The Generic Bitch / Boast About CCP Changes Thread

[Nirgal]

To be honest, I think null would be more fun if the isk/resource gathering were mostly passive and players just needed to protect the isk generators from other players. Mining for instance, would more interesting if it was done by an anchorable mining structure. Make the mining structure drop a high value mining core, make the mining facilities show up on the map and you have a small gang objective. Instead of people zoning out to the sound of mining lasers, you form a defense fleet. If raiders overwhelm the defenders, it becomes a race to get the mining structures torn down before the attacking fleet gets to them.

[jimmychrist]

The problem with small gang objectives is that they're ridiculously easy to steamroll with a handful of supers or a large gang.

[jimmychrist]

Although the more passive income and isk generators part sounds interesting.

[Arkady Sadik]

The problem with small gang objectives is that they're ridiculously easy to steamroll with a handful of supers or a large gang.

Unless they are time-based and not dps-based. Then bringing a huge fleet doesn't give you such a big advantage anymore ...

[RansomList]

The problem with small gang objectives is that they're ridiculously easy to steamroll with a handful of supers or a large gang.

So, people can complete them with small gangs or with supers and blobs.

Thats no reason to avoid placing them in EVE, just a reason to not have them be the sole challenge and to have them setup in such a way that multiple small gangs are favoured rather than the singular ball of death full of supercaps

[Malcanis]

The problem with small gang objectives is that they're ridiculously easy to steamroll with a handful of supers or a large gang.

The problem with "small gang objectives" is that they mean that the large sov holders now have a real incentive to hotdrop/blob/faggotry those small gangs other than just "bored & lulz", because every small gang will be a threat. The idea that they'll suddenly stop being hot-dropping faggot blobbers because now they actually have something at stake is almost surreally unrealistic.

[Malcanis]

Unless they are time-based and not dps-based. Then bringing a huge fleet doesn't give you such a big advantage anymore ...

Because God knows, if there's one thing small gang PvPers ache to do, it's to sit around watching timers. Why that's the kind of gameplay that's made FW the runaway success it is!

[Dwergi]

I've been supporting things like small (100 m3) anchorable ISK printing machines for ages. Each one has, say, an hour-long cycle, is anchored at a planet and shows up on system overview. If the cycle completes, you get some amount of money (if certain space is meant to be valuable, then base it on truesec) that's equivalent to maybe 30 minutes of ratting. The modules themselves are relatively cheap (~couple of cycles) and only one can be anchored per planet and only one per solar system per person. So a solar system with 10 planets could have 10 modules owned by 10 different players in it.

If a hostile arrives, they can offline it with a 5 minute timer, which you can cancel at any time if you're within 5km of it. If the thing goes offline, the cycle doesn't complete and you get nothing and the enemy gang can pop the module trivially (like, 50 rounds for a cane). What I'd hope would happen is that people roam around a constellation reactivating their modules periodically. When a hostile gang arrives, they would deactivate all the modules and wait for the defenders' response. A massive fleet wouldn't really be helpful, because it'd still take just as long, and 5 minutes gives enough time for a pre-formed defense gang to scout out the location and make a decision about whether to engage. If no fight is forthcoming, you've denied individual enemy pilots a significant chunk of income.

Obviously, there's modifications that could be made - eg. if warping to every planet is tedious for a gang, you could instead centralize them and cap how many pilots can use the ISK Printing Hub simultaneously and charge every player ISK up front to use it. Cancelling still takes 5 minutes, but cancels the cycles of everyone using that hub at the same time. The hub could also give the gang that successfully deactivates it all the players' cycle activation ISK (a fraction of what the cycle would have produced, maybe 5mil per active cycle).

I'm sure there's some way to abuse this, but it seems like it would give more motivation to actually stay in PvP ships and form constellation-wide defense gangs that work together than just POSing up in your carebearing ship, because defending isn't worth the risk of losing your PvE ship.

[Grim]

Although the more passive income and isk generators part sounds interesting.

You own space, the space has planets, the planets have people. Logically the people should pay you isk, and if you don't defend them raiders will steal your tribute. Unfortunately this would only make isk for the corp/alliance. I would like to see CCP do something to encourage corps to give members dividends, but that would mean ratting tax needs to be a minor source of income so members get back more than they paid, kinda like a real corporation.

[Iratus]

The idea posted above, the "mining towers" seems good, but what would be the role of barges and exhumers then? Would it just make them a highsec only kind of thing?

Also... why not use the rorqual for that? Change it's "deployed" mode to an "anchored" one, where it becomes a structure.

[Nirgal]

Yeah, I'm not sure what you do about the various barges. One thought I had for the Rorqual was to give it a pretty obscene bonus to the mining towers, but only while it's on-grid and in siege mode. Maybe strengthen its tank and repping abilities so that it can perform a bit better as a defensive emplacement. Then every now and then the mining towers can poop out a can for the Rorqual to tractor in and compress.

[Rakshasa]

You own space, the space has planets, the planets have people. Logically the people should pay you isk, and if you don't defend them raiders will steal your tribute. Unfortunately this would only make isk for the corp/alliance. I would like to see CCP do something to encourage corps to give members dividends, but that would mean ratting tax needs to be a minor source of income so members get back more than they paid, kinda like a real corporation.

And there is a mission where you had to haul a cargo-hold full of 'planet-side currency' for a ransom or something. That money wasn't even worth using as toiletpaper for us capsuleers.

Don't really see what you'd use a freighter full of monopoly money.

[Combat Scrub]

One quick way to making Sov more desirable would be to limit placing posses to systems you have sov in (not including lowsec or npc 0.0). Much of sov 0.0 only works if sov is something you want to have, and want to have more of.

This is a... really bad idea.

Staging POS for an assault?
Stealth POS for whatever nefarious operations you can think of?

Boo.

[Malcanis]

This is a... really bad idea.

Staging POS for an assault?
Stealth POS for whatever nefarious operations you can think of?

Boo.

Sov holders already get an email announcing when any other entity anchors a POS in their space, but apparently that's not enough of an advantage, as expecting them to actually read warning mails is pretty unreasonable.

[Arkady Sadik]

Because God knows, if there's one thing small gang PvPers ache to do, it's to sit around watching timers. Why that's the kind of gameplay that's made FW the runaway success it is!

Actually, having participated in FW, those plex timers can be pretty awesome.

The proble with FW is not that plexes require time to complete. That's fine. The problem is that to "win a system", you have to run 30 randomly-spawned plexes, which is best done in a PvE-fit ship in a way so that the enemy hopefully doesn't even notice.

When we had actual fights about plexes (liberation of Siseide and Lantorn winter 2009, say), the timer stuff worked excellently to provide good fights with objectives.

In the end, it's just the same as shooting structures: There's a time limit until one side wins, and the other side need to stop them before that happens. With structures, the time depends entirely on the attackers dps, while with plexes, the time is fixed regardless of fleet size.

While time-based stuff can be done completely wrong as well, don't write it off as generally bad :-)

[Malcanis]

While time-based stuff can be done completely wrong as well, don't write it off as generally bad :-)

Fair point. I guess I'm still jumpy from enduring sov timers...

[Borza]

Fair point. I guess I'm still jumpy from enduring sov timers...

Long timers, bad. Short timers... possibly good.

[Arkady Sadik]

Fair point. I guess I'm still jumpy from enduring sov timers...

Understandably. Both FW and sov timers get some essential things wrong there (in addition to "too many timers").

The basic mechanic of "getting a fight" has roughly the stages challenge, scramble, engagement. Basically, the attackers march in on the battlefield and say "I challenge you to a fight!" (attack a structure, sit next to a capture point). The defenders then have "some time" to scramble together a defense fleet. Once they have one, there hopefully will be an engagement. If they do not engage, they lose "something".

You can balance the fleet sizes that will engage with the amount that is at stake and the time you give for scrambling.

The amount that is at stake primarily encourages attacking fleet sizes. E.g. "this thing will gain us the whole system" will encourage attackers to bring a huge fleet. Less grand objectives will attract smaller fleets (that's the reason why you rarely see 1k blobs hunt ratters - the potential gain is not exciting enough to attract so many people and make the cat herding worthwhile). On the other hand, it has to hurt the defender a bit, or he will just wait it out (one of the main FW problems).

The amount of time you give for scrambling is the main factor for the defense fleet. Defenders have the home advantage of (usually) being able to field bigger fleets, but they need time to form the fleet as the attack happened at a time not of their choosing. This is something FW did very right - if I see a minor plex going up in local, I know I have under 10 minutes to get together a frig/destroyer fleet to throw them out. Which gives an incentive to go in there with whatever you got after 5 minutes and hope it's enough. Giving longer will just increase the defender's blob size (a sov timer of 2-3 days is a very long "scramble time", hence the huge fleets).

FW gets this wrong because the goals you can achieve are limited to bragging rights, and because the "marching in and say 'I challenge you to a fight!'" 90% of the time happens without the defender knowing about it, which removes the whole point of it.

Structure shooting gets this wrong because it gets the scramble time wrong. Smaller fleets need longer to accomplish the goal, meaning the defender has more time to scramble a big fleet - a small fleet attacking should give less time to scramble, not more. It also encourages huge fleets because they get the objective done faster.

So if you want small-scale fights, you need to first identify something that's not earth-shattering to the defender, but still annoying; then pick a time you want to allow the defenders to react on; and then go with that. Ideas I've heard in the past are things such as "stealing the contents of the current moon miner silo", "downgrading the industry index to reduce ratting efficiency", even station services if they'd not require so much damage to take down, etc.

Just as a silly example, with numbers requiring more thought and adjustment: Moon miners and silos become structures independent of POSes, but also invincible. When you "hack" one with a codebreaker, a timer of 20 minutes starts, after which you can open the silo and take the contents with you. A roaming fleet comes to a system and starts doing this. Now the defenders have 20 minutes to set up a fleet - no 60 minutes of "x up x up" in the Supercoalition Intel Channel, they need a fleet, fast. They might even be able to get a smaller fleet in first to distract the attackers so the bigger fleet can slowly form in the background, or whatever other tactics they can come up with.

I think this would provide a lot more incentive to start small-scale fights.

Fake edit: *looks up* holy wall of text, that turned out longer than I thought it would ...

[Malcanis]

I like the "steal from moon miners" idea.

[tgr]

I like the "let's randomly tell people they can't take titan bridges, and instead tell them the person is either not in system or not in fleet".

up your fucking faggot arse, CCP.

[Aeon221]

http://www.kugutsumen.com/showthread...693#post232693

Repoastin' cuz I got a great response to it last time.

Timers work pretty well in Battlefield style games where you sit near a flag for a bit and it switches sides. I like the idea of initiating a "switch side" timer where you need to be there at the start to push butan, and you need to come back to receive bacon, but you don't have to be there in the middle. The attackers can tag a few and then go do something else (roam, piss on miners, log off and masturbate) while the timer runs for, say, half an hour. That gives the defenders time to form up a few gangs to protect the flags, and the attackers can pick one, hit it, kill the defenders or die trying, and then receive bacon (or not if they're dead).

Letting them tag multiple timers at once and not stick around helps with the issue of defenders just jumping all over the attacker with a horde (gotta spread out or teh bacons will be takens from one of the undefended sites), and also doesn't involve sitting around twiddling your dick and waiting for a long ass timer. Those are both good for gameplay.

Once a gang receives bacons from a flag, the flag goes into a 24hr cooldown, but flags that don't dump bacon can be hit again. Flags would be tied to stuff in the system -- maybe the indices, maybe giving a slight bonus to ratting income or some shit. Something with an effect that people care about, but nothing hugely important so that it's not mad lame. Only a couple per system, only in systems held by an 0.0 entity. Bacon could be anything -- some random loot, maybe some isk, even just LP with the pirate faction that hangs out in the area. Doesn't really matter so long as there's not a huge amount of it, and it's not totally fucking irritating to move. Figure the bacon isn't sufficient to reward more than 20 or so people -- a fleet doing it would get like 1isk each, but a small gang would do ok.

So, enough to encourage pvp by money grubbers in fast ships, but not enough to be worth doing with a blob.


Another rando idea. Maybe CCP could add in the ability to open an LP store (with the same kind of gear for every alliance) in player owned 0.0 stations. Doing specific stuff would earn you LP with the holding alliance. Takes up an office slot, costs money on the regular, in return your players can buy loot. Players can't hand out the LP, but players who do good things for the alliance (defending the bacon pumping flags, certain pve activities, working to raise the index) would get you some LP.

Neat way for CCP to use the inner jew-whore of all Eve players to reward team effort in alliances. Doubt it would work well, it's just a mind shit. Problem with Eve is that anything an enemy would do that you could reward a player for undoing, the player could exploit by doing it and then fixing it. So if you reward them for killing reds or repairing a pos, players will set up sock puppet corps to kill for farming the LP or shoot their own pos to rep it. It is our way.

Third idea is allowing corps/alliances to set a cash bounty (paid from corp/alliance wallet subsection set up for it) on reds/wts. Since it's player money it'd be policed better, and it'd offer an interesting tool for some corps. Doubt many would use it, but I can see where it'd be fun on occasion.

[Gyncognito]

Neat way for CCP to use the inner jew-whore of all Eve players to reward team effort in alliances.

Sov needs pay days that don't filter through some moon goo controlled by a select few people. So many RMT bitches start with bots and move to moon goo. Nobody is trying to solve that issue outside of 'give me more and them less.'

People rarely see an actual return for the time they invest in taking and holding. It's the difference between indirect and direct reward for behavior. It causes burn out. The only financial return pilots get for pvp is an option to invest even more time to try to re-coop the expenses they incurred in pvp. Even in fn Wow or WoT there's a direct return on each pvp kill/objective the player participates in.

Eve is pvp. You want more pvp in your eve? Take the bulk of your rewards outta the hands of the few and add direct incentives to participation in pvp.

[Faife]

Sov needs pay days that don't filter through some moon goo controlled by a select few people. So many RMT bitches start with bots and move to moon goo. Nobody is trying to solve that issue outside of 'give me more and them less.'

People rarely see an actual return for the time they invest in taking and holding. It's the difference between indirect and direct reward for behavior. It causes burn out. The only financial return pilots get for pvp is an option to invest even more time to try to re-coop the expenses they incurred in pvp. Even in fn Wow or WoT there's a direct return on each pvp kill/objective the player participates in.

Eve is pvp. You want more pvp in your eve? Take the bulk of your rewards outta the hands of the few and add direct incentives to participation in pvp.

there is the shares system, but that's kinda a joke. i tried to use it to collect money from alts, then give shares to my main to 'easily' move isk around between all my accounts, but long story short that doesn't work.

[Aeon221]

Sov needs pay days that don't filter through some moon goo controlled by a select few people. So many RMT bitches start with bots and move to moon goo. Nobody is trying to solve that issue outside of 'give me more and them less.'

People rarely see an actual return for the time they invest in taking and holding. It's the difference between indirect and direct reward for behavior. It causes burn out. The only financial return pilots get for pvp is an option to invest even more time to try to re-coop the expenses they incurred in pvp. Even in fn Wow or WoT there's a direct return on each pvp kill/objective the player participates in.

Eve is pvp. You want more pvp in your eve? Take the bulk of your rewards outta the hands of the few and add direct incentives to participation in pvp.

Yeah, but WoW has clearly marked foes. Eve doesn't.

Since the foes aren't marked, the reward system is easily gamed by players -- you get into ship, you get alt into ship in enemy alliance (t1 fit, t1 hull, insured), you blow it the fuck up repeatedly -- meaning bacon + insurance fraud.

That's why bacon dispensing pvp flags seemed like a good idea. They'd be harder to game, they'd involve something the enemy wants to defend, and they don't require hours of waiting or mindlessly shooting an inert structure. Just push butan, get fight, receive bacon.

That and the mining pos thing I was blabbing about before (basically a pos that sits on an asteroid belt but is small and kind of lame) would add more targets for people in small groups to shoot at and start fights.

[Grim]

Yeah, but WoW has clearly marked foes. Eve doesn't.

Since the foes aren't marked, the reward system is easily gamed by players -- you get into ship, you get alt into ship in enemy alliance (t1 fit, t1 hull, insured), you blow it the fuck up repeatedly -- meaning bacon + insurance fraud.

But what you gain from killing a ship would naturally be less than it cost to make the ship.

[Aeon221]

You'd get a faked KM that looks legit, insurance on the T1, maybe corp reimburse and definitely whatever the kill bacon is.

That's why it seems pretty problematic to tie rewards directly to ships -- other than rewards created by the dead player him or her self, like gear or ransom or something -- as opposed to activities that result in pvp.

So transfer works, but creation of new loot don't because it can be gamed.

[Duder123]

CCP will NEVER allow passive income on a wide scale for the Eve Community. I'm honestly surprised they did PI. CCP wants people in game and capable of being ganked. Anything you suggest that would detract from such goal is pointless waste of typing. They want people in their game not logging in once a week to push a button. I suspect they're itching for a reason to nerf tech and make Incursions the primary means of Alliance level income because it's an active form of wealth acquisition.

[Nirgal]

Honestly, what would be nice is some way that you could put your shit out there to be ganked and earn passive income while you're in a defense fleet instead of mindlessly clicking on red crosses for hours.

[Aeon221]

Honestly, what would be nice is some way that you could put your shit out there to be ganked and earn passive income while you're in a defense fleet instead of mindlessly clicking on red crosses for hours.

Other than the anchorable mini mining pos, I can't think of much you could do in this regard. But I agree. Passive income that can be ganked at point of generation -- unlike current industrial and research stuff, which can only be ganked at point of transfer -- would be much more interesting and fun than grinding NPCs or watching a ship derp de derp away at rocks.

Current moongoo production model is a good start conceptually, but something that a single player can set up, on a smaller scale, with less time intensive maintenance would be great.

[Nirgal]

Other than the anchorable mini mining pos, I can't think of much you could do in this regard. But I agree. Passive income that can be ganked at point of generation -- unlike current industrial and research stuff, which can only be ganked at point of transfer -- would be much more interesting and fun than grinding NPCs or watching a ship derp de derp away at rocks.

Current moongoo production model is a good start conceptually, but something that a single player can set up, on a smaller scale, with less time intensive maintenance would be great.

Exactly. Thanks for summing up my thoughts so eloquently.

[Internet Spaceships]

Off-center OCD raaaaaaage.

[Lordo]

Furthermore:






Yes t3 ships literally flying fucking backwards now.

[Faife]

Furthermore:






Yes t3 ships literally flying fucking backwards now.

apparently goes away if you clear the cache

*shrug* just repeating twitter

[Lordo]

Overview is fucked, i can't launch missiles, PI got (accidentally?) nerfed to hell, it's probably not as bad as deleting boot.ini but this is still pretty hilarious.

[jimmychrist]

They moved the session change timer to a dumber place. I didn't think it was even possible to find a dumber place. But CCP found a way.

Tenacity. Perseverance. Rampant incompetence. Deliver.

[Lordo]

*changes some ui code* *breaks literally every fucking thing they can* *is ccp*

[jimmychrist]

Also, MOTD text in channels. You'd think that's something they'd notice...

Well, as long as they only fuck up their own application. Boot.ini *shudder*

[Don Peyote]

Anyone else having issues with the client? I log in, click my character and it crashes about 1/2way through the load every time :V

[Faife]

Anyone else having issues with the client? I log in, click my character and it crashes about 1/2way through the load every time :V

are you in reverberation project?

[tgr]

Quickest client update yet:

Incursion 1.6 Client Update #1
Client Update #1 for Incursion 1.6 To be deployed on May 31, 2011
This client update fixes a number of issues introduced with EVE Online: Incursion 1.6. We strongly urge you to download and install this client update.

[Lordo]

Yeah there's some hilariously gigantic fucking exploits floating around from this. It looks like the meatgrinder won't happen tonight after all, because it will take ccp all night to fix this clusterfuck.

[Internet Spaceships]

To quote some ccp guys: "Bugs are coming on us like in starshiptroopers" cheer for Dev work !
players must understand that patch have bug and issue, but we must do it, its the evolution of technology.
If humanity were always following the "old school spirit", we were probably still live in shelters and hunt bison.

Don't read the official 1.6 patch notes/bug threads on eve-o, it'll break your brain.

[Don Peyote]

are you in reverberation project?

The :V and substitution of half with 1/2? Sorry, I was in a rush and kinda worried about why I can only log my alt and not my main due to some issues

[Faife]

The :V and substitution of half with 1/2? Sorry, I was in a rush and kinda worried about why I can only log my alt and not my main due to some issues

no, cause their logo is causing crashes.

[Don Peyote]

no, cause their logo is causing crashes.

Oh right, I'm not no

[Xystance]

In other news... TEST's alliance logo still hasn't appeared...


qq

[Don Peyote]

In other news... TEST's alliance logo still hasn't appeared...


qq

At least you can log in 6_6

I'm 20 hours from losing sub so if I overlap I demand compensation

[Checkbox Poll]

At least you can log in 6_6

I'm 20 hours from losing sub so if I overlap I demand compensation

good luck with that, i've had a petition escalated with "senior gms" for a week and still no response.

[Don Peyote]

good luck with that, i've had a petition escalated with "senior gms" for a week and still no response.

Tech support

I've never had to deal with them before but wow it's bad

[Dwergi]

They moved the session change timer to a dumber place. I didn't think it was even possible to find a dumber place. But CCP found a way.

Where's the session change timer? I was searching for it the entirety of yesterday's fleet, but had no idea where it had gone to.