Mechanics behind player controlled systems.

** I wrote this BEFORE the news about the change in the Sov mechanics was released…**

So here is a discussion dissection of the skills/ideas I wrote about in the fictional piece from yesterday in response to CK’s challenge here:

This part 2

Incremental is the way to go about it, in my opinion, no one approaches things like CCP does, not to say there have not been missteps, but I would say that changes they have become much less frequent and much smaller in terms of impact. My taking steps that are small but determined, the user trusts that CCP does not want to screw up their whole style of gameplay…but rather enhance it.

This is designed to be open ended idea so that additional items can be added on.  Due to some needed changes (sovereignty as it exists now is abysmal) as POS bashing is just plain boring.  Is it fun to fly in a large fleet and coordinate movement ( I think so) but, the whole “lets shoot thins thing, then come back at some idiotic time and do it all over again” is repetitive and rather boring.

I like the majesty of large fleets all rumbling towards something, and engaging fights can happen, but in largely contested space having to kill 20 or so of these is idiotic in the extreme.  Move the Sov mechanic from the Moons to the planets ( there are less of them, so quicker changes can happen, and give them strategic value, so if they are lost it hurts the enemy)

The following skills would be added:

  • Planetary Liaison
  • System Liaison
  • Regional Liaison
  • Military Liaison ( for military bonuses to ships)
  • Industry Liaison ( for Industry bonuses related to production)
  • Planetary Probe launcher
  • Planetary Exploration

several bonuses were listed:

  • Build time bonus
  • Armor bonus
  • Weaponry Optimal Range

New Modules:

  • Planetary Probe Launcher
  • Planetary Probe

Let us at a high level, talk about my proposal.

The Merit’s :

I like the idea of maintaining Planetary control and gaining some bonus from it. Bonuses to things that indirectly affect players  in PvP, by giving more benefits to ships being produced in different areas with different bonuses also leads to PvP’ers more interested in where ships come from/what bonuses they have etc…

I would also like Sovereignty being linked to planets rather than to POS’s so this makes planets not only important from a sovereignty standpoint but also from a tactical benefit as well. Ever been to 49-U6U there must be 50 moons there which makes POS spamming the only way to gain sovereignty…that whole POS spamming BS must stop.  Like it or hate it there are some major problems with it.

It is scalable.  Starting with a small number of skills primarily for the industry builder ( which MUST be helped if we are ever to see prices fall and quantities of ships rise) allows branching of different skill sets, and different bonus’s as well.

Adding one new module Planetary Prob Launcher, and using the existing probe system to allow us to scan planets would not be terribly difficult plus it would get people using a mechanic they might not otherwise know. Adding the planetary exploration skill would allow results to come back faster and allow more efficient use of the module.

Planets could change in dynamics..i.e. rebellion on world 1 limits bonuses, or increases bonuses…happier population could be more efficient, conscripted labor could allow for faster building but sloppier work…however that would/could morph.

The Benefits:

An increase in understanding of where ships come from and why they are important…and a decrease in the outright hatred some have for industry people.

Better base stats on ships built in different areas…adds some additional variability within different ships that are produced.

Makes planets something more than just a place to warp to…right now the attitude is who cares about the planet…that’s right…. abso-frigging-lutely no one at all cares not a rats-ass about planets.  Big planet goes poof as part of Apocrypha…everyone went to see the remnants only because the space had changed…a big inflatable bunny could have been launched and people would have gone to see that change. Anything that affects the environment people seem drawn to. Make the change a dynamic part of the game.  Within a well defined idea…i.e. sandbox type game.

This moves production from major trade hubs to distant areas where better bonuses could be had. This type of change also alters dynamics in terms of logistics and opens up new markets based on valuable locations.

The Difficulties:

De-linking Sovereignty has many many perils the LEAST of which is that those who have Cyno jammers and Capital systems gain a much increased risk to assets.  Look what Happened to BoB (kenzoku) for a good example of what happens when you lose all your Sovereignty in 1 day.  This makes it difficult for small alliances ( who do not hold space at the moment) to get ramped up…so as compromise, let Low sec space be changed to allow people to hold some sort of sudo-sovereignty that gains them a  benefit, but has a lower barrier of entry

“balancing ships” becomes much more difficult with an increase in the number of variables.  Admittedly this would not be popular for people who would see some change as a decrease in their effectiveness.  i.e. “nerfed”. This makes it critical that each raced be balanced(normalized) as effectively as possible.  Otherwise a tiny  disparity between the races will be magnified 10 fold.

All in all, the idea still holds some merit.

If all we are to become is galatic school bus drivers “ferrying combatants around” I will be sorely upset.  Lets hope some of the great ideas others have expressed, in addition to my own are brought about.

~ by Manasiv5 on August 18, 2009.

3 Responses to “Mechanics behind player controlled systems.”

  1. Hey Manasi,

    I've added your blog to a list of EVE players blogs on my own blog, I was wondering if I could have your in-game main character name (And possibly alt names). I'd also like to be able to contact you through an instant messaging program my email address is also my id for GTalk, MSN, AIM and ICQ. and my twitter account is th3elitist.

    Hope to here from you soon (Through IM or Email).

    Regards, Xeross/TheElitist

  2. Good idea to switch Sovereignty away from Moons to Planets. In my proposal I suggested Planetary Control Towers should add much more to Sovereignty, but kept counting moon CTs. But to create additional focus on the planets and do away with the tower spamming in certain systems, I agree, making the planets key to Sovereignty makes much more sense.

    I also suggested in my proposal to provide bonuses for manufactered items related to planets (i.e. using special planetary resources). This too creates more incentive for planetary exploration/control, will make some planets more valuable than others, and extends another interesting facet to Eve Industry.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: