I like your style, and your dedication to make Pochven a better place outside the dominance of the big blocs, have my vote!
2 Likes
yep, it definitely needs to be done carefully and be properly planned out
Having certain station services or even access to certain systems locked behind a standings requirement really gives players something tangible to strive for.
one thing that we have asked for multiple times in pochven aswell is standings based service bonuses, for things like reprocessing and industry
the fitting service is one area that I personally think should not be standings locked (or be the very first thing you unlock when building standings)
Drake you should push for Abyssal strip miners and youll have my votes 
1 Like
only if I can also push for abyssal MJDs and overprop battleships
1 Like
Here it is, the candidate everyone should put in their ballot.
1 Like
I am of the mindset more abyssal mods = good change
1 Like
When asked by CCP why you canât tell normal jokes like everyone else simply say âThatâs not how Eye Rollâ
A good starter template might be to look at each faction one by one and itemise that factions objectives/goals and see how player agency (from both a PVE and PVP standpoint) can contribute towards those goals. Rather than a WoW type scavenger hunt to see who can collect the most eggs I reckon it could be more of a graduated system of where smaller more engaging objectives net you quicker standings gain up to a certain point. At each milestone the objectives require more skills, better ships, better piloting to accomplish the objectives but more importantly have a tangible feeling of player agency involved in the progression of a single objective. A simple starter point would be to build a set of criteria for each faction one by one to list out:
- Who is the faction
- Who is the opposing faction or other factions that frequently have interaction with them
- (if applicable) Who are the affiliates / subaffiliates
- What are the factions stated objectives
- What are the factions undeclared objectives (of course subject to NDA for obvious reasons)
- When do objectives need to be completed when accepted (time sensitive)
- Where are their field of backline operations
- Where are their field of frontline operations
- What things can players do to produce a desired outcome for their chosen faction
- What things can players do to produce a negative outcome for their opposing faction
Once the above are containerised they can start looking at the Why/How of how players interact with them. So for Sanshaâs for instance could be infiltrating an highly centralized nexus of operations for both Edencom, Triglavians or even perhaps the Drifters and allow some more meaningful player agency in exposition of the story.
Of course you donât want scope creep so keeping the objectives specific and geared towards the factions overarching goals should be central to all of the above.
Maybe start with a simple faction pair (like Amarr/Minmatar) at first to get a feel for how it would work with the more nuanced factions and boiler plate out from there.
Once the initial templating is done for each faction look at interaction points between other factions as they feed into the wider narrative for each.
Feel free to template, play around and take apart as you deem fit.
2 Likes
got my vote!
god if you get the fitting tool requirement removed i will literally be so happy
It seems I missed you
- What has CCP got correct?
- What has CCP got incorrect?
- What do you wish existed in-game that doesnât?
- What exists in-game that you wish didnât?
- What exists in-game that you think ought to continue to exist?
- What doesnât exist in-game that you hope never comes into existence?
- How would you improve PI?
- How would you improve the entire corporation UI?
@PixyWarrior_Ellecon
wider variety of Abyssal Module options would be of interest. [Although would Drake want to feed the MILINT fitting monster?]
I think though there should be a review of base modules and materials to fine tune them first, before setting out to allow for abyssal module modifications. This is just my perspective.
Once we get the house in order baseline wise. Then we can go to town on the abyssal module modification side.
I have a feeling, that eventually things like weapons, fitting modules, and passive tank options will be able to be abyssal module adjusted. I am not one hundred percent sold on the concept, but it appeals to me. (we have abyssal mutated dronesâŚits soon going to be either the weaponsâŚor the ammo itself soon enough.)
But, in all due honesty, abyssal module modifications feel like a bandaid on more serious issues with modules and fittings currently in game. And due to this there are some very broken or weird abyssal module combinations that I think CCP never really factored in.
But also in another direction of thinking the abyssal modifications do not go far enough to really shake things up. In some cases it completely entrenches very specific playstyles and concepts to the extreme.
Now I am not advocating that one should Abyssal Mutate a ship hull, which did throw alot of speculation during the initial opening of âUprisingâ with the âcombat explorers;â although that could be an interesting way to further modify and drive ship markets and contracts. (Maybe in the future)
@PixyWarrior_Ellecon CCP already has an abyssal mining disintigrator in the game which is attached to the Triglavian Resource Collection Nexus. Maybe, very big maybe. This item could be released for capsuleer usage on Triglavian shipsâŚbut with optimal function on the Triglavian Haulers. However, there is another option. The Triglavian Resource Collection Nexus is released directly to the Capsuleers to be used a deployable mining item. [Highly Unlikely but the ground work is already there.] Not as fast though as a boosted mining ship, but the Triglavian Abyssal Mining Disintegrator would have ramping collection cycles. Meaning much higher yields as it interacts with mining materials.
@Drake_Iddon maybe you should also argue for over gunned battleships as well while we are at it. If we are putting more extreme equipment on the block for goofing around with. On paper at Battleship can fit a capitols turrets and weapons.
And what is your perspective in expanding officer modules up and down classes? Especially with weapons and other equipment.
@Rhett Schouten you can review things if you like to. And ask questions elsewhere I am open to considering.
Their commitment to non-intervention outside of actual cheating and limited edge cases is a huge boon to eve, on a fundamental level it is what allows EVE to stand apart from any other sandbox game, its why the universe has such a rich and diverse history
CCPâs communication, both to players and within its own company is disgustingly poor, we see the end result time and time again where CCP puts its foot in its mouth and fucks something up on something so fundamental, we saw this in the evermarks system, the ship sales, and more recently the widom of gheinok booster that was sold for real money
allowing 50kMN and 10kMN prop modules on battleships
also holograms, skins, more customisation as a whole
I donât think the shuttle should have interdiction nullification, it allows for perfect information without any investment and has massively reduced demand for the fleet interceptors (except the malediction because its absolutely cracked) Give permanent interdiction nullification back to the fleet interceptors if they give the nullifier module.
Ganking, there are few candidates and alot of youtubers that decry ganking and are trying as hard as they can from getting it removed from the game, all they need to do is look at eve echoes to see what an awful idea that is, granting immunity from player intervention in hisec would absolutely cripple the economy in many areas
Gacha and P2W Mechanics, see EVE Serenity and Echoes, if people think this game is dead they should look over there good lord
two fixes in mind:
1: A single button to refresh the extractors, having to do each one individually is cancerous
2: building templates that you can use on any planet, having to set up PI piece by piece is soul draining
As my corp consists of me and 3 friends I dont really interact with the corp menu, however having to grant roles through the role and title management tabs is extremely clunky, a big QoL for large corps like training corps would be allowing multiselection;s on the member list letting you grant/remove roles from all of them with a single right click
(also transaction logs for LP ty ccp)
1 Like
and none of them have any impact on the game, the only bad abyssal issues the game has had was sieged titans and cloaking dreads that didnt use any nanite paste
this would serve no purpose, battleships do not get bonuses to capital guns, plus those guns without siege or titan bonuses are absolutely terrible
Iâm down for this tho for a few select items, prop mods for example
3 Likes
Thereâs kind of a pattern here, if you frame the first instance, CCPâs non intervention as Non-communication then the second instance, their failure to communicate internally, kind of makes sense. Really whatâs happening is that theyâre not communicating⌠at all⌠full stop⌠ever⌠with anyone⌠including themselves
This is a really unique answer that nobody has mentioned before. What are your thoughts on local chat as intel, pros and cons. is there a middle ground where the shuttle has an interdiction nullification cooldown?
I agree it breaks the first law which is that CCP does not intervene. The law of non-communication 
My personal opinion is that the current iteration of hi sec restrictions is about as healthy a compromise as youâre going to get. Punish not prevent.
Thanks for your reply I can heart you today as I have more hearts.
even if it has a cooldown, its a 0sp required ship that costs 10k isk with sub 2 align, it would remain the perfect intel tool that requires zero investment and there is no downside if you lose it
Local chat is an insanely powerful intel tool, pros are quite obvious you know the instant someone enters your system, you know exactly who they are and by extension you can look up what they fly and who they fly with, it is an uncounterable system
the cons happen to be the exact same as the pros, it is a near perfect, instant intel tool that is uncounterable (outside of ticker/alt tanking/awoxing)
yep agreed, if ganking gets too powerful or too prolific in an extreme case there is always the option of tweaking concord response times, but outright banning it in hisec would be absolutely catastrophic for this game
1 Like
I donât know you very well Drake Iddon. Pochoven is not my area of play. Iâm tempted to support you but Pochoven has been overrun by participants of the Tranquility consortium taking advantages of a Plebiscite ccp provided to them in farming drones for isk.
Will you ask CCP to retract that Plebiscite?
Will you also oppose RMT and Gambling operations being run off TOR and other means, Drake?
Youâll need to be a bit more specific, a plebiscite is a direct vote on what happens and CCP does not change pochven on the whim of its players
but I do agree with you that pochven is definitely too high on the krabbing side, direct isk injection of the OBS for example needs to be done away with in place of an LP/item/redloot system so that the risk doesnât end when the sites do
100000% yes, I want to have a good ongoing dialogue with team security to try and identify and understand where the failings with the (in my eyes) lack of effective enforcement over cheating and RMT happen, right now honestly there is next to zero repercussions for RMT
2 Likes
for those who missed it I was on the Meta Show with Mark and Stitch
I donât appreciate your potty mouth but I do appreciate your barbarian rage and desire to behead cheaters. For a game like Eve, that is really all about a player driven economy, cheating is above and beyond the biggest problem and always will be. In the history of Eve, RMT isk sellers were a massive problem until CCP smartly came out with the idea of PLEX, which no other MMORPGs at the time would dare consider. Turns out they were right.
But the problem is identifying a cheater without any false positives. Banning someone who isnât cheating but is just industrious, is bad. But cheaters cheat and lie and will say they are running 30 accounts with an elaborate setup of toothpicks, even if they only crafted the design for a âproofâ video before promptly taking it all down and returning to their scripts.
The solution to this is difficult, especially as AI makes it easier to integrate adaptive scripts. To solve these problems you would need to game theory this⌠and find ways to make gameplay where a single human is the most valuable element and bots are not easy to scale money printers. Player cooperation is probably the cornerstone of this detection⌠since you can script reactions to NPCs and game mechanics a lot easier than you can script a response to a strange and unpredictable player interaction, rivalry or friendship.
1 Like