| 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.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 05:25:00 -
[2]
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.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 05:30:00 -
[3]
 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
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 05:51:00 -
[4]
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.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 07:05:00 -
[5]
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
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 07:29:00 -
[6]
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.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:53:00 -
[7]
Leandro Salazar, if your main reason for running these missions is to relax.. then you can relax by doing level 3 missions. After all, why do you need to make tons of money if you already have CNR with faction gear and 0 risk of ever losing it? High sec level 3s should work for you. If you think they are too easy, then try them in a cruiser size ship.
On other hand, if you run level 4 missions because you want to make money fast, as opposed to simply relaxing, then you should take some risk of doing them in low sec space. Low sec space is by no means automatic death for mission runners. That's a common misconception that can be solved only by making those people try it, and learn.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 04:42:00 -
[8]
I want to make this clear: I am not against carebears doing well.
Making EVE more "hardcore" to me means 2 things:
1) Harsher death penalties. People with high skill points and uber ships should hurt more when they die. This would make people respect combat to death more. It would make people be more serious and behave better (only a tiny bit better). Every civil society is based on fear of losing your stuff and dying. If in real world you could respawn for 5 bucks with perfect health, all hell would break loose.
2) Harder PvE. In particular, I want harder PvE in 0.0 belt spawns and level 4+ missions. I want it to be more challanging. There is still lots of easy stuff to try for those who can't handle the risk. Also, harder PvE doesn't mean only more powerful NPCs, it also means increased risk from PvP attack - at least for high end PvE stuff.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 04:47:00 -
[9]
Originally by: James Duar
I'm going to say it again: this plan is stupid. Apparently the OP despite being so "hardcore" enjoys ratting for 5 hours to have enough ISK to buy battleships or something.
Yes I spend a lot of time to buy expensive battleships. I put in a lot of work into getting a good ship. Doing all that work makes me value what I have. I take pride in my accomplishment, because I had to work hard at it. And when I put my ships on the line, I feel much more excited than I would flying a cheap t1 cruiser than is only worth 1 hour of work to get.
Quality over quantity.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 06:36:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Anehra
Frankly, it seems more logical to increase the insurance payouts and lower the clone costs to make people take bigger risks, at least as I see it.
Let me know why I'm wrong.
You are wrong, because what you propose is lowering the amount of risk to encourage people to take risks more often. The less people lose when they die, the less risk they have to deal with in combat. This will encourage people to fight more, but not take more risks. It is essentially a move toward FPS style combat - lots of meaningless fighting.
The goal is not to create more PvP encounters, the goal is to have more exciting, higher quality pvp experience.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 06:18:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Rhedea
Care bears pay the bills, live with it. Why has eve been stuck at the 30k online mark for such a long time? Its not because of pvp but not enough things for CB to do in eve. I believe planets gaming would draw in more people into the game as traders, builders and social players. Pvpers need to nurture their care bears like ants nurture their aphids.
You can't really believe what you say. Remember that the alliance you are part of represents hardcore pvp'ers. Your alliance has been responsible for in-game pursecution and complete destruction of several large carebear alliances.
Anyway, considering that most of my points are unpopular, there is still 1 important point that we could agree to change: introduction of harder 0.0 belt spawns.
Harder 0.0 belt spawns doesn't mean that your regular low skill 2x stabbed + cloaked Raven alt can't kill them. He would still be able to kill most of them, but not all. There should exist some random spawns that are simply too hard for those Ravens.
And I suggest Devs seriously look into the issue of why nearly 90% of isk farmers (many legit alts and mains) use Raven as their ship of choice. NPC belt spawns should be designed in such a way as to make other ships attractive/competetive choices for farming. It's a bit surprising that Ravens are a choice battleships even for killing Sanshas and Blood NPCs, which use mostly EM and Thermal damages - the best damage against shield tankers. This issue needs to be addressed. Raven shouldn't be the best choice for everything.
|
| |
|