the person/people who discover it and translate it into tech. Only that combination of elements (including the unpredictable breakthrough experiment) unlocks the ability to make (and more importantly USE) the device or whatever it is. |
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5625
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 14:24:00 -
[27] - Quote
Gabriel Genoa wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Zan Shiro wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: The "easy" way is to only give bonus to things that already exist but that still create problem such as people taking the lead and keeping it forever unless there is a way to catch up.
and even with a success rate buried deep in improbability-ville....this doesn't even favor the small guy. Blob spamming invents on god knows how many pos'/station slots....rng will favor them most likely. And then even the ones that don't go to the big groups will get bought out by them. Just like T2BPOs were. No, because the idea is that the invention isn't immediately replicable by people who haven't put in the time to train, invested in the necessary equipment and had the breakthrough in the lab. It's only operable by the person/people who discover it and translate it into tech. Only that combination of elements (including the unpredictable breakthrough experiment) unlocks the ability to make (and more importantly USE) the device or whatever it is.
So... the only one who can use it is my industry alt. Welp.
Also EVE doesn't do soulbound loot. One of the guiding principles is that you can sell *anything* if you can find a buyer. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
287
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 14:26:00 -
[28] - Quote
Gabriel Genoa wrote:Hi, I'm new and this is my first post. so forgive any ignorance on my part..
I've read the sticky and other threads and I can't see this idea anywhere. Apologies if I've missed it.
I've picked up that there are some people who feel the strategic situation in null sec is stagnant and shuts solo players and small gangs out. That might or might not be an accurate characterisation of a situation I know nothing about personally yet, but if true it would reflect what we know about the dynamics that drive Empires (Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" remains a terrific read on this).
Empires rise and fall according to the resources they can
a) acquire, b) transform into economic (and then military) resources c) deploy efficiently
What disrupts the established pattern of power between Empires is changes to a, b or c; ie,
a) new resources become available to a party through exploration or conquest (eg the "discovery" of America by European nations) b) new technologies that confer a multiplier effect become available to one or more parties (eg Britain's industrial revolution) c) a party uses its resources better than its rivals to acquire, translate or deploy its resources (eg better military tactics, like Rome, or more successful mercantilism, like Venice)
What I'd like to suggest is that EVE adds something under item b, above. Invention - genuine invention - could be represented by discovery of a breakthrough technology in EVE that confers serious benefits that
1) a party can achieve through the acquisition and deployment of science, and 2) which remains the exclusive asset of that party for a period of time depending on what other parties subsequently invest in catching up.
I've seen a sticky thread somewhere that suggests a science profession should be available. There are some great ideas in that thread (I didn't see this one). Combining these two suggestions would
a) make EVE closer to how real life works, b) introduce a great new profession/way of earning isk c) provide a means by which a small alliance could take down a dominant faction, changing the course of History
This game is brilliant, btw, and I hesitate to suggest changing it in any way. But hey, that's how humans progress, right?
Gabriel
This idea is kind of neat, but runs into serious problems if you consider EVE is still a game, not the real world. Also CCP doesn't have infinite ressources to program all this crap, so it seems you're out of luck here OP.
At least you can have fun with typing furiously awesome answers, though. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 15:38:00 -
[29] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:[quote=Gabriel Genoa][quote=RubyPorto][quote=Zan Shiro][quote=Frostys Virpio]
So... the only one who can use it is my industry alt. Welp.
Also EVE doesn't do soulbound loot. One of the guiding principles is that you can sell *anything* if you can find a buyer.
Yes, you could sell it, and if you do then the buyer would be able to use it (you pass on the necessary unique expertise you gained with your successful Experiment ). But making another one with your knowledge and equipment would require another successful Experiment.
Again, I don't know if it would work or is implementable. I'm just wondering if there's a way to represent breakthrough technologies because they have changed the game throughout Human History, and EVE seems suitably epic to warrant such cataclysmic upheaval now and again. |
Gabriel Genoa
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 15:48:00 -
[30] - Quote
Owen Levanth wrote:This idea is kind of neat, but runs into serious problems if you consider EVE is still a game, not the real world. Also CCP doesn't have infinite ressources to program all this crap, so it seems you're out of luck here OP. At least you can have fun with typing furiously awesome answers, though.
Ha! Thanks. I like playing with ideas - that's what I love about science fiction, in particular. I'm not expecting anyone to invest in this, I was just throwing it around.
I work from home, writing, so typing furiously about the things that change the course of History is a nice change from typing furiously about more mundane matters! As a new player I'm also wondering what degree freedom I'll be able to enjoy as I explore, and to what extent the existing superpowers will constrain it. In the real world superpowers rise and - inevitably - fall (Usually because their reach exceeds their grasp, and eventually they cannot acquire sufficient resources and loyalty to continue to control the territory they have conquered). Everything fades..... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |