| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Morhon
Amarr
Aegis Starship Enterprises
   |
Posted - 2006.12.16 23:40:00 -
[1]
It's my understanding that CCP are trying hard to get people to move to 0.0 via various changes. Mostly because they don't like the servers being hammered with all the people in empire while 0.0 is empty.
If this is correct and people aren't going to 0.0 no matter what CCP does; why not just make empire bigger instead of 0.0?
Another solution might be to stop people starting out as the most popular races either physically or by balancing the game a bit so that when people like myself suggest eve to m8's I don't feel I should tell them to be anything other than amarr (who happen to have the largest space).
Does my bum look big in this cape? |
Erim Solfara
|
Posted - 2006.12.17 12:20:00 -
[2]
So we're crap enough and now you want to remove the role-playing aspect of having the largest space fairing empire in the galaxy? geez thanks -_-
Maybe I should start training up that minmatar alt again...
----------------------------------------
Proposed new ship class |
Morhon
Amarr
Aegis Starship Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.17 14:16:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Morhon on 17/12/2006 14:27:40
No I didn't mean CCP should get rid of the amarr or it's space, just get more people to want to play in amarr space. I was saying that when I recomend Eve to people I tell them not to chose amarr because they are nuffed to hell. It only takes a look at the map to get an idea of which races are more popular (caldari and gallante).
There is probbly alot more to it than that but it's just a different way to solve the same problem as I see it.
The main thing I was trying to get at was instead of trying all these different ways to get people to go to 0.0 mabe empire should be made bigger instead, I don't know how, perhaps it's time for the jove to be added?
Does my bum look big in this cape? |
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2006.12.17 16:07:00 -
[4]
Its really not about the number of systems with empire status but that the mission runners and traders flog only to certain systems.
CCP would have to add quite a few agents and complexes to empire if they want to spread out the empire population.
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that. 
|
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.17 20:03:00 -
[5]
I still kind of like the idea of nerfing empire, limiting the agents or degrading their quality as they get used up.
"Gee, thanks for stopping by, but the Angels aren't all that extravagant around here any more since the last fourteen fleets they sent to this constellation got obliterated by three guys. Oh, I know! My brother bought fifteen units of consumer electronics and left them in Niarja. Would you go grab those for me?"
Miners more to less populous systems to escape competition for ore, ratters go to far-flung places to be alone with their rats. Why shouldn't mission runners have to develop a relationship with an agent that doesn't have 500 other contacts lining up to do their bidding?
I say revamp the agent system entirely so that there are no "levels" for agents, and each agent has a finite number of each type of mission, which he distrubutes based on standing and bids. If you have 10% less standing than another guy, but offer to do Worlds Collide for 11% less reward, you get the job.
The number of available missions would depend on the system's security status. Lower sec means the agents have more and better missions. If your agent has ten assignments for Worlds Collide per day, you can compete with other players to line them up. Population density would become a problem for the mission runners as well as the servers, and they'd disperse.
--------------
Civis Ascendant Sum |
Morhon
Amarr
Aegis Starship Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.17 22:05:00 -
[6]
Must admmit I have been wondering about the agent system too. Does seem to be one of the biggest causes of people being drawn to the same system/ area (jita for example).
Surely CCP could just add new good agents (lvl3 and lvl4) spread about through empire then cap existing agents and new ones; so an agent can only have X number of people working for him. If someone doesn't use there agent for 30 days they get struck off the list. It could be made clear from looking up agent info how many places are avalible, so people don't spend ages looking for an agent that is avalible.
CCP must be able to tell how many people do missions regulary and set a cap that reflects the number of people likley to want to do them and add enough agents accordingly; so instead of 700 people in jita you would have about 700 people spread over 7 systems.
Does my bum look big in this cape? |
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2006.12.17 22:36:00 -
[7]
Jita is a rather special case as it is THE trade hub of EVE.
I dont think anything short of NPC freighter service and market access from all over empire will have a chance of getting rid of the trade hubs.
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that.
|
Morhon
Amarr
Aegis Starship Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.17 23:10:00 -
[8]
You are probbly right there, but Amarr in Domain is the Amarr trade hub and there is nowhere near 700 people there at any given time (200 max). Which kinda backs up my point about the number of players of each race.
Everyone clumping together for whatever reason needs to be addressed, because it has a knock on effect. If I want to do lvl4 intel missons in high sec I need to be in penigram, others in amarr. These are the main amarr trade hubs, but that is in part because people know they can sell stuff to mission runners, then everyone that isn't mission running goes there because they know they can buy stuff in one place. So the people that build stuff have to be close so they don't have to travel to far to get to the good markets. And people that mine have to be close so that people that build buy stuff from them 
Its alot of things causing the problem, but rather than try to sort out empire CCP always seem to try to get people to go to 0.0 instead
Does my bum look big in this cape? |
Alkirin
Gallente
Die Hard Mining
|
Posted - 2006.12.18 01:16:00 -
[9]
Alot of people prefer the game in High sec compared to the complete anarchy of low sec and 0.0
People don't like being ganked, and more aren't that interested in PvP.
The focus should be more toward adjusting to how players play the game, instead of forcing them to play differently.
[Cogito Ergo Sum Atheios] - Alkirin of Scientia Obscura |
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.18 03:04:00 -
[10]
 Originally by: Alkirin
People don't like being ganked, and more aren't that interested in PvP.
That's fine, but you shouldn't be able to succeed more in a non-competitive and almost 100% safe profession than in a risky, competitive one. As it stands you're better off running missions in high-sec than mining in low-sec.
Even if you want to play EvE and be involved in the game, the money and opportunities are all in high-security space. The best miners in a 0.2 system, risking their Covetors to pirates and mining only Hemorphite make less isk/hour than a level 4 mission runner, have less fun, and don't get the sweet loot and agent offers.
That's not right. Until that gets fixed, CCP can't complain about people refusing to operate in low-sec, and pirates can't complain about the lack of easy marks.
--------------
Civis Ascendant Sum |
Oarta
|
Posted - 2006.12.18 06:17:00 -
[11]
I would like to see a technical solution to dynamically load balancing the different systems. Even if you create additional space, it is still the same number of people accessing a system on the same hardware. People will always gather together for any number of reasons so giving them more places to go to be alone doesn't seem like it will work in practical terms.
|
Rodge
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.18 11:34:00 -
[12]
Making Empire bigger won't help, there's already tonnes of high sec systems that are usually empty. When I lived in Empire, I used to live in Amarr space precisely because it's so empty. Caldari being the PvE easy mode means that the majority of agent runners are gonna flock to Caldari space and the busiest systems in Eve are where the best agents are.
Reducing the rewards of Empire space will make 0.0 more attractive. Take L4 agents out of high sec space and introduce higher transaction taxes for systems that are consistently super-busy. That'll help the population disperse a bit....
Sig inappropriate-not eve related -Abdalion
[ 2005.04.17 00:34:30 ] Nagilam > u better leave Rodge, u will not gank any1 else 2nite......
|
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2006.12.18 14:51:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Rodge
Reducing the rewards of Empire space will make 0.0 more attractive. Take L4 agents out of high sec space and introduce higher transaction taxes for systems that are consistently super-busy. That'll help the population disperse a bit....
I dont think that lowering the rewards from agents inside empire space will change a thing. I know quite a few that wouldnt be happy with such a change but still wouldnt set a foot outside of empire as they really really dislike the risk of PvP. They will simply continue to do empire missions at a lower income level and be happy with it.
The idea for an adaptable transaction tax has a good chance of working but i fear that ppl will just change their pricings and we get a nasty inflation out of it.
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that.
|
Oliver Singh
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.12.18 15:23:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Sir Drake
I dont think that lowering the rewards from agents inside empire space will change a thing. I know quite a few that wouldnt be happy with such a change but still wouldnt set a foot outside of empire as they really really dislike the risk of PvP. They will simply continue to do empire missions at a lower income level and be happy with it.
I think they wouldn't fear PVP quite as much if tactics and fittings required to successfully do a high level mission and actually put up a fight against another player weren't so radically different. Making mission rats smarter, giving them the DPS people actually do, reducing their numbers and removing the "big invulnerable blob" mentality while upping the bounties to compensate would do a great deal towards making people spread out of the Empire.
Another thing to do would be to make low sec actually LOW, but still some "sec" and not "no security whatsoever and no allies within earshot".
-----
I'm fine with being an !. That picture doesn't have my best hat in it anyway. |
Alkirin
Gallente
Die Hard Mining
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 02:45:00 -
[15]
The deal with low sec is the pirates, and how alot of hard work can go to waste with very little effort on the part of pirates. Even if high sec were less rewarding (would have to be marginal); it wouldnt change too much.
People who don't like to be ganked are going to avoid being ganked. Those that don't like PvP are going to avoid PvP.
Sweet irony would be a migration to low sec; and complaints from griefers when others find a way to cirumvent their gate camps and deadspace ganks.
[Cogito Ergo Sum Atheios] - Alkirin of Scientia Obscura |
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 09:58:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Oliver Singh
I think they wouldn't fear PVP quite as much if tactics and fittings required to successfully do a high level mission and actually put up a fight against another player weren't so radically different. Making mission rats smarter, giving them the DPS people actually do, reducing their numbers and removing the "big invulnerable blob" mentality while upping the bounties to compensate would do a great deal towards making people spread out of the Empire.
Another thing to do would be to make low sec actually LOW, but still some "sec" and not "no security whatsoever and no allies within earshot".
I dont think it has anything to do with ppl setups for missions etc but that they simply HATE PvP. I certainly dont like PvP and will run from most fights as good as i can not because i dont have the skills or the wrong ship or fear the loss of ISKs but because i DONT LIKE PvP!
Most of the ppl in empire are pretty content with running missions and prefer playing solo instead of ally warfare or risking their hard earned stuff in low sec/0.0.
That wont change even if you make empire smaller or minimize agent rewards.
Pointing out to them the higher rewards in 0.0 doesnt help at all because most people understand that to grab the rewards through mining or ratting you need some safety.
Sure you can mine all the isk you need for a BS in one day but how often will that mining op be disturbed by roaming gangs?
I guess most of the guys posting here like PvP and dont realise how few you really are compared to the silent mass of those who dont like it (just look at the map and population comparison empire/0.0!). People are not willing to participate in PvP because they dont want to risk their stuff and are happy with playing EVE as fun as they can without it.
If you want to draw them out of empire you need to provide them with some sort of save haven in 0.0 where they can still play without getting involved in PvP or ally warfare.
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that.
|
Tanaka Nari
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 10:48:00 -
[17]
The only way to draw people into 0.0 is to raise the average age of player accounts. In my experience, many people start becoming interested in PVP after a while in the game, when they have done everything else.
I happen to know a very carebearish corp quite well, for over a year they have been content with high sec mining and high sec missions. Brief stints of low sec activity were always followed by going back to high sec, because low sec was too bothersome (lower market activity, higher risk, etc). The core of the corp has stayed pretty constant, although the younger members fluctuated some. A month ago, said group surprised me (a lot) by announcing they were moving to low sec, possibly 0.0 and shift their activities to low sec mining/agents/PVP, possibly go to 0.0 and claim some space. This is by the way not talking about a single corp, but sort of rippled out over their alliance (which was much the same), which ranks in the couple hundred member range.
So, what I'm saying is, older players are more likely to venture into 0.0, regardless of whether they use their mains or possibly start alts for that purpose. Now, I would be really interested in seeing the correlation of the curves for "account age" and "has a 0.0 character".
|
Joerd Toastius
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 10:54:00 -
[18]
CCP aren't trying to move people to 0.0 because of server load, they're doing it for largely ideological reasons, afaik. And it's not a push to move all players there, just a push to make it more populated and more interesting
Originally by: Alkirin
Alot of people prefer the game in High sec compared to the complete anarchy of low sec and 0.0
A common misconception. 0.0 is not anarchaic - it's far more organised, structured and controlled than highsec. Marginally more dangerous at best, yes, but not by much, and certainly not (for the most part) just a haven for random killings. 0.0 is not like lowsec.
|
Alkirin
Gallente
Die Hard Mining
|
Posted - 2006.12.20 01:06:00 -
[19]
The point still stands; there is little incentive to get into 0.0; Either you join an existing alliance and get exploited to hell, or you try to claim your own turf - good luck with that. The only people that manage that are the ones that currently have.
Risk >>>>>>>>> Reward; so unless that is severely mitigated, there is no point.
[Cogito Ergo Sum Atheios] - Alkirin of Scientia Obscura |
Frecator Dementa
|
Posted - 2006.12.20 08:43:00 -
[20]
now here's an idea:
Mission runners don't want to risk their hard earned ships/mods in PvP, now what could be a solution to make them less scared of losing their ships?
I know: Make their gear less "hard earned" :give runners more money (this may be a bad idea, since L4 missions already give out enough) or make ships/mods cheaper to buy/manufacture (especially the damn T2 stuff). Reduce mineral requirements for ships by 10-15%, this would actually encourage more people to mine/manufacture, since you can get more stuff on the market with the same amount of ore.
...and give out more damn T2 BPOs...
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |