Is it a restriction, though? Whenever they’re not dec’d, they could be working in the 0.5-0.7 as usual. But when someone wardecs them, they can pull back into the safer systems… and, importantly, the trade hubs (other than Rens and Hek) are safe from wardecs.
I mean, I get what you’re saying about ‘don’t add restrictions’, and I’m not sold on that system (or moving the L4 agents), just… is it really a restriction, or turning the current 0.8+ into a kind of panic room for when and if trouble comes knocking?
My proposal isn’t to restrict what people can do, but rather to use the granularity of the security level to open things up. PvE folks have systemss they can withdraw to, but still earn ISK. Wardec corps have systems where they can actually hunt (and be hunted) again.
This is the main gist of my (admittedly not fleshed out) idea. Under war, players can drop back, but have less ISK making opportunities in war free systems. This would even be the perfect time for them to try wh daytripping, abyssal sites etc. It then also means that for better hisec rewards players need to learn and understand the risks, but can do so from an area of safety.
Ed: The level IV mission move is just a carrot/stick suggestion. If it isn’t appropriate then some new abyssal style content could add the extra draw.
CCP and PA are faced with a simple business decision:
How do they retain paying customers that are leaving through current WD mechanics?
Customers are leaving because they feel that the costs to them, both time and RL money, is not being received back to them through gameplay. How do you offer more perceived value (or less cost) without fundamentally ruining the game for all the other players? By either reducing cost charged by CCP/game (HA!) or by adding something to their gameplay that adds significant value to the TOTAL return on their cost for those people leaving. Adding a non wardecable social corporation identity adds to perceived value, but then you cannot then remove value by reducing player options/assets that they already enjoy in a npc corporation. CCP could attempt to introduce better/more engaging PvE options, but they freely admit they don’t have the dev assets for that. Removing all wars in HS is an option, but now you then reduce the value of the game to people like Marmite and PIRAT.
As Arrendis said before, there is no magic bullet or one change that will be the ultimate solution to EVE’s current problem. However, any solution must answer the question asked by those players that are looking to leave of “am I getting my money’s worth playing EVE?” Removing their choices, restricting their gameplay, failing to add new and either profitable/entertaining {TO THEM!} gameplay, and making changes that take away just as much or even more than the perceived gain results in failure. Failure that results in the game eventually being lost to us all.
My suggestion doesn’t stop any player from doing anything they can do now, just provides an area where hisec players can always function. They can also function exactly as they do now in the wardec vulnerable systems, but at risk of war.
I was probably reacting most about the original suggestion of level 4 missions being in jeopardy during WD status.
Don’t agree with suggestion, but it is an option and far,far from the worse idea suggested in this thread.
I guess it would offer “life support” care for the corp; would that be of enough value to stay playing?
I think it’s a balance between risk and being able to farm l4’s, but it’s just a suggest as the carrot to accompany the stick. As you say there are no easy solutions to wars, so I think CCPneed to bite the bullet and actually redesign it completely.
Lvl 4 missions are hardly high isk income, and telling people that because there is a wardec on them they can’t make isk (which they need to compete with the wardeccers if they want to fight back) is a good way to get them logging off.
It’s great we all walked barefoot uphill both ways in the snow in our days, but the reality is that the people targetting them now have massively deeper pockets than we had to deal with.
Then use something new based around abyssal site mechanics maybe.
The core concept is to have an area of space where hisec folks can play irrespective of wardecs. They should also have some incentive to move lower (structures, moons, better ore etc should cover this to a degree). However, doing so, or hauling hub to hub should put you at risk of wars.
War mechanics would then be changed to introduce multiple possible victory conditions (mining x amount, running y missions, hauling z goods, killing targets etc), any combination of which can add up to an overall ‘win’.
What bollocks. Moving from an NPC to a Social Corporation shouldn’t create such an arbitrary limit on where a player can go. Why prevent a new player and their friends going to see the wreck of “Steve The Titan” or going to the “Eve Gate” ?
Sure, your proposal means players can undock in some areas, but they will be isolated from each other and suffer from the fact that to get from Amarr to Jita you must pass through at least one 0.5 system.
You can’t wall off parts of the game based on their security status. The root cause of player retention is they can’t do what they want to do in wartime. All your proposal does is move the walls from being the station, to a few systems in any direction.
A cage is still a cage, no matter how small ( security status limitation ) or how big ( no LS, HS, WH ) it is.
Loss of ISK generation? What loss is there for people in ventures mining veldspar, or running level 1 and 2 missions? You jus hurt the people who want to run level 3/4’s and dive them to dropping corp the same way people would under the oppressive conditions Proteus Onzo keeps spouting.
You’re missing the fact that the poor player retention is because some people don’t want to PvP with those doing the war declarations.
I think you bring up a lot of great points here. I find it amusing that we’re stuck on trying to find THE solution when it isn’t a one-hit fix all situation we have here. The issue includes and extends past wardecs.
I have a corp mate that went to last years Fan Fest where he got to chat with some devs and none of them had any idea how they could change or improve wardecs. CCP is ultimately going to do what they think is best, and not everyone here is going to agree with. I mean aren’t we all arm-chair game developers?
We can all beat each other on what we think to be right and bicker over nuances, but the honest truth is that the solution that CCP will end up using won’t be found in these forums, nor will it be found on reddit.
No system is walled off, even in wartime, but you need to understand and mitigate the risks for travelling. New players are likely to be mining in a venture/running level I and II missions which wouldn’t be affected. They can also test out WHs, DED sites etc even whilst under wardec.
They still have a place to play, and more importantly learn the game mechanics. Wars also still have a place in interdicting another corps actions.
There would be no impact on new players up to and including level IIIs, that’s the whole point. Level IV agents being moved was to encourage players into the lower hisec systems. This could be some other content if moving level IVs was considered to much.
The core principal is to create a system where newer players can still play whilst under wardec, wars can still have an impact, and corps can still function as intended.
I don’t want to be stopped from doing my level 3/4’s by pesky war declarations. I wouldn’t join a social corporation under such restrictions and I doubt many who play for the same reasons would either.
Hint, if your implementation sucks more than being in a NPC corporation, its flawed for addressing the problem at hand.
