Yes, I've played EVE. I left because it was completely one dimensional, and I see that same thing happening here: players are rushing to the lowest common denominator style of play. Maybe that's the game's fault, bu I think it's really our -the players'- fault. Too many people decided it was EVE on wheels, and rushed to establish the same status quo.

The problem I see in this thread is similarly one-dimensional: people love to say 'sandbox' and 'risk-taking' and 'challenge,' but they're really only talking about one thing: combat. And the majority of the time, it's combat on their terms only: angry kid wants to grief people.

This game has nothing that approaches real risk: lose a robot, so what? Here's another. Want a better one? No problem, just turn on the free money faucet. Corp lost a fight? Eh, nothing's changed anyway, we have a hundred more bots in the garage.

And now, into this environment, some very short-sighted people want to introduce choiceless PvP, claiming that it will introduce "risk-taking." Nonsense: the risk should be shouldered by the player who wants to attack, not by the player who chooses to harvest.

Now, certainly, any kind of progression should require a measure of challenge- if I don't want to face that challenge, that should be my choice. But if I want to move on to bigger and better things, then I should be prepared to pay the price.

But why do those risks have to be combat-related? The answer is that they don't, but a few single-minded people can't imagine anything else.

In other words, I want to see real risk-taking, and that's not introduced by allowing people to gank each other.

What if the money faucet went away, and you had to take assignments from other players or player-run corps? What if your ability to fight depended on your economic status? What if your corp had to pay rent to keep those hundred bots in the garage? What if losing an outpost meant you lost 30% of your credit line?

I want to see more challenges, more kinds of risk, greater complexity. I want to see economic warfare, and real diplomacy. If I want to spend all day mining titan ore without being bothered, I should be able to do so. But if I want to get the better ores and the higher tech, I'll need to find a way to meet the challenges: maybe spend more EP in combat extensions, and gear my bot differently, or join a corp that will keep attackers out of range, or hire mercenaries to farm kernels for me.

In short: real challenges and real risk will never come about from allowing players to gank people on alpha. Real challenges and real risk will only come about from introducing more depth in more non-combat areas.

So?

Why reinvent the wheel? If CCP has produced something that works, why not borrow from that and focus on introducing other innovations?

Perpetuum has a lot of potential; here's hoping it continues to grow.

"Perpetuum is a new sci-fi MMORPG that revolves around mankind struggling for power on the distant planet of Nia inhabited by robotic lifeforms.

Its main features are a persistent, unsharded game world, fully customizable mechs and robots with hundreds of equipment items, open-world PvP and missions, player-controlled economy, extensive crafting and industry, dynamically changing environment and much more."

Of course, but I don't think any of these ideas reduces the amount of combat- Wraithbane's idea of outpost defense against NPC attacks should actually increase it.

Similarly, if the benefits of owning an outpost were increased, I think there would be even more competition for them.

And finally, of course, continuing to introduce NPC bots with higher levels of tech will ensure more destruction.

This is a very good point, Other, and it needs to be kept in mind.

I think you could introduce some sinks without much trouble. For example, what if any corp that held an outpost had to pay tribute or rent to the mega-corp back home? Every week, they would need to send home X units of resources or tech; if they did not, the landlord would shut off the lights, or evict them.

Of course, to be fair, the benefits of owning an outpost should be increased as well - but those benefits must be tied to economic PvP: only a PvP corp could provide the resources, but only a PvEer could use them.

H.L. Mencken is credited with saying "Puritans are people who are haunted by the fear that someone, somewhere, is having fun."

Ever notice the similarity?

Exactly! There's no problem with corps hiring or recruiting dedicated industrialists- that's the idea. My point is that they should be necessary: not as alts, but either as highly specialized corp members, or as trade partners.

I really like this idea- there should be greater rewards (and greater costs) for holding outposts. More importantly, as you say, holding should require more than simple firepower.

What if there were unique nodes, say, like a geyser that produced unique chemicals or gasses, that produced one unit for every minute that someone held the outpost? Having it occur automatically would allow combat-focused players to spend their time doing what they wanted, rather than force them to mine.

Excellent ideas as well. The only problem I see right now is that the NPC attacks would have to be somewhat predicatble- it doesn't seem fair to ask a corp to defend when most of its members are asleep.

This is something that really hasn't been developed, and could easily be tied to the outpost system. Aren't we all supposed to be here for the purpose of exploiting resources? If that's the case, then shouldn't we be required to pay "rent" or "tribute" to the mega-corps back home? What if part of maintaining an outpost required a weekly tribute of resources to the mother companies? It doesn't matter how they were obtained- loot, harvested, or bought- so long as they are sent home on schedule. And if you can't make this week's rent? You're out of the outpost, or your credit line is closed down and you have a week's notice.

Expectations? You're off-topic (and off-language, it seems), but ok.

I expect, that if I stay on the alpha islands, I will be able to mine all day, all week, all year, without interruption so long as I stay away from NPCs and PvP islands. In other words, I expect Alpha islands to stay the same.

Now, if you wanted me to answer the actual question, I am satisfied with assignments and the placement of NPC spawns. There are other elements I would like added to PvE, but apparently Annihilator doesn't want anyone to mention that.

Wraith, you're right, of course, and game after game has demonstrated this. But you can't compete with a guy who gains five years of gaming 'expertise' in one night. Nor can you argue with someone who thinks that when you point out how wrong he is, you "own" yourself.

Besides, as I said before, what harm could possibly come from a little German guy wanting to impose his will on everyone?

But let's get back on topic:

Wraithbane, what ideas do you have about improving PvE for those who prefer it to PvP?

Other: I think you have some great ideas- let the PvE grind have more meaning by giving the grinders some exclusive resources or recipes. Then introduce an improved economic system that increases player interaction and competition, and let us go on to flesh it out.

Annihilator: "I" am not the one reducing PvE to mining and manufacturing- the game does that. The fact is that there's a threshold where characters who have the majority of their EP in gathering or industry cannot pass. At a certain level, the NPC bots are simply too tough for a character with only basic combat extensions.

Now, there's no question that additional NPC encounters would be a lot of fun for those who could handle them- namely, PvPers who weren't PvPing at the moment.

Lightcrye: Those actually sound like fun ideas, but they are also tailored to combat-oriented characters. Adding more "twitch" is great for the player who has the right build and extensions, but it would be just another aspect of the game that was unavailable to industry-oriented players.

Other: I agree with you that the economic aspects should be more important than they are now. First, we are supposedly on this planet for purposes of exploitation- so why aren't we sending resources back home? Also, if our sponsors are giant corporate conglomerations, wouldn't they take particular interest in our profitability?

Moreover, the economic/diplomatic aspect is really the only area where industrial types can compete, where they aren't excluded because they have the wrong extensions.

I'm sorry, but tough guy talk aside, you are contradicting yourself here. First you say that nothing should be "forced," but you end with "there HAS to be potential risk of dieing by the hand of players ALL THE TIME." It's not possible to have both.

The point is that some PvP players, and it sounds like you're one of them, feel that they should be able to attack anyone, anywhere. As many people have pointed out, this leads to greifing, and is generally not good for the game.

Moreover, your right to attack anyone at any time forces other players to PvP when they don't want to. If your answer to that is "fine, then they can go to another game," then you've given the devs the very answer they don't want. They are interested in how PvE could be improved, and your response is to tell them to turn it into PvP?