EVE Search - Make EVE hardcore again or "Reverse Carebearization"

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Make EVE hardcore again or "Reverse Carebearization"

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:00:00 - [1] Unfortunately (for me) CCP has been moving away from "hardcore" game feel to something more carebearized and WoW-like. In particular, they did so by: 1. boosting insurance 2. boosting missions 3. reducing clone costs 4. making 0.0 NPC spawns much easier to kill and avoid 5. reducing number of low security empire systems by increasing security Maybe people like these changes, but there are already many games with this style of play. If we want to keep EVE hardcore, we need to reverse those changes: 1. Nerf insurance. Keep current insurance system only for t1 frigs and cruisers. All other ship classes should have no NPC insurance coverage. Disable insurance for t1 frigs and cruisers if the character owning them has security status of -5 or lower, if if the ship was destroyed by CONCORD 2. Nerf missions. No level 4+ mission should be available in high security space. It's already hard enough to scan mission runners. Most level 4 mission runners in high sec are running Navy Ravens with faction gear, completely solo. This is evidence that they have it too easy. It should never be that easy in game like EVE. 3. Clone costs should be restored to Castor (or pre-castor) levels. A 45 mil sp char should be prepared to pay out 32 mil. 4. 0.0 belt spawn NPC strengths should be restored to Castor levels. In particular, there need to be much more warp scrambling and webbing NPCs. Currently, your average 0.0 isk farmer character with noobish skills uses a Raven with 2 warp core stabs and t1 cloak. Such a Raven setup has no problem if killing every possible 0.0 belt spawn. This is unacceptably easy. There should be at least some 0.0 belt spawns that are too hard for such poorly setup, poorly skilled Ravens. The fact that chinese macro miners started prefering 0.0 belt spawn farming to mining just shows how wrong things are going in EVE. 5. Many empire systems that had their security status raised to 0.5 and above should be returned back to 0.4 or below. At the same time, to balance out the shrinking high sec space, introduce measures that make high sec suicide ganking harder: such as CONCORD remote-repaiering the victim (will only help victims in big ships or well tanked ones). But the true nature of EVE should remain PvP, hence empire space should have a lot more low sec systems.
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:10:00 - [2] Sounds great if you want empty servers and CCP not being able to afford their electrical bill Since they are embarking on a huge advertising campaign I somehow doubt that your ideas will come to pass... <-----------> Factional Warfare: The LowSec wars which never happened.
Adam Weishaupt Minmatar Pyrrhus Sicarii Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:22:00 - [3] Originally by: Ephemeron 1. Nerf insurance. Keep current insurance system only for t1 frigs and cruisers. All other ship classes should have no NPC insurance coverage. Disable insurance for t1 frigs and cruisers if the character owning them has security status of -5 or lower, if if the ship was destroyed by CONCORD. I'm for disabling insurance in the case of being CONCORDed, but the rest of it? Come on...the insurance payout blows on t2 ships. And the real cost of losing a ship has always been in the modules, anyway. If you dramatically increase the cost of losing a battleship, you'll just see fewer battleships, which would fit your goal of returning us to Castor-style economics, where owning a BS was still a big deal. However, I like seeing lots of big boxes on my overview. If anything, they could reduce or remove insurance for capital ships, since those should (and already do) hurt like a mother to lose and are the new 'special' ships. And supercaps...are they even insurable? I'd guess not, since you can't dock...and they obviously shouldn't be. Quote: 2. Nerf missions. No level 4+ mission should be available in high security space. It's already hard enough to scan mission runners. Most level 4 mission runners in high sec are running Navy Ravens with faction gear, completely solo. This is evidence that they have it too easy. It should never be that easy in game like EVE. I think we have to wait and see on missions, since they're about to be changed anyway. But there needs to be at least some PVE content that doesn't result in you getting ganked. But it should never end up being more rewarding than low-sec missions, 0.0-COSMOS, etc. Quote: 3. Clone costs should be restored to Castor (or pre-castor) levels. A 45 mil sp char should be prepared to pay out 32 mil. No, no, no. This is a terrible idea and a completely pointless ISK sink. I prefer to spend my time PVPing, not making ISK to make up for getting caught in an interdictor bubble. Quote: 4. 0.0 belt spawn NPC strengths should be restored to Castor levels. In particular, there need to be much more warp scrambling and webbing NPCs. Currently, your average 0.0 isk farmer character with noobish skills uses a Raven with 2 warp core stabs and t1 cloak. Such a Raven setup has no problem if killing every possible 0.0 belt spawn. This is unacceptably easy. There should be at least some 0.0 belt spawns that are too hard for such poorly setup, poorly skilled Ravens. The fact that chinese macro miners started prefering 0.0 belt spawn farming to mining just shows how wrong things are going in EVE. Anything that nukes macro ratting is fine by me. Remember we'll be able to scan them out soon (although they'll probably just log off again). Quote: 5. Many empire systems that had their security status raised to 0.5 and above should be returned back to 0.4 or below. At the same time, to balance out the shrinking high sec space, introduce measures that make high sec suicide ganking harder: such as CONCORD remote-repaiering the victim (will only help victims in big ships or well tanked ones). But the true nature of EVE should remain PvP, hence empire space should have a lot more low sec systems. It takes very little skill to gatecamp in lowsec and then run back to highsec when things get too dicey. In 0.0 at least there is the risk of your enemy trapping you in your own camp. I've personally always viewed suicide ganking as the guarantee that you're always vulnerable, to some degree, no matter where you are or what you're in - which is what you seem to be aiming at. But I think many things you propose would actually make PVPing less desirable by making it far too punitive. On the 0.0 side, I'd like to see those Outpost upgrades implemented, as well as the ability to damage/destroy outpost components and services, which would then cost a fair amount to restore.
Alski Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:23:00 - [4] So basicley a lot more ISK grinding then? -
Frug Zenithal Harvest	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:24:00 - [5] I agree with all but the mission nerfing. L4 missions could be a bit harder, but moving them all to low sec would be too big a hit. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Shoukei	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:25:00 - [6] Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby Sounds great if you want empty servers and CCP not being able to afford their electrical bill scaremongering... essentially pure nonsense you're spouting here. eve survives because its different from other mmo's, not because its trying to be like wow.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:25:00 - [7] I understand that the majority of players prefer games like WoW But what about small minority of players who want a serious hardcore game? There are already many games that aim to appeal to that majority. Why should EVE become just like them? Where should players like me go then? I want at least 1 MMORPG I'm not alone. I'm sure that at least 100k people would play hardcore EVE.
Ryas Nia Minmatar Stormriders Fimbulwinter	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:29:00 - [8] while i love the "hardcore" nature of the game CCP cant sell it... subscriptions have leveled off. They just recently stated that they are putting lots of resourced into getting more players playing the game, and i expect that part of it will be further nerfs to empire making it "almost" pvp free. The changes to the war decelerations have made wars all but impossible for my corp and alliance. So were forced to suck on what little life can be found in low sec. Thanks CCP for making wars unfordable PVTR's were good for the game. Recruiting Terrorists
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:30:00 - [9] Originally by: Alski So basicley a lot more ISK grinding then? Only if you can't grasp the idea of using t1 cruiser as main pvp ship Flying HACs and BS shouldn't be the easiest thing ever
Samaritan Azuma	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:41:00 - [10] lets change the part ov EVE that has the guy thinking the whole game should be revamped.

Nito Musashi	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:41:00 - [11] I just wanna say so you think crowded overpopulated zones, and breeding like humans do and consume resources like they do they would never expand populated territory into low sec zones? And since there are more people in high sec than low why should low sec get more love, so wannabe amature pirates have more space to try and gank people and cry about warp to zero because it makes it harder? I think no sec space needs some love, or high sec mining a nerf or a combo of the two. To make it so mining scord in high sec is not more lucrative than mining in no sec for the risk vs reward. hardcore people are a minority and are often sadists that just want a game that none else will play, or have so much in a game that they simply dont want other people to get to where they are at and cry that the games too easy and everyone that started after you now needs to be nerfed because they are making money too fast getting gear too fast etc. now if they made eve so that you never lost a ship, you respawned at a station as a wisp and just kept floating back to your ships tomb and picked it up no loss at all or you cold sit at station and recall your tomb and pay some isk then we dipping into wow territory. Insurance may make losing a ship less risky and i think alot of people think insurance needs another look at, but lets be realistic here what costs more to replace a ship or the mods on it? I bet if a character is more than a month old the mods on their ship cost 2x more than the ship itself to buy. Less we talking gankers that just fit junk onto their ship to minimize any losses while ganking. I read in a thread here today that mission are going to get nerfed anyway because they do not want mission runners to make the isk they making now but then they going to let mission mobs drop rare mods more often, maybe even factional stuff, so we see how this works.
Alski Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:42:00 - [12] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Alski So basicley a lot more ISK grinding then? Only if you can't grasp the idea of using t1 cruiser as main pvp ship Flying HACs and BS shouldn't be the easiest thing ever Actuley my primary pvp ships of choice are T2 frigates, so cost of loseing them really isent any higher than a uninsured resonaley fit cruiser. Flying a HAC or BS well is not "the easyest thing ever" it takes a lot of SP and a lot os isk sunk into fitting which your not likeley to get back when it pops, there are enouth ways to fit a HAC or BS that make the fitting more expensive than the ship, the price of defeat is just fine. Becides people like there big shiney toys, if what little security we have for them (fitting cost outweighing ship value) was taken away, masses would quit - probaley not me actuley - though 0.0 ratting in an AF would really **** me off after a while - but more than enouth would quit to cause the end of Eve. This isent just a game, its a business. -
Adam Weishaupt Minmatar Pyrrhus Sicarii Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:43:00 - [13] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Alski So basicley a lot more ISK grinding then? Only if you can't grasp the idea of using t1 cruiser as main pvp ship Flying HACs and BS shouldn't be the easiest thing ever No, and the insurance/module costs, especially for HACs (Medium Diminishing Nos, anyone?) reflects that. A T1 cruiser is a drop in the bucket for an experienced player like you or me and a significant milestone for a younger player. EvE already beats WoW into the ground in terms of 'hardcore' features. There's zero comparison. WOW has basically no death penalty whatsoever, EVE involves a loss of ship-insurance, modules (not insurable, may profit your enemies), clone (smaller cost than before, but still noticeable), and if you're careless, SP and thus a huge time investment. It also can potentially involve the loss of huge force-multiplying fixed assets such as Outposts and Regions. In other "PVP" MMORPGS such as Lineage 2, the loss of a Castle or whatever means virtually nothing and in no way reflects the result of a lengthy, ongoing campaign, but rather who can spam the most players on any given Castle Siege. Granted, most of this assumes that at some point, you are required to venture out of Empire to make the Big Bucks, and I am all for monitoring the potential income of Empire mission-running/whatever versus 0.0 activities of the same category to guarantee that those who take the risk make the bucks. But if nobody mines Trit in empire, then PVP in 0.0 becomes prohibitively expensive and we all huddle in our core systems, desparately trying to mine ourselves new BS before the enemy arrives. On top of all this, there is also Market PVP, which is a whole different ballgame...and POS warfare...corporate espionage...and suicide ganking...and soon, factional warfare. We are not lacking for opportunities to screw up and lose billions.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:50:00 - [14] 90% of players just want to do the grinding game and get the best gear and quit at the top. Honestly, thats what I think most players want from any mmorpg. Anything that makes the grind more difficult removes fun from these players. They play the game for entertainment and dont want it to be difficult. --- Originally by: CCP Wrangler You're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, thats what hello kitty online is for.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:51:00 - [15] I am not trying to change EVE into something radically different. Most of my ideas are based on what EVE used to be back in Castor days - with improvements on that. During Castor EVE had many people playing, maybe 50k people. It's enough for CCP to survive and it shows that more hardcore game won't result in empty servers. Considering current popularity of EVE, I'm fairly confident that it can keep 100k players with the changes I proposed. The hardcore gamer are a minority. But it's the most loyal minority, partly because there aren't many choices. Also, as normal players get older and more experienced, many of them will also evolve into hardcore gamers. So EVE can't die by appealing to that group.
Cartiff Darwin With Attitude oooh Shiny	Posted - 2007.06.07 05:54:00 - [16] I must admit i like the idea to resetting the 0.0 rat spawns to castor levels. I remember ratting with EVE Marshals in Providence in a gang of 6-10 BS's in 1 group as the spawns were 10bs + 10+ support, and hard as hell. Awesome fun. Your signature was inappropriate, email [email protected] to find out why -Sahwoolo "Uggs386 > omfg i like little boys"
Yurii Chan	Posted - 2007.06.07 06:00:00 - [17] Edited by: Yurii Chan on 07/06/2007 06:01:08 Originally by: Ephemeron I am not trying to change EVE into something radically different. Most of my ideas are based on what EVE used to be back in Castor days - with improvements on that. During Castor EVE had many people playing, maybe 50k people. It's enough for CCP to survive and it shows that more hardcore game won't result in empty servers. Considering current popularity of EVE, I'm fairly confident that it can keep 100k players with the changes I proposed. The hardcore gamer are a minority. But it's the most loyal minority, partly because there aren't many choices. Also, as normal players get older and more experienced, many of them will also evolve into hardcore gamers. So EVE can't die by appealing to that group. so uhm... you want to turn back all the evolution cycles that EVE has gone thru? You think a company out to make money is going to say 'uhm, we had 150k subscribers but our loyal fans are unhappy. lets go back to just 50,000 subs by changing the game to please our fans! we'll make a ton of isk!!!!' get real. EVE is a business - Game 'usually' goes where the money is. no such thing as 'enough to survive' in a business. you're either profiting or you're not. edit - forgot: even the most loyal eventually leave and that usually happens way faster than the influx of new 'hardcore' players. so no! ps: i'm not saying eve is perfect nor has its evolution been squeaky clean image of perfection. There are many faults but i believe that most updates were for the greater good.
Rafein	Posted - 2007.06.07 06:01:00 - [18] For insurnce, i would like to see the max payout reduced, maybe to 85% base value, and totally remove the "free" insurance, that gives them what, 10, 20 million for their ship getting popped, even if they never bought insurance. As for moving level 4's, my worry is it will make it harder for a newer player toget out into low sec/0.0. The Mantra fly what you can afford to lose is great, but when isk becomes tight that you can only afford to lose shuttles, maybe a T1 frig, you'll be less likely to even try low sec, which will cause players in low sec to maon about not having enough targets. I would not mind seeing level 4's reduced in effectiveness, but not at the expence of luring people into 0.0.
Alski Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries	Posted - 2007.06.07 06:07:00 - [19] Originally by: Ephemeron I'm fairly confident that it can keep 100k players with the changes I proposed. so only about a 20-30% drop in profits for ccp then? These days there is more to lose, and the disparaty between newbies and older players in term of isk makeing ability is far wider than it once was, but there are enouth isk sinks to keep the older players from becomeing financially invunerable. Becides, the other consequence of this would be a complete market crash, coupled with mineral prices droping through the floor, why bother about not haveing insureance on your battleship when it only costs 25m isk to build. -
Nero Scuro Jejaikaro Corporation	Posted - 2007.06.07 06:10:00 - [20] Fat chance. Face it, CCP used the hardcore gamers to make their niche game popular, now they're selling out to appeal to the easy-to-please grindfest crowd. Grindfests are easy to make and easy to keep the players happy with - just occasional release another ship, change the colour of it and for it's stats just hold the 9 key down longer than you did last time. Who needs principles and a decent niche game when you can sell out for cash? Now if only CCP had realised they have absolutely no chance of competing with the likes of Blizzard and co. --------- EVE is like a box of chocolates. omg nerf chocolates D:

James Duar Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.06.07 06:10:00 - [21] HARDCORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yurii Chan	Posted - 2007.06.07 06:32:00 - [22] Originally by: Nero Scuro Fat chance. Face it, CCP used the hardcore gamers to make their niche game popular, now they're selling out to appeal to the easy-to-please grindfest crowd. Grindfests are easy to make and easy to keep the players happy with - just occasional release another ship, change the colour of it and for it's stats just hold the 9 key down longer than you did last time. Who needs principles and a decent niche game when you can sell out for cash? Now if only CCP had realised they have absolutely no chance of competing with the likes of Blizzard and co. so CCP is bad for trying to make a buck?
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.07 06:51:00 - [23] Idealists tend to always end up without wives, home, and/or life. CCP want profit, hence they need a big target audience. To appeal to a bigger target audience they made the game a bit less harsh to get into. It's a business strategy, not a move against the minority who wish for the good old days. This is how any successful corporation in this world needs to operate if they want to continue to be successful. It's a quite rational goal. No different from you wanting a higher salary for your job. Maybe you need to sometimes sacrifice something small for something bigger. But that's how life is. The "those were the days people" are the ones who will end up marginalized because they failed to adapt. You may whine all you want about it of course, still does not change fact. - Recruitment open again-
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 07:05:00 - [24] Originally by: Tobias Sjodin The "those were the days people" are the ones who will end up marginalized because they failed to adapt. Personally, I am doing pretty well in the current game world. As I said, my main problem is that things are too easy. However, I may eventually "adapt" by switchng to another game. There are no good alternatives now, but I am looking for another hardcore MMORPG. I "whine" here because I don't want to switch to another game
w0rmy M. Corp M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.06.07 07:12:00 - [25] I fail to see how 1 and 3 will have anything but a negative impact on PVP. 32million isk clone... will encourage logging, and staying docked. No insurance... will encourage logging and staying docked. Not everyone plays eve full time, and has the isk to afford either of these two. $5 says if introduced, we would see you posting on the forums in a months time saying you dont have enough targets. 2 and 4 I agree with. Originally by: CCP Oveur I'm very sorry w0rmy, I beg your forgiveness. Originally by: Dianabolic I was never sworn to secrecy, w0rmy, sorry to dissappoint you.
Rhaegor Stormborn Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e	Posted - 2007.06.07 07:13:00 - [26] Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby Sounds great if you want empty servers and CCP not being able to afford their electrical bill PvP is what made Eve popular, if they keep making it more carebear they are going to lose people. No one cares if all the macro miners and isk farming mission runners quit. Hate to break it to you. RISE Recruitment Thread
MehTheTrader University of Caille	Posted - 2007.06.07 07:17:00 - [27] Nerf insurance.. I agree
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.07 07:28:00 - [28] Edited by: Tobias Sjodin on 07/06/2007 07:27:28 Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Tobias Sjodin The "those were the days people" are the ones who will end up marginalized because they failed to adapt. Personally, I am doing pretty well in the current game world. As I said, my main problem is that things are too easy. However, I may eventually "adapt" by switchng to another game. There are no good alternatives now, but I am looking for another hardcore MMORPG. I "whine" here because I don't want to switch to another game Well of course you do, but the minority cannot rule over the majority. I think that's one of the major advancement of the rationalization of the world. As it is, and I agree with you that it is unfortunate - EVE have become less harsh over time. But by no means is it a WoW. I think there can be a good balance between "the good old days" and "carebearisms", and I think CCP is well aware of it, and are working toward it. For instance, the changes to WCS, the added t2 warp disruptors available to more people, and increased availability to the T2 market for "regular players". Look at T2, and the insurance possibilities for T2, and you have your "hard core" world. Not to mention how you lose your fittings, etc. I think it really IS a more "I don't want to change" nostalgic approach you're coming with here. And it stands against advancement of CCP, EVE, and the relations with the majority of the customers. - Recruitment open again-
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.07 07:29:00 - [29] Originally by: w0rmy I fail to see how 1 and 3 will have anything but a negative impact on PVP. 32million isk clone... will encourage logging, and staying docked. No insurance... will encourage logging and staying docked. Not everyone plays eve full time, and has the isk to afford either of these two. $5 says if introduced, we would see you posting on the forums in a months time saying you dont have enough targets. You argue from perspective of FPS style PvP. I understand if we make EVE into Counter Strike in space, we will greatly increase amount of PvP people do. However, that's not really what I am after. I want PvP that thrills me, and in order to be thrilled, I want something big to put on the line. I want people to be afraid to die. I want people to be serious when they commit to PvP. Also, never in EVE's history have I argued about "not enough targets". I value quality over quantity. When I want lots of kills, I got various online FPS games I can play.
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.07 07:32:00 - [30] Originally by: Ephemeron You argue from perspective of FPS style PvP. I understand if we make EVE into Counter Strike in space, we will greatly increase amount of PvP people do. However, that's not really what I am after. I want PvP that thrills me, and in order to be thrilled, I want something big to put on the line. I want people to be afraid to die. I want people to be serious when they commit to PvP. Also, never in EVE's history have I argued about "not enough targets". I value quality over quantity. When I want lots of kills, I got various online FPS games I can play. Well, as hard as it may be to realize. EVE is not about the minority, or your view of what it should be. It's about appealing to a bigger audience. You seem to repeatedly miss this. - Recruitment open again-



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: 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.