Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Locutus ofBorg
Una Salus Victis Wrong Hole.
4
|
Posted - 2012.12.10 15:47:00 -
[451] - Quote
Allow us to interact more with the objects in our quarters. Inviting Corp members or anyone really to your quarters. Proper platform views for our location in station, the Amarr quarters are improperly located. |
Dsparil Fel
Scanline Research Industries SQUEE.
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.10 23:10:00 -
[452] - Quote
Locutus ofBorg wrote:Allow us to interact more with the objects in our quarters. Inviting Corp members or anyone really to your quarters. Proper platform views for our location in station, the Amarr quarters are improperly located.
That and the ability to punch, kick and beat up corp members you don't like. |
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Shockwave Sovereign Industries
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.11 21:41:00 -
[453] - Quote
... decorating a captains quarters would be nice (I have a nice corpse I would like mounted next to my couch).
|
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:07:00 -
[454] - Quote
It's always bothered me that NPC don't follow the rules, or more importantly don't have equipment that makes any sense at all. My real issue with this is that it creates a complete disconnect from reality when a newer player first starts to PVP with their corp, and it only gets more bizarre as new tiers of content are attempted.
Frigates that can't hit a AB Cruiser at 3km? Battleships that can be 3-shotted with anything? Super-MWD speeds, unlimited lock ranges, perma-jamming BS, super-neuts, all from the same factions that field fleets of *dozens* of ships incapable of killing a single cruiser a few systems over...
This generates unrealistic 'knowledge' of how to survive/deal with different ship types in the game.
It would be an awesome challenge for a level 4 mission to be made up of a CS, a curse, a BS, two HAC, a couple Interceptors... But real fitted ones with known properties the same as the ones the player has to use. I can see arguments against the 'blitz-ability' of a structure like this, but smarter AI should at least partly mitigate this. Current NPC don't exactly try to stay alive...
Dropping on-grid for a level 3 and finding your tanked BC is facing a brick tackle maller, 2 Retributions, and a logi cruiser sitting 50km away....
Imagine the thrill of going in to a level 2 mission to find it's just single ship to fight, then having to deal with a t2 fit blaster harpy like you might in a real lowsec encounter.... learning to deal with a couple realistic-fit rail incursis or other 'real' fits in your Destroyer would be a strong learning experience for the consumers of this level of content, and being successful at it would actually make them more useful to their corps in other ways.
It would be nice to have to slingshot, tackle, separate, and otherwise think about the fight during a mission.
There have likely been other posts of this type, but I'm wondering if there is some body of knowledge that says PVE can't be modeled after PVP content? I haven't found the right post maybe, but I'm wondering if this has ever had a dev response? |
Master Taron
International Future Of Eve Gaming
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:21:00 -
[455] - Quote
I second this. It's the way it should be be |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
207
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:47:00 -
[456] - Quote
Thirded. You learn a lot of otherwise useless things about ship combat doing PVE as it stands.
While NPCs will never be as good or as unpredictable as PCs are, they can at least play by the same rules. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
143
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 21:47:00 -
[457] - Quote
This idea certainly has some merit.
Just kinda wondering how it should be implemented for bounties and the inescapeable fact that CCP would just add a bunch of eWar ships to the existing missions.
Would take a serious rework of the AI, although AI in missions is a serious strech of the term as it is now.
Oh.... and in before "But I could never solo these in my pimped fit navy Domi".
Certainly would encourage teamwork. |
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:09:00 -
[458] - Quote
I don't think teamwork and PVE in the mission context should be something enforced by the gameplay model at all, just that we should be fighting less ships that behave like real ones.
There is essentially zero chance this would ever work as a re-work of existing missions, the balance would invariably be skewed to easy or hard or less/more rewarding.
The player base is always asking for more content though, so it's not like a new type of mission (*cough* bounty hunting *cough*) is out of the question... Heck, even just updating the roaming belt rats to behave like this would shake up a ton of things.
Some form of PVE content that encouraged teamwork would be fun actually (in addition to normal missions). Somewhat off-topic but right now there is really only WH content that requires a Ton of prework/logistics and dedication, or incursions which are sort of like the EvE equivalent to synthetic dps benchmarking. Nothing some corp buddies can jump in 3 ships and go do as a group for moderate reward/fun in a 30 minute gameplay nugget. PVP roams generally require significant time commitment and don't often generate isk....
Just think, if belt ratting involved a disrupt/scram so the NPC can't warp away and save their bounty... you'd already be fit for PVP!
Also, less macros... And lots of folks trolling belts looking to fight something. I can dream... |
Anneliese Pollard
University of Caille Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:13:00 -
[459] - Quote
Or you know... you could actually go do "real" PVP. Lots of corps out there I hear that will help you learn. Making PVE into some faux PVP is not a solution. The idea has merit, but no...
The risk vs reward has to be changed drastically to accommodate this, and it will probably turn the market on its head, making lots of ships and modules obsolete. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
11
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:25:00 -
[460] - Quote
BECAUSE the value of mission item drops/salvage.
why would they have this glaring flaw with NPC's for so long? because it's intentional. spontaneous ISK is kept scarce. higher-value drops exist, in null and wh space. $$ drops in high sec, in mission volumes, would produce too much spontaneous ISK, I think.
I hold a personal belief that CCP has an active interest in making sure most pilots don't end up with too much ISK, because if too many pilots can PLEX their subscription with ISK, they lose money from subscriptions
you as the player mostly feel the gameplay only, but CCP... is a for-profit company. maybe I'm wrong and NPC AI is an afterthought they wish didn't exist, so they neglect it.
if ISK was too easily had, they would lose PLEX purchase income, and players should be charged a subscription fee regardless of ISK wealth.
if ISK is too scarce, EVE should become free-to-play (for everyone)
as it is I think CCP is double dipping |
|
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:28:00 -
[461] - Quote
To be sure, modifying belt rats like this would kinda be getting off in the weeds vs improving the mission experience to jive with the rest of gameplay.
Its just that one has to make isk somehow to pay for that PVP, and if you' don't have an industry alt it generally involves shooting some form of NPC. It always feels terribly 'not eve' to slay 3 waves of 20 BS/BC/Cruisers et all in my weird DPS/Tank drag racing ship that can't be used in any other context (especially true for incursions).
Of course there are non-mission isk fountains, and doing exploration/WH content is generally the right answer. This isn't an 'adapt or die' thing, more like a 'fun' thing. You know, the reason you play games instead of work a 2nd job.
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
11
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:30:00 -
[462] - Quote
can you imagine a level 2 mission dropping a T2 blaster fit harpy?
consider how valuable that drop would be. in a level 2? c'mon, they're not going to give you that kind of ISK. |
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:38:00 -
[463] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:can you imagine a level 2 mission dropping a T2 blaster fit harpy?
consider how valuable that drop would be. in a level 2? c'mon, they're not going to give you that kind of ISK.
I think my OP is/was mainly posed as a function of the gameplay experience, the actual challenge or activity you the player perform on your way to the reward.
It's not like that "T2 blaster fit harpy" NPC has to drop the same loot or even have a t2 wreck, but it would be nice if it had similar EHP/cap/DPS/range/tracking to a real ship. It just seemed like a good example in contrast to a normal l2 mission where you slay 10 frigates and 3 destroyers without a thought.
Ofc any implementation of this structure would find more middle ground, like 3 merlins and a logi frig for example in a l2.
|
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:44:00 -
[464] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: if ISK was too easily had, they would lose PLEX purchase income, and players should be charged a subscription fee regardless of ISK wealth.
This is off-topic but...
All PLEX entering on to the market cost more than a months sub for someone else to buy with real money and trade for a virtual good (isk). When I PLEX for a month, it makes them more real world money than if I have a normal sub. Particularly, since I normally sub for 6 months at a time and pay much, much less than a PLEX per month.
Double dipping is right. ;) |
Rain6637
Team Evil
11
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:45:00 -
[465] - Quote
I assume that CCP has the programmer skill to give you any NPC experience it wants.
assuming the NPC AI is intentional, I ask why they want to give you this hollow NPC experience had currently
and then I figure it comes down to irl money. or maybe server CPU resources.
I assume it's intentional, and has a very real-world reason (and gameplay is the least important consideration). |
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:55:00 -
[466] - Quote
I just hope that somewhere in their internal CVS tree there is a 'belt pirate' AI script that actually ransoms your silly carebear ship if you can't kill it. Right now 'belt pirates' are more like 'cattle' :p
Further, someday I hope they flip it on for a dev event... just for the tears... |
Rain6637
Team Evil
11
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:58:00 -
[467] - Quote
server load is a big consideration, I think. it's the reason for reinforced servers, and time dilation. any increase in mission complexity would cause higher server load thousands-fold. |
Delphineas Fumimasa
Overpowered Noobs
4
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 06:27:00 -
[468] - Quote
Because this is an MMO, no League of Legends.
They would lose a LOT of customers if levels 1s and 2s required a fleet to survive as a 2 week toon. |
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 07:25:00 -
[469] - Quote
Delphineas Fumimasa wrote: They would lose a LOT of customers if levels 1s and 2s required a fleet to survive as a 2 week toon.
I think my examples were a little off... maybe a blarpy shouldn't be encountered in a l2, but certainly a 2-week old toon in a destroyer can fight a couple NPC piloted meta-3 fit t1 frigate and come out on top feeling good about the challenge.
I guess I just don't see the problem with taking {e.g} 5 'frigates' with 500 ehp and making them one 2500ehp object. It's the same EHP chunk to chew through, but at least it feels like you're killing a ship and not swatting flies.
|
Maelle LuzArdiden
University of Caille Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 08:10:00 -
[470] - Quote
This is what they are doing now, CCP's stated purpose is to redesign PVE to resemble real PVP more.
They started by making the AI target drones as well, just like players do.
|
|
Ahn Tee Mahtur
13
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 09:51:00 -
[471] - Quote
errr...*stomach grumbles* PvE and PvP should be two different elements in a video game >.< |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
2312
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 12:39:00 -
[472] - Quote
Maelle LuzArdiden wrote:This is what they are doing now, CCP's stated purpose is to redesign PVE to resemble real PVP more.
They started by making the AI target drones as well, just like players do.
Never had a player target my drones... I don't fly drone boats. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Maelle LuzArdiden
University of Caille Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 14:09:00 -
[473] - Quote
Well, I guess that was relevant and valuable information in some way then. What do you fly in PVP?
|
Grombutz
Treasures Collectors Solar Citizens
15
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 14:18:00 -
[474] - Quote
Think about 2 Logi-NPC's in a mission and how to break such a tank on proper fitted ships with just one BS / T3... then you have the answer why PvE is different from PvP.
Missions need to be solo-able - if they would have setup's with logis and proper fitted ships, this wouldn't be possible at all. Think about officer-spawns and their tank and dps numbers, or even the end-boss of Lv1 Epic ARC which do have more realistic "fits".
It's not that hard at all... |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance
206
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 16:12:00 -
[475] - Quote
Anneliese Pollard wrote: The idea has merit, but no...
its been brought up before, and the devs would like to head in a direction that that blurs pvp/pve fits towards a common setup.
I'll dig out the link to the devpost and link it --> here soonGäó |
Kasutra
Tailor Company Hashashin Cartel
95
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 17:23:00 -
[476] - Quote
I agree with the sentiment. The current PvE experience, where NPCs are suicidal, stupid, a disgrace to their ship class, ridiculously numerous, and simply not playing by the same rules as players, could be improved a lot by making it more like PvP.
I think everyone is overreacting a bit to the perceived difficulty increase, though. This doesn't have to result in missions requiring more ships or more pimped out ships to complete. It might result in people having to engage more than a handful of brain cells when tackling the missions, but I'm fine with that.
That being said, I have some, uh lore (LolLore?) objections to the NPCs flying ships that are exactly the same as player ships. While I think they should behave more like player ships and work in the same way as player ships do, I think they should be restricted to having mostly mass-produced modules (read: meta 0) and have ****-poor skills affecting those modules. Buying high-tech and prototype modules, as well as having skills injected into the brain should be the players' (capsuleers') competitive advantage. But "only" that should be plenty to keep us afloat and ahead of small gangs of NPCs.
Grombutz wrote:Think about 2 Logi-NPC's in a mission and how to break such a tank on proper fitted ships with just one BS / T3... then you have the answer why PvE is different from PvP. I think the solution to that should be to neut out one of the logis, or to force them to fly apart, or to alpha them between cycles. You know, as if this weren't dumb NPCs you are dealing with. |
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 17:44:00 -
[477] - Quote
Kasutra wrote: That being said, I have some, uh lore (LolLore?) objections to the NPCs flying ships that are exactly the same as player ships. While I think they should behave more like player ships and work in the same way as player ships do, I think they should be restricted to having mostly mass-produced modules (read: meta 0) and have ****-poor skills affecting those modules. Buying high-tech and prototype modules, as well as having skills injected into the brain should be the players' (capsuleers') competitive advantage. But "only" that should be plenty to keep us afloat and ahead of small gangs of NPCs.
This is a pretty interesting point, alluding to what the difference between a pod-pilot and an NPC really is.
For something like this to work it'd really need to be baseline stats distilled down from some kind of fitting with e.g. 'average sansha pilot' skills applied to it. As previously noted, CPU/memory should be considered.
In the end, I'm really just looking for a PVE experience where ewar, cap, mwd mechanics, etc all behave as expected. You should be able to cap out NPC, shut off their MWD and tackle them down, etc. At a minimum, it would allow neuting to be a valid defense vs tackle frigate NPC since drones can/will get popped...
I suppose all of this is academic, but the discussion points are interesting food for thought. Having done some AI scripting in LUA, this sort of thing pops out of any game at me.... |
Grombutz
Treasures Collectors Solar Citizens
15
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 20:04:00 -
[478] - Quote
Kasutra wrote:Grombutz wrote:Think about 2 Logi-NPC's in a mission and how to break such a tank on proper fitted ships with just one BS / T3... then you have the answer why PvE is different from PvP. I think the solution to that should be to neut out one of the logis, or to force them to fly apart, or to alpha them between cycles. You know, as if this weren't dumb NPCs you are dealing with.
In a missionboat? Good jokes dude, good jokes :D |
Taoist Dragon
Forced Penetration Reckless Faith
91
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 21:39:00 -
[479] - Quote
I like the idea of making NPC have 'proper' fits and abilties this would go a long way to close the gap in between pve and pvp.
One thing I would suggest though would be the loot table follow player drops and that for missions/belts/anoms the actual number of npc's scale depending on the number of players active in the area.
For example: I'm running a level 2 mission in my destroyer and have to fight 2 decent mets 2-3 fit combat frigs and on attack frig. I'm fully T2 fit this would be a pretty easy task. But the npc's may warp out to a 'holding point' 1mil km from the mission if they are hurt but have time to warp off or if I have no tackle. Now if a corp mate joines me then the npc's call for back up and another couple of frigs warp in from the 'holding point'
This would give them a much more 'alive' feeling and prepare pve'ers more for pvp combat. It would also make pve combat more 'interactive' and ensure you need to really think about your fits rather than having a generic mission fit if solo. Sure you could fleet up with specific mission fits and just burn everything down really quickly.....oh wait isn't that the purpose of fleet composition! wow it really would be more like pvp!
The bounties would have to be adjusted to level them against the meta item drops though. That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Velarra
Ghost Festival Naraka.
141
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 23:02:00 -
[480] - Quote
You might want to try Incursion Scout sites.
Which can be run solo or in a group of new-ish pilots, and are remarkably educational, particularly if you're in a pvp fit ship.
There's absolutely no return of note in them in terms of isk/lp etc. - but the educational value, -Transversal training/practice i'm looking at you ;) is really quite engaging. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |