|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2163
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 19:12:19 -
[1] - Quote
why not have some sort of anomaly like a wreckage feild for each personal hangar? If the structure dies you have the normal single loot point that everyone has access to, then after a period of time the wreck disperses throughout the system. The locations of these personal loot sites remain unknown (and as far as server is concerned, non-existant) until you accept some sort of time or memo in your journal which then creates a location in space with your own wreck. So you have all the time in the world to come back and get your belongings, but you wont have to be perfectly safe either. This would mostly apply to subcapital ships and items. Not exactly sure how it might affect capital ships and such.
Quick layout: - Structure dies - Single wreck spawns with everyone's belongings - after a period of time (anywhere from a week to a month) the main wreck vanishes and each character gets all of the assets transferred to the 'loot cloud' (kind of difficult to explain - players then get a notice in journal of location of personal wreck site - player acknowledges or accepts the memo - wreck site spawns as a warpable site for the player and a scannable location for everyone else - only the owning player has access to wreck - player can then get to wreck and grab what he can with the safety depending on factors normally attributable to operating in space you lost
and a similar process for corp/alliance hangars. You dont permanently lose your belongings, but your access is restricted for a period and then easier to get to later on. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2225
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 21:22:43 -
[2] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:I think its way too soon before Fozziesov to change how assets are stored. Changing this mechanic is NOT going to increase 'content'. I'd much rather keep the current system. Having your assets locked in a station you no longer own is more than enough to encourage getting a station back. Ask yourself, did Solar finally get their stuff back from RPO or whatever system that was? Those are now assets that can be used again, to create content.
Also lets not forget that this mechanic will be exploited for the sole purpose of grrreifing. its going to be hard to get the structure back when its been blown to smithereens. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2233
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 21:48:56 -
[3] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTROPHIC effects to this:
1. People will keep as few ships as possible in stations (resulting in much less pew pew)
2. People will keep far less things on market or contracts (resulting in even less pew pew as less replacements are available) Why are you assuming the assets are going to be destroyed? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2234
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 23:33:08 -
[4] - Quote
w1ndstrike wrote:Rowells wrote:SFM Hobb3s wrote:Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTROPHIC effects to this:
1. People will keep as few ships as possible in stations (resulting in much less pew pew)
2. People will keep far less things on market or contracts (resulting in even less pew pew as less replacements are available) Why are you assuming the assets are going to be destroyed? he doesn't assume asset destruction, he assumes loss of assets (someone looting them still means the original owner loses them) this is my primary concern with this as I have outlined in previous postings. I have yet to see a good reason for having asset loss from destruction or looting that would actually be healthy for the game as a whole. for anyone else who hasn't read the whole thread: try to think about the whole game ecosystem before you form an opinion. looting might sound cool until you realize it's also why you'll have to go 50+ jumps to find anyone to fight in nullsec. I'm not seeing where personal belongings are being looted either, unless you're referring to another players suggestions |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2256
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 05:40:14 -
[5] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:The prevailing philosophy for nullsec is "bring everything I own out to one virtually impervious location, and in the off chance we lose the station, I may have to sell all my stuff but I won't actually lose any of it so it's all good."
Why? Even with the current mechanics why bring all your stuff out there? Other than a few PvE ships aren't most of what you fly doctrine ships provided by the alliance? So why bring all your personal assets out there?
Instead of adapting the mechanics to continue supporting this mentality, perhaps adapting one's mentality to the new mechanics would be a better solution? CCP wants to distribute fights. If station loss resulted in asset loss I think that not only would people fight harder to defend their space, but also would distribute assets so as to not lose everything if they lose one station. Distributed fights would reduce TIDI, blobs, and would make nullsec wars much more dynamic.
CCP has an opportunity to really shake things up for the better, but I don't think they will because of the outcry of so many nullsec residents who are stuck in the old paradigm of having all their eggs in one basket in complete safety. Complete safety. In nullsec. Wasn't that supposed to be risky, dangerous space? people would start hiding things in actually safe locations like NPC space is what they would do. the idea of risk vs reward needs consider that the other options comparably. Free station that I can never lose my stuff or access to sounds much better than "I will lose everything here if I lose two fights, while the winner takes the loot back to his safe NPC station.
You won't encourage more anything so long as better options are available. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2309
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 19:42:19 -
[6] - Quote
Alia Ravenswing wrote:This is fantastic. I have long wanted all these features.
The only thing I don't like is how some destroyed items are some how protected by magic, preventing anybody other than the original owner from salvaging them.
My entire reason for launching an attack, may be to get the items that may be in the salvage. The problem is, there wouldnt be much to get, since the owner wont risk it as much as he would under some safety. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2411
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 18:33:08 -
[7] - Quote
Sayod Physulem wrote:Maybe some inspiration: The station owner can call "Evacuation" that means escape pods with all the assets will be jettisoned into the system. If you call Evacuation when the station is undamaged, the Evacuation will go smootly and ALL the assets will be jettisoned in escape pod with cloaks. The more damaged the station gets the more Escape pods get damaged. Maybe their cloak has malfuntions and the pods can be scanned down after a certain amount of time. Maybe the escape pod is so badly damaged that it can't even be jettisoned and all the assets stay in the station wreck. Next thing - how damaged is the firewall? If it is fully intact the escape pod can only be accesed by the owner of the assets. If it is partly damaged you need to hack it, and the hacking difficulty decreases with the damage. So basically you have escape containers with 3 modules: - Launch module (if damaged it stays in the wreck) ---------------------------------------------- where (wreck or scattered with bookmark) - cloak module (if damaged it will be scanable after a certain amount of time) ------------ time (until able to be accessed by everyone) - access firewall (if damaged it will be hackable - difficulty depending on the damage) - by whom (and how easy) Damage to the station has a chance of damaging the escape container modules. If all the modules are completely intact it is impossible for the attacer to retrieve any loot. So you might just want to jettison all the assets when the station gets attacked the first time? Well you can do that. But if you win the siege you have to collect all your items spread in space So you might want to wait with the evacuation? Well the longer you wait the less likely it is that your assets are still safe So there it is Risk vz Reward. Do you risk waiting with the evacuation? Or do you want to play it safe certainly have to do a retrieval op? You could maybe buy escape pod of different quality and use them just like station containers to store and sort your assets in the station. (There could maybe even be very expensive escape pods with jump drives that can jump to a cyno lighted in a nearby system) This could also explain the origin of relic and data sites and make the spawn of them more related to the player driven events. there is no station damage.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2625
|
Posted - 2015.07.26 03:52:05 -
[8] - Quote
O2 jayjay wrote:Item safety sound like world of war craft. I'm playing eve. High risk high reward. All items should drop just like everything else. So where's the high reward? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2762
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 00:10:01 -
[9] - Quote
Aendoren wrote:Your items should be at risk, you should be able to insure them so you can rebuy them again. The idea is for you to defend your outpost and not let your stuff blow up.
You want it to easy you want the magic ferry to make your blown up stuff appier somewhere else with no hauling or risk.
So, you're saying I should live in NPC space? Since there isn't much benefit aside from a few extra percentage points of bonus for my activities.
I mean, what's the point of risking billions in assets, if I miss a couple days of playtime, it could be gone by then?
Btw, you're making the assumption that a 10% value cost is not risk. I'm not sure how that came across. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2762
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 04:47:05 -
[10] - Quote
Aendoren wrote:This is Eve player built fantasy lands don't belong. What's next you want jump freighters/freighters to magically have there hauls dumped into the nearest npc station because the risk is to hi? That is the mentality you're taking. Basically i'm just saying you need a good cheap insurance plan that covers your losses that way you're covered if thing go south. And no one should build game mechanics on helping you if your missing a couple of days of playtime. Quote: Btw, you're making the assumption that a 10% value cost is not risk. I'm not sure how that came across 10% risked are you kidding me! Yes i am absolutely saying 10% is not adequate risk. The way ccp is showing it now there is almost no reason to fight to save your outpost. That first sentence makes me really question your thinking. Seeing as it's kind of the basic premise Eve was built on.
Maybe you could try not seeing things in black and white rather than assuming my 'mentality' is the polar opposite of yours.
If I were to take your logic a step further, we should remove all loot drops. Doesn't make any sense that you have a chance to salvage your losses right? I bet it just infuriates you that the pilot even has the chance.
I'm sure that, in solidarity with your beliefs, you don't insure your ships or use SRP or take handout ships. I'm sure every time you lost access to assets in a station you or your alliance don't own, you turned around, opened assets, selected all, and trashed it.
Or you could possibly realize that 10% to you might be nothing, whereas 10% loss to an industrialist (not including aborted jobs) could run a few billion, not to mention eclipsing the potential margin they would have gotten from the structure. Or a marketeer, who likely has the same if not more in assets tied up there.
Nor have you seemed to remember the cost of the structure itself. Upwards of a billion possibly reaching 50bil+. And of course let's not forget the loot drop. Too much safety there, gotta remove it. No reason to fight for it either. Costs astronomically more than a POS, but definitely not worth fielding anything for that. No way, that's crazy talk.
I'm not sure you understand how much the measure of perceived safety affects the decisions of pilots. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2762
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 20:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
Alright, I likely misinterpreted what your intent was, I apologize for that.
Now to make sure I'm understanding this correctly, your issue is not (or less) the safety mechanic itself, but more the realism (or lore reason, correct those if I'm wrong)? |
|
|
|