Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 62 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2260
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:07:07 -
[1021] - Quote
You really don't get it though and are just picking spinets of what i said to support your argument.
You have started a new argument here by saying it is ok to uses a general word to replace a specific one. That was what the fruit and water analogies were about.
My main point is that playing a game is not game content. End of.
Dirty Forum Alt wrote: Players swim in water, but do not add water! The only people who add water in EVE are the developers.
Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? And why people take offence at it? [/quote]
I did sound ridiculous because you misunderstood what i was saying... So i fixed it for you.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:15:10 -
[1022] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:You really don't get it though and are just picking spinets of what i said to support your argument.
You have started a new argument here by saying it is ok to uses a general word to replace a specific one. That was what the fruit and water analogies were about.
My main point is that playing a game is not game content. End of. See...you keep trying to say that you've been arguing what *I* said a few pages ago...
But you haven't.
*I* said that. *NOT YOU*. You can't just change our sides on this argument when it suits you, declare yourself the winner because *I* was right - and then change back and try to keep your victory... I admit it is a novel debating tactic...but it isn't going to work.
Even here - your *main* point is that the general word *can't* describe the specific word. Water is *NOT* liquid - per you...
I give up, you are an idiot. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:16:26 -
[1023] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:You really don't get it though and are just picking spinets of what i said to support your argument. You have started a new argument here by saying it is ok to uses a general word to replace a specific one. That was what the fruit and water analogies were about. My main point is that playing a game is not game content. End of. Dirty Forum Alt wrote: Players swim in water, but do not add water! The only people who add water in EVE are the developers.
Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? And why people take offence at it?
I did sound ridiculous because you misunderstood what i was saying... So i fixed it for you. Swimming in water is not a general word for water.
See? You've completely changed what you were saying now - because you *know* you were wrong, and I was right.
As I said, I'm not changing sides with you - you picked the wrong side, you stay there.
Now shut up. |
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2260
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:25:36 -
[1024] - Quote
Read the original quote idiot. Swimming is the player action, the water is the content in this analogy.
The act of playing the game is not game content, it is simply interacting with the game content within the designed limits. If you believe otherwise, then i would say you are wrong.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
2094
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:27:19 -
[1025] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Dracvlad wrote:T2 fit which is correct, do I have to explain every bit of detail to people like you So much for having a PhD, is it in being stupid... What would be better is if you just don't lie. Sure, I should have studied being stupid. You would have been a gold mine of data.
Well when a person who I think is a complete loser thinks I am a loser I take that as a compliment...
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:32:59 -
[1026] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Read the original quote idiot. Swimming is the player action, the water is the content in this analogy.
The act of playing the game is not game content, it is simply interacting with the game content within the designed limits. If you believe otherwise, then i would say you are wrong. Meanwhile, 8 pages ago
I read the original quote. That is why I said you were *not* arguing about using a generic word vs using a specific word - because you clearly weren't.
*I* understand your point. I think you are wrong - because as *I* said 8 pages ago, in the very generic sense of the word "content" is *everything* in the game...
Then *you* turned around and claimed that was what you meant all along - and I pointed out how ridiculous that was...
And now you are mad at me for pointing out that your attempt to reverse your position and steal my position was ridiculous.
I'm following along quite well I think...
You are still an idiot. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:36:45 -
[1027] - Quote
Also if you *must* keep arguing this with me - shoot me an eve-mail....we've already derailed this thread too far... |
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2260
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:43:30 -
[1028] - Quote
And yet you argue with me without offering a counter point and instead resorting to name calling and pointless comments.
I have said what i want to say. If you feel the need to continue this via email, feel free to do so. I'm happy to just go about my day.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
710
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 13:48:13 -
[1029] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Dracvlad wrote:T2 fit which is correct, do I have to explain every bit of detail to people like you So much for having a PhD, is it in being stupid... What would be better is if you just don't lie. Sure, I should have studied being stupid. You would have been a gold mine of data. Well when a person who I think is a complete loser thinks I am a loser I take that as a compliment... I don't think you're a loser Drac.
Just a liar.
Unfortunately through your lack of integrity you get continuously called out on your lies. If you just stuck to verifiable information, you'd have a lot better position to argue from. But facts seem somewhat inconvenient to many of your claims, though that doesn't stop you claiming to be able to reference devs, etc. when you can't, while calling for others to post figures and then squirming a way to pretend the figures are flawed. |
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
710
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 13:59:05 -
[1030] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Read the original quote idiot. Swimming is the player action, the water is the content in this analogy.
The act of playing the game is not game content, it is simply interacting with the game content within the designed limits. If you believe otherwise, then i would say you are wrong. Using your water analogy, players don't add additional water to the environment. That's not the same as players don't create content.
If a group of people got together to play water polo, then that becomes a game that others can enjoy and consume. The water polo - action of people in the water - becomes content using the tools available that a larger group of people can enjoy.
That's all that's meant by creating content in an Eve sense. Players taking the tools available and creating things that others can consume, in all it's forms.
There's no real need to get so hung up on black and white definitions. It's a cultural norm of the community, not a formal definition. Being a cultural norm, it's every bit as valid as other uses of the word. |
|
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
310
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:09:06 -
[1031] - Quote
**blinks slowly**
Holy Bob... What happened while I was snoozing?
Ok... Couple of things here.
First, basic dictionary definitions aren't going to cut it for jargon.
Second, Gaming jargon and EvE jargon isn't necesarrily the same thing.
Example : Tank.
It means something in gaming jargon: a focal point for damage and/or attacks as a noun, or being the focal point for damage or attacks as a verb.
In EvE this word also has this meaning, but it can also mean how a ship is set up to deal with incoming damage/attacks (In general use an armor tank if you have more low slots than mid.), and even more recently the word has morphed to mean EHP in general (The Skiff has too much tank in Baltec's opinion.)
Never heard of any other game calling the armor that a character wears "tank".
The concept of Content follows in this path into EvE jargon. To me, and I don't think I'm alone in this, content for EvE means a 'New way to play EvE' regardless of the source, but the not rules themselves. And there's a distinction of just using the rules to play and creating a new way to play.
For example, I would NOT consider getting ganked in a retriever to be content, but the creation of organized suicide ganking I DO consider player made content. The first is business as usual, the second was the introduction of a whole new playstyle.
To me, the difference is in the act of creation in the artistic sense. The first uses existing ideas, the second created new ideas. I think that creation makes all the difference. And I think that's what makes this definition vastly different (yet derived) from any dictionary definition and is close to the gaming "standard" but is more tailored to the unique game and community that is EvE.
--Gadget
Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist
|
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
14377
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:09:28 -
[1032] - Quote
2 pages of quibbling over the word content. This is why the developers reply more on Reddit, this BS could at least be downvoted there. |
Jessica Starblaze
Rookie Help
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:11:25 -
[1033] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: and explained that your position is also ridiculous. *everything in the game - player made or CCP made - is content*. I'll stop you there. I have made it clear that i do not agree with this so it's pointless to continue. I can accept that players want to use a word incorrectly, i'm just pointing out that the word is being used incorrectly. So just accept that. It's like arguing that a swimming pool full of water is actually a swimming pool full of liquid. Technically both are right but the guy who said it is full of water is more right.
Actually, the one saying that it is filled with liquid is a lot more accurate than the one saying it is filled with water.
-> A swimming pool is filled with water + chemicals which creates a solution which does not exactly qualify as Water -> the person saying it is filled with liquid actually is the one who not making an incorrect statement (if one wants to be as pedantic as you are trying to be here)
Now let-¦s switch over to a more serious example:
So you say any player intereaction in a game is merely playing the game and not creating content.....
Situation 1:
Let-¦s say Player X creates an alliance that has the goal to destroy the amarrian empire and all the members of that alliance start attacking amarrian ships everywhere, no matter if the ships are controlled by players or by npcs.
-> By your statement that is not creating content.
Situation 2:
CCP creates a new NPC faction which randomly shows up all over space and attacks any amarrian ship they can find.
-> By your statement this is content.
Conclusion:
Despite both situations having the same effect on the environment you claim that, when it is done by players it is not content, but when CCP adds NPCs which do exactly the same thing the players are doing, it suddenly is content.
Also your comparison to WoW makes no sense as you are comparing 2 completly different game concepts: Theme Park vs. Sandbox.
PvP in a Theme Park surely qualifies as just playing the game, as it does not have any long term effect on the environment or economy. You just use a the games features and so in this case you are not creating any content.
However in a persistant world like EvE the player actions do have a long term effect on the environment. Creating an alliance as in the example above changes the game world just as much as an expansion introducing a NPC faction does and thus players are actually able to create content.
Of course a single gank hardly qualifies as creating content as it has very little effect on the game world. The activitiy of ganking in general however is a tool to create content on a larger scale. So nerfing things like ganking leads to the restriction of content creation. |
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
14377
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:16:47 -
[1034] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote: If you just stuck to verifiable information, you'd have a lot better position to argue from. But facts seem somewhat inconvenient to many of your claims, though that doesn't stop you claiming to be able to reference devs, etc. when you can't, while calling for others to post figures and then squirming a way to pretend the figures are flawed.
You must be new here
This is GD. You cannot expect some posters to tell the truth, acknowledge the existence of facts contrary to their (emotionally born) opinions or even converse in good faith. GD is the forum equivalent of the in game situation where someone flies in a gang and blobs other players for kills (and pretends this is skillful) and then complains about blobbing when a bigger gang kills them. It's all self interest, not any desire for 'balance'. Add in a hefty dose of actual mental illness and you got yourself a Good GD thread lol.
I've wasted years on this frustrating 'forum pvp' stuff. Don't be me, just set ignore on the guy and get back to enjoying GD discussions. I'm not kidding, I set ignore on exactly 2 toxic people and it improved my GD experience greatly. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
396
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:18:32 -
[1035] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:2 pages of quibbling over the word content. This is why the developers reply more on Reddit, this BS could at least be downvoted there. So you are saying EVE needs to add a down-vote option to the forums, and an option to sort posts by rating?
I would support that. |
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
14377
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:22:48 -
[1036] - Quote
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:2 pages of quibbling over the word content. This is why the developers reply more on Reddit, this BS could at least be downvoted there. So you are saying EVE needs to add a down-vote option to the forums, and an option to sort posts by rating? I would support that.
These forums don't need to be Reddit. Reddit already does Reddit.
What it needs is the one thing it won't have: Posters who don't quibble about small things. I say this as a forum Master Quibbler.
|
Galaxy Chicken
Free Highsec Industrialists
70
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:35:29 -
[1037] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:That's because you don't argue with facts and he does. He keeps saying the same thing over and over again because he is right and you are not only wrong but a liar.
baltec1 wrote: Fittings for a gank nado stands at 60 mil, total cost for the ship and fittings is roughly 135 million. Three T1 catalysts will kill it so you are spending 7 million to gank a tornado for potential profit of 60 million.
How about any of the figures he posts actually make sense? Exhibit AExhibit BExhibit CExhibit DExhibit EExhibit FExhibit GThis from ZKill's frontpage. It's between 6-14 mil. If half of that drops you're looking at 3-7 mil in loot. We've had this conversation before: he'll say "it's 12 mil for a Thrasher", I quickly look 'em up on ZKill and what does my leery eye spot? 2.06 mil, of course. That's off by a rather large margin. It does not inspire confidence in any argument he might have -- and by now I don't even know what point he's trying to prove anymore. I'm just debunking false figures for those who might take them at face value and work from there. Whenever numbers get posted and arguments spun on top of those: do take the time to VERIFY THEM people. Seriously. The fully T2 fit thrasher can get up to 12m if you buy it in a hurry instead of shopping around But when calculating the cost/profit you of course have to consider that the looting alt doesn't even need a suspect flag to loot everything that drops from the ganking ship - so they can, on average, count on getting half of it back. On average people who gank mining ships at least break even nearly every time - and often make a small profit. Hmm, interesting. Let me ask you something. Do you often make completely BS claims about something you clearly know nothing about?
The whole "On average people who gank mining ships at least break even nearly every time - and often make a small profit."
If you had the experience with ganking that you claim, you'd know that this is incorrect.
The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community.
If I invest 10 mil into a gank, I can expect to recover 5-10 mil in loot (my own included) on average.
Unless you're super selective about your targets (read as "hardly ever ganking") then you can expect a slight loss over time.
Watching the back and forth over ganking arithmatic, one might think it was complicated or something. It's seriously not rocket science, people.
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
396
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:50:56 -
[1038] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community. You know what...I don't even care anymore.
You win.
I agree - gankers of Galaxy Chicken's calibur are whiny, crybaby idiots who can only operate at all because people hold their hand and give them money/handouts.
CCP should clearly coddle them and change the game in their favour, because they are just too pathetic to make it without this extra help.
Perhaps some station ads? "For 10 million isk a day, you can save a poor, helpless ganker like Galaxy Chicken from going bankrupt due to his own stupidity. Pledge your support today!" |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
396
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:53:12 -
[1039] - Quote
Alternatively you could just target miners more than a month old who fit t2 modules...
Or scan your targets...
Or just hit the haulers and become rich... |
Caco De'mon
New Order Logistics CODE.
23
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:59:33 -
[1040] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community.
If I invest 10 mil into a gank, I can expect to recover less than 10mil in loot (my own included) on average.
I would totally back that up. The enlightened people of New Eden who support our noble quest are the true heroes for without them, the struggle to bring order our of the chaos would be much harder...
Also what seems to be missed is that while breaking even on a gank might be something that happens on average, a percentage of ganks fail and that can really ruin things.
But that is out cross to (care)bear.
James be praised
*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
|
|
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
312
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 15:00:12 -
[1041] - Quote
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Galaxy Chicken wrote:The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community. You know what...I don't even care anymore. You win. I agree - gankers of Galaxy Chicken's calibur are whiny, crybaby idiots who can only operate at all because people hold their hand and give them money/handouts. CCP should clearly coddle them and change the game in their favour, because they are just too pathetic to make it without this extra help. Perhaps some station ads? "For 10 million isk a day, you can save a poor, helpless ganker like Galaxy Chicken from going bankrupt due to his own stupidity. Pledge your support today!"
HEY!
Why haven't I seen a CODE. ad yet? I wanna be able to throw darts at James' mug while spinning in my ship.
Fix this, CODE.
Spread your drivvel message to the masses.
--Gadget... readying new darts
Edit. And OOC... Go all Jonestown if y'all do get an ad up and running. It'll be glorious.
Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
397
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 15:05:16 -
[1042] - Quote
Caco De'mon wrote:Galaxy Chicken wrote:The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community.
If I invest 10 mil into a gank, I can expect to recover less than 10mil in loot (my own included) on average. I would totally back that up. The enlightened people of New Eden who support our noble quest are the true heroes for without them, the struggle to bring order our of the chaos would be much harder... Also what seems to be missed is that while breaking even on a gank might be something that happens on average, a percentage of ganks fail and that can really ruin things. But that is out cross to (care)bear. James be praised Well ironically CODE. is pretty new-player friendly in their recruitment - so for CODE. specifically (and not just people in the alliance, I know) I'm sure the average profit for miner ganking does suffer from needing extra ships and the occasional failed gank/etc.
My own experience was more planned out - I did the math before I went in, so of course I made sure I turned a profit =P. I'm not a religious zealot, I just wanted to try out ganking.
My comments were regarding ganking in general - not the CODE. organization specifically - even though I do realize they are the primary ganker of mining ships.
The *primary* point I've been making all along on this issue is that gankers are in the lucky position to *choose* how much they spend and how much they make. The only reason *not* to turn a profit is if profit is not your motive - but that is still your *choice* - not a broken game mechanic at that point.
But if people like Galaxy Chicken want me to pity them - fine, they can have my pity. Just perhaps not for the reasons they want it.... |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5073
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 16:14:22 -
[1043] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Then call it what it is instead of using the catch all word "content". What the **** do you call it then? If CCP gives you something to do in game....oooohhh it is content. Wow. A player gives you something to do in game and it is.....? Shall we call Beverly? If that "something to do" is mining, call it mining, if it's shooting someone call it a fight or PVP, if CCP say "we are adding wormholes" call that a content expansion.
See, the generic term is content. I don't care you want to call it, but it is called content.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5073
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 16:16:31 -
[1044] - Quote
Lucy Lollipops wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Then call it what it is instead of using the catch all word "content". What the **** do you call it then? If CCP gives you something to do in game....oooohhh it is content. Wow. A player gives you something to do in game and it is.....? Shall we call Beverly? If that "something to do" is mining, call it mining, if it's shooting someone call it a fight or PVP, if CCP say "we are adding wormholes" call that a content expansion. Exactly. It happens that in this game there are players ( usually gankers ) that seem to show off what they do claiming that what they do is special and that they "are creating content". No, they aren't and they are not special at all, they are playing the game exactly as everyone else.
No, content comes in many forms. When an alliance/coalition decides to go to war with another that is content. Content is an umbrella term. Why does WoW get to call everything they do "content" when it is not all the same. It is an umbrella term. Same thing for players providing in game activities for other players to do.
The problem here is the limited view you and Rek Seven have. You are wrong, CCP says you are wrong. Good enough for me.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5073
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 16:17:42 -
[1045] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I don't require support to prove my point, the dictionary and the rest of the gaming community does that for me.
The eve community overused the word to the point were it has become a slang term for PVP or a general aggressive action. We know what is meant when eve players use the word content but that doesn't mean they are correct.
Anyway, we can argue this all day if you like but it's pointless and off topic... Sticking with my original point, i quit the game when i am bored of the content ccp provide not because of the activities the players enable me to participate in.
Please point out in the dictionary where it says "content" comes only from game developers. Oh....you can't.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Blood Retributor
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
36
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 16:21:07 -
[1046] - Quote
I have promised myself to not post ever again in these forums, but I guess I stopped caring since then, as for about a week I have decided to quit Eve (after playing it for more than two months). Why am I still here? Bringing Biology to level 5 so I can use the boosters I got from running the "Kill the Shipyard Event" (all three of them), for the unlikely chance that Eve will become "my game" someday and I will be back to ENJOY playing it.
I have read a good number of posts in this thread (first 10 pages for sure ) and decided to share a new player's view (my irrelevant opinion) and feel about Eve Online. When I am done, you can proceed with slapping me with whatever accusations that come to your mind. I'll take it, it is forum PvP after all !
First I would suggest changing the name of the game. It should be called As****le/Punk Ganker Paradise. According to what I read about and experience in the game this would be a better name for its current state. There is no real PvP in it.
Wherever you turn in the game everyone is "reaping/collecting/savouring/out for" other players "tears". They are actually out there to "PvP" (read blobb/gank/grief) just for that purpose. It does not matter where: fighting in space, scamming, you name it.
A new player (2 days) posts on reddit: "I am out for tears. Can you suggest best fit for a ship to grief miners?" (not exact words as I read them about 2 weeks ago). What was the reaction? Everyone eagerly jumped in with suggestions.
Honestly, I do not feel comfortable around such a high percentage of people with psychopathic tendecies. How else would you call someone whose intention is to make another person suffer (emotionally or otherwise) and enjoy it?
Everyone is talking about Eve as a cold and harsh universe. Most of those people have no idea what that really means. Bedroom/basement/home office "warriors" . If you are a considerate person and have experienced real life harsh and cold universe/environment, you will never want to "reap tears" without a very sound reason.
For a long time I wanted to play Eve being misinformed about it. If I would have known who the major part of the playerbase is, I would have not payed for a one year subscription.
And by the way, if you come across my only kill (me being killed in a wormhole), please do not try to use that as "carebear lost a Heron and is crying now". I was so bored and burnt out after the Shipyard event that I simply did not care and just wanted to know if there is something else in this game I am missing and I could not care less about the loss.
Mining - boring, missions - boring/repetitive with negative effect on one's standings, lowsec - gatecamped, nullsec - divided/owned and most of the time unreachable for a noob that does not care about corporations/alliances.
Maybe Eve was intended as a sandbox, but it is not (especially for a new player). I looked on the recruitment forum to find a corp to join, that is in a WH/null. What do I find? Logi/mining ship/bait frigate skills for null, 20 mill SP for WH. Is that an open world/go wherever/do whatever you want environment? Hardly so!
So what options a new casual player has? Mine/mission run in hisec coping with all the a** gankers and other arrogant pricks and wait and hope that one day you will actually do something you might enjoy.
And that in addition to the brick wall learning curve, and artificial/unnecessary complexity/SP requirements. I have an impression that most people keep playing this game only because they got so invested while waiting for the SPs to allow them to do anything meaningful/worth doing in this game.
All of the above might give you a hint regarding the low retention of new players. I will be leaving soon, before I get even more invested and I am really sad about it, as I wanted to like Eve Online.
I am done whining ! Now you can start slapping me.
Fly safe!
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5073
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 16:26:50 -
[1047] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: and explained that your position is also ridiculous. *everything in the game - player made or CCP made - is content*. I'll stop you there. I have made it clear that i do not agree with this so it's pointless to continue. I can accept that players want to use a word incorrectly, i'm just pointing out that the word is being used incorrectly. So just accept that. It's like arguing that a swimming pool full of water is actually a swimming pool full of liquid. Technically both are right but the guy who said it is full of water is more right.
Water is a liquid. So a swimming pool full of water or a swimming pool full of liquid are both correct. Liquid is the "umbrella term" all water is a liquid, but not all liquids are water. Mining is content, but not all content is mining.
Fighting is content, but not all content is fighting (see mining above for content that is not fighting). Whether that fighting is due to CCP (you are fighting NPCs) or you are fighting other players.
This is where you fall flat on your face and look like a complete bumbling fool. You have restricted your definition so that you can whine and *****, but to everyone else it makes you look like an ass.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Galaxy Chicken
Free Highsec Industrialists
71
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 16:57:48 -
[1048] - Quote
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Alternatively you could just target miners more than a month old who fit t2 modules...
Or scan your targets...
Or just hit the haulers and become rich...
I'm talking t2 fit, no tank.
Again, this isn't complicated maths. |
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
14377
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 17:06:11 -
[1049] - Quote
Blood Retributor wrote:I have promised myself to not post ever again in these forums, but I guess I stopped caring since then, as for about a week I have decided to quit Eve (after playing it for more than two months). Why am I still here? Bringing Biology to level 5 so I can use the boosters I got from running the "Kill the Shipyard Event" (all three of them), for the unlikely chance that Eve will become "my game" someday and I will be back to ENJOY playing it. I have read a good number of posts in this thread (first 10 pages for sure ) and decided to share a new player's view (my irrelevant opinion) and feel about Eve Online. When I am done, you can proceed with slapping me with whatever accusations that come to your mind. I'll take it, it is forum PvP after all ! First I would suggest changing the name of the game. It should be called As****le/Punk Ganker Paradise. According to what I read about and experience in the game this would be a better name for its current state. There is no real PvP in it. Wherever you turn in the game everyone is "reaping/collecting/savouring/out for" other players "tears". They are actually out there to "PvP" (read blobb/gank/grief) just for that purpose. It does not matter where: fighting in space, scamming, you name it. A new player (2 days) posts on reddit: "I am out for tears. Can you suggest best fit for a ship to grief miners?" (not exact words as I read them about 2 weeks ago). What was the reaction? Everyone eagerly jumped in with suggestions. Honestly, I do not feel comfortable around such a high percentage of people with psychopathic tendecies. How else would you call someone whose intention is to make another person suffer (emotionally or otherwise) and enjoy it? Everyone is talking about Eve as a cold and harsh universe. Most of those people have no idea what that really means. Bedroom/basement/home office "warriors" . If you are a considerate person and have experienced real life harsh and cold universe/environment, you will never want to "reap tears" without a very sound reason. For a long time I wanted to play Eve being misinformed about it. If I would have known who the major part of the playerbase is, I would have not payed for a one year subscription. And by the way, if you come across my only kill (me being killed in a wormhole), please do not try to use that as "carebear lost a Heron and is crying now". I was so bored and burnt out after the Shipyard event that I simply did not care and just wanted to know if there is something else in this game I am missing and I could not care less about the loss. Mining - boring, missions - boring/repetitive with negative effect on one's standings, lowsec - gatecamped, nullsec - divided/owned and most of the time unreachable for a noob that does not care about corporations/alliances. Maybe Eve was intended as a sandbox, but it is not (especially for a new player). I looked on the recruitment forum to find a corp to join, that is in a WH/null. What do I find? Logi/mining ship/bait frigate skills for null, 20 mill SP for WH. Is that an open world/go wherever/do whatever you want environment? Hardly so! So what options a new casual player has? Mine/mission run in hisec coping with all the a** gankers and other arrogant pricks and wait and hope that one day you will actually do something you might enjoy. And that in addition to the brick wall learning curve, and artificial/unnecessary complexity/SP requirements. I have an impression that most people keep playing this game only because they got so invested while waiting for the SPs to allow them to do anything meaningful/worth doing in this game. All of the above might give you a hint regarding the low retention of new players. I will be leaving soon, before I get even more invested and I am really sad about it, as I wanted to like Eve Online. I am done whining ! Now you can start slapping me. Fly safe!
All of you "EVE needs more players" type people who lament the fact that EVE turns away most people, I want you to read this post. This is what "most people" think like. Your mileage may vary, but for me the big SELLING POINT of EVE is that people like this don't like it.
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
401
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 17:20:45 -
[1050] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Alternatively you could just target miners more than a month old who fit t2 modules...
Or scan your targets...
Or just hit the haulers and become rich... I'm talking t2 fit, no tank. Again, this isn't complicated maths. A basic t2 fit retriever should drop ~3 million isk in loot (1 strip miner, 1 mining upgrade)
It can be ganked by a 2 million isk t1 fit catalyst in any 0.5 system with concord pre-pulled (using a free rookie ship)
You get 750k of the catalyst cost back - so total cost of the gank is 1.25 million isk.
3.75 million isk loot > 1.25 million isk lost.
Profit.
If you *choose* to gank ships that will not be profitable, by using cost-ineffective ships or targetting ships that are not cost effective to kill - that is still your *choice*....
Deal with it. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 62 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |