More pew pew

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

Theres a few things that need to change in eve.

#1 Hi sec
#2 Low sec
#3 Null sec
#4 Alts
#5 Mission runners

Tweaking these things would bring pvp back to eve (null pvp is a joke)

#1
Lets start with Hi sec. Its infested with miners and there alts. I mean infested. You have 1 guy playing a orca and 5 - 15 miners at 1 time doing the work of a small corp all by himself. Hes also very very safe thanks to concord. Its disgusting and i know how to fix it (code is a joke )

1st thing that needs to be done is add 10x - 20x more ore and ice anomalies. 2nd thing is remove the current low sec system and convert the new ore and ice anomalies into low sec. Let the greedy alters go farm that. This way theres more risk vs reward and small pvp corps can always find targets also noobs can experiment with pvp without gate camping noobs. Also with all the death and destruction it would bring sales of ammo, drones, ships ect ect would go up and everyone from noobs to vets could make more cash.

#2
Low sec is a joke full of gate camping scrubs that mainly noob bash. Get past the gate and low sec is a hair scarier then Hi sec. Gate guns need to be over hauled to blap anything they shoot. Also there needs to be more profit in low sec so people actually use it. Maybe give it a system closer to null. Or use my anomaly idea.

#3 Null
Null has turned into a joke and a simi carebear environment. Why does 1 alliance need so so much land? Why is nobody taking land? Iā€™ll tell you why. Nobody wants to loose there pixel space boats. Alliance A can field 500 combat ships in the blink of an eye. Alliance B can also do that. Alliance C can field 5 - 15 combat ships in 30 min. A n B dont want to loose there pixel space boats so they bash C untill they quit.

Not cool

We know A n B want kills but they also dont want to loose there ships so C is fked. But what if we had a reason for A n B to fight? Bragging rights are not cutting it and nobody wants to see who the top dog is so pvp needs to be forced on them. I say make a alliance require kill mail to maintain there land. The more land you have then the more kills are needed. Also this would force A to fight B just to keep land and we know C is to small to pay A or B rent.

With all the death n carnage alliances will matter and size will matter also sales of ammo, ships , ect ect go up and everyone from 1 day accounts to 10 yr accounts can make is and the fighting is a little more balanced on skill not noob bashing or pure numbers.

#4

ALTS there as bad as bots. Now for you and me this is a game we may say ban alts but for CCP its a business its how they feed there kids and pay there car bill ect ect. So CCP wont stop there own income to balance the game. BUT they can mark alts so everyone knows that player is a alt ( local chat) and they can make concord go code on them. Pay a protection fee or be fair game in Hi sec. Iā€™m sure some lore can be generated to explain it. Also alts need to be handicapped so they are less efficient in all areas. Killing alts will generate more industry bussiness and remove some of the stagnation.

#5

Hi sec is a great idea but its ment to teach new players the game not generate mountains of isk in safty.

Lvl 3 and 4 missions need to appear on D scan and become low sec zones like the ore and ice anomalies mentioned earlier. Lvl 3 should be restricted by ship size and lvl 4 can be anything goes. Eve was not meant to be a solo game. Eve was not meant to be super duper oober safe.

Get more pvp in. Get the economy going. Get the bragging in and dont be a pussy

2

What a brilliant ideas never heard before.
You should run for CSM so i can vote for you.
CCP get this man a job and a raise.

1 Like
3

This wont fix anything.

All youll do is change Lowsec into nullsec, i.e. have rorquals mine and supers protect them.

And what makes you think that fixing lowsec into being more lucrative, wont change it into nullsec-like carebear environment?

We just saw a huge war last year where A and B went to war and lost tons and tons of isk/ships.

And how do you decide who is the main and who are alts? If you have more than 1 account, are all chars flagged as alts? This would make marking alts, completely useless, because everyone would be marked in local.

Alts die all the time, but how would you make them less efficient, and how are you going to mark which one is a main and which are alts?

Also, what about people who wants multiple accounts that do different things? If you have a single mining alt, and your main is combat, which one gets nerfed, and why would it be fair for someone who uses a VPN to separate their accounts? How is CCP supposed to even confirm what accounts are your alts?

This is possibly the only part i have no objections to.

4

This Topic has been moved to Player Features and Ideas Discussion

5

The lack of control. Same reason NPC Null hasnā€™t turned into that sort of area.
Lack of bubbles, NPC stations, lack of bombs, makes for a totally different engagement and control profile.

High Sec players do not generate mountains of isk in safety. Go read the MER. Isk is made in Null, not in High.
Ignorance is no excuse for this sort of claim, and simply kills your entire proposal since itā€™s started from a flawed concept.

6

I was unaware you could have supers in Hi Sec or low sec.

As far as alts go theres a easy fix. Make a new account type say beta. Also have the player choose what is main and what is a alt. And the handicap would be a 75% cut to its efficiency in everything. Alts are for lending a hand not replacing players.

And your comment about alliance A and B having a huge war LAST YEAR prooves my point. More ships need to die on a regular basis. Id rather see null controlled by 500 alliences that are locked in combat then 5 siming.

For the current Low sec system. Making it more profitable would mean more traffic and that would mean more death. Low n null have different uses and rules. But as it stands now low is very rarely used for anything other then a quick short cut and gate camping. It needs more traffic or it will stay useless.

7

And just because you are not capable of making a mountain of isk in hi sec doesnā€™t mean others canā€™t. I can pull 1b isk a week playing 3 hrs a day in hi sec with lvl 2 - 3 skills. I know i can because i have

8

Yes yes, very nice. So you can make 50 mil / hour.
See I can do maths.

Null makes far more than that.

9

I donā€™t think you understand what this topic is about. Its not a epeen contest. The topic is about the lack of pvp and ways to fix it

10

Oh I got that.
The problem is that you have started from a flawed perspective on what is causing the issues, you are attempting to blame highsec for things which it simply isnā€™t responsible for, and therefore you are coming out with a badly flawed set of ideas for how to ā€˜fixā€™ the problems which donā€™t actually exist.

11

No i pointed to hi, low, null just because you focus on hi and ignore low, null and alts doesnā€™t mean i only focused on hi

12

Then stop nerfing missions and instead advocate for the complete removal of Titans, Supers and Rorqs. That will everything.

Have you looked at null sec? Mining in high sec is completely irrelevant and minuscule to the Rorq swarms in Null sec.

No, it is not. It is meant as an area of space where you can do your thing without having to be part of the dumpster fire that you want to see, aka be part of a big blob that suffocates any content by their sheer numbers. What you want is to force more people into these blobs so that they can do their thing, which is nothing but absolutely undesirable.

There is lots of profit in low sec. Missions pay better, there is better ore available, moons have better minerals, there are better anoms and exploration sites than in high sec. Why does almost no one use it? Because it is hard to defend and cumbersome to use. And you want to introduce that to high sec.

Yet EVE thrived the most when more focus was put on solo over more forced group play, ie. until a couple of years ago. Since then and since CCP started to bring this stupid social stuff more into play, EVE population has started to dwindle.

That will never happen. Reason: People have to make the ISK to own the ships that you want to see destroyed and have to create the materials to build the ships that you want to see destroyed. That necessitates a certain amount of ā€œsecureā€ space to do activities that generate the necessary amount of ISK and minerals. Holding that space and being able to defend it requires a certain amount of people, which in turn means that smaller groups just seek the help of bigger groups and merge into these over time. What you want is a dumpster fire but no one wants a dumpster fire all the time every day around the clock because it is tedious, unproductive, not fun and just frustrating.

13

No just no.

Missions donā€™t need nerfs they need player deaths. You can buy 1 battleship pimp it out and run missions until eve shuts down. High reward NO RISK. O god you have to stop n buy ammo here n there.

Again someone is going off topic with isk per hr hi vs null (still ignoring low) null can have a fleet of 1k rorqs n titans. Its the responsibility of other null corps to kill them. Nobody wants to pvp so it wont happen and thats my point. Yes iv seen null mining fleets and folks ratting in carriers iv done the null thing for yrs. WH space is the only place i lack experience.

Eve cant thrive as a solo player game. People are just replacing other people with alts

14

Few question for #3 Null, you mentioned:

So, how would you quantify the ā€˜amountā€™; 1) by number of kills; or 2) by the value of each kill multiplied by the number of kills?

And what would prevent power blocks to meta; alike creating alphas (which they already use as spies sometimes) in opponent alliances/corps and kill them to increase the number of kills in particular opponent region?

15

Low reward.
You keep having this delusion that Missions are high income, they arenā€™t.
Also, not no risk. If you pimp your ship out it becomes a gank target. Which is risk.

2 Likes
16

Yes, you can do that, if you pay attention. It is very easy to farm these BS if you know how to bait them, and people die all the time in burners and other missions to users and NPC alike. Look at your killboard. :slight_smile: And no risk? Look at your own killboard. :rofl:

Please read my post again and then delete this section. Otherwise you are inappropriately misrepresenting my post.

I am farming Delve kills on a daily basis. Maybe you should come down there and help farming? Though, judging by your killboard I wonder if you could be of any help. All you can do is die in missions, kill Ventures in high sec, die in null sec in barges to roamers (funny, isnā€™t it).

I know people who use alts and other actual people to advance their dreams in EVE. Your perspective is very onesided. On the other hand: Orca swarms and Rorq swarms are a very concerning thing. You can remove that concern by simply limiting how many of these ships can be near an asteroid field. Limit Rorqs to 1 around 1000 km of an asteroid and you create potential for more of this without impacting people who use alts in a far less extreme manner.

17

Thatā€™s not a good mechanic to limit things.
What you need to actually do is generate a mechanic which requires attention so it canā€™t be easily multiboxed, without making a mechanic that is tedious to do for long periods of time.

18

Since supers can be multiboxed by bots just fine, I do not agree with that statement at all. Limiting Rorqs to 1 per belt is just fine because it enforces the role the Rorq is supposed to have: the ultimate mining booster on field. It is not meant to be the ultimate mining ship on field, which is currently the case, even after 5+ nerfs to the ship. You can have this booster on field and even return its mining yield to the first iteration after the changes to make it desirable to have on field. But the actual bulk of the mining process should come from barges and exhumers.

Active fighter-like mining is not going to change that at all. You can just put your fighter-like mining drones on a roid and have them nibble away, switch to the next Rorq and do the same. And everyone knows how tedious it is to manage fighters.

19

Arbitrary limits simply cause bad gameplay. Itā€™s that simple. If you want to cause people to quit, thatā€™s a great way to do it,

20

That will never happen. Reason: People have to make the ISK to own the ships that you want to see destroyed and have to create the materials to build the ships that you want to see destroyed. That necessitates a certain amount of ā€œsecureā€ space to do activities that generate the necessary amount of ISK and minerals. Holding that space and being able to defend it requires a certain amount of people,

Maybe you missed it. Iv done the null thing b4. Own 50 systems use 2. The rest sit there unused if there unused then there NOT ā€œsecure space used to generate iskā€

Also Iā€™m not looking for blob wars im trying to remove them for more small scale battles. Hell ill be happy with any battle. If simming is your thing then power to you but simming is 100% pointless with out pvp.

Pvp is pointless with out simming. Circle of life thing. You may think pvp is ā€œtedious, unproductive, not fun and just frustrating.ā€
But what you do is ā€œtedious, unproductive, not fun and just frustrating.ā€ Without pvp