Reinforcement Zones PVP1/2

[admin]

2 minutes ago, rediii said:

 

In eve you make a lot of money in low and nullsec as far as I know. I dont know why its the other way around in naval action

In EVE you can make 1bln a day without in the highest security. The only main difference is that you cannot build or fly ships of the line in highec (ships of the line can only be built in low or null security). 

[Yngvarr]

What if we remove the reinforcement zones from the ports that are not regional capitals?

That way, a province with 4 ports only has 1 port with a reinforcement zone.

It would also make a bit more sense, as reinforcements are more likely to be stationed in the largest port.

 

I would suggest that this might or might not apply on the home region of a nation...this is something to be discussed.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Yngvarr

[z4ys]

6 minutes ago, admin said:

In EVE you can make 1bln a day without in the highest security. The only main difference is that you cannot build or fly ships of the line in highec (ships of the line can only be built in low or null security). 

give us reasons to leave carezones

[Yngvarr]

3 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

One port dont produce all the resources needed for building a ship.

One of the ideas behind safe zones is to give hope to the defeated nation of rebuilding itself.

that's why i said, may or may not apply to the home region.
If this does not apply to the home region, all ports of the home region keep their reinforcement zone

Also, there's this little thing called "smuggling"

Edited November 24, 2017 by Yngvarr

[victor]

17 minutes ago, admin said:

In EVE you can make 1bln a day without in the highest security. The only main difference is that you cannot build or fly ships of the line in highec (ships of the line can only be built in low or null security). 

So true, and even more: when you have the correct skills trained, just buy a properly PVE fitted marauder (with automatic loot deployable module in order to loot and salvage every wreck), do some high sec LVL 4 missions without screwing the triggers .... and you'll just see millions of ISK raining on you.

 

Edited November 24, 2017 by victor

[HachiRoku]

Bring pvp events back. If you sail a 15 man fleet around and attack something with less than half your br no rewards. Seems simple to me. I don't care if people abuse alts. I want more competitive pvp. 

[admin]

2 minutes ago, rediii said:

imagine the shitstorm

[victor]

3 minutes ago, admin said:

In eve online the SOLs - titans, dreadnaught and so on - are used only in 0.0 mega RvR engagements (or to siege structures), but are not actually needed in top tier missions (just for lvl 5 you'll need a carrier, but you can solo lvl 4 with ease in a battleship or marauder).

Let's suppose for a moment that in NA 1st and 2nd rate could be used ONLY in PB, but - on the other hand - rear solo admiral missions could be done in a properly fitted 3rd rate. I guess the community would not overreact to this scendario. After all even now in a Bucentaure - with good skills and proper fitting - you can do top tier missions with little problems.

Edited November 24, 2017 by victor

[Yngvarr]

2 minutes ago, victor said:

In eve online the SOLs - titans, dreadnaught and so on - are used only in 0.0 mega RvR engagements (or to siege structures), but are not actually needed in top tier missions (just for lvl 5 you'll need a carrier, but you can solo lvl 4 with ease in a battleship or marauder).

If in NA, let's say that 1st and 2nd rate could be used only in PB, but - on the other hand - rear solo admiral missions could be done in a 3rd rate, I guess the community would not overreact.

How does it make sense to have missions correspond with a class of ship the whole time, only to have that the top tier missions need to be done in a 3rd rate ship?

i mean, really? that's just removing content...

[victor]

Just now, Yngvarr said:

How does it make sense to have missions correspond with a class of ship the whole time, only to have that the top tier missions need to be done in a 3rd rate ship?

i mean, really? that's just removing content...

Not really, if being obliged to fight a 2nd rate in third rate pays off better enough for the risk you bear in comparison to sticking to "easy" 3rd rate missions.

Also PVE could include some skill vs reward benefit .

Sticking to EVE online, if I try to solo the bonus room of angel extravaganza (an infamous lvl 4 mission in EVE), I risk my ship but I get really good rewards!

Edited November 24, 2017 by victor

[Yngvarr]

1 minute ago, victor said:

Not really, if being obliged to fight a 2nd rate in third rate pays off better enough for the risk you bear in comparison to sticking to "easy" 3rd rate missions.

Also PVE could include some skill vs reward benefit.

Then you might just as wel bring back the option to go into low level missions with high level ships.
It might not bring me rewards, but at least i'll have fun blowing frigates out of the water in a lineship.

[Yngvarr]

7 minutes ago, rediii said:

It gives you faster more rewards with less risk actually I think

depends on how you juggle the multipliers, lets say, if you do a 4th rate battle:

in a 4th rate = 100% rewards

in a 5th rate = 150% rewards

in a 6th rate = 200% rewards

in a 3rd rate = 75 % rewards

in a 2nd rate = 50 % rewards

This is just a proof of concept, the numbers are variable.

This could be tweaked in a way that doing low level missions with high level ships is actually not efficient for gaining money or marks.

 

I think there should be room to allow people to blow up cutters with a line-ship, it'll just give little to no rewards.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Yngvarr

[Archaos]

1 hour ago, admin said:

In EVE you can make 1bln a day without in the highest security. The only main difference is that you cannot build or fly ships of the line in highec (ships of the line can only be built in low or null security). 

Please do not go down this route in NA, instead make it so that at higher ranks you do not get xp or rewards from fighting AI in safe zones, people still love blowing stuff up just for the fun of it without risk.

[Yngvarr]

10 minutes ago, Archaos said:

Please do not go down this route in NA, instead make it so that at higher ranks you do not get xp or rewards from fighting AI in safe zones, people still love blowing stuff up just for the fun of it without risk.

 

[Milkman van Swallows]

@admin @Ink Is there any plan for chaning/tweaking these reinforcement zones? I feel like a lot of ppl can be atleast temporarily pleased with the return of pvp events until all of this is figured out. Just something that will make pvp'ers and others encourage to converge to a zone preferably near a free/neutral town.

I hello kittying love this game, but everytime I try to make something happen(pvp wise) I die a little on the inside.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Lord Bomgordel

[Archaos]

1 hour ago, rediii said:

Lets see this from another point of view.

Imagine it as a new player, you get into a pve clan and live inside your safezone bubble. All the content of conquest and pvp doesnt get in your view so you leave the game unstatisfied becquse it offers no content for you.

Instead get could have a little encouragement doing something outside the safezone. You get into a huge battle or just a nice hunt, you escape or you get caught and just win the battle and feel a big joy to have won it and realize what NA can offer.

 

The difference between local safezone gameplay and "global" gameplay over the map with pvp and conquest is so much different and more. You experience much more content and get in contact with nice people you have fun with (and assholes)

Give carebears and new players the chance and let them experience the world ohtside the safezonebubble please.

 

I agree but it has to be by encouraging them to leave the safezone rather than throwing them out to the wolves. More would leave the game because they were seal clubbed than because they felt there was no content in the safezone.

[Hethwill]

Funny, the testing of missions to be chosen to be on enemy regions ( some time before ) was opposed a lot. Was probably the most interesting way of making players move out from capitals regions

Personally I'd keep the Safe Zones for now, seems like a interesting way to safekeep naval cadets, but remove reinforcements. As a balancer the National AI on those areas becomes aggressive. So in Swedish zone, swedish AI is agressive is enemy shipping passes in tag range and starts a chase.

[Bart Smith]

New nations have no reinforcements - join them if you looking for challenge!  There is always plenty gankers looking for easy targets in those waters to sunk...

[Archaos]

5 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

All I see are players in SOLs doing PvE in reinforcements. Reinforcements are supposed to give some buffer zone to rebuild, for newbies and rookies to start. SOLs do not really fit under these categories, they are just money making machines.

Yes you are correct, but why would anyone risk their SOL when all they want to do is grind up slots or earn combat marks, xp and drops, when they do not have to. 

If you get rid of the safe zones you bring back seal clubbing, now I know many enjoy that sort of PvP, but in reality it drives people from the game.

The solution has to be to not allow people gain xp, drops or combat marks after attaining a certain rank inside safe zones. That way you keep both sides happy, people who just want to have some fun killing AI for no rewards can have their fun and people who want to get rewards and xp have to choose to leave the safe zone and no one can complain about people making loads of money without risk.

[Pagan Pete]

1 hour ago, rediii said:

Lets see this from another point of view.

Imagine it as a new player, you get into a pve clan and live inside your safezone bubble. All the content of conquest and pvp doesnt get in your view so you leave the game unstatisfied becquse it offers no content for you.

Instead get could have a little encouragement doing something outside the safezone. You get into a huge battle or just a nice hunt, you escape or you get caught and just win the battle and feel a big joy to have won it and realize what NA can offer.

 

The difference between local safezone gameplay and "global" gameplay over the map with pvp and conquest is so much different and more. You experience much more content and get in contact with nice people you have fun with (and assholes)

Give carebears and new players the chance and let them experience the world ohtside the safezonebubble please.

 

I have said in the past, and its worth repeating;
Give new players "Insurance" So if they get nailed, they get say.. 3 insurance instances where the ship and cargo are paid for.

[Hethwill]

29 minutes ago, Pagan Pete said:

I have said in the past, and its worth repeating;
Give new players "Insurance" So if they get nailed, they get say.. 3 insurance instances where the ship and cargo are paid for.

Isn't that called Durabilities ?

Cargo insurance is another thing

[Hethwill]

Well, same as in ED. 100% insurance of the ship + extra insurance for equipment per piece.

Automated system versus keeping money on the side

Only difference is that you don't get the exact same ship back in NA.

In ED insurance works because basic ships are all equal. Equipment insurance is on the side but everyone has access to them, no drops, just shop.

[Archaos]

1 hour ago, Pagan Pete said:

I have said in the past, and its worth repeating;
Give new players "Insurance" So if they get nailed, they get say.. 3 insurance instances where the ship and cargo are paid for.

The problem is that if they remove safe zones then the new players will constantly get ganked and it does not matter if they have insurance or not or if you replace their ships for free, eventually they get disheartened by being defeated so many times that they give up. You have to make it a risk vs reward equation so people can decide if it is worth the risk.

I trade a lot in dangerous waters and I seldom even carry guns on my traders, if I get caught I know I will lose at least 1 trader, but I also know the chances of getting caught are low, so the risk vs reward makes it worth it as I know I will get away with it most times and when I do get caught my profits from previous runs more than makes up for it. If I knew I would get caught most times then I would stop trading. The same risk vs reward has got to apply to PvE and PvP in the game.

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, Archaos said:

The problem is that if they remove safe zones then the new players will constantly get ganked and it does not matter if they have insurance or not or if you replace their ships for free, eventually they get disheartened by being defeated so many times that they give up. You have to make it a risk vs reward equation so people can decide if it is worth the risk.

I trade a lot in dangerous waters and I seldom even carry guns on my traders, if I get caught I know I will lose at least 1 trader, but I also know the chances of getting caught are low, so the risk vs reward makes it worth it as I know I will get away with it most times and when I do get caught my profits from previous runs more than makes up for it. If I knew I would get caught most times then I would stop trading. The same risk vs reward has got to apply to PvE and PvP in the game.

Safe zones are at the detriment the the entire game. For every safe zone that's another restriction on freedom, another port locked away from PVP. A hit to the sandbox.

If we were to have a safezone, it should be in the main capital, nothing more. If you're a new player you don't need dozens of safezones all around the map to pull missions. The bubble doesn't need to be massive, there just needs to be a bubble.

[Archaos]

1 minute ago, Slim Jimmerson said:

Safe zones are at the detriment the the entire game. For every safe zone that's another restriction on freedom, another port locked away from PVP. A hit to the sandbox.

If we were to have a safezone, it should be in the main capital, nothing more. If you're a new player you don't need dozens of safezones all around the map to pull missions. The bubble doesn't need to be massive, there just needs to be a bubble.

What about the freedom for people to just do what they want without being ganked? The safe zones are only a small portion of the map, its just that people are so used to finding their PvP there that they cannot accept the change.

It always surprises me that there seem to be so many people who want PvP, yet all of them cannot seem to find it against each other and they want to be able to attack people that are not looking for PvP. I like a good PvP fight as much as the next person but I also enjoy sometimes just killing easy AI's without interruption. Thats the whole point of a sandbox, p[eople can do what they want.