Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
64
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 21:00:55 -
[181] - Quote
Some Rando wrote:baltec1 wrote:People actually defending the clone mechanics... To be fair it's only like one guy and his alts writing a terrible novel.
If you disagree, don't try to ad hom the opposition so you can echo chamber and feel smug. Claiming "alts!" to, in your mind, devalue the arguments or people arguing doesn't actually make you right.
At 5 drones of T2, the Tristan is nearly as powerful as the Algos, with a cheaper price tag, better maneuverability and speed, and smaller sig radius to avoid the lazy carebearish T3 station blapping -10s who have no life. Pick tristan for FW.
|
Ryomaru Reaper
One Killing Machine
7
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 21:07:54 -
[182] - Quote
Quote:Then why are you against clone upgrades, if time isnt a poblem, and you don't belong to the instant gratification playerbase, since, you know, clone costs is more time/more isk and less instant gratification?
No, clones do not impose more time upon a player, we're talking about 1 click and 1 confirm click. It currently does not add anything as several people said, and this answer you wrote, isn't even pertaining my post at all.
It looks like you got nothing really worthwhile to write up, thus you wrote a make-shift, nothing to add post at me hoping it would divert any sense.
Clones do not IMPOSE anything but penalization at it's prime core idea, with little cost attached to it as well, so, yeah. |
Some Rando
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1298
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 21:17:38 -
[183] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:If you disagree, don't try to ad hom the opposition so you can echo chamber and feel smug. Claiming "alts!" to, in your mind, devalue the arguments or people arguing doesn't actually make you right. Doesn't matter whether I'm right and you're wrong or vice-versa, change is coming and we're all going to have to adapt. Anyway, I'm just poking fun at you writing these amazingly wordy diatribes that basically amount to "you're not playing EVE right" and "punish players for enjoying the game and forgetting to click a button."
CCP has no sense of humour.
|
Carmen Electra
The Scope Gallente Federation
13170
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 22:00:05 -
[184] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:Some Rando wrote:baltec1 wrote:People actually defending the clone mechanics... To be fair it's only like one guy and his alts writing a terrible novel. If you disagree, don't try to ad hom the opposition so you can echo chamber and feel smug. Claiming "alts!" to, in your mind, devalue the arguments or people arguing doesn't actually make you right. Huh, I guess there must have been some people who really enjoyed that awful class in college where we learned about ad hom, strawman, and all that. I personally did my best to forget all of it after the final.
Bacon makes us stronger
|
Jvpiter
Jovelike
475
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 22:03:05 -
[185] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote: Your post is ironic considering that what's being stated is accepting the costs or consequences of actions or choices. How do you think that makes you right, or makes me a hypocrite? I'd like to understand the logic in this.
I accused you of hypocrisy because in this thread you are advocating for solving a game mechanic by investing in alts.
In a different thread, as I have quoted, you find it unacceptable that alts are a solution to a game mechanic.
E: Added correct quote for this reply. |
Carmen Electra
The Scope Gallente Federation
13170
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 22:07:20 -
[186] - Quote
Jvpiter wrote:13kr1d1 wrote: Your post is ironic considering that what's being stated is accepting the costs or consequences of actions or choices. How do you think that makes you right, or makes me a hypocrite? I'd like to understand the logic in this.
I accused you of hypocrisy because in this thread you are advocating for solving a game mechanic by investing in alts. In a different thread, as I have quoted, you find it unacceptable that alts are a solution to a game mechanic. E: Added correct quote for this reply. Dat OP roast tho. Smells like bacon.
Bacon makes us stronger
|
Jvpiter
Jovelike
476
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 22:10:51 -
[187] - Quote
Carmen Electra wrote:
Dat OP roast tho. Smells like bacon.
Did you know that bacon makes your stronger?
|
Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
178
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 23:16:42 -
[188] - Quote
Yay they are getting rid of clone upgrades.
I just lost JDC 5 a few days ago.
Good riddance to the stupid clone upgrades. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
313
|
Posted - 2014.11.16 23:21:54 -
[189] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:13kr1d1 wrote:Unezka Turigahl wrote:Most games have one death and it is meaningless. Eve has two deaths that are both full loot-loss deaths with the possibility for a third XP death if you're forgetful. It stupid. It adds nothing. Good riddance.
And no, I've never personally lost XP. I just know stupid when I see it. So you don't like the core of Eve gameplay. Don't wander into lowsec, you may not enjoy it. With the caveat that I'm not a game designer, I do understand the reasoning and I'll share it. The fundamental issue is that clone grades don't add a choice. When you are pod killed, you aren't presented with an interesting question -- "Should I upgrade my pod? How much should I upgrade it?" Instead, you either upgrade, and protect your skill points against an inevitable further pod kill, or you don't, and suffer. One choice is so incredibly better than the other that you'll always pick it, unless you happen to forget. Good game design isn't about punishing mere forgetfulness. It should be about presenting a meaningful choice to a player and letting them pick which way to go, with benefits to offset risk. Clone upgrade costs just don't do that -- they present a choice for which there's only one right answer.
Totally misses the point. Many if not most vets are sitting on large isk piles. For instance, I hate pve and don't actively pursue isk gathering, yet im sitting on approximately 6bil liquid isk and about 30 bil in assets, which I just acquired by merely playing in the game. As a result, for a vet pvp in a ship that costs less then 500 mil (at least for me) or so is utterly painless. From an isk point of view, engaging in frig combat (hell in fact any t1 ship up to a bs) is risk free pvp. On the other hand for a newer player, pvp entails considerable risk because the isk loss likely represents a considerable portion of their total net worth. Clone tiers and costs acted as a balance - it imposed an entailed risk on older players thereby equaling the playing field. Over all this change is not a good thing and is just another step towards making pvp in eve painless and risk free.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Mike Adoulin
Adolescent Radioactive Pirate Hamsters
991
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 00:16:05 -
[190] - Quote
PVP isn't the only way to get podded.
The new Ghost and Sleeper exploration sites, to start with.
Everything in EVE is a trap.
And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)
You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.
Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
|
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
784
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 00:51:05 -
[191] - Quote
First of all, words describing generalizations like "anyone" and "ever" are not the perfect choice when you are addressing a community of players as diverse as in EVE. There's more than just a chance that some yuppie looking "bitter" vet dude in Gallentean "I'm sexy and I know it" type of jacket will appear along with something that awfully resembles "Divine Aureole of Forums Knightery" and hit your "anyones" and "evers" with a nerf bat.
Let's for a moment put aside the fact that 9 out of 10 you simply anticipated that and posted this in its current form and place just to provoke posts like these. So lets forget about: - posting in a General Discussion instead of an appropriate place; - posting on an NPC corp alt about a topic you want to look like you care about. And no this is not "Ad hominem". This is about caring about a topic so much that you thought it would be better to do it with an NPC alt that has no wight in the community and is easily forgotten instead of using your main character that probably has some history as a dedicated player of this game and thus can attract more people to the cause; - generally exploiting a seemingly popular trend on GD to bash CCP at every single change they make like it's the end of the world... at least as we know it;
The fact that this thread haven't been locked on Page 2, but instead received blue ribbon is the proof that CCP does listen to feedback no matter the quality of it.
Anyway, let's dissect your post: Clones and clone costs have always been a part of Eve. So what. It makes them good? By introducing tradition as your first argument you simply want to be confronted with a counter argument. Why is bringing tradition as your first argument bad for a discussion? Because there were numerous traditions that apparently sometimes even gave benefit at their time in the context of the community that was practicing it, but were ultimately called off because they were just plainly stupid, wasting time or simply bad for the community itself.
They make sense in the scope of the game. No, they actually don't. They do only because CCP decided that they do and you were told they do when you started to play the game - just like they decided now that they do not make sense any more. If you want a confirmation of the fact that it's not your rational decision about the feature itself that lead to making sense of the feature, but instead CCP's presentation of the feature so far, ask the player who started to play in a game without clones one year after he starts playing and see if he tells you "yeah, having to pay for a clone upgrade when you lose a fight makes perfect sense and it should be implemented".
They aren't a problem for anyone to pay off, ever. I've already covered "anyone" and "ever" in a general way, so let's cover it in a more direct manner. Take me as an example. Started to play as a solo player not knowing anyone in the game (that's a proper use of the word "anyone" without risking that the generalization might be ruined with an argument of a single person). Played it for a couple of months, made a couple of friends and was nicely leveling up my Raven - literally. You could say that I was one of those "bigger is better" players that skipped small ships except for the fact that I've learned pretty quickly that it's not the case and was deliberately training to be most effective with battlecruisers and battleships because I liked that gameplay more at that point.
That was in Red Moon Rising. So, after a lot of level 4's in a Raven and a couple of fights in Ravens and Drakes I went to nullsec looking for more experiences. Being the oldest character out of all of my in-game friends, I took the task of training what's the most useful for for corp rather for myself, since I already had what I like - BCs and BSs.
Then came joining a big alliance and training for doctrine ships, since Ravens and Drakes were not that popular among the FCs for obvious reasons. It just happened to be that doctrines were switching just barely slower than I could train for them, so my skill queue was always well planned for months ahead. When I got out of all that nullsec stuff, I was already looking at 80+ million of skillpoints and a very expensive clone. I also got bored with flying "big ships" and looked for a new adventure... something that I never had a chance to try... like small ship PvP.
However, since I've never stopped playing and by playing I mean fighting and loosing (as the integral part of fighting), I never had more than I needed to PvP. Some would say that since I have been playing for 7+ years and have about 3 bil in the wallet I'm doing it wrong, but I say I'm doing it right. I keep spending ISK for fun rather than hoarding it and the more ISK I have at my disposal the more fun I'll have in this game. If I have ISK, I'll spend it.. it's that simple. It's not like I have to save ISK for retirement or my children's college fund.
The problem is not about not having enough ISK to pay for a clone. I'd probably always find a way to have it. The problem is that I simply don't feel like it's a rational thing to do if I just jump in a 2 mil ISK frigate and go have some fun while having a 30+ mil ISK default clone. That's not fun, at least not in the long run which makes it unsustainable for a player like me who actually spends all of his ISK with the intention of getting the most fun of it. And I'm not alone. Many of my in-game friends share the same gameplay (have USK = have fun; don't have ISK = get some ISK and then have some fun until you run out of it again).
o.0
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
784
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 00:52:05 -
[192] - Quote
Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. "Can" and "willing to if they are given a choice" are not the same thing.
Why would the empires simply hand out clones for free just cause of feels? Are you seriously bringing even lore into this? Ok then, let's see... Because empires feel that they could push capsuleers to fight for their interests better if they provide some services for free. Minmatar Elders observed behavior of Tribal Liberation Force members and got to the conclusion that the most used ships were Thrashers and Rifters with better skilled capsuleers not willing to engage in combat for the TLF because of the costs of more skilled capsuleer clones. The study further continued on marketing uses of free clones for all capsuleers as a way to potentially attract currently uninterested pilots to TLF's cause.The Elders shared the vision of the free clone initiative and what it could do for their fight against the Amarr with Gallente in an annual Coalition Summit in Dodixie. All it took for the word to spread out is for one Gallente politician to sleep with a Caldari spy (official reaction to the accusations broadcasted on Scope News Network was "All of you journalists sound like my third wife. How could I have known that a beautiful young man like [the spy] was, in fact a Civire. I never thought those blue eyes could ever lie to me."). Caldari quickly shared the plan with Amarr and now none of the empires want to miss the opportunity of attracting capsuleers to their cause.
First it was the removal of needed standings for certain game mechanics, now it's clone costs. Yes and yes.
If we don't halt this now, it'll be learning implants gone next, and then standings will probably go away altogether. As CCP already stated, you don't have a choice of upgrading your clone when you lose a pod. You do have a choice of not having more expensive implants and you do have a choice when it comes to balancing standings. If those two mechanics ever get removed, it would be for a completely different reason.
Why is the original vision of Eve being torn apart? The original vision of EVE: - didn't include most of the current ships; - It excluded "Warp to 0" as an option; - didn't have wormholes; - didn't have capitals; - included T1 frigates using cruise missile launchers; - had learning skills; - didn't planned to have 100+ mil skill point characters for the next 6 years; - ...
Many of the things envisioned in the original EVE made sense at the time, but it doesn't mean it makes sense now.
It was fine for 10 years. And it will be fine for the next 10 without artificially taxing player losses.
Let's not allow this Rhea patch to go through. "Why" and "How" come to mind as the logical questions, but I don't think I'll get logical answers.
Post here to save our clones. Done that... saving our clones without added tax.
o.0
|
Kaaeliaa
The Vendunari End of Life
30232
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 00:53:55 -
[193] - Quote
Can't possibly like the above post enough.
LAGL Cosplayer. Princess of Sibyyl's Pillowfort. Professional Jimmy-rustler.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
25063
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 01:25:28 -
[194] - Quote
Paynus Maiassus wrote:Yay they are getting rid of clone upgrades.
I just lost JDC 5 a few days ago.
Good riddance to the stupid clone upgrades. sorry to hear that broski. petition, and use reasons from this thread one at a time, each time it's kicked back to you.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Areen Sassel
35
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 03:06:59 -
[195] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:And you know what, the new jump limitation mechanics are shards of glass in the foot as well, going by your analogy. Hell, turning on the Damage Control Unit is a shard of glass. Why do I have to turn it on every time I undock? Why can't it just be a passive module or something that automatically comes on at all times?
Well, indeed, why not? As I understand it, the DCU is only an active module because of some engine limitation at the time it was implemented. Turning on the DCU's a no-brainer; why, indeed, make the player implement non-decisions?
(And, yes, I'd have D-scan fire every however-many seconds automatically. It's not a meaningful choice; there's no advantage to not D-scanning.)
Quote:Why would the empires simply hand out clones for free just cause of feels?
Same reason they hand out rookie ships for free? Same reason they let a bunch of amoral homicidal maniacs run around space even though CONCORD could squash them all flat in an afternoon? When the universe's internal logic and gameplay conflict, gameplay wins. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
313
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 03:09:55 -
[196] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. "Can" and "willing to if they are given a choice" are not the same thing.
Thats the point - clone costs impose risk on high sp lvl players for participating in low skilled pvp. People who dont like that are just inclined to perfer risk free pvp which is not the way eve has ever been.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1692
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 03:19:29 -
[197] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. "Can" and "willing to if they are given a choice" are not the same thing.
Thats the point - clone costs impose risk on high sp lvl players for participating in low skilled pvp. People who dont like that are just inclined to perfer risk free pvp which is not the way eve has ever been. whats wrong with high sp characters participating in anything? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13925
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 04:16:43 -
[198] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. "Can" and "willing to if they are given a choice" are not the same thing.
Thats the point - clone costs impose risk on high sp lvl players for participating in low skilled pvp. People who dont like that are just inclined to perfer risk free pvp which is not the way eve has ever been.
I would rather spend that 45 mil on more ships than on a death tax that punishes me more the longer I play.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
25066
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 04:44:38 -
[199] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. "Can" and "willing to if they are given a choice" are not the same thing.
Thats the point - clone costs impose risk on high sp lvl players for participating in low skilled pvp. People who dont like that are just inclined to perfer risk free pvp which is not the way eve has ever been. you realize damage application does not scale with ship size, in fact it gets worse? and the distances in common situations such as gate spawn and webs and points are within 15 km. good luck brawling in a 15 km radius with large guns.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
802
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 05:15:29 -
[200] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. "Can" and "willing to if they are given a choice" are not the same thing.
Thats the point - clone costs impose risk on high sp lvl players for participating in low skilled pvp. People who dont like that are just inclined to perfer risk free pvp which is not the way eve has ever been. That would be true if we had "epic soulbound gear" that only older players have and are divided by levels of characters. EVE does not work that way. When I fly, for example, a Kestrel I have the same amount of skill points for that ship as most of the 3 month old characters who fly Kestrels. The fact that I have a Dreadnought trained to 5 does not give me an advantage in a frig fight whatsoever. So basically, as it is now, I'm risking the same as my 3 months old opponent + being penalized for having trained skills completely unrelated to frigates. Not to mention the fact that the amount of skill points in this game does not mean that you'd be better at actually flying the ship.
With clones removed it wouldn't be risk free PvP. Instead I'd finally risk the same as my opponent.
o.0
|
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
25098
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 06:25:23 -
[201] - Quote
+1. Vol is labelling frigate / small ship PVP as "low skilled" but that's just incorrect. It's fun PVP and it's fast paced, effective PVP. not to mention tackle is really important for kills.
Assuming Vol was correct, that characters should always go up and out from frigates and cruisers, there's still a good 75 million SP to be trained in cruisers and below.
So the best solution in Vol's world is what, only train up to frigates and never go back? You can't even skip frigate skills, you need them to some degree for spaceship command and gunnery. So currently there's 20 million SP in small stuff that pilots have no financial interest in being caught in. because it's "low skilled PVP" right
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Nami Kumamato
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
317
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 11:51:50 -
[202] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:13kr1d1 wrote:The same can be said of putting modules on your combat based ships. It's not a choice of should I shouldnt I. It's a forced option just like the clone, because the consequences of not choosing is a blown up ship and no ability to kill anyone else. OK, but let's look at the alternative. In EVE you have a number of slots to fill, and it's not always an incorrect choice to leave one empty. You might do so because a particular fit maxes out your CPU and power grid before you have filled all your slots, for example. Is such a fit optimal? Well, you have to figure that out. A design that required every module slot to be filled would take away the meaningful choice of fitting in such a way that you can't fill that last slot. This might preclude an interesting, effective choice. Clone grades aren't like that. There's no reason you would ever not upgrade a clone, other than being unable to spare the money. Quote:I don't agree that it's good game design objectively to try to "weed out" such decisions. I think it's subjective. Let's say it's subjective. The game designers have come to the conclusion that, subjectively, they want to get rid of clone grades. Hope that helps clarify.
I understand this - totally do. Upgrading your clone is a thing that you do regardless of where you are in the game. However what bothers me in relation to all these small changes rolling out, is that with every removal it seems a bit of EVE's soul is lost.Every time some small thing is removed I feel like EVE's "lore" dies a little bit. Again, totally understand the game-dev idea behind the removal, but then again clones were and still are a huge part of EVE's storyline and universe.
Clones should have grades, it's normal and it's what would logically happen in the ultra-capitalistic world of New Eden. Not everybody would have access to top of the line 1 bazillion skillpoint clones, some would have cheaper one, some others will have expensive ones. Clones are disposable - totally agree - however there should be a difference between them.
How about a reverse change - we put a hard limit on the number of SP a certain clone-grade may hold, such as that your training will not progress if your clone's brain cannot handle the data? This way we don't pay not to lose skillpoints but we pay to be able to progress in training. After all, you need to have a special brain to understand Astrometrics V :P Or how about we have different types of clones that give small bonuses to a certain skill - you would have clones for Industrialists, clones for Researches or clones for the pew-pew loving fans, clones for FC's (I dunno, explanations can be found really easy, like : an FC-specialised clone has more I/O ports and neural connections than a standard clone allowing for faster and more efficient data flow, which in turn increases the effectiveness of links and such)
To sum things up : I feel the clone is slowly becoming the respawn-point/soul-guide , and although in essence it always was that - the coat of polish that it had in EVE made it feel very very different. And in the end it's one of the reasons that we love this game so much - because it's different.
[i]"And now my ship is oh so cloaked and fit
It never felt so good, I never felt so hid"[/i]
- Ramona McCandless, Untitled
|
Areen Sassel
35
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 12:51:34 -
[203] - Quote
Nami Kumamato wrote:Or how about we have different types of clones that give small bonuses to a certain skill - you would have clones for Industrialists, clones for Researches or clones for the pew-pew loving fans, clones for FC's (I dunno, explanations can be found really easy, like : an FC-specialised clone has more I/O ports and neural connections than a standard clone allowing for faster and more efficient data flow, which in turn increases the effectiveness of links and such)
We do have different types of clones that give bonuses to a certain skill; ones with implants in.
This isn't just pedantry; there's two real points. First of all, any clone specialisation scheme has to feel different to implants. A naive implementation is, essentially, just a special kind of implant that medical bays sell.
Secondly, implants mean that Rhea won't be "risk-free" PvP. Sure, you can go out in a bare clone, and it'll cost you no ISK - but you're foregoing skillpoints until you can jump back into one with attribute implants. You're also foregoing any implant bonus to pertinent skills. If you're willing to put some more ISK on the line, you can have more skillpoints, and get bonuses to skills while you're out there. That's a meaningful choice. |
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
3
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 13:01:59 -
[204] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:13kr1d1 wrote:Unezka Turigahl wrote:Most games have one death and it is meaningless. Eve has two deaths that are both full loot-loss deaths with the possibility for a third XP death if you're forgetful. It stupid. It adds nothing. Good riddance.
And no, I've never personally lost XP. I just know stupid when I see it. So you don't like the core of Eve gameplay. Don't wander into lowsec, you may not enjoy it. With the caveat that I'm not a game designer, I do understand the reasoning and I'll share it. The fundamental issue is that clone grades don't add a choice. When you are pod killed, you aren't presented with an interesting question -- "Should I upgrade my pod? How much should I upgrade it?" Instead, you either upgrade, and protect your skill points against an inevitable further pod kill, or you don't, and suffer. One choice is so incredibly better than the other that you'll always pick it, unless you happen to forget. Good game design isn't about punishing mere forgetfulness. It should be about presenting a meaningful choice to a player and letting them pick which way to go, with benefits to offset risk. Clone upgrade costs just don't do that -- they present a choice for which there's only one right answer.
and thus Darwinism would prevail. |
Xavier Holtzman
Imploding Turtles Rising in Outerspace Gravity Fatal Ascension
224
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 13:07:05 -
[205] - Quote
How did this thread reach 11 pages
I do not like the men on this spaceship. They are uncouth and fail to appreciate my better qualities. I have something of value to contribute to this mission if only they would realize it.
- Bill Frug
|
Leannor
Central Builders Incorporated Northern Associates.
3
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 13:07:55 -
[206] - Quote
Xavier Holtzman wrote:How did this thread reach 11 pages
lets make it 12! |
MidnightWyvern
Night Theifs DamnedNation
63
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 13:33:23 -
[207] - Quote
Carmen Electra wrote:Jvpiter wrote:13kr1d1 wrote: Your post is ironic considering that what's being stated is accepting the costs or consequences of actions or choices. How do you think that makes you right, or makes me a hypocrite? I'd like to understand the logic in this.
I accused you of hypocrisy because in this thread you are advocating for solving a game mechanic by investing in alts. In a different thread, as I have quoted, you find it unacceptable that alts are a solution to a game mechanic. E: Added correct quote for this reply. Dat OP roast tho. Smells like bacon. This OP has dedication, I'll give him that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=eaUaJUhTZfw#t=148s
An excellent example of why pod killmails are the best feature to be implemented in EVE Online since warping at zero.
|
Christopher AET
hirr Northern Coalition.
829
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 13:34:34 -
[208] - Quote
To the OP. If it helps you can pay me 50 million ISK every time you lose a pod. I am more than willing to provide this service and help you have the game experience you want.
I drain ducks of their moisture for sustenance.
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
314
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 14:35:55 -
[209] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Anyone who can fly a T3 can pay off medical clones. "Can" and "willing to if they are given a choice" are not the same thing.
Thats the point - clone costs impose risk on high sp lvl players for participating in low skilled pvp. People who dont like that are just inclined to perfer risk free pvp which is not the way eve has ever been. That would be true if we had "epic soulbound gear" that only older players have and are divided by levels of characters. EVE does not work that way. When I fly, for example, a Kestrel I have the same amount of skill points for that ship as most of the 3 month old characters who fly Kestrels. The fact that I have a Dreadnought trained to 5 does not give me an advantage in a frig fight whatsoever. So basically, as it is now, I'm risking the same as my 3 months old opponent + being penalized for having trained skills completely unrelated to frigates. Not to mention the fact that the amount of skill points in this game does not mean that you'd be better at actually flying the ship. With clones removed it wouldn't be risk free PvP. Instead I'd finally risk the same as my opponent.
Completely missing the point. In eve, the entire game is supposed to be premised upon risk v. reward. To make eve pvp meaningful there are supposed to be consequences to your actions. Hence eve (as opposed to many if not most other mmos) imposes a death penalty. Up until these proposed clone changes, there were only two types of death penalties - isk and and potential clone degradation for those forgetful enough to update their clone. The isk penalty came in two forms - ship loss and clone fees.
For vets, ship loss becomes increasingly meaningless as they naturally acquire isk. To use your example, a loss of a kestrel to most vets is meaningless isk wise - hell t1 frigs are frequently used as throwaway cyno ships. OTH, to a newer player a kestrel and its mods may comprise a significant portion of their total net worth. Thus, if clone costs are not factored in, there is an imbalance - a newer play is risking significantly more then a vet. In fact, without clone costs, the vet is functionally engaging in riskless pvp, cause the loss of a t1 frig is meaningless to him as there is no significant death penalty associated with the loss.
The removal of the death penalty for vets will of course change player behavior. Vets will likely engage in more low lvl pvp, and as a result we can expect a new round of whining from players complaining that vets rollstompping (because sp doesnt equal player experience) newer players is unfair.
Basically the nerfing of the death penalty is just one more example of the limiting of risk and the wowification of eve. Hell with Thera we even now got battle fields - Yippy
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Jvpiter
Jovelike
608
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 14:42:29 -
[210] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
For vets, ship loss becomes increasingly meaningless as they naturally acquire isk. To use your example, a loss of a kestrel to most vets is meaningless isk wise - hell t1 frigs are frequently used as throwaway cyno ships. OTH, to a newer player a kestrel and its mods may comprise a significant portion of their total net worth. Thus, if clone costs are not factored in, there is an imbalance - a newer play is risking significantly more then a vet. In fact, without clone costs, the vet is functionally engaging in riskless pvp, cause the loss of a t1 frig is meaningless to him as there is no significant death penalty associated with the loss.
I don't disagree with this paragraph.
I don't believe we have a lot of data that says vets prey on newer players significantly, but this may be a consequence of removal of clone grades.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |