Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
I do not live in my mother's basement.
I am fortunate enough to have full time employment as a fairly successful Solution Architect for a Global consulting firm. I play from a custom built home office and hotels all over the United States. My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. Eve has woven itself in as an on-again, off-again diversion where for the last three years I can apply business acumen and some custom tools to build an industrial marketer and manufacturer.
Eve is a fun low pressure environment where I make the conscious choice to forgo combat and low sec rewards to maintain the low stress nature of this pursuit.
Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment.
I petition CCP to consider the policy and natural violations that the inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural Consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'hulkageddon' - or at least limit them to the low- and null-sec systems where they belong.
Recognizing the Violations of CCP Policy
An external competition like hulkageddon depends upon players allying and indeed competing to determine which player is most willing to ignore the disincentives engineered into the game which protect players who participate in high security systems. Indeed the competition organizers have created systematic logs denoting and ridiculing the expressions of distress or outrage by affected players:
Quote:" The same cannot be said for the 5000 poor fools that have been deshipped in the first half of this yearGÇÖs Hulkageddon, with over a trillion isk in damages done so far. This hulkageddon has exceeded our wildest expectations. I am so very proud of all our great competitors, and remember the race for the gold is not yet over!" - http://hulkageddon5.machine9.net/?p=96
Yet CCP has denoted conduct such as this which determines to interfere with the operation of the system and the enjoyment of other players as verboten through at least two provisions.
Quote:"Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. " -http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp
The terms of service at http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp specifically forbids role playing that interferes with others enjoyment of the game as well as forbidding conduct which disallows others to enjoy the game.
By organizing large scale operations to eliminate players engaging in high sec mining operations, and entire sector of game play is disrupted. By CCP's own statistics, thousands of players have already been affected in this way to date.
Quote:"A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account." -http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336
In the Knowledge Base published by CCP, as well, we find a definition of griefing and its specific prohibition of players deriving a significant portion of their time to game tactics that derive their enjoyment through the harassment of other players ourside of genuine pvp conflict such as corporation wars.
Recognizing Inaction as Counter to Real Life Analogs
One of the other clear guides CCP has applied to player conduct is the consideration of the real life treatment of the analog of the player conduct in a real society.
Were a real life band to conspire to affect markets by systematically attacking mining operations, there is ample precedent to recognize that governments and international organizations would act.
The grounds to do so are numerous.
- Systematic attacks on the unarmed
- Collusion to manipulate market dynamics
- Collusion to destroy an entire class of entity
We would see concerted action on multiple fronts from the US, the EU, and the UN. Antitrust hearings. Courts and tribunals. Resolutions and committees.
CCPs response in the role of the international arbitration? Absent.
A Simple Response
I would suggest the response is simple and two pronged.
- Concord notices the drop in the markets and in order to ensure the supposed stability of the universe, have placed a couple of concord ships resident in high sec asteroid belts only in addition to their current locations.
- CCP begins warning and taking action against blatant high sec offenders.
Anecdotal evidence has already started to surface of player discontent with allowing these actions to remain unpunished and indeed unrestrained. I question how long CCP will wait to allow bands of players to flagrantly collude to ignore intended game mechanics and deny greater segments of the player base the enjoyment of the chosen virtual profession that keeps the real-life game revenue coming in. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on. Welcome to EVE, a PVP game full of nasty pirates and terrorists who love people who fail to protect themselves in even the most basic way.
Best you get used to EVE as it is not advertised as a dark and hostile game for nothing. |
Peter Raptor
Plutonian Army
188
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
I agree with you OP, Hulkageddon is turning thousands away from Eve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1329447#post1329447
But CCG (-oon) will do little or nothing. Evelopedia;-á
The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion -áGÇá-á-á |
ShipToaster
157
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sandbox. Begin |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. |
Tallon Sylph
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
|
Peter Raptor
Plutonian Army
188
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died.
Really? In 2010, I really can't remember less than 50k players on weekends, sometimes around 58k.
Evelopedia;-á
The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion -áGÇá-á-á |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
564
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is not a family-friendly pastime created for the enjoyment and benefit of working family men to unwind after a hard day of shaking hands and having power lunches. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:
Really? In 2010, I really can't remember less than 50k players on weekends, sometimes around 58k.
Because players online at any one time is the same as active subs. |
Llywelyn Emrys
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
Think of EVE as a libertarian paradise.
The government (CCP) will not do anything to save you.
You have to do it yourself. |
|
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
World of Warcraft ---------------------------> If you want instant gratification, go stimulate your genitals. EvE is Hard, deal with it. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1613
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Really? In 2010, I really can't remember less than 50k players on weekends, sometimes around 58k.
2010 was before Incarna. The server pop hasn't recovered from that yet, but it's steadily climbing. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Meryl SinGarda
Belligerent Underpayed Tactical Team
512
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:41:00 -
[13] - Quote
Honestly, I think you could have started here - "Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec." Why do we need to hear your life story before you go on about being killed? lol
|
James 315
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1746
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:42:00 -
[14] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. No, your identity is defined as a "highsec miner" and a "carebear."
Proposal
- EVE players continue to destroy your ships and pod you at every opportunity.
I eagerly await your considered response. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1020
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:43:00 -
[15] - Quote
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13478516 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13478515
1.9 bil implants plugged in head, prefers to leave midslots empty rather then fit tanking modules |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
OP left out the part about his asian kickboxing girlfriend. |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
The mids aren't empty. He does have that tracking computer in there. |
Quartzlight Evenstar Icefluxor
Perkone Caldari State
69
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:48:00 -
[18] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Quote:"Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. " -http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp
Well reasoned and thought out.
And indeed the Policy above is constantly violated by the Goons and the CFC period. Even SONY said "They sure bring great content".
(Hulkageddon I must remain neutral about. As long as it's a temporary event I find it rather exciting. This time around though it is unfortunately coinciding with a huge Goon death squad campaign as well. But that is not the fault of Helicity Boson, the organizer of Hulkageddon).
All I can figure at this point is Vikings will inflict their culture and ways on the unwilling as they always have. It's a real mess. Good luck dealing with it all if you do stick around. Ohh poor silly goon chillrens. Nobody in high sec cares about your plans to occupy jita like a bunch of dirty hippies. "....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced." |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:49:00 -
[19] - Quote
Kaeda Maxwell, nice gank :) If you want instant gratification, go stimulate your genitals. EvE is Hard, deal with it. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1613
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:50:00 -
[20] - Quote
Alia Gon'die wrote:The mids aren't empty. He does have that tracking computer in there.
It's an Omni-Directional Tracking Link because.... o.0 Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
|
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:53:00 -
[21] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Alia Gon'die wrote:The mids aren't empty. He does have that tracking computer in there. It's an Omni-Directional Tracking Link because.... o.0
To track all those nano rocks |
Sara XIII
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:56:00 -
[22] - Quote
Why didn't you tank your Hulk.
WHY? Between Ignorance and Wisdom |
bongsmoke
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
46
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:56:00 -
[23] - Quote
ask CCP Phantom, as he/she told me, "there is no room for fuzziness in TOS or EULA" Since he/she should be a beacon of enlightenment, lets see if we get a response. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:59:00 -
[24] - Quote
bongsmoke wrote:ask CCP Phantom, as he/she told me, "there is no room for fuzziness in TOS or EULA" Since he/she should be a beacon of enlightenment, lets see if we get a response.
HTFU If you want instant gratification, go stimulate your genitals. EvE is Hard, deal with it. |
Copine Callmeknau
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
174
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:06:00 -
[25] - Quote
0/10 not even remotely convincing There should be a rather awesome pic here |
Sarah Schneider
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
234
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:09:00 -
[26] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is not a family-friendly pastime created for the enjoyment and benefit of working family men to unwind after a hard day of shaking hands and having power lunches. Dangit, i can't bold and underline that sentence more. "Eve isnGÇÖt some welcoming online utopia: itGÇÖs cut-throat, cruel, atavistic despite the futuristic setting. Give people a sandbox, and theyGÇÖll throw the sand in a rivalGÇÖs eyes before kicking them in the shins and destroying their sandcastle." -Keza MacDonald, IGN. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
36
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:10:00 -
[27] - Quote
Wow! That hurt OP.
No mid slot shield help? You had a head full of shield implants and not even an Invul field or extender?
But I do agree it's a sad commentary on the state of this game that CCP thinks suicide ganking is a viable form of PvP.
It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1021
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:12:00 -
[28] - Quote
npc corp highsec miners are literally giving you valid fitting advice |
Virgil Travis
GWA Corp Unified Church of the Unobligated
228
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:12:00 -
[29] - Quote
I've got a solution for ya, Mr Solution Architect, try learning what the game is about, grow some balls and teeth and maybe you won't be such an easy target.
If the Sims all became zombies it would be easy to escape them, just shove them in a room and make them answer the telephone. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:15:00 -
[30] - Quote
James 315 wrote:Oddball Six wrote:My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. No, your identity is defined as a "highsec miner" and a "carebear." Proposal
- EVE players continue to destroy your ships and pod you at every opportunity.
I eagerly await your considered response. Only you need to agree if it's about ganking. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1613
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:19:00 -
[31] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote: It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
Find the word Grief or Griefing or any variation in the EULA/TOS/Code of Conduct. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:26:00 -
[32] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote: It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
Find the word Grief or Griefing or any variation in the EULA/TOS/Code of Conduct. Basically, the people that decide such things don't agree with you.
So they're wrong. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:28:00 -
[33] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Wow! That hurt OP.
No mid slot shield help? You had a head full of shield implants and not even an Invul field or extender?
But I do agree it's a sad commentary on the state of this game that CCP thinks suicide ganking is a viable form of PvP.
It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
You do realise that ganking untanked hulks can be done for profit right? And that it has been done for near enough a decade now. |
Virgil Travis
GWA Corp Unified Church of the Unobligated
229
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
Well it's CCP that provides access to the game and makes the rules and they say you sir are incorrect. If the Sims all became zombies it would be easy to escape them, just shove them in a room and make them answer the telephone. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
36
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
I guess you could call a few dropped mods profit, true.
I think the OP's point about this mass group gank-a-thon is that he feel's it IS against CCP's own stated policies.
Did you all read his post or just go straight to the KM's?
|
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:40:00 -
[36] - Quote
Quote:I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on.
Well known if you keep track of such things, perhaps. I am a casual gamer with disposable income. Believe it or not, the largest segment of MMO revenue is from just such gamers.
I don't read EVE news. I don't follow the EVE forum.
The first I head of hulkageddon was AFTER I was killed today. And then my reaction went from "oh well" to "why the heck doesn't CCP realize the impact of their inaction". Hence the post.
Quote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died.
Yet every month a greater risk is incurred as to the age of the game and the resonance within the eventual total revenue opportunity. You can only market your growth to a certain point. Instead, CCP has been far more successful with a combination of marketing and innovation.
Those can be expensive avenues, particularly if you choose to aggravate your existing paying customers through ignoring something like this.
You guys like new developments in the game? They have to be paid for. Superfan subscriptions alone are insufficient to sustain the resources that go into engineering on multiple continents.
Quote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
Had I not given the background, you would be accusing me of living on the game and/or in my parent basement. I prefer being attacked for my success.
Further, you can afford to disparage the casual gamer segment and its thoughts. Its $15 a month to you. CCP cannot. Every tenth of a percent in subscriber turnover affects either future development funding or operating income. Eventually that becomes jobs.
Quote:You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is not a family-friendly pastime created for the enjoyment and benefit of working family men to unwind after a hard day of shaking hands and having power lunches. Actually thats only one attitude about what it is. And even only one facet of how its advertised. Its also been advertised about being a universe where you can do anything. Make a career that you want. Play the game that you want.
Quote:No, your identity is defined as a "highsec miner" and a "carebear."
Actually you miss the point. Casual gamers with disposable income is where the revenue comes from. They tend to be short lived subscriber base so they require marketing to keep the flow. Yet those who stick around are often the kind who will pay for upgrades in the form of PLEX, etc.
CCP knows this. Anyone with MMO development / engineering experience knows the segmentation of revenue. Realizing that there are subscribers whose revenue impact can be lost by ignoring such dynamics as Hulkageddon creates is a quick path to declining revenue.
|
Mr Stark
Pimpin' Ain't Easy Dark Therapy
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:44:00 -
[37] - Quote
I am a drunk homeless tramp, I pimp women out to pay for my Eve addiction which I play at an internet cafe - You know what? This exact same thing happened to me.
Hooray for equality hey dude? |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:45:00 -
[38] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Wow! That hurt OP.
No mid slot shield help? You had a head full of shield implants and not even an Invul field or extender?
But I do agree it's a sad commentary on the state of this game that CCP thinks suicide ganking is a viable form of PvP.
It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it. You do realise that ganking untanked hulks can be done for profit right? And that it has been done for near enough a decade now. It's like ratting.
Now we know how those rats feel. Or not "we" rather but "the miners that get ratted". Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:46:00 -
[39] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Quote:I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on. Well known if you keep track of such things, perhaps. I am a casual gamer with disposable income. Believe it or not, the largest segment of MMO revenue is from just such gamers. I don't read EVE news. I don't follow the EVE forum. The first I head of hulkageddon was AFTER I was killed today. And then my reaction went from "oh well" to "why the heck doesn't CCP realize the impact of their inaction". Hence the post.
I work 72 hours a week so tell me more about being a casual gamer. This was advertised in the news, all over the forums, in just about every local, in most alliances and in all the NPC corps and on EVE radio. You really must ask yourself why you are not interacting with the community on even the most basic level. This was entirely your fault. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:47:00 -
[40] - Quote
Quote:1.9 bil implants plugged in head, prefers to leave midslots empty rather then fit tanking modules because 'don't have to cuz pvp is optional right?'
Exactly.
I built the fit when i was in a corp with air cover for mining operations. I didnt modify the fit because in the handful of years since I never needed to and was not seriously threatened in high sec. Organized initiatives to violate the gameplay elements of high-sec excepted, of course.
Quote:OP left out the part about his asian kickboxing girlfriend.
Because I don't have or want one. The wife I have and the child we have together is more than sufficient for me. Make fun if you like. Many wish for as much as I have. I recognize the blessings I have and its important to understand where the perspective is coming from.
Quote:Kaeda Maxwell, nice gank :)
If it were in low sec, I would have to agree with you. I have previously lost a freighter because I took a short cut through .3 space. That was my fault. I made a decision to do something stupid. When you allow people to organize a competition of violating the guidelines established to setup an entire sector of gameplay that is a different matter altogether.
Quote:No mid slot shield help? You had a head full of shield implants and not even an Invul field or extender?
True but in the end it would not have mattered, I don't think. I also didn't align to a starbase or anything which I probably should have done as well. I learned several lessons from this. I also started to think about just killing off the multiple accounts I have. Something that others appear to have done before me. At a certain point when an executive asks "why did we lose 2% of our playerbase that we were unable to recover through marketing last month?" hopefully someone understands that inaction in the face of such events may be part of the answer.
|
|
Pisov viet
Kaesong Kosmonauts Test Alliance Please Ignore
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:47:00 -
[41] - Quote
That man Had 1.3b in shield tanking implants While flying a hulk With no tank in the midslots.
I'll gladly keep "breaking the EULA" if it means killing ***** like you. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:48:00 -
[42] - Quote
I don't understand why people like this Oddball Six guy play sandbox games, maybe they don't know what a sandbox is. If you want instant gratification, go stimulate your genitals. EvE is Hard, deal with it. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:49:00 -
[43] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
I work 72 hours a week so tell me more about being a casual gamer. This was advertised in the news, all over the forums, in just about every local, in most alliances and in all the NPC corps and on EVE radio. You really must ask yourself why you are not interacting with the community on even the most basic level. This was entirely your fault.
A fair point.
I don't read the news.
This is one of my first forum posts in years.
I have not seen it in local or I would have known.
My corp is not in an alliance.
I am not in an NPC corp.
Remember, casual gamer, no EVE radio. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:54:00 -
[44] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
A fair point.
I don't read the news.
This is one of my first forum posts in years.
I have not seen it in local or I would have known.
My corp is not in an alliance.
I am not in an NPC corp.
Remember, casual gamer, no EVE radio.
Lesson learned then I take it. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
567
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:56:00 -
[45] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Quote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children. Had I not given the background, you would be accusing me of living on the game and/or in my parent basement. I prefer being attacked for my success. Further, you can afford to disparage the casual gamer segment and its thoughts. Its $15 a month to you. CCP cannot. Every tenth of a percent in subscriber turnover affects either future development funding or operating income. Eventually that becomes jobs. Nope, that's an assumption you're making. I don't bring peoples' real-life activities into in-game discussions. You chose to do so yourself, and got ridiculed for it.
As far as casual gamers go, I don't for one second believe that their existence justifies the destruction of a unique product on the MMO market. Can you honestly name another game that allows this level of ruthlessness? So, if you want a nice, relaxing, safe environment, you have other choices. For those of us who like EVE the way it currently is (or to some extent, the way it was before it was somewhat "casualized" for players like yourself), this is the only option. We have nowhere else to go, aside from maybe, in your opinion, psychiatric institutions.
Oddball Six wrote:Quote:You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is not a family-friendly pastime created for the enjoyment and benefit of working family men to unwind after a hard day of shaking hands and having power lunches. Actually thats only one attitude about what it is. And even only one facet of how its advertised. Its also been advertised about being a universe where you can do anything. Make a career that you want. Play the game that you want. And I'm playing the game the way I want, which focuses entirely on destroying other players.
When you started playing this game, you explicitly agreed that all of the possessions within the game are not your property, that they are the property of CCP, and are subject to whatever rules CCP wants to enforce in regard to their usage. These rules, as set by CCP, allow the destruction of these assets by other players at their own discretion, and place the responsibility of asset defense solely on yourself.
I am sure a successful businessman such as yourself reads EULAs before signing service contracts, right? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1613
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:56:00 -
[46] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:baltec1 wrote:
I work 72 hours a week so tell me more about being a casual gamer. This was advertised in the news, all over the forums, in just about every local, in most alliances and in all the NPC corps and on EVE radio. You really must ask yourself why you are not interacting with the community on even the most basic level. This was entirely your fault.
A fair point. I don't read the news. This is one of my first forum posts in years. I have not seen it in local or I would have known. My corp is not in an alliance. I am not in an NPC corp. Remember, casual gamer, no EVE radio.
Do you log in? Cause it had a Login Advert and a News item (can be found on the righthand side of the login screen).
In the future, read the news to figure out what the other players in your Multiplayer game are up to. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
780
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:58:00 -
[47] - Quote
The OP is correct in every respect. The only people who'd dispute that are the systematic violators. They of course will post to this thread couching their responses in "objectivity" as well as "inside knowledge of the game" and "veterans who understand Eve is a 'cold, harsh environment - so stop whining'." Along with that, as can be seen, are the accusations you're just not fitting your ship right.
What is absent is the admission that null and low sec, where this "play style" is intended to occur are empty enough - or being held in a state of stasis by the occupants - giving rise to a claim that high sec should be turned into low or null so there's an excuse for griefing - it's just normal play. The intent of CCP in going to the extreme to carefully define griefing, the fact CSM members (one forcibly retired of late) are FRIENDS of certain CCP upper ups and are literally being catered to, and the resultant inaction on CCP's part (pretending to hide behind the fact that there are "sore losers in life as in EVE"), not only exacerbates the situation, but puts CCP's seal of approval on it. This is up to and including sanctioning by placing the events in the MOTD as "player generated content."
I've on many occassions pointed out how with the NPC sovereignty allusions the game is an object of ridicule, as these mighty virtual kingdoms are powerless to control debilitating crime in their most "safe" regions, along with the absurdity of sovereign powers renting out their security to Rent-A-Cops that use a narrowly drawn set of response parameters - which amount to "Don't make us do anything. We were just enjoying our donuts." I've advocated for criminal flags with NO time limit, and acknowledgement of the fact that allowing criminals to dock in this NPC's sovereign domain anywhere is collusion and accessory after the fact, which makes the owners of said stations criminals as well. Such is the analog reality. Without that exercise in power, any definition of sovereignty becomes a joke.
In the face of such observations of fact, CCP has ignored it all, leaving me to believe they have little to no understanding of such matters. The fact they specialize in computer programming, and not in game design and especially not in the field of politics, law and concepts such as sovereignty is proved by their ineptitude in the matter the OP defines so sharply and so well. Judging by the videos from the recent Fanfest, it is more than evident their behavior is so adolescent in the extreme, it beggars belief to think they could rise to the occassion and bring themselves to understand the social, cultural and so state dynamics about which the OP remarks, and which I've pointed out on several occassions.
I guess we should be gratified they did bring in a phd in economics at one time, admitting they were in over their heads in matters such as these. I'm convinced they're so ill-educated, and incompetent in affairs of state as a dynamic that observations such that we make here go over their heads as well. (The bottle of Jaeger on the table in the videos doesn't offer much encouragement.)
I hasten to add I'm more than suspicious CCP is now using EVE as a cash cow and has no intention in examining its model for this particular set of absurdities and so finding a solution, as now their attention is fully on SONY and Dust. I fully expect at some point in the future EVE's development will become tokenistic and then non-existent - relegated to legacy.
So...there you go. They've turned the asylum over to the inmates who're convinced they're the true doctors of EVE. And, they think they're smart in doing so. Worse mistakes have been made. They'll walk away with the satisfaction that "There once was this game called EVE Online...and WE invented it." May their grandchildren be pleased to hear this bedtime story. I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:59:00 -
[48] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote: It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
Find the word Grief or Griefing or any variation in the EULA/TOS/Code of Conduct.
Grief play http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336
Terms of Service http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp
Quote:You may not use GÇ£role-playingGÇ¥ as an excuse to violate these rules. While EVE Online is a persistent world, fantasy role-playing game, the claim of role-playing is not an acceptable defense for anti-social behavior. Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy.
also
Quote:You may not do anything that interferes with the ability of other EVE Online subscribers to enjoy the game or web site in accordance with its rules.
A single gank here or there is one thing. Organized efforts to induce others to participate in such operations is another. Players deriving a large segment of their gameplay from such operations in areas that CCP has ostensibly made it "illegal" to do so should run afoul of the existing rules. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:02:00 -
[49] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Oddball Six wrote:
A fair point.
I don't read the news.
This is one of my first forum posts in years.
I have not seen it in local or I would have known.
My corp is not in an alliance.
I am not in an NPC corp.
Remember, casual gamer, no EVE radio.
Lesson learned then I take it. Yes, he now understands the need to whine on the EVEO forums. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
256
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:06:00 -
[50] - Quote
OP you do realize that your first paragraph is completely irrelevant.
Secondly if you feel that actions of a person or a group a persons is violating the rules then.
Open up a petition, and if you feel that CCP is not giving you a fair review. You can always escalate it to a senior GM and also contact the CSM to see what they can do for you. They are supposed to have CCP's ear after all.
Best of luck. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1613
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:07:00 -
[51] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote: A single gank here or there is one thing. Organized efforts to induce others to participate in such operations is another. Players deriving a large segment of their gameplay from such operations in areas that CCP has ostensibly made it "illegal" to do so should run afoul of the existing rules.
First, the KB is not the EULA nor is it the TOS. Second, you should read the next paragraph:
Quote: The EVE universe is a harsh universe largely driven by such conflict and notice must be taken of the fact that nonconsensual combat alone is not considered to be grief play per the above definition.
The TOS gives specific examples of what it means by that quote, to wit:
Quote:1. You may not abuse, harass or threaten another player or authorized representative of CCP, including customer service personnel and volunteers. This includes, but is not limited to: petitioning with false information in an attempt to gain from it or have someone else suffer from it; sending excessive e-mails, EVE-mails or petitions; obstructing CCP Employees from doing their jobs; refusal to follow the instructions of a CCP Employee; or implying favoritism by a CCP Employee.
2. You may not use any abusive, defamatory, ethnically or racially offensive, harassing, harmful, hateful, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, threatening or vulgar language. (Alternate spelling or partial masking of such words will be reprimanded in the same manner as the actual use of such words.)
3. You may not organize nor be a member of any corporation or group within EVE Online that is based on or advocates any anti-ethnic, anti-gay, anti-religious, racist, sexist or other hate-mongering philosophies
Same goes for the other quote:
Quote: This includes, but is not limited to, making inappropriate use of any public channels within the game and/or intentionally creating excessive latency (lag) by dumping cargo containers, corpses or other items in the game world. See how it's discussing server issues, not PvP interaction.
You still haven't found the word Grief or any variation of that word in the EULA/TOS. The knowledge base is not the rules of the game. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
baltec1
1196
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:08:00 -
[52] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:
So...there you go. They've turned the asylum over to the inmates who're convinced they're the true doctors of EVE. And, they think they're smart in doing so. Worse mistakes have been made. They'll walk away with the satisfaction that "There once was this game called EVE Online...and WE invented it." May their grandchildren be pleased to hear this bedtime story.
Its been like this since day one and has, infact, become safer over the years. The OP failed in may ways. He failed to take an interest in what was happening in the game dispite the vast amount of easy to find info out there. He failed to fit any tank on his ship which allowed for an easy gank. He failed to warp off his pod dispite getting three alarms, each one louder than the last.
EVE online has always and will always punish you for making mistakes. |
seany1212
Zat's Affiliated Traders Originally Riotous Corps
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:10:00 -
[53] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:
"So...there you go. They've turned the asylum over to the inmates who're convinced they're the true doctors of EVE. And, they think they're smart in doing so. Worse mistakes have been made. They'll walk away with the satisfaction that "There once was this game called EVE Online...and WE invented it." May their grandchildren be pleased to hear this bedtime story."
and other nonsensical garbage
High sec ganking has been viable from day 1, and in certain times you could even tank concord. This is once again another carebear spew from serene about how CCP do nothing and that they've handed the game to griefers
The plea for rationale you should have been asking is how to fit a hulk under the assumption given from day 1 where nowhere in eve is safe. Coupled with the fact that they managed to get your pod any person paying attention to there computer should have been able to get out. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:12:00 -
[54] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:OP you do realize that your first paragraph is completely irrelevant. Yes, thank you. It would not have been included had I not read another similar forum thread where others accused the OP of being a neckbeard and living in thier mother's basement.
I included the paragraph for two reasons.
1) I would rather be attacked for my actual success than for some vague perception of my post being because I live with my mother and am obsessed with the game.
2) To make clear to CCP that the perspective is from those who are not superfans. From those who are part of one of the most lucrative revenue segments.
Quote: Secondly if you feel that actions of a person or a group a persons is violating the rules then.
Open up a petition, and if you feel that CCP is not giving you a fair review. You can always escalate it to a senior GM and also contact the CSM to see what they can do for you. They are supposed to have CCP ear after all.
Best of luck.
Indeed thank you, I have already done so. |
Mercy Kills
Reapers...
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:15:00 -
[55] - Quote
ok so, a lot of you are giving the OP flak for voicing his opinion and i think its just because you don't understand what he's saying. so, let me translate his "successful businessman who DOES NOT live in his mother's basement" argument into layman's terms:
"yes, this game has been running for 9yrs running on a platform of bringing its players maybe THE most immersive total sandbox where they[the players] are given the freedom to be anything from industrialists to pirates and have complete control to shape the in-game world. And yes, it has done pretty damn well in an over-saturated market with this platform of complete player control even with a steep learning curve and its wickedly delicious, harsly brutal gameplay. BUT today I fell victim to this harsh reality so it all needs to change NOW!!!
sure this could have all been avoided had i taken the few minutes required to take the necessary precautions to protect myself, my investment, and my ship like, idk, fitting a basic goddamn tank on my moderately expensive mining ship before i took her out of the station while an event that combined the name of said ship and the word 'Armageddon' but HEY, i'm a successful businessman and DON'T live in my mother's basement like the rest of you! i don't have time for all this googling of gameplay mechanics and seriously, when has armageddon ever been used to denote anything but sunshine and lollipops.
in conclusion, change this game CCP because its MY money that allows you to keep it running. i'll be awaiting your reply and the reimbursement of the isk for my ship and adequate pain and suffering compensation. do not make me "buddy program" my lawyer into this."
see...makes perfect sense...
>.> |
baltec1
1196
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:16:00 -
[56] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Indeed thank you, I have already done so.
And this is why it takes so long to get valid petitions answered. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1614
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:16:00 -
[57] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Indeed thank you, I have already done so.
Just FYI, GSF and OTEC stands to make on the order of 200m worth of Tech sales on each and every Hulk purchased. Assuming more than 5% of ganked Hulk pilots buy a new Hulk, GSF makes money off the gank after paying out 10m. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Shian Yang
213
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:36:00 -
[58] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:True but in the end it would not have mattered, I don't think. I also didn't align to a starbase or anything which I probably should have done as well. I learned several lessons from this. I also started to think about just killing off the multiple accounts I have. Something that others appear to have done before me. At a certain point when an executive asks "why did we lose 2% of our playerbase that we were unable to recover through marketing last month?" hopefully someone understands that inaction in the face of such events may be part of the answer.
Greetings capsuleer,
You are very eloquent and make a strong case for your point. Unfortunately, as data released by CCP has shown your allegations has no basis in fact.
The population in New Eden has been rising year after year after year. This is a fact as released by CCP, with the latest update coming with the recent meeting in Reijkavik.
The capsuleers that choose to make New Eden their home are exceptionally unlikely to depart. This is a fact as released by CCP during the latest CSM summit.
In essence, yes, you lost a Hulk because you did not tank it despite having the room to do so, you did not take any safety precautions for escape and you relied on CONCORD for a service they have never, ever provided.
You made a lot of assumptions that in the end cost you a fortune in ISK. This is not the fault of New Eden, of pirates roaming in CONCORD patrolled areas or of any Alliance or corporation. This is your fault.
Accept you made a mistake and fly better from now on.
Regards,
Shian Yang
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
286
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:38:00 -
[59] - Quote
Feel free to petition and whine all you want. You should be embarrassed when you find out that CCP supports hulkageddon and these types of shenanigans but you'll probably just emo quit instead of acting like a rational person.
This just shows another good thing about hulkageddon, it tells players in a dramatic way what EVE-Online is all about in case they missed it and thought EVE was WoW in space.
Oh and why didn't you warp out your pod? It takes a catalyst about 3 seconds to lock a pod and about .25 seconds for a pod to warp out. The only reason you get podded is because you don't pay attention or are botting.
All in all, most "rational" people take a loss as a natural part of playing a video game, they don't throw a tantrum on the forums like a 4 year old child when something doesn't go their way. You may be old and have a job but you still haven't grown up or matured. |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
140
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:39:00 -
[60] - Quote
You know the OP has made a good point when so many knuckle-draggers make such feeble explanations and personal attacks. |
|
Homo Jesus
The LGBT Last Supper
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:40:00 -
[61] - Quote
I too want a change to the rules so it's easier for me to win at something. Whenever I get the time I'll find the bits and pieces of the EULA that support my views and make another thread to help our douche bag cause. |
FeralShadow
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:51:00 -
[62] - Quote
While you may not make a conscious effort to pvp, and want to avoid it, this is a game where you are safe nowhere. You cannot float along and expect your ship to be perfectly safe at any given time, even in high security. This seems like your own ignorance that cost you your ship. Shift click to open new window. How the Eve Sandbox Works:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=482176#post482176 "I believe in karma. That's why whenever I do something sh**ty to others, they somehow deserved it." |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:51:00 -
[63] - Quote
Vaal Erit wrote: Oh and why didn't you warp out your pod? It takes a catalyst about 3 seconds to lock a pod and about .25 seconds for a pod to warp out. The only reason you get podded is because you don't pay attention or are botting.
Casual gamer. I was trying to warp out and had right clicked and was selecting from menu when I was killed.
Not everyone has the same decade-honed super-gamer reflexes your theoretical explanation has. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1614
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:52:00 -
[64] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:You know the OP has made a good point when so many knuckle-draggers make such feeble explanations and personal attacks.
I gots the EULA; the TOS; 8 Years of Dev Blogs, Posts, Videos, etc; 8 years of adverts and promotional materials; and 8 years of expansions that never stopped suicide ganking. All backing my stance.
So I don't actually care to convince anyone right now. I'm arguing to amuse myself, and sometimes it amuses me (with my knuckles firmly in the dirt) to call people like you little nancys. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1614
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:55:00 -
[65] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Vaal Erit wrote: Oh and why didn't you warp out your pod? It takes a catalyst about 3 seconds to lock a pod and about .25 seconds for a pod to warp out. The only reason you get podded is because you don't pay attention or are botting.
Casual gamer. I was trying to warp out and had right clicked and was selecting from menu when I was killed. Not everyone has the same decade-honed super-gamer reflexes your theoretical explanation has.
So lesson learned. Every overview should have the Sun (at least). As soon as you were tackled, you should have selected the sun and started spamming warp (through the selected item window) until your pod was in warp. No reflexes to it.
You really should have an overview tab with just planets and the sun, but for HS mining, the sun's probably plenty. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
baltec1
1199
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:59:00 -
[66] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:You know the OP has made a good point when so many knuckle-draggers make such feeble explanations and personal attacks.
What point would that be? |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
572
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:00:00 -
[67] - Quote
Homo Jesus wrote:I too want a change to the rules so it's easier for me to win at something. Whenever I get the time I'll find the bits and pieces of the EULA that support my views and make another thread to help our douche bag cause. He's simply used to the real-life status quo, where people like himself have always gotten ahead via lobbying and frivolous lawsuits. There is nothing competitive about the state of business today, save for the free-for-all that is the entry-level job market. The whole system is fixed and rotten, but aside from that, it encourages complacency.
He is unable to enter an environment that EVE simulates, a purer, more base environment, and compete. He became lost, and unable to respond to changing trends. So he came to the forums, and with the usual passive-aggressive attitude that his kind exhibits, tried to get what he wants by making a bunch of real-life legal parallels.
At some point, he forgot that he was playing a video game with guns.
The thing that gets me the most, though, is that he thinks that his subscription acts as anything more than a cash buffer for CCP's actual development budget. It is indeed ignorant to think that CCP itself doesn't realize that the players who whine about getting killed will quit at some point. The only way they would stay (and even that is questionable, due to the whole boredom factor), is if these players were never violenced in any way, shape, or form. And in a game like EVE, that's simply impossible. |
Virgil Travis
GWA Corp Unified Church of the Unobligated
229
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:00:00 -
[68] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:You know the OP has made a good point when so many knuckle-draggers make such feeble explanations and personal attacks.
Better than being a thumb sucker I guess. If the Sims all became zombies it would be easy to escape them, just shove them in a room and make them answer the telephone. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:01:00 -
[69] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Oddball Six wrote:Vaal Erit wrote:Oh and why didn't you warp out your pod? It takes a catalyst about 3 seconds to lock a pod and about .25 seconds for a pod to warp out. The only reason you get podded is because you don't pay attention or are botting. Casual gamer. I was trying to warp out and had right clicked and was selecting from menu when I was killed. Not everyone has the same decade-honed super-gamer reflexes your theoretical explanation has. So lesson learned. Every overview should have the Sun (at least). As soon as you were tackled, you should have selected the sun and started spamming warp (through the selected item window) until your pod was in warp. No reflexes to it. You really should have an overview tab with just planets and the sun, but for HS mining, the sun's probably plenty. Casual gamer is an excuse nowadays? Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Haulie Berry
122
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:04:00 -
[70] - Quote
You used a whole lot of words just to say, "Something I didn't like happened to my spaceship, CCP should do something about this because things I don't like shouldn't happen. |
|
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
37
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:06:00 -
[71] - Quote
One of the biggest points is that this PvP game is so fail at PvP that a large pct of the palyers actually think attacking defensless miners is some kind of accomplishment.
Or it's the only kind of PvP they can afford. |
baltec1
1199
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:11:00 -
[72] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:One of the biggest points is that this PvP game is so fail at PvP that a large pct of the players actually think attacking defensless miners is some kind of accomplishment.
Or it's the only kind of PvP they can afford.
It pays to kill untanked miners. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1615
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:14:00 -
[73] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:One of the biggest points is that this PvP game is so fail at PvP that a large pct of the players actually think attacking defensless miners is some kind of accomplishment.
Or it's the only kind of PvP they can afford.
Oh, now it's not against CCP's stated policies, it's just distasteful to *you.*
I think it's funny. Plenty of other people also find it entertaining. Nobody actually said it was an accomplishment. Miners have exactly the same defensive options as everyone else, so they are in no way defenseless.
In the immortal words of the great Dr. Cox: "Wrong, Wrong, wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, WRONG, Wrong, You'reWrong You'reWrong" Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
38
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:17:00 -
[74] - Quote
Quote:Oh, now it's not against CCP's stated policies, it's just distasteful to *you.*
Actually I think their policies are in conflict with their implementations, and I would use lame instead of distasteful. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1616
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:19:00 -
[75] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Quote:Oh, now it's not against CCP's stated policies, it's just distasteful to *you.*
Actually I think their policies are in conflict with their implementations.
How so? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Makkz
Lamorei Prosapia Vexillum
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:22:00 -
[76] - Quote
Quote: "A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account."
Your own quote nullifies your entire argument.
"WHILE HE DOES NOT PROFIT FROM IT IN ANY WAY."
Hulkageddon organizers are both the holders of hulk BPO's, as well as huge stakeholders in the grand tech moon game, it has been quoted as a hulk's current tag of some 330m is some 70-80% based on the cost of tech moon goo.
If you didn't know these facts... your welcome, it shows your business sense is worth crap all in the sandbox, as you basically just got killed by a bigger better industrialist working there isk. |
Hroya
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:23:00 -
[77] - Quote
You dont have to mine in a Hulk or other exhumer. You can mine good enough the old fashion way in a dashing Rohk racked with miner 2's or the ever charming Domi to name 2.
Miner 2's have actuall mining sounds where as stripminers make your brain turn into mud. It's oldschool but better then those shite dedicated barges.
Put some rock music on and zap away with your oversized all american hummer miner. Costs less, yields enough and keeps most of the isk in your own pocket if you build it yourself. Then spend your profit on some cheap t1 frigs or cruisers, slap some looted mission meta 4 mods on it and off you go to low/null/wh and get blown up in a blaze of glory.
Hop back into your Rohk and rinse repeat. You go your corridor but. |
baltec1
1200
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:27:00 -
[78] - Quote
Makkz wrote:Quote: "A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account."
Your own quote nullifies your entire argument.
"WHILE HE DOES NOT PROFIT FROM IT IN ANY WAY."
Hulkageddon organizers are both the holders of hulk BPO's, as well as huge stakeholders in the grand tech moon game, it has been quoted as a hulk's current tag of some 330m is some 70-80% based on the cost of tech moon goo.
If you didn't know these facts... your welcome, it shows your business sense is worth crap all in the sandbox, as you basically just got killed by a bigger better industrialist working there isk.
Lets not forget that the ganker will also make a profit on every hulk killed via loot and salvage. Hulkageddon also offers bounties and prises for killed barges. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
38
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:30:00 -
[79] - Quote
Well the definitions from the TOS the OP quoted sure sound exactly like Hulkageddon, add in the the Goons sponsorhip and profitrering, as pointed out by you and others, and that sure looks likes a conflict with CCP's definition of griefing.
Still my biggest gripe is that their really should be a way for "Skilled" (not throw away alts) pirate types to ply their trade in high sec. Also with them having a chance for a BIG loss, just like the targets.
I don't have all the answers, I just find the whole suicide ganking thing, well, lame. Lacking in content :)
edit: and yeah, I know about the profit thing. Pfft, which makes it even worse in my opinion. Not the gankers looting, the Goons behind it all. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1616
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:38:00 -
[80] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Well the definitions from the TOS the OP quoted sure sound exactly like Hulkageddon, add in the the Goons sponsorhip and profitrering, as pointed out by you and others, and that sure ;ooks likes a conflict with CCP's definition of griefing. Still my biggest gripe is that their really should be a way for "Skilled" (not throw away alts) pirate types to ply their trade in high sec. Also with them having a chance for a BIG loss, just like the targets. I don't have all the answers, I just find the whole suicide ganking thing, well, lame. Lacking in content :)
Where in the TOS or EULA does it mention griefing or any variation on that word? The Knowledge Base is part of neither the TOS nor the EULA.
As I pointed out above, the quotes from the TOS only appear to support an anti-gank agenda when stripped of context (both textual from the rest of the TOS and judicial from past GM rulings and Dev responses).
Recycling alts to escape sec status hits is a bannable offense.
Everyone sets their own risk tolerance in EvE. You can generally only lose what you have undocked with. So gankers and haulers/miners lose exactly the amount they were willing to risk. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:39:00 -
[81] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:edit: and yeah, I know about the profit thing. Pfft, which makes it even worse in my opinion. Not the gankers looting, the Goons behind it all. Luv2fromBehind Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Mina Hiragi
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
21
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:40:00 -
[82] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Still my biggest gripe is that their really should be a way for "Skilled" (not throw away alts) pirate types to ply their trade in high sec. Also with them having a chance for a BIG loss, just like the targets.
I keep hearing this 'throw away' nonsense. I've yet to see anyone ever prove it. Which you'd think they'd be happy to, given that recycling alts to get around negative security status is (unlike suicide ganking) a violation of the rules, and dealt with rather harshly.
|
Arcticblue2
Nordic Freelancers inc
44
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:41:00 -
[83] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:I don't understand why people like this Oddball Six guy play sandbox games, maybe they don't know what a sandbox is.
Oh you must be good, you must know it all so enlighten us humble gamers what this game is all about ... because I have read what CCP tells me what this game is about, that must be complete wrong because you obviously know better than CCP.
To help you abit .. this is what CCP writes about the sandbox.
"The Sandbox is the game world of EVE combined with the persistent actions of thousands upon thousands of players who interact with one another in a single-server environment.
Your actions in the Sandbox can lead to the destruction of starships, the creation of a thriving corporation or the doom of an empire. Every action taken by every player affects the state of the Sandbox, and through it those actions affect every other player.
The web of action and reaction in EVE leads to emergent gameplay where a single shot, business deal or even just a word can determine the destiny of thousands."
At this page there is a presentation about the different paths you can take in this game... - Manufacturer - Trader - Miner - Empire builder - Freedom fighter - Pirate - Bounty hunter - Planetary industrialist - Explorer - Salvager - Loyalist - Fleet commander
So this are the paths CCP suggest there is possible to do in this sandbox...
|
baltec1
1200
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:45:00 -
[84] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Well the definitions from the TOS the OP quoted sure sound exactly like Hulkageddon, add in the the Goons sponsorhip and profitrering, as pointed out by you and others, and that sure looks likes a conflict with CCP's definition of griefing. Still my biggest gripe is that their really should be a way for "Skilled" (not throw away alts) pirate types to ply their trade in high sec. Also with them having a chance for a BIG loss, just like the targets. I don't have all the answers, I just find the whole suicide ganking thing, well, lame. Lacking in content :) edit: and yeah, I know about the profit thing. Pfft, which makes it even worse in my opinion. Not the gankers looting, the Goons behind it all.
It wasn't the goons who first found out you could make a profit from killing untanked hulks. It also wasn't the goons who came up with hulkageddon. Your definition of greifing is also wildly wrong as under your idea of what greifing is everyone in 0.0 and lowsec should be banned. |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
124
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:46:00 -
[85] - Quote
"I am an extremely successful businessman who jets around the world ******* foreign women, bathing in foreign shores and eating foreign foods. I play EVE every now and again when I've ran out of things to do. My opinion therefore, is worth more than yours." |
James 315
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1747
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:51:00 -
[86] - Quote
I would like to thank the OP for making this thread.
He has proven the point I have been trying to make for some time now:
Highsec miners like the OP want their hulks to be absolutely invincible in highsec, even if they put no tanking modules on their ships whatsoever. They want to ban anti-mining activity like Hulkageddon. They literally want CCP to stop you from shooting at their ships, because they think they are entitled to mine in total peace and security.
This is the enemy we are fighting. |
Virgil Travis
GWA Corp Unified Church of the Unobligated
229
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:54:00 -
[87] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:I don't understand why people like this Oddball Six guy play sandbox games, maybe they don't know what a sandbox is. Oh you must be good, you must know it all so enlighten us humble gamers what this game is all about ... because I have read what CCP tells me what this game is about, that must be complete wrong because you obviously know better than CCP. To help you abit .. this is what CCP writes about the sandbox. "The Sandbox is the game world of EVE combined with the persistent actions of thousands upon thousands of players who interact with one another in a single-server environment. Your actions in the Sandbox can lead to the destruction of starships, the creation of a thriving corporation or the doom of an empire. Every action taken by every player affects the state of the Sandbox, and through it those actions affect every other player. The web of action and reaction in EVE leads to emergent gameplay where a single shot, business deal or even just a word can determine the destiny of thousands." At this page there is a presentation about the different paths you can take in this game... - Manufacturer - Trader - Miner - Empire builder - Freedom fighter - Pirate - Bounty hunter - Planetary industrialist - Explorer - Salvager - Loyalist - Fleet commander So this are the paths CCP suggest there is possible to do in this sandbox...
Nice of you quote what we already knew, did any of it sink in? If the Sims all became zombies it would be easy to escape them, just shove them in a room and make them answer the telephone. |
Arcticblue2
Nordic Freelancers inc
44
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:58:00 -
[88] - Quote
Virgil Travis wrote:
Nice of you quote what we already knew, did any of it sink in?
Well it tells me that miners are a CCP sanctioned profession despite what Goons feels about it, industrialist are also sanctioned professions in this game. |
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
784
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:01:00 -
[89] - Quote
Only one reason why so-called "pirates" would want to "ply their trade" in high sec - it's EASY. I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
Virgil Travis
GWA Corp Unified Church of the Unobligated
229
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:02:00 -
[90] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:Virgil Travis wrote:
Nice of you quote what we already knew, did any of it sink in?
Well it tells me that miners are a CCP sanctioned profession despite what Goons feels about it, industrialist are also sanctioned professions in this game.
That's fine, it doesn't mean they're entitled to be wrapped in cotton wool though. If they can't protect their interests then they run the risk of losing them just like everyone else in the game. If the Sims all became zombies it would be easy to escape them, just shove them in a room and make them answer the telephone. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1616
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:03:00 -
[91] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:Virgil Travis wrote:
Nice of you quote what we already knew, did any of it sink in?
Well it tells me that miners are a CCP sanctioned profession despite what Goons feels about it, industrialist are also sanctioned professions in this game.
Right. Nobody is seriously arguing they're not.
It's the miners that are arguing that the Suicide Ganking profession be eliminated. Suicide Ganking is also officially sanctioned. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
baltec1
1200
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:04:00 -
[92] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:Virgil Travis wrote:
Nice of you quote what we already knew, did any of it sink in?
Well it tells me that miners are a CCP sanctioned profession despite what Goons feels about it, industrialist are also sanctioned professions in this game.
Again, you say things everyone already knows. |
Miura Bull
Black Rebel Rifter Club
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:05:00 -
[93] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:One of the biggest points is that this PvP game is so fail at PvP that a large pct of the players actually think attacking defensless miners is some kind of accomplishment.
Or it's the only kind of PvP they can afford.
Nope.
Oh and....
annoyinggamerimg
Kaeda Maxwell does this for profit, and is making good ISK from it. OP needs to grow some, this is a sandbox with kids with spears and sharp knives in it, not a play school or day care centre.
|
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:06:00 -
[94] - Quote
James 315 wrote:I would like to thank the OP for making this thread.
He has proven the point I have been trying to make for some time now:
Highsec miners like the OP want their hulks to be absolutely invincible in highsec, even if they put no tanking modules on their ships whatsoever. They want to ban anti-mining activity like Hulkageddon. They literally want CCP to stop you from shooting at their ships, because they think they are entitled to mine in total peace and security.
This is the enemy we are fighting.
The enemy?
Because apparently the game WASNT engineered to have different security spaces. Apparently your argument is that the sandbox portion of multiplayer sandbox is paramount, and the clear measures CCP has already taken (and are being ignored or engineered around) to protect high sec are really just a way of making sure you can personally do whatever you want.
Say what you like, CCP has engineered game elements intended to establish and protect high security space outside of clearly defined conditions like corp war decs, allowing retribution for illegal actions like theft, etc.
Those elements clearly establish an intent to allow for a space which also has its costs. The key high value ores which are required for high value manufacturing are not present in high sec. Anchoring cannot happen in sec above 0.7. Certain types of missions are not available in high sec. The missions and activities available in high sec are broadly speaking lower value than those in low sec and null sec.
CCP needs to make a decision. Was high sec essentially a "cul de sac" intended exclusively to allow newbie generation, OR do they want to protect the segment of revenue which comes from gamers interested in activities OTHER than the pvp oriented play of low/null sec?
Because that's the decision at the end of the day. Do they want to act and protect the account base as it stands today, or are they willing to see what the long term effect is if these activities change the dynamic of who plays and pays over the long term? Remember a tenth of a percentage point of the player base is real money. It moves profitability. It affects marketing and other expenses. When you get to 1, 2, 4, 7% of the player base, now you are affecting current jobs and future development.
CCP needs to make a call.
Is this a anyone does anything sandbox? Or does high sec mean something? And where is the line drawn? Because today, gamers have found ways to organize and deter mining to the tune of 40% percent, and affect the mining operations and assets of thousands of players. Some of whom may be making the decision that the game is no longer worth the investment or that its not the game they thought it was. Apparently the sandbox only has room for the ones willing to fling crap, and not for those interested in building castles.
And what happens when the 10% of the player base or whatever it is who is building sandcastles in the corner leaves? Do some of the crap slingers leave too because some of the targets are gone? |
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
784
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:06:00 -
[95] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:I don't understand why people like this Oddball Six guy play sandbox games, maybe they don't know what a sandbox is. Oh you must be good, you must know it all so enlighten us humble gamers what this game is all about ... because I have read what CCP tells me what this game is about, that must be complete wrong because you obviously know better than CCP. To help you abit .. this is what CCP writes about the sandbox. "The Sandbox is the game world of EVE combined with the persistent actions of thousands upon thousands of players who interact with one another in a single-server environment. Your actions in the Sandbox can lead to the destruction of starships, the creation of a thriving corporation or the doom of an empire. Every action taken by every player affects the state of the Sandbox, and through it those actions affect every other player. The web of action and reaction in EVE leads to emergent gameplay where a single shot, business deal or even just a word can determine the destiny of thousands." At this page there is a presentation about the different paths you can take in this game... - Manufacturer - Trader - Miner - Empire builder - Freedom fighter - Pirate - Bounty hunter - Planetary industrialist - Explorer - Salvager - Loyalist - Fleet commander So this are the paths CCP suggest there is possible to do in this sandbox... Of course, you've heard the saying, "Don't confuse them with the facts. Their minds are made up." Or there's, "Never argue with a fool. He'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experience." I'm willing to bet the majority of the naysayers on this thread, and oddly enough all like them, don't understand half the words the OP used. When they DID have the vocabulary, they didn't have the abstract reasoning ability to parse out what was being said. Guess another what. They aren't the sort that are financially reliable over time...CCP...got your ears on? I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
190
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:07:00 -
[96] - Quote
If local were removed pirates would have a chance at attacking something more worthwhile than miners. |
Hroya
54
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:07:00 -
[97] - Quote
What would happen if all Hulk pilots would tank thier ships properly ?
Would you just bring more suiciders to take one out seeing as you have more financial wiggle room before it becomes cost inefficient ? Just curious.
You go your corridor but. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:10:00 -
[98] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
CCP needs to make a call.
Is this a anyone does anything sandbox? Or does high sec mean something? And where is the line drawn? Because today, gamers have found ways to organize and deter mining to the tune of 40% percent, and affect the mining operations and assets of thousands of players. Some of whom may be making the decision that the game is no longer worth the investment or that its not the game they thought it was. Apparently the sandbox only has room for the ones willing to fling crap, and not for those interested in building castles.
CCP made the call 11 years ago when they came up with EVE. I am currently building my castle in high sec and have been for a very long time. |
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
784
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:11:00 -
[99] - Quote
Hroya wrote:What would happen if all Hulk pilots would tank thier ships properly ?
Would you just bring more suiciders to take one out seeing as you have more financial wiggle room before it becomes cost inefficient ? Just curious.
What would happen if anyone ganking a hulk in high sec were flagged as criminals until they paid a hefty fine? No entry to any stations held by the sovereignty where the crime was committed. No use of sovereign assets, such as jumpgates. The fine would take money out of circulation easing inflation. Win. Win. But, for the players pretending to be leet...ganking unarmed ships in high sec. Gimme a break. That's something we should bend over backwards to save - such skill. Such finesse. I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:12:00 -
[100] - Quote
Hroya wrote:What would happen if all Hulk pilots would tank thier ships properly ?
Would you just bring more suiciders to take one out seeing as you have more financial wiggle room before it becomes cost inefficient ? Just curious.
You couldn't gank them for profit and as a result a lot less miners would die. Hulkageddon would still happen but that only lasts for a few weeks at most. Attention would shift to the poorly tanked haulers with far too much isk in their holds and pimp fitted mission boats. |
|
Arcticblue2
Nordic Freelancers inc
44
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:15:00 -
[101] - Quote
Virgil Travis wrote:
That's fine, it doesn't mean they're entitled to be wrapped in cotton wool though. If they can't protect their interests then they run the risk of losing them just like everyone else in the game.
Now that is partial true, because CCP also have found out that miners in low-sec and 0.0 should get a boost because it is so dangerous but we all know that being a miner in high-sec is quite alot more dangerous because there you won't have any protection from suicidegankers, in 0.0 you have your sovereigny with your alliance for protection. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1616
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:15:00 -
[102] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote: Because apparently the game WASNT engineered to have different security spaces. Apparently your argument is that the sandbox portion of multiplayer sandbox is paramount, and the clear measures CCP has already taken (and are being ignored or engineered around) to protect high sec are really just a way of making sure you can personally do whatever you want.
CONCORD provides consequences, not protection. HighSec is Higher Security. Doesn't say anything about safety.
Quote: Say what you like, CCP has engineered game elements intended to establish and protect high security space outside of clearly defined conditions like corp war decs, allowing retribution for illegal actions like theft, etc.
Those elements clearly establish an intent to allow for a space which also has its costs. The key high value ores which are required for high value manufacturing are not present in high sec. Anchoring cannot happen in sec above 0.7. Certain types of missions are not available in high sec. The missions and activities available in high sec are broadly speaking lower value than those in low sec and null sec.
CCP needs to make a decision. Was high sec essentially a "cul de sac" intended exclusively to allow newbie generation, OR do they want to protect the segment of revenue which comes from gamers interested in activities OTHER than the pvp oriented play of low/null sec?
HiSec is just as big of a PvP playground as the rest of EvE. Most of it just happens to be in the form of Market PvP. Since it would break the game to be able to opt out of only some PvP, any PvP-Opt out would have to be permanent and cut the toon off from the PvP side. SiSi works really well if you want to do stuff without PvP.
Quote: Because that's the decision at the end of the day. Do they want to act and protect the account base as it stands today, or are they willing to see what the long term effect is if these activities change the dynamic of who plays and pays over the long term? Remember a tenth of a percentage point of the player base is real money. It moves profitability. It affects marketing and other expenses. When you get to 1, 2, 4, 7% of the player base, now you are affecting current jobs and future development.
CCP needs to make a call.
Is this a anyone does anything sandbox? Or does high sec mean something? And where is the line drawn? Because today, gamers have found ways to organize and deter mining to the tune of 40% percent, and affect the mining operations and assets of thousands of players. Some of whom may be making the decision that the game is no longer worth the investment or that its not the game they thought it was. Apparently the sandbox only has room for the ones willing to fling crap, and not for those interested in building castles.
The Sandbox has only enough room for so many castles before people want to knock them down. The smarter monkeys learn to protect the castles that are important to them.
EvE is a Niche game, and that's why it's subs have been growing year after year for all 8 years. Besides WoW, no other MMO has done that. Removing PvP would turn EvE into a themepark MMO and it would likely follow the themepark MMO pattern:
Launch > People > People finish content in 2 months > People unsub until next expansion > Company folds. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Dreksl
Black Rebel Rifter Club
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:16:00 -
[103] - Quote
This crab has some wisdom to share on this topic. Also Kaeda I love you. |
James 315
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1749
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:17:00 -
[104] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:The enemy? Yes, "enemy." You are my enemy, and you are the enemy of all EVE whether you know it or not.
I wholeheartedly support the actions being taken against you, and I congratulate Kaeda Maxwell for destroying your mining vessel. I think Kaeda Maxwell deserves particular credit for killing your pod. Most highsec gankers are unable to kill the pods which, as we see in your case, often hold very valuable implants.
If you are genuinely interested in learning why you are the enemy, and why you need to cease your mining activity, I invite you to read this quick post I wrote on the topic, which explains everything.
Regardless, I wish you the best, unless you continue to mine in highsec in which case I wish you unending destruction (no offense). |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1616
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:18:00 -
[105] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:Virgil Travis wrote:
That's fine, it doesn't mean they're entitled to be wrapped in cotton wool though. If they can't protect their interests then they run the risk of losing them just like everyone else in the game.
Now that is partial true, because CCP also have found out that miners in low-sec and 0.0 should get a boost because it is so dangerous but we all know that being a miner in high-sec is quite alot more dangerous because there you won't have any protection from suicidegankers, in 0.0 you have your sovereigny with your alliance for protection.
Aren't alliances made out of other people? And CONCORD made of... pixels?
Nullsec is safe to mine in IF and only IF a huge number of people put a huge amount of Effort into making it so. Null is High Effort (collective) > High Reward (individual and collective) High is No Effort (individual) > Moderate Reward (individual) Low Reward (collective). Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Arcticblue2
Nordic Freelancers inc
44
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:18:00 -
[106] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:What would happen if anyone ganking a hulk in high sec were flagged as criminals until they paid a hefty fine? No entry to any stations held by the sovereignty where the crime was committed. No use of sovereign assets, such as jumpgates. The fine would take money out of circulation easing inflation. Win. Win. But, for the players pretending to be leet...ganking unarmed ships in high sec. Gimme a break. That's something we should bend over backwards to save - such skill. Such finesse. PS That level of ability should invite them to go faceroll WoW.
Actually there are many good ideas... paying fines for suicideganking ... also does make the timer for concord last only in gametime so there is no point for the player to log off to wait out the timer with their main instead ... so that would make them having to wait a while before next target and such.
|
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:24:00 -
[107] - Quote
James 315 wrote:Oddball Six wrote:The enemy? Yes, "enemy." You are my enemy, and you are the enemy of all EVE whether you know it or not. I wholeheartedly support the actions being taken against you, and I congratulate Kaeda Maxwell for destroying your mining vessel. I think Kaeda Maxwell deserves particular credit for killing your pod. Most highsec gankers are unable to kill the pods which, as we see in your case, often hold very valuable implants. If you are genuinely interested in learning why you are the enemy, and why you need to cease your mining activity, I invite you to read this quick post I wrote on the topic, which explains everything. Regardless, I wish you the best, unless you continue to mine in highsec in which case I wish you unending destruction (no offense).
Actually I have read your manifesto.
I think you over-reach, frankly. Towers, player owned stations, and larger corps have as much to do with the changes in PvP dynamics as anything you cite in your series of posts. I do, however applaud you for expounding on the idea so extensively, I may not agree with you, but I can appreciate the detail in your position.
My position is that high sec should be as it is today, just with a touch more protection to ensure it remains a "more safe" area in the face of new gank-fests and player organized competitions like hulkageddon.
High sec should stay low/moderate value. High sec should remain neutral and NPC corp controlled. High sec should have all of the nerfs I have already touched on in my earlier posts re anchoring, POS, T1 components only, low missions, etc.
I think that mining can happen in high sec, and be part of the broader economy and game, but that CCP needs to act in SOME way to preserve it as ONE POSSIBLE profession among the many available. When an entire sector of the game has been reduced by half, that is a rousing indictment that the balances available in the system are inadequate and action is needed. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:26:00 -
[108] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:
Actually there are many good ideas... paying fines for suicideganking ... also does make the timer for concord last only in gametime so there is no point for the player to log off to wait out the timer with their main instead ... so that would make them having to wait a while before next target and such.
The ganker loses their ship They get a sec status hit and will be attacked by the empire navies when it gets low enough They turn flashy red in local and on the overveiw Anyone can attack a -10 pirates ship Concord will destroy any ship the pirate gets into within 15 minutes of aggression The "victim" can kill the pirate
Seems we already have penalties in place. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:28:00 -
[109] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Actually I have read your manifesto.
I think you over-reach, frankly. Towers, player owned stations, and larger corps have as much to do with the changes in PvP dynamics as anything you cite in your series of posts. I do, however applaud you for expounding on the idea so extensively, I may not agree with you, but I can appreciate the detail in your position.
My position is that high sec should be as it is today, just with a touch more protection to ensure it remains a "more safe" area in the face of new gank-fests and player organized competitions like hulkageddon.
High sec should stay low/moderate value. High sec should remain neutral and NPC corp controlled. High sec should have all of the nerfs I have already touched on in my earlier posts re anchoring, POS, T1 components only, low missions, etc.
I think that mining can happen in high sec, and be part of the broader economy and game, but that CCP needs to act in SOME way to preserve it as ONE POSSIBLE profession among the many available. When an entire sector of the game has been reduced by half, that is a rousing indictment that the balances available in the system are inadequate and action is needed.
There is nothing new happening. Everything you see going on has been going on for the past 5 years or from the very start. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:29:00 -
[110] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Arcticblue2 wrote:
Actually there are many good ideas... paying fines for suicideganking ... also does make the timer for concord last only in gametime so there is no point for the player to log off to wait out the timer with their main instead ... so that would make them having to wait a while before next target and such.
The ganker loses their ship They get a sec status hit and will be attacked by the empire navies when it gets low enough They turn flashy red in local and on the overveiw Anyone can attack a -10 pirates ship Concord will destroy any ship the pirate gets into within 15 minutes of aggression The "victim" can kill the pirate Seems we already have penalties in place.
Which are clearly effective [/sarcasm].
I think that's the problem, none of these are particularly effective in a high sec zone. Particularly when these individuals are able to dock at stations, etc, as if nothing had happened. |
|
Mercy Kills
Reapers...
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:29:00 -
[111] - Quote
Dreksl wrote:This crab has some wisdom to share on this topic. Also Kaeda I love you.
God, that's awesome. Saving that and +1 for you good, sir.
|
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:34:00 -
[112] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Which are clearly effective [/sarcasm].
I think that's the problem, none of these are particularly effective in a high sec zone. Particularly when these individuals are able to dock at stations, etc, as if nothing had happened.
Log in and jump into a badger
Now park yourself on the perimiter gate in jita and count how long it takes for someone to kill you.
Then take a badger to a high traffic lowsec gate and count how long you last. |
James 315
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1750
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:37:00 -
[113] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:My position is that high sec should be as it is today, just with a touch more protection You are afflicted by the "one more nerf" disease. Why weren't all of the previous nerfs to ganking enough? Because you don't want your ship to be destroyed, even if you fail-fit it.
Quote:[]....to ensure it remains a "more safe" area in the face of new gank-fests and player organized competitions like hulkageddon. You think it's against the EULA to do Hulkageddon. Player-organized events like Hulkageddon are a primary draw of EVE. And you want to ban people from doing them.
Mining, for obvious reasons, does not and cannot take priority. |
Quartzlight Evenstar Icefluxor
Perkone Caldari State
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:39:00 -
[114] - Quote
Dreksl wrote:This crab has some wisdom to share on this topic. Also Kaeda I love you.
I've been CRAB-WOWED !
+20 Ohh poor silly goon chillrens. Nobody in high sec cares about your plans to occupy jita like a bunch of dirty hippies. "....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced." |
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
37
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:42:00 -
[115] - Quote
This story made me aware of EVE:
http://eve.klaki.net/heist/
Before I read about this I couldn't imagine paying a monthly subscrition to a game. Now I've been doing so for 6 years.
... oh, and I also want to see some more WIS
Jill.
EVE Racing event thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=107164&find=unread
Join in game channel/mailing list: New Eden Racing |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:43:00 -
[116] - Quote
James 315 wrote:]You are afflicted by the "one more nerf" disease. Why weren't all of the previous nerfs to ganking enough? Because you don't want your ship to be destroyed, even if you fail-fit it. If there's enough buffs the only fail fit will be one without max yield. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Mercy Kills
Reapers...
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:45:00 -
[117] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:baltec1 wrote:Arcticblue2 wrote:
Actually there are many good ideas... paying fines for suicideganking ... also does make the timer for concord last only in gametime so there is no point for the player to log off to wait out the timer with their main instead ... so that would make them having to wait a while before next target and such.
The ganker loses their ship They get a sec status hit and will be attacked by the empire navies when it gets low enough They turn flashy red in local and on the overveiw Anyone can attack a -10 pirates ship Concord will destroy any ship the pirate gets into within 15 minutes of aggression The "victim" can kill the pirate Seems we already have penalties in place. Which are clearly effective [/sarcasm]. I think that's the problem, none of these are particularly effective in a high sec zone. Particularly when these individuals are able to dock at stations, etc, as if nothing had happened.
Yea, YOU think they're not effective because YOU got caught with your pants down. Seriously all this whining and you still haven't provided good enough answers to some very relevant questions:
*Why the **** would you fly a 300million isk ship and not even TRY to protect it(i.e. fitting it with SOME sort of tank)?
*Why do you think after 9yrs of Eve encouraging this cutthroat kind of gameplay, should CCP change everything now because people like you apparently, have the isk to spare to buy an expensive ship but apparently, buying the relatively inexpensive mods to keep it protected are just out of your price range(read: you're lazy) ?
*Why is it so hard for you to understand that being in hi-sec space does not mean you are invincible? It only means and it has ALWAYS ONLY meant(again for NINE years that you are relatively MORE safe than you would be in low/null sec. That all means, for the slow among us, that you still need to be on your toes(for example: TANKING. YOUR. SHIP.) and that you can still be killed if someone wants you dead bad enough as long as that person is willing to accept the consequences for the act of killing you.
Lastly, but maybe the most important:
*Why on EARTH would you not make sure that you knew what the game was truly about before you plopped down your credit card info? This is not anything new and has always been and always will be until the servers shut down. Why you think the entire game should change for you because YOU got caught being lazy and doing something that even one week old players know(your ship should be fitted with a tank) is...beyond the realm of logical thought.
Not being mean but maybe instead of beating your head against the brick wall that is trying to "ganking" banned(read: **** that's never gonna happen) why not either a.) take this as a learning experience and say, "hey, i will never leave the station without my ship being properly fitted again and i will definitely keep an eye out for strange people entering the asteroid field I'm in." or b.) just change to a game that has set pve servers where you know that you can pick flowers, mine, enchant, etc etc. and never be touched. |
Ituhata Saken
Elysium Enterprises
113
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:49:00 -
[118] - Quote
Quote:Yet CCP has denoted conduct such as this which determines to interfere with the operation of the system and the enjoyment of other players as verboten through at least two provisions. Quote: "Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. "
-http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp The terms of service at http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp specifically forbids role playing that interferes with others enjoyment of the game as well as forbidding conduct which disallows others to enjoy the game.
Role playing violates the rules of the sandbox. More importantly, role playing usually doesn't destroy a ship which often results in more plex/money for CCP. |
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
95
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:52:00 -
[119] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Homo Jesus wrote:I too want a change to the rules so it's easier for me to win at something. Whenever I get the time I'll find the bits and pieces of the EULA that support my views and make another thread to help our douche bag cause. He's simply used to the real-life status quo, where people like himself have always gotten ahead via lobbying and frivolous lawsuits. There is nothing competitive about the state of business today, save for the free-for-all that is the entry-level job market. The whole system is fixed and rotten, but aside from that, it encourages complacency. He is unable to enter an environment that EVE simulates, a purer, more base environment, and compete. He became lost, and unable to respond to changing trends. So he came to the forums, and with the usual passive-aggressive attitude that his kind exhibits, tried to get what he wants by making a bunch of real-life legal parallels. At some point, he forgot that he was playing a video game with guns. The thing that gets me the most, though, is that he thinks that his subscription acts as anything more than a cash buffer for CCP's actual development budget. It is indeed ignorant to think that CCP itself doesn't realize that the players who whine about getting killed will quit at some point. The only way they would stay (and even that is questionable, due to the whole boredom factor), is if these players were never violenced in any way, shape, or form. And in a game like EVE, that's simply impossible.
Pretty much. |
Kaeda Maxwell
Black Rebel Rifter Club
100
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:53:00 -
[120] - Quote
Hello Oddball,
I'm sure you know who I am. You'll be pleased to learn (I hope) I don't live in my mothers basement either. In fact it's a fairly nice three bedroom apartment with two balconies. I'm not a husband or a father because I instead would like to retire early to a nice cottage preferably overlooking the sea, and well children cost money. We all make our choices in life. I am however like you employed full time, I fly a desk nothing overly impressive. I fail to see how any of this is relevant to EVE Online, which is a fictional universe that only exists as code on a server-park somewhere in London. But since you seemed to think real life had some bearing on all this I decided to be courteous and indulge you.
Lets move on to the matter at hand shall we, your Hulk and pod that so unfortunately (for you) died due to my actions in Bahromab, which you seem to think is some random act of griefing. Since arguing opinions would be a futile exercise I shall instead share with you the work that went into accomplishing your virtual demise in this instance. And some views on EVE as a game.
As you may or may not have noticed I'm -10.0 which means operating in hisec takes some doing, so lets start with that. In order to find targets I use an alt, unlike most gankers my alt isn't exactly inconspicuous had you paid attention to local in Bahromab you would have noticed Kohana Maxwell. She was around for quite a while as you switched belts several times before you finally (almost) stayed put. Had you paid any attention to your directional scanner you would have also noticed combat probes following you around from belt to belt. Anyway I digress. Once I seized you up to be a viable target I undocked from Youl station, which in in hisec (0.8), and warped to an undock bookmark I had made earlier using said alt. Then I proceed to head over to Bahromab which is a 7 jump journey since I have to avoid the busy system of Madirmilire which often has suicide gankers of a different brand present who would happily explode my flashy red catalyst upon entering the system. Regardless that is 7 jumps on which any alert players can end my endeavour there and then. Eventually I arrived in Kudi, one jump away from you, sadly for me you at this point decided to switch belts again so I spend the next 3 or 4 minutes bouncing between celestials in Kudi with the Amarr Navy in hot pursuit. Meanwhile waiting for you to pick a new belt (Planet 5 Belt 1 if I recall correctly) and dual boxing keeping Kaeda alive and moving and relocating probes on Kohana to get a decent warp in. When this finally happened I came into system had Kohana squad warp Kaeda on top of you and exploded you hulk and indeed you pod. Which turned out to be quite the rewarding killmail indeed.
Afterwards I salvaged the wreck and looted I think a single T2 stripminer the result of which only just about covered the cost of my T2 fitted catalyst. Which hadn't it been for the well nice pod mail would have made me consider it a mediocre gank, I like to actually run a profit on them. You see and this is where we differ in opinion, what you call griefing isn't in fact griefing so much. I make decent ISK ganking miners I wrote a lengthy blog on it here. Yes obviously Hulkageddon provides added value (for me), I'll even admit I would have done other things in May in EVE had it not been Hulkageddon. I don't even do it for the tears which I also wrote a lengthy blog about actually. But that said a competition to liven things up a little, plus chatting with other gankers and all in all Hulkageddon is quite the worthwhile content to me. And Helicity is a star for putting in the time to organize and administer it all if you ask me.
Anyway Oddball, I don't think we are very likely to ever agree on what comprises 'fun gameplay', but I would like to point out that when you come to a sandbox game you might want to keep in mind that what you consider 'fun' or 'worthwhile' might not even be recognizable as such by somebody else in the same sandbox. You may think of me as some random griefer, while in fact I'm having a lot of fun working around the fact I'm -10.0 and attempting to make a profit ganking miners in hisec despite it (and succeeding). You don't however see me going onto the forums and writing some wall of text quoting the EULA to try and get CCP to remove mining from the sandbox because I don't consider it fun or entertaining, I'd appreciate it if you'd at least consider providing us 'griefers' the same courtesy. At the end of the day EVE is a a sandbox and a PvP game that you and I both willingly subscribe too and I may assume (I hope) while being aware of both these things. Yet here you are pleading to CCP to invalidate a gameplay style you don't agree with for mostly no other reason then that it interferes with your own. Nothing is stopping you from interfering with my playstyle for the record, and I mean in game within EVE's existing framework and rules (instead of by trying to get CCP to change the rules). Such is the very nature and beauty of EVE.
I look forward to your cunning ingame revenge. I promise not to post a lengthy post on the forums begging CCP's aide when it happens.
Peace,
Kaeda out.
p.s. After the 29th I'll be out in lowsec and null again you'll be pleased to learn, contrary to popular myth being a ganker and a pvp'er aren't mutually exclusive. |
|
Tyraenin
Black Rebel Rifter Club
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:54:00 -
[121] - Quote
I have to marvel at the sheer sense of entitlement the OP has. This game is about taking something from somoene else. You grief other miners because every rock you chew up with your Hulk is one less rock that another miner is able to mine. Ergo, you have taken resources from another player - Griefer.
But if someone takes something away from you, you somehow feel wronged and come here and whine. You are not the first and I have no doubt that you won't be the last. At the end of the day though. the collective whine is the demon spawn of a over-inflated sene of entitlement.
You have assets in the game. There is even an icon on the Neocom labeled "Assets" and you feel entitled to have those assets and don't feel as though you should be troubled to have to defend them. All the shinies are yours! The lesson to take from this is to consider the consequences of your actions just as Kaeda Maxwell did when she exploded your Hulk (that you refused to defend) and then your pod (which you refused to defend). There are also consequences to your inaction.
I would say if this is difficult for you to swallow you will continue to have your shinies taken away from you.
Regards.
|
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
96
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:58:00 -
[122] - Quote
How is that these "casuals" don't seem to get that their subscription is just a convenient cash grab by ccp. They don't matter as they come and go all the time. Thanks for injecting cash into ccp's wallet so they can keep developing the game for those that get it. |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
124
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:58:00 -
[123] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Which are clearly effective [/sarcasm].
I think that's the problem, none of these are particularly effective in a high sec zone. Particularly when these individuals are able to dock at stations, etc, as if nothing had happened.
You give em an inch and they take a ******* mile.
Insurance payouts were recently taken away for losses caused by concord. That change made a lot of sense and forced gankers to make things a little more cost effective.
So you want to take more? Why not just request the removal of non-consensual pvp from hisec seeing as thats what youll be asking for 3 months after they introduced said fines...
...and another thing; there's nothing more vile being spilled out by you lot than the claim that you should be allowed to mine in peace because after all this is a sandbox game and youre free to do whatever you like. God forbid anyone trying to stop you because as we all know its a sandbox game... |
Welsige
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:59:00 -
[124] - Quote
Tallon Sylph wrote:ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
High sec dosent means safety.
High sec is that place you spawn and after you see how sh*t it is you move along to other endeavours, where your security is provided by other fellow and known players, not some dummy npc's. ~ 10.058 ~
Free The Mittani |
Mercy Kills
Reapers...
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:07:00 -
[125] - Quote
Kaeda Maxwell wrote:Hello Oddball, ......[omitted for character limit -Mercy] Lets move on to the matter at hand shall we, your Hulk and pod that so unfortunately (for you) died due to my actions in Bahromab, which you seem to think is some random act of griefing. Since arguing opinions would be a futile exercise I shall instead share with you the work that went into accomplishing your virtual demise in this instance. And some views on EVE as a game. As you may or may not have noticed I'm -10.0 which means operating in hisec takes some doing, so lets start with that. In order to find targets I use an alt, unlike most gankers my alt isn't exactly inconspicuous had you paid attention to local in Bahromab you would have noticed Kohana Maxwell. She was around for quite a while as you switched belts several times before you finally (almost) stayed put. Had you paid any attention to your directional scanner you would have also noticed combat probes following you around from belt to belt. Anyway I digress. Once I seized you up to be a viable target I undocked from Youl station, which is in hisec (0.8), and warped to an undock bookmark I had made earlier using said alt. Then I proceed to head over to Bahromab which is a 7 jump journey since I have to avoid the busy system of Madirmilire which often has suicide gankers of a different brand present who would happily explode my flashy red catalyst upon entering the system. Regardless that is 7 jumps on which any alert players can end my endeavour there and then. Eventually I arrived in Kudi, one jump away from you, sadly for me you at this point decided to switch belts again so I spend the next 3 or 4 minutes bouncing between celestials in Kudi with the Amarr Navy in hot pursuit. Meanwhile waiting for you to pick a new belt (Planet 5 Belt 1 if I recall correctly) and dual boxing keeping Kaeda alive and moving and relocating probes on Kohana to get a decent warp in. When this finally happened I came into system had Kohana squad warp Kaeda on top of you and exploded your hulk and indeed you pod. Which turned out to be quite the rewarding killmail indeed. Afterwards I salvaged the wreck and looted I think a single T2 stripminer the result of which only just about covered the cost of my T2 fitted catalyst. Which hadn't it been for the well nice pod mail would have made me consider it a mediocre gank, I like to actually run a profit on them. You see and this is where we differ in opinion, what you call griefing isn't in fact griefing so much. I make decent ISK ganking miners I wrote a lengthy blog on it here. Yes obviously Hulkageddon provides added value (for me), I'll even admit I would have done other things in May in EVE had it not been Hulkageddon. I don't even do it for the tears which I also wrote a lengthy blog about actually. But that said a competition to liven things up a little, plus chatting with other gankers and all in all Hulkageddon is quite the worthwhile content to me. And Helicity is a star for putting in the time to organize and administer it all if you ask me. Anyway Oddball, I don't think we are very likely to ever agree on what comprises 'fun gameplay', but I would like to point out that when you come to a sandbox game you might want to keep in mind that what you consider 'fun' or 'worthwhile' might not even be recognizable as such by somebody else in the same sandbox. You may think of me as some random griefer, while in fact I'm having a lot of fun working around the fact I'm -10.0 and attempting to make a profit ganking miners in hisec despite it (and succeeding). You don't however see me going onto the forums and writing some wall of text quoting the EULA to try and get CCP to remove mining from the sandbox because I don't consider it fun or entertaining, I'd appreciate it if you'd at least consider providing us 'griefers' the same courtesy. At the end of the day EVE is a a sandbox and a PvP game that you and I both willingly subscribe too and I may assume (I hope) while being aware of both these things. Yet here you are pleading to CCP to invalidate a gameplay style you don't agree with for mostly no other reason then that it interferes with your own. Nothing is stopping you from interfering with my playstyle for the record, and I mean in game within EVE's existing framework and rules (instead of by trying to get CCP to change the rules). Such is the very nature and beauty of EVE. I look forward to your cunning ingame revenge. I promise not to post a lengthy post on the forums begging CCP's aide when it happens. Peace, Kaeda out. p.s. After the 29th I'll be out in lowsec and null again you'll be pleased to learn, contrary to popular myth being a ganker and a pvp'er aren't mutually exclusive.
And this...this right here is just one example of why I love this game and always come back. Just the amount of strategy, tactics, and subterfuge that went into the destruction of ONE ship, you multiply it by a couple of thousand and you only just begin to get the larger picture of why this game is like no other and it's fanbase, while small, is strongly devoted. Plus we're collectively smarter than other communities, too. ;)
Thanks for sharing your story, Kaeda.
-Mercy |
James 315
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1756
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:07:00 -
[126] - Quote
Kaeda Maxwell wrote:(words) Well said. What you described is emergent gameplay at its finest, overcoming obstacles by using skill and creativity, in order to carry out a goal. And the OP thinks this should be against the EULA.
I wish people like the OP would take this into consideration. Should players like Kaeda Maxwell be banned for playing EVE to the fullest, all so highsec miners can grab a coffee and be guaranteed to find their ship still intact when they return?
These are the two visions of EVE's future, and there cannot be any compromise. Either the OP's fail-fit hulk is invincible, or it is not. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
464
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:09:00 -
[127] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:Only one reason why so-called "pirates" would want to "ply their trade" in high sec - it's EASY.
Because you make it easy. eh |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:09:00 -
[128] - Quote
Welsige wrote:High sec dosent means safety.
High sec is that place you spawn and after you see how sh*t it is you move along to other endeavours, where your security is provided by other fellow and known players, not some dummy npc's. What, really.
Don't most just stay in highsec for their endeavors? Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
125
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:14:00 -
[129] - Quote
Welsige wrote:
where your security is provided by other fellow and known players
That doesnt sound like deklein |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
581
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:18:00 -
[130] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:So you want to take more? Why not just request the removal of non-consensual pvp from hisec seeing as thats what youll be asking for 3 months after they introduced said fines... They've been doing this for over half a decade.
And slowly getting there. |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
908
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:21:00 -
[131] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Aruken Marr wrote:So you want to take more? Why not just request the removal of non-consensual pvp from hisec seeing as thats what youll be asking for 3 months after they introduced said fines... They've been doing this for over half a decade. And slowly getting there. You have to do it incrementally. A small "adjustment" here, some "trweaking" there, a midge of "compromise".
And then you reach the magic button and slam it with the force of three strip miners hitting a veldspar rock. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Jessie-A Tassik
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:27:00 -
[132] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on. Welcome to EVE, a PVP game full of nasty pirates and terrorists who love people who fail to protect themselves in even the most basic way.
Best you get used to EVE as it is not advertised as a dark and hostile game for nothing.
Boilerplate Goon lying.
Hulk's cannot be tanked in any reasonable way.
Fly covetors not hulks. |
Jessie-A Tassik
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:29:00 -
[133] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:Oddball Six wrote:
Which are clearly effective [/sarcasm].
I think that's the problem, none of these are particularly effective in a high sec zone. Particularly when these individuals are able to dock at stations, etc, as if nothing had happened.
You give em an inch and they take a ******* mile. Insurance payouts were recently taken away for losses caused by concord. That change made a lot of sense and forced gankers to make things a little more cost effective. So you want to take more? Why not just request the removal of non-consensual pvp from hisec seeing as thats what youll be asking for 3 months after they introduced said fines... ...and another thing; there's nothing more vile being spilled out by you lot than the claim that you should be allowed to mine in peace because after all this is a sandbox game and youre free to do whatever you like. God forbid anyone trying to stop you because as we all know its a sandbox game...
Why don't we take your CYNO blankie and your Local blankie away? |
baltec1
1203
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:30:00 -
[134] - Quote
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
Boilerplate Goon lying.
Hulk's cannot be tanked in any reasonable way.
Fly covetors not hulks.
A hulk will tank a pair of alpha maelstroms easily. |
Cyprus Black
Novatech Armada En Garde
208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:31:00 -
[135] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:A Simple ResponseI would suggest the response is simple and two pronged.
- Concord notices the drop in the markets and in order to ensure the supposed stability of the universe, have placed a couple of concord ships resident in high sec asteroid belts only in addition to their current locations.
- CCP begins warning and taking action against blatant high sec offenders.
Anecdotal evidence has already started to surface of player discontent with allowing these actions to remain unpunished and indeed unrestrained. I question how long CCP will wait to allow bands of players to flagrantly collude to ignore intended game mechanics and deny greater segments of the player base the enjoyment of the chosen virtual profession that keeps the real-life game revenue coming in. There are some obvious and glaring problems with your "Simple Response" propositions.
1) It doesn't matter how many Concord ships are present. One or a million ships makes little to no difference due to a thing called Alpha Strike Damage. Basically highsec gankers fit their ships to do maximum amount of damage in one or two volleys. Concord cannot predict the future and cannot preemptively strike down gankers. They can only take action against gankers AFTER they've engaged in the deed. The ganker is guaranteed to get in at least one volley on the victim and often that's enough to get a kill.
2) EvE Online just turned nine years old. It's been a LONG standing policy that ganking in highsec is an allowable practice. Reversing that decision would take a massive amount of effort on CCPs part, both in getting the word out that the practice is no longer allowed and actually policing the new ruling.
A far more elegant and functional solution is to change the stats on the exumers or and/or boost their survivability. You wouldn't complain about needles when you get a tattoo. So why would you complain about PvP when you play EVE? |
baltec1
1203
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:35:00 -
[136] - Quote
Cyprus Black wrote:
A far more elegant and functional solution is to change the stats on the exumers or and/or boost their survivability.
Not needed. The hulk can tank very well if people chose to. Even the mac can be fitted with a good tank. |
Ituhata Saken
Elysium Enterprises
113
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:42:00 -
[137] - Quote
no hope for retriever pilots, huh? |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
180
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:43:00 -
[138] - Quote
James 315 wrote:Oddball Six wrote:The enemy? Yes, "enemy." You are my enemy, and you are the enemy of all EVE whether you know it or not. I wholeheartedly support the actions being taken against you, and I congratulate Kaeda Maxwell for destroying your mining vessel. I think Kaeda Maxwell deserves particular credit for killing your pod. Most highsec gankers are unable to kill the pods which, as we see in your case, often hold very valuable implants. If you are genuinely interested in learning why you are the enemy, and why you need to cease your mining activity, I invite you to read this quick post I wrote on the topic, which explains everything. Regardless, I wish you the best, unless you continue to mine in highsec in which case I wish you unending destruction (no offense).
You should run for public office. Long-winded sociopaths are always in demand there.
All I can say is that I hope you enjoy it when there is no more tritanium or pyreite to build your ganking ships, or indeed to build the ships you enjoy ganking.
Everyone claiming that EVE is a sandbox and that everyone should be able to do exactly what they want to do is missing an important part of CCPs vision. It's not just a sandbox, it's a sandbox with actions and consequences. You can do anything you want in real life, too. You're perfectly able to buy yourself a AR-15, walk into a library, and start putting rounds in people that don't want anything to do with you, and you can even steal from and eat their dead bodies. No place is truly safe. Do you think that you should be able to shoot people because they forgot to wear a bulletproof vest that day?
You bang on and on about the consequences of other people's choices and completely ignore your own, because you and the rest of the idiots are incapable of seeing past your own noses. I hope you and the Goons enjoy mining your own minerals and losing your Orcas and Exhumers. If you want to create an incentive for more people to live in nullsec/WH space, fine. Do it, and I'll look forward to it. If you want to harass and annihilate botters until CCP finally gets around to banning them, you'll hear no argument from me. Bots and RMT are a blight on the face of the green Earth and a festering pustule on the ass of our EVE.
I think your manifesto is a blatant troll, but on the off-chance you're actually serious, I just had to tell you what an idiot you are. Large nullsec alliances have FAR more influence over the direction of this game than any other group has ever had, and that influence is degrading EVE at an alarming rate. In fact, your causality chain is completely backwards. The sociopathic actions of pirates, thieves, and scum is what continues to deter people without serious psychological problems away from lowsec and nullsec. Facing a distinct lack of easy targets instead of other organized alliances, the powerful groups decided to impose their will on players that wanted nothing to do with them. Since CCP isn't a company of complete morons, they were forced to take action before they started losing subscriptions. If you want small scale PvP in nullsec back, then suggest ideas actually relevant to PvP, such as mechanics that make blobbing and hotdropping garbage less viable. Your immensely tedious whinging about players in highsec is no more or less valid or influential than the whining of highsec players that are getting caught in the crossfire of bored nullsec players disappointed with the situation in nullsec. |
Mercy Kills
Reapers...
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:45:00 -
[139] - Quote
>.>
where this thread is going:
Nowhere |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1027
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:49:00 -
[140] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:
You should run for public office. Long-winded sociopaths are always in demand there.
Everyone claiming that EVE is a sandbox and that everyone should be able to do exactly what they want to do is missing an important part of CCPs vision. It's not just a sandbox, it's a sandbox with actions and consequences. You can do anything you want in real life, too. You're perfectly able to buy yourself a AR-15, walk into a library, and start putting rounds in people that don't want anything to do with you, and you can even steal from and eat their dead bodies. No place is truly safe. Do you think that you should be able to shoot people because they forgot to wear a bulletproof vest that day?.
Petition God about it. |
|
baltec1
1204
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:52:00 -
[141] - Quote
Ituhata Saken wrote:no hope for retriever pilots, huh?
Its possible to tank them against a destroyer. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2231
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:56:00 -
[142] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Untrue, but hey keep saying that.
http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
Since the middle of 2009, the amount of active players online has significantly decreased.
I agree with the OP. He posted a very excellent and concise thread. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
912
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:57:00 -
[143] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
Boilerplate Goon lying.
Hulk's cannot be tanked in any reasonable way.
Fly covetors not hulks.
A hulk will tank a pair of alpha maelstroms easily. It's a surprisingly small ship. It would be surprising if battleship weapons hurt it too badly
Of course, this doesn't hold true if a titan (with even bigger weapons) was shooting it, but that's hardly a problem. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:59:00 -
[144] - Quote
Quote:How is that these "casuals" don't seem to get that their subscription is just a convenient cash grab by ccp. They don't matter as they come and go all the time. Thanks for injecting cash into ccp's wallet so they can keep developing the game for those that get it.
Make the gun substantially more dangerous and/or less fun for the casuals and a funny thing happens. You start losing them.
You are actually proving my point, not debasing it.
Quote:1) It doesn't matter how many Concord ships are present. One or a million ships makes little to no difference due to a thing called Alpha Strike Damage. Basically highsec gankers fit their ships to do maximum amount of damage in one or two volleys. Concord cannot predict the future and cannot preemptively strike down gankers. They can only take action against gankers AFTER they've engaged in the deed. The ganker is guaranteed to get in at least one volley on the victim and often that's enough to get a kill.
2) EvE Online just turned nine years old. It's been a LONG standing policy that ganking in highsec is an allowable practice. Reversing that decision would take a massive amount of effort on CCPs part, both in getting the word out that the practice is no longer allowed and actually policing the new ruling.
A far more elegant and functional solution is to change the stats on the exumers or and/or boost their survivability.
Item 1 of the approach I suggested takes a similar approach. If you can gank with a strength that in the first X bursts, you take down a hulk before concord takes you out, then by all means, have at it. Its just higher risk for your reward.
It took probably 4 or 5 strikes to take down my hulk. And one against my pod, and in neither case was I fast enough with my click sequence to warp out. As I have noted in this thread, I certainly learned a number of lessons I had forgotten since being in a corp that was war decc'd. But as I also noted, its because I went a different way with my gameplay and trusted to the system to promote (and inhibit) certain behaviors as it was intended to do.
My main points with all of my post boil down to two things: 1) CCP needs to decide at what point a high sec gank becomes grief and/or what impact they are willing to accept to the casual and/or non-pvp player base.
2) The advent of ganking competitions, large scale information sharing, large-scale cartel-like alliances building massive fleets, etc, has changed the level of risk and the ability of what players can do pushing into high-sec. High-sec needs to be re-tuned in some way. Either by balancing the ability of the mining ships to survive longer, adding security to some element of the system, or introducing a deterrent for players who engage in this activity in a systematic way that falls over to griefing - which is predicated on the CCP decision from point 1. |
Eso Es
Li3's Electric Cucumber SpaceMonkey's Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:01:00 -
[145] - Quote
Quartzlight Evenstar Icefluxor wrote:Oddball Six wrote:Quote:"Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. " -http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp
You conveneniently have left out the bolded portion.
"A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. "
Hulkageddon can be quite profitable for the gankers, every 10 Exhumers is 100M ISK paid from goonswarm, not to mention mods/ore that drops from the actual kill.
I feel for you guys, I really do, but this:
Oddball Six wrote:
- Concord notices the drop in the markets and in order to ensure the supposed stability of the universe, have placed a couple of concord ships resident in high sec asteroid belts only in addition to their current locations.
just shows how little you guys actually know about game mechanics and protecting yourselves. You want CONCORD in your belt protecting your op? Build a throw away alt, warp him to said belt, aggro something illegally, and wammo CONCORD is now in your belt until it has to protect some other poor hapless HiSec resident.
Additionally, while I do feel badly for people who lose so much in these kills, I have to take the "metagame" side of the recent podcast debates, you are playing a multiplayer game, where other players actions regularly affect your own gaming experience. For someone to have no idea about Hulkageddon clearly shows they are not willing to involve themselves in the community (other than to complain about the consequences of not doing so), and as such are at a clear disadvantage to those who do follow what is happening in the game.
You don't have to metagame- but be prepared to accept the consequences of your ignorance. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:03:00 -
[146] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: It's a surprisingly small ship. It would be surprising if battleship weapons hurt it too badly
Of course, this doesn't hold true if a titan (with even bigger weapons) was shooting it, but that's hardly a problem.
Look at what I just cooked up
[Skiff, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Co-Processor II
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
17.9k EHP and no implants in a damn skiff. It even gets +2 warp warp strength to boot. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:04:00 -
[147] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Untrue, but hey keep saying that. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquilitySince the middle of 2009, the amount of active players online has significantly decreased. I agree with the OP. He posted a very excellent and concise thread.
The number of subscriptions has risen. |
James 315
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1758
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:04:00 -
[148] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:I think your manifesto is a blatant troll, but on the off-chance you're actually serious, I just had to tell you what an idiot you are. Large nullsec alliances have FAR more influence over the direction of this game than any other group has ever had, Let's hope so.
Quote:....The sociopathic actions of pirates, thieves, and scum is what continues to deter people without serious psychological problems from lowsec and nullsec. You mean by blowing up spaceships in a game where people blow up spaceships? Is it sociopathic to play EVE as intended? I think not.
Quote:Facing a distinct lack of easy targets instead of other organized alliances, the powerful groups decided to impose their will on players that wanted nothing to do with them. Good. This is called "non-consensual PvP."
Quote:Since CCP isn't a company of complete morons, they were forced to take action before they started losing subscriptions. They lost subscriptions with Incarna, the expansion designed to gear the game toward a more mainstream audience. CCP gains subscriptions when they gear the game toward proper EVE players--the "sociopaths" you mentioned earlier.
You can have your mindless highsec mining...I and the rest of the EVE community will take Burn Jita and Hulkageddon any day. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:06:00 -
[149] - Quote
Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own.
Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed
[Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
|
RAP ACTION HERO
Estel Arador Corp Services
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:19:00 -
[150] - Quote
hard to sympathize with the op's big ticket implants and empty mid slots. |
|
Llywelyn Emrys
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:23:00 -
[151] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own. Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed
[Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
Good to see you adapting instead of calling it quits. You took a step towards being a real member of the EVE community today. |
Lyron-Baktos
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
198
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:23:00 -
[152] - Quote
holy ****, this is the most intelligent tears I've seen in these forums. You did very well disguising them behind intelligent, thoughtful and patient words but they are still tears at the end of the day.
BTW, you can't blame CCP for your loss. You chose to go out and mine. You chose not to take precautions. So now you have to live up to your choices On holiday. -áIn some other world. Where the music of the radio was a labyrinth of sonorous colours. To a bright centre of absolute convicton where the dripping patchouli was more than scent, It was a sun-á |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
585
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:24:00 -
[153] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Quote:How is that these "casuals" don't seem to get that their subscription is just a convenient cash grab by ccp. They don't matter as they come and go all the time. Thanks for injecting cash into ccp's wallet so they can keep developing the game for those that get it. Make the gun substantially more dangerous and/or less fun for the casuals and a funny thing happens. You start losing them. You are actually proving my point, not debasing it. You are operating under the assumption that we want them.
Not all publicity is good publicity. Not all money is good money. |
RAP ACTION HERO
Estel Arador Corp Services
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:33:00 -
[154] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own. Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed
[Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
There's going to be some dead catalysts hehe, enjoy.
|
3D Horrorshow
Black Rebel Rifter Club
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:35:00 -
[155] - Quote
Kaeda, great kill here, the only thing that could have made it better was if the victim had done a huge post bitching about it for all our amusement. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2231
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:39:00 -
[156] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Untrue, but hey keep saying that. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquilitySince the middle of 2009, the amount of active players online has significantly decreased. I agree with the OP. He posted a very excellent and concise thread. The number of subscriptions has risen.
lol, so has the amount of bookmarks in my browser, it doesn't mean they're all active or even used.
That graph shows the facts, not hearsay and misinformation gained from a company's PR department.
|
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
706
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:53:00 -
[157] - Quote
If you want to mine in perfect safety, go mine on sisi. Incursions still need to be nerfed more. Cut payouts by 50% for all ships worth more than 10m. |
Keno Skir
136
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:55:00 -
[158] - Quote
Repeat : I will not fly a ship that represents such a large portion of my wealth, that losing it means quitting the game. I will not fly a ship that represents such a large portion of my wealth, that losing it means quitting the game. I will not fly a ship that represents such a large portion of my wealth, that losing it means quitting the game.
It's an easy principal to grasp, and it's a concept that is as old as EvE itself. It is THE basic rule by which anyone with the slightest bit of foresight should play the game. If you don't live by this easy rule then regardless of how you came to lose your vessel, you must admit you were kinda pushing the limits weren't you? I'm not saying HTFU or saying PVP ONLY WAY TO GO!!!!... I'm just suggesting it as an act of common sense, i can't understand why people keep building themselves up for these MASSIVE losses The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:58:00 -
[159] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
lol, so has the amount of bookmarks in my browser, it doesn't mean they're all active or even used.
That graph shows the facts, not hearsay and misinformation gained from a company's PR department.
Subscriptions are where the money comes from. A graph of players on a few days is nice but says nothing about how much money is being made. |
Ituhata Saken
Elysium Enterprises
113
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:07:00 -
[160] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Ituhata Saken wrote:no hope for retriever pilots, huh? Its possible to tank them against a destroyer.
Hmph, that's probably good enough, any more expensive than a destroyer is not realyl worth wasting on the retriever,. |
|
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:14:00 -
[161] - Quote
Ituhata Saken wrote:
Hmph, that's probably good enough, any more expensive than a destroyer is not realyl worth wasting on the retriever,.
I have a procurer fit that stands a 50/50 chance of surviving a destroyer so the retriever should survive most attempts |
Cloned S0ul
Blood Fanatics
58
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:22:00 -
[162] - Quote
Here two type of people who pvp, a true warriors who fight vs combat ships druing war dec, or on low sec, or null space, second type a carebear who think they badass because he can kill other careberars who using miningbarges, also no balzz ******* bunch of idiots who fell mighty while destroying poor mining barge, even no profit form kiling them only empty killmails statistic with some value but infact 0 profit. Some people say, we do it for lulz but this is bulshit, here no fun at all while kiling carebear who blow in 5sec to two destroyers. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:26:00 -
[163] - Quote
Cloned S0ul wrote:Here two type of people who pvp, a true warriors who fight vs combat ships druing war dec, or on low sec, or null space, second type a carebear who think they badass because he can kill other careberars who using miningbarges, also no balzz ******* bunch of idiots who fell mighty while destroying poor mining barge, even no profit form kiling them only empty killmails statistic with some value but infact 0 profit. Some people say, we do it for lulz but this is bulshit, here no fun at all while kiling carebear who blow in 5sec to two destroyer.
An untanked hulk with t2 strips and MLU will get you millions depending on your luck. |
Mina Hiragi
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
21
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:29:00 -
[164] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:baltec1 wrote:Arcticblue2 wrote:
Actually there are many good ideas... paying fines for suicideganking ... also does make the timer for concord last only in gametime so there is no point for the player to log off to wait out the timer with their main instead ... so that would make them having to wait a while before next target and such.
The ganker loses their ship They get a sec status hit and will be attacked by the empire navies when it gets low enough They turn flashy red in local and on the overveiw Anyone can attack a -10 pirates ship Concord will destroy any ship the pirate gets into within 15 minutes of aggression The "victim" can kill the pirate Seems we already have penalties in place. Which are clearly effective [/sarcasm]. I think that's the problem, none of these are particularly effective in a high sec zone. Particularly when these individuals are able to dock at stations, etc, as if nothing had happened.
Clearly, they are indeed effective. If you understand what effective means. Effective, despite the mewlings of the clueless, does not mean, "Nobody will ever blow up my failfit hulk! I will never suffer any negative consequences for my complete failure at risk mitigation!"
Protip: If your Industripie evolves into a Squishypod, use HARDENTFU. It's super-effective! |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
466
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:29:00 -
[165] - Quote
Cloned S0ul wrote:Here two type of people who pvp, a true warriors who fight vs combat ships druing war dec, or on low sec, or null space, second type a carebear who think they badass because he can kill other careberars who using miningbarges, also no balzz ******* bunch of idiots who fell mighty while destroying poor mining barge, even no profit form kiling them only empty killmails statistic with some value but infact 0 profit. Some people say, we do it for lulz but this is bulshit, here no fun at all while kiling carebear who blow in 5sec to two destroyers.
posts like this make it worth all the while even if it was totally unprofitable eh |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
913
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:32:00 -
[166] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Cloned S0ul wrote:Here two type of people who pvp, a true warriors who fight vs combat ships druing war dec, or on low sec, or null space, second type a carebear who think they badass because he can kill other careberars who using miningbarges, also no balzz ******* bunch of idiots who fell mighty while destroying poor mining barge, even no profit form kiling them only empty killmails statistic with some value but infact 0 profit. Some people say, we do it for lulz but this is bulshit, here no fun at all while kiling carebear who blow in 5sec to two destroyers. posts like this make it worth all the while even if it was totally unprofitable Look, I see the "lulz" right there ~ Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Cloned S0ul
Blood Fanatics
58
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:36:00 -
[167] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Cloned S0ul wrote:Here two type of people who pvp, a true warriors who fight vs combat ships druing war dec, or on low sec, or null space, second type a carebear who think they badass because he can kill other careberars who using miningbarges, also no balzz ******* bunch of idiots who fell mighty while destroying poor mining barge, even no profit form kiling them only empty killmails statistic with some value but infact 0 profit. Some people say, we do it for lulz but this is bulshit, here no fun at all while kiling carebear who blow in 5sec to two destroyer. An untanked hulk with t2 strips and MLU will get you millions depending on your luck.
Fit tornado go to jita area in weekend while a lot people, scan industrals, you can earn bilions depending your luck... Still better solution to get money than hunting for 3 strip miners and mlu, and much easy. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
466
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:37:00 -
[168] - Quote
Cloned S0ul wrote:Fit tornado go to jita area in weekend while a lot people, scan industrals, you can earn bilions depending your luck... Still better solution to get money than hunting for 3 strip miners and mlu, and much easy.
because there most certainly aren't 200 dudes waiting to loot every ship that pops in jita eh |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:41:00 -
[169] - Quote
Cloned S0ul wrote:
Fit tornado go to jita area in weekend while a lot people, scan industrals, you can earn bilions depending your luck... Still better solution to get money than hunting for 3 strip miners and mlu, and much easy.
There is an endless supply of badly tanked hulks out there which will earn you a suprising amount of isk in a short time. Ganking miners is easyer as there is just so many of them. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2232
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:57:00 -
[170] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:
lol, so has the amount of bookmarks in my browser, it doesn't mean they're all active or even used.
That graph shows the facts, not hearsay and misinformation gained from a company's PR department.
Subscriptions are where the money comes from. A graph of players on a few days is nice but says nothing about how much money is being made.
Considering there's no outside party to verify the numbers posted by a company PR representative, what little info there is available along with recent events seems to paint a different picture.
If what you and others claim is true, then the Eve Offline graph would definitely show it. |
|
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
184
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 05:10:00 -
[171] - Quote
James 315 wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:I think your manifesto is a blatant troll, but on the off-chance you're actually serious, I just had to tell you what an idiot you are. Large nullsec alliances have FAR more influence over the direction of this game than any other group has ever had, Let's hope so. Quote:....The sociopathic actions of pirates, thieves, and scum is what continues to deter people without serious psychological problems from lowsec and nullsec. You mean by blowing up spaceships in a game where people blow up spaceships? Is it sociopathic to play EVE as intended? I think not. Quote:Facing a distinct lack of easy targets instead of other organized alliances, the powerful groups decided to impose their will on players that wanted nothing to do with them. Good. This is called "non-consensual PvP." Quote:Since CCP isn't a company of complete morons, they were forced to take action before they started losing subscriptions. They lost subscriptions with Incarna, the expansion designed to gear the game toward a more mainstream audience. CCP gains subscriptions when they gear the game toward proper EVE players--the "sociopaths" you mentioned earlier. You can have your mindless highsec mining...I and the rest of the EVE community will take Burn Jita and Hulkageddon any day.
Incarna wasn't mainstream, it was just complete crap. Melting people's GPUs because of some of the most terribly optimized code I've seen in a long time, charging $70 for a monocle, and showing their paying customers the door, literally, when disabling the CQ...well, that's bound to **** some people off.
For the record, I am not a miner. I also apologize for the name-calling; I'm in a foul mood. But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands.
Here's the problem: yes, non-consensual PvP will happen. You are perfectly within your rights to destroy anything you feel like destroying. However, your actions have human consequences that reach far beyond getting your ship destroyed by CONCORD. Like it or not, in the current state of the game, highsec miners provide a large volume of low end minerals. Enticing them to ragequit doesn't help the economy, which directly hurts you and many, many other people, not all of them highsec "carebears." The large alliances mostly don't care about this, since they have renter mining corps and supply trains. But if ship and mineral prices increase significantly, it's yet another entry barrier for new players, especially into small-gang PvP, which is what you ultimately want. If battlecruiser hulls all break 100 mil, cruisers for 20 mil, frigates for 2 mil...you're actually reducing the incentive and ability of people who might have been interested in PvP to get started with it. Consequences have an annoying habit of cascading.
Basically, what I'm trying to say, is don't **** in your own sandbox, because nobody will want to play with you. |
baltec1
1209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 05:27:00 -
[172] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:
Incarna wasn't mainstream, it was just complete crap. Melting people's GPUs because of some of the most terribly optimized code I've seen in a long time, charging $70 for a monocle, and showing their paying customers the door, literally, when disabling the CQ...well, that's bound to **** some people off.
For the record, I am not a miner. I also apologize for the name-calling; I'm in a foul mood. But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands.
Here's the problem: yes, non-consensual PvP will happen. You are perfectly within your rights to destroy anything you feel like destroying. However, your actions have human consequences that reach far beyond getting your ship destroyed by CONCORD. Like it or not, in the current state of the game, highsec miners provide a large volume of low end minerals. Enticing them to ragequit doesn't help the economy, which directly hurts you and many, many other people, not all of them highsec "carebears." The large alliances mostly don't care about this, since they have renter mining corps and supply trains. But if ship and mineral prices increase significantly, it's yet another entry barrier for new players, especially into small-gang PvP, which is what you ultimately want. If battlecruiser hulls all break 100 mil, cruisers for 20 mil, frigates for 2 mil...you're actually reducing the incentive and ability of people who might have been interested in PvP to get started with it. Consequences have an annoying habit of cascading.
Basically, what I'm trying to say, is don't **** in your own sandbox, because nobody will want to play with you.
If miners were going to quit they would have done it years ago and prices have in fact been dropping over the last few weeks. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2232
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 05:38:00 -
[173] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
If miners were going to quit they would have done it years ago and prices have in fact been dropping over the last few weeks.
Years ago Suicide Ganking Industrial ships wasn't as prevalent in-game as it is now.
Also the majority of players who rage quit this game are Industrialists. |
baltec1
1209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 05:52:00 -
[174] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: Years ago Suicide Ganking Industrial ships wasn't as prevalent in-game as it is now.
Also the majority of players who rage quit this game are Industrialists.
Sure it was. You think its bad now? You should have been here when M0o were camping the space lanes killing everything including CONCORD
They are what brought about the CONCORD we see today. And its not industrialists that quit in a fit of rage. Its the risk adverce cowardly fools who do stupid things and the blaim everyone and everything for their own mistakes. The type of people who, rather than learn from mistakes will whine to CCP to change the core of a 9 year old game because they don't want to face failing. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
914
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:00:00 -
[175] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote: But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands. Yeah, that's sort of to be expected. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
96
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:01:00 -
[176] - Quote
Whiners don't quit, they just whine over and over again. True story. I wish they would quit since they contribute nothing to the game except their subscriptions and forum griefing.
Also, amazing how many people can't separate RL from a game. It's depressing. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
914
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:06:00 -
[177] - Quote
Ludi Burek wrote:Whiners don't quit, they just whine over and over again. True story. I wish they would quit since they contribute nothing to the game except their subscriptions and forum griefing.
Also, amazing how many people can't separate RL from a game. It's depressing. Let me tell you about a certain highsec miner that had a lowsec pos .... Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:19:00 -
[178] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Cloned S0ul wrote:Here two type of people who pvp, a true warriors who fight vs combat ships druing war dec, or on low sec, or null space, second type a carebear who think they badass because he can kill other careberars who using miningbarges, also no balzz ******* bunch of idiots who fell mighty while destroying poor mining barge, even no profit form kiling them only empty killmails statistic with some value but infact 0 profit. Some people say, we do it for lulz but this is bulshit, here no fun at all while kiling carebear who blow in 5sec to two destroyers. posts like this make it worth all the while even if it was totally unprofitable
ah but isnt that CCP's definition of actionable ganking? |
baltec1
1209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:22:00 -
[179] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
ah but isnt that CCP's definition of actionable ganking?
Nope. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
914
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:31:00 -
[180] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:ah but isnt that CCP's definition of actionable ganking? Nope. Maybe they should ask CCP. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
|
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
347
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:31:00 -
[181] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote: We would see concerted action on multiple fronts from the US, the EU, and the UN. Antitrust hearings. Courts and tribunals. Resolutions and committees.
Hold up, what game are we playing again? You totally lost me, how does these assumed norms of our present day world apply to EVE?
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement.
Clearly a very important fact, thank you for telling us. However, it does raise other questions. Does your mother have a basement, and would she allow you to live there if you asked?
|
Ziranda Hakuli
Relativity Holding Corp AAA Citizens
69
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:34:00 -
[182] - Quote
I like what the OP has to say on this. he is correct. even if he lost a hulk or someone else has lost it. there are ALOT of people in violation of the agreements we made with CCP.
well there are a few things to point out and if you are reading this you know how to read the EULA and his little brother. techinicallity can be a killer for some.
Have fun kids |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
914
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:34:00 -
[183] - Quote
Xorv wrote:Oddball Six wrote:We would see concerted action on multiple fronts from the US, the EU, and the UN. Antitrust hearings. Courts and tribunals. Resolutions and committees. Hold up, what game are we playing again? You totally lost me, how does these assumed norms of our present day world apply to EVE? Yeah CONCORD does a lot of work on gankers. Following their strict rules of engagement. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:40:00 -
[184] - Quote
Is it too late for /popcorn? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3970
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:46:00 -
[185] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Wow! That hurt OP.
No mid slot shield help? You had a head full of shield implants and not even an Invul field or extender?
But I do agree it's a sad commentary on the state of this game that CCP thinks suicide ganking is a viable form of PvP.
It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
Not sure what you mean here - suicide ganking became "a viable form of PvP" the day CONCORD was introduced. CCP even explicitly say that it's intended, not an exploit, and so on.
If you don't want PvP in hi-sec, fine, let's imagine that route where you have some kind of "PvP flag". Of course if it's a no-PvP flag, you won't be able to consume limited resources to the detriment of other players, so no mining. And of course you won't be able to buy limited goods on the markets as that would be competing for the goods, so NPC trade goods only. And of course you definitely won't be able to sell anything either, since that would be competing for the buyer's ISK. I guess that pretty much leaves you able to run agent missions.
Oh wait, what's that you say? You want to be able to do all of those things, just not get shot at? Well that's not very fair now is it? In that case, I should be able to buy anything I want at NPC prices. I just want to be able to shoot people, not get wallet-ganked by merciless traders who are breaking the EULA by reducing my capacity to enjoy the game with their predatory market practices!
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
No More Heroes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
278
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:47:00 -
[186] - Quote
ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
. |
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
96
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:48:00 -
[187] - Quote
Jake Warbird wrote:Is it too late for /popcorn?
Not at all. I think we're about to see a proposal for an International Convention on Conservation of High Security Hulk Miners in Eve-Online. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3970
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:50:00 -
[188] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:baltec1 wrote:
If miners were going to quit they would have done it years ago and prices have in fact been dropping over the last few weeks.
Years ago Suicide Ganking Industrial ships wasn't as prevalent in-game as it is now.
Yes it was. It goes through cycles, during which a fresh new batch of players who until now assumed that EVE was just another hand-holding PvE MMO are educated, they wise up, ganking gets more difficult and less profitable, people turn to other ways to make their ISK, and so on until the cycle repeats. We go through this about every 9 months or so.
DeMichael Crimson wrote: Also the majority of players who rage quit this game are Industrialists.
That's an interesting assertion. Can I see the source of your data?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Maraner
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
106
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:50:00 -
[189] - Quote
Yup it's a sandbox, I've shot up more than a few hulks in high sec but I do think for a 200 million + ship they could use a raw HP buff. Seems a bit lightweight that a single destoyer can pop a hulk with ease (granted dependant upon **** fit), three of them can kill anything.
Still there is a way to spawn your own concord at a belt folks, just think about it...... |
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:55:00 -
[190] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:My position is that high sec should be as it is today, just with a touch more protection to ensure it remains a "more safe" area in the face of new gank-fests and player organized competitions like hulkageddon. How safe do you really want it to be? If I read your killboard correct this is the first ship loss in over THREE YEARS!! Is that not safe enough for you?
Once upon a time you were concerned enough to plug your head with defensive implants. But now, after years of nothing, you find yourself in complete denial and forgot to even fit a basic tank on your ship.
Can't you see what has happened to you and how it is a threat to the health of the game? Your own story tells us that hisec is too safe. |
|
Kara Vix
Vinegar Flies Peregrine Nation
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:59:00 -
[191] - Quote
This thread is an excellent example of the EVE forums. A player expresses a well thought out concern (and/or opinion) and it is followed by the same forum chuckleheads saying the same one liners. Yes EVE is a dangerous game but if it were just a pure sociopathic pvp game as you forum fighters represent then why are there rules built into it to protect high sec? The game is more dynamic than that, or rather it was at one time before CCP decided to get in bed with one player base at the expense of the others. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
914
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:00:00 -
[192] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:Once upon a time you were concerned enough to plug your head with defensive implants. But now, after years of nothing, you find yourself in complete denial and forgot to even fit a basic tank on your ship.
Can't you see what has happened to you and how it is a threat to the health of the game? Your own story tells us that hisec is too safe. That's .. uh.. impressive. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
142
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:01:00 -
[193] - Quote
ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
CCP defines what is inside and what is outside the sandbox, so what is your point ? |
RAP ACTION HERO
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:14:00 -
[194] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Untrue, but hey keep saying that. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquilitySince the middle of 2009, the amount of active players online has significantly decreased. I agree with the OP. He posted a very excellent and concise thread.
tell us about wis dmc |
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:18:00 -
[195] - Quote
No More Heroes wrote:ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
Err no the sanbox has been changed by CCP manu times due to player actions many times. Concorde made invincible when mOo started chaining them is just one example.
Good post by the op
Tal |
Raukhur
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:36:00 -
[196] - Quote
There is one thing I think CCP could do that wouldn't violate the idea of the sandbox as we know and want it.
Make sure people don't have to engage in meta-gaming, i.e. being updated on blogs and forums, to know about these events.
Simply add these to the news at login:
"Dear carebear. Just a quick warning that in a weeks time a player event is beginning that might impact your play style. We do suggest you inform yourself and take action accordingly. Sincerely CCP"
They could also have a "suicide gank flag" in systems when it goes say above X ganks per hour, just a flashing signal in the system (or constellation or region for that matter) info on the top left indicating that something might be ongoing in the system that PVE minded people might wanna consider in their actions. like and risk alert flag.
I am all for the risk and sandbox of eve, but I would mind giving people some help in adapting to it, tbh, its to easy to bank these days.
Of course gankers could adapt to some degree, spreading out ganks or keeping events secret if they can, but they would then be vulnerable to spies that report of impeding activities to CCP and maybe ccp could reward gank-spies with plex, handled by CCP skunk :-D JK.....
|
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:37:00 -
[197] - Quote
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
I am a typical goon fat boy pretending to be a chick!
It's a surprisingly small ship. It would be surprising if battleship weapons hurt it too badly
Of course, this doesn't hold true if a titan (with even bigger weapons) was shooting it, but that's hardly a problem.[/quote]
|
Gorki Andropov
Kerensky Initiatives
882
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:40:00 -
[198] - Quote
If you're as successful an architect/designer as you claim to be, why don't you just build yourself a new Hulk, miner-boy? |
Sarton Wells
Blackmoon Ltd.
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:52:00 -
[199] - Quote
Maraner wrote:Still there is a way to spawn your own concord at a belt folks, just think about it......
Does it matter whether CONCORD is already spawned? I guess that would guarantee only a single volley but aren't most Hulk kills from a single volley anyway? I'm not very familiar with suicide ganking Hulks so this is an honest question. |
Francisco Bizzaro
132
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 07:54:00 -
[200] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment. The only one who is acting against the high-sec risk/reward balance is you.
You chose to go for high rewards by flying an expensive ship, and thus you assumed a greater risk than you might otherwise have. You are completely free to forego some of the high rewards, and as a result you will face almost zero risk. Mining in anything that is not an exhumer is one example of how to do this, but there are many others.
Unfortunately, some miners seem to feel they are entitled to maximum reward with minimal risk, and that excludes any option other than a maximum yield hulk (flown while watching TV, because effort-vs-reward is another concept they struggle with).
But if you think about it, you have fairly complete control over the risk vs. reward that you face. If, as you say, you find mining to be a relaxing diversion in a "low pressure environment", then you don't need to be doing it in a top of the line ship. So why invite that stress? Take advantage of the options that you already have and then you won't need to bother CCP with your problems. |
|
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:03:00 -
[201] - Quote
Well this has turned into a complete goon -alt-a- thon.
No surprise there huh CCP ??
CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful!
And an ex Goon is telling how cool the completely fail UI is gonna work for us.
CCP you got garbage in u house. Clean it up!
|
Hroya
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:11:00 -
[202] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own. Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed
[Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
Good post pointing out that a Hulk definatly isnt a miningvessel. If you would show up in a pvp roam with a crossover setup like this you can pack your suitcase and go home.
The yield on this multi million isk mining setup makes it more viable to mine in a tormentor.
You go your corridor but. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
68
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:13:00 -
[203] - Quote
You just got "Rogged" by CCP |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:18:00 -
[204] - Quote
Hroya wrote:Oddball Six wrote:Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own. Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed
[Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
Good post But Ima gonna whine ALOt cause I can't kill it with a dessie! The yield on this multi million isk mining setup makes it more invulnerable to ganking smacktards like me.
|
Sandboxie Hanomaa
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:21:00 -
[205] - Quote
i'm quite new to eve, so i would like to ask a question for a newbs prospective to the OP.
why is it that the assumed motive was greifing?
as i see it, the motive is quite obviously, profit. nobody cares about makeing you unhapppy. otherwise there would have always been high sec suicide ganking before hulkagedon
The goons are making a profit from every hulk replaced due to their monopoly, while also increasing the income of their own miners.
and the best, fastest, and easiest to do this is to make people replace their ships for gankers by paying mercs in throwaway ships to do it for them.
so the best way to mitigate this would be to make yourself unprofitable. go mine in a battleship or put on shield extenders if you want to mine so badly. you'll be ungankable except for the craziest of crazys.
originally, i was going to high sec mine too. then i started to look into the community for guides etc and ran across this gigantic fiasco... and said **** this ****. trading is more profitable and takes less effort anyways. and i get to train skills to shoot people instead of rocks. and i thank the goons for making me realize the mistake of my ways. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:27:00 -
[206] - Quote
Quote:i'm quite new to eve
Yep and what continues to amaze me are the guys who think this is profitable??????
Heck running high sec plexs is more profitable than this, and I quit going that YEARS ago.
Gank a goon, they may have borrowed an implamt from Mittens! |
Kara Vix
Vinegar Flies Peregrine Nation
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:27:00 -
[207] - Quote
Sandboxie Hanomaa wrote:i'm quite new to eve, so i would like to ask a question for a newbs prospective to the OP.
why is it that the assumed motive was greifing?
as i see it, the motive is quite obviously, profit. nobody cares about makeing you unhapppy. otherwise there would have always been high sec suicide ganking before hulkagedon
The goons are making a profit from every hulk replaced due to their monopoly, while also increasing the income of their own miners.
and the best, fastest, and easiest way to make people replace their ships for gankers by paying mercs in throwaway ships to do it for them.
so the best way to mitigate this would be to make yourself unprofitable. go mine in a battleship or put on shield extenders if you want to mine so badly. you'll be ungankable except for the craziest of crazys.
originally, i was going to high sec mine too. then i started to look into the community for guides etc and ran across this gigantic fiasco... and said **** this ****. trading is more profitable and takes less effort anyways. and i get to train skills to shoot people instead of rocks. and i thank the goons for making me realize the mistake of my ways.
Yes, thanks goons, lol. Sooo, goon_alt_12002 or just a silly person who has no clue? People do gank to make people unhappy, its all about the tears and nothing to do with profit or cornering the market by eliminating the competition. You need only spend a few moments reading the forums or local chat in a busy hub to realize that. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:35:00 -
[208] - Quote
Quote:Yes, thanks goons, lol. Sooo, goon_alt_12002 or just a silly person who has no clue? People do gank to make people unhappy, its all about the tears and nothing to do with profit or cornering the market by eliminating the competition. You need only spend a few moments reading the forums or local chat in a busy hub to realize that.
Yep that's it in a nutshell. Griefing sanctioned by CCP. |
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
520
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:43:00 -
[209] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:If local were removed pirates would have a chance at attacking something more worthwhile than miners.
Yes please.
The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:49:00 -
[210] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful! CCP designed the game before the goons were even playing it. Go figure. |
|
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:51:00 -
[211] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote:CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful! I am so ugly I must be a Goon alt.
:)
and all those likes must be Goonies, GO AWAY! |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1627
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:55:00 -
[212] - Quote
Hroya wrote: Good post pointing out that a Hulk definatly isnt a miningvessel. If you would show up in a pvp roam with a crossover setup like this you can pack your suitcase and go home.
The yield on this multi million isk mining setup makes it more viable to mine in a tormentor.
Then don't tank your Hulk and accept that you are sacrificing your defense (increasing the risk to your ship) in order to maximize your yield (increasing your reward).
Everybody else makes compromises when fitting their ships, why should miners be any different?
Anyway, if you want to be PERFECTLY SAFE, mine in a Rokh. Now before you whine "But Battleships aren't mining ships, I want SP" and shit your pants, the Rokh is not required to mine. It is a STRATEGY that will allow you to mine with much less risk than mining in a Hulk represents. With the new rigs and one Aoede, you can fit all the lows with mining upgrades and get 42k EHP. (Not recommended) Dropping the Aoede for a Co-Pro, you get 92k EHP (109 if you OH as you see the gank incoming). (Recommended) 100k EHP, most of the Yield of a Hulk, and the insurable hull is 2/3 of its fitted value. Both need a CPU implant, but v0v Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Shian Yang
217
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 08:59:00 -
[213] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Untrue, but hey keep saying that. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquilitySince the middle of 2009, the amount of active players online has significantly decreased. I agree with the OP. He posted a very excellent and concise thread.
Greetings capsuleer Crimson,
Forgive me for stepping our of character, but I cannot speak against your spurious allegations without doing so.
(( What Baltec said was true. The number of pilots in New Eden has grown year on year. He did not say the number active per day has grown. There is a difference.
In May, 2009 New Eden had over 300,000 registered players.
Quote:As of May 6, 2009, Eve Online claimed to have more than 300,000 active subscriptions and 45,000 active trial accounts.[37][38][39][40][41] The total active subscription count at end of 2010 was 357,000 accounts.[42]
Source is here.
Quote:In March 2012, Eve Online reached over 400,000 subscribers.
The source is here.
This is exactly what capsuleer Baltec is saying. It is not untrue. It is 100% true and supported by the facts. You are attempting to twist this by using the average pilots online per day, but let me give you an example of why that could be a flawed metric to look at.
Scenario 1 - Pre WiS / Incarna: Monday: Bob, John, Sarah (3) Tuesday: Bob, John (2) Wednesday: Bob, John, Sarah (3) Thursday: Bob, John, Sarah, Tim (4) Friday: Bob, John, Sarah (3) Saturday: Bob, John, Sarah (3) Sunday: Bob, John, Sarah (3)
The average players is roughly 3. There are 4 people spread across the time period.
Scenario 2 - Post WiS / Incarna: Monday: Bob, John (2) Tuesday: Sam, Sarah (2) Wednesday: Gabby, Allen (2) Thursday: Michael, Del(2) Friday: Tim, Randolf (2) Saturday: Lulu, Baldy (2) Sunday: Johnny (1)
The average players is roughly 2. There are 13 people spread across the time period.
Now, I am NOT saying this is the case.
But looking at the average players is a flawed measurement as you cannot and will not know how often players login, how frequently they follow the same patterns and so forth. The spread could be very different now as to what it was 2 years ago, particularly as veterans mature and run longer term plans.
But to take your example. I picked a random point in 2009 for which we will have corresponding data in 2012. I ignored any date a week or so before the release of Diablo III as the release of such an anticipated, AAA title will surely engage a number of pilots and skew numbers. You are welcome to disagree, but then I'd have to question if you know anything about PC gaming and the hype machine.
15 April 2009 - 29,012 15 April 2012 - 36,329
On average though the two appear roughly similar. Honestly not much to pick between the two, although a delve into the raw data would be really useful. I could see approximately 6 peaks above 36,000 in 2012 and approximately 3 in the same period of 2009 when zoomed in. This is despite the good growth in subscribers and average players online during 2010 and 2011 which was subsequently blown away by the disaster otherwise known as Walking in Stations or Incarna.
For a game recovering from that mess, it is doing bloody well. Your statement:
Delmichael Crimson: "Since the middle of 2009, the amount of active players online has significantly decreased."
Is severely misleading as you ignore seasonal factors, the impact of mistakes by CCP and the impact of other companies and their products and conveniently brush away the actual growth in subscribers and thus revenue for CCP.
So my question for you is - what do you hope to gain by painting such a fundamentally flawed, untrue picture of CCP and EVE Online?
What is the gain for you both as a person and as a person subscribed to the game? Do you hope to persuade others not to play? Do you like being a bearer of "bad" tidings? Do you want to spread misery around?
I cannot fathom why anyone would twist things in such a way. It seems ... sick to me. ))
I'd wish you kind regards, but then I'd be dishonest.
Shian Yang |
Sugar Kyle
The humbleless Crew Capital Punishment.
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 09:07:00 -
[214] - Quote
It is interesting how these posts only appear after something has happened to someone. Yet, this has been happening all around the OP, unnoticed for weeks. If it was so terrible world changing/end of Eve how did he manage to miss it for three weeks?
I received eve-mail from my high sec carebear friends about it. They have not been dying, BTW. See OP, they made friends in this social game. They came to me, their pirate friend, and asked what to do. I advised them on basics of scanning and checking local. I then went to people who have been around longer then I (for I am very new here) and collected advice and tips for them.
Some have learned new and exciting skills.
But, every one of these threads comes with demands to change the game or die.
OP, your attitude is what drove me out of high sec as a month old player. Not to become a pirate to kill your hulk (for I have no exhumer kills), but to not become a victim with their head in the sand.
The game is more then you and your viewpoint. Oh yes, you are part of the game. So are those that destroyed you.
Will you next call others out for cheating because they activly seek information about the game and you do not? |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
71
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 09:17:00 -
[215] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment.
so,, to be clear,, you went through all this time and effort to produce this thread OP yes ?
but you failed to read the forums and become aware of the event taking place ?
you lost a ship and a pod because you write more than you read.
i'm going to quote Ronald Spiers from band of brother (tv show)
The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a soldier is supposed to function: without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends upon it.
if you think you are not in a war for resources you are a stupid miner, if you think eve is not one huge sandbox of war and killing you are also stupid, but here's the deal OP, i'm thinking you are far from stupid, you just refuse to accept the rules and mechanics of eve, like most carebears you want the universe to go away and let you supply the enemy with ships and ammo. the moment you undock and mine resources you are a part of the system.
look at it like this perhaps,, your ammo cost me a ship once,, did ya see me whining on here about it,, lol
|
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 09:26:00 -
[216] - Quote
[quote=xxxTRUSTxxx}lol[/quote]
I loved my Communist overlords also. Can I have my Bots back? Perhaps? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3972
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 09:47:00 -
[217] - Quote
ITT: people who resist with their uttermost might any suggestion that they stop thinking and acting like victims and who are then somehow shocked and appalled that they're victimised. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
71
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 09:54:00 -
[218] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:
I loved my Communist overlords also. Can I have my Bots back? Perhaps?
Seriously u guys had the best bots going, I know the goons were complainin that they were spyin on them, but hey, what do they know!
i'm sorry alt, we don't and have never used bots, i think you're confusing us with someone else. |
BoSau Hotim
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:05:00 -
[219] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Oddball Six wrote:
Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment.
so,, to be clear,, you went through all this time and effort to produce this thread OP yes ? but you failed to read the forums and become aware of the event taking place ? you lost a ship and a pod because you write more than you read. i'm going to quote Ronald Spiers from band of brothers (tv show) The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a soldier is supposed to function: without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends upon it. if you think you are not in a war for resources you are a stupid miner, if you think eve is not one huge sandbox of war and killing you are also stupid, but here's the deal OP, i'm thinking you are far from stupid, you just refuse to accept the rules and mechanics of eve, like most carebears you want the universe to go away and let you supply the enemy with ships and ammo. the moment you undock and mine resources you are a part of the system. look at it like this perhaps,, your ammo cost me a ship once,, did ya see me whining on here about it,, lol
^^^ Great answer
Seriously Oddball, Living under the impression that high sec is low risk/low reward doesn't understand Eve at all. Highsec is High risk. You have chosen to go after the players who participate in Hulkageddon. What about the gankers that go after mission runners, haulers, incursion runners, and shiny ships? Are you going to complain about them too? They are doing the same thing... They are playing within the framework of Eve and are the same as the players who participate in Hulkageddon. Should CCP place Concord in every incursion? in every mission? at every planet and sun? just so no one can be ganked anymore?
Go play hellokitty online - you'll be safer there
I'm not a carebear...-áI'm a SPACEBARBIE! |
Tifin'a Ach'ing
University of Caille Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:06:00 -
[220] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Wow! That hurt OP.
No mid slot shield help? You had a head full of shield implants and not even an Invul field or extender?
But I do agree it's a sad commentary on the state of this game that CCP thinks suicide ganking is a viable form of PvP.
It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
Very eloquent OP, well thought out and presented in a very ordered manner. It shows you put some thought into the post. Unfortunately your complete lack of forethought to actually attempt to tank your hulk pretty much crushes any credibility you may have had before your long winded rant about being a blah blah blah what ever casual EVE player.
vr Tif
Oh and HTFU its a game and a well advertised event. |
|
Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
215
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:10:00 -
[221] - Quote
Ganking miners exposes the very broken nature of all PvP in EVE.
A killmail for a T3 cruiser? A Killmail for a Carrier? A Killmail for a Command Ship?
No, we brag about Hulk killmails. That's our e-peen.
Broke? Just a bit.
I didn't fight a mighty dragon but I killed a baby cow when it wasn't looking. |
Mallak Azaria
xX-Crusader-Xx Luna Sanguinem
103
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:12:00 -
[222] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement. I am fortunate enough to have full time employment as a fairly successful Solution Architect for a Global consulting firm. I play from a custom built home office and hotels all over the United States. My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. Eve has woven itself in as an on-again, off-again diversion where for the last three years I can apply business acumen and some custom tools to build an industrial marketer and manufacturer. Eve is a fun low pressure environment where I make the conscious choice to forgo combat and low sec rewards to maintain the low stress nature of this pursuit. Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment. I petition CCP to consider the policy and natural violations that the inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural Consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'hulkageddon' - or at least limit them to the low- and null-sec systems where they belong. Recognizing the Violations of CCP PolicyAn external competition like hulkageddon depends upon players allying and indeed competing to determine which player is most willing to ignore the disincentives engineered into the game which protect players who participate in high security systems. Indeed the competition organizers have created systematic logs denoting and ridiculing the expressions of distress or outrage by affected players: Quote:" The same cannot be said for the 5000 poor fools that have been deshipped in the first half of this yearGÇÖs Hulkageddon, with over a trillion isk in damages done so far. This hulkageddon has exceeded our wildest expectations. I am so very proud of all our great competitors, and remember the race for the gold is not yet over!" - http://hulkageddon5.machine9.net/?p=96Yet CCP has denoted conduct such as this which determines to interfere with the operation of the system and the enjoyment of other players as verboten through at least two provisions. Quote:"Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. " -http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp The terms of service at http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp specifically forbids role playing that interferes with others enjoyment of the game as well as forbidding conduct which disallows others to enjoy the game. By organizing large scale operations to eliminate players engaging in high sec mining operations, and entire sector of game play is disrupted. By CCP's own statistics, thousands of players have already been affected in this way to date. Quote:"A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account." -http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336 In the Knowledge Base published by CCP, as well, we find a definition of griefing and its specific prohibition of players deriving a significant portion of their time to game tactics that derive their enjoyment through the harassment of other players ourside of genuine pvp conflict such as corporation wars. Recognizing Inaction as Counter to Real Life AnalogsOne of the other clear guides CCP has applied to player conduct is the consideration of the real life treatment of the analog of the player conduct in a real society. Were a real life band to conspire to affect markets by systematically attacking mining operations, there is ample precedent to recognize that governments and international organizations would act. The grounds to do so are numerous.
- Systematic attacks on the unarmed
- Collusion to manipulate market dynamics
- Collusion to destroy an entire class of entity
We would see concerted action on multiple fronts from the US, the EU, and the UN. Antitrust hearings. Courts and tribunals. Resolutions and committees. CCPs response in the role of the international arbitration? Absent. A Simple ResponseI would suggest the response is simple and two pronged.
- Concord notices the drop in the markets and in order to ensure the supposed stability of the universe, have placed a couple of concord ships resident in high sec asteroid belts only in addition to their current locations.
- CCP begins warning and taking action against blatant high sec offenders.
Anecdotal evidence has already started to surface of player discontent with allowing these actions to remain unpunished and indeed unrestrained. I question how long CCP will wait to allow bands of players to flagrantly collude to ignore intended game mechanics and deny greater segments of the player base the enjoyment of the chosen virtual profession that keeps the real-life game revenue coming in.
OP fails to relise that this is a PvP game that revolves around people losing their ships regardless of whether they consent or not, then attempts to make real life comparisions.
Welcome to EVE.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
71
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:12:00 -
[223] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Well known if you keep track of such things, perhaps. I am a casual gamer with disposable income. Believe it or not, the largest segment of MMO revenue is from just such gamers.
I don't read EVE news. I don't follow the EVE forum.
The first I head of hulkageddon was AFTER I was killed today. And then my reaction went from "oh well" to "why the heck doesn't CCP realize the impact of their inaction". Hence the post.
CCP knows this. Anyone with MMO development / engineering experience knows the segmentation of revenue. Realizing that there are subscribers whose revenue impact can be lost by ignoring such dynamics as Hulkageddon creates is a quick path to declining revenue.
I'm betting you ran right to your wallet, grabbed that credit card and replaced all items from your disposable income with one swift transaction.
so your loss didn't matter right ?? so why the huge threadnought about a single ship loss ? |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:16:00 -
[224] - Quote
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
Why don't we take your CYNO blankie and your Local blankie away?
Bahahahahahahaha...
I'm more likely to get hot dropped than hot drop anyone. I dont think you understand how cyno's are used either. You think people make sure to undock with a cyno and a couple hundred people on stand-by just in case they get attacked? Please think about what you just said...
edit:
Oh I forgot you're that crazy conspiracy guy. Why would I even bother cyno'ing in a couple hundred people when I can get ccp to simply reverse my losses over skype? |
baltec1
1215
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:17:00 -
[225] - Quote
Maraner wrote:Yup it's a sandbox, I've shot up more than a few hulks in high sec but I do think for a 200 million + ship they could use a raw HP buff. Seems a bit lightweight that a single destoyer can pop a hulk with ease (granted dependant upon **** fit), three of them can kill anything.
Still there is a way to spawn your own concord at a belt folks, just think about it......
Spawning CONCORD for personal protection in a belt is an exploit and a bannable offence.
The hulk is more than able to tank 3 destroyers. |
Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
215
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:18:00 -
[226] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:
OP fails to relise that this is a PvP game that revolves around people losing their ships regardless of whether they consent or not, then attempts to make real life comparisions.
Welcome to EVE.
Honest, OP?
This. Solution? Find another game. You along with 60% of the people paying for this game don't belong here.
No need to do anything extreme. Just cancel and play something else. When 60% of the people wake up and figure out they really don't belong in 'this EVE' then CCP will wake up and figure out 'This EVE' is an absolute failure as a business model. Maybe then they will add more to EVE the 'sandbox' than blow stuff up. |
baltec1
1215
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:19:00 -
[227] - Quote
Hroya wrote:Oddball Six wrote:Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own. Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed
[Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
Good post pointing out that a Hulk definatly isnt a miningvessel. If you would show up in a pvp roam with a crossover setup like this you can pack your suitcase and go home. The yield on this multi million isk mining setup makes it more viable to mine in a tormentor.
By all means show us that tormentor fit. |
baltec1
1216
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:26:00 -
[228] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Quote:i'm quite new to eve Yep and what continues to amaze me are the guys who think this is profitable?????? Heck running high sec plexs is more profitable than this, and I quit going that YEARS ago. Gank a goon, they may have borrowed an implamt from Mittens!
At the start of the year my corp went on a caldari ice interdiction with just a handfull of gankers and killed 600+ miners in just two weeks. We made billions in profits just from the salvage and loot. |
BoSau Hotim
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:28:00 -
[229] - Quote
Nice smirk.. steady gaze... 8/10... Oh wait.. this isn't the rate the avatar above you??? dang.... I'm not a carebear...-áI'm a SPACEBARBIE! |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
503
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:32:00 -
[230] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Maraner wrote:Yup it's a sandbox, I've shot up more than a few hulks in high sec but I do think for a 200 million + ship they could use a raw HP buff. Seems a bit lightweight that a single destoyer can pop a hulk with ease (granted dependant upon **** fit), three of them can kill anything.
Still there is a way to spawn your own concord at a belt folks, just think about it...... Spawning CONCORD for personal protection in a belt is an exploit and a bannable offence.
Sigh... No it's not. It's banable to biomass the character that specifically is used to spawn Concord. As to not have to deal with the security hit(s).
An even then, the concord response time remains the same. So why even bother? Who needs television when you have EVE? EVE drama, best drama. |
|
baltec1
1216
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:38:00 -
[231] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:
Sigh... No it's not. It's banable to biomass the character that specifically is used to spawn Concord. As to not have to deal with the security hit(s).
An even then, the concord response time remains the same. So why even bother?
Wrong, spawning CONCORD for protection is a violation of the CONCORD mechanics. If CONCORD are in the belt then they will jam the offending ganker instantly.
It is also a violation to recycle ganking alts to avoid the sec status drop. |
RAP ACTION HERO
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:40:00 -
[232] - Quote
Ocih wrote:Ganking miners exposes the very broken nature of all PvP in EVE.
A killmail for a T3 cruiser? A Killmail for a Carrier? A Killmail for a Command Ship?
No, we brag about Hulk killmails. That's our e-peen.
Broke? Just a bit.
I didn't fight a mighty dragon but I killed a baby cow when it wasn't looking.
Naw gankers don't discriminate from pos mods to caps to hulks, collect em all kids. |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
503
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:44:00 -
[233] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Pak Narhoo wrote:
Sigh... No it's not. It's banable to biomass the character that specifically is used to spawn Concord. As to not have to deal with the security hit(s).
An even then, the concord response time remains the same. So why even bother?
Wrong, spawning CONCORD for protection is a violation of the CONCORD mechanics. If CONCORD are in the belt then they will jam the offending ganker instantly. It is also a violation to recycle ganking alts to avoid the sec status drop.
Can you show me a quote on the Concord part? Because a few years ago I used an alt multiple times to spawn Concord. And back then (we had it thoroughly researched) it wasn't a violation.
Massive on purpose Concord spawning, yes that was/ is.
And what if you by mistake shoot someone in your fleet or try as a noob, like I once did, try to rep a rat?
Who needs television when you have EVE? EVE drama, best drama. |
AutumnRage Achasse
4th Cavalry Space Forces THE UNTHINKABLES
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:52:00 -
[234] - Quote
I agree with Oddball. All you vets who think EVE is growing maybe need to look at who the new players are. The only thing growing are your alts. Keep up your good work CCP. |
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:02:00 -
[235] - Quote
AutumnRage Achasse wrote:The only thing growing are your alts. Keep up your good work CCP. Wouldn't it be better if you started grow your balls instead ... oh right you don't have any. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1630
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:07:00 -
[236] - Quote
AutumnRage Achasse wrote:I agree with Oddball. All you vets who think EVE is growing maybe need to look at who the new players are. The only thing growing are your alts. Keep up your good work CCP.
If the alternative is getting rid of the reason people choose EvE, then I'd be fine if it didn't get any new Subs.
But EvE's growing both in subscriptions and average server population, so looks like we're all good there. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
69
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:18:00 -
[237] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Maraner wrote:Yup it's a sandbox, I've shot up more than a few hulks in high sec but I do think for a 200 million + ship they could use a raw HP buff. Seems a bit lightweight that a single destoyer can pop a hulk with ease (granted dependant upon **** fit), three of them can kill anything.
Still there is a way to spawn your own concord at a belt folks, just think about it...... Spawning CONCORD for personal protection in a belt is an exploit and a bannable offence. The hulk is more than able to tank 3 destroyers.
Shoot a rookie alt in his free ibis with your other alt in his velator 100AU from the belt you are about to gank someone with your another/other alt, is also an exploit and a bannable offense. |
Ravan Hekki
Imperial Guardians The Aurora Shadow
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:18:00 -
[238] - Quote
@OP
If Hulkageddon was about greifing i would agree, however it isnt. It's a very cynical bit of market mainpulation. Look at what it takes to make you hulk, look at what the people running Hulkageddon own...now look back. That fuzzy warm felling is you realising that Hulkageddon has nothing to do with griefing and is, and has always been, about ISK.
What they are doing is manipulating people into creating a need in the market (for hulks etc) which equaites to profit for those who own tech moons.
Now Hulkageddon drwas to a close i have to ask, did all you miners lock yourself down and sell ore when prices are high? Did you tank your ships and laugh at exploding thrashers? If not you missed the opertunity that is the EvE sandbox.
|
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:18:00 -
[239] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote:CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful! CCP designed the game before the goons were even playing it. Go figure.
Mistah Ewedynao thinks he is funny wrote:I am so ugly I must be a Goon alt.
Mistah Ewedynao wrote: :)
and all those likes must be Goonies, GO AWAY!
If this was a true sandbox you would probably hit me in the head with your showel instead of ad hominem attacks and shouting GO AWAY! while running to your mommy. |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:50:00 -
[240] - Quote
>more to come, only up to page 6...<
Shian Yang wrote: Greetings capsuleer,
You are very eloquent and make a strong case for your point. Unfortunately, as data released by CCP has shown your allegations has no basis in fact.
The population in New Eden has been rising year after year after year. This is a fact as released by CCP, with the latest update coming with the recent meeting in Reijkavik.
baltec1 wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Really? In 2010, I really can't remember less than 50k players on weekends, sometimes around 58k. Because players online at any one time is the same as active subs. Because Tippia already showed the correlation between subscriptions and concurrent online users is a fairly accurate barometer when the same thing was said last summer during "The Summer of Rage"? Because the peak before the summer drop off is @ 2009 levels? Because Eve has started to show a downward trend in concurrent online numbers? http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility Inferno *was* the summer expansion, and it's not all that... But please, keep parroting the party line, this time next year will tell for sure.baltec1 wrote:Arcticblue2 wrote: Actually there are many good ideas... paying fines for suicideganking ... also does make the timer for concord last only in gametime so there is no point for the player to log off to wait out the timer with their main instead ... so that would make them having to wait a while before next target and such.
The ganker loses their ship They get a sec status hit and will be attacked by the empire navies when it gets low enough They turn flashy red in local and on the overveiw Anyone can attack a -10 pirates ship Concord will destroy any ship the pirate gets into within 15 minutes of aggression The "victim" can kill the pirate Seems we already have penalties in place. Completely ineffective and of no consequence (from my own experience in The Bastards) and so therefore of no actual deterrent value... but do go on...
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
|
Hroya
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:54:00 -
[241] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Hroya wrote: Good post pointing out that a Hulk definatly isnt a miningvessel. If you would show up in a pvp roam with a crossover setup like this you can pack your suitcase and go home.
The yield on this multi million isk mining setup makes it more viable to mine in a tormentor.
Then don't tank your Hulk and accept that you are sacrificing your defense (increasing the risk to your ship) in order to maximize your yield (increasing your reward). Everybody else makes compromises when fitting their ships, why should miners be any different? Anyway, if you want to be PERFECTLY SAFE, mine in a Rokh. Now before you whine "But Battleships aren't mining ships, I want SP" and sh it your pants, the Rokh is not required to mine. It is a STRATEGY that will allow you to mine with much less risk than mining in a Hulk represents. With the new rigs and one Aoede, you can fit all the lows with mining upgrades and get 42k EHP. (Not recommended) Dropping the Aoede for a Co-Pro, you get 92k EHP (109 if you OH as you see the gank incoming). (Recommended) 100k EHP, most of the Yield of a Hulk, and the insurable hull is 2/3 of its fitted value. Both need a CPU implant, but v0v
You Sir are my hero. Why didnt i think of that, a Rohk for mining .. wait .. oh poops. So if you are correct in your math here, doesnt it actually mean that a Hulk is really the piece of shite it truelly is ? Maths aside, a Rohk is way cooler ( if such is applicable to mining anyways) then a boring ass Hulk.
And look at what isk goes into someone elses pocket when you build that Rohk compared to a Hulk and as you pointed out the insurance vallue.
You go your corridor but. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1630
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:03:00 -
[242] - Quote
Hroya wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Hroya wrote: Good post pointing out that a Hulk definatly isnt a miningvessel. If you would show up in a pvp roam with a crossover setup like this you can pack your suitcase and go home.
The yield on this multi million isk mining setup makes it more viable to mine in a tormentor.
Then don't tank your Hulk and accept that you are sacrificing your defense (increasing the risk to your ship) in order to maximize your yield (increasing your reward). Everybody else makes compromises when fitting their ships, why should miners be any different? Anyway, if you want to be PERFECTLY SAFE, mine in a Rokh. Now before you whine "But Battleships aren't mining ships, I want SP" and sh it your pants, the Rokh is not required to mine. It is a STRATEGY that will allow you to mine with much less risk than mining in a Hulk represents. With the new rigs and one Aoede, you can fit all the lows with mining upgrades and get 42k EHP. (Not recommended) Dropping the Aoede for a Co-Pro, you get 92k EHP (109 if you OH as you see the gank incoming). (Recommended) 100k EHP, most of the Yield of a Hulk, and the insurable hull is 2/3 of its fitted value. Both need a CPU implant, but v0v You Sir are my hero. Why didnt i think of that, a Rohk for mining .. wait .. oh poops. So if you are correct in your math here, doesnt it actually mean that a Hulk is really the piece of shite it truelly is ? Maths aside, a Rohk is way cooler ( if such is applicable to mining anyways) then a boring ass Hulk. And look at what isk goes into someone elses pocket when you build that Rohk compared to a Hulk and as you pointed out the insurance vallue.
The Hulk has a better yield because it gives up Everything else to have that yield. So the Hulk is fine and so are the rest of the ORE ships (the 1 laser T1 barge needs help, actually). Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:13:00 -
[243] - Quote
James 315 wrote:Kaeda Maxwell wrote:(words) What you described is emergent gameplay at its finest, overcoming obstacles by using skill and creativity, in order to carry out a goal. Frankly, I *don't* give two ***** about the OP, but this is just hilarious...
I don't know Kaeda (don't think we ever met up when I was a pirate) so no offense intended for his/her/it's post - but flying a fast ship through hi-sec while being -10 (-9.8 or -9.9 in my case) was *not* an obstacle, nor *particularly* difficult, because there are *not* hi-sec gate camps with sebo'd people just waiting for the random flashy to fly through...
Using combats to provide a warp in is a *tiny* bit more effort not to alert your prey to your presence, but not in *any* way "skillful or creative..."
Ganking hulks/macks/whatever is *not* hard. Remunerative yes, but not hard.
baltec1 wrote:Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
Boilerplate Goon lying.
Hulk's cannot be tanked in any reasonable way.
Fly covetors not hulks.
A hulk will tank a pair of alpha maelstroms easily. Because everyone *knows* that pirates only come in pairs... There is *no* way to tank a hulk effectively, because those people attacking (if they want it) will just bring "*tank+1". Industrial ships will never be more than "lol" for pvp. All the videos showing people getting kills with their industrials are funny precisely because of this...
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:16:00 -
[244] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Well this has turned into a complete goon -alt-a- thon.
No surprise there huh CCP ??
CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful!
And an ex Goon is telling how cool the completely fail UI is gonna work for us.
CCP you got garbage in u house. Clean it up!
Goons will.fight the change because it puts a spanner in Mittani's economic plans.
I mean why would anyone but a greifer really object to making hi sec a tad safer for certain activities, if its a case that its too easy to make isk mining in hi sec, what's hard about earning revenue shooting ships that can't fight back.
Tal |
Hroya
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:21:00 -
[245] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: The Hulk has a better yield because it gives up Everything else to have that yield. So the Hulk is fine and so are the rest of the ORE ships (the 1 laser T1 barge needs help, actually).
Are you talking about a fully tanked Hulk or a full yield Hulk here ? I am no math guy, i do appreciate your Rohk input.
You go your corridor but. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1630
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:22:00 -
[246] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Fly covetors not hulks.
A hulk will tank a pair of alpha maelstroms easily. [/quote] Because everyone *knows* that pirates only come in pairs... There is *no* way to tank a hulk effectively, because those people attacking (if they want it) will just bring "*tank+1". Industrial ships will never be more than "lol" for pvp. All the videos showing people getting kills with their industrials are funny precisely because of this...[/quote]
Right now Hulks are getting ganked by 5m Isk catalysts. If everyone tanked their Hulks to beat off 2 arty maels, Suicide ganking would be much more expensive and thus less common. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:35:00 -
[247] - Quote
RAP ACTION HERO wrote:Oddball Six wrote:Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own. Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed [Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
There's going to be some dead catalysts hehe, enjoy. "*tank +1" = still dead.... [Catalyst, Pure Gank] Magnetic Field Stabilizer I Magnetic Field Stabilizer I Magnetic Field Stabilizer I
Warp Scrambler I Warp Scrambler I
Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
10 and 7 dead catalysts, to be exact...
371 dps with my skills....
Yeah, too bad pirates don't organize...
Glad us pirates *never* go in groups...
RubyPorto wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote: Because everyone *knows* that pirates only come in pairs... There is *no* way to tank a hulk effectively, because those people attacking (if they want it) will just bring "*tank+1". Industrial ships will never be more than "lol" for pvp. All the videos showing people getting kills with their industrials are funny precisely because of this...
Right now Hulks are getting ganked by 5m Isk catalysts. If everyone tanked their Hulks to beat off 2 arty maels, Suicide ganking would be much more expensive and thus less common. Horsepucky, it never slowed us (me) down, and it hasn't slowed down anyone in the last 4 Hulkageddons....
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Hroya
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:47:00 -
[248] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote: Horsepucky, it never slowed us (me) down, and it hasn't slowed down anyone in the last 4 Hulkageddons....
But the Isk, think of the Isk. It has to flow and follow the riverbed to the land of promise. You go your corridor but. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1630
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:48:00 -
[249] - Quote
Hroya wrote:RubyPorto wrote: The Hulk has a better yield because it gives up Everything else to have that yield. So the Hulk is fine and so are the rest of the ORE ships (the 1 laser T1 barge needs help, actually).
Are you talking about a fully tanked Hulk or a full yield Hulk here ? I am no math guy, i do appreciate your Rohk input.
Max yield Rokh (w/Aeode) has a yield of 2.8*8*60=1344m3/min Max Tank Rokh (1 Co-Proc) has a yield of 2.57*8*60=1233.6m3/min Max yield Hulk has a yield of 8.37*3*60=1506.6m3/min
None of these are implanted or fleet boosted numbers. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Hroya
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:53:00 -
[250] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Max yield Rokh (w/Aeode) has a yield of 2.8*8*60=1344m3/min Max Tank Rokh (1 Co-Proc) has a yield of 2.57*8*60=1233.6m3/min Max yield Hulk has a yield of 8.37*3*60=1506.6m3/min
None of these are implanted or fleet boosted numbers.
Awesome, thanks. So the Rohk is an oke mining ship if you take survivabillity, purchase, insurance payout into accaunt aswell, right ?
I am guessing the max tank Hulk is a good bit closer to the Rohk yields ? Thank you for taking the time to put the numbers up. You go your corridor but. |
|
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:56:00 -
[251] - Quote
Gorki Andropov wrote:If you're as successful an architect/designer as you claim to be, why don't you just build yourself a new Hulk, miner-boy?
Gorki Andropov wrote:If you're as successful an architect/designer as you claim to be, why don't you just build yourself a new Hulk, miner-boy? [Rokh, Miner] Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade Damage Control II Expanded Cargohold II Co-Processor II
'Dactyl' Type-E Asteroid Analyzer Large Shield Extender II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Invulnerability Field II Heat Dissipation Amplifier II Large Shield Extender II
Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Drone Link Augmentor II
Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Large Cargohold Optimization I Large Core Defence Field Extender I
Warrior II x5 Mining Drone I x5 My current mining ship - 115K ehp - and still could be taken out by 25 or 30 catalysts - now THAT stops ganking. Have to mine to an anchored can, but even *this* is vulnerable (i.e. - the cost to the individual pilot is miniscule if they {as a group} decide they want me...)
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1630
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:00:00 -
[252] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote: Because everyone *knows* that pirates only come in pairs... There is *no* way to tank a hulk effectively, because those people attacking (if they want it) will just bring "*tank+1". Industrial ships will never be more than "lol" for pvp. All the videos showing people getting kills with their industrials are funny precisely because of this...
Right now Hulks are getting ganked by 5m Isk catalysts. If everyone tanked their Hulks to beat off 2 arty maels, Suicide ganking would be much more expensive and thus less common. Horsepucky, it never slowed us (me) down, and it hasn't slowed down anyone in the last 4 Hulkageddons....
Last 4 HAGs, PEND was underwriting the gankers. Maelstroms cost like 20m to lose because of that.
Now they cost 150m-200m each. Tornados cost ~70-90m to lose.
Alpha is expensive.
If each Hulk were tanked and cost 100-400m to gank by mining in 1.0 to ensure that alpha is required, Suicide ganks would become less common. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
468
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:02:00 -
[253] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade
Are you theorycrafting or do you actually spend 1b on those? eh |
Hroya
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:02:00 -
[254] - Quote
Pump the Volume You go your corridor but. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
468
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:04:00 -
[255] - Quote
also for those saying "BUT THEY'LL JUST BRING 10 CATALYSTS TO KILL MY HULK" you're kinda missing the point, it'll take more than one catalyst to kill you and they'll probably gank other Hulks
hint: if a guy gets suicide ganked in your belt while you're mining, it's time to move eh |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1630
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:06:00 -
[256] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:Gorki Andropov wrote:If you're as successful an architect/designer as you claim to be, why don't you just build yourself a new Hulk, miner-boy? Gorki Andropov wrote:If you're as successful an architect/designer as you claim to be, why don't you just build yourself a new Hulk, miner-boy? [Rokh, Miner] Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade Damage Control II Expanded Cargohold II Co-Processor II 'Dactyl' Type-E Asteroid Analyzer Large Shield Extender II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Invulnerability Field II Heat Dissipation Amplifier II Large Shield Extender II Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Miner II Drone Link Augmentor II Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Large Cargohold Optimization I Large Core Defence Field Extender I Warrior II x5 Mining Drone I x5 My current mining ship - 115K ehp - and still could be taken out by 25 or 30 catalysts - now THAT stops ganking. Have to mine to an anchored can, but even *this* is vulnerable (i.e. - the cost to the individual pilot is miniscule if they {as a group} decide they want me...)
The hell is that monstrosity. You've got 1bil in droppable loot that's screaming for a gank. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:07:00 -
[257] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade Are you theorycrafting or do you actually spend 1b on those?
Wasn't paying attention and hit the wrong one - should be a meta 1.
But it would be *FUN* as hell!
RubyPorto wrote:The hell is that monstrosity. You've got 1bil in droppable loot that's screaming for a gank. I really, *REALLY* wanted to answer "well, i found 'em - are they that expensive...?" But I couldn't - just a misclick.
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Dar Tel
Tzolk'in
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:31:00 -
[258] - Quote
Many here tells the OP what he should have done before he was killed, to adapt to the present situation with Hulkageddon running etc., and not come here to complain.
I still think he made some good points about high-sec. And I for one would like to see pilots like him populating high-sec. Too much focus is constantly being directed toward PvP and what can be destroyed or stolen. And CCP also promotes this time and time again with their expansion videos. OK. Eve is about combat and flying space ships.
We have web sites like battleclinic ranking pilots according to how many kills they have and the value destroyed vs lost.
But the fact remains, Eve needs pilots that focus on production. People that enjoys creating something. Sadly, there is no ranking for these pilots anywhere, as far as I know. They are simply forgotten/ignored.
Perhaps Eve subscriptions are increasing year by year. But that doesn't convince me that the actual playerbase is increasing. I have one alt. And the pilot who killed the OP also has an alt. We could just as well assume that people have more alts, and that has been the reason for the increased subscriptions. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1631
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:46:00 -
[259] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade Are you theorycrafting or do you actually spend 1b on those? Wasn't paying attention and hit the wrong one - should be a meta 1. But it would be *FUN* as hell! RubyPorto wrote:The hell is that monstrosity. You've got 1bil in droppable loot that's screaming for a gank. I really, *REALLY* wanted to answer "well, i found 'em - are they that expensive...?" But I couldn't - just a misclick.
The rest of the fit's still a monstrosity.
104k EHP and better yield.
[Rokh, Mining Rokh]
Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Co-Processor II
Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Limited 'Anointed' EM Ward Field Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II [Empty Med slot]
Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Deep Core Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Large Processor Overclocking Unit I Large Processor Overclocking Unit I Large Core Defense Field Extender I
Mining Drone II x5 Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1631
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:49:00 -
[260] - Quote
Dar Tel wrote:Many here tells the OP what he should have done before he was killed, to adapt to the present situation with Hulkageddon running etc., and not come here to complain.
I still think he made some good points about high-sec. And I for one would like to see pilots like him populating high-sec. Too much focus is constantly being directed toward PvP and what can be destroyed or stolen. And CCP also promotes this time and time again with their expansion videos. OK. Eve is about combat and flying space ships.
We have web sites like battleclinic ranking pilots according to how many kills they have and the value destroyed vs lost.
But the fact remains, Eve needs pilots that focus on production. People that enjoys creating something. Sadly, there is no ranking for these pilots anywhere, as far as I know. They are simply forgotten/ignored.
Perhaps Eve subscriptions are increasing year by year. But that doesn't convince me that the actual playerbase is increasing. I have one alt. And the pilot who killed the OP also has an alt. We could just as well assume that people have more alts, and that has been the reason for the increased subscriptions.
If you want to produce things, don't you want a market to sell them into? Ships blowing up produces that market. Without ships blowing up, everyone will eventually have every ship they want and not need to buy anymore and production dies.
As for the subs, do you have any evidence that suggests that the average number of alts per person is on the rise? Cause that's what you're arguing. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7442
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:56:00 -
[261] - Quote
Dar Tel wrote:But the fact remains, Eve needs pilots that focus on production. People that enjoys creating something. Sadly, there is no ranking for these pilots anywhere, as far as I know. They are simply forgotten/ignored. So create one. The API gives you all the production and sales numbers you need. Get to it. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
449
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 13:58:00 -
[262] - Quote
Even when Eve is making more money, it's still "dying".
Poor Eve...it never even stood a chance |
Dar Tel
Tzolk'in
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:01:00 -
[263] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: If you want to produce things, don't you want a market to sell them into? Ships blowing up produces that market. Without ships blowing up, everyone will eventually have every ship they want and not need to buy anymore and production dies.
As for the subs, do you have any evidence that suggests that the average number of alts per person is on the rise? Cause that's what you're arguing.
I just don't think an organized killingspree all across high-sec is the way to do it. It's a one-way war in my opinion.
I looked at the Eve Online status monitor, (as did everyone else I guess), and saw that there is a decline. But I don't assume it to be a proof of a dwindling population.
Anyway, my point was only to express my support for the OP, and the issue he was making. |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
129
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:04:00 -
[264] - Quote
Talon SilverHawk wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Well this has turned into a complete goon -alt-a- thon.
No surprise there huh CCP ??
CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful!
And an ex Goon is telling how cool the completely fail UI is gonna work for us.
CCP you got garbage in u house. Clean it up!
Goons will.fight the change because it puts a spanner in Mittani's economic plans. I mean why would anyone but a greifer really object to making hi sec a tad safer for certain activities, if its a case that its too easy to make isk mining in hi sec, what's hard about earning revenue shooting ships that can't fight back. Tal
Here's where your problem is, you fail to realise that players are getting paid by players to do these things. This isn't some over powered game mechanic where people are earning isk directly for shooting miners. This is player created content driven by market manipulation. This is exactly what makes this game great, the idea of a multinational community working together to make isk and have fun. It just so happens that this is at the expense of people who don't understand how this game works...
I think here-in lies the further problem. A lot of you hiseccers in your 10 man indi corps cant fully comprehend what a community of a 1000+ players driven by a single or collection of motives to achieve something massive is really like. You dont see the work that's gone into amassing the funds required to motivate such widespread destruction. I mean, it can't be much harder than afk mining for enough hours to earn the isk for a plex and maintain that manufacturing pos so you can afk mine some more and watch that sp counter/wallet balnce go up indefinately, can it? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1631
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:09:00 -
[265] - Quote
Dar Tel wrote:RubyPorto wrote: If you want to produce things, don't you want a market to sell them into? Ships blowing up produces that market. Without ships blowing up, everyone will eventually have every ship they want and not need to buy anymore and production dies.
As for the subs, do you have any evidence that suggests that the average number of alts per person is on the rise? Cause that's what you're arguing.
I just don't think an organized killingspree all across high-sec is the way to do it. It's a one-way war in my opinion. I looked at the Eve Online status monitor, (as did everyone else I guess), and saw that there is a decline. But I don't assume it to be a proof of a dwindling population. Anyway, my point was only to express my support for the OP, and the issue he was making.
http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility I read it as increasing since last summer's disaster. Which direction are you reading the graph? Now is on the Left, 2003 is on the right.
From a post Incursion High of 42k online in Jan 2011, it dropped to the Incarna low of 24k in September 2011, and has risen to the current average of around 34k.
Aren't all wars one sided? Besides, in a sandbox, who are you to decide what wars should and shouldn't drive demand? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
919
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:14:00 -
[266] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:Here's where your problem is, you fail to realise that players are getting paid by players to do these things. This isn't some over powered game mechanic where people are earning isk directly for shooting miners. This is player created content driven by market manipulation. This is exactly what makes this game great, the idea of a multinational community working together to make isk and have fun. It just so happens that this is at the expense of people who don't understand how this game works...
I think here-in lies the further problem. A lot of you hiseccers in your 10 man indi corps cant fully comprehend what a community of a 1000+ players driven by a single or collection of motives to achieve something massive is really like. You dont see the work that's gone into amassing the funds required to motivate such widespread destruction. I mean, it can't be much harder than afk mining for enough hours to earn the isk for a plex and maintain that manufacturing pos so you can afk mine some more and watch that sp counter/wallet balnce go up indefinately, can it? The titans come from somewhere ~
They also go somewhere when you jump instead of bridge. But that's another issue ~ Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Selaya Ataru
Pink Kitten Kommando To The Moon
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:19:00 -
[267] - Quote
Honestly, why do you even make a thread like this?
The Point is: CCP wants Eve to be a game for people that like to play space psychotics. Yes its unfair, its harsh and even your extremly important rl job (seriously, do you have anything to compensate?) wont help you in Eve. Eve is about making people spacemiserale.
If CCP wants to have 5m subscribers, they would have made yet another fluffy bunny fantasy MMO. But it seems they dont give a **** and rather stick to what they can do and what they like.
Deal with it. |
Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
269
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:22:00 -
[268] - Quote
It really doesn't matter what kind of rationale you present, the bottom line is that CCP thinks the Goons are cool, and "events" like Hulkageddon are even cooler. They are seriously only going to act if subscription numbers dip. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
919
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:27:00 -
[269] - Quote
Ana Vyr wrote:It really doesn't matter what kind of rationale you present, the bottom line is that CCP thinks the Goons are cool, and "events" like Hulkageddon are even cooler. They are seriously only going to act if subscription numbers dip. Ah yes, the let's unsub thing...
EVE just keeps pulling you back though. And then there's the forums ~~ Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Salisar Salubrious
Black Rebel Rifter Club
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:35:00 -
[270] - Quote
Oddball, is Eve Online still a game to you?
Is it a game for you?
A little time spent thinking about these two questions may help you greatly. |
|
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
131
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:35:00 -
[271] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: The titans come from somewhere ~
They also go somewhere when you jump instead of bridge. But that's another issue ~
I thought they came from RMT? |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:45:00 -
[272] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:The rest of the fit's still a monstrosity. Bah! "good enough is good enough" Besides, unless i *really* **** someone off it's safe enough, and I'm not trying to maximize yield (just get it "done").
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
AutumnRage Achasse
4th Cavalry Space Forces THE UNTHINKABLES
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 14:50:00 -
[273] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:AutumnRage Achasse wrote:The only thing growing are your alts. Keep up your good work CCP. Wouldn't it be better if you started grow your balls instead ... oh right you don't have any.
That the best ya got? How many alts you have? lol |
baltec1
1218
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 15:01:00 -
[274] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote: Because everyone *knows* that pirates only come in pairs... There is *no* way to tank a hulk effectively, because those people attacking (if they want it) will just bring "*tank+1". Industrial ships will never be more than "lol" for pvp. All the videos showing people getting kills with their industrials are funny precisely because of this...
Go find 5 solo hulk kills with 2 or more battleships on the mail. |
baltec1
1218
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 15:06:00 -
[275] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote: "*tank +1" = still dead.... [Catalyst, Pure Gank] Magnetic Field Stabilizer I Magnetic Field Stabilizer I Magnetic Field Stabilizer I
Warp Scrambler I Warp Scrambler I
Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
10 and 7 dead catalysts, to be exact...
371 dps with my skills....
Yeah, too bad pirates don't organize...
Glad us pirates *never* go in groups...
Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 16:23:00 -
[276] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote: Because everyone *knows* that pirates only come in pairs... There is *no* way to tank a hulk effectively, because those people attacking (if they want it) will just bring "*tank+1". Industrial ships will never be more than "lol" for pvp. All the videos showing people getting kills with their industrials are funny precisely because of this...
Nobody ever kills a hulk with 2 or more battleships worth 350-400 mil. Just about all gankers will hit a hulk with a single or a pair of destroyers because that is the only way to make a profit from the gank.
Efficiency! |
Vladimir McSquizzle
Black Rebel Rifter Club
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 16:51:00 -
[277] - Quote
+1 \o/
I fully support the removal of these implants...FREE TAH BRAINS! |
Rhah Kaundur
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:02:00 -
[278] - Quote
Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again. |
Ituhata Saken
Elysium Enterprises
115
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:04:00 -
[279] - Quote
Rhah Kaundur wrote:Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again.
Old trick, and I love the ingenuity of it, but I thought that was deemed an exploit at one time? |
killorbekilled TBE
Dare Bears
89
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:07:00 -
[280] - Quote
That be alot of bigs words there mr, we are not but humble pirates
huh? |
|
TheBreadMuncher
Boxxed Up Industries EPIC Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:08:00 -
[281] - Quote
+1'd for the first line.
Removed that +1 after reading the rest of the post. I only ever emerge from the shadows when my main is banned. |
TheBreadMuncher
Boxxed Up Industries EPIC Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:10:00 -
[282] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote: Were a real life band to conspire to affect markets by systematically attacking mining operations, there is ample precedent to recognize that governments and international organizations would act.
We would see concerted action on multiple fronts from the US, the EU, and the UN. Antitrust hearings. Courts and tribunals. Resolutions and committees.
Heh. Yeah. I'm sure. Because the US government is entirely innocent of commiting any kind of action that might in some way gain them economic benefit. Nope, they've never been on a SINGLE oil-motivated invasion or anything. I only ever emerge from the shadows when my main is banned. |
baltec1
1218
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:11:00 -
[283] - Quote
Ituhata Saken wrote:Rhah Kaundur wrote:Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again. Old trick, and I love the ingenuity of it, but I thought that was deemed an exploit at one time?
It is. |
Rhah Kaundur
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:12:00 -
[284] - Quote
Ituhata Saken wrote:Rhah Kaundur wrote:Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again. Old trick, and I love the ingenuity of it, but I thought that was deemed an exploit at one time?
I don't know, maybe. Like other rule violations..as stated by the OP..its all open to interpretation. |
Ginseng Jita
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
339
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:15:00 -
[285] - Quote
@Oddball Six
If you really feel that strongly about CCP and their failure to stand by the rules of their own game...sue them. Take them to court. |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:01:00 -
[286] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. Dude, I don't know you, or where your coming from, but really, you sound as bad as any hi-sec carebear with your "profit"/"loss" statements...
If i were to start ganking again, isk would be a secondary concern.
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
197
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:12:00 -
[287] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote: But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands. Yeah, that's sort of to be expected.
You misunderstand me. Power in the game /= power in determining CCP policy.
Certain individuals in those alliances hold far more influence over CCPs decision-making than anyone should. On one hand, it's nice that the devs interact with the community. Interacting is fine. Being friends with players is probably overstepping boundaries. How can one then separate policy born out of CCPs vision of the game, and policy born out of a group of friends, some of which are not CCP employees and have absolutely no business influencing policy?
In government, something like that is called corruption. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1632
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:19:00 -
[288] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote: But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands. Yeah, that's sort of to be expected. You misunderstand me. Power in the game /= power in determining CCP policy. Certain individuals in those alliances hold far more influence over CCPs decision-making than anyone should. On one hand, it's nice that the devs interact with the community. Interacting is fine. Being friends with players is probably overstepping boundaries. How can one then separate policy born out of CCPs vision of the game, and policy born out of a group of friends, some of which are not CCP employees and have absolutely no business influencing policy? In government, something like that is called corruption.
1) CCP has a vision for the game now? If they do, it's clearly not a consistent one.
2) Those individuals have that power due to the mass assent of the playerbase as expressed through free elections.
3) Assuming CCP has a vision for the game, what evidence do you have that it has changed from their stated vision in 2003 of EvE as a cold, dark universe full of violence?
4) If you have evidence of corruption or inappropriate relationships between Devs and Players, CCP's Internal Affairs would like to hear it.
EvEWiki wrote:If you have a reasonable suspicion that an employee is abusing his/her position in some way in the game, you can contact Internal Affairs directly by sending an e-mail to [email protected] . Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Kara Vix
Vinegar Flies Peregrine Nation
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:23:00 -
[289] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote: But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands. Yeah, that's sort of to be expected. You misunderstand me. Power in the game /= power in determining CCP policy. Certain individuals in those alliances hold far more influence over CCPs decision-making than anyone should. On one hand, it's nice that the devs interact with the community. Interacting is fine. Being friends with players is probably overstepping boundaries. How can one then separate policy born out of CCPs vision of the game, and policy born out of a group of friends, some of which are not CCP employees and have absolutely no business influencing policy? In government, something like that is called corruption.
My thoughts exactly. |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
505
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:24:00 -
[290] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Ituhata Saken wrote:Rhah Kaundur wrote:Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again. Old trick, and I love the ingenuity of it, but I thought that was deemed an exploit at one time? It is.
No it is not. And you still haven't come up with something backing up your claim. Who needs television when you have EVE? EVE drama, best drama. |
|
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:32:00 -
[291] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Ituhata Saken wrote:Rhah Kaundur wrote:Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again. Old trick, and I love the ingenuity of it, but I thought that was deemed an exploit at one time? It is.
Man I wish uninformed people would just keep their mouths shut. GÇ£It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.GÇ¥ This is not an exploit as long as you don't biomass your character to get around sec-status drop. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1267319#post1267319 |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
198
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:37:00 -
[292] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote: But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands. Yeah, that's sort of to be expected. You misunderstand me. Power in the game /= power in determining CCP policy. Certain individuals in those alliances hold far more influence over CCPs decision-making than anyone should. On one hand, it's nice that the devs interact with the community. Interacting is fine. Being friends with players is probably overstepping boundaries. How can one then separate policy born out of CCPs vision of the game, and policy born out of a group of friends, some of which are not CCP employees and have absolutely no business influencing policy? In government, something like that is called corruption. 1) CCP has a vision for the game now? If they do, it's clearly not a consistent one. 2) Those individuals have that power due to the mass assent of the playerbase as expressed through free elections. 3) Assuming CCP has a vision for the game, what evidence do you have that it has changed from their stated vision in 2003 of EvE as a cold, dark universe full of violence? 4) If you have evidence of corruption or inappropriate relationships between Devs and Players, CCP's Internal Affairs would like to hear it. EvEWiki wrote:If you have a reasonable suspicion that an employee is abusing his/her position in some way in the game, you can contact Internal Affairs directly by sending an e-mail to [email protected] .
1) If they don't have a vision, then nothing we or anyone else can do will stop this game from failing. Pray that isn't the case.
2) The elections have been absolutely plagued with allegations of corruption, vote-buying, intimidation, and favoritism.
3) I never pretended to know exactly what CCPs vision is, either then or now, and made no statements implying that I did. There is plenty of universe in New Eden for rampant violence, and I, personally, have never said that I want to end it. War and conflict is hardwired into human beings. However, the amount of rampant crime going on in Empire space is ridiculous. Not because I have objections to it due to personal reasons. I have never lost a ship in a scenario in which I didn't deserve to lose it. But, from a lore standpoint, the Empires should have much more of an interest in policing their space and keeping it safe for their own. Allowing thousands of murders and billions of ISK of property destruction, along with the consequent loss of industrial capability, sure is a ****-poor way to protect their interests.
4) If I had solid evidence of collusion, you're damned right I would report it. The problem is that the large alliances have no transparency, and no reason to have transparency. I'm not in one of them. I can see, from an outsider's point of view, that their interests may be being unduly protected. But, being an outsider means that I would have a great deal of problems trying to pinpoint specific problems or individuals. Naturally, the people that have gotten close enough to the corrupted individuals to be able to rat them out, wouldn't.
|
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:40:00 -
[293] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:Talon SilverHawk wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Well this has turned into a complete goon -alt-a- thon.
No surprise there huh CCP ??
CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful!
And an ex Goon is telling how cool the completely fail UI is gonna work for us.
CCP you got garbage in u house. Clean it up!
Goons will.fight the change because it puts a spanner in Mittani's economic plans. I mean why would anyone but a greifer really object to making hi sec a tad safer for certain activities, if its a case that its too easy to make isk mining in hi sec, what's hard about earning revenue shooting ships that can't fight back. Tal Here's where your problem is, you fail to realise that players are getting paid by players to do these things. This isn't some over powered game mechanic where people are earning isk directly for shooting miners. This is player created content driven by market manipulation. This is exactly what makes this game great, the idea of a multinational community working together to make isk and have fun. It just so happens that this is at the expense of people who don't understand how this game works... I think here-in lies the further problem. A lot of you hiseccers in your 10 man indi corps cant fully comprehend what a community of a 1000+ players driven by a single or collection of motives to achieve something massive is really like. You dont see the work that's gone into amassing the funds required to motivate such widespread destruction. I mean, it can't be much harder than afk mining for enough hours to earn the isk for a plex and maintain that manufacturing pos so you can afk mine some more and watch that sp counter/wallet balnce go up indefinately, can it?
Your argument fell flat the moment you claimed to know what any other player in the game has experience of.
I'm not knocking what any large large entity including Goons have achieved even if I dislike their methods.
Still does not get away from the fact that its too easy and cheap to grief in hi sec. I like that hi sec can still be a dodgy place, but at the moment Its not balanced.
Lots of Goons in here as any change would affect Mittanis plans adversely.
Again why would anybody but a griefer complain about losing the chance to shoot defenceless targets in hi sec ?
Tal
|
Veronica Kerrigan
Hand Of Midas F0RCEFUL ENTRY
28
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 18:40:00 -
[294] - Quote
The role playing aspect of this is absurd, because Hulkageddon is not role play. It is an organized effort to collectively decrease the number of players mining in Highsec. This is griefing, which is perfectly acceptable in the eyes of CCP, as long as it's target is the populace at large. I can go out, and gank 100 different people, and there is no issue, because they are all isolated events. However if I gank the same person 100 times, I am deliberately making it impossible for them to play the game they have paid for, and it is a punishable offense. Moreover, you are a CAPSULEER. You are immortal. What does CONCORD care if you get ganked? They are there to ensure that the laws are upheld, and when they are not, they act as judge, jury, and executioner of the wrongdoer. They spend their time protecting the people who NEED protection, the people who don't get a second chance. They leave it to you to deal with the dangers of flying in space. |
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:06:00 -
[295] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:baltec1 wrote:Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. Dude, I don't know you, or where your coming from, but really, you sound as bad as any hi-sec carebear with your "profit"/"loss" statements... If i were to start ganking again, isk would be a secondary concern.
Good for you. Just about everyone else who ganks however do it for the isk. |
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:11:00 -
[296] - Quote
According to CCP and the GMs that we as a corp and alliance have been told when we did our ice interdictions, spawning CONCORD in a belt to be bodyguards is a missuse of the mechanic and seen as an exploit. Anyone caught doing this will get a warning and further missuse will result in a temp ban. Anyone doing this should be reported to a GM.
What you are thinking about is not biomassing a ganking alt to avoid having to grind up sec status.
|
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:12:00 -
[297] - Quote
Talon SilverHawk wrote:
Your argument fell flat the moment you claimed to know what any other player in the game has experience of.
I'm not knocking what any large large entity including Goons have achieved even if I dislike their methods.
Still does not get away from the fact that its too easy and cheap to grief in hi sec. I like that hi sec can still be a dodgy place, but at the moment Its not balanced.
Lots of Goons in here as any change would affect Mittanis plans adversely.
Again why would anybody but a griefer complain about losing the chance to shoot defenceless targets in hi sec ?
Tal
Its only easy because people make it easy. |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:29:00 -
[298] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Ituhata Saken wrote:Rhah Kaundur wrote:Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again. Old trick, and I love the ingenuity of it, but I thought that was deemed an exploit at one time? It is.
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:31:00 -
[299] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:baltec1 wrote:Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. Dude, I don't know you, or where your coming from, but really, you sound as bad as any hi-sec carebear with your "profit"/"loss" statements... If i were to start ganking again, isk would be a secondary concern. Good for you. Just about everyone else who ganks however do it for the isk.
Well they say they do it for that cause CCP's definition if griefing depends on you getting a profit from it and "for the lulz" could net you as the first person to ever get banned for griefing |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:32:00 -
[300] - Quote
Veronica Kerrigan wrote:The role playing aspect of this is absurd, because Hulkageddon is not role play. It is an organized effort to collectively decrease the number of players mining in Highsec. This is griefing, which is perfectly acceptable in the eyes of CCP, as long as it's target is the populace at large. I can go out, and gank 100 different people, and there is no issue, because they are all isolated events. However if I gank the same person 100 times, I am deliberately making it impossible for them to play the game they have paid for, and it is a punishable offense. Moreover, you are a CAPSULEER. You are immortal. What does CONCORD care if you get ganked? They are there to ensure that the laws are upheld, and when they are not, they act as judge, jury, and executioner of the wrongdoer. They spend their time protecting the people who NEED protection, the people who don't get a second chance. They leave it to you to deal with the dangers of flying in space.
QQ |
|
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:33:00 -
[301] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic. |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:33:00 -
[302] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:According to CCP and the GMs that we as a corp and alliance have been told when we did our ice interdictions, spawning CONCORD in a belt to be bodyguards is a missuse of the mechanic and seen as an exploit. Anyone caught doing this will get a warning and further missuse will result in a temp ban. Anyone doing this should be reported to a GM. What you are thinking about is not biomassing a ganking alt to avoid having to grind up sec status.
which is only a exploit if the reporting person can prove it which is nigh impossible to do. Why the hell this is even a exploit when random person getting ganked can never porove it happened is unknown to me |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:35:00 -
[303] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic.
Interesting how its legal for the gankers to kite them but not the defenders
|
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:41:00 -
[304] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic. Interesting how its legal for the gankers to kite them but not the defenders
The difference is we were not using CONCORD for protection just moving them about system. Thats the difference.
It is also very easy to prove someone is spawing concord for protection because the logs show the same ibis getting killed over and over by concord in the same system. |
Rhah Kaundur
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:42:00 -
[305] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic. Interesting how its legal for the gankers to kite them but not the defenders
You touched the matter with a needle. |
Neftaran
Eternal Profiteers Empire
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:55:00 -
[306] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:World of Warcraft --------------------------->
People pointing to WoW is getting so tiresome. There were plenty of games before Warcraft and have been many after.
I think I would rather
Guild Wars 2 ------------------------> |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
440
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 20:00:00 -
[307] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:baltec1 wrote:Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. Dude, I don't know you, or where your coming from, but really, you sound as bad as any hi-sec carebear with your "profit"/"loss" statements... If i were to start ganking again, isk would be a secondary concern. Good for you. Just about everyone else who ganks however do it for the isk. I don't believe that.
However, I will believe that isk motivates the weekend warriors/carebears...
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
136
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 21:16:00 -
[308] - Quote
Talon SilverHawk wrote:
Your argument fell flat the moment you claimed to know what any other player in the game has experience of.
So you're telling me that there aren't quite a lot of players who play like that; who play simply to collect shiny and when said shiny undergoes decompression in our lovely little vacuum they get mad and fail to understand that one of the core features of this game is that you're never truly safe. If there were a truly safe zone then the sandbox would be dead because there'd be areas where certain aspects of the sandbox are reduced to 0.
What exactly do you play for? It's not like any more anecdotal evidence wouldn't hurt.
Talon SilverHawk wrote:I'm not knocking what any large large entity including Goons have achieved even if I dislike their methods.
Still does not get away from the fact that its too easy and cheap to grief in hi sec. I like that hi sec can still be a dodgy place, but at the moment Its not balanced.
Like what baltec said, it's made easy by stupid players. You'd be surprised how many people shy away from chancing a tanked hulk. Then again there are plenty of people who'll go out of there way to kill that tanked hulk even if it costs them more than it's worth, simply because they can.
Quote:Lots of Goons in here as any change would affect Mittanis plans adversely.
Again why would anybody but a griefer complain about losing the chance to shoot defenceless targets in hi sec ?
Tal
So basically you don't like the way some people play this game. So you'd like to get ccp to marginalise a specific demographic. To a certain extent you're the pot calling the kettle black here. |
Jules Hawk
Pink Kitten Kommando To The Moon
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 21:22:00 -
[309] - Quote
ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
/sigh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvBPCOrZ32A |
Corelin
The Fancy Hats Corporation
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 21:23:00 -
[310] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because I choose to ignore the metagame and go afk during day 29 of an event that lasts over a month where my ship will be specifically targeted
Fixed a typo for you. |
|
Salisar Salubrious
Black Rebel Rifter Club
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 23:37:00 -
[311] - Quote
Oddball, it seems to me that you want to squish the laws and customs of a regular Western Democracy into an internet spaceships game. Why?
I play Eve because it is so far removed from my life as an active community member of a Western Democracy. Why do you play Eve?
Why are so many exhumers so poorly tanked? What is happening in the head of a miner that allows them to either simply fit their ships for maximum cargo space and yield, or have vitually no tank at all? Has greed got anything to do with it?
Seriously, send me an in-game email and we can discuss how to increase the survival of your exhumers. Now that you have learnt how to properly tank your internet space mining vessel from we wonderful group of people who happen to be partial to the odd suicide gank. |
Vicky Somers
Rusty Anchor
36
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 23:41:00 -
[312] - Quote
Any Hulk that doesn't have DCII should have its self destruct timer engaged randomly by the server. |
Ituhata Saken
Elysium Enterprises
117
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 00:21:00 -
[313] - Quote
Vicky Somers wrote:Any Hulk that doesn't have DCII should have its self destruct timer engaged randomly by the server.
Pretty much what happens, only replace the words 'the server' with 'other players'. |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
310
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 00:33:00 -
[314] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement. ...
Anecdotal evidence has already started to surface of player discontent with allowing these actions to remain unpunished and indeed unrestrained. I question how long CCP will wait to allow bands of players to flagrantly collude to ignore intended game mechanics and deny greater segments of the player base the enjoyment of the chosen virtual profession that keeps the real-life game revenue coming in.
The problem here is that Eve is setup so that everything is player driven. That includes your own security. Just as in real life, the police can never guarantee you will never be robbed or shot at, CONCORD does the same. They provide a consequence. Sometimes the consequence is a deterrent, sometimes not.
Players CAN enhance the deterrent level by:
1. providing a decent tank. * you sacrifice optimal efficiency, but then there's your risk vs. reward.
2. providing security. * the more risky mining becomes, the more lucrative it becomes, and the more easily security becomes affordable. * yea, part of your profits go to pay your player guardians, but again, risk vs. reward.
Again, it's just all about solving the problem presented to you, and you may not want to do that. It can be done with effort, or with isk. But if you don't want to do either, then you don't want to play in the sandbox. I'm just sorry for you that there aren't may spaceship mmos for you to choose from, but please don't try to take away our sandbox. ... |
Tycho Enderas
KR Acquisition and Logistics
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 00:41:00 -
[315] - Quote
It's pretty clear that RubyPorto has refuted your points OP, even if you chose not to respond. The fact that you left out those following paragraphs in the TOS/EULA (and tried to lump KB in with them) is just the kind of thing that makes this post more sensationalist news BS and less eloquent plea for reason. Hell, even the knucle-draggers with their one-liners do a damn good job against the weak foundations of your argument.
You want to talk about the economics of losing all these miner subs? How has that affected EVE in the last 10+ years? This is no monoclegate. How can you even bring up the subject of economics when you did not consider the risk/reward locus of your choices or educate yourself? I almost want to compare this to the sub-prime mortgage crisis, with maybe a bit more stupidity/laziness and less greed. Good thing there are no moral hazard issues in EVE (no bailouts from CCP for you).
Another interesting fallacy in your argument is the assumption that you understand CCP's mechanics and that players are clearly violating them. Precedent alone makes it abundantly clear that you are wrong. Further, as someone mentioned, "Hi-sec" does not imply complete safety, nor does CONCORD action imply that players are willfully collaborating to violate game design. They enforce consequences. They don't prohibit crime. Design goals are quite clear. In fact it is remarkably similar to real life, the only difference being the effectiveness of the deterrent.
Which brings me to the only part of the anti-ganking argument that I've found somewhat reasonable. Someone mentioned that the consequences of security status hits, outlaw status, etc., are not an effective deterrent and that and outlaw could still get around hi-sec relatively easily. I believe there is a point here in that consequences are probably not working as intended if this is the case.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1636
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 01:44:00 -
[316] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote: 1) If they don't have a vision, then nothing we or anyone else can do will stop this game from failing. Pray that isn't the case.
2) The elections have been absolutely plagued with allegations of corruption, vote-buying, intimidation, and favoritism.
3) I never pretended to know exactly what CCPs vision is, either then or now, and made no statements implying that I did. There is plenty of universe in New Eden for rampant violence, and I, personally, have never said that I want to end it. War and conflict is hardwired into human beings. However, the amount of rampant crime going on in Empire space is ridiculous. Not because I have objections to it due to personal reasons. I have never lost a ship in a scenario in which I didn't deserve to lose it. But, from a lore standpoint, the Empires should have much more of an interest in policing their space and keeping it safe for their own. Allowing thousands of murders and billions of ISK of property destruction, along with the consequent loss of industrial capability, sure is a ****-poor way to protect their interests.
4) If I had solid evidence of collusion, you're damned right I would report it. The problem is that the large alliances have no transparency, and no reason to have transparency. I'm not in one of them. I can see, from an outsider's point of view, that their interests may be being unduly protected. But, being an outsider means that I would have a great deal of problems trying to pinpoint specific problems or individuals. Naturally, the people that have gotten close enough to the corrupted individuals to be able to rat them out, wouldn't.
1) They've done pretty well so far bumbling from one massive change to another. Seriously, they have some idea what they want each sector of space, but clearly no idea how to make it happen. The Sanctum nerf was supposed to drive conflict and it... didn't, just like everyone told CCP it would
2) I said Free; I didn't claim they're "Fair." CCP explicitly stated that the CSM elections are the same as any other activity in the game, where people can influence other people through whatever means they like/think will be effective. Besides, since there's no way to tell who someone voted for, vote buying is simply a way to get scammed. As for favoritism, isn't that what elections are all about? You pick your favorite?
3) The Lore actually says that the factions don't strongly police Capsuleers because Capsuleers are gods compared to normal people. As for HiSec, CCP has explicitly stated that CONCORD is designed to provide Consequences to illegal actions (blowing up your ship when you shoot someone), not protection. Second, there is no reason why the safety of your assets would ever be of any concern to CONCORD.
4) Saying that collecting evidence is hard does not let you throw wild accusations around. By your logic, I could accuse you of murdering JFK, but since I don't know you well, I'd have a great deal of problems trying to pinpoint specific evidence that points to your role in the assassination. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:45:00 -
[317] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic. Interesting how its legal for the gankers to kite them but not the defenders The difference is we were not using CONCORD for protection just moving them about system. Thats the difference. It is also very easy to prove someone is spawing concord for protection because the logs show the same ibis getting killed over and over by concord in the same system.
I would think the fact that the mechanic is implemented at all is telling.
E.g. If it is a sandbox world, how does this mesh with a mechanic implemented in the sandbox to punish someone for an attack in high sec?
Doesn't the fact that the punishment is there and supposedly lethal imply that the style of gameplay is perhaps not intended to be sustained in that area by the developers who built it? |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:21:00 -
[318] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic. Interesting how its legal for the gankers to kite them but not the defenders The difference is we were not using CONCORD for protection just moving them about system. Thats the difference. It is also very easy to prove someone is spawing concord for protection because the logs show the same ibis getting killed over and over by concord in the same system.
yes the difference is theyre moving them out of the system so they have to re-warp to get there, taking time to get there again. AGAIN. Its funny its ok for the aggressors to kite concord but not the defenders
|
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:22:00 -
[319] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:baltec1 wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:baltec1 wrote:Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. Dude, I don't know you, or where your coming from, but really, you sound as bad as any hi-sec carebear with your "profit"/"loss" statements... If i were to start ganking again, isk would be a secondary concern. Good for you. Just about everyone else who ganks however do it for the isk. I don't believe that. However, I will believe that isk motivates the weekend warriors/carebears...
they have to pretend they do it for the isk. Ive seen where CCP defines griefing ny doing it for a non monetary reason.
If they actually said they do it for the lulz they might be the first ever ppl to get banned for griefing. |
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
96
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:23:00 -
[320] - Quote
OP is bad at space and worse at posting. He deserves to die (ingame).
Apparently he's tanking his hulk now, so I'm going to go ahead and put a hundred million isk bounty on it. Send me the killmail to claim it.
(Ingame link or api verified on eve-kill, dated after the time of this post, only valid for one kill. Final blow receives the isk.) |
|
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
96
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:24:00 -
[321] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:If they actually said they do it for the lulz they might be the first ever ppl to get banned for griefing.
I do it for the luls. Go ahead and report me, see what happens. |
Amitious Turkey
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:36:00 -
[322] - Quote
I'm glad the OP is successful. But his comprehension of this game fails.
Here we pay to grief and be griefed. If you don't like it, become a griefer, or leave
EVE Rule #2: Never fly what you can't afford to lose. Both in iskies and in emotional value. I like to lick things.
Haunting the forums since 03. |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
145
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:46:00 -
[323] - Quote
Amitious Turkey wrote:Here we pay to grief and be griefed. If you don't like it, become a griefer, or leave
Do you pay to be griefed, do you know people who pay to be greifed, have you ever heard someone say they pay to be greifed ?
No, sounds like your trying to justify being a dikhead. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:53:00 -
[324] - Quote
Ispia Jaydrath wrote:OP is bad at space and worse at posting. He deserves to die (ingame).
Apparently he's tanking his hulk now, so I'm going to go ahead and put a hundred million isk bounty on it. Send me the killmail to claim it.
(Ingame link or api verified on eve-kill, dated after the time of this post, only valid for one kill. Final blow receives the isk.)
Fun. Thanks for the warning at least :)
Hulk purchase scratched off my list for a while. |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
1448
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:58:00 -
[325] - Quote
While I agree with the sentiment of the OP for the most part, that's not what I read between the lines. It seems to me that he is upset that after three years playing, he got podded.
OP, if I whined every time I got hosed for a couple of billion, this forum would be Mr Epeen discussion, not general discussion.
Here's the thing, though. I can still play casually on my indy characters and come out ahead with a billion a day in losses It's not how much you lose, dude. It's how much you make. And after three years you should be making plenty. If you can't absorb the loss from one podding, then you have been doing it wrong all this time.
Mr Epeen There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks |
MR DEMOS
Death Knight Legion Whiskey Creek Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:59:00 -
[326] - Quote
in all honesty i think the OP dose have some valid points and i haven't seen anyone in this thread debate him on this lvl ..... Valid questions that maybe CCP should adress.. But there again CCP just wants it's money and wants us to blow stuff up so :))) sry op sandbox rules...
STAPLES MADE IT EASY WHY CAN"T CCP!!!!! |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1636
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:00:00 -
[327] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:Amitious Turkey wrote:Here we pay to grief and be griefed. If you don't like it, become a griefer, or leave Do you pay to be griefed, do you know people who pay to be greifed, have you ever heard someone say they pay to be greifed ? No, sounds like your trying to justify being a dikhead.
You pay to play EvE. EvE is a game designed explicitly to include non-consensual PvP.
If you don't like non-consensual PvP, you can play on SiSi or you can play a game that doesn't include non-consensual PvP.
Anyway, CCP has said multiple times that non-consensual PvP isn't griefing and has defined specific actions that are griefing. If people are griefing you *per CCP's definition* you should report them. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:02:00 -
[328] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:Amitious Turkey wrote:Here we pay to grief and be griefed. If you don't like it, become a griefer, or leave Do you pay to be griefed, do you know people who pay to be greifed, have you ever heard someone say they pay to be greifed ? No, sounds like your trying to justify being a dikhead. You pay to play EvE. EvE is a game designed explicitly to include non-consensual PvP. If you don't like non-consensual PvP, you can play on SiSi or you can play a game that doesn't include non-consensual PvP. Anyway, CCP has said multiple times that non-consensual PvP isn't griefing and has defined specific actions that are griefing. If people are griefing you *per CCP's definition* you should report them.
Out of curiosity, as you have indicated CCP has a definition out there, would you mind sharing or linking to it so I can at least understand where you are coming from? A general reference does not comprehension make. |
Ramon Sohei
URSALIS LOGISTICS GROUP Villore Accords
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:05:00 -
[329] - Quote
The bounty hunter system in EVE is broken. Should be able to attack anyone in hisec with a bounty on their head and pod them without CONCORD interference. That would fix alot of problems. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:08:00 -
[330] - Quote
Ramon Sohei wrote:The bounty hunter system in EVE is broken. Should be able to attack anyone in hisec with a bounty on their head and pod them without CONCORD interference. That would fix alot of problems.
Perhaps deny NPC station privileges at a certain bounty as well. |
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:13:00 -
[331] - Quote
Ramon Sohei wrote:The bounty hunter system in EVE is broken. Should be able to attack anyone in hisec with a bounty on their head and pod them without CONCORD interference. That would fix alot of problems.
As a 5.0 I don't approve.
You can already unship a -10 with relatively few consequences in highsec. Please look up warp disruptor II in the market, and yes you do have midslots you can make free.
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
597
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:18:00 -
[332] - Quote
MR DEMOS wrote:in all honesty i think the OP dose have some valid points and i haven't seen anyone in this thread debate him on this lvl ..... Valid questions that maybe CCP should adress.. But there again CCP just wants it's money and wants us to blow stuff up so :))) sry op sandbox rules... The OP's "lvl" is that he's a successful businessman and married and has kids, therefore he should get what he wants because he's entitled. That's below all other whine-bears; at least the other bears base their arguments on real-life morality and half-assed economic theories.
I'm still not entirely sure how a person can play this game for many years and be completely oblivious to the fact that spaceships+guns=violence. I've never watched a football game in my life, but I still know that people beat the **** out of each other in that game. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
597
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:23:00 -
[333] - Quote
Ramon Sohei wrote:The bounty hunter system in EVE is broken. Should be able to attack anyone in hisec with a bounty on their head and pod them without CONCORD interference. That would fix alot of problems. All you need for a bounty is a -1.0 rating. You're essentially advocating that a person who committed a minor crime or two (or better yet, actually had the integrity to give things like low-sec a shot) be a free-for-all target.
How about we give you that change, and in exchange replace CONCORD with tankable faction police spawns? |
Tauranon
Weeesearch
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:26:00 -
[334] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Ramon Sohei wrote:The bounty hunter system in EVE is broken. Should be able to attack anyone in hisec with a bounty on their head and pod them without CONCORD interference. That would fix alot of problems. Perhaps deny NPC station privileges at a certain bounty as well.
I sell ships to bountied players all the time. I also sell ships to the cleanskin alts of -10s, who fly or haul the things to the border to take into low with less chance of a lag or d/c loss in high, from the very stations that you would attempt to deny only to the main!
If someone has a decent bounty they'll just jc to a jumpclone and kill themselves with an alt or friend, or wear it as a badge of pride and let their alts do the station work.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1636
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:53:00 -
[335] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote: Out of curiosity, as you have indicated CCP has a definition out there, would you mind sharing or linking to it so I can at least understand where you are coming from? A general reference does not comprehension make.
TOS wrote: 1. You may not abuse, harass or threaten another player or authorized representative of CCP, including customer service personnel and volunteers. This includes, but is not limited to: petitioning with false information in an attempt to gain from it or have someone else suffer from it; sending excessive e-mails, EVE-mails or petitions; obstructing CCP Employees from doing their jobs; refusal to follow the instructions of a CCP Employee; or implying favoritism by a CCP Employee.
2. You may not use any abusive, defamatory, ethnically or racially offensive, harassing, harmful, hateful, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, threatening or vulgar language. (Alternate spelling or partial masking of such words will be reprimanded in the same manner as the actual use of such words.)
3. You may not organize nor be a member of any corporation or group within EVE Online that is based on or advocates any anti-ethnic, anti-gay, anti-religious, racist, sexist or other hate-mongering philosophies
More TOS wrote: 16. You may not do anything that interferes with the ability of other EVE Online subscribers to enjoy the game or web site in accordance with its rules. This includes, but is not limited to, making inappropriate use of any public channels within the game and/or intentionally creating excessive latency (lag) by dumping cargo containers, corpses or other items in the game world.
Bold for Emphasis. The rules allow ganks.
KB wrote: An example of grief play would be the so called "Can baiting" in starter systems. An experienced player drops a cargo container with some items in front of a station in a starter system and waits for a new player to take from it. The new player is flagged and promptly attacked and killed by the owner of the container. Doing the same in starter tutorial complexes is also considered grief play and will not be tolerated.
S&B Policy wrote: An immediate permanent ban of an account may result if a player:
a. Organizes or participates in a corporation or group that is based on or advocates any anti-ethnic, anti-gay, anti-religious, racist, sexist or other hate-mongering philosophies. Severe offences may result in an immediate ban without warning; however, warnings may be given for first time offenses, followed by account suspensions of varying degree and ultimately a permanent ban if a player:
a. Is abusive, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, ethnically or racially offensive, or threatening to another player or an official EVE Online representative. b. Uses role-playing as an excuse for violating the guidelines regarding fair play with others. c. Sends excessive e-mails, EVE-mails or petitions, petitions with false information or repeatedly petitions under the wrong category in an effort to circumvent the customer support queue.
Basically, CCP defines griefing as picking on Newbies and Harassment as speech advocating RL hate.
TOS Knowledge Base Suspension and Ban Policy Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Harrigan VonStudly
The Generic Pirate Corporation Fusion.
25
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:54:00 -
[336] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:The OP is correct in every respect. The only people who'd dispute that are the systematic violators. They of course will post to this thread couching their responses in "objectivity" as well as "inside knowledge of the game" and "veterans who understand Eve is a 'cold, harsh environment - so stop whining'." Along with that, as can be seen, are the accusations you're just not fitting your ship right.
What is absent is the admission that null and low sec, where this "play style" is intended to occur are empty enough - or being held in a state of stasis by the occupants - giving rise to a claim that high sec should be turned into low or null so there's an excuse for griefing - it's just normal play. The intent of CCP in going to the extreme to carefully define griefing, the fact CSM members (one forcibly retired of late) are FRIENDS of certain CCP upper ups and are literally being catered to, and the resultant inaction on CCP's part (pretending to hide behind the fact that there are "sore losers in life as in EVE"), not only exacerbates the situation, but puts CCP's seal of approval on it. This is up to and including sanctioning by placing the events in the MOTD as "player generated content."
I've on many occassions pointed out how with the NPC sovereignty allusions the game is an object of ridicule, as these mighty virtual kingdoms are powerless to control debilitating crime in their most "safe" regions, along with the absurdity of sovereign powers renting out their security to Rent-A-Cops that use a narrowly drawn set of response parameters - which amount to "Don't make us do anything. We were just enjoying our donuts." I've advocated for criminal flags with NO time limit, and acknowledgement of the fact that allowing criminals to dock in this NPC's sovereign domain anywhere is collusion and accessory after the fact, which makes the owners of said stations criminals as well. Such is the analog reality. Without that exercise in power, any definition of sovereignty becomes a joke.
In the face of such observations of fact, CCP has ignored it all, leaving me to believe they have little to no understanding of such matters. The fact they specialize in computer programming, and not in game design and especially not in the field of politics, law and concepts such as sovereignty is proved by their ineptitude in the matter the OP defines so sharply and so well. Judging by the videos from the recent Fanfest, it is more than evident their behavior is so adolescent in the extreme, it beggars belief to think they could rise to the occassion and bring themselves to understand the social, cultural and so state dynamics about which the OP remarks, and which I've pointed out on several occassions.
I guess we should be gratified they did bring in a phd in economics at one time, admitting they were in over their heads in matters such as these. I'm convinced they're so ill-educated, and incompetent in affairs of state as a dynamic that observations such that we make here go over their heads as well. (The bottle of Jaeger on the table in the videos doesn't offer much encouragement.)
I hasten to add I'm more than suspicious CCP is now using EVE as a cash cow and has no intention in examining its model for this particular set of absurdities and so finding a solution, as now their attention is fully on SONY and Dust. I fully expect at some point in the future EVE's development will become tokenistic and then non-existent - relegated to legacy.
So...there you go. They've turned the asylum over to the inmates who're convinced they're the true doctors of EVE. And, they think they're smart in doing so. Worse mistakes have been made. They'll walk away with the satisfaction that "There once was this game called EVE Online...and WE invented it." May their grandchildren be pleased to hear this bedtime story. And, let's try not to forget the rigged tournament last year...there's another tourney this year! I wonder who's been designated to win this time?
LOL Wow what rage. It's a game dude. ANd I'm pretty sure CCP hasn't ignored anything having to do with this post. Suicide ganking is valid gameplay in Eve. |
E man Industries
SeaChell Productions
273
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:27:00 -
[337] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:Amitious Turkey wrote:Here we pay to grief and be griefed. If you don't like it, become a griefer, or leave Do you pay to be griefed, do you know people who pay to be greifed, have you ever heard someone say they pay to be greifed ? No, sounds like your trying to justify being a dikhead.
Maybe some just like the unknown....the risk you take in undocking knowing you are never safe.
I bet when you undock again you heart will be pounding and every time you see local go up you'll get a bit ansy...maybe even align out...
that is fun....if i wanted to mine by myself in a vacume with no other players....well i'd go seek medical help.
Need more-ádecent content a casual player can access in a 1-2h play period that is actually fun and contributes to long term personal and corp goals. This applies to PvE and PvP. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
599
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:32:00 -
[338] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:that is fun....if i wanted to mine by myself in a vacume with no other players....well i'd go seek medical help. Or play the X series of games |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
146
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:40:00 -
[339] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:You pay to play EvE. EvE is a game designed explicitly to include non-consensual PvP.
If you don't like non-consensual PvP, you can play on SiSi or you can play a game that doesn't include non-consensual PvP.
I dont think the issue is (non-)consensual combat, the issue is all ships should be able to either fight or run (fight or flight).
Industry ships will never be able to fight like a combat ships, so at least give them the ability to run, maybe increase their hull tank so a DCU2 gives then a chance against a little alpha, maybe enough time to get into warp.
|
Onyx Nyx
Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:40:00 -
[340] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:E man Industries wrote:that is fun....if i wanted to mine by myself in a vacume with no other players....well i'd go seek medical help. Or play the X series of games
Or get one of these. With accessories. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1636
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:48:00 -
[341] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote:You pay to play EvE. EvE is a game designed explicitly to include non-consensual PvP.
If you don't like non-consensual PvP, you can play on SiSi or you can play a game that doesn't include non-consensual PvP.
I dont think the issue is (non-)consensual combat, the issue is all ships should be able to either fight or run (fight or flight). Industry ships will never be able to fight like a combat ships, so at least give them the ability to run, maybe increase their hull tank so a DCU2 gives then a chance against a little alpha, maybe enough time to get into warp.
1) A Hulk can tank the Alpha from 2 Maelstroms, what more do you want? 2) If you're aligned, you will get out. If you don't get out, you'll be pointed. 3) Why should Industrial Ships be good at fighting? Isn't that what Combat Ships are for? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
146
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:54:00 -
[342] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote:You pay to play EvE. EvE is a game designed explicitly to include non-consensual PvP.
If you don't like non-consensual PvP, you can play on SiSi or you can play a game that doesn't include non-consensual PvP.
I dont think the issue is (non-)consensual combat, the issue is all ships should be able to either fight or run (fight or flight). Industry ships will never be able to fight like a combat ships, so at least give them the ability to run, maybe increase their hull tank so a DCU2 gives then a chance against a little alpha, maybe enough time to get into warp. 1) A Hulk can tank the Alpha from 2 Maelstroms, what more do you want? 2) If you're aligned, you will get out. If you don't get out, you'll be pointed. 3) Why should Industrial Ships be good at fighting? Isn't that what Combat Ships are for?
I meant they should be good at one or the other.
Industrials will never be good at fighting, so make them good at running.
I believe most fits that give a Hulk a tank gimp them for mining, if they had a large hull HP, a single DCU2 would give them a good tank without reducing their ability to mine. (which is why they are out there) |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1636
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 06:11:00 -
[343] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote:You pay to play EvE. EvE is a game designed explicitly to include non-consensual PvP.
If you don't like non-consensual PvP, you can play on SiSi or you can play a game that doesn't include non-consensual PvP.
I dont think the issue is (non-)consensual combat, the issue is all ships should be able to either fight or run (fight or flight). Industry ships will never be able to fight like a combat ships, so at least give them the ability to run, maybe increase their hull tank so a DCU2 gives then a chance against a little alpha, maybe enough time to get into warp. 1) A Hulk can tank the Alpha from 2 Maelstroms, what more do you want? 2) If you're aligned, you will get out. If you don't get out, you'll be pointed. 3) Why should Industrial Ships be good at fighting? Isn't that what Combat Ships are for? I meant they should be good at one or the other. Industrials will never be good at fighting, so make them good at running. I believe most fits that give a Hulk a tank gimp them for mining, if they had a large hull HP, a single DCU2 would give them a good tank without reducing their ability to mine. (which is why they are out there)
I didn't know fitting a Tank reduced it's yield. In fact it doesn't. Fitting 2x MLUII raises it's yield, fitting a tank doesn't raise it's yield.
Most fits that tank a battleship gimp them for shooting things. If they had a large amount of HP, they'd be better.
Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
97
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 08:05:00 -
[344] - Quote
OP, A plea for rationale for you. Now be objective please. My statement will not be loaded in any direction.
We agree that Eve is a sandbox right?
1.) Mining is designed to be an integral part of the eve economy and a nice profession choice for those players that choose it. There are specialized ships, progression, income...
2.) Pirating and plain old murder, regardless of profit or motives are also integral part of the eve economy and a perfectly valid play style as advertised by CCP. The eve box even says you can pirate, plunder the shipping lanes.... crush your enemies etc...
3.) The sandbox means both styles are very much legitimate.
4.) Concord is there to punish IN GAME criminals. Yes, people are actually role playing criminals. This is the beauty of eve. Concord is also role playing and are not enforcing game rules. This point is hard to swallow for a lot of people but if you step back and look at it objectively, that is what it is.
5.) Just like the sandbox provides means to those that choose to role play committing a crime (big alpha or high dps in short time ships) before the police arrives, the sandbox also very much provides the means to prevent being a crime victim. It does require learning how the game works. The person that may have acted violently towards your ship in all likelyhood put the time in to study how to be successful. You too can work out how to be successful in preventing his crime towards you, using the same methods. Learning how the game works.
6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox. What makes you special? What makes me special or the guy who destroyed your ship? Nothing. We're all equal under the rule of the sandbox.
7.) Eve is about learning from your mistakes and adapting. In your case, as it has been mentioned previously, improving your hulk fit and awareness of your surroundings. I'll give you some personal examples of my costly lessons. As a -10 character undocking from a station I didn't have enough time to warp off before faction police webbed me and killed my tornado. A complete loss. Lesson learned, created bookmarks in line with undock. Other costly lessons, you better be warping to a new location as soon as your ship drops from warp as an outlaw in high sec, if in a big ship wait for faction navies at gates to spawn to web you into warp before that player interceptor on the gate can react etc etc...
8.) Losing ships sucks, no denying that. The thing is it's hardly ever someone else's fault. You make mistakes in pvp and die, you underestimate opponents, you mine in an tankless Hulk making you a prime target for someone looking to relieve you of it etc...
Not sure what else to say except that demanding for game mechanics change in your favor goes against the concept of sandbox, especially when legitimate resources are already available to you. You need to choose to use them though. Just as you may like playing in a certain way, you have to accept that someone else may like playing in a different way. In a way that may be in direct detriment to your safety. They are not in the wrong. You are not in the wrong wanting to be safe, but you need to ensure that safety as per sandbox.
Also a disclaimer that hulkageddon is not mass griefing. Some kills may be done for tears but so what. That is legitimate game play too. Don't give them tears. Hulkageddon is player content, aka sandbox. Propaganda and market manipulation at a grand scale. In what other game can you do that? This is why most long term player play this game as it doesn't have the limits of other "safe" games.
Best of luck in eve. I suggest you tank your hulk and get familiar with other areas of the game. You may not want to play other areas but knowledge doesn't hurt does it. You will probably have a target on your back for a couple weeks now thanks to this thread but do not be discouraged. It will pass. In the mean time if you wish to continue mining, go with your TANKED hulk to a system with many belts and/or scan down a gravimetric site and mine there. Most gankers look for the easiest target. Let me also point out that that is not wrong or dishonorable either. As you may be aware for example a predator in the wildlife always picks the easiest target in the herd. Often, just not being easy is enough to boost your survivability rate multi fold. |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
146
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 08:11:00 -
[345] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs.
So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame.
Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1637
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 08:23:00 -
[346] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs.
So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame. Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening.
Fitting and Piloting, yes. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
537
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 08:55:00 -
[347] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment. Because I'm a min-maxing miner moron that chooses to fly in a expensive Hulk with very expensive implants right during Hulkageddon, foolishly/arrogantly thinking that this sandbox-wide, player-driven even simply does not apply to me. I didn't ship down to something more replaceable like a Covetor. I didn't group up with other miners, scouts, boosters or logis. Hell, I didn't even bother to fit even a single tanking mod
FYP
Also: when you choose to swap 'low reward' in high-sec for 'medium reward' by mining with a fragile max-yield Hulk. Don't come whining when 'low risk' (which is not 'NO risk'), comes and bite you in the arse.
edit: Yes, ANYTHING can be ganked in high-sec, no matter the tank. But gankers prefer going for the weakest link and needing 2 or 3 Catalysts will keep your ship safe from the majority of gankers that do it solo. Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
599
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:10:00 -
[348] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote:Yes, ANYTHING can be ganked in high-sec, no matter the tank. But gankers prefer going for the weakest link and needing 2 or 3 Catalysts will keep your ship safe from the majority of gankers that do it solo. I respect the ones that fit properly, but I also check the forums to see if they previously whined or gave CCP "advice" on how to "fix" the game. If they did, then I get a Tornado. |
Elena Melkan
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:10:00 -
[349] - Quote
Imagine if instead of whining, all these miners would actually do something to it in game. They have endless possibilities...
- Asking corpmates to help.
- Grouping up with other miners and hiring some defense.
- Having an alt to guard you in a PvP ship with ECM fitted could work as well. To kill a destroyer you don't need that much after all.
- Instead of flying expensive Hulk, reshipping to something cheaper.
- Or actually tanking your hulk and not mining AFK. Mining is boring, but so is ratting. None of those you should be able to do safely AFK. I left my computer once for couple of seconds when ratting in null, and the result was my ship getting caught and blown up. Learned a lot from that lesson.
And many other ways already mentioned in all these threads complaining about Hulkageddon. No matter how well written these threads would be, the message is the same: these people would want to avoid all the possible risks and the game should change because they are too lazy take precautions. As someone said before, it's not the goons that are destroying EVE, it's the carebears. |
Firelight Morgenstern
JESUS CHRIST IT'S ROBOT UNICORN ATTACK PARTY
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:11:00 -
[350] - Quote
Posting in fred of pure win. I just coughed up a rainbow in my mouth. This is a game fool. A game where psychotic behaviour is one of the star attractions. |
|
Tobiaz
Spacerats
537
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:21:00 -
[351] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Tobiaz wrote:Yes, ANYTHING can be ganked in high-sec, no matter the tank. But gankers prefer going for the weakest link and needing 2 or 3 Catalysts will keep your ship safe from the majority of gankers that do it solo. I respect the ones that fit properly, but I also check the forums to see if they previously whined or gave CCP "advice" on how to "fix" the game. If they did, then I get a Tornado.
A Hulk usually drops somewhere between 10M and 20M ISK, added on top of the 10M ISK/Hulk from GoonSwarm. And even though a Tornado can drop two Hulks in one gank, it will still make him lose ISK. You might be saying you don't care about this, but most gankers do, so they stick to destroyers. Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
baltec1
1223
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:44:00 -
[352] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs.
So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame. Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening.
Out of 600 hulks and macs that we killed in the caladri ice interdiction not a single one was tanked. So I fully belive that 99% of killed miners have little to no tank fitted. |
Jeniam Retriat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:59:00 -
[353] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Anyway, how exactly does adding EHP help a Hulk *escape* a gank? Looks to me like you just want to make ganks more expensive. Well the insurance nerf did that already, so why should we believe that you'd stop whining if the Hulk got an EHP buff?
Ooh, my favourite subject!
As Kaeda Maxwell has pointed out, ganking a hulk is profitable (incidentally, a quick check of Kaeda's lossmail shows she's over-pimped her suicide ship; T2 guns and damage mods? No wonder she's barely turning a profit). Not "ganking a hulk that someone has covered with faction/deadspace mods" or "ganking a hulk that's full of PLEX", but simply "ganking a hulk that has a tech 2 fit that's fit for purpose". That's unique across all of EVE. Give any other ship a T2 fit that's fit for purpose (in other words even if you fill the lows on your Indy with cargo expanders you stick some extra shield mods in the midslots) and it's going to cost gankers more in losses than they can get from the fit itself. Thus, ganking-for-profit is relegated to ships carrying valuable cargos, or loaded up with valuable faction/deadspace/officer mods, while ganking-for-tears is still an option for anyone who wants, but comes at the cost of a guaranteed ISK loss.
Exhumers are the one exception to this, because they have very very low EHP - even with a maximised tank fit it's still about 29-30k ehp, which can be taken down by 5 suicide catalysts. If they're not given t2 weapons/damage mods then they cost about 2 mil each, so barring serious hatred from the loot gods throwing those 5 cheap ships at one very expensive hulk will still yield a profit to the gankers. As such, there is really no reason NOT to gank a hulk aside from sec loss.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the OP - a completely untanked hulk left AFK during Hulkageddon is asking to be ganked, and I'm not asking to change that, I'm just asking that ganking an exhumer that's fit to balance mining and defence should come with a guaranteed ISK cost to the gankers, which it doesn't at present. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1637
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:01:00 -
[354] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:
Exhumers are the one exception to this, because they have very very low EHP - even with a maximised tank fit it's still about 29-30k ehp, which can be taken down by 5 suicide catalysts. If they're not given t2 weapons/damage mods then they cost about 2 mil each, so barring serious hatred from the loot gods throwing those 5 cheap ships at one very expensive hulk will still yield a profit to the gankers. As such, there is really no reason NOT to gank a hulk aside from sec loss.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the OP - a completely untanked hulk left AFK during Hulkageddon is asking to be ganked, and I'm not asking to change that, I'm just asking that ganking an exhumer that's fit to balance mining and defence should come with a guaranteed ISK cost to the gankers, which it doesn't at present.
A cheapfit Catalyst is around 5m. 25m isk to gain ~10m in loot for a tanked hulk sounds like a great deal to me too. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
979
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:34:00 -
[355] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: EDIT: A Meta 0 Catalyst is 2m. Unfortunately it doesn't fit on CPU. Silly Scram.
You only need a scram on one catalyst, the others can save.
RubyPorto wrote: 2) If you're aligned, you will get out. If you don't get out, you'll be pointed.
There are actually skilled suicide gankers who learned to warp on cloakie and bump (not all miners will notice the few seconds it takes to get in position and bump). Not counting the fact that in order to be asininely stuck to the screen and spamming directional is really like missioning in low sec, except in low sec they need to scan you down first.
So, it's more effort than doing a L4 low sec mission but for a fraction of the income. Your remedy is not worthwhile.
RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs
You kill a lot of stuff - hats to you - but you should stick to the targets you know well.
The afk Hulks don't fit 2 MLUs, they fit for max cargo. Their objective is NOT max yield but max AFK. Can't AFK with jet can because in the meanwhile some can flipper will do their stuff.
RubyPorto wrote: By that, I mean that if you are paying attention and have your fit set up right, you can escape nearly 100% of the ganks. But of course, that takes effort. And you want to be able to mine AFK safely.
In EvE you skill up while AFK or even logged off. You earn some money off PI by clicking circles once a day. You earn some money off datacores by... training once and forgetting the alt for a year.
Perfectly in line with that, mining traditionally has been the "ultra low effort => ultra low reward" profession. This is why miners don't accept to raise the risk. Even with 30% higher mineral prices the pay is not worth the effort of playing like a PvPer in NPC nullsec.
Not saying it's right or wrong, but it's understandable. You don't shout at the burger flipper boy at how he sucks at high abstract mathematics, do you? He earns a crap wage, he does his thing. If he had to learn something requiring much more study and professionalism then you can stay sure he will ask a *multiple* of the wage.
Since minerals will not rise by 5 times, then you get the high resistance to adapt to a much more (orders of magnitude) skillful and effort game play.
Most of all, miners don't have the background to support the game play you preach about. They mine because they want to get some crap ISK alt tabbed at work so when they get home they can i.e. PvP on their main (time constraints might deny them the ability to spend hours online to farm red crosses).
Therefore your plea to basically PvP - on the receiving end - does not fulfill their need for afk income. Basically, before they adapt - they will just do something else or quit. Because it's stupid to PvP as prey and it won't bring in the ISK to log in later and play something fun. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
979
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:40:00 -
[356] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote: edit: Yes, ANYTHING can be ganked in high-sec, no matter the tank. But gankers prefer going for the weakest link and needing 2 or 3 Catalysts will keep your ship safe from the majority of gankers that do it solo
There is not a single The Forge ganker that I know, who does not use 2-3 catalysts or 2 catalysts + 1 thrasher. I know a mineral provider (which I also defend from gankers, figure that!) who has:
- The 22k EHP hulks fitting posted in another thread by a Goon or similar. - Orca links, all trained to 5. - Repair drones out.
This is not a sh!tty setup, that was not a weak link. This is expensive and long to train.
One morning his logistics friends did not come to RR, one of the known gankers warped to him and got 1 hulk of him to 200 structure. He would have killed it but another guy in a merc corp finished him off before the last shot. All of this blurb to say, they don't need to be so selective and are not just able to go for the weakest link.
Destiny Corrupted wrote: I respect the ones that fit properly, but I also check the forums to see if they previously whined or gave CCP "advice" on how to "fix" the game. If they did, then I get a Tornado.
Exactly. A PvPer (even those who feel accomplishment at killing miners) enjoys a challenge and will just escalate. Tank has an hard cap, gank may scale up indefinitely.
What's wrong then?
Miners? The fittings? The suicide gankers? Concord?
None of the above.
What's wrong is that on paper everyone is fair game as they undock. On paper everyone has to perma spam directional and stay aligned.
But only a category is subject to organized hunt campaigns.
When something is "spammed" and becomes FOTM, usually it's sign something is wrong and needs a nerf. Be it incursions, missions, super cap farming, nano fits, Pax Amarria, reprocessable POSes all these things and more have been nerfed after they became FOTM.
Even decshield got so much spammed (for other reasons) that it got nerfed and now we have another mechanic.
Statistically it should be equivalent risk to get out in an Hulk or a deadspace fit pinata. The latter actually let earn 80M per hour blitzing the same hi sec L4 and you see one dead every 100 Hulks. So what's the rationale at having someone earn multiple than someone else but with far less risk?
Why don't we see 8500 hi sec Tengus / CNR killmails? They are more expensive but also earn multiple, no? Either make modifications to the game so that we get 8500 Hulk AND 8500 Tengu / CNR killmails or else it's unfair risk vs reward.
If using a covetor yielded 40M per hour and an Hulk 60M per hour then the PvP-like effort to keep them alive would be OK. But you don't gain 60M per hour in hi sec.
"Then move to 0.0". Oh wait why don't you say the same to the 10B mission deadspace fitted ship? Why don't you ENFORCE it like you do for miners?
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1637
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:40:00 -
[357] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Not saying it's right or wrong, but it's understandable. You don't shout at the burger flipper boy at how he sucks at high abstract mathematics, do you? He earns a crap wage, he does his thing. If he had to learn something requiring much more study and professionalism then you can stay sure he will ask a *multiple* of the wage.
Since minerals will not rise by 5 times, then you get the high resistance to adapt to a much more (orders of magnitude) skillful and effort game play.
I'd shout at him if he were using a solid gold spatula. If you're not willing to actively play the game you're... playing, then mine in a Covetor. So long as you're not ganked more than once an hour, you'll be making isk without having to pay much attention.
Or if you're willing to do a little clicking, mine in a Rokh. Or still, mine in a tanked Hulk. You don't have to be invulnerable, just less vulnerable than the other guy in the belt.
If you're not happy with the ISK/effort you get while mining, don't mine. If you are happy with it, stop whining. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
March rabbit
Trojan Trolls Red Alliance
180
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:45:00 -
[358] - Quote
Llywelyn Emrys wrote:Think of EVE as a libertarian paradise.
The government (CCP) will not do anything to save you.
You have to do it yourself. government only needed to protect citizens.
If it doesn't do it what for it is needed? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:48:00 -
[359] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Even decshield got so much spammed (for other reasons) that it got nerfed and now we have another mechanic.
Statistically it should be equivalent risk to get out in an Hulk or a deadspace fit pinata. The latter actually let earn 80M per hour blitzing the same hi sec L4 and you see one dead every 100 Hulks. So what's the rationale at having someone earn multiple than someone else but with far less risk?
Why don't we see 8500 hi sec Tengus / CNR killmails? They are more expensive but also earn multiple, no? Either make modifications to the game so that we get 8500 Hulk AND 8500 Tengu / CNR killmails or else it's unfair risk vs reward.
If using a covetor yielded 40M per hour and an Hulk 60M per hour then the PvP-like effort to keep them alive would be OK. But you don't gain 60M per hour in hi sec.
"Then move to 0.0". Oh wait why don't you say the same to the 10B mission deadspace fitted ship? Why don't you ENFORCE it like you do for miners?
Suicide Ganking recently got nerfed too. Insurance stopped paying. That's why we use destroyers instead of Thoraxes and Brutixes.
Risk vs Reward is the wrong term. The balance is based on Effort v Reward. Risk is something you just have to deal with, since it comes from players and players whims aren't something you can balance reward on.
It takes effort to find mission runner pinatas, and there are fewer of them, and there's very little incentive for an organization to put bounties on mission ships, because it's impossible to cartelize faction stuff.
Anyway, tl;dr after "unfair." EvE has never claimed to be fair to every activity. It's a level playing field. Level Playing fields are monstrously unfair. Deal with it. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3989
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:52:00 -
[360] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Either make modifications to the game so that we get 8500 Hulk AND 8500 Tengu / CNR killmails or else it's unfair risk vs reward.
What "modifications" do you think are needed? Your averatge mission Tengu has about the same EHP as a tanked up Hulk, and costs 2-5 times as much. If you want to run a 'Tengugeddon' event then go for it - stepping up and organising it is the only "modification" that's required.
Personally I think that would be great. LP prices have sunk dramatically lately and I could do with some competition removing. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
979
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:54:00 -
[361] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Not saying it's right or wrong, but it's understandable. You don't shout at the burger flipper boy at how he sucks at high abstract mathematics, do you? He earns a crap wage, he does his thing. If he had to learn something requiring much more study and professionalism then you can stay sure he will ask a *multiple* of the wage.
Since minerals will not rise by 5 times, then you get the high resistance to adapt to a much more (orders of magnitude) skillful and effort game play.
I'd shout at him if he were using a solid gold spatula. And he'd rightly tell you to GTFO because he's not paid to bring in the correct spatula, he's using what he's been given by his superior, go blame the superior. [quote=RubyPorto] You don't have to be invulnerable, just less vulnerable than the other guy in the belt. If you're not happy with the ISK/effort you get while mining, don't mine. If you are happy with it, stop whining.
Patently false. You might refer to hobbyst gankers, the real ones play exactly like miners: they strip the belt. Miners strip the belt off minerals, real suicide gankers have their own logistics so they stay there and get up to 70 kills before moving on. Covetor, Retriever, Hulk, Mackinaw they are all fair game, they don't need to care about who is weaker because it just maps to 1 less catalyst to warp in, that's it.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
979
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:59:00 -
[362] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Suicide Ganking recently got nerfed too. Insurance stopped paying. That's why we use destroyers instead of Thoraxes and Brutixes.
Indeed, this actually hurt my wallet as I had some nice BPOs (I make money selling minerals, selling mining ships AND selling gank ships, this is why I have a really neutral vision, I make money anyway).
But what changed?
What changed is the name of the ship (find Brutix replace with Catalyst). Then they indeed removed insurance making but replacing a gank ship with one that does NOT need an insurance to still be vastly profitable achieved to change nothing.
I mean - once again - they changed everything in order to not change anything.
From
loot value > more gank cost + insurance
to
loot value > less gank cost (< loot value)
The change has been "neutral" to the outcome, it's not a real nerf except on the BPO holders.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
508
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:59:00 -
[363] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs.
So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame. Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening. Out of 600 hulks and macs that we killed in the caladri ice interdiction not a single one was tanked. So I fully belive that 99% of killed miners have little to no tank fitted.
And if they do you bring in more guns. In the end the miner always loses. Who needs television when you have EVE? EVE drama, best drama. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:01:00 -
[364] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Not saying it's right or wrong, but it's understandable. You don't shout at the burger flipper boy at how he sucks at high abstract mathematics, do you? He earns a crap wage, he does his thing. If he had to learn something requiring much more study and professionalism then you can stay sure he will ask a *multiple* of the wage.
Since minerals will not rise by 5 times, then you get the high resistance to adapt to a much more (orders of magnitude) skillful and effort game play.
I'd shout at him if he were using a solid gold spatula. And he'd rightly tell you to GTFO because he's not paid to bring in the correct spatula, he's using what he's been given by his superior, go blame the superior. [quote=RubyPorto] You don't have to be invulnerable, just less vulnerable than the other guy in the belt. If you're not happy with the ISK/effort you get while mining, don't mine. If you are happy with it, stop whining. Patently false. You might refer to hobbyst gankers, the real ones play exactly like miners: they strip the belt. Miners strip the belt off minerals, real suicide gankers have their own logistics so they stay there and get up to 70 kills before moving on. Covetor, Retriever, Hulk, Mackinaw they are all fair game, they don't need to care about who is weaker because it just maps to 1 less catalyst to warp in, that's it.
If they're stripping the belt, unless you're unlucky and are the first hulk hit, just warp off when you see hulks blowing up around you.
Regardless, my point stands. If you are unhappy taking the risk of mining in a Hulk during Hulkageddon, don't mine in a Hulk during Hulkageddon. Mine in something else or don't mine.
You're using a solid gold spatula to flip burgers at McDonalds. No wonder you're getting mugged. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
979
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:01:00 -
[365] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Either make modifications to the game so that we get 8500 Hulk AND 8500 Tengu / CNR killmails or else it's unfair risk vs reward.
What "modifications" do you think are needed? Your averatge mission Tengu has about the same EHP as a tanked up Hulk, and costs 2-5 times as much. If you want to run a 'Tengugeddon' event then go for it - stepping up and organising it is the only "modification" that's required. Personally I think that would be great. LP prices have sunk dramatically lately and I could do with some competition removing.
Sadly I don't have the time to organize that. I could toss some sponsorship money though. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
979
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:05:00 -
[366] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:If they're stripping the belt, unless you're unlucky and are the first hulk hit, just warp off when you see hulks blowing up around you.
Regardless, my point stands. If you are unhappy taking the risk of mining in a Hulk during Hulkageddon, don't mine in a Hulk during Hulkageddon. Mine in something else or don't mine.
You're using a solid gold spatula to flip burgers at McDonalds. No wonder you're getting mugged.
I am not talking about Hulkageddon, all the things I described above happened in the past months. Also, "belt stripping" is something that happens on multiple systems (look at how Bat Country work) so there's not really a lot that can be done except stopping.
Also, you might as well stop talking like *I* am mining in an Hulk. The only mining ship I can fly is a Bantam. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:07:00 -
[367] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Suicide Ganking recently got nerfed too. Insurance stopped paying. That's why we use destroyers instead of Thoraxes and Brutixes.
Indeed, this actually hurt my wallet as I had some nice BPOs (I make money selling minerals, selling mining ships AND selling gank ships, this is why I have a really neutral vision, I make money anyway). But what changed? What changed is the name of the ship (find Brutix replace with Catalyst). Then they indeed removed insurance making but replacing a gank ship with one that does NOT need an insurance to still be vastly profitable achieved to change nothing. I mean - once again - they changed everything in order to not change anything. From loot value > more gank cost + insurance to loot value > less gank cost (< loot value) The change has been "neutral" to the outcome, it's not a real nerf except on the BPO holders.
I pointed out the insurance Nerf to point out the fact that it's not a buff to the Hulk/nerf to the Gankers that the miners want, it's the banning of the practice of suicide ganking entirely. The calls for buffs/nerfs are just the baby steps they're trying to get through on the way.
You got gankers nerfed (it now costs ~15m or so to kill a tanked Hulk when it used to cost ~10m in an insured Brutix). You're not happy with that. You got miners income buffed (Drone poop nixed, a good thing overall), and you're not happy with that.
Years ago, you got CONCORD buffed to what it is today (before the buff, Suicide Ganks involved a lot less suicide), and you're not happy with that.
If we buff Hulks, whaddya wanna bet you won't be happy with that? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:09:00 -
[368] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote:If they're stripping the belt, unless you're unlucky and are the first hulk hit, just warp off when you see hulks blowing up around you.
Regardless, my point stands. If you are unhappy taking the risk of mining in a Hulk during Hulkageddon, don't mine in a Hulk during Hulkageddon. Mine in something else or don't mine.
You're using a solid gold spatula to flip burgers at McDonalds. No wonder you're getting mugged. I am not talking about Hulkageddon, all the things I described above happened in the past months. Also, "belt stripping" is something that happens on multiple systems (look at how Bat Country work) so there's not really a lot that can be done except stopping. Also, you might as well stop talking like *I* am mining in an Hulk. The only mining ship I can fly is a Bantam.
Ok, so you're claiming that it's impossible to reasonably escape a suicide gank attempt without trying it yourself? Really?
Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
146
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:12:00 -
[369] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: so why should we believe that you'd stop whining if the Hulk got an EHP buff?
Game balance is about balancing gameplay, not balancing whining. |
Jeniam Retriat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:14:00 -
[370] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:A cheapfit Catalyst is around 5m. 25m isk to gain ~10m in loot for a tanked hulk sounds like a great deal to me too.
EDIT: A Meta 0 Catalyst is 2m. Unfortunately it doesn't fit on CPU. Silly Scram.
Where do you do your shopping? Looking on EVE Central, with a little bit of shopping around you can get a Cata hull for 1-1.2 million ISK, 3x meta2 Linear Flux Stabilisers for about 74k each, 1x meta0 Warp Scram for 50k (which incidentally you only need on one gank cata, not all 5) and 8x meta1 Regulated Light Neutron Phase Cannons for 60k each. Caldar Navy Antimatter is about 666 ISK per round, so being optimistic and going with 15 rounds per gun is about 80k. That adds up to 1.8-2.0 million, and it fits just fine with Weapon Upgrades 4 alone. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3989
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:20:00 -
[371] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Either make modifications to the game so that we get 8500 Hulk AND 8500 Tengu / CNR killmails or else it's unfair risk vs reward.
What "modifications" do you think are needed? Your averatge mission Tengu has about the same EHP as a tanked up Hulk, and costs 2-5 times as much. If you want to run a 'Tengugeddon' event then go for it - stepping up and organising it is the only "modification" that's required. Personally I think that would be great. LP prices have sunk dramatically lately and I could do with some competition removing. Sadly I don't have the time to organize that. I could toss some sponsorship money though.
Well I'm sure if you contact Helicity, he'll be at least willing to discuss the idea. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:20:00 -
[372] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:RubyPorto wrote:A cheapfit Catalyst is around 5m. 25m isk to gain ~10m in loot for a tanked hulk sounds like a great deal to me too.
EDIT: A Meta 0 Catalyst is 2m. Unfortunately it doesn't fit on CPU. Silly Scram. Where do you do your shopping? Looking on EVE Central, with a little bit of shopping around you can get a Cata hull for 1-1.2 million ISK, 3x meta2 Linear Flux Stabilisers for about 74k each, 1x meta0 Warp Scram for 50k (which incidentally you only need on one gank cata, not all 5) and 8x meta1 Regulated Light Neutron Phase Cannons for 60k each. Caldar Navy Antimatter is about 666 ISK per round, so being optimistic and going with 15 rounds per gun is about 80k. That adds up to 1.8-2.0 million, and it fits just fine with Weapon Upgrades 4 alone.
I shop in pyfa. I cba to price out every little thing.
So 10m worth of ships to kill a hulk that drops an average of ~10m isk. 5 people spending at least 15m (GCC cooldown limits the rate of ganking) to maybe break even, or if they're very lucky (20m drop), make 2m each (compensating for a bad loot drop earlier, maybe).
Sounds really profitable.
You can't legitimately add in the GSF bounty, because that's a player run event, and not something that you can use for a balance argument. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:22:00 -
[373] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: so why should we believe that you'd stop whining if the Hulk got an EHP buff?
Game balance is about balancing gameplay, not balancing whining.
And the Gameplay is fine. Hulks give up defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
Before Barges and Exhumers were released, mining battleships ruled the roost. That's what the baseline is for mining. Hulks are higher yield, lower tank than the baseline. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3989
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:24:00 -
[374] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:baltec1 wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs.
So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame. Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening. Out of 600 hulks and macs that we killed in the caladri ice interdiction not a single one was tanked. So I fully belive that 99% of killed miners have little to no tank fitted. And if they do you bring in more guns. In the end the miner always loses.
Damb those filthy gankers, always adapting like they think they're somebody Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7458
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:26:00 -
[375] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Before Barges and Exhumers were released, mining battleships ruled the roost. That's what the baseline is for mining. Hulks are higher yield, lower tank than the baseline. WellGǪ higher yield and higher tank. But close enough.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:38:00 -
[376] - Quote
Tippia wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Before Barges and Exhumers were released, mining battleships ruled the roost. That's what the baseline is for mining. Hulks are higher yield, lower tank than the baseline. WellGǪ higher yield and higher tank. But close enough.
Before the new CPU rigs, a Rokh had a spare low that couldn't be filled with a MLU, so a Co-Proc and tank could be fitted.
(Though I don't remember when MLUII were introduced vs barges/exhumers, my point stands for MLUIs as well) Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7459
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:42:00 -
[377] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Before the new CPU rigs, a Rokh had a spare low that couldn't be filled with a MLU, so a Co-Proc and tank could be fitted. I'm just reading cross-eyed today. You were quite right.
AaaanywayGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
Elessa Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
88
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:57:00 -
[378] - Quote
@OP
Ok, your mistake was in drawing a real-life comparison, you should've compared it to a fairly recent set of events-- the calls for Incursions to be beaten to death with the nerfbat. Those Incursion runners were doing something fairly comparable with their farming of Vanguards. They were also abiding by the rules of the Sandbox which many seem all too eager to invoke in the defense of ganking, but when the Incursion runners were doing it, they were witch hunted for it. Devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been Eve is a great game if you can get past all of the asshats.... |
Jeniam Retriat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 12:33:00 -
[379] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:I pointed out the insurance Nerf to point out the fact that it's not a buff to the Hulk/nerf to the Gankers that the miners want, it's the banning of the practice of suicide ganking entirely. The calls for buffs/nerfs are just the baby steps they're trying to get through on the way.
You got gankers nerfed (it now costs ~15m or so to kill a tanked Hulk when it used to cost ~10m in an insured Brutix). You're not happy with that. You got miners income buffed (Drone poop nixed, a good thing overall), and you're not happy with that.
Years ago, you got CONCORD buffed to what it is today (before the buff, Suicide Ganks involved a lot less suicide), and you're not happy with that.
If we buff Hulks, whaddya wanna bet you won't be happy with that?
I am a miner, I do not want to get rid of suicide ganking. There are plenty of other miners who understand the nature of the sandbox and the risks and accept that, and even enjoy it. Incidentally we'd prefer you didn't lump us in with idiots like the OP who do want to make hisec 'safe' and get rid of ganking.
As to the rest of your points, there is a connecting theme with why miners aren't happy; it's still possible to suicide gank our ships and turn a profit, even if we're fitting them defensively. The insurance nerf didn't mean that players had to choose between not ganking and ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss, it meant they had to choose between easily ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss or ganking in a Catalyst with a couple of friends/alts and still breaking even or making a profit. Same with the CONCORD buff and same with the complaints/requests for tougher mining ships we have now.
RubyPorto wrote:Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed.
That's what the OP is doing, sure. The rest of us are asking why our profession is the only one that got handed the Solid Gold Spatula, and why we can't just get a high quality Stainless Steel Spatula that performs the same job just as well but isn't a magnet for muggers. To put it more clearly, why is it that Mining is the only profession whose best ship is an automatic target for for-profit ganking even outside of Hulkageddon? If an L4 mission runner moves into one of their high end ships like a Navy Raven, that ship isn't automatically a target for gankers just for being used; you have to fit it out in high end deadspace/faction/officer mods before it's a target (would that be a gold-plated spatula?). A mission runner doesn't get in a Rattlesnake and get told that that ship is too valuable to use in hisec, or that they have to drastically alter their way of playing to use it without getting killed, or that they should just use a Dominix because it's a lot cheaper and only a bit worse, and yet that's exactly what happens to miners when they move from Covetors to Hulks.
RubyPorto wrote:So 10m worth of ships to kill a hulk that drops an average of ~10m isk. 5 people spending at least 15m (GCC cooldown limits the rate of ganking) to maybe break even, or if they're very lucky (20m drop), make 2m each (compensating for a bad loot drop earlier, maybe).
Sounds really profitable.
Well, those 5 Catalysts will drop an average of about 4-500k ISK each in modules as well, so if they break even from the Hulk gank (and your numbers there aren't including the T2 salvage from the Hulk which could add a few more million in profit) they'd each be 4-500k better off overall. More to the point, the fact that there's no overall ISK cost for the ganks means there's no economic discouragement, like there is for every other ship. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 12:58:00 -
[380] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:And if they do you bring in more guns. In the end the miner always loses.
Only for big events like an interdiction or hulkageddon which offer more funding. Normal day to day ganks on tanked hulks happens rarely because there is no isk to be made. |
|
wiskyjack
Caldari Deep Space Ventures Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:12:00 -
[381] - Quote
It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II
miners = Jews Goon/ CFC= Waffen SS Mittani = ****** Hulkageddon = death camp
Learn to duck and dive and you will survive. I've had the same Hulk for 2 years, it's gone from high to low to high and back to low sec . |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1638
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:15:00 -
[382] - Quote
wiskyjack wrote:It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II
Jesus... Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:20:00 -
[383] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:RubyPorto wrote:So 10m worth of ships to kill a hulk that drops an average of ~10m isk. 5 people spending at least 15m (GCC cooldown limits the rate of ganking) to maybe break even, or if they're very lucky (20m drop), make 2m each (compensating for a bad loot drop earlier, maybe).
Sounds really profitable. Well, those 5 Catalysts will drop an average of about 4-500k ISK each in modules as well, so if they break even from the Hulk gank (and your numbers there aren't including the T2 salvage from the Hulk which could add a few more million in profit) they'd each be 4-500k better off overall. More to the point, the fact that there's no overall ISK cost for the ganks means there's no economic discouragement, like there is for every other ship.
You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. |
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:26:00 -
[384] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed.
That is quote worthy. |
Virgil Travis
GWA Corp Unified Church of the Unobligated
237
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:29:00 -
[385] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:wiskyjack wrote:It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II
Jesus...
They've been out there alone in Cobalt Edge for far too long i think, think of it like The Hills Have Eyes If the Sims all became zombies it would be easy to escape them, just shove them in a room and make them answer the telephone. |
Andoria Thara
Fallen Avatars
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:33:00 -
[386] - Quote
Hello OP,
I am new to EVE, been playing for about 3 months, and I love the fact that nowhere is safe. I wouldn't change anything. 100% security is the reason why I've left so many other games, they are 100% boring.
Just like in any other game, if you want to be good at something (such as surviving a gank), you need to do a little research. It's not that hard.
Granted, if a group is targeting you (which I'm sure they will now), it's near impossible to fit enough tank, but a Damage Control and a couple of shield hardeners (which you can overload if attacked) will help you survive the average solo/duo gank attempt. |
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
32
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:37:00 -
[387] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
What "modifications" do you think are needed? Your averatge mission Tengu has about the same EHP as a tanked up Hulk, and costs 2-5 times as much. If you want to run a 'Tengugeddon' event then go for it - stepping up and organising it is the only "modification" that's required.
Personally I think that would be great. LP prices have sunk dramatically lately and I could do with some competition removing.
My only problem with Hulkaggeddon is that it's not Tenguaggeddon. Although I am not a miner or have a bunch of miner love, I don't hate them either. In fact I am quite fond of the minerals they mine, as I build my machines of war with those minerals. So ganking miners is kind of counter productive for me since I use those minerals. Know what I never use though? The isk that gets deposited straight into missions runner's wallets. In fact the only thing that isk does for me, is cause my isk to be worth less due to inflation. So yes we need a Tenguaggeddon or a Mission-runneraggeddon.
Really I am getting double financially *****-slapped. Mission runners continue farming isk safely causing inflation. Dumb miners that can't fit a tank keep dying causing minerals to rise in price making my isk able to purchase less. I think its time that mission runners learn that High-sec isn't so safe. I've been doing my part to kill mission runners, I scan them down, warp in, kill all the triggers and hope a NPC has them scrammed. I got a mach popped a few days ago it was beautiful. |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
147
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:37:00 -
[388] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: so why should we believe that you'd stop whining if the Hulk got an EHP buff?
Game balance is about balancing gameplay, not balancing whining. And the Gameplay is fine. Hulks give up defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
|
Jeniam Retriat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:40:00 -
[389] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it.
Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:41:00 -
[390] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:
Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
Haulers have to give up defencive ability to run a max cargo hold. Comabt ships have to give up defences to go max offence and so on. What makes you think hulks shouldn't follow the same rules as everyone else? |
|
Chris Cooley
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:42:00 -
[391] - Quote
Totally agree with the OP. The recent heavy high sec griefing has imbalanced the game considerably. ORE boats need a big buff and or greifers need a larger penalty.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7466
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:43:00 -
[392] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. No, they don't.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:43:00 -
[393] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:baltec1 wrote:You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you.
No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:43:00 -
[394] - Quote
Chris Cooley wrote:Totally agree with the OP. The recent heavy high sec griefing has imbalanced the game considerably. ORE boats need a big buff and or greifers need a larger penalty.
Space is just as safe now as it was 6 years ago for hulks. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
474
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:47:00 -
[395] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
Just like a T3 has to give up a large chunk of its defensive capabilities to run 3 links? Just like a Guardian/Basilisk has to be fit with basically no tank to run a 6 rep setup? Just like a carrier has to give up fitting basically any sort of tank to perma-triage? Just like literally everyone who flies an armor tanked ship has to find an optimal balance between tanking and damage?
Why should Hulks be an exception to such tradeoffs? eh |
wiskyjack
Caldari Deep Space Ventures Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:51:00 -
[396] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:wiskyjack wrote:It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II
Jesus... did I upset your delicate goon sensibilitys,
|
Chris Cooley
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:52:00 -
[397] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs.
So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame. Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening.
werd |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:01:00 -
[398] - Quote
Chris Cooley wrote:Ten Bulls wrote: So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame.
Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening.
werd
The base stats of the hulk are in the same ballpark as heavy assault ships in defence.
|
Andoria Thara
Fallen Avatars
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:05:00 -
[399] - Quote
Chris Cooley wrote:Totally agree with the OP. The recent heavy high sec griefing has imbalanced the game considerably. ORE boats need a big buff and or greifers need a larger penalty.
A hulk can easily get around 20k ehp, with low skills. That's plenty to survive the average gank in highsec.
Not sure what the problem here is. |
Jeniam Retriat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:10:00 -
[400] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Jeniam Retriat wrote:baltec1 wrote:You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you. No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship.
You'd probably know better than me, but the best Hulk tank fits I've found are still only about 30k EHP, whereas a 2mil gank cata can do >6k in under 15 seconds. Obviously I'm not counting bait hulks that don't have strip miners, and I guess an off-grid booster could swing things in the Hulk's favour, but that seems about as far as you can take it. For Macks it's only about 18.5k, which would be about 3 Catas, though the fit on that is also cheaper. |
|
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:24:00 -
[401] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:
You'd probably know better than me, but the best Hulk tank fits I've found are still only about 30k EHP, whereas a 2mil gank cata can do >6k in under 15 seconds. Obviously I'm not counting bait hulks that don't have strip miners, and I guess an off-grid booster could swing things in the Hulk's favour, but that seems about as far as you can take it. For Macks it's only about 18.5k, which would be about 3 Catas, though the fit on that is also cheaper.
We tested this on sisi at the start of the year before the two ice interdictions. 3 catalysts will not kill a supertank hulk, 3 tornados can pull it off but a 4th is needed to garentee the kill. You also do not get 15 seconds in a lot of high sec. |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:30:00 -
[402] - Quote
Ludi Burek wrote:
6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox.
ah, like James 315 and the gankers are DOING to the miners? Glad you agree with the miners then.
RubyPorto wrote:wiskyjack wrote:It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II
Jesus...
no... WWII, youre thinking too far back |
Fred Lodenstane
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:32:00 -
[403] - Quote
You know it would be more effective finding ways to defend yourself than convincing CCP that hulkageddon is a form of griefing. After all, CCP makes it clear in all their comments about such matters that the responsibility falls on the player to defend themselves from other players, and such a thing is not CCP's job. CCP considers griefing to be anything mean or hurtful targeted against a specific character, which in this case does not apply since hulkageddon affects all miners in highsec and lowsec. Instead of posting here people can quite easily defend themselves by having logistic ships rep their hulks while they mine (seriously, this all but stops just about any ganker and I'm amazed it isn't used more often) or maybe even shield repair drones for those with less skills. Hulks don't need a buff, players just need to bring support fleets to protect their miners, just like how PvP fleets need to bring along support in order to be effective.
This Hulkageddon, which is three weeks linger than the usual event should be a wake-up call for miners ever that they need to change their fleet comps and really start thinking about game mechanics in order to keep their precious and expensive ships alive. Mining is something that is incredibly risky when done alone or with few people as the losses fall just on one person. What I hope to see emerge from this Hulkageddon are more organized and smarter miners. People are always whining about Goonswarm and their giant coalition which can essentially step on anyone else with little consequence, particularly people in highsec because there is so little organization and unity between those who solely reside there. The game would be a lot more interesting if a highsec coalition existed to challenge nullsec blocs like TEST, Goons, and others.
Do I think any of this actually has a chance of happening? No. The majority of people who actually live in highsec would have to get along and interact with each other to pull this off and considering most don't even read this forum or any news (take the op as an example of one such infrequent poster prior to losing his untanked hulk).
The point is, don't ask for game changes learn to defend yourself. That doesn't mean you have to take up PvP, it just means learning how to support one another in dangerous times. |
hedge betts Shiyurida
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:34:00 -
[404] - Quote
wiskyjack wrote:It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II
miners = Jews Goon/ CFC= Waffen SS Mittani = H!tler Hulkageddon = death camp
Learn to duck and dive and you will survive. I've had the same Hulk for 2 years, it's gone from high to low to high and back to low sec . This
Cup the balls, and work the shaft |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:34:00 -
[405] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. No, they don't.
really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:37:00 -
[406] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Ludi Burek wrote:
6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox.
ah, like James 315 and the gankers are DOING to the miners? Glad you agree with the miners then.
Because miners are the only people getting attacked and killed in space. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:38:00 -
[407] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Tippia wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. No, they don't. really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS
In those three words please tell me where tippia said that was possible. |
Lady Ayeipsia
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
142
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:38:00 -
[408] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Ludi Burek wrote:
6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox.
ah, like James 315 and the gankers are DOING to the miners? Glad you agree with the miners then. RubyPorto wrote:wiskyjack wrote:It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II
Jesus... no... WWII, youre thinking too far back
But you can still mine. With proper support, a decent tank, or even moving to a less traveled system. For example, there are systems in khanid kingdom that are hi sec, but are empty. It take little to no time to gain the standing needed to anchor a pos. If anyone shows up, warp to pos.
The converse, removing ganking would eliminate a style or play.
See, part of the problem is that miners wish to put minimal effort in, and still gain maximum yield and profit. It would be similar to level 4 mission runners demanding the ability to tank and tear through all missions with a rookie frig. Allowing tanking simply balances out the risk verse reward for miners, much like risk vs reward being balanced in other fields. |
Andoria Thara
Fallen Avatars
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:11:00 -
[409] - Quote
Lady Ayeipsia wrote: See, part of the problem is that miners wish to put minimal effort in, and still gain maximum yield and profit.
I totally agree with this. A lot of highsec miners are lazy. They fit 3 x cargo rigs which lowers their armor even more, so they can AFK mine more efficiently, or simply because they don't know any better.
The other day I saw an Orca in a belt, mining with mining drones... I suppose that's a bit better than slapping a mining laser on an industrial ship lol. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
980
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:15:00 -
[410] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
I pointed out the insurance Nerf to point out the fact that it's not a buff to the Hulk/nerf to the Gankers that the miners want, it's the banning of the practice of suicide ganking entirely. The calls for buffs/nerfs are just the baby steps they're trying to get through on the way.
You got gankers nerfed (it now costs ~15m or so to kill a tanked Hulk when it used to cost ~10m in an insured Brutix). You're not happy with that. You got miners income buffed (Drone poop nixed, a good thing overall), and you're not happy with that.
Years ago, you got CONCORD buffed to what it is today (before the buff, Suicide Ganks involved a lot less suicide), and you're not happy with that.
If we buff Hulks, whaddya wanna bet you won't be happy with that?
"You" did this "you" did that...
No, "I" recall asking for nerfs on hi sec missions and incursions not on suicide ganking.
I am not happy or unhappy, I am writing simple considerations.
One of these considerations is this: there's failfit expensive ships going all around hi sec yet they are not made targets.
Why?
I mean, why would a suicide ganker only go after mining ships with all the expensive stuff flying under their nose?
If they ignore most Tengus / CNR / Golem and similar (show me the 8500 killmails...), it's certainly NOT because:
- Killing them is impossible - Concord protects them better - It's not profitable - They are all fitted like a pro, with awesome buffer tank and all round resists. - They warp like a nano cov ops - Their pilots would never shower tears in local when killed
So what's the factor that tells the suicide ganker: "let's ignore all juicy this stuff and just go for overall less profitable targets"? What tells the suicide ganker: "let's go after the 20k EHP Hulk even if actively piloted and not vs a Tengu"?
Since on paper it seems a nonsense, it means there are other factors not involving Concord, not involving cost, not involving insurance, not involving general suicide ganking mechanics and not involving tears.
These are the factors that should be equalized. The first one that comes to mind, is the fact that everybody except miners need a tiny effort to scan them down. This would be easily fixed by just keeping belts in 1.0 sec (small Trit for new players) and the rest moved in anomalies. I mean more frequent ones than grav sites of course.
Do you see this as an unfair nerf to suicide ganking?
I am pretty sure there are other factors for making miners the default targets and they all are a delta:
Suicide miner - Suicide everyone else = Delta
This Delta is the subtraction of all the unique factors and mechanics covering miners vs everyone else. I.e. failfit or concord are not unique so subtracting them = 0 and therefore they don't contribute to Delta.
Once you find out Delta, then that's where the game balance would be looked at. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7474
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:17:00 -
[411] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:really... Yes, really. It can give up some yield for more tank or vice versa. At no point does it need to (or, indeed, can it) give up all of one to get more of the other.
Quote:post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia But that wasn't what he was saying, now was it?
Quote:Im calling you on that BS Good thing that I didn't say anything like that then.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
Andoria Thara
Fallen Avatars
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:18:00 -
[412] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:So what's the factor that tells the suicide ganker: "let's ignore all juicy this stuff and just go for overall less profitable targets"? What tells the suicide ganker: "let's go after the 20k EHP Hulk even if actively piloted and not vs a Tengu"?
The factor = hulkageddon V, which is now over.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
980
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:18:00 -
[413] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Ok, so you're claiming that it's impossible to reasonably escape a suicide gank attempt without trying it yourself? Really?
I had my own mining operation and indeed still have 1 x 4 years old Hulk somewhere. I stopped once I realized mining was the equivalent of what in other MMOs are the "UP classes", those only played by alts for fun and similar, with no chance to compete.
Andoria Thara wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:So what's the factor that tells the suicide ganker: "let's ignore all juicy this stuff and just go for overall less profitable targets"? What tells the suicide ganker: "let's go after the 20k EHP Hulk even if actively piloted and not vs a Tengu"?
The factor = hulkageddon V, which is now over.
No, Hulkageddon is a byproduct of the factor, not the cause.
In fact you can easily go back and find pre-Hulkageddon ganks and even other initiatives (see Bat Country). You will NOT find Bat "Tengu" Country or other things, all and only against miners.
So there's a kickstart factor that all the other factors being equal, still pushes gankers to go after one target and not the other, even if both are failfit, both share the same Concord mechanics, both are not exactly awake at the keyboard and so on.
I found one easy factor: miners are easily found while all the others need to be scanned (unless they autopilot the pinata thru Uedama). I am sure there are others. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
980
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:25:00 -
[414] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
So 10m worth of ships to kill a hulk that drops an average of ~10m isk. 5 people spending at least 15m (GCC cooldown limits the rate of ganking) to maybe break even, or if they're very lucky (20m drop), make 2m each (compensating for a bad loot drop earlier, maybe).
Sounds really profitable.
You can't legitimately add in the GSF bounty, because that's a player run event, and not something that you can use for a balance argument.
I get from 2 to 3 intact amor plates and similar per wreck, some bad times just 1.
They are 15M a piece. As I told you, are you sure you really know everything about suicide ganking Hulks and Macks? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1989
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:27:00 -
[415] - Quote
EVE isn't a mining simulator.
Mining has risks, and those risks vary from sec zone to sec zone.
This is by design. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
980
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:27:00 -
[416] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:As to the rest of your points, there is a connecting theme with why miners aren't happy; it's still possible to suicide gank our ships and turn a profit, even if we're fitting them defensively. The insurance nerf didn't mean that players had to choose between not ganking and ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss, it meant they had to choose between easily ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss or ganking in a Catalyst with a couple of friends/alts and still breaking even or making a profit. Same with the CONCORD buff and same with the complaints/requests for tougher mining ships we have now. RubyPorto wrote:Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed. That's what the OP is doing, sure. The rest of us are asking why our profession is the only one that got handed the Solid Gold Spatula, and why we can't just get a high quality Stainless Steel Spatula that performs the same job just as well but isn't a magnet for muggers. To put it more clearly, why is it that Mining is the only profession whose best ship is an automatic target for for-profit ganking even outside of Hulkageddon? If an L4 mission runner moves into one of their high end ships like a Navy Raven, that ship isn't automatically a target for gankers just for being used; you have to fit it out in high end deadspace/faction/officer mods before it's a target (would that be a gold-plated spatula?). A mission runner doesn't get in a Rattlesnake and get told that that ship is too valuable to use in hisec, or that they have to drastically alter their way of playing to use it without getting killed, or that they should just use a Dominix because it's a lot cheaper and only a bit worse, and yet that's exactly what happens to miners when they move from Covetors to Hulks.
Finally I found someone who understands my points!
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Haulie Berry
128
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:30:00 -
[417] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Tippia wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. No, they don't. really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS
Pretty sure you misunderstood what he meant by "No, they don't".
You don't "have" to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. You CHOOSE to.
EVERY ship has fitting tradeoffs, why should the hulk be any different? |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
475
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:31:00 -
[418] - Quote
Hulls intended for combat have stronger tanks and are thus more difficult to gank in hisec, color me shocked eh |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
933
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:33:00 -
[419] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Tippia wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. No, they don't. really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS Pretty sure you misunderstood what he meant by "No, they don't". You don't "have" to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. You CHOOSE to. EVERY ship has fitting tradeoffs, why should the hulk be any different? Because highsec... CONCORD makes highsec safe..
Why are gankers allowed here?! Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7475
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:33:00 -
[420] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Hulls intended for combat have stronger tanks and are thus more difficult to gank in hisec, color me shocked To be fair, Hulks have a stronger tank than some HACsGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
980
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:34:00 -
[421] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Jeniam Retriat wrote:baltec1 wrote:You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you. No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship.
Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty. 10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1989
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:34:00 -
[422] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Jeniam Retriat wrote:As to the rest of your points, there is a connecting theme with why miners aren't happy; it's still possible to suicide gank our ships and turn a profit, even if we're fitting them defensively. The insurance nerf didn't mean that players had to choose between not ganking and ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss, it meant they had to choose between easily ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss or ganking in a Catalyst with a couple of friends/alts and still breaking even or making a profit. Same with the CONCORD buff and same with the complaints/requests for tougher mining ships we have now. RubyPorto wrote:Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed. That's what the OP is doing, sure. The rest of us are asking why our profession is the only one that got handed the Solid Gold Spatula, and why we can't just get a high quality Stainless Steel Spatula that performs the same job just as well but isn't a magnet for muggers. To put it more clearly, why is it that Mining is the only profession whose best ship is an automatic target for for-profit ganking even outside of Hulkageddon? If an L4 mission runner moves into one of their high end ships like a Navy Raven, that ship isn't automatically a target for gankers just for being used; you have to fit it out in high end deadspace/faction/officer mods before it's a target (would that be a gold-plated spatula?). A mission runner doesn't get in a Rattlesnake and get told that that ship is too valuable to use in hisec, or that they have to drastically alter their way of playing to use it without getting killed, or that they should just use a Dominix because it's a lot cheaper and only a bit worse, and yet that's exactly what happens to miners when they move from Covetors to Hulks. Finally I found someone who understands my points!
Actually, people are told they are doing nothing more than making targets of themselves in those ships all the time... and they die frequently simply because they are a high value target and look good on a killboard regardless of how they are fit.
It's simply not as widely advertised.
If there was a 'Navygeddon" campaign going on to pop expensive Navy ships, those folks would (quite rightly) be told they were being incredibly stupid to do their missions in their Navy Raven anyway. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:38:00 -
[423] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Ludi Burek wrote:
6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox.
ah, like James 315 and the gankers are DOING to the miners? Glad you agree with the miners then. Because miners are the only people getting attacked and killed in space.
Well tbh you can find systems in The Forge with up to 73 miners kills in 24h, how many L4 Tengus and CNR kills do you get in the most busy L4 system? I bet less than 73. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:39:00 -
[424] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Hulls intended for combat have stronger tanks and are thus more difficult to gank in hisec, color me shocked To be fair, Hulks have a stronger tank than some HACsGǪ
miners want their hulks to tank like fully bricked Damnations while fitting a max-yield setup with cargo rigs eh |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
934
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:40:00 -
[425] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:baltec1 wrote:Jeniam Retriat wrote:baltec1 wrote:You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you. No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship. Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty. 10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero. Not bad, 10 catalysts.
Blobbing is coming to highsec, it seems. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:42:00 -
[426] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty. 10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero.
okay, this is a problem how? eh |
Malice Redeemer
Redeemer Group Joint Venture Conglomerate
114
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:46:00 -
[427] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is not a family-friendly pastime created for the enjoyment and benefit of working family men to unwind after a hard day of shaking hands and having power lunches.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:46:00 -
[428] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:baltec1 wrote:Jeniam Retriat wrote:baltec1 wrote:You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you. No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship. Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty. 10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero. Not bad, 10 catalysts. Blobbing is coming to highsec, it seems.
Well they do use 10+ ships to kill freighters since a long while so it's not a big change.
The only thing that really worries me about killing hi sec miners is that RMT botters today are VERY easily and quickly spotted (expecially at ice), easily killed, easily reported.
If you kill too many hi sec miners, however, the RMT botters will move to 0.0 renter space, where nobody will report them and much less kill them any more. I find this a very bad thing.
I have yet to see a 0.0 bot-a-geddon as well.
Imagine if all those fresh forces would be devoted to kill 20-70 bots per renter system a day. I can sweet dream, eh? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:47:00 -
[429] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty. 10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero. okay, this is a problem how?
Not a problem, just a clarification.
Clarifications are a problem how? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:47:00 -
[430] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:If you kill too many hi sec miners, however, the RMT botters will move to 0.0 renter space, where nobody will report them and much less kill them any more.
cloak an alt in their system and voila eh |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:50:00 -
[431] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:If you kill too many hi sec miners, however, the RMT botters will move to 0.0 renter space, where nobody will report them and much less kill them any more. cloak an alt in their system and voila
Well I only have 1 jump clone to 0.0, you guys are thousands... Can't you decide to finally ruin THEIR (the renters RMTers) game? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Francisco Bizzaro
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:54:00 -
[432] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:In fact you can easily go back and find pre-Hulkageddon ganks and even other initiatives (see Bat Country). You will NOT find Bat "Tengu" Country or other things, all and only against miners.
So there's a kickstart factor that all the other factors being equal, still pushes gankers to go after one target and not the other, even if both are failfit, both share the same Concord mechanics, both are not exactly awake at the keyboard and so on.
I found one easy factor: miners are easily found while all the others need to be scanned (unless they autopilot the pinata thru Uedama). I am sure there are others. Clearly this is true - Tengus operate in deadspace patches which need to be scanned down. Since gankers are at least as lazy as miners for the most part, they won't crack out the probes until long after the last hulk has been cleared from the belts. But if hulks operated in deadspace, they would probably be less attractive than the corresponding tengu, and less likely to be ganked (except for the fact that the tengu pilot is probably actually at the keyboard, so a harder target for that reason alone).
Note, though, that deadspace areas with asteroids are also available to miners, via missions and grav sites. This is yet another excellent and obvious way to avoid trouble which has nothing to do with the alleged weaknesses of the hulk. |
Fred Lodenstane
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:55:00 -
[433] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:If you kill too many hi sec miners, however, the RMT botters will move to 0.0 renter space, where nobody will report them and much less kill them any more. cloak an alt in their system and voila Well I only have 1 jump clone to 0.0, you guys are thousands... Can't you decide to finally ruin THEIR (the renters RMTers) game?
We do, but they don't whine on these forums like highsec miners. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
476
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:07:00 -
[434] - Quote
Francisco Bizzaro wrote:Since gankers are at least as lazy as miners for the most part, they won't crack out the probes until long after the last hulk has been cleared from the belts.
The problem with suicide ganking Tengus in deadspace pockets is that unless they're absolutely dumb, they orbit an object in the site while permarunning an AB. 1400s have atrocious tracking, so warping in Tornadoes wouldn't work. Miners are easier targets because they make themselves easy targets. eh |
baltec1
1228
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:29:00 -
[435] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
No, Hulkageddon is a byproduct of the factor, not the cause.
In fact you can easily go back and find pre-Hulkageddon ganks and even other initiatives (see Bat Country). You will NOT find Bat "Tengu" Country or other things, all and only against miners.
So there's a kickstart factor that all the other factors being equal, still pushes gankers to go after one target and not the other, even if both are failfit, both share the same Concord mechanics, both are not exactly awake at the keyboard and so on.
I found one easy factor: miners are easily found while all the others need to be scanned (unless they autopilot the pinata thru Uedama). I am sure there are others.
Hi Bat Country here. Killing droves of tengu doesn't mess with the ice market. Thats why we have not bothered to kill them. |
baltec1
1228
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:34:00 -
[436] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Well tbh you can find systems in The Forge with up to 73 miners kills in 24h, how many L4 Tengus and CNR kills do you get in the most busy L4 system? I bet less than 73.
Show me the droves of untanked CNR and tengu. I bet its less than 73. |
Francisco Bizzaro
136
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:45:00 -
[437] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Well tbh you can find systems in The Forge with up to 73 miners kills in 24h, how many L4 Tengus and CNR kills do you get in the most busy L4 system? I bet less than 73.
Show me the droves of untanked CNR and tengu. I bet its less than 73. Anyhow, what was miner #73 doing not to notice that 72 of his buddies went missing that day?
Yeah, it must be the hulk's tank that is the problem. |
Avid Bumhumper
Furian Necromongers
61
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:55:00 -
[438] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is a place where people with real life issues act out the way they would like to in real life, but can't due to pesky laws and such.
Fixed that for you....
My Tinfoil hat has been sugically implanted, so no,it is not for sale..... |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1990
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:02:00 -
[439] - Quote
Avid Bumhumper wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is a place where people with real life issues act out the way they would like to in real life, but can't due to pesky laws and such. Fixed that for you....
Since when is shooting someone in a game that specifically allows it indicative of "real life issues"?
Miners are strip mining the natural resources of the universe with no thought to conservation... is that indicative of "real life issues"? When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
205
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:10:00 -
[440] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Avid Bumhumper wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is a place where people with real life issues act out the way they would like to in real life, but can't due to pesky laws and such. Fixed that for you.... Since when is shooting someone in a game that specifically allows it indicative of "real life issues"? Miners are strip mining the natural resources of the universe with no thought to conservation... is that indicative of "real life issues"?
Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy.
From a dictionary: "Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for the feelings of others and often the rules of society. Psychopaths have a lack of empathy and remorse, and have very shallow emotions. They are generally regarded as callous, selfish, dishonest, arrogant, aggressive, impulsive, irresponsible, and hedonistic."
Your comparison is unimaginably stupid. There are no players controlling the asteroids. |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:11:00 -
[441] - Quote
Fred Lodenstane wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:If you kill too many hi sec miners, however, the RMT botters will move to 0.0 renter space, where nobody will report them and much less kill them any more. cloak an alt in their system and voila Well I only have 1 jump clone to 0.0, you guys are thousands... Can't you decide to finally ruin THEIR (the renters RMTers) game? We do, but they don't whine on these forums like highsec miners.
Do you reply the RMTers when they whine on their respective bots forum then?
Francisco Bizzaro wrote: Note, though, that deadspace areas with asteroids are also available to miners, via missions and grav sites. This is yet another excellent and obvious way to avoid trouble which has nothing to do with the alleged weaknesses of the hulk.
Indeed and if you look back I mentioned grav sites etc. The current implementation is not properly viable as replacement:
1) Missions are heavily biased on Trit, which alone is not enough for the overall game production. There are pyroxeres and even omber but it's a rare event (I have run lots of L3 and L4).
2) Grav sites are hard-ish to scan (so the average miner would have difficulty finding them since their skills are generally poor all around) and are very few compared to the volume needed to feed EvE.
Therefore CCP should introduce something in between the already existing mining missions (that send you to fake useless roids) and COSMOS (some missions send you to scan a decently easy signature). Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:13:00 -
[442] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Francisco Bizzaro wrote:Since gankers are at least as lazy as miners for the most part, they won't crack out the probes until long after the last hulk has been cleared from the belts. The problem with suicide ganking Tengus in deadspace pockets is that unless they're absolutely dumb, they orbit an object in the site while permarunning an AB. 1400s have atrocious tracking, so warping in Tornadoes wouldn't work. Miners are easier targets because they make themselves easy targets.
Well I tested arties on Hulks orbiting a can and they get hit, so that trick only works against some very low skilled alts using 'nados. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
71
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:14:00 -
[443] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Francisco Bizzaro wrote:Since gankers are at least as lazy as miners for the most part, they won't crack out the probes until long after the last hulk has been cleared from the belts. The problem with suicide ganking Tengus in deadspace pockets is that unless they're absolutely dumb, they orbit an object in the site while permarunning an AB. 1400s have atrocious tracking, so warping in Tornadoes wouldn't work. Miners are easier targets because they make themselves easy targets.
It's not like if Tengus travel through gates or dock/undock at stations, it's well known they have a special Asgard teleport button. |
Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
492
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:14:00 -
[444] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy.
The only mentally-unbalanced people are those who cannot distinguish a game from reality, and experience visceral suffering from the loss of space pixels.
|
Haulie Berry
131
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:15:00 -
[445] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote: Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy.
Nothing that happens to you in the game should ruin your game experience, as everything that happens in the game is a *part* of the game experience.
It should no more ruin your game experience than being picked off by an enemy sniper in an FPS game, being rocked by a rush strategy in an RTS game, or losing your queen in a game of chess should "ruin" your experience. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:18:00 -
[446] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Hi Bat Country here. Killing droves of tengu doesn't mess with the ice market. Thats why we have not bothered to kill them.
I know for certain that your upper ranks also mess with Technetium.
Why not messing with minerals by killing Tengus? Less loot goes to the market => prices rise.
This is now expecially evident, as since CCP nerfed the M0 drops, missioneers can now easily loot again in a solo setup (expecially on marauders but hey, why would you not kill them too ) and this is causing serious M3-M4 drop in price and by result, mineral prices are also affected. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
98
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:22:00 -
[447] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy.
From a dictionary: "Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for the feelings of others and often the rules of society. Psychopaths have a lack of empathy and remorse, and have very shallow emotions. They are generally regarded as callous, selfish, dishonest, arrogant, aggressive, impulsive, irresponsible, and hedonistic."
Your comparison is unimaginably stupid. There are no players controlling the asteroids.
It's funny because you're calling people sociopaths for playing a game, then calling somebody else stupid.
I looks like you have lost perspective in a serious way. I recommend taking a break from the game for a few days. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
205
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:28:00 -
[448] - Quote
Ispia Jaydrath wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy.
From a dictionary: "Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for the feelings of others and often the rules of society. Psychopaths have a lack of empathy and remorse, and have very shallow emotions. They are generally regarded as callous, selfish, dishonest, arrogant, aggressive, impulsive, irresponsible, and hedonistic."
Your comparison is unimaginably stupid. There are no players controlling the asteroids. It's funny because you're calling people sociopaths for playing a game, then calling somebody else stupid. I looks like you have lost perspective in a serious way. I recommend taking a break from the game for a few days.
I didn't call them sociopaths. I called them psychopaths. Despite your entirely useless statement, you didn't refute my point.
I also didn't call the poster I quoted stupid. I said that his/her comparison was stupid. You really should learn what the word "nuance" means.
|
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
98
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:32:00 -
[449] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Ispia Jaydrath wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy.
From a dictionary: "Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for the feelings of others and often the rules of society. Psychopaths have a lack of empathy and remorse, and have very shallow emotions. They are generally regarded as callous, selfish, dishonest, arrogant, aggressive, impulsive, irresponsible, and hedonistic."
Your comparison is unimaginably stupid. There are no players controlling the asteroids. It's funny because you're calling people sociopaths for playing a game, then calling somebody else stupid. I looks like you have lost perspective in a serious way. I recommend taking a break from the game for a few days. I didn't call them sociopaths. I called them psychopaths. Despite your entirely useless statement, you didn't refute my point. I also didn't call the poster I quoted stupid. I said that his/her comparison was stupid. You really should learn what the word "nuance" means.
Quibbling about minutiae won't turn you into a balanced individual. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
206
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:40:00 -
[450] - Quote
Ispia Jaydrath wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:Ispia Jaydrath wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy.
From a dictionary: "Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for the feelings of others and often the rules of society. Psychopaths have a lack of empathy and remorse, and have very shallow emotions. They are generally regarded as callous, selfish, dishonest, arrogant, aggressive, impulsive, irresponsible, and hedonistic."
Your comparison is unimaginably stupid. There are no players controlling the asteroids. It's funny because you're calling people sociopaths for playing a game, then calling somebody else stupid. I looks like you have lost perspective in a serious way. I recommend taking a break from the game for a few days. I didn't call them sociopaths. I called them psychopaths. Despite your entirely useless statement, you didn't refute my point. I also didn't call the poster I quoted stupid. I said that his/her comparison was stupid. You really should learn what the word "nuance" means. Quibbling about minutiae won't turn you into a balanced individual.
And misinterpreting other people's attempts to communicate doesn't do you any favors, either. (:
I find it interesting that most posters seem to assume that I'm personally involved in the current conflict between carebears and nullbears. In fact, I've never lost a mining ship, and I've been happily pulling in ice and ores in highsec all through Hulkageddon and for a long time before that.
My problem with the current situation is that making every area of the game a truly unpleasant place to be WILL have cascading consequences if it continues. I agree with the basic premise that something needs to be done, and that that something does not involve eliminating the possibility of suicide ganking. I think there's a much deeper problem plaguing the game; Hulkageddons and the recent uptick of suicide ganking is merely a symptom. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7479
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:41:00 -
[451] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:I didn't call them sociopaths. I called them psychopaths. Now, now. Just because the miners can't stick to the rules of society doesn't mean they're mentally disturbed.
GǪbut the whole Gǣselfish, dishonest, arrogant, irresponsibleGǥ bit sure fits. As well. It's more likely that they just suffer from BPD or schizophrenia, though.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
493
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:42:00 -
[452] - Quote
Ispia Jaydrath wrote:Quibbling about minutiae won't turn you into a balanced individual.
They actually mean exactly the same thing. I think one is just more modern, technical, and "politically-correct".
However, in every day use they are still used interchangeably, which means he's just grasping at straws to save face after getting ownzoned by multiple people for such making a ridiculous statement.
|
Haulie Berry
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:46:00 -
[453] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:
I didn't call them sociopaths. I called them psychopaths. Despite your entirely useless statement, you didn't refute my point.
I also didn't call the poster I quoted stupid. I said that his/her comparison was stupid. You really should learn what the word "nuance" means.
Like you, I am not a qualified psychologist.
Unlike you, I don't play one on the internet, so you'll have to help me out here: which disorder is it that causes people to levy diagnoses against anyone who does something they don't like in a video game?
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
982
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:50:00 -
[454] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:I find it interesting that most posters seem to assume that I'm personally involved in the current conflict between carebears and nullbears. In fact, I've never lost a mining ship, and I've been happily pulling in ice and ores in highsec all through Hulkageddon and for a long time before that.
My problem with the current situation is that making every area of the game a truly unpleasant place to be WILL have cascading consequences if it continues. I agree with the basic premise that something needs to be done, and that that something does not involve eliminating the possibility of suicide ganking. I think there's a much deeper problem plaguing the game; Hulkageddons and the recent uptick of suicide ganking is merely a symptom.
Hulkageddon due to last forever.
Just dropping this here. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1991
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:50:00 -
[455] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Avid Bumhumper wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is a place where people with real life issues act out the way they would like to in real life, but can't due to pesky laws and such. Fixed that for you.... Since when is shooting someone in a game that specifically allows it indicative of "real life issues"? Miners are strip mining the natural resources of the universe with no thought to conservation... is that indicative of "real life issues"? Because deliberately and gleefully ruining the game experience of other people for fun and profit, no matter how stupid those people may be, falls under the clinical definition of psychopathy. From a dictionary: "Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for the feelings of others and often the rules of society. Psychopaths have a lack of empathy and remorse, and have very shallow emotions. They are generally regarded as callous, selfish, dishonest, arrogant, aggressive, impulsive, irresponsible, and hedonistic."Your comparison is unimaginably stupid. There are no players controlling the asteroids.
In most any contact sport you can name the rules of that game allow for some level of violence towards the other players. In another setting this would be socially unacceptable and indicative of "real life issues", however in the setting of that game it is perfectly acceptable (in fact it is encouraged).
In many video games committing acts of violence that kill or offer a severe set back to the goals of other characters is allowed and encouraged. This is one such game.
By your definition any professional athlete or anyone that plays a game where conflict is encouraged has "real life issues".
Do you begin to see where the only person with issues is yourself yet.... When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
797
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:04:00 -
[456] - Quote
I can tell a contorted argument when I see one. Nice pretzel logic you got workin' there. I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1991
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:05:00 -
[457] - Quote
I think that part of the issue is that many think that suicide gankers are somehow breaking the rules because of how Concord intervention works.
This is, of course, completely incorrect.
The ability to suicide gank is a very carefully considered and valid part of the game mechanics. It is fully intended that this be allowed to happen, and is in no way outside the realm of normal gameplay or an exploit of any kind.
They are supposed to be able to kill you, but they are forced to pay a price for that victory and must be reasonably efficient at it or else they lose ISK. They are given a handicap if they wish to pursue this style of game play, and they understand that.
High Sec miners, on the other hand, believe they are simply tasked with the "challenge" of mining their ore efficiently.
This is, of course, completely incorrect.
High Sec miners must find ways to efficiently mine their ore while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them. This applies to all Sec levels.
Many High Sec miners appear to not understand the rules of the game that are relevant to their profession. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
235
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:13:00 -
[458] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:I think that part of the issue is that many think that suicide gankers are somehow breaking the rules because of how Concord intervention works.
This is, of course, completely incorrect.
The ability to suicide gank is a very carefully considered and valid part of the game mechanics. It is fully intended that this be allowed to happen, and is in no way outside the realm of normal gameplay or an exploit of any kind.
They are supposed to be able to kill you, but they are forced to pay a price for that victory and must be reasonably efficient at it or else they lose ISK. They are given a handicap if they wish to pursue this style of game play, and they understand that.
High Sec miners, on the other hand, believe they are simply tasked with the "challenge" of mining their ore efficiently.
This is, of course, completely incorrect.
High Sec miners must find ways to efficiently mine their ore while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them. This applies to all Sec levels.
Many High Sec miners appear to not understand the rules of the game that are relevant to their profession.
No I think many miners understand the risk, and don't mind some risk. In many ppls opinion though its unbalanced at the moment in favour of the ganker in hi sec.
Tal
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
982
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:17:00 -
[459] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote: High Sec miners must find ways to efficiently mine their ore while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them. This applies to all Sec levels.
Many High Sec miners appear to not understand the rules of the game that are relevant to their profession.
They can't defeat attempts by other players to stop them, since all it takes is to bring N + 1 catalyst to finish a more tanked Hulk.
They can avoid by docking and never undocking again and maybe ask themselves if they should do something else, like i.e. go play a real PvP game like GW2.
A miner that decides to undock since today perma-hulkageddon is just a poor idiot, similar to someone fitting a plate, shield flux, 3 medium lasers and 2 small turrets. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
baltec1
1237
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:20:00 -
[460] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:I know for certain that your upper ranks also mess with Technetium. Why not messing with minerals by killing Tengus? Less loot goes to the market => prices rise. This is now expecially evident, as since CCP nerfed the M0 drops, missioneers can now easily loot again in a solo setup (expecially on marauders but hey, why would you not kill them too ) and this is causing serious M3-M4 drop in price and by result, mineral prices are also affected.
Mission tengu activity is far too widespread to make any impact on the market on the corp level. Even on the CFC level a full interdiction on tangu mission runners would cost a fortune for little return from the markets other than perhaps slightly elevated tengu prices. An anti Tengu campain is not viable let alone an anti mission crusade. Both of the interdictions worked because the vast bulk of miners fail to fit any tank where as mission runners always have a tank and dont sit still very long. |
|
baltec1
1237
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:24:00 -
[461] - Quote
Yet another reason to fit a tank. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:29:00 -
[462] - Quote
Darth Tickles wrote:Ispia Jaydrath wrote:Quibbling about minutiae won't turn you into a balanced individual. They actually mean exactly the same thing. I think one is just more modern, technical, and "politically-correct". However, in every day use they are still used interchangeably, which means he's just grasping at straws to save face after getting ownzoned by multiple people for such making a ridiculous statement.
The diagnosis of sociopathy is being phased out in favor of other, more tightly defined personality disorders. You are correct in that the general public often misuses the terminology, which is not uncommon and indeed not particularly meaningful as an argument.
I don't think I've made any particularly ridiculous or radical statements. EVE is a cesspool. The people that inhabit that cesspool, by and large, like it that way.
However, like any other thing, EVE will evolve over time. Right now, the direction it's going is troubling to most of us; this I'm sure we can all agree on. However, for the players that don't belong to megacorporations or large and powerful nullsec alliances, the outlook is much more grim than having a ridiculous new inventory. I'd like to reiterate that I have not lost a ship to Hulkageddon or any other action, and I've been happily mining away in peace. I don't think suicide ganking should be outlawed. As I mentioned before, I believe that it's merely a symptom of bigger problems. CCP needs to nail the archer, and not the arrow, in this case. |
Benf Hawlr
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:34:00 -
[463] - Quote
How fortuitous that on the very day i decide to make this alt a ganker/pirate i should come across a whiney f***** posting in faux execu-speak. 'Solution Architect' sounds like a euphemism for thug, the white collar variety.
Thats not the first Hulk your gonna lose mister. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
937
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:36:00 -
[464] - Quote
Benf Hawlr wrote: How fortuitous that on the very day i decide to make this alt a ganker/pirate i should come across a whiney f***** posting in faux execu-speak. 'Solution Architect' sounds like a euphemism for thug, the white collar variety.
Thats not the first Hulk your gonna lose mister. Kill 10 hulks and receive a bounty ~
You, too, can join the "exhumer ganker" profession. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
108
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:43:00 -
[465] - Quote
ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
Like all great things, can be taken too far.
This is not even something "cool" it is the strongest picking on the weakest, it is just lame.
Everything has limits. I'm an American, English is my second language... |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow NightSong Directorate
603
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:49:00 -
[466] - Quote
Bootleg Jack wrote:ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox. Like all great things, can be taken too far. This is not even something "cool" it is the strongest picking on the weakest, it is just lame. Everything has limits.
I can hear the goons playing a little T2 violin for all the miners out there. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:51:00 -
[467] - Quote
Bootleg Jack wrote:ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox. Like all great things, can be taken too far. This is not even something "cool" it is the strongest picking on the weakest, it is just lame. Everything has limits.
This is essentially what I've been trying to point out.
We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. One group of people trying to make certain things impossible to do, however, is just as bad as a rule that states the same thing. There's a huge difference between nullsec alliances attacking each others' supply chains (which is sound strategic doctrine) and trying to basically make mining illegal everywhere.
After you drive off all the miners, what's next? Industrial ships? Go after the traders, too, because no one should be able to move their stuff around? And then comes the missioners, right? Where does it end? The inmates running the asylum doesn't always work out. Some of the inmates, even though they're still inmates, just want to be left alone.
If you fill the sandbox with raw sewage, no one is going to want to play with you unless they enjoy being covered in ****. |
Aiden Gillan
Bearforce Academy
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:53:00 -
[468] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:[quote=ShipToaster]Sandbox. If you fill the sandbox with raw sewage, no one is going to want to play with you unless they enjoy being covered in ****.
|
baltec1
1239
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:00:00 -
[469] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox. Like all great things, can be taken too far. This is not even something "cool" it is the strongest picking on the weakest, it is just lame. Everything has limits. This is essentially what I've been trying to point out. We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. One group of people trying to make certain things impossible to do, however, is just as bad as a rule that states the same thing. There's a huge difference between nullsec alliances attacking each others' supply chains (which is sound strategic doctrine) and trying to basically make mining illegal everywhere. After you drive off all the miners, what's next? Industrial ships? Go after the traders, too, because no one should be able to move their stuff around? And then comes the missioners, right? Where does it end? The inmates running the asylum doesn't always work out. Some of the inmates, even though they're still inmates, just want to be left alone. If you fill the sandbox with raw sewage, no one is going to want to play with you unless they enjoy being covered in ****.
My heart bleeds for the miners who dont want to fit a tank to their ships because it messes with thie max yeild. Perhaps this is the kick in the balls they need to understand the dark and harsh place they are in. |
Shian Yang
226
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:04:00 -
[470] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. One group of people trying to make certain things impossible to do, however, is just as bad as a rule that states the same thing. There's a huge difference between nullsec alliances attacking each others' supply chains (which is sound strategic doctrine) and trying to basically make mining illegal everywhere.
After you drive off all the miners, what's next? Industrial ships? Go after the traders, too, because no one should be able to move their stuff around? And then comes the missioners, right? Where does it end? The inmates running the asylum doesn't always work out. Some of the inmates, even though they're still inmates, just want to be left alone.
If you fill the sandbox with raw sewage, no one is going to want to play with you unless they enjoy being covered in ****.
Greetings capsuleer,
They will not drive off all the miners. Or all the Industrialists. Or all the traders either. They will kill and profit from those that are, like the person that started this discussion, too stupid to tank, align or take any form of precaution in the universe. And that is how it should be.
Kaaeliaa wrote:We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything.
But you want to make it possible to only do some things you agree with? Change that which you love until it is no longer what you love?
Shian Yang
|
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1993
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:13:00 -
[471] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: High Sec miners must find ways to efficiently mine their ore while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them. This applies to all Sec levels.
Many High Sec miners appear to not understand the rules of the game that are relevant to their profession.
They can't defeat attempts by other players to stop them, since all it takes is to bring N + 1 catalyst to finish a more tanked Hulk. They can avoid by docking and never undocking again and maybe ask themselves if they should do something else, like i.e. go play a real PvP game like GW2. A miner that decides to undock since today perma-hulkageddon is just a poor idiot, similar to someone fitting a plate, shield flux, 3 medium lasers and 2 small turrets.
All it takes is N + 1 Catalysts to finish any ship in the game. If your argument boils down to that you have no valid argument.
If you survive an inital attack because you mounted a good tank, you would be an idiot to go back to the same belt or stay there when the gankers come back to finish the job. Again, this applies to ANY ship in the game as well.
Your job is to be alert, keep track of real or potential threats, communicate with like minded people to share vital information, fit for either defense or evasion while still maintaining viable profitability, and use the correct ship and fittings for the threat level of the area you intend to operate with, modify your tactics used to be approprate to the situation (evasion/defense/or pure yield).
Just like every other profession in the game that involves undocking.
Use a Hulk when/where appropriate, use a lower grade exhumer when/where appropriate, use a miner equipped BS or mining cruiser/frigate when/where appropriate... in other words use the same amount of brain power everyone else is required to use to be successful. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:16:00 -
[472] - Quote
Shian Yang wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. One group of people trying to make certain things impossible to do, however, is just as bad as a rule that states the same thing. There's a huge difference between nullsec alliances attacking each others' supply chains (which is sound strategic doctrine) and trying to basically make mining illegal everywhere.
After you drive off all the miners, what's next? Industrial ships? Go after the traders, too, because no one should be able to move their stuff around? And then comes the missioners, right? Where does it end? The inmates running the asylum doesn't always work out. Some of the inmates, even though they're still inmates, just want to be left alone.
If you fill the sandbox with raw sewage, no one is going to want to play with you unless they enjoy being covered in ****. Greetings capsuleer, They will not drive off all the miners. Or all the Industrialists. Or all the traders either. They will kill and profit from those that are, like the person that started this discussion, too stupid to tank, align or take any form of precaution in the universe. And that is how it should be. Kaaeliaa wrote:We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. But you want to make it possible to only do some things you agree with? Change that which you love until it is no longer what you love? Shian Yang
I have a lot of respect for you as a poster, because you're always courteous, but unfortunately, you're missing my point.
I will repeat: I have not lost an industrial ship. Ever. I mined all through Hulkageddon with only a minimum of inconvenience. You're quite right in that it's not difficult to avoid being an easy target.
I don't want to change the rules of EVE. I want to change the attitude, because right now, it's poisonous. No, it won't drive off all the miners. And if the gankers change targets, it won't drive off all of them, either. Changing the atmosphere is a difficult task and it's hard to know where to begin. Remove NPC corps to force players to work together more coherently? It's been suggested in this thread and a few others, along with many other things. Perhaps it would help, perhaps not.
But, if EVE is a sandbox, then miners aren't the only ones who will end up with a kick in the balls, in the end. I both anticipate and fear the day that it's the nullsec alliances that get the boot shoved up their crotch. There will be much suffering and gnashing of teeth. After everyone receives their share, will EVE survive? Maybe. It's been around for a long time. The difference is that I would rather not gamble with its future. Players with the attitude of, "Screw you, I've got mine, and you can't have it," are taking that gamble. And it'll be the end for all of us if they lose. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
485
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:17:00 -
[473] - Quote
It takes n catalysts to kill a titan, buff titans eh |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
83
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:25:00 -
[474] - Quote
A very few folks have heard me rant against the "entitled" high sec player, the ones who should know eve is a pvp oriented MMO, but who choose to live socially isolated pve/high sec only life style. In other words, they choose to live a game life that goe sagainst the nature and character of a game no one is forcing them to play (especially given the fact that there are other more thempark-isk pve friendly games, even space ship games, out there).
Even knowing all this, and rather than doing the simple things needed to do that, they choose to play stupidly (CONCORD gives consequences, not protection) and THEN come to the forums and blame others for their problems/beg for EVE shattering changes.
I dispise Goons (and have in every game i've played with them), but anything that riles up people who know their "playstyle" goes against the nature of the game is good work in my book. Though I gag as I type this, I say GO GOONS. |
Tysinger
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:30:00 -
[475] - Quote
OP....
You are a Fkn Tard and hopefully you posted on your main :) cya soon |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
985
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:30:00 -
[476] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: High Sec miners must find ways to efficiently mine their ore while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them. This applies to all Sec levels.
Many High Sec miners appear to not understand the rules of the game that are relevant to their profession.
They can't defeat attempts by other players to stop them, since all it takes is to bring N + 1 catalyst to finish a more tanked Hulk. They can avoid by docking and never undocking again and maybe ask themselves if they should do something else, like i.e. go play a real PvP game like GW2. A miner that decides to undock since today perma-hulkageddon is just a poor idiot, similar to someone fitting a plate, shield flux, 3 medium lasers and 2 small turrets. All it takes is N + 1 Catalysts to finish any ship in the game. If your argument boils down to that you have no valid argument. If you survive an inital attack because you mounted a good tank, you would be an idiot to go back to the same belt or stay there when the gankers come back to finish the job. Again, this applies to ANY ship in the game as well.
My "argument" was just an easy refutation of your "while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them", not an absolute statement.
Of course it applies to all the ships in game, it does not make your "while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them" any more true.
Ranger 1 wrote: Your job is to be alert, keep track of real or potential threats, communicate with like minded people to share vital information, fit for either defense or evasion while still maintaining viable profitability, and use the correct ship and fittings for the threat level of the area you intend to operate with, modify your tactics used to be approprate to the situation (evasion/defense/or pure yield).
Just like every other profession in the game that involves undocking.
It's not *my* job to be alert, since *my* job is to make money by selling the minerals that GS help make pricier. I don't need to undock, ever.
It's also not *their* job to be forced into playing in hi sec like they were in Amamake yet get the lowest payout in game.
This is why it's completely stupid to mine, they get all the risk and no ISK. From today it's even stupider. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1993
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:34:00 -
[477] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Shian Yang wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. One group of people trying to make certain things impossible to do, however, is just as bad as a rule that states the same thing. There's a huge difference between nullsec alliances attacking each others' supply chains (which is sound strategic doctrine) and trying to basically make mining illegal everywhere.
After you drive off all the miners, what's next? Industrial ships? Go after the traders, too, because no one should be able to move their stuff around? And then comes the missioners, right? Where does it end? The inmates running the asylum doesn't always work out. Some of the inmates, even though they're still inmates, just want to be left alone.
If you fill the sandbox with raw sewage, no one is going to want to play with you unless they enjoy being covered in ****. Greetings capsuleer, They will not drive off all the miners. Or all the Industrialists. Or all the traders either. They will kill and profit from those that are, like the person that started this discussion, too stupid to tank, align or take any form of precaution in the universe. And that is how it should be. Kaaeliaa wrote:We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. But you want to make it possible to only do some things you agree with? Change that which you love until it is no longer what you love? Shian Yang I have a lot of respect for you as a poster, because you're always courteous, but unfortunately, you're missing my point. I will repeat: I have not lost an industrial ship. Ever. I mined all through Hulkageddon with only a minimum of inconvenience. You're quite right in that it's not difficult to avoid being an easy target. I don't want to change the rules of EVE. I want to change the attitude, because right now, it's poisonous. No, it won't drive off all the miners. And if the gankers change targets, it won't drive off all of them, either. Changing the atmosphere is a difficult task and it's hard to know where to begin. Remove NPC corps to force players to work together more coherently? It's been suggested in this thread and a few others, along with many other things. Perhaps it would help, perhaps not. But, if EVE is a sandbox, then miners aren't the only ones who will end up with a kick in the balls, in the end. I both anticipate and fear the day that it's the nullsec alliances that get the boot shoved up their crotch. There will be much suffering and gnashing of teeth. After everyone receives their share, will EVE survive? Maybe. It's been around for a long time. The difference is that I would rather not gamble with its future. Players with the attitude of, "Screw you, I've got mine, and you can't have it," are taking that gamble. And it'll be the end for all of us if they lose.
That "poisonous" atmosphere is the very thing that made EVE a success. If you want security it is up to the player to find a way to achieve it and/or enforce it. Until miners realize that to be successful they must work together in an organized fashion to be successful.
I know what you are saying, and yes you are far more reasonable than most of the High Sec dwellers posting in this thread, but you have to understand that players that mine for a profession have the exact same toolset and capabilities at their disposal as the people that prefer suicide ganking as their profession.
The main difference between the average suicide ganker and the average miner is the level of thought and organization invested in playing this game.
If you think the "bad guys" are getting away with too much, you have the tools available to do something about it.
When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Willie Horton
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:35:00 -
[478] - Quote
You made wall of text with all kind of links where CCP failed ,and in same time you failed on basic thing like reading.
All this time you refused to interact with game, to inform your self about things that can harm your style of play.That is I must say ignorant ,I am sorry for harsh response but that is fact.
Your fit is joke ,and if you bothered to invest tiny bit of your time and read any tutorial for miners you would know that.
How is possible that you didn't know about hulkagedon ?I find that hard to believe .Why?Since I started to play this game (less than 5 months ) rookie and help chat are spammed with that even on almost daily basses.
What is also strange ,while that even is up (sorry I simply cant believe you didn't know ) you mine in 0.6 sec where is concord reacting much slower that in higher parts of high sec.That is like you put a sign over your hulk " pls kill me ".
With all this and your lack of any interaction with game ,you are the last one that should brag how game is broken.I don't like that event my self ,but for I must admit if I need to choose to play with "bad guys " and people like you that are tracking asteroids and have zero wish to read anything about game ,I choose "bad guys".
You failed to understand few things :
1. this is sandbox ( PLAYER driven game ) 2. this is mmo 3. informing your self about how game works (concord reaction time ) 4. informing your self about path you took and dangers about your play style 5. READING
If you check this five things ( and I am saying again I am noob in this game but I informed my self ),for me you and players like you are bigger danger for this game than gankers that participated in this event.And please try at least to think for five minutes why I say that. |
baltec1
1242
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:38:00 -
[479] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not *my* job to be alert, since *my* job is to make money by selling the minerals that GS help make pricier. I don't need to undock, ever.
It's also not *their* job to be forced into playing in hi sec like they were in Amamake yet get the lowest payout in game.
This is why it's completely stupid to mine, they get all the risk and no ISK. From today it's even stupider.
Its always your job to look after yourself. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
940
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:40:00 -
[480] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Oddball Six wrote:Quote:I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on. Well known if you keep track of such things, perhaps. I am a casual gamer with disposable income. Believe it or not, the largest segment of MMO revenue is from just such gamers. I don't read EVE news. I don't follow the EVE forum. The first I head of hulkageddon was AFTER I was killed today. And then my reaction went from "oh well" to "why the heck doesn't CCP realize the impact of their inaction". Hence the post. I work 72 hours a week so tell me more about being a casual gamer. This was advertised in the news, all over the forums, in just about every local, in most alliances and in all the NPC corps and on EVE radio. You really must ask yourself why you are not interacting with the community on even the most basic level. This was entirely your fault.
you forgot twitter, facebook, etc... |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
985
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:43:00 -
[481] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:
That "poisonous" atmosphere is the very thing that made EVE a success. If you want security it is up to the player to find a way to achieve it and/or enforce it. Until miners realize that to be successful they must work together in an organized fashion to be successful.
This will never, never happen. The kind of player attracted by mining is exactly the guy who does not want or cannot play organized, cannot be hard core, will not train many skills to 5 just to use one of the loltank Hulks fits posted on GD.
If they wanted or could work together and organized, then they would not mine at all.
Also, once they are organized, what are they going to do? Cloakie warps in 4 catalysts on this organized guy, and then? BOOM popped like the most random guy.
The only organization that can come close to that is to have mercs / allies sit 8 hours a day (so much for the lowest pay profession getting to pay mercs) and be totally ready to shoot to blinky catalysts the second they appear. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
985
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:43:00 -
[482] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not *my* job to be alert, since *my* job is to make money by selling the minerals that GS help make pricier. I don't need to undock, ever.
It's also not *their* job to be forced into playing in hi sec like they were in Amamake yet get the lowest payout in game.
This is why it's completely stupid to mine, they get all the risk and no ISK. From today it's even stupider.
Its always your job to look after yourself.
Maybe once they implement Gank In Station Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
baltec1
1242
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:46:00 -
[483] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Maybe once they implement Gank In Station
Even in stations you are not safe from pvp. God I love this game. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1993
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:47:00 -
[484] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: High Sec miners must find ways to efficiently mine their ore while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them. This applies to all Sec levels.
Many High Sec miners appear to not understand the rules of the game that are relevant to their profession.
They can't defeat attempts by other players to stop them, since all it takes is to bring N + 1 catalyst to finish a more tanked Hulk. They can avoid by docking and never undocking again and maybe ask themselves if they should do something else, like i.e. go play a real PvP game like GW2. A miner that decides to undock since today perma-hulkageddon is just a poor idiot, similar to someone fitting a plate, shield flux, 3 medium lasers and 2 small turrets. All it takes is N + 1 Catalysts to finish any ship in the game. If your argument boils down to that you have no valid argument. If you survive an inital attack because you mounted a good tank, you would be an idiot to go back to the same belt or stay there when the gankers come back to finish the job. Again, this applies to ANY ship in the game as well. My "argument" was just an easy refutation of your "while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them", not an absolute statement. Of course it applies to all the ships in game, it does not make your "while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them" any more true. Ranger 1 wrote: Your job is to be alert, keep track of real or potential threats, communicate with like minded people to share vital information, fit for either defense or evasion while still maintaining viable profitability, and use the correct ship and fittings for the threat level of the area you intend to operate with, modify your tactics used to be approprate to the situation (evasion/defense/or pure yield).
Just like every other profession in the game that involves undocking.
It's not *my* job to be alert, since *my* job is to make money by selling the minerals that GS help make pricier. I don't need to undock, ever. It's also not *their* job to be forced into playing in hi sec like they were in Amamake yet get the lowest payout in game. This is why it's completely stupid to mine, they get all the risk and no ISK. From today it's even stupider.
If you think that a suicide gank attempt cannot be easily avoided, you are mistaken.
If you think that a suicide gank attempt cannot be easily defeated, you are mistaken.
Yes, any suicide gank attempt can be successful... just as any attempt to evade or defeat it can be successful... most "victims" did neither.
"You" was made in reference to all miners, not you personally. I don't know what you personal profession in EVE is and could care less... that is completely beside the point. You are being purposefully obtuse.
Miners are only being forced to play the game like they are citizens in the EVE universe, which can be a dangerous place in any Sec level. They chose their profession, location, ships, fit, tactics and level of awareness. If they are not skillful enough to succeed at that profession, they need to pick one that is less challenging. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:54:00 -
[485] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:
That "poisonous" atmosphere is the very thing that made EVE a success. If you want security it is up to the player to find a way to achieve it and/or enforce it. Until miners realize that to be successful they must work together in an organized fashion to be successful.
I know what you are saying, and yes you are far more reasonable than most of the High Sec dwellers posting in this thread, but you have to understand that players that mine for a profession have the exact same toolset and capabilities at their disposal as the people that prefer suicide ganking as their profession.
The main difference between the average suicide ganker and the average miner is the level of thought and organization invested in playing this game.
If you think the "bad guys" are getting away with too much, you have the tools available to do something about it.
I actually do agree with you that highsec players, for the most park, lack the coordination and cohesion to defend themselves properly; unfortunately, the game mechanics in highsec don't promote that kind of organization, and indeed many new players don't even know it exists.
I don't just want the nullsec players' attitudes to change, I would like the attitudes of highsec players to change as well. Hulkageddon is a means to that end as well. I just don't agree with the method. That amount of negative reinforcement isn't the best option in the long term. What we should all be trying to accomplish is to encourage all players, not just those in nullsec, to band together for common goals.
As I think about it while participating in this thread, I get the increasing feeling that NPC corps are a huge part of the problem. But, there's also the fact that player corporations in highsec have limited tools to defend themselves and limited options for organization. Theoretically, let's say that NPC corps went away and new players and highsec dwellers had to find player-owned groups to join, maybe even going as far as to make most NPC stations inaccessible. And, the player corporations would be capable of recognizing most of the advantages of being organized - that is to say, unrestricted anchoring, jump bridges (perhaps inside their forcefields and only from one starbase to another), and such. They would, of course, not have sovereignty benefits and would still lack access to capital ships. Now, the move from highsec to lowsec to nullsec (although lowsec also needs help) becomes fluid. The mechanics of being a player don't change, and of course the risks and rewards scale properly.
Right now, carebears don't live in highsec. Think about reversing the causality. Highsec BREEDS carebears, especially the kind that stay in NPC corps or make their own for tax evasion purposes, and highsec doesn't provide any incentive for players to work together. The incentive to work together to accomplish things should be everywhere, in every system, and instilled in the heart of every player, whether they want to work together to strip a roid belt, bash a POS, or crash a mining op.
My specific idea is completely irrelevant, since changing mechanics is up to CCP. But that's what I mean by changing attitudes. EVE won't be any less brutal or any less dangerous, but there will be more parity in the ability of players to defend themselves reach their goals, and ultimately have fun. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1993
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:56:00 -
[486] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:
That "poisonous" atmosphere is the very thing that made EVE a success. If you want security it is up to the player to find a way to achieve it and/or enforce it. Until miners realize that to be successful they must work together in an organized fashion to be successful.
This will never, never happen. The kind of player attracted by mining is exactly the guy who does not want or cannot play organized, cannot be hard core, will not train many skills to 5 just to use one of the loltank Hulks fits posted on GD. If they wanted or could work together and organized, then they would not mine at all. Also, once they are organized, what are they going to do? Cloakie warps in 4 catalysts on this organized guy, and then? BOOM popped like the most random guy. The only organization that can come close to that is to have mercs / allies sit 8 hours a day (so much for the lowest pay profession getting to pay mercs) and be totally ready to shoot to blinky catalysts the second they appear.
Being organized and sharing intel does not necessarily involve shooting. If you want to evade a hostile you need to first identify who the hostiles are and be aware of them entering your area.
That would be the point where organization comes in....
Sharing intel... sharing standings of known hostiles, reporting in a common chat where known hostiles are operating, having a network of eyes that cover a number of systems in all directions.
This is all EVE 101, and is the least challenging level of cooperation possible. Thousands of people do this in EVE every day, in all sec levels. There is absolutely no reason why miners can't... and if they can do this and simply refuse to do so they need to find a less challenging profession.
When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1993
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:05:00 -
[487] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:
That "poisonous" atmosphere is the very thing that made EVE a success. If you want security it is up to the player to find a way to achieve it and/or enforce it. Until miners realize that to be successful they must work together in an organized fashion to be successful.
I know what you are saying, and yes you are far more reasonable than most of the High Sec dwellers posting in this thread, but you have to understand that players that mine for a profession have the exact same toolset and capabilities at their disposal as the people that prefer suicide ganking as their profession.
The main difference between the average suicide ganker and the average miner is the level of thought and organization invested in playing this game.
If you think the "bad guys" are getting away with too much, you have the tools available to do something about it.
I actually do agree with you that highsec players, for the most part, lack the coordination and cohesion to defend themselves properly; unfortunately, the game mechanics in highsec don't promote that kind of organization, and indeed many new players don't even know it exists. I don't just want the nullsec players' attitudes to change, I would like the attitudes of highsec players to change as well. Hulkageddon is a means to that end as well. I just don't agree with the method. That amount of negative reinforcement isn't the best option in the long term. What we should all be trying to accomplish is to encourage all players, not just those in nullsec, to band together for common goals. As I think about it while participating in this thread, I get the increasing feeling that NPC corps are a huge part of the problem. But, there's also the fact that player corporations in highsec have limited tools to defend themselves and limited options for organization. Theoretically, let's say that NPC corps went away and new players and highsec dwellers had to find player-owned groups to join, maybe even going as far as to make most NPC stations inaccessible. And, the player corporations would be capable of recognizing most of the advantages of being organized - that is to say, unrestricted anchoring, jump bridges (perhaps inside their forcefields and only from one starbase to another), and such. They would, of course, not have sovereignty benefits and would still lack access to capital ships. Now, the move from highsec to lowsec to nullsec (although lowsec also needs help) becomes fluid. The mechanics of being a player don't change, and of course the risks and rewards scale properly. Right now, carebears don't live in highsec. Think about reversing the causality. Highsec BREEDS carebears, especially the kind that stay in NPC corps or make their own for tax evasion purposes, and highsec doesn't provide any incentive for players to work together. The incentive to work together to accomplish things should be everywhere, in every system, and instilled in the heart of every player, whether they want to work together to strip a roid belt, bash a POS, or crash a mining op. My specific idea is completely irrelevant, since changing mechanics is up to CCP. But that's what I mean by changing attitudes. EVE won't be any less brutal or any less dangerous, but there will be more parity in the ability of players to defend themselves reach their goals, and ultimately have fun. The atmosphere of the game can be dangerous and tension-filled without being venomous.
On the matter of NPC corps, I personally do not want them taken out. Instead I would rather be able to join any NPC corp I chose, and that those corps would have specific advantages and disadvantages to membership.
Joining Ishukone for example would give you certain perks on building things they make, however it would also perhaps put you in the middle of a dispute with their competitors (either in the Caldari faction or outside it) which could put you at a disadvantage (or even in harms way) in other ways.
Joining an NPC corp should always be more restrictive, and offer less overall advantages than being a member of a capsuleer created corp. However they are a huge piece of the EVE universe and we should be able to interact with them on a more meaningful level.
Faction Warfare does this to a degree in regards to the NPC factions in game, I would like to see mechanics brought in to introduce a (roughly) similar state to NPC corps... perhaps based primarily on industrial competition but also having combat elements possible as well.
We have this to a degree with missions, but this would actively involve competition with real players that are members of other NPC organizations. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
940
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:16:00 -
[488] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:
That "poisonous" atmosphere is the very thing that made EVE a success. If you want security it is up to the player to find a way to achieve it and/or enforce it. Until miners realize that to be successful they must work together in an organized fashion to be successful.
This will never, never happen. The kind of player attracted by mining is exactly the guy who does not want or cannot play organized, cannot be hard core, will not train many skills to 5 just to use one of the loltank Hulks fits posted on GD. If they wanted or could work together and organized, then they would not mine at all. Also, once they are organized, what are they going to do? Cloakie warps in 4 catalysts on this organized guy, and then? BOOM popped like the most random guy. The only organization that can come close to that is to have mercs / allies sit 8 hours a day (so much for the lowest pay profession getting to pay mercs) and be totally ready to shoot to blinky catalysts the second they appear.
Hi VV
semi-organised miner here ... but hell if you'll find me actually mining in hisec... |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
210
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:22:00 -
[489] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:
On the matter of NPC corps, I personally do not want them taken out. Instead I would rather be able to join any NPC corp I chose, and that those corps would have specific advantages and disadvantages to membership.
Joining Ishukone for example would give you certain perks on building things they make, however it would also perhaps put you in the middle of a dispute with their competitors (either in the Caldari faction or outside it) which could put you at a disadvantage (or even in harms way) in other ways.
Joining an NPC corp should always be more restrictive, and offer less overall advantages than being a member of a capsuleer created corp. However they are a huge piece of the EVE universe and we should be able to interact with them on a more meaningful level.
Faction Warfare does this to a degree in regards to the NPC factions in game, I would like to see mechanics brought in to introduce a (roughly) similar state to NPC corps... perhaps based primarily on industrial competition but also having combat elements possible as well.
That's not a bad idea, either. Like I said, my little vision of how it should be was just an example.
Goons and gankers: carebears don't live in highsec, highsec hatches them. You can't destroy the NPC stations, you can't wardec the NPC corps to decimate their ranks. Don't shoot them after they hatch. Go for the hatchery.
Let's change attitudes and outlooks. In fact, forget calling it highsec. It's not, especially not anymore. It's faction space. We need to lobby for changes to faction space to make it advantageous for new players and "carebears" to join real corporations, get out in space, and have a chance to play the "real" game, as the 0.0 players tend to call it. Before you say, "Just come out to 0.0," it's really not an option for some people. Being at the back and call of your landlord alliance isn't fun for a lot of us. Neither is trying to find an empty system, grab sovereignty, and then have to defend it against neighbors that can bleed capital ships like a cut to the jugular vein. Many of you have to admit that it's just not possible for a new corporation to make it in 0.0 without either selling their soul or being chased out in a matter of hours. A lot of people stay in highsec because they don't want to deal with that, not because they fear any kind of risk whatsoever.
Maybe we should try it your way, 0.0'ers. Everything should be player-driven, even faction space. But for that to happen, all the players have to have the tools available to make it so, and right now, any space that isn't 0.0 just doesn't have them. We may all hate each other, but we like our game, right? |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
987
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:29:00 -
[490] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote: Being organized and sharing intel does not necessarily involve shooting. If you want to evade a hostile you need to first identify who the hostiles are and be aware of them entering your area.
That would be the point where organization comes in....
Sharing intel... sharing standings of known hostiles, reporting in a common chat where known hostiles are operating, having a network of eyes that cover a number of systems in all directions.
This is all EVE 101, and is the least challenging level of cooperation possible. Thousands of people do this in EVE every day, in all sec levels. There is absolutely no reason why miners can't... and if they can do this and simply refuse to do so they need to find a less challenging profession.
It's going to be a frigid day in hell when random miners will create intel and similar. They will just quit, EvE is not worth all the hassle to people who did not want to actively PvP to begin with. They are basically not relevant to your gameplay but bring in the bucks CCP needs to implement those fantastic new content like Incarna and Unified UI after all.
Also, I can imagine an effective intel channel for corps and alliances or cartels in low and null, but in hi sec there are thousands of perma-biomassed new alts who in few days replace the ones gone nor you can dock because 1 neutral just entered the system.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1048
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:41:00 -
[491] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:My problem with the current situation is that making every area of the game a truly unpleasant place to be WILL have cascading consequences if it continues. I agree with the basic premise that something needs to be done, and that that something does not involve eliminating the possibility of suicide ganking. I think there's a much deeper problem plaguing the game; Hulkageddons and the recent uptick of suicide ganking is merely a symptom. If suicide ganking in highsec was a true problem, highsec miners would forego their maximum-yield/minimum safety fits and instead fit a decently tanked Hulk and take out the cost of having to buy new Hulks from net profit calculations. However, since they do not so, it can be safely concluded that suicide ganking is not a real problem (or loss of net profit) to the significant majority of highsec miners on a regular basis.
If suicide ganking is a problem, then the problem lies in EVE highsec players not being able to contest resources/assets using any other meaningful mechanic. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1993
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:44:00 -
[492] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: Being organized and sharing intel does not necessarily involve shooting. If you want to evade a hostile you need to first identify who the hostiles are and be aware of them entering your area.
That would be the point where organization comes in....
Sharing intel... sharing standings of known hostiles, reporting in a common chat where known hostiles are operating, having a network of eyes that cover a number of systems in all directions.
This is all EVE 101, and is the least challenging level of cooperation possible. Thousands of people do this in EVE every day, in all sec levels. There is absolutely no reason why miners can't... and if they can do this and simply refuse to do so they need to find a less challenging profession.
It's going to be a frigid day in hell when random miners will create intel and similar. They will just quit, EvE is not worth all the hassle to people who did not want to actively PvP to begin with. They are basically not relevant to your gameplay but bring in the bucks CCP needs to implement those fantastic new content like Incarna and Unified UI after all. Also, I can imagine an effective intel channel for corps and alliances or cartels in low and null, but in hi sec there are thousands of perma-biomassed new alts who in few days replace the ones gone nor you can dock because 1 neutral just entered the system. Velicitia wrote: Hi VV
semi-organised miner here ... but hell if you'll find me actually mining in hisec...
That would actually mean I'd care to find you. Those who kill miners do it for many reasons but not because they have you as their special target.
Actually there are industry based corps and consortiums that do precisely this every day. You don't hear much about them as they have little, if any, reason to complain on the forums. They can take care of themselves.
I have taken contracts in the past against such organizations, and the conflict was challenging and fun for all parties involved. They pegged us very early on as hostiles and reacted intelligently.
Alt cycling is a bannable offense, but that aside if an alt crafted to suicide gank (or several if the target is in the habit of actually putting some defense on this ship) and gets a couple of kills before he becomes tagged as a hostile (then becoming next to useless) by all the local miners he either moves on to a new area or retired, and it very rapidly becomes not worth the hassle of creating more.
If you chose your mining system wisely, when an unknown neutral comes into systems you start a close range scan (or get eyes on him). If he attacks then you set standings and share them. It's not that hard. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
EVE Roy Mustang
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:47:00 -
[493] - Quote
I still like my idea. low sec status you get podded.
Real consequences for your actions. Unless of course that consequences thing is just another bs smoke screen like "we dont care about insurance" (given the QQ that came after the insurance nerf and how ppl are convinced that CCP are caving to the carebears over it shows THAT lie) |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1993
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:56:00 -
[494] - Quote
Quote:They will just quit, EvE is not worth all the hassle to people who did not want to actively PvP to begin with.
I missed this part before.
People that take the basic precautions I mentioned are not actively engaging in the "hassle" of PVP.
They have chosen to engage in the mining profession, and knowing how to AVOID PVP is an intergal part of that profession. If they cannot deal with that fact (just as your average hauler pilot must) they need to pick a profession that does not involve undocking. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
211
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:57:00 -
[495] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Kaaeliaa wrote:My problem with the current situation is that making every area of the game a truly unpleasant place to be WILL have cascading consequences if it continues. I agree with the basic premise that something needs to be done, and that that something does not involve eliminating the possibility of suicide ganking. I think there's a much deeper problem plaguing the game; Hulkageddons and the recent uptick of suicide ganking is merely a symptom. If suicide ganking in highsec was a true problem, highsec miners would forego their maximum-yield/minimum safety fits and instead fit a decently tanked Hulk and take out the cost of having to buy new Hulks from net profit calculations. However, since they do not so, it can be safely concluded that suicide ganking is not a real problem (or loss of net profit) to the significant majority of highsec miners on a regular basis. If suicide ganking is a problem, then the problem lies in EVE highsec players not being able to contest resources/assets using any other meaningful mechanic.
You're quite right, and in my past few posts I've tried to outline what I believe to be the underlying problem behind the epidemic of carebears and the rising tide of scorn and hatred for them, and that problem is that it's too easy to avoid the multiplayer part of the game. An 11% tax rate is a pittance compared to immunity from wardecs and being free of the hassle of having to work with other players.
Think about it: no NPC corps. No anchoring restrictions. Every ice field in faction space would have bitter wars between miner corporations, staging from their POSes, to secure resources for themselves (assuming, of course, that the ice field wasn't big enough to support multiple corporations). Lower-security systems on the fringes of faction space, likewise, with slightly more valuable ores and maybe better PI products, would be in similar contention. Without NPC stations to store, refine, research, whatever, player-owned corps would have to operate out of POSes, and they couldn't just dock up and stay invincible. If there was a cap on wartargets in faction space, it could discourage giant megacorps from planting POSes everywhere, wardecing everything in sight, and making themselves untouchable. CONCORD and faction police would still intervene if someone attacks a non-war target, some NPC stations might be accessible for trading, but that's about it. 0.0 space keeps the advantage of having much more valuable resources, access to capital ships, and sovereignty, EVE becomes a universe fighting because of resources instead of boredom/maliciousness, everybody wins.
I'm dreaming, but it would be glorious. |
baltec1
1244
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:57:00 -
[496] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:I still like my idea. low sec status you get podded.
Real consequences for your actions. Unless of course that consequences thing is just another bs smoke screen like "we dont care about insurance" (given the QQ that came after the insurance nerf and how ppl are convinced that CCP are caving to the carebears over it shows THAT lie)
There are consequences for not fitting a tank too. |
Roparzh Greek
Eternal Profiteers Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 21:31:00 -
[497] - Quote
uhmm pretty interesting points. Lets see how this will end...
best regards,
RG |
Mallak Azaria
xX-Crusader-Xx Luna Sanguinem
106
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 21:46:00 -
[498] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement.
And I'm not gay. |
Hauling Hal
The Black Ops
62
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 21:47:00 -
[499] - Quote
I was playing a game of chess when my opponent moved the horse figure in a funny way that I didn't know it could do. He took my queen, so I lost the game. I wrote to the chess rules association clearly stating how I'd been griefed, but they refused to change the rules.
See any similarities here? |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
988
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:22:00 -
[500] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote: Alt cycling is a bannable offense
CCP won't ban any alt cycling at all, it has really really to become supreme, overabused and repeating very similar name before someone bothers to report the guy.
Ranger 1 wrote: If you chose your mining system wisely, when an unknown neutral comes into systems you start a close range scan for likely gank craft getting close to your belt (or get eyes on him). If he attacks then you set standings and share them. It's not that hard.
Your remedy does not work for choosing a nitrogen isogen ice mining system wisely. With the 20-30 unknown neutrals going in and out all the time of course. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
167
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:26:00 -
[501] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:A very few folks have heard me rant against the "entitled" high sec player, the ones who should know eve is a pvp oriented MMO, but who choose to live socially isolated pve/high sec only life style. In other words, they choose to live a game life that goe sagainst the nature and character of a game no one is forcing them to play (especially given the fact that there are other more thempark-isk pve friendly games, even space ship games, out there).
Even knowing all this, and rather than doing the simple things needed to do that, they choose to play stupidly (CONCORD gives consequences, not protection) and THEN come to the forums and blame others for their problems/beg for EVE shattering changes.
I dispise Goons (and have in every game i've played with them), but anything that riles up people who know their "playstyle" goes against the nature of the game is good work in my book. Though I gag as I type this, I say GO GOONS.
If this is really a sandbox, then where did the game get a "play style" from?
|
El Deuce
CyberShield Inc ROMANIAN-LEGION
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:28:00 -
[502] - Quote
Talon SilverHawk wrote:Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Well this has turned into a complete goon -alt-a- thon.
No surprise there huh CCP ??
CCP hasn't figured out a good PvP mechanism so they are just going with the Gooons "Content". Wonderful!
And an ex Goon is telling how cool the completely fail UI is gonna work for us.
CCP you got garbage in u house. Clean it up!
Goons will.fight the change because it puts a spanner in Mittani's economic plans. I mean why would anyone but a greifer really object to making hi sec a tad safer for certain activities, if its a case that its too easy to make isk mining in hi sec, what's hard about earning revenue shooting ships that can't fight back. Tal
CCP could issue a helmet and a bubble wrap suit and it wouldn't fix a thing. Any action taken by concord has to be reactive or the game is broken and would die a quick death. Therefore, people will always get ganked in high sec, or eve will die. If that has to be explained, you've got a delusional idea of what eve online is.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
988
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:31:00 -
[503] - Quote
Ban Bindy wrote: If this is really a sandbox, then where did the game get a "play style" from?
You are not playing a sandbox, but THEIR sandbox. You have to play their way and go live in 0.0 or GTFO. Your $15 a month will be appreciated as you subject yourself to become another expendable pawn in their hands.
To keep you enticed they will send you a link of the CCP "Butterfly effect" video, where you are sold the idea you really matter.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
942
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:37:00 -
[504] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:You are not playing a sandbox, but THEIR sandbox. You have to play their way and go live in 0.0 or GTFO. Your $15 a month will be appreciated as you subject yourself to become another expendable pawn in their hands.
To keep you enticed they will send you a link to the CCP "Butterfly effect" video, where you are sold the idea you really matter. Not sure if I've seen that. Can you link it ? Bit busy not mattering in a blob out here. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
988
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 00:00:00 -
[505] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:You are not playing a sandbox, but THEIR sandbox. You have to play their way and go live in 0.0 or GTFO. Your $15 a month will be appreciated as you subject yourself to become another expendable pawn in their hands.
To keep you enticed they will send you a link to the CCP "Butterfly effect" video, where you are sold the idea you really matter. Not sure if I've seen that. Can you link it ? Bit busy not mattering in a blob out here.
Link. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Cailais
Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance
261
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 00:08:00 -
[506] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
You are not playing a sandbox, but THEIR sandbox.
A sandbox universe simply means that it can exist in a near infinite variety of states including the most extreme states.
Even if one entity commanded all of EVE the sandbox would remain valid as long as it was theoretically possible for that state to change.
C.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1651
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 01:32:00 -
[507] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Jeniam Retriat wrote:As to the rest of your points, there is a connecting theme with why miners aren't happy; it's still possible to suicide gank our ships and turn a profit, even if we're fitting them defensively. The insurance nerf didn't mean that players had to choose between not ganking and ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss, it meant they had to choose between easily ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss or ganking in a Catalyst with a couple of friends/alts and still breaking even or making a profit. Same with the CONCORD buff and same with the complaints/requests for tougher mining ships we have now. RubyPorto wrote:Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed. That's what the OP is doing, sure. The rest of us are asking why our profession is the only one that got handed the Solid Gold Spatula, and why we can't just get a high quality Stainless Steel Spatula that performs the same job just as well but isn't a magnet for muggers. To put it more clearly, why is it that Mining is the only profession whose best ship is an automatic target for for-profit ganking even outside of Hulkageddon? If an L4 mission runner moves into one of their high end ships like a Navy Raven, that ship isn't automatically a target for gankers just for being used; you have to fit it out in high end deadspace/faction/officer mods before it's a target (would that be a gold-plated spatula?). A mission runner doesn't get in a Rattlesnake and get told that that ship is too valuable to use in hisec, or that they have to drastically alter their way of playing to use it without getting killed, or that they should just use a Dominix because it's a lot cheaper and only a bit worse, and yet that's exactly what happens to miners when they move from Covetors to Hulks. Finally I found someone who understands my points!
Rokh = Stainless Steel Spatula Hulk = Solid Gold Spatula
Miners, through years of nobody bothering them, have adjusted their baseline from what it was before Barges were released. They've started to view the Solid Gold Spatula as the only thing that can flip burgers.
Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1651
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 01:41:00 -
[508] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Hi Bat Country here. Killing droves of tengu doesn't mess with the ice market. Thats why we have not bothered to kill them.
I know for certain that your upper ranks also mess with Technetium. Why not messing with minerals by killing Tengus? Less loot goes to the market => prices rise. This is now expecially evident, as since CCP nerfed the M0 drops, missioneers can now easily loot again in a solo setup (expecially on marauders but hey, why would you not kill them too ) and this is causing serious M3-M4 drop in price and by result, mineral prices are also affected.
How do you know GSF messes with the Tech market? Is it because they've been very public about doing exactly that? If it's public knowledge because the cartel announced it in a press release, you look a little silly when you make it sound like super sekrit spy knowledge.
Minerals are hard to hold in a Cartel. Tech is easy to hold in a Cartel. Once someone holds a Tech Cartel, it makes perfect sense to fund a campaign to increase Tech demand. There is one industry whose Tech demand is massive when that industry is disrupted. That's mining.
Besides that, Tengu's are blitz boats. If they're hanging out to loot/salvage the field, they're doing it wrong. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1651
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 01:44:00 -
[509] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: High Sec miners must find ways to efficiently mine their ore while avoiding or defeating the attempts by other players to stop them. This applies to all Sec levels.
Many High Sec miners appear to not understand the rules of the game that are relevant to their profession.
They can't defeat attempts by other players to stop them, since all it takes is to bring N + 1 catalyst to finish a more tanked Hulk. They can avoid by docking and never undocking again and maybe ask themselves if they should do something else, like i.e. go play a real PvP game like GW2. A miner that decides to undock since today perma-hulkageddon is just a poor idiot, similar to someone fitting a plate, shield flux, 3 medium lasers and 2 small turrets.
2 Hulks, 3x Webs and 2 MLUIIs each. Gank proof hulks if you're looking at your screen at all.
Mine aligned. If that's hard, figure out a way to make it easier. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
vivcalc
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:05:00 -
[510] - Quote
i like what the op has to say. he's right. there shouldn't be ganking in hi sec. i had five accounts and i closed them all because of the ganking. ccp doesnt care about the hi sec losses because it boils down to they make more money off pvp accounts than pve accounts. miners and traders are the minority and therefore will continue to be victimized because it is in ccp's economic self interest. if they gave a **** about this issue they would ban ganking and end the nonsense. but money forms their decisions about what kind of game play is going to happen. at least they could be honest about it so those of us who dont like being the victim can have the honesty to decide to quit altogether and let ccp go to hell. |
|
Devore Sekk
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:07:00 -
[511] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Rokh = Stainless Steel Spatula Hulk = Solid Gold Spatula
Miners, through years of nobody bothering them, have adjusted their baseline from what it was before Barges were released. They've started to view the Solid Gold Spatula as the only thing that can flip burgers.
See, it's a matter of expectations.
There are Level 4 mission runners who use a Drake, which you might consider the Cardboard Spatula. There is a whole spectrum of Level 4 capable ships; each higher one comes with the expectation you are able to fit and pilot it appropriately so as not to lose your investment. Each level of mission ship means you can run missions more efficiently.
If you don't want to risk losing a 3B isk mission runner or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper, and accept the lesser lever of income and efficiency.
However, this is not the case with mining. Every miner seems to be of the opinion that you can only mine in a Hulk. When in fact there is also and ENTIRE spectrum of mining ships. Each step in the ladder means you are able to mine more efficiently, but each step on the ladder also means you are expected to fit and pilot your ship appropriately so as to avoid losing it.
If you don't want to risk losing a 400M isk mining ship or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper and accept lesser mining efficie.... err, sorry, apparently you come crying to the forums.
Carebear logic. |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:08:00 -
[512] - Quote
vivcalc wrote:i like what the op has to say. he's right. there shouldn't be ganking in hi sec. i had five accounts and i closed them all because of the ganking. ccp doesnt care about the hi sec losses because it boils down to they make more money off pvp accounts than pve accounts. miners and traders are the minority and therefore will continue to be victimized because it is in ccp's economic self interest. if they gave a **** about this issue they would ban ganking and end the nonsense. but money forms their decisions about what kind of game play is going to happen. at least they could be honest about it so those of us who dont like being the victim can have the honesty to decide to quit altogether and let ccp go to hell.
I'm sorry we killed your hulk, why don't you buy another one with Technetium provided by OTEC? |
Hench Tenet
The Suicide Kings Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:18:00 -
[513] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Homo Jesus wrote:I too want a change to the rules so it's easier for me to win at something. Whenever I get the time I'll find the bits and pieces of the EULA that support my views and make another thread to help our douche bag cause. He's simply used to the real-life status quo, where people like himself have always gotten ahead via lobbying and frivolous lawsuits. There is nothing competitive about the state of business today, save for the free-for-all that is the entry-level job market. The whole system is fixed and rotten, but aside from that, it encourages complacency. He is unable to enter an environment that EVE simulates, a purer, more base environment, and compete. He became lost, and unable to respond to changing trends. So he came to the forums, and with the usual passive-aggressive attitude that his kind exhibits, tried to get what he wants by making a bunch of real-life legal parallels. At some point, he forgot that he was playing a video game with guns. The thing that gets me the most, though, is that he thinks that his subscription acts as anything more than a cash buffer for CCP's actual development budget. It is indeed ignorant to think that CCP itself doesn't realize that the players who whine about getting killed will quit at some point. The only way they would stay (and even that is questionable, due to the whole boredom factor), is if these players were never violenced in any way, shape, or form. And in a game like EVE, that's simply impossible.
This is a Good Post. I was going to say this. The fact that you think your payment is worth more than other's, and the fact that you contribute nothing to the game except that payment, is just bad. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
48
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:38:00 -
[514] - Quote
Hench Tenet wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Homo Jesus wrote:I too want a change to the rules so it's easier for me to win at something. Whenever I get the time I'll find the bits and pieces of the EULA that support my views and make another thread to help our douche bag cause. He's simply used to the real-life status quo, where people like himself have always gotten ahead via lobbying and frivolous lawsuits. There is nothing competitive about the state of business today, save for the free-for-all that is the entry-level job market. The whole system is fixed and rotten, but aside from that, it encourages complacency. He is unable to enter an environment that EVE simulates, a purer, more base environment, and compete. He became lost, and unable to respond to changing trends. So he came to the forums, and with the usual passive-aggressive attitude that his kind exhibits, tried to get what he wants by making a bunch of real-life legal parallels. At some point, he forgot that he was playing a video game with guns. The thing that gets me the most, though, is that he thinks that his subscription acts as anything more than a cash buffer for CCP's actual development budget. It is indeed ignorant to think that CCP itself doesn't realize that the players who whine about getting killed will quit at some point. The only way they would stay (and even that is questionable, due to the whole boredom factor), is if these players were never violenced in any way, shape, or form. And in a game like EVE, that's simply impossible. This is a Good Post. I was going to say this. The fact that you think your payment is worth more than other's, and the fact that you contribute nothing to the game except that payment, is just bad.
Actually I think you isolate my point to myself personally when the point I am making is broader than that. Clearly as you go down the first few pages of posts in the forum, I am not the only one asking questions about the recent mechanics that are brought front-of-mind by organized "gank fests" and "hulkageddon". I lost a ship and some implants. Big deal. My post is about more than just a single loss. Its about a lot of people having some of the same experiences that I am, where things you expect from the game and expectations set around the game turn out not to be true, and CCP is asleep at the wheel.
"Casual Gamers" and "Carebears" (there is probably some overlap, but they are two separate player contingents as you can easily be one without being the other) make up a segment of game subscription beyond mine personally. They contribute real dollars to the real CCP that enables real development work and investment in products like the upcoming dust.
There is so much concentration on the word "sandbox" in the term "multiplayer sandbox" that people forget there are both in-game and real life considerations attendant to the word multiplayer as well. At some point CCP is going to have to determine where that line is drawn and at what level of external manipulation they feel comfortable allowing.
Either CCP needs to wake up and say we see the effect that ganking in high sec, the new development of organized ways of doing this has macro impacts and we are going to say sandbox is paramount.
OR
They say we arent completely comfortable with these things, we think there is a balance here. Ganking is and will continue to be legitimate but there are some ways of balancing the audiences we have and the point at which things become griefing, a point of organization we will allow and not allow, etc.
The other extreme of completely removing ganking as a player element is NOT going to happen. I know that. You know that. I knew that when I wrote my original post. No matter what direction the game goes, CCP needs to stop sleeping next to the griefing provisions, and the macro developments in the gaming universe, and the development of the player audience (and its attendant revenue streams) and show a strategy in place that marks what the line is to be. |
Berithon Athonille
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:48:00 -
[515] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:lots of words
Basically this boils down to you wanting to play a pacifist sim game. Unfortunately EVE isn't this game.
EVE is founded on being able to shoot other people, in null sec, low sec, or high sec.
Learn this. Tank your ship. Don't be so fail. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
48
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:15:00 -
[516] - Quote
Berithon Athonille wrote:Oddball Six wrote:lots of words Basically this boils down to you wanting to play a pacifist sim game. Unfortunately EVE isn't this game. EVE is founded on being able to shoot other people, in null sec, low sec, or high sec. Learn this. Tank your ship. Don't be so fail.
Actually it boils down to two things:
1) CCP enforcing rules and policies it has apparently engineered to engender specific gameplay, and then stood by as those systems of control are disregarded.
2) The conversation has evolved to include a side strain of discussion about how the game also contains those whose intended use of the multiplayer sandbox is to rely on those controls in a way that is profitable to CCP but doesn't stay completely predicated on pvp. CCP's balancing of the game has to make some form of consideration for those players in defining what the sandbox is to look like. Much of the argument in the thread has been predicated on "sandbox" as an unbounded, overriding term. But blatantly that is not the case, is it? Otherwise Concord would not exist at all, high-sec would be an absent construct, etc. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1652
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:16:00 -
[517] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Actually I think you isolate my point to myself personally when the point I am making is broader than that. Clearly as you go down the first few pages of posts in the forum, I am not the only one asking questions about the recent mechanics that are brought front-of-mind by organized "gank fests" and "hulkageddon". I lost a ship and some implants. Big deal. My post is about more than just a single loss. Its about a lot of people having some of the same experiences that I am, where things you expect from the game and expectations set around the game turn out not to be true, and CCP is asleep at the wheel.
"Casual Gamers" and "Carebears" (there is probably some overlap, but they are two separate player contingents as you can easily be one without being the other) make up a segment of game subscription beyond mine personally. They contribute real dollars to the real CCP that enables real development work and investment in products like the upcoming dust.
There is so much concentration on the word "sandbox" in the term "multiplayer sandbox" that people forget there are both in-game and real life considerations attendant to the word multiplayer as well. At some point CCP is going to have to determine where that line is drawn and at what level of external manipulation they feel comfortable allowing.
Either CCP needs to wake up and say we see the effect that ganking in high sec, the new development of organized ways of doing this has macro impacts and we are going to say sandbox is paramount.
OR
They say we arent completely comfortable with these things, we think there is a balance here. Ganking is and will continue to be legitimate but there are some ways of balancing the audiences we have and the point at which things become griefing, a point of organization we will allow and not allow, etc.
The other extreme of completely removing ganking as a player element is NOT going to happen. I know that. You know that. I knew that when I wrote my original post. No matter what direction the game goes, CCP needs to stop sleeping next to the griefing provisions, and the macro developments in the gaming universe, and the development of the player audience (and its attendant revenue streams) and show a strategy in place that marks what the line is to be.
What new mechanic are you referring to? The only new mechanic that significantly affected the rate of suicide ganking is the Insurance nerf, which reduced the ease and profitability of ganking.
EvE, with its constant training and the many ways to make ISK quickly is very casual friendly, but it doesn't suffer fools or the lazy very well. Carebears are fine so long as the recognize that EvE actually works as advertised (i.e. People will shoot you sometimes *GASP*)
CCP has made it clear from the get go that they are happy with any manipulation that occurs within the game. What "external" manipulation are you referring to, because all I see you talking about is an in game group manipulating the in game market through in game actions.
The large scale developments in the universe are what CCP (and everyone else) call "emergent gameplay" and most companies would kill for a playerbase that gets in the news for emergent gameplay as often as EvE's players do. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1652
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:20:00 -
[518] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Berithon Athonille wrote:Oddball Six wrote:lots of words Basically this boils down to you wanting to play a pacifist sim game. Unfortunately EVE isn't this game. EVE is founded on being able to shoot other people, in null sec, low sec, or high sec. Learn this. Tank your ship. Don't be so fail. Actually it boils down to two things: 1) CCP enforcing rules and policies it has apparently engineered to engender specific gameplay, and then stood by as those systems of control are disregarded. 2) The conversation has evolved to include a side strain of discussion about how the game also contains those whose intended use of the multiplayer sandbox is to rely on those controls in a way that is profitable to CCP but doesn't stay completely predicated on pvp. CCP's balancing of the game has to make some form of consideration for those players in defining what the sandbox is to look like. Much of the argument in the thread has been predicated on "sandbox" as an unbounded, overriding term. But blatantly that is not the case, is it? Otherwise Concord would not exist at all, high-sec would be an absent construct, etc.
1) What rules and policies are being disregarded? Is CONCORD no longer killing aggressing ships? Are people not being censured for EULA/TOS violations? I haven't seen any evidence of either of those.
2) CONCORD as it exist today is a concession to the carebears who didn't want to be shot. Back when EvE was released, CONCORD was pretty easily tankable (indeed, it was farmed for tags), so Suicide Ganks involved a lot less Suicide than they do today. If you want EvE without PvP, you have access to SiSi, where there is no PvP, including market PvP. Anytime you interact with another player, including through the market screen, you are involved in PvP. Just because you don't like some forms of PvP doesn't mean you get to avoid being influenced by them. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
49
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:35:00 -
[519] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
CCP has made it clear from the get go that they are happy with any manipulation that occurs within the game. What "external" manipulation are you referring to, because all I see you talking about is an in game group manipulating the in game market through in game actions.
Extra-game or "meta-gaming" at greater scale and frequency through events like organized "gank fests", "hulkageddon", et al. While they are not exaclty new, they are now occuring with an organization promoted through elements and communications outside of the game that have scaled such participation to the level of macroeconomic impact. CCP has probably never seen an event in the past where an entire sector of gameplay is curtailed up to HALF by an organized event that is predicated on circumventing the design controls on high sec space.
Quote: The large scale developments in the universe are what CCP (and everyone else) call "emergent gameplay" and most companies would kill for a playerbase that gets in the news for emergent gameplay as often as EvE's players do.
And yet, CCP has had to hire an economist and making tools and reporting investments to track the complexity of the effects of the emergent gameplay. The recent emergence being of a type that circumvents engineered / developed design elements in an entire class of game play area. And which progression of execution affects a large number of subscribers who have a certain gameplay style.
I understand your point about emergent gameplay. I have thought about its impact and absolutely and completely agree with you, that to some level it is a celebratory feature of the game, and a key area of development that CCP is going to be careful to maintain.
At the same time, we cannot become so focused on the concept of sandbox that we forget the multiplayer and associated revenue elements. As I have stated before, this thread is more about CCP stepping in to recognize the changes that the new organization and its direction of organization have wrought on a large segment of game mechanics and for them to make a call once again whether this is intended gameplay or whether balancing or enforcement action is appropriate at a certain threshold of player impact and/or ignoring developed game mechanics. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
49
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:41:00 -
[520] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
1) What rules and policies are being disregarded? Is CONCORD no longer killing aggressing ships? Are people not being censured for EULA/TOS violations? I haven't seen any evidence of either of those.
2) CONCORD as it exist today is a concession to the carebears who didn't want to be shot. Back when EvE was released, CONCORD was pretty easily tankable (indeed, it was farmed for tags), so Suicide Ganks involved a lot less Suicide than they do today. If you want EvE without PvP, you have access to SiSi, where there is no PvP, including market PvP. Anytime you interact with another player, including through the market screen, you are involved in PvP. Just because you don't like some forms of PvP doesn't mean you get to avoid being influenced by them.
1) See my original post for the references for what CCP has committed. It is precisely the nascent willingness to ignore the developer implemented guards like concord in order to participate in metagaming rewards which are outside of the established controls, revenue sources, et al, of the game itself.
2) Your narrow view is that anyone interested in avoiding combat should be relegated to a separate instance so as not to befoul your intended mode of gameplay. The simple fact is that the carebear professions have an integral place in the primary environment of play. They have been a player base which is nutured in some measure by the expectations that the game mechanics will be effective in promoting and inhibiting certain types of play.
When the metagaming encourages gamers en masse to ignore the controls which establish those modes of play, the impact has to be considered by CCP for its effect on real life subscription demographics.
What does it do to the player experience for certain players? Does a certain threshold of meta-gaming rise to the level of griefing or circumvention of the intended controls? How do you define that threshold? Is it based on the organization to accept ganking individually on a large scale? On the number of times someone is involved in a gank? On the strategies one uses to scout and get a gank in place? Something else? |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1652
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:52:00 -
[521] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
CCP has made it clear from the get go that they are happy with any manipulation that occurs within the game. What "external" manipulation are you referring to, because all I see you talking about is an in game group manipulating the in game market through in game actions.
Extra-game or "meta-gaming" at greater scale and frequency through events like organized "gank fests", "hulkageddon", et al. While they are not exaclty new, they are now occuring with an organization promoted through elements and communications outside of the game that have scaled such participation to the level of macroeconomic impact. CCP has probably never seen an event in the past where an entire sector of gameplay is curtailed up to HALF by an organized event that is predicated on circumventing the design controls on high sec space.
Those events are In-Game groups manipulating In-Game markets through In-Game activity. Complaining about the metagame in a game that celebrates the same is
As for similar events, the first one happened in 2003, when m0o camped a HS-HS gate for a few months. Then there were the cartels based on T2BPOs that controlled T2 prices. There was also BOB, controlling 2/3 of player controllable space. Then there was EBANK. Then there were the first 4 Hulkageddons. I could go on.
What design controls are being circumvented? CONCORD is designed to provide consequences to illegal actions. Those consequences are clearly spelled out and ruthlessly enforced (it's an exploit to escape them). CONCORD is not meant to and has never been meant to provide protection to anyone.
Quote:Quote: The large scale developments in the universe are what CCP (and everyone else) call "emergent gameplay" and most companies would kill for a playerbase that gets in the news for emergent gameplay as often as EvE's players do.
And yet, CCP has had to hire an economist and making tools and reporting investments to track the complexity of the effects of the emergent gameplay. The recent emergence being of a type that circumvents engineered / developed design elements in an entire class of game play area. And which progression of execution affects a large number of subscribers who have a certain gameplay style. I understand your point about emergent gameplay. I have thought about its impact and absolutely and completely agree with you, that to some level it is a celebratory feature of the game, and a key area of development that CCP is going to be careful to maintain. At the same time, we cannot become so focused on the concept of sandbox that we forget the multiplayer and associated revenue elements. As I have stated before, this thread is more about CCP stepping in to recognize the changes that the new organization and its direction of organization have wrought on a large segment of game mechanics and for them to make a call once again whether this is intended gameplay or whether balancing or enforcement action is appropriate at a certain threshold of player impact and/or ignoring developed game mechanics.
How is having to hire an economist to stop them from ravaging the puppy again (specific acts of canine ravishment include the introduction of the Drone Regions and the r64 nerf that lead to the Tech bottleneck) in any way relevant to this conversation?
Again, what design elements are being circumvented? Be specific. If people are escaping CONCORD, or otherwise using explots, that's circumventing design elements. Suicide Ganking is adapting to the buff that CONCORD got some years ago, and Suicide Ganking in destroyers is adapting to the Insurance Nerf that miners were clamoring for for years. Eve is all about adapting to your environment. The gankers do it, why can't you?
So you're calling for CCP to punish players for daring to organize themselves in a Massively Multiplayer Online Game? Really?
CCP has been clear many, many times that Suicide Ganking is an intended gameplay mechanic. If you can't adapt to another players use of an intended gameplay mechanic, play another game. It's like landing on Boardwalk with a Hotel and complaining that Hotels are an unintended gameplay mechanic because you don't like that someone organized four houses to put a Hotel up. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Annabelle Ember
Kavashikari
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:55:00 -
[522] - Quote
The fact that you're always in danger -- even in hi-sec -- is what makes this game so uniquely satisfying.
I realize it's a little hard to feel satisfaction at the moment your Hulk has just been scattered in pieces across half the solar system, but the fact is that risk is what gives the reward value. There are a LOT of games where its way easier to get rewards. They're really fun! ...at first. But they don't have the depth and staying power that EVE has.
Your problem isn't that you got shot. It's that you aren't shooting back. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1652
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:59:00 -
[523] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
1) What rules and policies are being disregarded? Is CONCORD no longer killing aggressing ships? Are people not being censured for EULA/TOS violations? I haven't seen any evidence of either of those.
2) CONCORD as it exist today is a concession to the carebears who didn't want to be shot. Back when EvE was released, CONCORD was pretty easily tankable (indeed, it was farmed for tags), so Suicide Ganks involved a lot less Suicide than they do today. If you want EvE without PvP, you have access to SiSi, where there is no PvP, including market PvP. Anytime you interact with another player, including through the market screen, you are involved in PvP. Just because you don't like some forms of PvP doesn't mean you get to avoid being influenced by them.
1) See my original post for the references for what CCP has committed. It is precisely the nascent willingness to ignore the developer implemented guards like concord in order to participate in metagaming rewards which are outside of the established controls, revenue sources, et al, of the game itself.
How are they ignoring CONCORD? Are their ships not being destroyed?
Players paying other players to do things is exactly what mining is (via the market). You want to ban that too?
Quote: 2) Your narrow view is that anyone interested in avoiding combat should be relegated to a separate instance so as not to befoul your intended mode of gameplay. The simple fact is that the carebear professions have an integral place in the primary environment of play. They have been a player base which is nutured in some measure by the expectations that the game mechanics will be effective in promoting and inhibiting certain types of play.
When the metagaming encourages gamers en masse to ignore the controls which establish those modes of play, the impact has to be considered by CCP for its effect on real life subscription demographics.
What does it do to the player experience for certain players? Does a certain threshold of meta-gaming rise to the level of griefing or circumvention of the intended controls? How do you define that threshold? Is it based on the organization to accept ganking individually on a large scale? On the number of times someone is involved in a gank? On the strategies one uses to scout and get a gank in place? Something else?
Yes, the carebear profession do have an integral place in the economy. That's the exact reason they cannot be divorced from risk and still be allowed to participate in said economy.
CCP has very narrowly defined griefing as killing newbies in newbie systems (along with things like endlessly bumping a freighter with no intent to gank it). They've defined harassment as using offensive/racist/inflammatory language. They've specifically said, over and over, that Suicide ganking is perfectly valid gameplay. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Kimmi Chan
Black Rebel Rifter Club
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:03:00 -
[524] - Quote
Devore Sekk wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Rokh = Stainless Steel Spatula Hulk = Solid Gold Spatula
Miners, through years of nobody bothering them, have adjusted their baseline from what it was before Barges were released. They've started to view the Solid Gold Spatula as the only thing that can flip burgers.
See, it's a matter of expectations. There are Level 4 mission runners who use a Drake, which you might consider the Cardboard Spatula. There is a whole spectrum of Level 4 capable ships; each higher one comes with the expectation you are able to fit and pilot it appropriately so as not to lose your investment. Each level of mission ship means you can run missions more efficiently. If you don't want to risk losing a 3B isk mission runner or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper, and accept the lesser lever of income and efficiency. However, this is not the case with mining. Every miner seems to be of the opinion that you can only mine in a Hulk. When in fact there is also and ENTIRE spectrum of mining ships. Each step in the ladder means you are able to mine more efficiently, but each step on the ladder also means you are expected to fit and pilot your ship appropriately so as to avoid losing it. If you don't want to risk losing a 400M isk mining ship or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper and accept lesser mining efficie.... err, sorry, apparently you come crying to the forums. Carebear logic.
+130427
Intelligence shouldn't be free. by Mors Sanctitatis |
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
99
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:09:00 -
[525] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
1) What rules and policies are being disregarded? Is CONCORD no longer killing aggressing ships? Are people not being censured for EULA/TOS violations? I haven't seen any evidence of either of those.
2) CONCORD as it exist today is a concession to the carebears who didn't want to be shot. Back when EvE was released, CONCORD was pretty easily tankable (indeed, it was farmed for tags), so Suicide Ganks involved a lot less Suicide than they do today. If you want EvE without PvP, you have access to SiSi, where there is no PvP, including market PvP. Anytime you interact with another player, including through the market screen, you are involved in PvP. Just because you don't like some forms of PvP doesn't mean you get to avoid being influenced by them.
1) See my original post for the references for what CCP has committed. It is precisely the nascent willingness to ignore the developer implemented guards like concord in order to participate in metagaming rewards which are outside of the established controls, revenue sources, et al, of the game itself. 2) Your narrow view is that anyone interested in avoiding combat should be relegated to a separate instance so as not to befoul your intended mode of gameplay. The simple fact is that the carebear professions have an integral place in the primary environment of play. They have been a player base which is nutured in some measure by the expectations that the game mechanics will be effective in promoting and inhibiting certain types of play. When the metagaming encourages gamers en masse to ignore the controls which establish those modes of play, the impact has to be considered by CCP for its effect on real life subscription demographics. What does it do to the player experience for certain players? Does a certain threshold of meta-gaming rise to the level of griefing or circumvention of the intended controls? How do you define that threshold? Is it based on the organization to accept ganking individually on a large scale? On the number of times someone is involved in a gank? On the strategies one uses to scout and get a gank in place? Something else?
Oh come on now. Your view is the narrow minded one and detrimental to Eve, whether your own self perception of some important guy will allow to recognize that or not.
What you describe above can be applied to any sort of ganking. It can easily apply to a system called Rancer. What do the perma camps there "do for player experience for certain players"? Any choke points. People claiming systems and regions and not allowing certain players to exist there by any means available. Where does it stop? What makes miners special that they need special intervention? What makes you special? Besides the fact that IT IS YOU
I remember back in the good old days, yes I said good old days, there were whines when certain groups started laying claims to regions. People petitioned GMs and whined how such and such will not allow them to play there.
I also remember being able to gank in perimeter on jita gate, yes on the gate, for good 30 seconds a long time ago. Yet, the whining was only a fraction of what it is today. It is people's attitudes that need adjusting and not the mechanics.
What you also need to accept is that concord is "role play police" and not equipped with thought crime detection. They punish crime role played by players only. Being a criminal is role play in eve. No one is actually braking game rules.
Game is a sandbox and yes it does allow you to ignore others and mine in peace but you are not entitled to it. You will have opposition, competitors etc... Don't confuse sandbox with "I am entitled to do what I want". You are only entitled to try make it happen, just like the rest of us.
No one is asking anyone to enjoy being ganked, but prevention is so damn easy yet people refuse to even try.
I tried responding to you politely several pages ago but apparently if points don't align with your views they are invalid.
You (and all other whiners) are demanding changes based on limited perception born of ignorance. Changes which will affect all of us. You really think that you are that entitled?
And since you like real life comparisons, here's one: "bad stuff" doesn't care about your ignorance of it. It will simply happen.
* I may or may not be writing this from my mother's basement. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
945
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:18:00 -
[526] - Quote
Devore Sekk wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Rokh = Stainless Steel Spatula Hulk = Solid Gold Spatula
Miners, through years of nobody bothering them, have adjusted their baseline from what it was before Barges were released. They've started to view the Solid Gold Spatula as the only thing that can flip burgers.
See, it's a matter of expectations. There are Level 4 mission runners who use a Drake, which you might consider the Cardboard Spatula. There is a whole spectrum of Level 4 capable ships; each higher one comes with the expectation you are able to fit and pilot it appropriately so as not to lose your investment. Each level of mission ship means you can run missions more efficiently. If you don't want to risk losing a 3B isk mission runner or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper, and accept the lesser lever of income and efficiency. However, this is not the case with mining. Every miner seems to be of the opinion that you can only mine in a Hulk. When in fact there is also and ENTIRE spectrum of mining ships. Each step in the ladder means you are able to mine more efficiently, but each step on the ladder also means you are expected to fit and pilot your ship appropriately so as to avoid losing it. If you don't want to risk losing a 400M isk mining ship or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper and accept lesser mining efficie.... err, sorry, apparently you come crying to the forums. Carebear logic. Wait, Rokhs can MINE?
But their yield ... so far below a Hulk. And the cycle time, you can't AFK, is this TRUE mining?
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1652
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:35:00 -
[527] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: Wait, Rokhs can MINE?
But their yield ... so far below a Hulk. And the cycle time, you can't AFK, is this TRUE mining?
I know, right. ~80%, aka a B is such a terrible thing to get. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Peta Michalek
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 05:02:00 -
[528] - Quote
This is an interesting thread(well the OP is; almost all responses are twats being twats as usual in Gen). Indeed CCP mentions in their own TOS that griefing is forbidden and indeed one could look at the entire hulkageddon as a big griefing campaign. Yes, the ultimate goal of it is to make the rich goons even richer, but 99% of participants don't even realize this and do it, as they themselves admit, "for the tears" because "you mad" and "HTFU" and other tired internet catch-it-all lingo.
Technically speaking, I think CCP could be sued for not upholding their side of the agreement. No I'm not going to do it(none of this, hulkageddon or not, affects my playstyle in any way) but hey, I wouldn't get it past Mr. I Drive A Saab. And yes, going to court over internet spaceship sounds hilariously improbable but this is EVE Online, the game of firsts, is it not? Didn't we have russians cutting off an enemy corp's leader power IRL over internet spaceships before?
Whatever the result, a court case would have one good effect: CPP would finally have to get their heads out of sand and decide what do they want to do with hisec - whether to keep it as safe playground and an alternate playstyle within the same universe, or to bring it back in line with rest of the game(un-buff CONCORD).
Because the current, third option is the worst of them all. |
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
102
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 05:11:00 -
[529] - Quote
Peta Michalek wrote:This is an interesting thread(well the OP is; almost all responses are twats being twats as usual in Gen). Indeed CCP mentions in their own TOS that griefing is forbidden and indeed one could look at the entire hulkageddon as a big griefing campaign.
You didn't read the thread.
Quote:Technically speaking, I think CCP could be sued for not upholding their side of the agreement.
Fun fact: After claiming that you are rich and successful in real life, the thing second most likely to get you mocked on the internet is roleplaying a lawyer.
Get back in your hole. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
284
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 05:16:00 -
[530] - Quote
Peta Michalek wrote:Whatever the result, a court case would have one good effect: CPP would finally have to get their heads out of sand and decide what do they want to do with hisec - whether to keep it as safe playground and an alternate playstyle within the same universe, or to bring it back in line with rest of the game(un-buff CONCORD).
I love love love posts like this because they infer that CCP is somehow on the fence about what they want to do with hisec.
Guess what? THEY DO KNOW.
CONCORD is an imperfect protection ON PURPOSE. CCP tweaks with their abilities and response times, but notice how the response times have never become zero? That'd be an easy way to actually make hisec safe!
Suicide ganking has recieved nerfs - CONCORD response times have changed, insurance doesn't pay out. Yet, suicide ships can still target and fire on whoever they want in hisec, and if they can kill it before CONCORD responds, the kill stands! I wonder why that is?
Now ask yourself - are these just two absolutely monolithic oversights in CCP's attempt to make hisec 100% safe? Or could it maybe be that THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO BE SAFE?
Nah, can't be! They're just confused, is all! |
|
Peta Michalek
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 05:51:00 -
[531] - Quote
Ispia Jaydrath wrote: You didn't read the thread.
Considering you just confused me with the OP, I think you didn't read the thread. Or am I just a sockpuppet in your mind? Welp, twats.
@Snow Axe(multiquote, why would a forum software need it): Nice try, but why was CONCORD buffed in the first place? Maybe it's because CCP didn't think players would be so willing as to sacrifice their ship just to get a kill? In the old system, CONCORD wasn't cutting it, so they applied the laziest possible solution - as they tend to do - and simply made it ridiculously powerful and warp in almost instantly. The way around(suicidegank) was found quickly but was never really an issue until recent crusade of corpsec.
So to summarize: If hisec was never meant to be safe, why was CONCORD buffed so much it made any suspension of disbelief of it crack at the seams? The non-safe hisec was non-safe before with old CONCORD. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
284
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 06:06:00 -
[532] - Quote
Peta Michalek wrote:@Snow Axe(multiquote, why would a forum software need it): Nice try, but why was CONCORD buffed in the first place? Maybe it's because CCP didn't think players would be so willing as to sacrifice their ship just to get a kill? In the old system, CONCORD wasn't cutting it, so they applied the laziest possible solution - as they tend to do - and simply made it ridiculously powerful and warp in almost instantly. The way around(suicidegank) was found quickly but was never really an issue until recent crusade of corpsec.
So to summarize: If hisec was never meant to be safe, why was CONCORD buffed so much it made any suspension of disbelief of it crack at the seams? The non-safe hisec was non-safe before with old CONCORD.
Buffing CONCORD is a balance thing. Maybe they wanted to make ganking harder than it was? Either way, they clearly didn't want it gone, as there are far, far easier ways to do it than a buff that still doesn't accomplish that. Also, the laziest solution would have been to buff CONCORD and give them a 0 second response time, rather than one that scales depending on security level - hell, the scaling itself is proof that CONCORD is functioning more-or-less as intended, as an imperfect guard mechanism.
Remember now, this is the FIFTH Hulkageddon. The FIFTH ONE. There's been so many windows for CCP to outright ban ganking had they actually been interested in doing it, and yet time and time again, they haven't. Sure, they've played with the mechanics of ganking itself, but at no point did they render it not possible, despite that being the simpler of the two things to do. The only conclusion to draw from that is that they have no problem with ganking existing. Well, that or you believe they're functionally ********, in which case trying to get them to see reason is a fool's errand. |
Francisco Bizzaro
137
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 06:15:00 -
[533] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:2) Your narrow view is that anyone interested in avoiding combat should be relegated to a separate instance so as not to befoul your intended mode of gameplay. The simple fact is that the carebear professions have an integral place in the primary environment of play. They have been a player base which is nutured in some measure by the expectations that the game mechanics will be effective in promoting and inhibiting certain types of play.
When the metagaming encourages gamers en masse to ignore the controls which establish those modes of play, the impact has to be considered by CCP for its effect on real life subscription demographics.
What does it do to the player experience for certain players? Does a certain threshold of meta-gaming rise to the level of griefing or circumvention of the intended controls? How do you define that threshold? Is it based on the organization to accept ganking individually on a large scale? On the number of times someone is involved in a gank? On the strategies one uses to scout and get a gank in place? Something else? How is anyone preventing your "intended mode of gameplay"? Mining is a perfectly viable profession for a casual. But if you are casual, you will probably not be able to do it at the highest level, that is in a max-yield hulk. For that, you need to be paying a bit of attention to your environment, which I think is not too much to ask of a game.
You can play this game as casual as you like, while watching TV, and earn an respectable income which will significantly more than cover your losses. It's maybe not the absolute best income - but is the best income really what you deserve if you are just going along for the ride?
Hulkageddon, Burn Jita, whatever metagaming you like to name, are not preventing any play style. Because while "casual mining" is a play style, flying a max-yield untanked hulk is not. |
Francisco Bizzaro
137
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 06:21:00 -
[534] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:"Casual Gamers" and "Carebears" (there is probably some overlap, but they are two separate player contingents as you can easily be one without being the other) make up a segment of game subscription beyond mine personally. They contribute real dollars to the real CCP that enables real development work and investment in products like the upcoming dust. You seem to be keen on the consequences for CCP's bottom line as a reason to take you seriously, an argument which we see increasingly on these forums.
At this point I'd like to suggest a corollary to Malcanis' law: "Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit CCP's income" is invariably for the purpose of improving the player's income."
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
992
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 06:58:00 -
[535] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Rokh = Stainless Steel Spatula Hulk = Solid Gold Spatula
Miners, through years of nobody bothering them, have adjusted their baseline from what it was before Barges were released. They've started to view the Solid Gold Spatula as the only thing that can flip burgers.
Miners, incredibly enough, adapted from using a combat ship to a mining ship. This is clearly preposterous and needs to be dealt with.
RubyPorto wrote:
How do you know GSF messes with the Tech market? Is it because they've been very public about doing exactly that? If it's public knowledge because the cartel announced it in a press release, you look a little silly when you make it sound like super sekrit spy knowledge.
Minerals are hard to hold in a Cartel. Tech is easy to hold in a Cartel. Once someone holds a Tech Cartel, it makes perfect sense to fund a campaign to increase Tech demand. There is one industry whose Tech demand is massive when that industry is disrupted. That's mining.
Besides that, Tengu's are blitz boats. If they're hanging out to loot/salvage the field, they're doing it wrong.
"Knowing for certain" does not imply in any way it's exclusive knowledge. It implies it's true. It implies many in GD don't follow MD and might not know about this.
RubyPorto wrote: 2 Hulks, 3x Webs and 2 MLUIIs each. Gank proof hulks if you're looking at your screen at all.
Mine aligned. If that's hard, figure out a way to make it easier.
Keep 5-6 Hulks aligned and moreover have the corp op Orca also stay in range. Seems vastly not worth the effort. Had it been a 100M per hour *group* work like Incursions then it'd be worth. But no, it does not yield 100M per hour, not even in 0.0. All of this despite effective mining risk > Incursion risk. I don't recall the 8500 incursion pimpboats kill mails in a month. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
947
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 06:59:00 -
[536] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote: 2 Hulks, 3x Webs and 2 MLUIIs each. Gank proof hulks if you're looking at your screen at all.
Mine aligned. If that's hard, figure out a way to make it easier.
Keep 5-6 Hulks aligned and moreover have the corp op Orca also stay in range. Seems vastly not worth the effort. Had it been a 100M per hour *group* work like Incursion then it'd be worth. But no, it does not yield 100M per hour, not even in 0.0. To the incursions, then !
Or are L4s all the rage now?
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
992
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 07:02:00 -
[537] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote: 2 Hulks, 3x Webs and 2 MLUIIs each. Gank proof hulks if you're looking at your screen at all.
Mine aligned. If that's hard, figure out a way to make it easier.
Keep 5-6 Hulks aligned and moreover have the corp op Orca also stay in range. Seems vastly not worth the effort. Had it been a 100M per hour *group* work like Incursion then it'd be worth. But no, it does not yield 100M per hour, not even in 0.0. To the incursions, then ! Or are L4s all the rage now?
L4, for the same reason: L4 cater to those who mined while alt tabbed and whatever. The massive incursions payouts might have drawn them out to seek for a group but after the nerf their mentality will make them fall back to the path of least resistance.
Devore Sekk wrote:
See, it's a matter of expectations.
There are Level 4 mission runners who use a Drake, which you might consider the Cardboard Spatula. There is a whole spectrum of Level 4 capable ships; each higher one comes with the expectation you are able to fit and pilot it appropriately so as not to lose your investment. Each level of mission ship means you can run missions more efficiently.
If you don't want to risk losing a 3B isk mission runner or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper, and accept the lesser lever of income and efficiency.
No, the proper expectation is this: There are level 4 mission runners who buy a marauder. Now have coordinated server wide operations decimate 8500 marauders in a month and you'll see they'll also come on the forums.
But of course if it's any other profession, they are cool and entitled. Short bus children are not.
RubyPorto wrote:2) CONCORD as it exist today is a concession to the carebears who didn't want to be shot. Back when EvE was released, CONCORD was pretty easily tankable (indeed, it was farmed for tags), so Suicide Ganks involved a lot less Suicide than they do today. If you want EvE without PvP, you have access to SiSi, where there is no PvP, including market PvP. Anytime you interact with another player, including through the market screen, you are involved in PvP. Just because you don't like some forms of PvP doesn't mean you get to avoid being influenced by them.
CONCORD is the worst abomination ever created. It should be made tankable again if not removed completely.
Who effing cares that CONCORD deals swift lol justice by killing your 2M ship?
EvE would be a real sandbox if active defense involving players (corpies, mercs...) would insta-pop any inbound hostile. As of today, all a merc can do is to wait for a -10 guy to appear directly on the target, the time to react is minimal.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
947
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 07:09:00 -
[538] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:L4, for the same reason: L4 cater to those who mined while alt tabbed and whatever. The massive incursions payouts might have drawn them out to seek for a group but after the nerf their mentality will make them fall back to the path of least resistance.
Who effing cares that CONCORD deals swift lol justice by killing your 2M ship? Oh no, my poor T1 Catalyst
Do people L4 while alt tabbed? I actually need to do some standings grinding but was planning on Drake in L3s, tbh. Or maybe just courier missions, even easier plus I might want a good industrial. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
992
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 07:11:00 -
[539] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:L4, for the same reason: L4 cater to those who mined while alt tabbed and whatever. The massive incursions payouts might have drawn them out to seek for a group but after the nerf their mentality will make them fall back to the path of least resistance.
Who effing cares that CONCORD deals swift lol justice by killing your 2M ship? Oh no, my poor T1 Catalyst Do people L4 while alt tabbed? I actually need to do some standings grinding but was planning on Drake in L3s, tbh. Or maybe just courier missions, even easier plus I might want a good industrial.
Yes, buy Dominix, put sentries, come back 1 hour later and (optionally) loot.
At this point you might wonder why certain players like miners joined DA SANDBOX game.
Because they expected to find a sandbox where everybody could live at their own pace, as slow / casual / relaxed they wanted (other sandbox MMOs are like that). Most CCP material sells the gran epic game where everybody may choose to be important, may choose their present and future. The real product is a groupthink held hostage by out of game organized communities where you either obey and play their way our you are better out.
Just the idea I am forced to be puppeted and used makes me want to unsub today. Losing some stupid ship is just some space pixels. Losing freedom = death.
Also, grats on taking over and ruining Hulkageddon. You took Helicity's idea and made it much less epic. Now it's bland subsidized welfare instead of the time of the year whereas there'd be fireworks, increased activity and so on. Market wise (where it matters to me) it will be a sh!t because it will cause a lack of momentum in the markets that will stabilize at a higher level, while money is nicely made when markets trend up like in anticipation of Hulkageddon. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RAP ACTION HERO
28
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 07:14:00 -
[540] - Quote
i guess this will go on until the ring mining thing. |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
948
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 07:27:00 -
[541] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Yes, buy Dominix, put sentries, come back 1 hour later and (optionally) loot. Hm, oh right. I guess they like the new drone damage mods.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Just the idea I am forced to be puppeted and used makes me want to unsub today. Losing some stupid ship is just some space pixels. Losing freedom = death. Definitely. Agree totally. If they started forcing level 5 CTAs on us, I would quit too.
But you know, if people started bashing on our door, there wouldn't be a need to do that sort of thing. In fact people would resub (and poor auth directors having to get them back in corp) and it would be GLORIOUS.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Also, grats on taking over and ruining Hulkageddon. You took Helicity's idea and made it much less epic. Now it's bland subsidized welfare instead of the time of the year whereas there'd be fireworks, increased activity and so on. Market wise (where it matters to me) it will be a sh!t because it will cause a lack of momentum in the markets that will stabilize at a higher level, while money is nicely made when markets trend up like in anticipation of Hulkageddon.
All you achieved is to transform a yearly epic event into LOL player Insurance in place of EvE NPC old one.
Yeah. I guess so. You can't just hide until the shells stop coming because by golly, now it's 1400mm shells all day every day/ (Or Void/Antimatter S for catalysts).
Indeed many people would like it if it was over and they can return to mining and call it "irrelevant". Now it's "relevance" is in your face, so to speak. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
992
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 07:35:00 -
[542] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Just the idea I am forced to be puppeted and used makes me want to unsub today. Losing some stupid ship is just some space pixels. Losing freedom = death. Definitely. Agree totally. If they started forcing level 5 CTAs on us, I would quit too.
That's why I quit myself. It's my playtime and I am not always available to play for somebody else and then buy PLEX to keep play for somebody else.
Alavaria Fera wrote: Yeah. I guess so. You can't just hide until the shells stop coming because by golly, now it's 1400mm shells all day every day/ (Or Void/Antimatter S for catalysts).
Indeed many people would like it if it was over and they can return to mining and call it "irrelevant". Now it's "relevance" is in your face, so to speak.
It will become irrelevant for me, since I trade minerals I need them to swing up and down. If the event lasts forever prices will stabilize and will be about 7-8 times less profitable. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1654
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:03:00 -
[543] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Rokh = Stainless Steel Spatula Hulk = Solid Gold Spatula
Miners, through years of nobody bothering them, have adjusted their baseline from what it was before Barges were released. They've started to view the Solid Gold Spatula as the only thing that can flip burgers.
Miners, incredibly enough, adapted from using a combat ship to a mining ship. This is clearly preposterous and needs to be dealt with.
I never said don't use Hulks. I said that the baseline for safe mining yield in HS is the Rokh, for proof of that, take a tanked mining Rokh (80% of the yield of a Hulk) and mine until you get ganked. You'll never lose the ship.
The Hulk Gains its yield bonus at the expense of not being able to tank as well. The Max Yield Hulk takes that one step further and gains a littile-itty bit more yield in exchange for not being able to tank at all.
Regardless, no ship has any purpose other than what it's currently fitted for.
Quote:RubyPorto wrote:
How do you know GSF messes with the Tech market? Is it because they've been very public about doing exactly that? If it's public knowledge because the cartel announced it in a press release, you look a little silly when you make it sound like super sekrit spy knowledge.
Minerals are hard to hold in a Cartel. Tech is easy to hold in a Cartel. Once someone holds a Tech Cartel, it makes perfect sense to fund a campaign to increase Tech demand. There is one industry whose Tech demand is massive when that industry is disrupted. That's mining.
Besides that, Tengu's are blitz boats. If they're hanging out to loot/salvage the field, they're doing it wrong.
"Knowing for certain" does not imply in any way it's exclusive knowledge. It implies it's true. It implies many in GD don't follow MD and might not know about this. RubyPorto wrote: 2 Hulks, 3x Webs and 2 MLUIIs each. Gank proof hulks if you're looking at your screen at all.
Mine aligned. If that's hard, figure out a way to make it easier.
Keep 5-6 Hulks aligned and moreover have the corp op Orca also stay in range. Seems vastly not worth the effort. Had it been a 100M per hour *group* work like Incursions then it'd be worth. But no, it does not yield 100M per hour, not even in 0.0. All of this despite effective mining risk > Incursion risk. I don't recall the 8500 incursion pimpboats kill mails in a month.
Look, if you don't like the income v effort ratio of mining, don't mine. Eventually mineral prices will rise to the point that it will once again be worth it. If you don't like the player generated risk, figure out how to mitigate that player generated risk.
Anyway, try reading that fit again, then rub two braincells together and you might figure it out. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1654
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:05:00 -
[544] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Devore Sekk wrote:
See, it's a matter of expectations.
There are Level 4 mission runners who use a Drake, which you might consider the Cardboard Spatula. There is a whole spectrum of Level 4 capable ships; each higher one comes with the expectation you are able to fit and pilot it appropriately so as not to lose your investment. Each level of mission ship means you can run missions more efficiently.
If you don't want to risk losing a 3B isk mission runner or do not know how to protect it properly, you fly something cheaper, and accept the lesser lever of income and efficiency.
No, the proper expectation is this: There are level 4 mission runners who buy a marauder. Now have coordinated server wide operations decimate 8500 marauders in a month and you'll see they'll also come on the forums. But of course if it's any other profession, they are cool and entitled. Short bus children are not.
Exactly what is stopping you from doing that? Is it cause you're too lazy to do that? I think it is.
The CFC, a group of players, have decided to focus their efforts on doing something. Why should CCP punish them for it? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
993
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:10:00 -
[545] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Look, if you don't like the income v effort ratio of mining, don't mine.
I don't. I trade.
Sometimes I warp in the belts in a cane and assist a merc corp hired to defend miners. It's not an easy task, because the game is utterly, completely stacked in gankers' favor.
Now, if only there was a new PvP feature, where a mining corp can forfeit concord protection in exchange for being able to enlist a merc corp to defend them as allies... THAT would be hot.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
521
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:11:00 -
[546] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Now, if only there was a new PvP feature, where a mining corp can forfeit concord protection in exchange for being able to enlist a merc corp to defend them as allies... THAT would be hot.
can't wait to offer "merc services" and proceeding to kill my "customers" eh |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
994
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:13:00 -
[547] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Exactly what is stopping you from doing that? Is it cause you're too lazy to do that? I think it is.
The CFC, a group of players, have decided to focus their efforts on doing something. Why should CCP punish them for it?
I put EvE in the priority video games deserve for someone with a life: low, very low. So low that I will never commit in a large scale operation.
If I don't play with the mercs, my log in time is 10 minutes. For PI and setting market orders. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
949
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:14:00 -
[548] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Just the idea I am forced to be puppeted and used makes me want to unsub today. Losing some stupid ship is just some space pixels. Losing freedom = death. Definitely. Agree totally. If they started forcing level 5 CTAs on us, I would quit too. That's why I quit myself. It's my playtime and I am not always available to play for somebody else and then buy PLEX to keep play for somebody else. Guess I'm lucky I'm not forced to do that, non-independent bee that I am.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote: Yeah. I guess so. You can't just hide until the shells stop coming because by golly, now it's 1400mm shells all day every day/ (Or Void/Antimatter S for catalysts).
Indeed many people would like it if it was over and they can return to mining and call it "irrelevant". Now it's "relevance" is in your face, so to speak.
It will become irrelevant for me, since I trade minerals I need them to swing up and down. If the event lasts forever prices will stabilize and will be about 7-8 times less profitable. Ah, well sorry about that. Wasn't intending to start a tradergeddon.
Oh well, that's EVE for ya. Unintended consequences. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
994
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:15:00 -
[549] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Now, if only there was a new PvP feature, where a mining corp can forfeit concord protection in exchange for being able to enlist a merc corp to defend them as allies... THAT would be hot.
can't wait to offer "merc services" and proceeding to kill my "customers"
Well, that's sandbox, and the true one, where you can choose whether to be a loyal merc with an history and prestige or a betrayer. TBH it's much more bearable to risk having unloyal mercs than having to be loyal puppies. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
994
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:17:00 -
[550] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: Ah, well sorry about that. Wasn't intending to start a tradergeddon.
Oh well, that's EVE for ya. Unintended consequences.
It will take a bit more effort off your alliance before you can do a tradergeddon. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
949
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:18:00 -
[551] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote: Ah, well sorry about that. Wasn't intending to start a tradergeddon.
Oh well, that's EVE for ya. Unintended consequences.
It will take a bit more effort off your alliance before you can do a tradergeddon. Ah phew. Glad we didn't accidentally do too much damage to your trading, then.
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
994
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 08:22:00 -
[552] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote: Ah, well sorry about that. Wasn't intending to start a tradergeddon.
Oh well, that's EVE for ya. Unintended consequences.
It will take a bit more effort off your alliance before you can do a tradergeddon. Ah phew. Glad we didn't accidentally do too much damage to your trading, then.
Well, this year it has been awesome. Hulkageddon in particular was very tasty since I had some massive isotopes and minerals stock, I earned about 30% markup on minerals and about 290% on isotopes.
I am not going to poke my eyes out at losing this juicy opportunity for the next years but well, lets say it was very good till it lasted. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
217
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 09:35:00 -
[553] - Quote
This thread is losing focus pretty quickly. Let's start over with what we know:
1) Players in empire space, specifically systems colloquially known as highsec, are inserted and trained in an area where all indications, besides anecdotes, point to these systems being "safe." These players often have to face a vastly different reality - that they either misunderstood or were misinformed as to the security of "highsec" space. It's in the name. 2) Empire space does not provide any incentive for either new players or longtime empire space dwellers to leave the NPC corporations, except to form their own shell corporations to dodge the 11% tax rate. 3) Because NPC corporations are immune to wardecs, the only conflict in faction space comes from factional warfare, selective and dedicated, but ultimately contrived, efforts like Rifterlings and RvB, and ganking. 4) Resources in faction space are essentially unlimited. NPC stations have the ability to manufacture, research, copy, clone, fit, repair, and store items and ships in nearly limitless storage space.
Conclusions: there is NO natural driving force behind conflict in faction space. Players do not have to fight over resources. Players have too many options available to them to avoid any contact with other players. Players also have limited means and little incentive to work together and form their own real, living breathing corporations, with shared goals and access to the ability to stage out of their own base of operations.
These game mechanics are the reason that carebears exist, and not (only) because they're scared of losing their ships; it's that they have no chance to fight back and few alternatives other than to either quit the game and move on or mothball their mining ships and run missions or Incursions instead.
Because there is a lack of natural conflict, the situation leaves open a gaping hole that only artificial conflict can fill. Hulkageddon, suicide ganking, lazy gatecamping...these are all examples of artificial conflict. What we should want is REAL conflict, with real driving forces behind it.
Remove NPC corps besides factional warfare corps (which new players will then start in, baptizing them in fire without exposing them to incredibly frustrating things like capship hotdropping). NPC stations should stop offering services (besides agents), or charge much, much more for said services. Players should WANT to form up with other players and fight for their place in EVE, whether that means factional warfare, or simply fighting other industrial corps for control of resources in a system.
I live in faction space known as "highsec." I am in an NPC corporation because there's no good reason to leave it. I don't have the desire to kill other miners, because there's enough Veldspar and Scordite and ice to go around. I dislike the artificial conflict currently rippling through faction space. But you know what? I wish it were different. I would love to join up with a small corp in which we could set up a POS wherever we wanted, work together to protect it, mine ores and ice to fuel our station and build our ships, and be able to legally fight off gankers and any other corporation who moves in to take our resources. I realize that most of that is POSSIBLE. The underlying problem and the reason this thread was created, along with so many others, with so much arguing, bitching, and moaning, is that it's mostly possible, but almost entirely pointless and not encouraged by game mechanics.
The carebears OR the gankers aren't the problem. The problem is that "highsec" and "lowsec" are too fundamentally different from 0.0 and WH space. They consequently breed fundamentally different types of players, which is why the two groups constantly bicker. After thinking about it, I agree with the sentiment that "highsec" just doesn't feel like EVE, and it doesn't feel like an MMO. We always say EVE is a sandbox, but the problem with that analogy is that sandboxes are small, and right now, some players are trying to actively stay out of the sandbox, in the grass, so they don't get dirty. That's a problem. EVE should be a beach. No matter where you are, you're gonna get covered in sand and that crap sticks to you and gets all in your car's carpet no matter how hard you try to wash it off. I got a little off-track, but my point is that I believe faction space needs a serious revamp. The transition from high to low to null should be fluid. Right now, leaving highsec is more like falling off of a cliff. |
Hauling Hal
The Black Ops
62
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 09:38:00 -
[554] - Quote
To the OP, if you are as successful in real life as you imply, why do you care?
tl/dr |
Tallian Saotome
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
675
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 10:29:00 -
[555] - Quote
ITT OP forgets that CCP making their decisions based on revenue streams is what cause Incarna, the closest EVE has ever come to dying.
I rather think that the bean counters have lost power to call the shots at CCP, and now get to just make the numbers add up right. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom. |
Roccia19
Wings of Power
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 11:32:00 -
[556] - Quote
At its origins I thought Hulkageddon was a great idea, but I really think it has crossed the line of ridiculous. It has become an imbalance in the game. Look at the top player in Hulkageddon, it is an alt that is only a month old and has been able to solo suicide gank 300 minors with ease. That certainly runs contrary to the underlying principles of balance in eve and the implied increase in capabilities with more SP. Granted superior knowledge of the game can and should be able to counter these balances, but within reason.
After reading Oddball's post and excerpts I am curious as to whether a group of players who have been affected by CCP's negligence of their own player agreement would be able to take legal action. The player agreement is a contractual obligation for the terms of service purchased from CCP, a company that does not withholding those terms under gross negligence opens themselves up to liability. Nuttier things have been successful in the US courts.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1658
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 11:39:00 -
[557] - Quote
Roccia19 wrote:At its origins I thought Hulkageddon was a great idea, but I really think it has crossed the line of ridiculous. It has become an imbalance in the game. Look at the top player in Hulkageddon, it is an alt that is only a month old and has been able to solo suicide gank 300 minors with ease. That certainly runs contrary to the underlying principles of balance in eve and the implied increase in capabilities with more SP. Granted superior knowledge of the game can and should be able to counter these balances, but within reason.
After reading Oddball's post and excerpts I am curious as to whether a group of players who have been affected by CCP's negligence of their own player agreement would be able to take legal action. The player agreement is a contractual obligation for the terms of service purchased from CCP, a company that does not withholding those terms under gross negligence opens themselves up to liability. Nuttier things have been successful in the US courts.
1) If you think combat ability comes from SP, you're wrong. HAG is actually proof that SP is no barrier to PvP.
2) The month old guy is an alt. Most likely has another 2 toons that he uses to make his ganking efficient (Orca+Scout).
3) What negligence is that? CCP offered to provide access to a game world with certain rules in exchange for $15 a month. They provided access to said game world. If you don't like the rules, you can simply end the business relationship. The EULA and the TOS are the only things CCP is bound (kind of) to enforce in its game world. Hulkageddon and its ilk very clearly breach neither the EULA nor the TOS. Even if all that weren't true, the EULA clearly states that all in game items and isk are property of CCP, so what damages could you prove? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Damius Winter
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 13:43:00 -
[558] - Quote
Hey everyone,
Brand new player...really just started, have about 3 months into the game now. Got wicked interested after I started reading about the Burn Jita event and just went nuts after that, hehe.
Anyways, I'm not highly familiar with a number of the terms being used, but one thing I have done is become active in blogs and forums to see what's happening in the world. I read about the Hulkageddon event for a couple of weeks prior to it beginning. After having learned exactly what to expect I did what I thought was the most prudent thing... I stopped playing entirely for a few weeks until the event was over.
Didn't lose my ship, money or time. Kinda unfortunate not playing, but I think the trade off was worth it. |
Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
509
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 13:46:00 -
[559] - Quote
hahahaha
legal action
holy **** |
Barbelo Valentinian
The Scope Gallente Federation
233
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 14:57:00 -
[560] - Quote
10/10 Best troll evah, look at 'em all go!!! |
|
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
70
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 16:47:00 -
[561] - Quote
Roccia19 wrote:At its origins I thought Hulkageddon was a great idea, but I really think it has crossed the line of ridiculous. It has become an imbalance in the game. Look at the top player in Hulkageddon, it is an alt that is only a month old and has been able to solo suicide gank 300 minors with ease. That certainly runs contrary to the underlying principles of balance in eve and the implied increase in capabilities with more SP. Granted superior knowledge of the game can and should be able to counter these balances, but within reason.
After reading Oddball's post and excerpts I am curious as to whether a group of players who have been affected by CCP's negligence of their own player agreement would be able to take legal action. The player agreement is a contractual obligation for the terms of service purchased from CCP, a company that does not withholding those terms under gross negligence opens themselves up to liability. Nuttier things have been successful in the US courts.
Already looked at it, frankly, after someone mailed me about something similar in game.
Short answer is no, I wouldn't have done something like that anyway, but the way the EULA is written, you would have a tough road to hoe on that one, legally speaking.
I am certainly no attorney but sections 11 through 14 pretty much offer the usual blanket preclusions that you agree to in using the software. In CCP's position, they have two options.
FIrst is to force you as a US player to escalate your costs by claiming incompetent jurisdiction based on the acceptance of the EULA whose section 16 forces you to the courts of iceland.
Alternatively, if you could claim jurisdiction in federal courts predicated on the US presence established in Georgia together with governance of US players in several states, etc, then in thier place, I would put in a motion for Summary Judgement on the grounds of having sole control of the game per section 2D where they clearly note they are not obligated to enforce the rules, as well as on the grounds of waiver predicated on end user acceptance of the EULA generally as well as on the acceptance of section 14 where you provide CCP indemnity based on your use of the game.
The idea of a legal suit over something this trivial is ludicrous.
No, what's at stake here is player enjoyment in certain segments of the paying audience and whether CCP wants to act to preserve the game for some viewpoints or if they are happy with the status quo induced by organized large scale manipulation of the game, particularly in areas where game elements have been written to control those game elements. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
964
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 16:49:00 -
[562] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I am certainly no attorney but sections 11 through 14 pretty much offer the usual blanket preclusions that you agree to in using the software. In CCP's position, they have two options.
FIrst is to force you as a US player to escalate your costs by claiming incompetent jurisdiction based on the acceptance of the EULA whose section 16 forces you to the courts of iceland.
Alternatively, in thier place, I would put in a motion for Summary Judgement on the grounds of having sole control of the game per section 2D where they clearly note they are not obligated to enforce the rules, as well as on the grounds of waiver predicated on end user acceptance of the EULA generally as well as on the acceptance of section 14 where you provide CCP indemnity based on your use of the game.
The idea of a legal suit over something this trivial is ludicrous. Sounds just in place in General Discussion.
So where do people sign up to support such action?
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1660
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 16:52:00 -
[563] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote: No, what's at stake here is player enjoyment in certain segments of the paying audience and whether CCP wants to act to preserve the game for some viewpoints or if they are happy with the status quo induced by organized large scale manipulation of the game, particularly in areas where game elements have been written to control those game elements.
Be specific, what game elements are designed to control what game elements?
CONCORD is designed to control HS PvP, limiting it to baiting, Wars, and Suicide Ganks. Unless you're getting killed by something that doesn't fall under one of those categories, CONCORD is working exactly as intended. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
70
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 16:53:00 -
[564] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: 3) What negligence is that? CCP offered to provide access to a game world with certain rules in exchange for $15 a month. They provided access to said game world. If you don't like the rules, you can simply end the business relationship. The EULA and the TOS are the only things CCP is bound (kind of) to enforce in its game world. Hulkageddon and its ilk very clearly breach neither the EULA nor the TOS. Even if all that weren't true, the EULA clearly states that all in game items and isk are property of CCP, so what damages could you prove?
Clearly RubyPorto and I havent agreed on much here, but even I agree with him here.
SO there is a third way to dismiss the case, based on failure to state a claim. In the EULA section 10A, they own everything you are being licensed to use, so what damages could you claim?
Again. Lawsuit. Ludicrous. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
964
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 16:56:00 -
[565] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:SO there is a third way to dismiss the case, based on failure to state a claim. In the EULA section 10A, they own everything you are being licensed to use, so what damages could you claim?
Again. Lawsuit. Ludicrous. Yeah CCP owns it all. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
107
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 16:58:00 -
[566] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:RubyPorto wrote: 3) What negligence is that? CCP offered to provide access to a game world with certain rules in exchange for $15 a month. They provided access to said game world. If you don't like the rules, you can simply end the business relationship. The EULA and the TOS are the only things CCP is bound (kind of) to enforce in its game world. Hulkageddon and its ilk very clearly breach neither the EULA nor the TOS. Even if all that weren't true, the EULA clearly states that all in game items and isk are property of CCP, so what damages could you prove?
Clearly RubyPorto and I havent agreed on much here, but even I agree with him here. SO there is a third way to dismiss the case, based on failure to state a claim. In the EULA section 10A, they own everything you are being licensed to use, so what damages could you claim? Again. Lawsuit. Ludicrous.
Yes YOU are Ludicrous. Please keep going you making everyone laugh If you want instant gratification, go stimulate your genitals. EvE is Hard, deal with it. |
baltec1
1252
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 18:26:00 -
[567] - Quote
Roccia19 wrote:At its origins I thought Hulkageddon was a great idea, but I really think it has crossed the line of ridiculous. It has become an imbalance in the game. Look at the top player in Hulkageddon, it is an alt that is only a month old and has been able to solo suicide gank 300 minors with ease. That certainly runs contrary to the underlying principles of balance in eve and the implied increase in capabilities with more SP. Granted superior knowledge of the game can and should be able to counter these balances, but within reason.
After reading Oddball's post and excerpts I am curious as to whether a group of players who have been affected by CCP's negligence of their own player agreement would be able to take legal action. The player agreement is a contractual obligation for the terms of service purchased from CCP, a company that does not withholding those terms under gross negligence opens themselves up to liability. Nuttier things have been successful in the US courts.
Thats 300 people who failed to fit any tank at all, working as intended. Also space lawyers. |
Kaaeliaa
Ministry of War
232
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 18:39:00 -
[568] - Quote
I think this thread is heading for a lock.
Bloody hell, threatening legal action because someone blew up your Hulk?
This thread started with a crackpot post, gathered some scorn and also some good ideas along the way, but I think it's time to end it. Believing that there's some kind of contract that's been breached, opening up the possibility of legal action...please tell me it's trolling, PLEASE, because I don't want to live in a world where people think they can sue a game company because some other player blew up their shinies. It's absolutely ludicrous. When I was a young player, I lost ships. When I ventured out into nullsec in a renter corp, I lost ships. Every time I lost a ship, it was my fault. I wasn't good enough, wasn't fast enough, wasn't strong enough, or just plain wasn't paying enough attention.
As I've said many times before in this thread, I don't like Hulkageddon. I don't like the underlying causes of it. I don't like the attitude behind it.
But the tears and now threats from players who have lost ships are reaching ludicrous levels. We need rationality if we want to accomplish anything. |
Onyx Nyx
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 18:46:00 -
[569] - Quote
Roccia19 wrote:At its origins I thought Hulkageddon was a great idea, but I really think it has crossed the line of ridiculous. It has become an imbalance in the game. Look at the top player in Hulkageddon, it is an alt that is only a month old and has been able to solo suicide gank 300 minors with ease. That certainly runs contrary to the underlying principles of balance in eve and the implied increase in capabilities with more SP. Granted superior knowledge of the game can and should be able to counter these balances, but within reason.
After reading Oddball's post and excerpts I am curious as to whether a group of players who have been affected by CCP's negligence of their own player agreement would be able to take legal action. The player agreement is a contractual obligation for the terms of service purchased from CCP, a company that does not withholding those terms under gross negligence opens themselves up to liability. Nuttier things have been successful in the US courts.
People like you is the shinning example why you aren't supposed to marry your sister. |
Devore Sekk
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 19:31:00 -
[570] - Quote
Roccia19 wrote:After reading Oddball's post and excerpts I am curious as to whether a group of players who have been affected by CCP's negligence of their own player agreement would be able to take legal action. The player agreement is a contractual obligation for the terms of service purchased from CCP, a company that does not withholding those terms under gross negligence opens themselves up to liability. Nuttier things have been successful in the US courts.
US courts? You internet lawyers are funny.
From the EULA you so cherish and love:
Quote:16. GOVERNING LAW AND EXCLUSIVE FORUM
The EULA, and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto, shall be governed and construed by and in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Iceland. The EULA shall not be governed by the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.
The sole and exclusive forum for resolving any controversy, dispute or claim arising out of or relating to the EULA, or otherwise relating to any rights in, access to or use of the Software, System, Game, Game Content, User Content and/or the rights and obligations of the parties hereto, shall be the District Court of Reykjav+¡k, Iceland, (H+¬ra+¦sd+¦mur Reykjav+¡kur). You hereby expressly waive and agree not to raise any and all objections based on personal jurisdiction, venue and/or inconvenience of such forum and agree to the jurisdiction of the District Court of Reykjav+¡k, Iceland.
Have fun going to court in Iceland because someone blew up your internet spaceship and called you names in local. |
|
Wacktopia
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
251
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 19:48:00 -
[571] - Quote
OP - please point to the marketing video from CCP that does not show people blowing each other up. This is a pvp game. Pvp is not your choice, it is your DESTINY. CCP: Fix Inferno war decs.-áAllies should not be free and unlimited. -á-á |
Drax Dremal
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 19:55:00 -
[572] - Quote
Hulkageddon for a week was just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for a month was still just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for more than a month will start to lower the playerbase. |
Juess
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 19:59:00 -
[573] - Quote
Drax Dremal wrote:Hulkageddon for a week was just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for a month was still just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for more than a month will start to lower the playerbase. I suspect that might be a giant case of "Working as intended." |
baltec1
1254
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 20:00:00 -
[574] - Quote
Drax Dremal wrote:Hulkageddon for a week was just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for a month was still just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for more than a month will start to lower the playerbase.
Only the ones that fail to adapt. |
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
497
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 20:11:00 -
[575] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Drax Dremal wrote:Hulkageddon for a week was just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for a month was still just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for more than a month will start to lower the playerbase. Only the ones that fail to adapt. Yeah, if anything it will strengthen the playerbase. Evolution. |
Haldor Rune
State War Academy Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 20:14:00 -
[576] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:baltec1 wrote:Drax Dremal wrote:Hulkageddon for a week was just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for a month was still just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for more than a month will start to lower the playerbase. Only the ones that fail to adapt. Yeah, if anything it will strengthen the playerbase. Evolution.
Goonswarm has a bunch of economists and people good with calculators, right? I'm sure they predicted what the long-term effects would be before they committed to Unending Hulkageddon. If the playerbase also evolves as a result, then their mission (or, at least, part of it) will actually be complete! |
Drax Dremal
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 20:49:00 -
[577] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement. I am fortunate enough to have full time employment as a fairly successful Solution Architect for a Global consulting firm. I play from a custom built home office and hotels all over the United States. My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. Eve has woven itself in as an on-again, off-again diversion where for the last three years I can apply business acumen and some custom tools to build an industrial marketer and manufacturer. Eve is a fun low pressure environment where I make the conscious choice to forgo combat and low sec rewards to maintain the low stress nature of this pursuit. Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment. I petition CCP to consider the policy and natural violations that the inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural Consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'hulkageddon' - or at least limit them to the low- and null-sec systems where they belong. Recognizing the Violations of CCP PolicyAn external competition like hulkageddon depends upon players allying and indeed competing to determine which player is most willing to ignore the disincentives engineered into the game which protect players who participate in high security systems. Indeed the competition organizers have created systematic logs denoting and ridiculing the expressions of distress or outrage by affected players: Quote:" The same cannot be said for the 5000 poor fools that have been deshipped in the first half of this yearGÇÖs Hulkageddon, with over a trillion isk in damages done so far. This hulkageddon has exceeded our wildest expectations. I am so very proud of all our great competitors, and remember the race for the gold is not yet over!" - http://hulkageddon5.machine9.net/?p=96Yet CCP has denoted conduct such as this which determines to interfere with the operation of the system and the enjoyment of other players as verboten through at least two provisions. Quote:"Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. " -http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp The terms of service at http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp specifically forbids role playing that interferes with others enjoyment of the game as well as forbidding conduct which disallows others to enjoy the game. By organizing large scale operations to eliminate players engaging in high sec mining operations, and entire sector of game play is disrupted. By CCP's own statistics, thousands of players have already been affected in this way to date. Quote:"A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account." -http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336 In the Knowledge Base published by CCP, as well, we find a definition of griefing and its specific prohibition of players deriving a significant portion of their time to game tactics that derive their enjoyment through the harassment of other players ourside of genuine pvp conflict such as corporation wars. Recognizing Inaction as Counter to Real Life AnalogsOne of the other clear guides CCP has applied to player conduct is the consideration of the real life treatment of the analog of the player conduct in a real society. Were a real life band to conspire to affect markets by systematically attacking mining operations, there is ample precedent to recognize that governments and international organizations would act. The grounds to do so are numerous.
- Systematic attacks on the unarmed
- Collusion to manipulate market dynamics
- Collusion to destroy an entire class of entity
We would see concerted action on multiple fronts from the US, the EU, and the UN. Antitrust hearings. Courts and tribunals. Resolutions and committees. CCPs response in the role of the international arbitration? Absent. A Simple ResponseI would suggest the response is simple and two pronged.
- Concord notices the drop in the markets and in order to ensure the supposed stability of the universe, have placed a couple of concord ships resident in high sec asteroid belts only in addition to their current locations.
- CCP begins warning and taking action against blatant high sec offenders.
Anecdotal evidence has already started to surface of player discontent with allowing these actions to remain unpunished and indeed unrestrained. I question how long CCP will wait to allow bands of players to flagrantly collude to ignore intended game mechanics and deny greater segments of the player base the enjoyment of the chosen virtual profession that keeps the real-life game revenue coming in.
I agree. CCP needs to stop any actions that destroy the balance of the game. |
Onyx Nyx
Perkone Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 20:56:00 -
[578] - Quote
Drax Dremal wrote:
I agree. CCP needs to stop any actions that destroy the balance of the game.
I have a big glaring balance issue with the game that I find ultimately ruins EVE.
My negative sec status.
Let me back into hi-sec, I promise I'll be good.
|
Atomic Virulent
Dark Matter Industrial
104
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 21:00:00 -
[579] - Quote
Brillaint post. However, your argument falls on demented ears. CCP make up much of GSF and allies. CCP Soundwave for example is a "former" Goon director. He is essentially the public face of CCP. Doesn't that make you all warm inside? |
Onyx Nyx
Perkone Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 21:03:00 -
[580] - Quote
Atomic Virulent wrote:Brillaint post. However, your argument falls on demented ears. CCP make up much of GSF and allies. CCP Soundwave for example is a "former" Goon director. He is essentially the public face of CCP. Doesn't that make you all warm inside?
It gets me warm and fuzzy, just thinking about how much you cringe at the fact that CCP Soundwave is ex-Goon.
edit: CCP Sreegs is the ex-CEO (Darius Johnson) of Goonswarm and he is the head of security. Spontaneous self-combustion next? |
|
Khadann
First Legion
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 21:09:00 -
[581] - Quote
ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox.
Still i give the post author a + 1 for posting with a real character and +1 for brining the legal espects in the topic |
Galadriel Vasquez
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
89
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 21:35:00 -
[582] - Quote
Well, I have read all of this thread and I laughed at some of it and am concerned at other areas. Firstly let me say that while losing a pod with that much isk in is a right pisser and would make you sad panda I have to say you brought it on yourself - you should have known that it was open season on Hulks and you should have Dscan on permanently - see Combat Probes? GTFO! Paranoia is your friend in New Eden!
I genuinely hope your bad experience does not cause you to quit and I apply that to all Hulkageddon victims - and before you ask, no I don't gank Miners and I have no alts that do either. Though if I saw you mining in Null and you were red or orange then I would blow you to bits. Unlikely though as no sane Egger mines in enemy Sov right?
Finally to Mittens and his cohorts - I kind of get what your doing and why but be careful what you wish for. I feel our game is at an important junction. I have tin foil hat trained to 5. |
W0z3R
Opportunist Enterprise
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 00:36:00 -
[583] - Quote
Interesting read |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
77
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 00:58:00 -
[584] - Quote
Hauling Hal wrote:To the OP, if you are as successful in real life as you imply, why do you care? tl/dr
Because wild sex that is illegal in 7 states takes no more than an hour a day.
More seriously, as far as I am concerned, major cred for the oatmeal reference. Love that site. And for any who haven't worked at any of the the Seattle, WA, USA major tech / consulting firms, some of the passive aggressive crap in the comics on TheOatmeal is JUST how it is. I once went into one of the bathrooms at the braeburn office in Bellevue and someone had put up a paper taped to the mirror about how the toilets cry when people miss when they pee. Seriously. With a picture of a toilet crying. |
Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 02:56:00 -
[585] - Quote
OP: the key phrase in the EULA is "at CCP's discretion". That means they don't have to lift a finger if they don't want to and it's non-binding.
Should they or shouldn't they is a valid question, but logically speaking not on the grounds you've presented in your opining post as they have an out. I <3 Vexors. |
Samuel Wess
SW Consulting
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 11:07:00 -
[586] - Quote
It just shows a badly architected fitting solution for a hulk.
On the other hand the predators are dependent on their prey, over hunting will exterminate both. |
Nirnias Stirrum
Tr0pa de elite. Against ALL Authorities
180
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 12:29:00 -
[587] - Quote
Funny thing is if you had fitted at least some tank you would never have died, would never have created this thread and would never have made an absolute fool of yourself to the entire eve community.
Since you have all those shield implants, if you had fitted some shield tank that catalyst would of died long before he even got half your shield down.
It would take at least 4 catalysts to gank a hulk fast enough before concord response.
In short, you fail sir. |
Drax Dremal
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 15:23:00 -
[588] - Quote
CCP does not seem to care what players want. |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 15:34:00 -
[589] - Quote
Drax Dremal wrote:CCP does not seem to care what players want.
You're right, that's why they created EVE Online and have updated it consistently for 9 years now, because the players never wanted it. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 15:40:00 -
[590] - Quote
Drax Dremal wrote:CCP does not seem to care what players want.
No, CCP does not share your vision of a pacifistic, safe, boring thempark MMO in Space. Their players seem to like that, since Subs have been up every year since release 9 years ago.
If you don't like it... I'd say there's the door, but... Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
|
baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 18:20:00 -
[591] - Quote
Samuel Wess wrote:It just shows a badly architected fitting solution for a hulk.
On the other hand the predators are dependent on their prey, over hunting will exterminate both.
We also hate it when people tank them. |
Vicata Heth
The Primary is Primary
18
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 07:48:00 -
[592] - Quote
I like how the OP assumes there is some high court in eve that his legalese mumbo jumbo will appeal to. News flash, EVE doesn't work like the real world. People don't play games because they want them to be like the real world. As a matter of fact most people play mmos, more specifically sandbox mmos, because they're different from the real world. Whether that's escapism, boredom, or simply a way to kick back, relax, and enjoy the rest of your day after work, is dependent on the player. Point is though, this is EVE, not real life.
If you think spewing your legalese crap in a video game is going to do anything but make people point and laugh at your delicious tears, you are VERY sadly mistaken. You lost a ship, and if you're an active miner I'm sure you've got the isk to replace it. Your time would have been better spent researching why you died and how to prevent it in the future. But alas it appears learning is a foreign concept to you, and anything that doesn't work how you want it to work must be changed. Instead you chose to write a wall of text about why CCP should change game mechanics that the majority of the community enjoys this game for, so that you can mine in peace.
Had you been paying attention, you wouldn't have lost your pod at the very least. If you had a clue about any aspect of EVE other than how fast your hulk can mine roids, for example, how to use your directional scanner, or even adding combat probes to your overview, you probably wouldn't have lost your ship either. On top of that if you bothered to pay attention to anything other than how much veldspar was in your hold, you'd have known that hulkageddon was active. You would have also known that mining in an untanked hulk during hulkageddon was about the dumbest, most careless decision you could have made.
I don't mine anymore, and to be honest I never mined much when I did. My total mining time is probably under 24 hours worth. However even though I don't mine, I still took the time to learn the mechanics. I still take the time to fit a mining ship in EFT to see how much tank it can achieve, and how much ore it can mine. I actively learn the game mechanics, every day I play EVE I learn a new mechanic. If I were you, I would stop crying every time something happens that I don't like, and instead use that energy to educate myself about the mechanic that caused the action I did not want.
Here's a protip for you, if it costs more to blow your ship up than you will lose as a result, your ship probably won't be looked at by gankers much.
This wall of text is starting to compete with yours though. So I'm going to leave this as my final statement.
EVE is not real life, you are not safe, ever, and your ignorance is not reason to change game mechanics that have been in place long before you started playing this game. This is MY EVE, and you should consider yourself lucky you have the privilege to play target practice with us.
EDIT: Oh, and by the way, I didn't even read the OP. I already knew pretty much everything you said, and the type of theme park lover that you are from the quotes in the ganker's response. |
Valya Niell
Lobster of Babel The Dark Nation
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 09:45:00 -
[593] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on. Welcome to EVE, a PVP game full of nasty pirates and terrorists who love people who fail to protect themselves in even the most basic way.
Best you get used to EVE as it is not advertised as a dark and hostile game for nothing.
First, i would like you to point me to where this advertisement is. Second, it is no longer a question of dark and hostile as it is a question of CCP's blatant disregard of their own policies.
Quote:"A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account."
by this definition any of the players participating are not griefers unless they don't accept the imposed bounty. however this still violates the policy of not taking from others enjoyment of the game. counterpoint: some taking of the enjoyment from others is inherrent in all MMO's.
I do believe that a concerted game wide effort goes beyond the call for action from ccp. (if to do nothing other than reword their own policies).
However what i want to see is concerted efforts to take the enjoyment from the people who take it from us industrialists. i propose a sort of coalition or something to rip the control back, re-establish our roles. if these efforts exist already point me them so i may support them. as for you goonies. quit trolling, or at least let me in on the bounty you get for bombing threads against you into a flame war.
PS: i'm curious, do those subscription counts include people paying for multiple accounts and how do they take in to consideration counts deactivated at all.
XTreme Industries: Take back your roids! winners not whiners. If you care about your game experience take it back or find a different game experience to hate. Goonsquad: now offering bounties to troll and flame. inquire within. |
Plaude Pollard
Crimson Cartel
35
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 10:14:00 -
[594] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Really? In 2010, I really can't remember less than 50k players on weekends, sometimes around 58k. When I started my first account, almost three years ago, it wasn't unusual to see more than 60k pilots online. Over the last month, I've never seen more than 35k online, and hell, when I logged in last night, there weren't even 30k online. Why? Because Hulkageddon is making it impossible to mine in peace, which makes miners quit the game entirely.
Last Wednesday evening, my main's corp was having an Ice-mining operation, in order to fuel our POS. Normally (even during Hulkageddon) we would see about Mining Barges, Mackinaws and Orcas lying in the Ice Field, but that evening there were only 10 ships total. Our 8 and another Orca with a single Mackinaw. And no, we didn't bot-mine. We didn't AFK-mine. In fact, we had our ships tanked out and even stored a Kitsune in the Orca, which one of us would switch to when we saw non-mining ships on D-Scan, and prepare to jam anyone the moment they started aggressing us. We didn't need our tank nor the Kitsune, but we still brought the means to defend ourselves. There were 10 people mining ice, out of the usual 50. If that figure applies everywhere, it would mean that 80% of all miners have quit because it's too dangerous (or they've moved to more hostile environments or just learnt to spread out to make it hard for the gankers to rack up lots of kills quickly). |
Valya Niell
Lobster of Babel The Dark Nation
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 10:21:00 -
[595] - Quote
on the bright side the outflux of miners has bottomed out the market... oh wait no because the suicide gankers have their own miners that produce stuff and eat the profit from resupplying the ganked... XTreme Industries: Take back your roids! winners not whiners. If you care about your game experience take it back or find a different game experience to hate. Goonsquad: now offering bounties to troll and flame. inquire within. |
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
328
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 10:59:00 -
[596] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Drax Dremal wrote:CCP does not seem to care what players want. No, CCP does not share your vision of a pacifistic, safe, boring thempark MMO in Space. Their players seem to like that, since Subs have been up every year since release 9 years ago. If you don't like it... I'd say there's the door, but...
It doesn't need to be a pacifistic safe boring MMO in space, neither does it have to be a greifers paradise, which it currently is. If they do balance it and you don't like it , I'd say there's the door, but....
Also the current lvl of misery being caused by low and null sec trying to dictate what hi sec is hasn't been such a big issue for 9 years, we will only as players (CCP probably already knows) what the affect on numbers has been in 6 months to a year. Quoting historical numbers doesn't really count.
Remember your motto "We don't want to ruin the game, just your game". you come into a game with that attitude then ppl will push back and perceive you as just that, greifers (true or false)
Tal |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7619
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:09:00 -
[597] - Quote
Plaude Pollard wrote:When I started my first account, almost three years ago, it wasn't unusual to see more than 60k pilots online. Yes it was. Three years ago (2009), the PCU record was 53k players. GǣAlmostGǥ three years ago (early 2010), the PCU record was 56k. Less than two years ago (mid 2010), the PCU record finally broke 60kGǪ
GǪthe record was 60k. It didn't get close to that until early 2011 when a new PCU record was set at 63k.
So would you like to 'fess up now which part it was you were lying about? Your age, the PCUs you were seeing, or all of it? When you started your account, almost three years ago, it wasn't just GÇ£unusualGÇ¥ to see more than 60k pilots online GÇö it never even happened until over a year later. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Be a smarter newbie, don't fall into the trap of lvl V skills. |
Sekket
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
21
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:12:00 -
[598] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement. Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment.
I petition CCP to consider the policy and natural violations that the inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural Consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'hulkageddon' - or at least limit them to the low- and null-sec systems where they belong.
I was feeling some sympathy for your position until I took a glance at the kill mails that others posted.
You died to a single Catalyst.
Your Hulk had 3 empty mid slots and you had over half a billion isk worth of shield implants in your clone.
You lost your ship due to your own negligence, and your post smells of troll. - CQ isn't a refuge, it's a cage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iu4iekX3WE |
Xhaiden Ora
University of Caille Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:16:00 -
[599] - Quote
My favourite part of this is thread is how the op starts out like a personal ad on Adult Friendfinder. >.>
|
Gonada
The Oasis Group Combat Mining and Logistics
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:54:00 -
[600] - Quote
Meryl SinGarda wrote:Honestly, I think you could have started here - "Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec." Why do we need to hear your life story before you go on about being killed? lol
Probably because he wanted to show that he was an intelligent fellow, unlike you, CEO of a butt |
|
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:09:00 -
[601] - Quote
Sekket wrote:Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement. Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment.
I petition CCP to consider the policy and natural violations that the inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural Consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'hulkageddon' - or at least limit them to the low- and null-sec systems where they belong.
I was feeling some sympathy for your position until I took a glance at the kill mails that others posted. You died to a single Catalyst. Your Hulk had 3 empty mid slots and you had over half a billion isk worth of shield implants in your clone. You lost your ship due to your own negligence, and your post smells of troll.
There isn't any troll in his post, just a whole bunch of mad. |
Sri Nova
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:27:00 -
[602] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement.
I am fortunate enough to have full time employment as a fairly successful Solution Architect for a Global consulting firm. I play from a custom built home office and hotels all over the United States. My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. Eve has woven itself in as an on-again, off-again diversion where for the last three years I can apply business acumen and some custom tools to build an industrial marketer and manufacturer.
Eve is a fun low pressure environment where I make the conscious choice to forgo combat and low sec rewards to maintain the low stress nature of this pursuit.
Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment. -------------------------------------- well written stuff----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
Your post is well written and intentionally or unintentionally highlights the underlying problem .
using the tos to demonstrate that players are not acting accordingly is the wrong way to tackle this issue.
The central issue is that a core tool afforded to players to apply a , how did you put it ? Ah yes, system of natural consequences.
do not work as intended in game.
your proposal however is in direct conflict with the title of this thread placing concord at each belt to protect players is about as unnatural as it gets .
eve has systems in place that actually would allow one to avoid all the problems caused by hulkaggeddon but the majority of players refuse to use them .
the one tool that is needed is a tool to properly enact retribution . CCP's attempt at implementing this tool is broken thus why there is a problem with the underlying mechanics . Unfortunately a solution to the problem is not easy . many good post have been written about what to do about the bounty system but nothing concrete has surfaced that would make it 100% effective.
thus this brings us back to what the real problem is .
players have become to complacent, that they are safe in a game that was never intended to for them to be safe in the first place.
their are tools available to these players to prevent terrible things from happening to them . yet they refuse to use them for they feel they should be free to solo without consequences. unfortunately this is not how the game was envisioned or implemented.
to suggest otherwise and implements systems to protect these players is simply unnatural.
|
Ger Rees
EntroPraetorian Academy
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 15:13:00 -
[603] - Quote
I agree with OP.
Firstly, tanking your barge to survive a thrasher is only going to work if you have high skills, and he has low skills.
Secondly, if you survive a skilled thrasher (unlikely, but possible if you sacrifice all efficiency from your hulk) the suicide ganker will inevitably return in a tornado just to make his point.
Thirdly, sandbox gameplay is a poor excuse that becomes tiresome. 'Sandbox gameplay' does not mean you instantly need to kick over the little guys' sand castle.
Solution: Give the Hulk and Mackinaw another 100 tf cpu. A hulk only has 300 tf base. A falcon by comparison has 500 tf, even a sacrilege has 400 tf. And yet the most sophisticated tech 2 mining barge in the game, has less cpu available than a t2 cruiser? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 20:41:00 -
[604] - Quote
Talon SilverHawk wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Drax Dremal wrote:CCP does not seem to care what players want. No, CCP does not share your vision of a pacifistic, safe, boring thempark MMO in Space. Their players seem to like that, since Subs have been up every year since release 9 years ago. If you don't like it... I'd say there's the door, but... It doesn't need to be a pacifistic safe boring MMO in space, neither does it have to be a greifers paradise, which it currently is. If they do balance it and you don't like it , I'd say there's the door, but.... Also the current lvl of misery being caused by low and null sec trying to dictate what hi sec is hasn't been such a big issue for 9 years, we will only as players (CCP probably already knows) what the affect on numbers has been in 6 months to a year. Quoting historical numbers doesn't really count. Remember your motto "We don't want to ruin the game, just your game". you come into a game with that attitude then ppl will push back and perceive you as just that, greifers (true or false) Tal
Do you see a GSF tag under my name? No? Then don't hook the Mittani's propaganda on me (and that's what that quote is, in General, the Goons are here to have fun; they just don't care if their fun trods all over yours).
If it were a griefer's paradise, ganking newbies in the newbie systems would be allowed, since Per CCP, that's one of the only ways shooting spaceships in space can be considered griefing. This isn't WoW; we have a different definition of unacceptable play here. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 20:45:00 -
[605] - Quote
Ger Rees wrote:I agree with OP.
Firstly, tanking your barge to survive a thrasher is only going to work if you have high skills, and he has low skills.
Secondly, if you survive a skilled thrasher (unlikely, but possible if you sacrifice all efficiency from your hulk) the suicide ganker will inevitably return in a tornado just to make his point.
Thirdly, sandbox gameplay is a poor excuse that becomes tiresome. 'Sandbox gameplay' does not mean you instantly need to kick over the little guys' sand castle.
Solution: Give the Hulk and Mackinaw another 100 tf cpu. A hulk only has 300 tf base. A falcon by comparison has 500 tf, even a sacrilege has 400 tf. And yet the most sophisticated tech 2 mining barge in the game, has less cpu available than a t2 cruiser?
1) Nobody uses thrashers to kill Hulks, people use Catalysts
2) If you tank your Hulk, you'll have 30k EHP. If you keep an RR BS or Logi ship on field and paying attention, Catalysts will be unable to gank you (unless they can alpha you, which takes 30 of them or can overcome your Reps, which takes ~15-20) and all you'll have to worry about are Tornados (of which gankers would need 6 to kill you) at a cost of around 380m Isk per gank.
Your Hulks stats are fine. You just need to be better at fitting your ship. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 20:46:00 -
[606] - Quote
Valya Niell wrote:on the bright side the outflux of miners has bottomed out the market... oh wait no because the suicide gankers have their own miners that produce stuff and eat the profit from resupplying the ganked...
I buy my ships off the market in Jita. So does every other ganker. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Makkal Hanaya
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 11:50:00 -
[607] - Quote
Llywelyn Emrys wrote:Think of EVE as a libertarian paradise. Oh, it's not that bad. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 11:53:00 -
[608] - Quote
Makkal Hanaya wrote:Llywelyn Emrys wrote:Think of EVE as a libertarian paradise. Oh, it's not that bad.
Somalia in Space is equivalent and has a nice ring to it.
IB4 Butthurt Libertarians. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
226
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 19:30:00 -
[609] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement. I am fortunate enough to have full time employment as a fairly successful Solution Architect for a Global consulting firm. I play from a custom built home office and hotels all over the United States. My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. Eve has woven itself in as an on-again, off-again diversion where for the last three years I can apply business acumen and some custom tools to build an industrial marketer and manufacturer. Eve is a fun low pressure environment where I make the conscious choice to forgo combat and low sec rewards to maintain the low stress nature of this pursuit. Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment. I petition CCP to consider the policy and natural violations that the inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural Consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'hulkageddon' - or at least limit them to the low- and null-sec systems where they belong. Recognizing the Violations of CCP PolicyAn external competition like hulkageddon depends upon players allying and indeed competing to determine which player is most willing to ignore the disincentives engineered into the game which protect players who participate in high security systems. Indeed the competition organizers have created systematic logs denoting and ridiculing the expressions of distress or outrage by affected players: Quote:" The same cannot be said for the 5000 poor fools that have been deshipped in the first half of this yearGÇÖs Hulkageddon, with over a trillion isk in damages done so far. This hulkageddon has exceeded our wildest expectations. I am so very proud of all our great competitors, and remember the race for the gold is not yet over!" - http://hulkageddon5.machine9.net/?p=96Yet CCP has denoted conduct such as this which determines to interfere with the operation of the system and the enjoyment of other players as verboten through at least two provisions. Quote:"Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. " -http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp The terms of service at http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp specifically forbids role playing that interferes with others enjoyment of the game as well as forbidding conduct which disallows others to enjoy the game. By organizing large scale operations to eliminate players engaging in high sec mining operations, and entire sector of game play is disrupted. By CCP's own statistics, thousands of players have already been affected in this way to date. Quote:"A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account." -http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336 In the Knowledge Base published by CCP, as well, we find a definition of griefing and its specific prohibition of players deriving a significant portion of their time to game tactics that derive their enjoyment through the harassment of other players ourside of genuine pvp conflict such as corporation wars. Recognizing Inaction as Counter to Real Life AnalogsOne of the other clear guides CCP has applied to player conduct is the consideration of the real life treatment of the analog of the player conduct in a real society. Were a real life band to conspire to affect markets by systematically attacking mining operations, there is ample precedent to recognize that governments and international organizations would act. The grounds to do so are numerous.
- Systematic attacks on the unarmed
- Collusion to manipulate market dynamics
- Collusion to destroy an entire class of entity
We would see concerted action on multiple fronts from the US, the EU, and the UN. Antitrust hearings. Courts and tribunals. Resolutions and committees. CCPs response in the role of the international arbitration? Absent. A Simple ResponseI would suggest the response is simple and two pronged.
- Concord notices the drop in the markets and in order to ensure the supposed stability of the universe, have placed a couple of concord ships resident in high sec asteroid belts only in addition to their current locations.
- CCP begins warning and taking action against blatant high sec offenders.
Anecdotal evidence has already started to surface of player discontent with allowing these actions to remain unpunished and indeed unrestrained. I question how long CCP will wait to allow bands of players to flagrantly collude to ignore intended game mechanics and deny greater segments of the player base the enjoyment of the chosen virtual profession that keeps the real-life game revenue coming in. http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13674431 Welp, it appears your plea went unanswered. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1923
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 19:44:00 -
[610] - Quote
API please. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
|
baltec1
1453
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 19:49:00 -
[611] - Quote
Look at all that rock. |
Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
227
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 20:01:00 -
[612] - Quote
As soon as he wakes up, I'll get him to add it. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1924
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 20:08:00 -
[613] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:As soon as he wakes up, I'll get him to add it.
Wonderful. I've been disapoint with KMs in the past that turned out to never be verified or fell victim to the BPCs in cans are BPOs bug. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade Lost Obsession
228
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 20:11:00 -
[614] - Quote
Ganks are part of the game, learn to deal.
However, the Sandbox arguement.
In this sandbox you can do anything you want, as long as you're willing to deal with the after effects. Fair enough, Gankers do, when concord comes and removes their ship. Cool.
My question, is why are players allowed to bypass the ratting process thats built into the game for a reason? Is being able to gank in high sec while -10 really working as intended? Shouldn't you be forced to deal with your action by ratting?
Until of course you can buy back your sec off carebear ratters, but until then, -10 players are kinda bypassing a game mechanic. I say kinda as npcs have spawn times that allow -10 travel time.
I wonder if Crimewatch 2.0 will make this a moot point.
Just thinking out loud, as a -10 player, i would be upset if I wasn't allowed to travel in high sec anymore. Though it has been sometime since I saw the brightlights or a trade hub. |
Pirokobo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 20:18:00 -
[615] - Quote
Quote:Quote:"Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy. " -http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp The terms of service at http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp specifically forbids role playing that interferes with others enjoyment of the game as well as forbidding conduct which disallows others to enjoy the game.
We're not roleplaying.
We really are a******s.
And we're enabling a lot of people TO enjoy the game. At your expense. Secretary - Goonswarm Federation Corps Diplomatique |
Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
227
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 20:27:00 -
[616] - Quote
Pirokobo wrote:We're not roleplaying. We really are a******s. And we're enabling a lot of people TO enjoy the game. At your expense.
((OOC: I highly disagree with this jerk |
Strike The Moons
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 20:27:00 -
[617] - Quote
Nice obelisk. Be a shame if anything happened to it. http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13674431 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13674433 Fly safe |
Dimitryy
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
53
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 21:37:00 -
[618] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:I do not live in my mother's basement.
I am fortunate enough to have full time employment as a fairly successful Solution Architect for a Global consulting firm. I play from a custom built home office and hotels all over the United States. My identity is defined as a father, a husband, and a businessman. Eve has woven itself in as an on-again, off-again diversion where for the last three years I can apply business acumen and some custom tools to build an industrial marketer and manufacturer.
Eve is a fun low pressure environment where I make the conscious choice to forgo combat and low sec rewards to maintain the low stress nature of this pursuit.
Recently, I was killed mining and even podded in high sec. Losses in my ship of 300mil plus, implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a loose coalition of players to reward collective behavior against the engineered system of penalties and policies that are intended to make high security zones a low risk, low reward environment.
I live in my mother's basement.
I am fortunate enough to have part time employment as a minimum wage cleaning architect for a global cleaning firm. I play from a mass produced home desk and from outside buildings with wifi all over my town.
Recently i killed and podded in highsec. Losses in somebody's ship of 300mil plus implant losses of something on the order of a billion and change. Why? Because CCP has chosen by its inaction to allow a vast sea of players to reward individual behavior against the engineered system of risks and rewards that are intended to make high sec a low risk, low reward environment.
Eve is a fun high pressure environment where i make the conscious choice to enjoy combat and low sec rewards to maintain the high stress nature of this pursuit.
I petition CCP to consider the vast piles of isk that inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'lvl 4 missions' and 'risk free mining' - or at least limit them to the low and null sec systems where they belong.
Dimi
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1038
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 00:20:00 -
[619] - Quote
Dimitryy wrote:I petition CCP to consider the vast piles of isk that inaction to date represent, and also suggest a system of natural consequences which may be of use in curbing such competitions like 'lvl 4 missions' and 'risk free mining' - or at least limit them to the low and null sec systems where they belong. let's not be too extreme now... Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Deity Aiur
Moon In Scorpio RED.OverLord
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 00:35:00 -
[620] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You are investing time into something you don't really understand, Mr. Successful Real-Life Businessman Married With Children.
You see, this is a video game that focuses on conflict, scamming, violence, murder, and sociopathy. This is not a family-friendly pastime created for the enjoyment and benefit of working family men to unwind after a hard day of shaking hands and having power lunches.
Legendary post is legendary.
|
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1927
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 01:42:00 -
[621] - Quote
I still really want to see the magical API verification before I can celebrate. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Strike The Moons
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 05:20:00 -
[622] - Quote
I added my API to eve-kill. However long it takes to verify is it's own business.To celebrate I found a missioning apoc (terrible fit, meta tank mixed guns naturally) and dealt with him as well. http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13675326 |
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
611
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 06:13:00 -
[623] - Quote
How is it valid shooting your own Corpmate? That fail-fit Apoc looks like a setup too. That wasn't a gank, that was an arrangement. The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
San Severina
Hoplite Brigade
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 06:14:00 -
[624] - Quote
I have never been a pirate or hi-sec ganker but I do find these heart-felt appeals to CCP from disgruntled miners incredibly juicy & delicious.
Ahahaha, suck it up OP, you lose.
Would of Warcraft --> etc etc.
|
Solstice Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
1542
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 07:29:00 -
[625] - Quote
It's a troll, i remember the name. Inappropriate signature removed. Spitfire |
Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
230
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 23:50:00 -
[626] - Quote
I still don't understand why it hasn't verified. I witnessed both kills. I guess I should have had fraps on :( |
Strike The Moons
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 00:46:00 -
[627] - Quote
Yeah who knows. eve-kill is terrible. |
adam smash
University of Caille Gallente Federation
100
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 00:47:00 -
[628] - Quote
Just like to know why the OP is so dumb he links stuff he does not understand....
http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336
"while he does not profit from it in any way." Cept killing a hulk makes a profit...
"You may not do anything that interferes with the ability of other EVE Online subscribers to enjoy the game or web site in accordance with its rules."
That means attack the server, the player, etc.
Who likes being blown up?
O crap now no one can blow up ANYONE.
OP
Go find another game to play.
O and it's called a "gtfo" tab on the overview... right click is for noobs.
Hell we ran into a tanked STABBED hulk the other day...
He got out alive...
CCP should not change the whole game to make the oddball fit. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
237
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:02:00 -
[629] - Quote
adam smash wrote:CCP should not change the whole game to make the oddball fit. [USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST] |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1949
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 03:27:00 -
[630] - Quote
Strike The Moons wrote:Yeah who knows. eve-kill is terrible.
Maybe Battleclinic will have better luck with the API pull? Or a GSF kb?
It's weird that it's got the Apoc verified, but not the freighter. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
|
Strike The Moons
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 06:17:00 -
[631] - Quote
maybe, i'll try battleclinic then. It really IS weird because the Apoc was manually added and THAT api verified just fine. |
Mirime Nolwe
Mantra of Pain
47
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 09:13:00 -
[632] - Quote
0.0 is long dead, people need to start doing other stuff to keep entertained.
Instead of asking for the ganks to stop, ask for CCP to fix 0.0 and introduce something in there that make players want to fight each other. otherwise the game will slowly eat itself from inside. |
Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
234
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 23:06:00 -
[633] - Quote
Second Obelisk: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13750007 API's were added but haven't updated. This is starting to get annoying. Does oddball have to add his API? Missed his pod |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2041
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 23:36:00 -
[634] - Quote
I'd report the mails, hopefully EvE-Kill can do some sort of manual check. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 03:34:00 -
[635] - Quote
I'm chilling in their support IRC troubleshooting it down. Multiple killboards pulling from multiple API's screws it all up. |
Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 11:49:00 -
[636] - Quote
Verified |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1115
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 14:06:00 -
[637] - Quote
Yeah ! Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2048
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 20:51:00 -
[638] - Quote
Hell yeah! This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Strike The Moons
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 20:31:00 -
[639] - Quote
Fix mine too please! |
Rikanin
Wargasm Inc
47
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 20:46:00 -
[640] - Quote
Why in gods name hasn't this thread died yet?
|
|
Mons Pubis Giganticus
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 00:56:00 -
[641] - Quote
your pleas will be ignored |
Strike The Moons
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 02:36:00 -
[642] - Quote
Rikanin wrote:Why in gods name hasn't this thread died yet?
Where would the fun in that be? |
Mons Pubis Giganticus
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 20:08:00 -
[643] - Quote
Strike The Moons wrote:Rikanin wrote:Why in gods name hasn't this thread died yet?
Where would the fun in that be? i am a necromancer, thats why. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: [one page] |