Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 30 .. 33 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1050
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 21:22:48 -
[571] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:I actually thought it was the ironic type.
we need ccp's vision of nullsec to be thrust in our faces after all It said : "forced to have fun." That is not ironic, it is heartbreakingly sad on a level beyond believe that gamers have succumbed to this state of mind. It is entitlement on God level. This is what happens when you leave humans to their own devices. Efficiency will always supersede fun. If you looks at nearly any game (especially mmos), early mystique and wonder pretty rapidly give way to min/maxing, theorycrafting, and in the case of Eve, metagaming on a ridiculously high level. Those who do not adopt these things, quickly find themselves in the dustbin. That's where fun in any sort of competitive game lands you. No, you let min/maxing supersede fun, it isnt some kind of game requirement, you blame human nature but you do realize that most people playing video games, EVE or otherwise DONT min/max they settle for pretty damn good and leave it there because min/maxing tends to make playing a video game feel more like a job than a source of entertainment. Choose fun and you'll find it, make excuses and you wont. You ignored the part about what happens to people who put fun above efficiency. I am sure you did this, because it is undeniable. You want to see a prime example of what happens when "fun/hr" is your primary goal? Have a look at how Brave is doing these days. Turns out getting farmed to death doesn't make for compelling gameplay, no matter what you may want to tell yourself. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
408
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 21:22:50 -
[572] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Andreus Ixiris wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I think it's because following BR5 there were international news articles (in mainstream news, not just gaming news) and an influx of new players. That's what drives people to the game. "Come and play whack-a-mole in space" isn't. It drove a lot of people to the game, who promptly left when they discovered that nullsec fights like that happen incredibly seldom because even in the days of BR-5 the vast majority of nullsec was blue to each other. And now they just straight up don't happen. Which is apparently... better?
You (nullsec) chose to have few fights before and you are choosing to have zero of them now, not because fozziesov has made big fights impossible, quite the contrary it has made them easier to get into but you are CHOOSING to fight fozziesov instead of CHOOSING to use it to get into big fights. And as i mentioned in other posts CCP cannot force you to have fun with fozziesov, you could choose to but..........you stubbornly wont.......by choice.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
1008
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 21:32:34 -
[573] - Quote
For the record, min/maxing can be fun, and as space nerds we know that. Until it's not, that's it...
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
408
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 21:44:56 -
[574] - Quote
lucas kell wrote: Which is why conflict need to be encouraged by nullsec mechanics. If they read the news about big battles then arrived and found that there was a healthy amount of smaller battles they can get straight in on between the big ones, they'd be much more inclined to stay.
Sigh.......
Again CCP cannot force you to fight each other, nothing CCP programs into EVE can MAKE you fight. You must chose to fight and you have made it clear in a previous post that you have ZERO intention of doing so.
You dont like fozziesov not because it doesnt work but because it does. You are miserable with fozziesov not because it has to be that what but because you choose to play in a fashion that makes it miserable.
EVE is about choice and as a group nullsec is making the wrong one about fozziesov and suffering for it, as they should.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
408
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 21:54:20 -
[575] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:I actually thought it was the ironic type.
we need ccp's vision of nullsec to be thrust in our faces after all It said : "forced to have fun." That is not ironic, it is heartbreakingly sad on a level beyond believe that gamers have succumbed to this state of mind. It is entitlement on God level. This is what happens when you leave humans to their own devices. Efficiency will always supersede fun. If you looks at nearly any game (especially mmos), early mystique and wonder pretty rapidly give way to min/maxing, theorycrafting, and in the case of Eve, metagaming on a ridiculously high level. Those who do not adopt these things, quickly find themselves in the dustbin. That's where fun in any sort of competitive game lands you. No, you let min/maxing supersede fun, it isnt some kind of game requirement, you blame human nature but you do realize that most people playing video games, EVE or otherwise DONT min/max they settle for pretty damn good and leave it there because min/maxing tends to make playing a video game feel more like a job than a source of entertainment. Choose fun and you'll find it, make excuses and you wont. You ignored the part about what happens to people who put fun above efficiency. I am sure you did this, because it is undeniable. You want to see a prime example of what happens when "fun/hr" is your primary goal? Have a look at how Brave is doing these days. Turns out getting farmed to death doesn't make for compelling gameplay, no matter what you may want to tell yourself.
Then you admit that the reason you are not having fun is your own (poor) choice, great we agree.
I have a great time everyday, you are choosing to be miserable, i prefer my choice and you just endure yours. Which one of us is really winning EVE, id have to say me because im enjoying myself and you are not by your own admission.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1050
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 22:29:30 -
[576] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: Then you admit that the reason you are not having fun is your own (poor) choice, great we agree.
I have a great time everyday, you are choosing to be miserable, i enjoy my choice and you just endure yours. Which one of us is really winning EVE, id have to say me because im enjoying myself and you are not by your own admission.
There is no more bitter pill to swallow than the one you made yourself.
Who's miserable? Eve actually happens to have facilitated the only reason I am still around (being in alliance with the people I play with). I spend far more time on Mumble, Jabber, and forums than actually playing Eve, so if CCP continues to **** it up, I'm sure we'll all find another home elsewhere.
But, until then, we'll keep pointing out their **** design choices as they are made, and hope that they knock it off at some point. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6753
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 22:45:04 -
[577] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Turns out getting farmed to death doesn't make for compelling gameplay, no matter what you may want to tell yourself. Get massadeath to write you a victory narrative and keep it up years and several membership changes later
... it works.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2324
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 22:47:03 -
[578] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Kiandoshia wrote:Like I said, we're not having fun on our own and if they keep letting us come up with 'metas' we wont.
We need to be forced to have fun, we need limitations. Um, CCP cannot force you to have fun, you can choose to be miserable if you want and nothing CCP can do about that except perhaps pity your poor choice.
Of course they can. They make this game. They can make all ship classes relevant, they can make all ship types relevant and all weapons viable and all choices of ammo have some kind of point. They are the god in the sky that can change everything and tweak all the numbers and force us to do anything. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6540
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 23:30:30 -
[579] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I think its disgracefull to complain about boredom and that fozzysov is boring when they are clearly not doing nothing them selves to spice it up. You have massive blob of blues and they wont deploy. CFC fault, not the rest of eve or CCP. It was like this before so nothing to do with fuzzy sov. Fozzy sovstill brings a lot of fun and pvp. There are those that already are choosing to escalate it from the start to titans "not doing nothing". So we're doing something?
And lol, we're back to that crap where you're suggesting that because CCP can't design a fun mechanic that we should cripple ourselves to create content. How about we go back to dominion sov, then the onus is back on you to create your own superblob to fight? No? Oh that's right, because you guys shouldn't be forced to play any particular way, but we should just abandon our coalitions and fight at random with our neighbours to keep the game going.
**** that. If CCP can't build an entertaining mechanic, we'll continue to just farm null as we ever have until the game dies.
Snowmann wrote:The recent Sov changes came about because of the complaints about the previous Sov system, and the blue donut. Yes. You guys crying about the mysterious blue doughnut and actively refusing to do what you needed to do to fight in the sov system (form up into coalitions) because it bored you, so you complained. Now it's the other way round, where we're expected to just trash our way of playing to play with the boring new struture mining whack-a-mole mechanics. You're a hypocrite.
I think the real issue is the players and leaders themselves. They are bored with "this" game as it is, and they won't play in the new system because they don't automatically have the advantage like they used to.
Snowmann wrote:Sov warfare now has a much lower barrier to entry and their big toys can be easily outmaneuvered in the new system. They want fights on their terms, where the incumbents have the advantage. No they can't. Nobody can take sov that we want under the new system without fighting our "big toys". They still exist and any serious attempts to take sov will result in fleet fights which we will generally outblob. The only difference is that idiots in interceptors feel relevant when they make us have to respond almost constatntly.
Snowmann wrote:Getting new blood out there and at the top would be far more effective. Go on then. You think new blood is needed, so be new blood. Form up your own alliance and your own coalition and take some space.
Snowmann wrote:But the ultimate change would be to make the best gear rare, not by cost, but by being unique. That would probably be the hardest change, but it might be the best. Why would it? The best gear is mostly irrelevant anyway. Sheer numbers beat out shiptypes any day. All you're really saying here is "I don't like titans, therefore titans should be removed". It's not going to happen.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6540
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 23:41:23 -
[580] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:1. You admit that you have gamed nullsec and the reason you dont find big fights is because you dont want to, thanks its about time at least one of you admitted this truth, certainly a step in the right direction. Everyone games every system. It's the nature of MMOs and pretty much the most defining win metric. We could easily set each other red and fight, but we would literally be throwing away what we have just to generate content because CCP are bad at game design. No thanks, I'd literally rather watch null die than have to fake content into the game.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:2. You ask why dont i condemn those small groups for not bringing you big fights it is because i have not heard them moaning en masse that they want big fights, it is you that said you did and at the same time give yet another lame excuse why you dont, that being you might lose sov well that is what your fights are supposed to be about not staged slap fights in space. Of course you haven't, because most of them are "grr goons". They don't care whether null mechanics or fun or whether players are attracted to EVE, they simply want to feel like they've got one up on the null groups. What dumb is that this mechanic also make it easier for use to deny people space if we really want to, and I think as renter alliances grow back in you're going to see that happening a lot more.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:3. If nullsec remains stagnant that is okay as i said CCP cant make you have fun, you can block that fun any time you like but dont blame fozziesov because you want to sit on your space ass and do nothing all day, fozziesov is telling you that isnt how its going to be anymore. So fight frigates all day or go get into a big fight but stop blaming fozziesov for your personal shortcomings. You say that's OK, but CCP disagrees. They know that nullsec is a massive portion of the appeal of the game, and they won't leave that to die. And no, Fozziesov isn't saying that. If anything it's saying "sit on your ass more" since we now have to farm our space to keep indices up. Sure, we have to chase frigates and the capture mechanics are boring as hell, but we can pretty much ignore most of the mechanics and be safe in the knowledge that our space is secure. Fozziesov was supposed to encourage people to want to fight, it failed. That's what you don't seem to be able to get into your head over whatever it is that goonswarm did to make you flip your **** like you have here.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
Drachiel
Mercury LLC
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 23:46:17 -
[581] - Quote
10mn Svipuls are metagame enough without being awesome at tossing from 150KM away going sonic hedgehog fast. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6540
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 23:48:51 -
[582] - Quote
Loneball wrote:Give us an actual reason?
LoL! Ok, uhhhh. . . . . .
How about we issue:
CHALLENGES!!!!
Party A issues a CHALLENGE to Party B!!!
Party B has 5 minutes to respond and fight. If they do not undock and aggress on one of the challengers within that 5 minutes,
PARTY B GETS BANNED FROM THE GAME FOR 24 HOURS!
That's an actual reason right?
Play the game or you'll not get to play the game. That's kind of how it is right now, but maybe we should make it official. Minus the bannign part, that's what we're asking for. The problem is, it's currently this.
1. Party A shows up in disposable ships 2. Party A challenges Party B 3. Party B shows up to fight 4. Party A runs away and cloaks 5. Party B returns to ratting 6. Goto 1
What we want is for Party A to put enough on the line for step 1 that they may actually lose during the fight so that when the challenge Party B, a fight actually occurs. That won't happen without trollceptors going in the bin and more needing to be put on the field to challenge sov. It used to require too many people and too much isk. Now it requires too few people and too little isk. It just needs to be balanced somewhere in the middle. I think at some point along the line CCP forgot this is an alliance level mechanic, not something one idiot in a frigate should be able to contest.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6540
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 23:54:44 -
[583] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:No, you let min/maxing supersede fun, it isnt some kind of game requirement, you blame human nature but you do realize that most people playing video games, EVE or otherwise DONT min/max they settle for pretty damn good and leave it there because min/maxing tends to make playing a video game feel more like a job than a source of entertainment.
Choose fun and you'll find it, make excuses and you wont. Generally speaking the people that don't minmax MMOS are the people that are terrible at playing them. You seem to think that minmaxing and fun can't go hand in hand, but in most games they can. Even in EVE, we can still minmax and have fun, we are just ignoring the vast majority of fozziesov to do it.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:You (nullsec) chose to have few fights before and you are choosing to have zero of them now, not because fozziesov has made big fights impossible, quite the contrary it has made them easier to get into but you are CHOOSING to fight fozziesov instead of CHOOSING to use it to get into big fights. And as i mentioned in other posts CCP cannot force you to have fun with fozziesov, you could choose to but..........you stubbornly wont.......by choice.
Instead you are throwing the biggest self-pity party in the history of EVE, congrats well played and to such a productive end. No it hasn't. How in any reality s it now easier to get into fights?
In dominion sov we got into fights when we set them up or when someone legitimately wanted to take sov. In fozziesov we get into fights when we set them up or when someone legitimately wants to take sov. The problem is that actually taking sov in the new system is boring as sin, so very few serious players want to do it and that number will decrease as people get bored of mining structures only to get roflstomped by the local blob.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Loneball
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 00:21:48 -
[584] - Quote
OK so you know what you want.
Tell me a specific system that will motivate you to fight every possible fight.
|
Removal Tool
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 00:26:35 -
[585] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: boring as sin
I've always found sin to be quite exciting, but yes, using a sov laser is boring as ****.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6540
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 00:27:26 -
[586] - Quote
Loneball wrote:OK so you know what you want.
Tell me a specific system that will motivate you to fight every possible fight. I don;t know of a particular system that would do it off the top of my head, though to fix the current one so it would work considerably better than it does, I've already answered this. I'd make the minimum ship size for entosis links a cruiser or possibly battle cruiser, I'd make entosis links burn out and require around half their cost if you move out of range while they are active, and I'd make it so that you need multiple links to start a capture (not so sustain it once started) in higher defence indices. What that would do is ensure more people attacking sov were doing so because they actually want to to take sov, not just to make the defenders send out a ship to chase them off every 5 minutes.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Salvos Rhoska
1229
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 00:34:59 -
[587] - Quote
Lucas Kell: If as you say, you are losing population and interest to boredom, how about this:
Start a proper war. Even better, start several.
Set the whole goddam universe on fire.
------------
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6754
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 00:35:52 -
[588] - Quote
We're being invaded by moa!
Winter has arrived in deklein~~
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6540
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 00:43:41 -
[589] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lucas Kell: If as you say, you are losing population and interest to boredom, how about this:
Start a proper war. Even better, start several.
Set the whole goddam universe on fire. Why don't you start a war? Why should the onus fall on us to make up for terrible mechanics? When dominion sov was out, small groups complained that we owned too much space. Did they form up into coalitions and fight us? Not, they complained to no end about how the mechanics forced them to be too big. Now the mechanics allow them to be smaller and all they do is run away when engaged. Seems like it's always us that has to bear the burden of bad game mechanics.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6756
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 02:46:25 -
[590] - Quote
A bunch of small groups -did- become pets of that one coalition that existed to destroy us.
Sadly, it seems they were destroyed instead...
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2688
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 02:46:34 -
[591] - Quote
Unfortunately I haven't had the blessing of experiencing full blown fozziesov because:
A - our blue list is bigger than I would like
B - I am bad enough to play outside the vulnerability timer when any action does hit. HINT HINT NUDGE NUDGE WINK FRIKKEN WINK
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 05:32:04 -
[592] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lucas Kell: If as you say, you are losing population and interest to boredom, how about this:
Start a proper war. Even better, start several.
Set the whole goddam universe on fire. Why don't you start a war? Why should the onus fall on us to make up for terrible mechanics? When dominion sov was out, small groups complained that we owned too much space. Did they form up into coalitions and fight us? Not, they complained to no end about how the mechanics forced them to be too big. Now the mechanics allow them to be smaller and all they do is run away when engaged. Seems like it's always us that has to bear the burden of bad game mechanics.
Only stupid players would engage a significantly superior force in symmetric warfare when asymmetric means are available. Yes, you are being engaged asymmetrically.
Also, its not CCPs job in a sandbox game to create Sov mechanics that make you "want" to go to war. Its their job to create Sov mechanics to support you going to war. Its up to the player to want it.
In my Low Sec adventures I don't look to CCP to give me a reason to create content through direct fire. If someone appears in my space who has a standing of zero or less I just react and create the content simply because they are there.
Yes, we actually create our own content with the mechanics we are given.
And in the old Null Sec days when we had players engaging us asymmetrically we would chase them off and maybe get one or two them and then we formed up to fight one of our neighbors. We didn't blue the whole damn universe then complain we are bored and ask the Devs to give us a reason to fight.
This attitude that CCP needs to give you a reason to go to war is simply another sign of how stagnate many of the Null Sec players have become. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6756
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 05:44:22 -
[593] - Quote
Anyway we have even more mining and ratting content
pvesov
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6542
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 09:56:34 -
[594] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:Only stupid players would engage a significantly superior force in symmetric warfare when asymmetric means are available. Yes, you are being engaged asymmetrically. First off, forming a coalitions yourself makes you an equal force. Secondly, noone is engaging us in asymmetric war. Noone is actually attacking us for strategic victory. There's simply people who want to time waste since the system allows them to. You guys and your misunderstanding of how war works is funny.
Snowmann wrote:Also, its not CCPs job in a sandbox game to create Sov mechanics that make you "want" to go to war. Its their job to create Sov mechanics to support you going to war. Its up to the player to want it. Of course it is! It's 100% their job to create mechanics players want to use.
Snowmann wrote:Yes, we actually create our own content with the mechanics we are given. Good for you. We're going to create our own content by ignoring **** mechanics and farming isk.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6756
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 11:10:33 -
[595] - Quote
It's pve content
We enjoy it, ok
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
330
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 16:16:31 -
[596] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:And now eight! Welcome, Suddenly Spaceships. Looks like Boys without pants is declining to defend their claim. OSS, MC and VEGA continue to have TCUs up.
Continuing the narrative... Up to nine different alliances now. The Irukandji. took SLIP's system. And one of the MC systems is now unclaimed.
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
33
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 17:08:55 -
[597] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Snowmann wrote:Only stupid players would engage a significantly superior force in symmetric warfare when asymmetric means are available. Yes, you are being engaged asymmetrically. First off, forming a coalitions yourself makes you an equal force. Secondly, noone is engaging us in asymmetric war. Noone is actually attacking us for strategic victory. There's simply people who want to time waste since the system allows them to. You guys and your misunderstanding of how war works is funny.
No one would do anything in this game without a purpose. There is always a reason. You may not see it or agree with it but there is one.
Strategic victory may not even be in anyone's mind when they are attacking you. Tactical victory over you or even psychological warfare against someone not even involved could be their objectives.
Even psychological warfare against CCP could be in the works. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6545
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 17:26:03 -
[598] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:No one would do anything in this game without a purpose. There is always a reason. You may not see it or agree with it but there is one.
Strategic victory may not even be in anyone's mind when they are attacking you. Tactical victory over you or even psychological warfare against someone not even involved could be their objectives.
Even psychological warfare against CCP could be in the works. You can dress it up however you want, but it's people who want to use the fact that the mechanics are boring to make the game dull for certain players. It's a failure of the mechanics to do what they were intended to do, which is make the act of competing for sov entertaining for all involved.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
33
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 21:16:02 -
[599] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Snowmann wrote:No one would do anything in this game without a purpose. There is always a reason. You may not see it or agree with it but there is one.
Strategic victory may not even be in anyone's mind when they are attacking you. Tactical victory over you or even psychological warfare against someone not even involved could be their objectives.
Even psychological warfare against CCP could be in the works. You can dress it up however you want, but it's people who want to use the fact that the mechanics are boring to make the game dull for certain players. It's a failure of the mechanics to do what they were intended to do, which is make the act of competing for sov entertaining for all involved.
I would suggest that what you and many others are looking for is for the mechanics to allow you to force others to fight on your terms alone, what you think is fun. I would also suggest that not everyone agrees with that, so you will never find something that satisfies all.
There may be a middle ground which CCP could find, but you can't expect to please everyone. And no, current Sov holders are not the only ones who should be or are concerned with this.
There are groups who like to interfere with Sov holders' claims without the desire to ever hold Sov. Their views are just as valid.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6545
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 22:01:32 -
[600] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:I would suggest that what you and many others are looking for is for the mechanics to allow you to force others to fight on your terms alone, what you think is fun. Then you'd be wrong. It's that simple. It's been explained hundreds of times over and there's no possible way you still don't get it, leading me to believe you have no interest in what we actually want. I'm not going to continue to rehash the same conversation over and over with you. CCP know that what they've put in doesn't do what they wanted it to do and they'll act accordingly.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 30 .. 33 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |