The First Seven Sins of EVE

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

This world should be cruel and dark.
There shouldn’t never ever be safe place under no conditions.
But some things allow a player to feel the warm cover of invulnerability, to feel protected from the outer cruel world.
This things should be removed from EVE universe.

Summary

  1. Ship in logoff (no aggro) can’t be destroyed against will of player
  2. Cloaked on safe spot ship can’t be destroyed against will of player (almost)
  3. Capsuleer can’t be destroyed against will of player
  4. Gates can’t be destroyed
  5. NPC Stations can’t be destroyed
  6. CONCORD ships can’t be destroyed
  7. Not all player assets can’t be destroyed against his will

All this sins should be redeemed together. Some of them are dependent from each other.

Ship in logoff (no aggro) can’t be destroyed against will of player
Disappearing on logoff should be removed. A ship always stays in space. It may be unscannable using probes but always visible on direct-scan.

Cloaked on safe spot ship can’t be destroyed against will of player (almost)
This must be ended. Cloaked ship should be scannable. May it be difficult or time consuming but possible everywhere.

NPC Stations can’t be destroyed
No such restriction should exists. Lets price for killing Jita 4-4 CNAP will be “-10 from all caldari factions/corporations/agents for all pilots, corporations and alliances from killmail” but it should be possible.

Gates can’t be destroyed
Gates should be destructable and buildable of course. All of them. Price same as for station -10 from all factions in region and no bounty from CONCORD for a period.

Capsuleer can’t be destroyed against will of player
NO - to eternal life. If pilot dies and there is no spare clones - pilot dies forever. End of game.

CONCORD ships can’t be destroyed
Add sun super-cannon as “dead hand” mechanic or make punishment cruel enough, forbid using all NPC-services (market, clones, fitting and so on) for a period.
But they should die and left loot.

Not all player assets can’t be destroyed against his will
Asset safety - NO. NO in any size, shape or color.

2

Your post has a good structure. Nice work.

But

This sounds funny considering skill-injectors and alphas.

1 Like
3

:rofl:

3 Likes
4

This sounds funny considering skill-injectors and alphas.

make it not funny in any desirable way
ban such attackers from using skill extractors forever for example

5

Looks like restriction rather then mechanics. And it will not solve the problem when one infinitly creates alts/twinks and boost them with injectors (it’s not about extractor) then goes for stations/gates when he wants and so many times as he wants.

1 Like
6

Looks like restriction rather then mechanics.

Manufacturer have added identity check!!!

And it will not solve the problem when one infinitly creates alts/twinks and boost them with injectors (it’s not about extractor) then goes for stations/gates when he wants and so many times as he wants.

My solution is not perfect. It’s obvious. But the idea is “attacker should suffer in hi-sec space”. Low/Null/WH - no restrictions, you can blow up all what you want.

7

Wat.

Talk about easy intel on what systems to hellcamp supers/titans that log off. What about all the accounts with logged off titans/supers that were on POS sticks, will they suddenly appear in space? Granted you cant probe them down (assuming im reading that right), but it wouldnt be hard to place dictors/probe alts to scan them down on their eventual login.

The other issue is dscan clutter. Hundreds if not thousands of ship in each system just cluttering scans and making dscan near unusable, and also inducing server lag if enough people are in system dscanning, having to constantly refresh the location of all these logged off ships.

So, in short, no. What does this change solve? It creates more issues than whatever “sin” youre claiming it causes.

8

Talk about easy intel on what systems to hellcamp supers/titans that log off.

no more easy logoffsky

What about all the accounts with logged off titans/supers that were on POS sticks, will they suddenly appear in space? Granted you cant probe them down (assuming im reading that right), but it wouldnt be hard to place dictors/probe alts to scan them down on their eventual login.

they will die suner or later

The other issue is dscan clutter. Hundreds if not thousands of ship in each system just cluttering scans and making dscan near unusable, and also inducing server lag if enough people are in system dscanning, having to constantly refresh the location of all these logged off ships.

you right, logged off ships must be scanable by probes

What does this change solve? It creates more issues than whatever “sin” youre claiming it causes.

Not a change, but changes. It add more issues to the game. Isn’t it wonderful?

9

I get what you’re getting at, but I think one of your points is counter-productive to making eve a more violent and dangerous place.

If there’s the chance that getting podded means you’ll lose all your SP, then surely players with lots of SP will just become more risk averse? Would people still fleet up if there was a chance that they could use years of accumulated SP? Would FC’s want to be held accountable for that if they ■■■■ up? Would people even want to organise large scale conflicts if all their members who have been training for months to get into doctrine ships, could lose everything in a single battle?

I think you;d need to answer all those questions before that idea was even considered worthy of discussion.

1 Like
10

I think you;d need to answer all those questions before that idea was even considered worthy of discussion.

Don’t forget to check clones before undock! Like it was in Old Times.

11

People and their ideas

1 Like
12

The old clone mechanic didn’t offer anything. Certainly no risk/reward. The price of clones was easily affordable, and there was no reason why you would pick a clone that didn’t completely cover you.

If you make it so that clone costs were more prohibitive, all you’re doing is making fighting prohibitively expensive.

If you want to see more fighting in EVE, then building financial barriers measured against the risk of losing years of SP is not the way to do it.

1 Like
13

What I want is written in first post.
I’m not building financial barriers. Current clon cost is less than old upgrade to XXX grade.
What I really want: player should have chance to really die and not because he want to die but because it happens.

14

FFS… the crap you find on the forums. lol.

1 Like
15

hmm,
I found you here!

1 Like
16

What does it mean? O_o English is not your home language?

It’s not about this idea. It’s about useless of any sanctions toward attackers because the player can create dozens of new boosted by skill-injectors. And any restrictions even very extrime are not equal the damage being made by things you propose (NPC stantions and gates destroying).
And this is the corner stone of your conception which is actually absent.
So

doesn’t work and will not help.

1 Like
17

They used to be. CCP changed that one rather quickly.

That also used to be the case once. But you know how it is, with players constantly crying about how CCP dares to not protect them from their own stupidity.

The abuse if they were destructible… If you truly want this to be a botter and RMTer paradise game, implement this one.

I knew right away that you’d cry about that. So predictable.

1 Like
18

What does it mean? O_o English is not your home language?

of course not

dozens of new boosted by skill-injectors

first of all skill points will be spended,
let’s suppose they will be locked on this chars,
because according to new lore attackers will be cut from all empires services including any related to skill extraction/injection

And any restrictions even very extrime are not equal the damage being made by things you propose

they shouldn’t be equal, it is a new rule “nothing constant”
and enforcing of this rule by players shouldn’t be to easy

(I think it’s obvious that gates and and stations will be strong enough to withstand goons attack at least a week or two)

19

It’s hardest part where money and good game doesn’t coexists
With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 per cent. will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 per cent. certain will produce eagerness; 50 per cent., positive audacity; 100 per cent. will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 per cent., and there is not a crime at which it will scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged.

Don’t be an unimaginative hunker. You aren’t I know. If gates can be destoyed in system they can be build to system. If there is random wormholes than add controlled one to the game.

you couldn’t resist to counter-cry either.

1 Like
20

I can tell after reading that none of this is serious, but I’ll still join in on the fun of shooting it down.

Umm, no? So you’re basically asking people to literally live this game. If they log off for any reason they could be hunted and killed without even having the ability do defend themselves or call for help. This isn’t adding anything but free kills to the horribly lazy.

Veiled, cloaky camper tears. While I can agree something should be implemented to add counter play, being able to scan them down at will defeats the entire purpose of a cloak. Remember a cloak is primarily a defensive tool, and even after the release of covert it’s still defensive in nature. Everything needs a counter, but nothing so simple as just letting you scan down someone without any true effort on your behalf as if they’re some common sig in space.

Go play hardcore on diablo? I mean I’m not sure what you think this would bring other than a ton of people simply walking away from EVE to a more enjoyable game. There’s a reason why Diablo has a hardcore mode, and it’s not forced on ever player coming in. Very few people actually enjoy that style of game, even fewer in an MMO style game where everything you own can take years to accrue. Hell, CCP even did away with clones states and SP loss along side it because it was literally driving risk adverse behavior.

Aside from technical issues, I would see more use of this to create effectively null pockets that nobody can get into or out of unless the sov holder allows it. So it really just makes the game more safe.

Again, technical issues. I’m sure you’d want it to drop the items too since you don’t want item safety either. So, what do you think would happen if the server tried to generate the can(s) holding the trillions of assets held within that single station? or any station for that matter? There’s a reason they very quickly removed our ability to do this (aside from them initially not thinking anyone would want to or try).

Ya, and avoiding them is also a banable offense now so what’s the purpose here? The concord BB already have a 1 shot mechanic. It’s not like the days of old when you could actually tank them. Even then it didn’t exactly make space more dangerous, it was more like people would get bored and go farm concord for a while till they were overwhelmed.

It’s still an MMO. There has to be some amount of security that when you come back to the game after having to take any length of a break that your stuff wont simply be gone. That’s not exactly good for new/returning player retention. Again, adds nothing to the game. Just drives more people away.

2 Likes