Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Verra Keyne
Plus 10 NV Synthetic Systems
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 02:00:00 -
[31] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:I avoid player null at all costs, Im not afraid of the players in fact once past chokes its safer than low. I avoid it because theres no place to refit, resupply, sell or do anything that would make it worthwhile to go out there.
The design of null doesnt attract people there because to operate out of alliance in null is a massive PITA.
I will agree with this. How could it be improved? I don't know. |
Ordellus
ORI Ground Forces
15
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 15:24:00 -
[32] - Quote
Froggy Storm wrote: To the contrary this is the heart of the debate. The only "advantage" cited is the ability to cut down on the time to "get stuff".
That would indeed be the trifling thing you make it out to be if it wasn't a huge deal, since progress = time in eve. Buying isk gives payers better ships and modules, and reduces the loss of a loss. The advantage isn't illusionary, it happens the second they buy that plex.
Froggy Storm wrote: do you mean to say a 8 year bittervet with no idea how to play "deserves" to win when outplayed by a 1 year well rounded player? The skill of the human being is far and away the biggest (perhaps only) real critical factor involved in advantage in eve.
Nope I mean to say that EVE have virtually nothing to do with actual player skill at fighting, but is actually all about the ship and modules. Put anyone into a stock rookie ship and force them to fight to the death with a well fit pvp tech 2 frigate.... rookie ship loses every time.
Froggy Storm wrote:The fact that blobs exist is proof of that.
And the only thing blobs prove is that players would prefer to overwhelm anonymous red dots to "zomg win pew pew killmailz" instead of having heartpounding, skill-testing, real PVP....
But you are obviously someone that would rather pay for their isk and ships as opposed to earn them..... so we probably aren't going to agree on the "Paying real cash for everything I have in eve is cheating" debate.... so agree to disagree, or respond to stroke your epeen. Up to you.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1451
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 15:28:00 -
[33] - Quote
Ordellus wrote:Nope I mean to say that EVE have virtually nothing to do with actual player skill at fighting, but is actually all about the ship and modules. Put anyone into a stock rookie ship and force them to fight to the death with a well fit pvp tech 2 frigate.... rookie ship loses every time.
Why did you use a "stock rookie ship" in your example instead of a T1 ship? (because in that case player skill DOES matter, and your thesis falls apart) |
Princess Nexxala
Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats
402
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 16:51:00 -
[34] - Quote
Holy ****, really?
Ordellus wrote: Nope I mean to say that EVE have virtually nothing to do with actual player skill at fighting, but is actually all about the ship and modules. Put anyone into a stock rookie ship and force them to fight to the death with a well fit pvp tech 2 frigate.... rookie ship loses every time.
http://thewaysofthemew.blogspot.com We are recruiting - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1823364&#post1823364 |
Machiavelli's Nemesis
Angry Mustellid
271
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 18:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
Getting kills in a velator used to be a rite of passage until they changed them.
It's not quite as fun any more. |
Ordellus
ORI Ground Forces
15
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 18:50:00 -
[36] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: Why did you use a "stock rookie ship" in your example instead of a T1 ship? (because in that case player skill DOES matter, and your thesis falls apart)
B/c the whole "ships and modules don't matter in a fight" argument is ********, and by using extremes you make it impossible to ignore the point.
New premise 1) two pilots with identically spent SP 2) pilots have equal knowledge 3)ships are well fit for pvp 4) First ship is entirely meta 1 5) Second ship is entirely tech 2 Outcome -> expensive stuff wins again.
In the event that the battleground is fielded by people who have actually played the game before... cash makes you win.
We done pretending that all the PVPers spending billions on ships aren't doing it b/c the expensive stuff gives them an advantage?
Or all you all going to keep arguing the facade?
|
Ordellus
ORI Ground Forces
15
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 18:52:00 -
[37] - Quote
Machiavelli's Nemesis wrote:Getting kills in a velator used to be a rite of passage until they changed them.
Ordellus wrote:And the only thing blobs prove is that players would prefer to overwhelm anonymous red dots to "zomg win pew pew killmailz" instead of having heartpounding, skill-testing, real PVP.... |
James 420
EVE Corporation 98188875
23
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 19:36:00 -
[38] - Quote
I think you are looking for the wrong game, eve pvp isn't "balanced" and will never be, eve is reliant on numbers and players willing to have fair fights. Eve is also pay2win depending on what you consider "winning" in a "sandbox" game, it's also why eve is such a niche game winning is so "meta" and most of the fun come from outside of the game/player interactions. Is eve good entertainment? Sure! Is eve a decent competitive game? Hell no ! Is it changing? MaybeGäó Proud enforcer of 420 BLAZE IT |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1452
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 19:57:00 -
[39] - Quote
Ordellus wrote:X Gallentius wrote: Why did you use a "stock rookie ship" in your example instead of a T1 ship? (because in that case player skill DOES matter, and your thesis falls apart) B/c the whole "ships and modules don't matter in a fight" argument is ********, and by using extremes you make it impossible to ignore the point. New premise 1) two pilots with identically spent SP 2) pilots have equal knowledge 3)ships are well fit for pvp 4) First ship is entirely meta 1 5) Second ship is entirely tech 2 Outcome -> expensive stuff wins again. In the event that the battleground is fielded by people who have actually played the game before... cash makes you win. We done pretending that all the PVPers spending billions on ships aren't doing it b/c the expensive stuff gives them an advantage? Or all you all going to keep arguing the facade? Some people practice what they preach.
Sometimes the 1.5 million isk ship wins over the T2 fit ship.http://gallente.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17435252 Been flying these cheap atrons for months because they work.
Doesn't really matter all that much whether the opponent is T1, meta, or T2 fit. If it's the same ship with the same fitting philosophy, then T2 matters, but if you are going after a dissimilar target, then it's about appropriate fitting and piloting skill.
Quote:P.S. Also seems that you missed the part where I specified "Put Anyone in a rookie ship".... b/c hate you admit but no amount of "player skill" is going to save some from being out ISKed It's a combination of skill+fittings+knowledge+ a host of other things. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1452
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 20:09:00 -
[40] - Quote
In before the "You are a high sp player that's why you won":
Here's a post from one of our "noobs" in corp doing the same thing to another "well-fit loot pi+¦ata"
Jeann Valjean wrote:I have 5m SP and decided to deplex 1 or 2 sites in a Derptron before bed to help militia out. and within 2 minutes of logging in this happened: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18019064ISK means nothing. Keep up the gud fites. & long live the Derptron. Edit: to be clear I'm not saying I'm that good... I'm saying he was that bad, and we should always take fights that we think look iffy because you may be surprised. |
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
184
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 20:39:00 -
[41] - Quote
I tried real hard to figure out what point(s) you were trying to make, but I'm coming up short.
You complain about pay-to-win, which has always been there, but then go on about how nullsec is broken. I'm not seeing the correlation.
You suggest lowsec is "humming" but then make no attempt to show that, perhaps, this is exactly where you should be to avert and/or rectify the vague problems which are plaguing you.
You then make some bullet points on specific things you believe to be broken, but fail to provide an explanation as to why you think any of it should be changed, contradict yourself in the process, and seem to lose basic train of thought:
Grace Ishukone wrote: 1- jump range on capitals should be reduced 50% 2- bridge range on titans similarly reduced 3- jump range on carriers should be the same 4- jump range on jump freighters should be 50% more 5- bottleneck map points should have second and third pathways added 6- nullsec should have NPC highsec areas added. Most of the players play in highsec anyway, Odyssey will never change that due to machnics forcing players to go to highsec anyway (for skill books, parts, and goo trading) - so bring highsec to null. 7- review the concept of ships - capitals should NEVER be immune to 1,000 rifters, and should not be 2 shotting small ships.
1- why? 2- why? 3- why? also, this contradicts #1 4- WHY? And for god's sake NO. Freighters can already go straight to null directly from Jita. Hell no! 5- why? you want a landscape with no hills? 6- why?!?! If there is no risk in farming nullsec NPC corps, then LP rewards better change drastically. 7- They aren't. You should do your research on how Goonswarm got their feet wet.
If I had to guess..... you mission for Blood Raiders or Sansha in NPC null and use a carrier to bring LP goods back to highsec, but with all the recent Test/CFC/Goon/NC/PL action going on down there, you're on the brink of wetting yourself? C'mon, tell me I'm wrong. |
Vizvig
Savage Blizzard Bright Side of Death
92
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 22:41:00 -
[42] - Quote
Quote:Center for Advanced Studies [CAS] Member for 7 years, 3 months, 4 days Let's guess who is hiding behind that avatar
It seems you play eve more than you need, because of this see missions everyvhere |
Grace Ishukone
Ishukone Advanced Research
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 08:27:00 -
[43] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:You make some good points. And then drown them in a sea of b.s. It's ok, I do the same thing too on the forums sometimes. We probably share the same mental illnesses
Then say which are the good points.
Bottom line is this - CCP have spent a LOT of real world money on advertising, yet despite Odyssey being successfully deployed, people I know and enjoy playing with are quitting the game. Too many basic design mistakes, too much dumbing down of gameplay, too hard to get into null sec play.
Quote:Games where you have a "home" do well at retaining players longer than three months. But they also inevitably lose players when those players lose their home. We have seen that dynamic ever since Ultima Online introduced the concept of ownable homes in the first place, it is repeated in every game with player housing and player owned cities / play areas.
There are players I know who would likely stay playing EVE indefinitely if they could have only one thing added to the game - a nullsec system they could own, but never lose. If they could keep their home, they would stay. The map, instant travel and skill mechanics of buying pilots and capitals currently strongly favours mega-alliances. That's nice, but when those lose their homes, they quit as well. Indeed we see much of nullsec remains dead and empty, BoB etc did not simply reform when they lost there, many just left the game. If TEST lose the numbers of players in nullsec will likely fall yet again, in the spiral that leads inevitably to the death of nullsec as we know it.
Would I join with my Corp to pay 12 PLEX for a -1.0 system in Jove space that would be ours for as long as our alliance continued to exist? Yes, I would. Would I pay in towards another 12 PLEX to have that system be 1 jump from Highsec? Yes, I'd do that too. I'd prefer that CCP changed the map and sov mechanics to make independent alliances actually viable in nullsec. But we are in a Pay to Win phase now, so if I need to get everyone together, pay CCP to make a "house" for us that randomly connects to other Jove -1.0 systems owned by other independent alliances ... yes, I'd pay for that. Oh, and yes they should have random moons. Why not. Having sov that you can't lose and a nice moon somone else wants is otherwise known as a reason for pvp. Currently, if you want the moon, you take the reigon. Then no-one pvps there any more without an SBU and cap fleet at 2 am in the morning ... *ywan*.
Seriously CCP, fix the design. Either stop the pay to win trend, or sell me and my friends a new nullsec system, crafted just for us to live in (and other people to come in and pvp us in). Enough of this dead, empty map with no players in it called Nullsec. |
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
255
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:48:00 -
[44] - Quote
Major Killz wrote: As for why null sec is the way it is. The answer is simple. ORGANIZATION! That's the big problem that everyone tries to fix with more ways to make that easier. If CCP removed the alliance system. Then coordinating multiple corporations and personalities becomes ALOT MORE difficult. Restricting the size of a corporation to 200 would also help. Believe me. A leader of a coalition has an easier time coordinating 7 alliances than what it would take to organize a coalition of the 700 corporations those 7 alliances now make up. This will not STOP organization but it will make it HELLA hard.
That's an interesting thought but I don't think removing the alliance mechanic would have the effect you think it would.
What the alliance system does is make it clear *who* the middle managers are in a coalition. Do you think that removing the mechanic would make it impossible for people to find another way to find out who is running the show?
Believe me when I say that people who have a strong drive to organize things aren't going to let the absence of an in-game mechanic stop them. Organizing isn't something that only happens when the right tools are available. For some people (I admit to being one of those) organizing is a need and will happen even if there are no tools at all.
Forcing things to become smaller or forcing things to become more disorganized isn't the answer, if you ask me.
But your second point about SOV mechanics would help enormously to force alliances to not overextend the boundaries of what they can realistically defend.
If you look at SOV in main lines it only really has four functions.
1) allows the building of jump bridges, stations and improvements 2) expresses something akin to "ownership" for policial reasons (ie, you can draw boundaries) 3) it acts like entrenchment giving an advantage to the defenders in any fight to take a system 4) it acts like an early warning system because an enemy must telegraph their intention to invade.
to my way of thinking #1 creates unnecessary limitations but I can live with it. #2 makes a lot of sense #3 makes sense to a point but the current mechanic results far too much in a "grind" #4 is completely ridiculous.
If you look at a real war zone, an advancing army does not have to give prior warning that they're going to attack in a particular location (setting up SBUs). If it's an empty field (ie system with no stations) they do no have to attack multiple times in order to take that field especially if the enemy didn't show up to defend it.
I think it shoud be like that in EVE too. I understand that people are not online all the time and that defenders need time to get organized over multiple time zones in order to mount a defense, but the current SOV mechanics completely eliminate anything like "surprise" attack or a drive by shooting (except on a POS). Assets (ihubs, stations, POCO's) should still have a reinforcement mode (and only 1 timer) because of the time zone thing but there should be no heirarchy. If you want the ihub dead then just shoot it. If you want the TCU dead then just shoot it. If you want the station dead then just shoot it.
With these simplified SOV mechanics surprise attacks, blitz attacks, drive by guerrilla tactics and scorched earth policies have a place in the game and would make wars much less tedious. Taking stations, in particular, I would say to change it so that if the station is reinforced and you shoot it again without first shooting down the TCU then the station blows up and drops some of the contents of corp and personal hangars. If you take down the TCU first then the station is conquered.
All together this would vastly increase the tempo of wars and open doors to new strategic possibilities.
What I think this would do is to force alliances to be more compact because taking vast areas of space would simply mean that your neighbours will constantly be reinforcing and/or destroying things like IHUBs and TCU's in your outer provinces before you can form up and move a fleet down to do anything about it. The maximum size of the area of space that can be controlled, therefore, would depend on how much ambition/mobility an alliance had to constantly form up and move fleets long distances to patrol for and defend from incursions on the border zones.
The border zones would therefore become much more fluid, changing hands rapidly and often and an alliance that committed too many resources to a distant war would risk a counter attack on their core space. These are all things that make sense in the real world but CCP implemented SOV in such a way that leaving a flank open doesn't matter at all.... From the time that the enemy starts to attack to the point where you could actually lose a station is several days, whether you bother to defend it or not.
Anyway, enough tinfoil hattery. Any way you look at it, though, I think SOV mechanics and not the alliance mechanic, are to blame for the emersion of large null-sec juggernauts. Once "defending what you own" becomes important you'll see alliances considering much more carefully where they want to have their borders. |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
463
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 14:18:00 -
[45] - Quote
Seraph Castillon wrote:Grace Ishukone wrote:Lowsec is humming at the moment, but I would like CCP to admit the statistics on just how many players quit, having been lured into lowsec with the rumors of riches and exploration, only to be mercilessly butchered by veteran pvpers whom they could never beat. This is such utter bullshit. There are new guys in my corp owning faction frigs and what not in their meta 1-3 fit Atrons. Eve PvP isn't easy. Don't go blaming the game because you don't have what it takes or are reluctant to learn. Watch the PvP videos, look at the killboards of good players and join a decent corp. There are plenty of good PvP corporations that have an open recruitment policy. They are the perfect environment to learn as they have people that, for the most part, know what they are doing. If you lose a fight, don't accept the answer that your opponent "payed to win". Think about what you actually did wrong. Yes, there are people flying around with OGB or Falcon alts. Learn to spot them and don't give them the gratification of a fight. Or even better, outfox them and kill them anyway. Also: if you got lured into lowsec with riches and those riches weren't FW then you are an idiot. Grace Ishukone wrote: - nullsec should have NPC highsec areas added.
It's called Orvolle. Stop crying.
This ^^ Fix this **** See Sea Pea. |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
463
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 14:30:00 -
[46] - Quote
Ordellus wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:Sometimes, I think it should be called pay2lose, because there's nothing more juicy than a noob in a tengu in lowsec. See that logic holds as long as you don't think about it. Claiming players that spend money on ships and what-not don't have a huge advantage based on the fact that you fooled a noob is just silly. Although I'm sure pretending you proved yourself is a nice feeling...
It holds from some perspectives.
I also think beginners buying toons have no advantage - A ship you do not know how to fit or fly correctly simply will not last. A badly fit Tengu is just a cruiser hull at the end of the day.
Fooling people (noobs or otherwise) into engaging by making them think they can win is half of the game. Everyone does it to everyone. We all fall for it too - otherwise no one would never lose ships.
Beginners who buy high SP toons are just learning this in a more expensive way.
The bigger and shinier the bling - the more attention it brings. This is not an advantage to a new player. Fix this **** See Sea Pea. |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
1209
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 14:46:00 -
[47] - Quote
To win what exactly?
eve?
yeah good luck buying that Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
|
Jeann Valjean
Justified Chaos
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:22:00 -
[48] - Quote
Send me more of these pay-to-win types you speak of.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18019064 |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
1209
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:32:00 -
[49] - Quote
thats somthing many would consider using actually....
I bet thats not a play to win douche bag Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
|
Grace Ishukone
Ishukone Advanced Research
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 01:58:00 -
[50] - Quote
Muad 'dib wrote:To win what exactly? eve? yeah good luck buying that
No. Nullsec.
You buy capitals, super capitals and super capital pilots with PLEX, and pay people like Pandemic Leigon with PLEX. Then you take whatever you want that someone with more PLEX doesn't want, set up your moon mining, and sell goo to buy more PLEX.
Seriously, do you think the people in nullsec who have been using and losing capital ships *ratted* their way to owning them? Most went to the EVE store to buy PLEX, then the character bazaar for a pilot, then into battle. People who actually earned their ships through personal effort tend to be a lot more conservative with them - i.e. boring.
You guys do seem to have forgotten one of the basic points of pvp games. If you want juicy kills, you need people to kill in pvp zones. Putting highsec islands in null and redoing the map to improve access for independent alliances would simply mean more newbies in nullsec. From reading the above you seem to like nullsec EMPTY. So you can afk mine in null and play world of tanks, right? |
|
Dan Carter Murray
425
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 04:34:00 -
[51] - Quote
Grace Ishukone wrote:Title says it all.
This is the current reality of the game in nullsec. Want to win in sov warfare? Hire Pandemic Leigon. Want to do pretty much anything else in EVE? Buy a veteran character with the required skills, buy the ships you need, and click the "I win" button.
Am I upset? Sure am.
When I started playing a long time ago (yes, this is an alt), player skill meant something. Now you only need real world money to buy the I WIN ships, and unless you are completely idiotic, you will win.
It is no wonder nullsec is dead and empty. You can only build t1 ships if you mine there yourself, everything else you need to farm in highsec or buy from Jita (because yes, you can't possibly get enough goo to make t2 ships using alchemy with a few moons because the goo is too rare to permit that. You have to go to Jita to make a t2 ship in nullsec ... which is stupid).
Lowsec is humming at the moment, but I would like CCP to admit the statistics on just how many players quit, having been lured into lowsec with the rumors of riches and exploration, only to be mercilessly butchered by veteran pvpers whom they could never beat.
Highsec ... well I kinda like highsec. Except if I want to play in carebear land, well ... I have world of warcraft, and I can be a panda.
So yes, in my view we are now in the age of pay to win. The flight of a thousand rifters rather emphasized the point - even a thousand t1 frigates were simply no threat at all to the Nyx. None. Yet a Nglafar can 2 shot kill a tanked pvp brutix.
So my thoughts on EVE at the 10 year mark?
All in all - stop playing with fluff like animations on warp gates that crash you out in the middle of jumping in nullsec, and announce you to local 2 seconds before you land, and go back to the basics. The map makes too much of nullsec inaccessible to players who are mechanically *forced* to buy things they need from highsec, jump bridges and cynos make it far too easy for tiny numbers of players to effectively control entire regions of nullsec without ever playing there, and when it comes down to it the easiest way to win in EVE is now to pay to win. That all has to change.
- jump range on capitals should be reduced 50% - bridge range on titans similarly reduced - jump range on carriers should be the same - jump range on jump freighters should be 50% more - bottleneck map points should have second and third pathways added - nullsec should have NPC highsec areas added. Most of the players play in highsec anyway, Odyssey will never change that due to machnics forcing players to go to highsec anyway (for skill books, parts, and goo trading) - so bring highsec to null. - review the concept of ships - capitals should NEVER be immune to 1,000 rifters, and should not be 2 shotting small ships.
PvP used to be fun in EVE. Now ... it's more fun on SiSi than tranquility. Fix nullsec, and stop the pay to win trend, or simply give up and give us pandas in space. After all, we have Mintchip now, so the jovians really are king-fu pandas, right? I knew it.
The thing that is ruining eve is killboards. remove all kill related api info and data. either that or remove all ogb or make ogb a siege mechanic (5 minutes, 30 minute cooldown) that can only be done outside of a POS.
Oh and introduce a cyno jamming ship... I have yet to find a pvp corp in eve that I have respect for |
Grace Ishukone
Ishukone Advanced Research
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 05:27:00 -
[52] - Quote
Dan Carter Murray wrote: The thing that is ruining eve is killboards. remove all kill related api info and data. either that or remove all ogb or make ogb a siege mechanic (5 minutes, 30 minute cooldown) that can only be done outside of a POS.
Oh and introduce a cyno jamming ship...
Yes, preventing off grid boosting from inside POS would be a good start, and introducing a cyno jammer ship would be an excellent addition. But we are unlikely to see either any time soon. |
FuzzyButt
Rainbow Dash Goes Red Rainbow Dash Friends
35
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 13:40:00 -
[53] - Quote
Grace Ishukone wrote:Dan Carter Murray wrote: The thing that is ruining eve is killboards. remove all kill related api info and data. either that or remove all ogb or make ogb a siege mechanic (5 minutes, 30 minute cooldown) that can only be done outside of a POS.
Oh and introduce a cyno jamming ship...
Yes, preventing off grid boosting from inside POS would be a good start, and introducing a cyno jammer ship would be an excellent addition. But we are unlikely to see either any time soon.
Dafuq?
EvE is so damn easy too play and you wanna make it even more restricted.
Isk in this game will help you If you can afford alt's it will help you You can buy plexses and it will help you
But it will not make you awsome at pvp!
And hiring PL dosnt cost 50 plexses.
If you really want to go into nullsec do it.
Get some friends with you and just go... We did, easily with 15 man fleets.
its so easy too make isk in this game, i suggest you go make some.
Get your own OGB |
Grace Ishukone
Ishukone Advanced Research
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 04:59:00 -
[54] - Quote
FuzzyButt wrote:
Dafuq?
EvE is so damn easy too play and you wanna make it even more restricted.
Isk in this game will help you If you can afford alt's it will help you You can buy plexses and it will help you
But it will not make you awsome at pvp!
And hiring PL dosnt cost 50 plexses.
If you really want to go into nullsec do it.
Get some friends with you and just go... We did, easily with 15 man fleets.
its so easy too make isk in this game, i suggest you go make some.
Get your own OGB
So how much did it cost you per month to keep your SOV space? What was the mandatory level of PLEX to which mega alliance to be able to play there?
EVERY time I have seen an active independent alliance go to nullsec, it tracks like this: 1. Initially great 2. 20 ~ 30 players highly active in null, goals achieved 3. major fleets of neuts / reds appear because there is pvp to be had 4. campers appear because there are miners to kill 5. activity in the system crashes due to continual neut fleets that cannot be defeated 6. withdrawal from nullsec or system taken off them because 'someone else wanted to get in on the pvp' (never seeming to realize that the people they were kicking out were the entire reason for any pvp being there in the first place. 7. the null sov reverts to totally empty, totally unused ... like 99% of nullsec.
Fix it CCP, or watch players continue to quit despite the millions spent on advertising. |
FuzzyButt
Rainbow Dash Goes Red Rainbow Dash Friends
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 09:14:00 -
[55] - Quote
Grace Ishukone wrote:FuzzyButt wrote:
Dafuq?
EvE is so damn easy too play and you wanna make it even more restricted.
Isk in this game will help you If you can afford alt's it will help you You can buy plexses and it will help you
But it will not make you awsome at pvp!
And hiring PL dosnt cost 50 plexses.
If you really want to go into nullsec do it.
Get some friends with you and just go... We did, easily with 15 man fleets.
its so easy too make isk in this game, i suggest you go make some.
Get your own OGB
So how much did it cost you per month to keep your SOV space? What was the mandatory level of PLEX to which mega alliance to be able to play there? EVERY time I have seen an active independent alliance go to nullsec, it tracks like this: 1. Initially great 2. 20 ~ 30 players highly active in null, goals achieved 3. major fleets of neuts / reds appear because there is pvp to be had 4. campers appear because there are miners to kill 5. activity in the system crashes due to continual neut fleets that cannot be defeated 6. withdrawal from nullsec or system taken off them because 'someone else wanted to get in on the pvp' (never seeming to realize that the people they were kicking out were the entire reason for any pvp being there in the first place. 7. the null sov reverts to totally empty, totally unused ... like 99% of nullsec. Fix it CCP, or watch players continue to quit despite the millions spent on advertising.
Join an alliance then =)
its not supposed too be amazingly easy too take Sov =)
|
Vizvig
Savage Blizzard Bright Side of Death
107
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 09:47:00 -
[56] - Quote
Hello there, dude with 30 thousands of kills. |
Grace Ishukone
Ishukone Advanced Research
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 12:04:00 -
[57] - Quote
FuzzyButt wrote: Join an alliance then =)
its not supposed too be amazingly easy too take Sov =)
And yet it is. Drop SBUs at correct time, bring in capital fleet at correct times, take sov. Add iHub etc, pay bills.
Sov 101. There is *zero* need to play in a system to keep sov. Some say that is the essence of the problem in nullsec - that megal alliances can and do own entire reigons, even if there are no players active anywhere in the system other than the occasional player clearing moon goo and dropping off fuel. Yet as long as you pay the bills, and turn up with your blob if anyone dares to try to actually move in, that's all fine.
Well it's not fine at all. It's boring the game to death. |
FuzzyButt
Rainbow Dash Goes Red Rainbow Dash Friends
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 12:35:00 -
[58] - Quote
Grace Ishukone wrote:FuzzyButt wrote: Join an alliance then =)
its not supposed too be amazingly easy too take Sov =)
And yet it is. Drop SBUs at correct time, bring in capital fleet at correct times, take sov. Add iHub etc, pay bills. Sov 101. There is *zero* need to play in a system to keep sov. Some say that is the essence of the problem in nullsec - that megal alliances can and do own entire reigons, even if there are no players active anywhere in the system other than the occasional player clearing moon goo and dropping off fuel. Yet as long as you pay the bills, and turn up with your blob if anyone dares to try to actually move in, that's all fine. Well it's not fine at all. It's boring the game to death.
Are you saying they're teamwork shouldn't pay off? =)))) still takes something for these blobs too do what they do they got strength in numbers
And what you mentioned with easy mobility and dropping fleets at the right time isn't wrong at all. it makes sense.
Simply as it is know you'll need too pick a side too be a part of it (coalitions and become blue with someone that is allready out there fighting)
If small alliances could be out there soloing SOV it would be really fun.. but the amount of members of the big alliances would still make a difference a difference you cannot change in anyway.
So find someone you like and join them =) then you got your sov war and you can go ratting in fun space =D=D
Even with blob VS blob, if you don't like it don't do it.
NPC null sec Low sec Wormhole High sec
choices is endless =D=D=D=D |
Farley genocent
Solutis in Sanguis
44
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 07:20:00 -
[59] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:In before the "You are a high sp player that's why you won": Here's a post from one of our "noobs" in corp doing the same thing to another "well-fit loot pi+¦ata" Jeann Valjean wrote:I have 5m SP and decided to deplex 1 or 2 sites in a Derptron before bed to help militia out. and within 2 minutes of logging in this happened: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18019064ISK means nothing. Keep up the gud fites. & long live the Derptron. Edit: to be clear I'm not saying I'm that good... I'm saying he was that bad, and we should always take fights that we think look iffy because you may be surprised.
This right here proves that there is no automatic pay to win. We've killed this guy a few times and it got to the point where if we saw him in local we would search for him automatically as a little isk boost. More isk than skill/sense. |
Grace Ishukone
Ishukone Advanced Research
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:15:00 -
[60] - Quote
It's simple. The fundamental mechanics of this game currently mean players will have the hopes and dreams of being able to play the entire game, only to discover that to play in nullsec you need to buy in with real money, and must join mega-alliances.
If you don't, you inevitably get what has happened to us - and continues to happen - that highly active *players* are blasted out of null and indeed lowsec POS by those who did use the pay to win mechanic. Pandemic dropped 6 reve, 2 Moros, a handful of Achon to kill a lowsec POS of ours ... what could we do? Nothing.
We have not spent nearly enough $$ - even though we had double the number of pilots engaged in the 'fight' for the system, it was over before it began because they could and did by capitals, and we didn't. We had 20 to 30 more pilots who would have come to fight with us too - but again, they don't have capitals either, so none of us could do anything at all but lose. When money means you win, without any risk, it just makes people want to quit EVE and go play a game where you don't have to buy a toon or play 3 years before you can have even a *chance* to win.
Make no mistake. Bottom line pvp balance, nullsec access, and pay to win is about maintaining the health of the game. And as I see things, currently the game is very badly broken in a number of areas, and if CCP fail to fix things, then I honestly don't expect EVE to make it to 20 years. Next good pvp game with conquest and depth, everyone who *isn't* a nullsec cap pilot in an ubercorp will walk out. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |