Introducing The Winter Expansion - EVE Online: Lifeblood

(Sgt Ocker) #344

Seriously, did you NOT bother to read the description of the “new” highsec content.
The only resemblance it has to FW is that it is “faction” based - It is described as “Group” content.
The clue/key words (in case you missed them) Collaborative - Groups.

(Aareya) #345

The focus on categorizing and limiting a player’s input based upon security status of a zone in EVE is ludicrous. Yet, players on these forums do it over and over. Players in will have varying styles of playing the game. Mission runners play differently than suicide gankers. Players engaging in FW in low sec play differently than PL or Snuff Box.

There will not be a one-size-fits-all solution to make more appealing. When CCP announced that winter would have updates for PVE, focusing on empire zones and new players, I think players (at least myself) believed there would be a variety of new features. We are starting to hear about a few on the site. I hope there’s more to come. We don’t need 1 or 2 “Jesus features”. We need variety of new content and iteration.

(Jin'taan) #346

Can you elaborate on this at all? What iteration and new content were you, personally hoping for?

(Aareya) #347

Honestly, I think high sec and low sec should be tied together. It’s essentially empire space, territory owned by the NPC factions. Think about how sov null works under Dominion. Sov entities would own large swaths of space. In the core territory, there were defense fleets that would shoot down enemies. It was very secure to rat or mine or haul between stations. But in the outer regions, the “low sec” of the alliance’s sov, enemies could roam through unopposed. There were no defense fleets. Ratting and mining was riskier. If a hostile entity began to take their “low sec” systems and R64’s, the alliance would lose income.

A similar concept can exist for the NPC empire factions. If a faction is losing low sec territory, it could be felt by high sec. Maybe taxes increase, mission payouts are impacted. Maybe this spawns the idea of creating high sec missions that could impact your FW war zone (e.g. boosting structures, etc). From a story perspective, whether you are a solo player or group oriented player, you might have the opportunity to contribute to the success of your faction in a number of ways, appealing to a variety of play styles.

(DeMichael Crimson) #348

Either or, as long as it’s available to everyone with the option to engage in it solo or in a fleet with others.

The only reason I suggested the idea of having exploration based agents was due to someone earlier stating that Burner missions was new high sec content. However that content is only accessible by a specific level of player.

As for new solo content, I actually like the idea behind The Agency events, however I think it needs to be split up into 2 different level’s, one for Alpha Clones and one for Omega Clones. Also the rewards need to be buffed to make those events more special which would incite more player participation.

Also get rid of the task timer, just have completed tasks reset with downtime.

(Jin'taan) #349

The thing is there’s nothing stopping you bringing a friend in to help you kill a Burner if you can’t do it on your own. I guess I’m just struggling to understand why all content has to be able to be done by newer players, is there no benefit to having high end, challenging solo content to the point that it doesn’t count as content? Or is the fact that it’s only available at LvL 4 the problem? Would adding some stat-scaled down Lvl 3 versions be useful? Perhaps Corvette burners?

(Buoytender Bob) #350

Not a bad idea. Get your feet wet with an easier burner mission, gain experience on how to run them, and graduate to the level 4 burners.

(DeMichael Crimson) #351

I like that idea, have it scaled down for all agent levels which would then make that content available to all players.

Now I already mentioned adding new Exploration agents for new PvE content. However other than the Career Agents there’s no agent missions that also incorporate Manufacturing skills. Could also add new agents that Trade / Industrial characters can engage in.

Granted it’s not specific for high sec but it’s still new PvE content that can be done solo.

(DeMichael Crimson) #352

And as an after thought to negate ‘Cherry Picking’ of specific event tasks, each task would need to be completed at least once in order to complete the event.

(Buoytender Bob) #353

What I (and according to many in HS I have talked to) want is some sort of random mission generator that offers a variety of opponents, a variety of difficulty,and a variety of objectives (including exploration,hacking,building). Throw in some sort of randomness, don’t make it always the same. Don’t allow someone to always blitz or cookie cut fit a mission ship; do this by throwing in unknown opponents, time locked mission gates, a twist of some type. Many HS soloist love to take the time to full clear a mission, explore blowing up buildings to see if something drops, see what asteroids are available in the mission,etc. Those that want to blitz or always use the same ship are those people who are trying to max out their isk/tick, usually funding their PvP in lower sec by a safer alternative method. The people I talk with are looking for more options, not necessarily more isk. Many prefer solo, but if you introduced a way to introduced cooperative play that mimics part of the dynamics of solo play (yes, it is possible), most would be willing try it out. I suggested bringing back the old data chip fragments which used to drop as way to build a gated mission site; collect all the chips (3-5) either by yourself or with others and spawn the gate available only to the chip owners. These chips could also be sold or traded.

This thread, by itself, has offered many good ideas and, more importantly, opened the communication that appeared to many to be lacking. Let’s try to keep the spirit and this thread productively going forward.

(DeMichael Crimson) #354

On the topic of making things random, have all spawn triggers be random in missions and in exploration sites. Also remove ability to ‘Blitz’ exploration encounter sites by having the Faction Commander / Overseer NPC only spawn after all defending NPC’s have been destroyed. Also remove ability to ‘Cherry Pick’ Containers in Hacking sites by making Containers un-scanable. Now that would definitely make PvE content much more interesting.

(Jeremiah Saken) #355

and how many of players participated in roundtable were solo hisec players? It seems like nullsec players were asking for group content and they got one. Unless there will be seats for every aspects of the game at CSM nothing will change. For now most of them are nullsec players, elected by nullsec blocs, discussing nullsec matters.
You know why players “leveling their Raven” are leaving after one year? Because content is stale. There nothing wrong with leveling Raven nor should be. It’s how it should be in sandbox, people choose how to play with their sand. Most of players don’t want to combat pvp. Assuming that 90% of EvE populace should play that way is a dead end.

Still waiting for some details CCP, Jin can’t even give them because of your bloody NDA.

(Tipa Riot) #356

This is true, but the reason is that EvE is a sandbox PvP game, and other games are not. You simply can’t create a corp in highsec and happily go on raids all day … because of the PvP sandbox and especially wardecs.

Why do you think Incursion corps are not a thing in highsec? In highsec forming a non-PvP oriented corp is punished by the mechanics to the point where it’s not viable, unless you keep a very low profile and use alts for everything.

You promote group PvE content, but you do not recognize that in EvE this requires a PvP-capable group … and why should such a group live in highsec? If some denies that, it’s the ask for a different EvE with highsec being a safe from PvP zone. I do not want CCP going that route.

(Arrendis) #357

That’s a fair cop, I think, Jin’taan. In other MMOs, you can just go to a PvE server. The fact that there’s noplace in EVE where you can escape non-consensual PvP is going to be something of a sore-point for some players. I wonder, if 1.0 security systems were strict PvE zones… how empty would the rest of High-sec be?

(Yiole Gionglao) #358

On the topic of how do you know what highsec Pvers want/like:

Currently the approach is to set a stand with a large sign saying “SHY PEOPLE COME HERE” right in the middle of a Gay Pride Parade. Assuming that shy people even leave home those days, an assuming they know there will be a stand, they will be embarrassed to go to the parade, and if they go, they will not make themselves notorious by going to the stand. But oh, you will gather a lot of opinions about shy people.

What has worked for me, and probably would for CCP, is proactive engagement. Usually I would say in chat “if you need help with mining or missions just ask or convo me”. Just knowing that there was someoen who was not a nullsec PvP poking others like him about killmails, wars and the such, was enough for some people to break theirradio slilence.

What could CCP do? First, I suppose that they can tell players by their behavior -someone who only runs misisons, and never jumps to lowsec, and only activated a module on another players after being attacked, probably is a highsec PvEr. Mass mailing a poll to those accoutns could provide a framework on what do they like and why, and with that information, CCP coud venture into the more risky waters of asking what would they like to see. Another thing would be to set up simple prototypes with common MMO mechanics and just see which ones players use and repeat, and figure what does that mean. Another thing would be to make a open poll, but that would get a lot of noise from non-target players, that is what non-PvE players think about PvE -which would be just one step ahead of the current flawed system.

Another possibility would be to make personal interviews with selected targets (probably with a tangible reward for their time) in order to let the horse speak from its own mouth.

Or maybe, you know, CCP could just ask the noisemakers like me to get a fast and cheap input on why they’re flogged whenever they try to do anything for highsec.

“Why you beat me?” works wonders when people are legitimely angry and not just are saddistic mofos who enjoy abusing CCP.

All in all, the thing that really upsets me is not that CCP never gets highsec right, but that they never have asked directions no matter how lost and clueless they are. In a way I’ve been waiting for a massive poll about highsec and PvE like the ones they did for structures. Or just something else than “oh, fly a few thousand kilometers and have a coffee with your favourite dev if he even bothers to attend -or you know who you should talk to”.

(Tipa Riot) #359

I think I can compress the root cause like that … socializing in corps requires PvP-capabilities, but PvP in highsec is crippled to mostly no-fun for defenders, so there is no reason to not move to low/null/WH with always better rewards for those groups.

Everybody who wants to group for PvE and live in highsec, do want that in safety…

(Arrendis) #360

Or they’re gankers, or mercenaries, or wardec griefers, or just people who haven’t really figured out what they want from the game—and in some cases, haven’t figured out what options there are.

I started EVE three times before finally sticking around. It was more than two years from when I started this ‘successful’ go-round that I found the thing I really, really love doing in this game: flying and leading the logistics in large-scale combat. Before I went out to null, I did time in highsec. I did time in w-space. I did missions, I did mining, I did ratting. (Still do 'em all on alts, too.) It was fun, but it wasn’t anything special.

My point is that it’s not just the people who just want PvE… it’s also the people who don’t know what they want yet. And if what they’re offered out of the gate isn’t engaging enough to keep them… they’ll never find that niche they really love.

(Mina Sebiestar) #361

Catering to specific group of eve users won’t yield best results.

Eve missions in current form belong to recycle bin end are dead end.

I would like them to be scalable to the pilot skills gear type and amount involved.

So it is pilot choice to push missions to the max or to go steady or to ramp up with more ppl on grid.That way all the questions of wanting solo friend and whatever is up to pilot to decide not for you to loose sleep about.

Missions that are not tied up with agents example from game I played in past patrol you see NPC in system they ask you to be part of patrol they choose where to go missions AI determine spawns of NPC for you to dispatch or to just be part of action.something interactive dps ship is not requirement.

ALL ded sites need to be brought to 2017 year with updated rats, stats,behavior most of them are graveyard they can be more.

Incursions stale static need I say more.

What happened with drifter Incursions seriously what happened they looked like step up from sansha but they did not work anyone like i cant find the answer?

Miner fleets are good group content without Incentive and standing loss.

Is there anything CCP is considering successful on PVE front.?

How hard is it to expect that pve that is so old and static gonna carry large portion of player base forward.

I personally prefer group gameplay over solo but having vibrant PVE is a worthy goal no matter what or what not you like.

(Tipa Riot) #362

Just found this, relevant:

(Jin'taan) #363

Quite frankly if solo hisec players can’t turn up to an event dedicated to making them feel comfortable and talk about their actual area of expertise, I doubt you’re going to find any who can effectively serve on the CSM.

I’m all for trying to reach out to them, but allotting slots on the CSM for a community which is so abjectly anti-social seems a bit forced. Besides, how are you going to stop me, for example, using one of my hisec alts and running for the position?