Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Louella Dougans on 27 Feb 2012, 12:56
-
There's one of CCP's staff that puts out a lot of statistics.
Would it be useful, for there to be a regular issuing of some numbers about missions completed for various corporations ?
E.g. say, every month, CCP put out some numbers that said things like:
Amarr navy, 123456 missions completed, 123456 M isk spent in loyalty store
Ardishapur family, 1234 missions completed, 1234 M isk spent in loyalty store
Carthum Conglomerate, 12345 missions completed, 12345 M isk spent in loyalty store
would that be useful for RP ?
I feel it would be useful, as it is something concrete that many people can point at and say "Yes! I contributed to the glorious expansion of X!" and ofc, critics can say "Behold, the flailing Quafe Corporation, financially bankrupt as well as morally!" and similar.
would it be super cheap for CCP to do ? possibly even automated, on the wiki page or something ?
-
We could start by returning external viewing of other peoples' NPC standings.
Missions counts might be useful as well. Maybe a Navy NPC destroyed count for the 4 nations?
-
CCP Diagoras / John Turbefield takes requests. If we compile a list here, it's easy to just point him at the thread and ask. :)
-
With this system you could prove that someone who claims to be Quafe aligned is lying. I'm not sure if I like the idea. For many, running missions is not the greatest activity you can do in EVE and this kind of public data would force you to either stay away from loyalist RP or bore yourself endlessly with a mechanic that does not appeal to you. The old standings system at least required you to do the grind only once.
I do like the idea of having an indisputable loyalism apparatus in the game, I just wouldn't like it to be bundled with a certain kind of game mechanic (missions, mining, industry, combat).
-
With this system you could prove that someone who claims to be Quafe aligned is lying. I'm not sure if I like the idea. For many, running missions is not the greatest activity you can do in EVE and this kind of public data would force you to either stay away from loyalist RP or bore yourself endlessly with a mechanic that does not appeal to you. The old standings system at least required you to do the grind only once.
I do like the idea of having an indisputable loyalism apparatus in the game, I just wouldn't like it to be bundled with a certain kind of game mechanic (missions, mining, industry, combat).
I'm not understanding what you are saying here ?
I was thinking more along the lines of:
"Kador Region Economic Activity: Amount of trade increased 1% from last month. Kador Family remains most popular contractor for pilots. Amarr Constructions drops to third place"
And people can say "I contributed to these developments" while others can talk about other things.
-
I think that sort of info would be fun. I think making player standings with factions, corps, etc public again would be meh.
-
They'd have to be -very- careful with specifics because with the amount of repetitive missions being farmed it throws believability out the window very fast. That damsel has been rescued now about 100,000 times.
-
I'm not understanding what you are saying here ?
I was thinking more along the lines of:
"Kador Region Economic Activity: Amount of trade increased 1% from last month. Kador Family remains most popular contractor for pilots. Amarr Constructions drops to third place"
And people can say "I contributed to these developments" while others can talk about other things.
I was thinking something like the following discussion
Sarpati93 > "I'm a serpentis supporter. Serps are a successful power bloc in New Eden."
Statistics > "No serpentis missions have been run within last six months and there's no indication of economic activity around Serpentis prime."
But maybe no one would use the statistics like this. Can't deny that a few economic figures might be a good way to allow players to have influence on the game world.
-
I was thinking something like the following discussion
Sarpati93 > "I'm a serpentis supporter. Serps are a successful power bloc in New Eden."
Statistics > "No serpentis missions have been run within last six months and there's no indication of economic activity around Serpentis prime."
But maybe no one would use the statistics like this.
They would. I've seen it happen.
There was an occassion, after a lot of back and forth arguing on the IGS, where the suggestion was made that a highsec constellation in Sinq Laison was plagued by a greater threat from Serpentis piracy than lowsec Placid.
This was supported by NPC kill statistics from Dotlan which OOC was obviously just a reflection of hisec missioning close to one of the major trade hubs and contradicted both the canon / IC setting and in-pod realities of what's actually encountered on system gates and in asteroid belts in the two locations :roll:
-
Missions are a terrible way of gauging 'factional success'. While the losses for the navies are horrible on a daily basis, the losses for the (smaller) pirate factions wouldn't be embarassing but outright devastating. Statistics from Incursions and missions/complexes/anomalies would lead to horrible unusable numbers for RP purposes.
Standings, however, or the number of completed missions - one could at least pretend that not every mission involves frying 20-40 rats - would be more suitable.
-
We could start by returning external viewing of other peoples' NPC standings.
Seconded.
-
To clarify: I've never seen anyone use the NPC standings as a negative proof, i.e. "you aren't a...". I've only ever seen it used as positive proof, i.e. "I am a .... , see, look at my standings." I think most RPers understand that not everyone wants to grind up high standings with a given corp/faction, though if others have experienced it I understand your apprehension.
-
True loyalty has - almost - nothing to do with mission farming. Any NPC faction/corporation liking/disliking someone is just a proof that they actually like/dislike him/her, but not that he/she is devoted to that faction.
-
8.13 with Khanid Innovation, being my case in point :oops: (totally Morwen's fault)
-
True loyalty has - almost - nothing to do with mission farming. Any NPC faction/corporation liking/disliking someone is just a proof that they actually like/dislike him/her, but not that he/she is devoted to that faction.
Sure, Sure, but their is a tool for RP to play around... let me explain what I mean..
My idea would be, that we can choose five standings and add this five standings as public. This Standigs can be Faction standings or Corp standing; postiv or negativ. For example a RP how is proud that he has a -9,99 with the Republic can make it public plus 4 others.... even Agents if he like....
This five standings get updated ever 24 hour (doring downtime)... why just 24 hour?
Because I can already see, the Forums comments "WTF fix lag and dont add lags, this shitty RP... and their etc... CCP add them out because we as players had look to much on them, and this was a to much CPU for CCP for a feature which had for them (CCP) no value....
So if we had all change doing Downtime, we havent this problem. And more important: It isnt a issue were one group of players can easy be rush on another group. I know... It is just such a juicy move to get problems out the way, to be more precisely to send problems to the future.
The same counts for changes on this 5 Standigs every 24 hour (downtime). If you like to change one or all of this 5 stanings you can do this, but just every 24 hours.
-
popping in to chime in about public standings :
Even though I would love to show off some of my standings, ultimately I think the game is better without any public demonstration. I do think applications should include a field that can show a person's NPC standings (as some corps this is very important mechanically for), but otherwise I'm all for them remaining private. The intelligence they give away is way too valuable.
-
To clarify: I've never seen anyone use the NPC standings as a negative proof, i.e. "you aren't a...". I've only ever seen it used as positive proof, i.e. "I am a .... , see, look at my standings." I think most RPers understand that not everyone wants to grind up high standings with a given corp/faction, though if others have experienced it I understand your apprehension.
When the standings were public, they were used quite often as a negative proof in the summit, it was one of the standard ways to win an argument and be dismissive towards new players. Although times may have changed, it might still be occasionally tempting to appeal to canonical data resources to silence the opposition.
Building more content on top of missions and standings might not really be the ideal way to go, because they are more or less abandoned features right now. I'd rather like to see them evolve into some kind of loyalism package, together with the incursion mechanic.
It might be attracting for instance to be able to sign up as a supporter of any faction, institution, coalition or nonfaction group and earn ranks, benefits and public recognition with all kinds of gameplay, be it pve, pvp or isk.
-
8.13 with Khanid Innovation, being my case in point :oops: (totally Morwen's fault)
ilu2 Kalalalalalokitiri :cube:
-
popping in to chime in about public standings :
Even though I would love to show off some of my standings, ultimately I think the game is better without any public demonstration. I do think applications should include a field that can show a person's NPC standings (as some corps this is very important mechanically for), but otherwise I'm all for them remaining private. The intelligence they give away is way too valuable.
^ Seconded
-
popping in to chime in about public standings :
Even though I would love to show off some of my standings, ultimately I think the game is better without any public demonstration. I do think applications should include a field that can show a person's NPC standings (as some corps this is very important mechanically for), but otherwise I'm all for them remaining private. The intelligence they give away is way too valuable.
That why I think a Free to choose option should be in there... like in the certificates system... but keep the number limited and the timeframe of actualisation of the Stanting... plus a timelimit how often you can change this Standings how you like to show (like ever 24hour or 7 days etc....). Why? See here (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=3090.msg46308#msg46308).
-
I quite like the idea to be able to choose if some standings are to be public or not, much like decorations and stuff like that.
-
I like the idea of being able to show a set number of standings. One could play up the affiliations one was proud of (for good or ill), and mute the ones that don't make sense (e.g. Vieve's continuing high FIO standings -- oh, how I would love to see the introduction of a decay rate on NPC corp standards).
-
Not showing standings is okay, but the option to show certain standings off should be given, similar to certificates.
-
To clarify: I've never seen anyone use the NPC standings as a negative proof, i.e. "you aren't a...". I've only ever seen it used as positive proof, i.e. "I am a .... , see, look at my standings." I think most RPers understand that not everyone wants to grind up high standings with a given corp/faction, though if others have experienced it I understand your apprehension.
When the standings were public, they were used quite often as a negative proof in the summit, it was one of the standard ways to win an argument and be dismissive towards new players. Although times may have changed, it might still be occasionally tempting to appeal to canonical data resources to silence the opposition.
I don't see why calling out someone who claims to be a supporter of faction x but has a history of shooting at them at every opportunity should be a problem.
-
I don't see why calling out someone who claims to be a supporter of faction x but has a history of shooting at them at every opportunity should be a problem.
I have highlighted the important part of Bastian's post - which I think you missed - below:
When the standings were public, they were used quite often as a negative proof in the summit, it was one of the standard ways to win an argument and be dismissive towards new players. Although times may have changed, it might still be occasionally tempting to appeal to canonical data resources to silence the opposition.
When you start a new character, you are given pre-set faction standings towards a number of the major factions, including the pirate ones. I'm pretty sure this is what he's talking about.
Added to the inability to create complex characters from the outset - in this case, starter schools that don't match your character's race, lack of equivalent 'starter' corps for factions not among the Big Four, this used to be a very disheartening prospect for the new guy who wanted to make (for example) an Ammatar loyalist or a Caldari dissident who's working for the Guristas, because not only would his/her character start in an inappropriate rookie corporation, but they would have pre-set standings that were based on loyalties the player didn't get to have any say in.
-
Alright, so here's something else I've been thinking about, seeing as hw it get referenced so much in RP:
What about increased NPC traffic, both at stargates and stations, and being comprised of more than a couple of types of industrials or cruisers we see in "convoys" today?
To expand on this, what about "hidden" NPC stargates at scannable sites in lowsec? Rather than being a stargate you could transit, this would allow the user to hit up NPC convoys using these stargates for potential goods and/or shiny empire drops?
In either case, I'd suggest that a major revamp of Convoy AI, ship types available, and potential loot tables would be needed, as their current "fly away from a station at subwarp speeds until they drop off grid" behavior is obiously open to abuse. Similarly, while the ship types and loot we have now would be suitable for smaller convoys, I'd be interested in seeing larger convoys escorting freighters and/or advanced industrials with the potential of better/higher-value gear. Obviously these would have to be rarer to prevent significant devaluing of the good stuff...
-
When I was doing the RP industrialist thing it would have been nice to have market data from a single station, solar system or constellation and not just a region.
-
A voice here in favour of public standings. I liked them. I miss the information they gave. Without them I'm even less inclined to grind standing.
-
While I'd like public standings back, I'd like to see an overhaul first.
Certain factions still have positive and/or negative standings to one another where the reverse should be true, or they should be neutralised.
Also to help the NPE as Morwen was mentioning, the first gains toward any faction (up to somewhere between 1.0 and 2.0) should come from work through the faction's corporations. So if you run a few missions for x corp and you're 0.0 to both corp and faction, your first few missions will give you both faction and corporation standings (or a % of the corp standings as faction. So for every 1.0 gain there's a .1-.25 standing gain)
Whether or not that should come with a level of derivative standings (pro and con) I'm not sure. But it gives new players a foothold, by running one corporation they've unlocked themselves a few agents across the board and are able to quickly establish a character.
-
When you start a new character, you are given pre-set faction standings towards a number of the major factions, including the pirate ones. I'm pretty sure this is what he's talking about.
Added to the inability to create complex characters from the outset - in this case, starter schools that don't match your character's race, lack of equivalent 'starter' corps for factions not among the Big Four, this used to be a very disheartening prospect for the new guy who wanted to make (for example) an Ammatar loyalist or a Caldari dissident who's working for the Guristas, because not only would his/her character start in an inappropriate rookie corporation, but they would have pre-set standings that were based on loyalties the player didn't get to have any say in.
I don't see the problem here.
I don't think that you are 'supposed' to have a character with a background that spans years of actions in New Eden.
Everyone is equal when they start their career.
In EVE there is this great capacity in RP to actually have a history that consists of the choices of your character and very real actions that it has done within the sandbox of EVE.
In EVE the fact that all RP was very real, in the sense that it required you to actually to do something in game, was why I was interested in it.
Not because I could godmode a Mary Sue to a spaceship.
As a GM on PnP RPGs the kind of players that have spent ages making background stories for themselves where they explain all the choices that they have made in their previous life before the campaign starts have always annoyed me.
Not because of their personalities, or that I felt that it was a waste of time.
It was because they were playing by themselves instead of interacting with the world and the people inhabiting it.
The penny that dropped for me was that I think this is how CCP feels.
They created the world, the background story, it has been filled with other players and NPC entities.
They created the 'campaign' for the players to be in the 0.0
The lowest priority for CCP are the people that have the inclination to play by themselves.
Not in the 'campaign' or with the world.
Hence, very little background information.
EDIT: Had a penny drop.
-
In EVE there is this great capacity in RP to actually have a history that consists of the choices of your character and very real actions that it has done within the sandbox of EVE.
In EVE the fact that all RP was very real, in the sense that it required you to actually to do something in game, was why I was interested in it.
Not because I could godmode a Mary Sue to a spaceship.
So much this. One reason I love RP in EVE is that having an interesting history as a capsuleer is that its something you earn through months and years, not something you create overnight while staring at the character generator.
-
Then you get into simply awkward standings corners: how do you explain being blue to Cartel loyalists (Naraka. in my case, this was an alliance-level thing btw) while holding a -9.something Angel Cartel standing to someone who doesn't know how just how cheek-by-jowl Curse's main pipe is?
-
Then you get into simply awkward standings corners: how do you explain being blue to Cartel loyalists (Naraka. in my case, this was an alliance-level thing btw) while holding a -9.something Angel Cartel standing to someone who doesn't know how just how cheek-by-jowl Curse's main pipe is?
Simple.
You killed Angels. Lots and lots of Angels, obviously, to get that ranking.
Angel's leadership and VIPs are pragmatic (and ruthless) enough to not really care what you did in the past. They want profit, and they want capsuleer allies who will do the things they cant.
The rank and file? The average Angel Joe who might have lost friends, family and money to you in the past? They hate you, but their opinion doesnt really matter.