Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4559
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 10:01:00 -
[31] - Quote
Sabrina Solette wrote:Cede Forster wrote:forestwho wrote:ps: for the trolls again:Im saying here that there is a fundamental error in the game mechanics that leads somehow to 0.0 stalemates. i see your "its the game mechanics fault" and raise you a "it is the human natures fault" You seem to like that 'it is the human natures fault'. Game mechanics should take into consideration human nature, otherwise they might not work as intended.
I will send you 100M ISK if you can come up with a game mechanics solution that I have not seen on this forum already.
I will send you a PLEX if you can come up with a solution that I can't think up an easy and obvious work around for within 60 seconds. 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/ |
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
94
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 10:28:00 -
[32] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Sabrina Solette wrote:Cede Forster wrote:forestwho wrote:ps: for the trolls again:Im saying here that there is a fundamental error in the game mechanics that leads somehow to 0.0 stalemates. i see your "its the game mechanics fault" and raise you a "it is the human natures fault" You seem to like that 'it is the human natures fault'. Game mechanics should take into consideration human nature, otherwise they might not work as intended. I will send you 100M ISK if you can come up with a game mechanics solution that I have not seen on this forum already. I will send you a PLEX if you can come up with a solution that I can't think up an easy and obvious work around for within 60 seconds.
Well thanks but I don't actually need your isk or PLEX, have plenty of isk of my own. |
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
94
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 10:37:00 -
[33] - Quote
Cede Forster wrote:mechanics are stones you throw in the way of human who then go on to circumvent it,
I wouldn't call them stones but people will tend to do things the easiest way. If you put in place a change to stop something happening some people will see that as a challenge and try to circumvent it.
Problem with CCP is they've introduced changes in the past that have not been thought out properly.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4559
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 10:43:00 -
[34] - Quote
Sabrina Solette wrote:Malcanis wrote:Sabrina Solette wrote:Cede Forster wrote:forestwho wrote:ps: for the trolls again:Im saying here that there is a fundamental error in the game mechanics that leads somehow to 0.0 stalemates. i see your "its the game mechanics fault" and raise you a "it is the human natures fault" You seem to like that 'it is the human natures fault'. Game mechanics should take into consideration human nature, otherwise they might not work as intended. I will send you 100M ISK if you can come up with a game mechanics solution that I have not seen on this forum already. I will send you a PLEX if you can come up with a solution that I can't think up an easy and obvious work around for within 60 seconds. Well thanks but I don't actually need your isk or PLEX, have plenty of isk of my own.
So you admit you can't think of anything that would reverse human nature or group dynamics?
Well OK, that's resolved this thread quite nicely. 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/ |
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
94
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 10:47:00 -
[35] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:So you admit you can't think of anything that would reverse human nature or group dynamics?
Well OK, that's resolved this thread quite nicely.
Lol, whose's talking about reversing human nature?
You plan for human nature you take it into account you don't try to change it. |
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
133
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 10:47:00 -
[36] - Quote
Its not a stalemate, CFC/HBC have been taking regions all year. |
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
133
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 11:30:00 -
[37] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Nariya Kentaya wrote:Brooks Puuntai wrote:Also having most of 0.0 in constant motion would cause havoc on the T2 market. Periods of stability or I guess in your mind stagnation is actually good. Empires rise Empires fall, Even the great British Empire, unriovaled for hundreds of years, fell when a ragtag group of farmers decided they would attack and fight for their outermost territory (North America) and allowed the Empires long-standing Enemy France, the opening they needed to win both their eternal war with britain (and america's revolutionary war, YEAH I SAID IT, france won the revolutionary war FOR america) Actually that was 150 years before the end of the British Empire.
Indeed, Britain didn't even exist til 1707 (70 years before american revolution), only acheived global dominance at the expense of France in 1815 and reached its peak in 1922
And the american revolution actually lost France the war for global domination (see french revolution, napoleon, battle of Waterloo). |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
717
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 11:42:00 -
[38] - Quote
Karn Dulake wrote:The only problem with Nullsec is that its favourite colour is blue.
Isn't the purpose in a player created content game that players create the content it's the most interesting for them?
You might not like it, you can even yell on top of all roofs it's unfair but in the end the only thing and comments that deserve respect are those from players creating their own content in a pvp game with player created content, everything else doesn't count, it's just another pvep content for silly people.
Edit: as for the blue thing, I say lol lol and double lol brb |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1421
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 11:45:00 -
[39] - Quote
Sabrina Solette wrote:Malcanis wrote:So you admit you can't think of anything that would reverse human nature or group dynamics?
Well OK, that's resolved this thread quite nicely. Lol, who's talking about reversing human nature? You plan for human nature you take it into account you don't try to change it. You attempt to reeducate them into the new way of thinking. And if it doesn't work, then you have to take "drastic steps". You let them stay in highsec. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Solstice Project
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1742
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 11:50:00 -
[40] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Sabrina Solette wrote:Malcanis wrote:So you admit you can't think of anything that would reverse human nature or group dynamics?
Well OK, that's resolved this thread quite nicely. Lol, who's talking about reversing human nature? You plan for human nature you take it into account you don't try to change it. You attempt to reeducate them into the new way of thinking. And if it doesn't work, then you have to take "drastic steps". You let them stay in highsec. Tbh i have a GREAT idea how to get more people into lowsec and 0.0 !
Goons and TEST abandon their space in 0.0, come back to highsec and just beat the living hell out of all these whiny little bitches, so they leave highsec for lowsec or nullsec.
Then they'll just move back to 0.0 and repeat the process. ^_^ Inappropriate signature removed. Spitfire |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4559
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 12:08:00 -
[41] - Quote
Sabrina Solette wrote:Malcanis wrote:So you admit you can't think of anything that would reverse human nature or group dynamics?
Well OK, that's resolved this thread quite nicely. Lol, who's talking about reversing human nature? You plan for human nature you take it into account you don't try to change it.
You want to reverse or disincentivize the natural tendency to group together to combat an opposing group.
I am asserting that this is essentially impossible unless by fiat. No matter what mechanics change you propose, it will not make a large well organised group inferior or even equal to a smaller group. So long as the map is contiguous there will be a gradual and irreversable trend towards larger and more powerful groupings, punctuated by the occasional collapse of a large group into fragments, and those fragmests will inevitably join new larger groupings or fade away. EVE history shows this very clearly, as does RL history. CCP are not to blame except insofar as they have decided not to interfere directly in 0.0 politics. This effect is intrinsic to the very nature of 0.0
If you want to live in space that suits the "homesteader" lifestyle, CCP have thoughtfully and generously provided W-space, which is exactly designed for this kind of activity. It's also a good illustration of the level of mechanical change that would have to be put in place to limit grouping. And even in W-space, a large powerful group like AHARM or R&K is still going to beat the hell out of a weak, low SP, small corp.
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/ |
iskflakes
Magnets Inc.
44
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 12:13:00 -
[42] - Quote
There are two problems with mechanics.
The CFC and pets like the HBC are all blobbers. They have huge numbers and organize them well. There are other alliances which use ISK and skill to try and win fights anyway, take Raiden as an example. There used to be a nice balance of power between these two. Either side had a chance of winning, and the wars were interesting and destructuve. However, CCP introduced TiDi which was a huge buff for blobs. Then, nearly simultaneously, they nerfed the major counter to blobs which was super/titan fleets. Now a blob is THE way to win a fight, and it always works.
After realizing this, many of the players who had supers were forced to join up with blobbers in order to survive (e.g. PL merging with TEST), and this just produces a bigger blob. Unfortunately, 0.0 is very resource poor and as it can't be defended there's not much to fight over. Everybody simply decided to join the same team, and that's the situation we live in today.
The problems: * No counter to blobs * Null has nothing worth fighting over for an individual, and less to fight over for an alliance since the tech nerf. Track your wealth with EVE Stats: https://ohheck.co.uk/EVEStats/home.php |
Cede Forster
54
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 12:27:00 -
[43] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:There are two problems with mechanics.
The CFC and pets like the HBC are all blobbers. They have huge numbers and organize them well. There are other alliances which use ISK and skill to try and win fights anyway, take Raiden as an example. There used to be a nice balance of power between these two. Either side had a chance of winning, and the wars were interesting and destructuve. However, CCP introduced TiDi which was a huge buff for blobs. Then, nearly simultaneously, they nerfed the major counter to blobs which was super/titan fleets. Now a blob is THE way to win a fight, and it always works.
After realizing this, many of the players who had supers were forced to join up with blobbers in order to survive (e.g. PL merging with TEST), and this just produces a bigger blob. Unfortunately, 0.0 is very resource poor and as it can't be defended there's not much to fight over. Everybody simply decided to join the same team, and that's the situation we live in today.
The problems: * No counter to blobs * Null has nothing worth fighting over for an individual, and less to fight over for an alliance since the tech nerf.
if the blob is the way to win and it is the only way to win, why in gods name do people insist not to blob is the way to solve it, wouldn't be the solution that everybody blobs?
just checking |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4559
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 12:35:00 -
[44] - Quote
iskflakes wrote: The problems: * No counter to blobs
When 100 players fight 50 players, then all else being equal, the 100 players will very likely win. Why do you think this is wrong? What's your problem with it?
Bringing more people to a fight is done to gain an advantage, just like using T2 guns or gang bonuses or logistics ships or EW or scouts or spies or training skills. Why is bringing "more people" any different to (or if you prefer, worse than) high SP players using T2 vs low SP players who can only use T1? Why is it OK for a high SP player to use his advantage in employing T2 vs a low player who can't, but it's not OK for the low SP player to use his advantage in bring more friends to counter?
These arguments sound suspiciously similar to those used by medieval knights to outlaw crossbows, because crossbows obsoleted the outlay of heavy armour that previously made the knights almost invincible vs poor people in battle.
Well wars aren't tournaments fought between gentle-born equals. Wars are organisational struggles where both sides try and use every advantage they can bring to bear in order to achieve their objectives. 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/ |
Lord Zim
1430
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 12:43:00 -
[45] - Quote
forestwho wrote:ps: for the trolls again:Im saying here that there is a fundamental error in the game mechanics that leads somehow to 0.0 stalemates. Sov mechanics. The complete lack of proper incentive for people to live in nullsec.
There you go. |
iskflakes
Magnets Inc.
44
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 13:17:00 -
[46] - Quote
Cede Forster wrote: if the blob is the way to win and it is the only way to win, why in gods name do people insist not to blob is the way to solve it, wouldn't be the solution that everybody blobs?
just checking
It should be possible to counter a blob by taking a bigger ISK risk. For example if I risk a 20 billion ISK ship, it should be able to kill 5 billion worth of drakes (50 drakes). Right now if you have 50 guys you can kill any ship, even if you're all in T1 destroyers worth 1m each, that's why I say blobs are overpowered and make ISK irrelevant. Track your wealth with EVE Stats: https://ohheck.co.uk/EVEStats/home.php |
William Walker
House Aratus Fatal Ascension
58
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 13:19:00 -
[47] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:Cede Forster wrote: if the blob is the way to win and it is the only way to win, why in gods name do people insist not to blob is the way to solve it, wouldn't be the solution that everybody blobs?
just checking
It should be possible to counter a blob by taking a bigger ISK risk. For example if I risk a 20 billion ISK ship, it should be able to kill 5 billion worth of drakes (50 drakes). Right now if you have 50 guys you can kill any ship, even if you're all in T1 destroyers worth 1m each, that's why I say blobs are overpowered and make ISK irrelevant.
Thank heavens for that! So by your definition a titan could kill any amount of ships that are in sum worth less than a titan? I dread the thought. |
Cede Forster
55
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 13:30:00 -
[48] - Quote
if you want to live in 0.0, you just join somebody who has it because its easier
and we are back at human nature: "take the easier way" |
iskflakes
Magnets Inc.
44
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 13:44:00 -
[49] - Quote
William Walker wrote: Thank heavens for that! So by your definition a titan could kill any amount of ships that are in sum worth less than a titan? I dread the thought.
Yep that's how it SHOULD work, but not how it does work. Track your wealth with EVE Stats: https://ohheck.co.uk/EVEStats/home.php |
Lord Zim
1443
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:17:00 -
[50] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:It should be possible to counter a blob by taking a bigger ISK risk. For example if I risk a 20 billion ISK ship, it should be able to kill 5 billion worth of drakes (50 drakes). Right now if you have 50 guys you can kill any ship, even if you're all in T1 destroyers worth 1m each, that's why I say blobs are overpowered and make ISK irrelevant. Get
The ****
Out. |
|
forestwho
Foonfleet Investment Banking
30
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:18:00 -
[51] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: CCP are not to blame except insofar as they have decided not to interfere directly in 0.0 politics. This effect is intrinsic to the very nature of 0.0
Some ppl disagree on this on different aspect of which the biggest is tech & the true sec anomaly system change |
Jonah Gravenstein
1136
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:19:00 -
[52] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:William Walker wrote: Thank heavens for that! So by your definition a titan could kill any amount of ships that are in sum worth less than a titan? I dread the thought.
Yep that's how it SHOULD work, but not how it does work.
To put that in real life terms, an entity such as the former USSR or the US should be able to pacify a small country with no standing army, look how well that's worked out in the past.
Bigger is not always better.
CCP can't patch stupid. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1287
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:23:00 -
[53] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:Cede Forster wrote: if the blob is the way to win and it is the only way to win, why in gods name do people insist not to blob is the way to solve it, wouldn't be the solution that everybody blobs?
just checking
It should be possible to counter a blob by taking a bigger ISK risk. For example if I risk a 20 billion ISK ship, it should be able to kill 5 billion worth of drakes (50 drakes). Right now if you have 50 guys you can kill any ship, even if you're all in T1 destroyers worth 1m each, that's why I say blobs are overpowered and make ISK irrelevant.
And when the blob is the one with the bigger wallet?
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Cutter Isaacson
Quantum Reality R n D GREATER ITAMO MAFIA
1194
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:24:00 -
[54] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:Cede Forster wrote: if the blob is the way to win and it is the only way to win, why in gods name do people insist not to blob is the way to solve it, wouldn't be the solution that everybody blobs?
just checking
It should be possible to counter a blob by taking a bigger ISK risk. For example if I risk a 20 billion ISK ship, it should be able to kill 5 billion worth of drakes (50 drakes). Right now if you have 50 guys you can kill any ship, even if you're all in T1 destroyers worth 1m each, that's why I say blobs are overpowered and make ISK irrelevant.
Your attention please ladies and gentlemen, we here at "players with a brain" would like to apologise for the sudden derailment of this thread. but feel it necessary due to the impending doom we all face as this thread descends into a farce. Please exit the thread in a calm and orderly fashion. Thank you for travelling with "players with a brain", we hope to see you in a slightly less troll filled endeavour in the near future.
With that out of the way, I sincerely hope you are either very new, or just very bad at trolling. I'm trying to repair my Hyperdrive, this is the maintenance hatch. Now stop asking silly questions and pass me the Hydrospanner. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4647
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:25:00 -
[55] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:William Walker wrote: Thank heavens for that! So by your definition a titan could kill any amount of ships that are in sum worth less than a titan? I dread the thought.
Yep that's how it SHOULD work, but not how it does work.
that's how it should work in pubbie spreadsheet logic
that's not how it actually should work please leave |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4647
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:26:00 -
[56] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:And when the blob is the one with the bigger wallet?
you must dread the thought right now
heh please leave |
Jafit
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
354
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:39:00 -
[57] - Quote
Cede Forster wrote:if you want to live in 0.0, you just join somebody who has it because its easier
and we are back at human nature: "take the easier way"
Yes, because it's pretty much impossible for a smaller group to take and hold space against a larger group. We have a sov system that hinges on shooting through millions of structure HP. It might be feasible for a smaller group to get some dreads and carriers to shoot that structure but thanks to supercapital proliferation you a critical mass of caps to kill that structure in one or two siege cycles because any longer than that and you're going to get dropped by supers and you're not going to have any more capitals.
Want to SBU an enemy starsystem? The defenders can drop supers to kill your SBUs before you can make any progress. ANd really what are you going to do to counter a supercap blob without a blob of your own?
But also let me tell you about defensive SBUs, where at least one of the necessary SBUs in a system belongs to the defender, so the attacker has to kill that SBU before they can anchor their own. If they try to make any progress attacking sov with a defensive SBU in place, the defenders can offline their SBU and reset all the timers and wipe out the attackers progress and this is a legal use of game mechanics.
So yeah, smaller entities don't get to hold space. And even if they do get to hold it, it's a giant isk-sink with sov and infrastructure bills. A TCU costs 6m per day. Jump bridge costs 10m per day. Cyno beacon costs 2m per day. A cyno jammer costs 20m per day. Then it'll cost billions to upgrade your space with ihubs to the point where your members can make a nice bit of money from it. So if you take a few systems you'd better hope you have a few R32 or R36 moons - except moon mining doesn't even require sov. I think it's a bad state of affairs, and I say this being a member of the largest sov-holding entity in the game. |
Cede Forster
58
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:40:00 -
[58] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:Cede Forster wrote: if the blob is the way to win and it is the only way to win, why in gods name do people insist not to blob is the way to solve it, wouldn't be the solution that everybody blobs?
just checking
It should be possible to counter a blob by taking a bigger ISK risk. For example if I risk a 20 billion ISK ship, it should be able to kill 5 billion worth of drakes (50 drakes). Right now if you have 50 guys you can kill any ship, even if you're all in T1 destroyers worth 1m each, that's why I say blobs are overpowered and make ISK irrelevant.
sure you can win with ISK, pay people to fight for you
also, concerning last war reports, more expensive ships do seem to counter quite well and require the enemy to commit more resources |
Anunzi
High House Of Shadows Tribal Band
39
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 15:47:00 -
[59] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:Brooks Puuntai wrote:Also having most of 0.0 in constant motion would cause havoc on the T2 market. Periods of stability or I guess in your mind stagnation is actually good. Empires rise Empires fall, Even the great British Empire, unriovaled for hundreds of years, fell when a ragtag group of farmers decided they would attack and fight for their outermost territory (North America) and allowed the Empires long-standing Enemy France, the opening they needed to win both their eternal war with britain (and america's revolutionary war, YEAH I SAID IT, france won the revolutionary war FOR america)
Erm. Pretty sure the British Empire lasted until the Second World War. The American war of independence was a sideshow at the time as far as the grand scheme of things was concerned, to Britain it was more profitable to protect India than the (at that time) poor and undeveloped American continent.
To claim losing the American colonies caused the downfall of said Empire is not accurate.
|
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks The Marmite Collective
2350
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 15:55:00 -
[60] - Quote
Global politics in the real world tend towards stalemates...or perhaps "equilibrium" is a better term. I'm not at all surprised if 0.0 trends that direction. The Skunkworks is recruiting. -áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1540711#post1540711 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |