Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Vigirr
326
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:24:03 -
[121] - Quote
I play Battlefield, the guys on the other team are all assholes and that one guy who killed me twice now is a bully. |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
101
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:30:18 -
[122] - Quote
Rroff wrote:While I'd agree that griefing isn't driving away a large number of people who try the game out - IMO it is also not an insignificant factor amongst those that don't persist with the game - between people I know IRL and a couple of other forums I frequent I've associated with a good number of people who have tried the game. A good number have stuck with it but being the victim of griefing is one of the more common themes with those that haven't.
Given that social behaviour is one of the biggest indices I'm surprised they haven't invested more into getting people working together more earlier on - many people won't immediately jump into a corp or might not even want to be involved with a corp but might still want to work with other players to some degree.
Yes, but this is part of the mindset problem. For it's not 'griefing'.
Players who think it's 'griefing', or 'bullying', or 'unfair'.......they just don't want to play EVE as it is.
Now me, I choose to play EVE as the best version of me there is - that's my 'RPG stance' - a 'Paladin' if you like. Now other people don't, and that's their choice.
I choose not to gank people; or try to 'win' by dominating others with WarDecs - but they are perfectly valid play-styles - each to his own.
When you choose to undock you choose to play EVE - as it is. You cannot die. The only things that matter in EVE as an immortal pod pilot are fun and isk. Are you gaining whatever satisfaction you are after and do you have enough isk to achieve it? If the answer to either is 'no', then try harder or, perhaps, give up.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Bjorn Tyrson
EVE University Ivy League
416
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:31:47 -
[123] - Quote
Bubblegum Finesse wrote:Rroff wrote:[quote=Bjorn Tyrson][Quote]
As per the other thread I posted in - after talking to a few people who quit the game early on due to being ganked or losing stuff in a similar fashion in most cases it wasn't the act of being ganked that turned them away as I had first thought but that they found there was no meaningful way in most cases to even attempt to exact revenge. In some cases the lack of tools to better understand the dangers was also cited.. This. And switching to an NPC corp is not a solution to getting away from wardeccing, you shouldn't have to give up your own corp to use HS. There are very few HS corps that could put up a reasonable fight against the likes of Marmites, etc. This essentially means making a corp in HS is not viable at all. That should not be the way the game plays out, and is certainly not what CCP had in mind IMO.
Why not? By forming or joining a corp you are trading the safety of an npc corp for the safety of your chosen group such as it is If they cannot provide that safety then return to the npc group for it.
Yes npc corps can be restrictive. You have no control over the tax, no corp hangars, and you can't anchor structures. But that is a VERY minor price to pay for 100% invulnerability to wardecs don't you think?
There isn't even anything stopping you and your friends from flying and working together. Set up a mailing list, create a private channel, and get in voice coms and you know have access to the majority of the same organizational resources that a corp does. And you have wardec security. So how much more do you want? |
Bubblegum Finesse
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:39:35 -
[124] - Quote
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:
Why not? By forming or joining a corp you are trading the safety of an npc corp for the safety of your chosen group such as it is If they cannot provide that safety then return to the npc group for it.
Yes npc corps can be restrictive. You have no control over the tax, no corp hangars, and you can't anchor structures. But that is a VERY minor price to pay for 100% invulnerability to wardecs don't you think?
There isn't even anything stopping you and your friends from flying and working together. Set up a mailing list, create a private channel, and get in voice coms and you know have access to the majority of the same organizational resources that a corp does. And you have wardec security. So how much more do you want?
The vast majority of corporations are tiny in comparison to the big ones. I'd also guess that the majority of players lie within these corps. You're basically telling the majority of the player base that they cannot create their own corps, whilst the mercenray corps only grow bigger and bigger and as they feed on and destroy the smaller corps.
Nope, i'm not ok with this.
Highesc exists for a reason. If people want risk and PvP then thats what null, lo-sec and WH space is for. HS should not be safe, but it also should NOT be worse than being in lo-sec.
Running your own corp already comes with a lot of extra work and responsibility. It shouldn't come with the extra danger of fighting off perma wardecs on top of that. |
Bubblegum Finesse
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:45:54 -
[125] - Quote
I also don't really understand the passion to keep wardecs in the game. Like I said above, if you want to fight and live in dangerous space, there are already SO MANY options available for that. So why the hell do wardecs even exist at this point? As another poster has pointed out, 99% of wardecs now are basically so that merc corps can destroy smaller corps and greif players in their vulnerable states. It's a mechanic for kids to be the arseholes they want to be without any consequences. Are we really using the 'Eve is harsh' ethos to justify that bullshit? |
Vigirr
326
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:49:22 -
[126] - Quote
Bubblegum Finesse wrote:I also don't really understand the passion to keep wardecs in the game. Like I said above, if you want to fight and live in dangerous space, there are already SO MANY options available for that. So why the hell do wardecs even exist at this point? As another poster has pointed out, 99% of wardecs now are basically so that merc corps can destroy smaller corps and greif players in their vulnerable states. It's a mechanic for kids to be the arseholes they want to be without any consequences. Are we really using the 'Eve is harsh' ethos to justify that bullshit?
Why are you playing EVE if you don't agree to its base premise? And why are you then, while not liking the game you play, trying to change into something you DO like while at the same time taking away from people who like the game for what it actually is?
Why should the game be changed and suffer because you chose to play a game you don't like?
|
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
10656
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:51:15 -
[127] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Alasdan Helminthauge wrote:CCP's own survey has showed that new players who have been ganked are more likely to stay than those who mine all days in peace. [Topic closed] Really? It never started.
Topic was war decs, not ganking.
As to the actual topic, I'm of two minds. On the one hand, CCP has always gone out of its way to attract the kind of player that has been kicked out of every other MMO for bullying and griefing. The war dec mechanics are slanted in their favor.
I'm fine with that. I expect that. It's the way it is and has always been. Adding a special flavor to the game that is very rare in any other game.
On the other hand, CCP is shooting itself in the foot by catering only to this small subset of the player base. You don't need to prove how edgy you are as a game company by trying to sell yourself as a science fiction universe when all the mechanics say psychopathic kill-fest. The hardcore EVE players of the past are leaving and not being replaced.
I'd never suggest that CCP make this a game of pure safety, but if they want to retain people to the micro transaction supported game they are now selling it as, they need to adjust the balance. Not much. Just a little tweak to keep the people daring to leave the NPC corps for the first time a little more likely to stick around than quit out of frustration.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Bubblegum Finesse
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:58:32 -
[128] - Quote
Vigirr wrote:
Why are you playing EVE if you don't agree to its base premise? And why are you then, while not liking the game you play, trying to change into something you DO like while at the same time taking away from people who like the game for what it actually is?
Why should the game be changed and suffer because you chose to play a game you don't like?
I love this game. I love living in null, I love exploring in WHs and the dangers that come with it.
The part i'm trying to change is the part I found to be pointless and frustrating when i was a newbro. I also don't believe the game would suffer at all if wardeccing were removed or changed. I believe the only difference it would make is that the kids who camp at Jita undock will have to find some real PvP to satisfy themselves. (or at least turn to suicide ganking, which i'm also ok with). |
Vigirr
326
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:10:15 -
[129] - Quote
Bubblegum Finesse wrote:Vigirr wrote:
Why are you playing EVE if you don't agree to its base premise? And why are you then, while not liking the game you play, trying to change into something you DO like while at the same time taking away from people who like the game for what it actually is?
Why should the game be changed and suffer because you chose to play a game you don't like?
I love this game. I love living in null, I love exploring in WHs and the dangers that come with it. The part i'm trying to change is the part I found to be pointless and frustrating when i was a newbro. I also don't believe the game would suffer at all if wardeccing were removed or changed. I believe the only difference it would make is that the kids who camp at Jita undock will have to find some real PvP to satisfy themselves. (or at least turn to suicide ganking, which i'm also ok with).
If you're in null and WH, why do you care. Don't tell me you do it for the betterment of the game, because no one is buying that. You want it changed for yourSELF. Thing is that the base premise of EVE is "pvp sandbox", that means that no one is safe and no one is innocent. We don't need "pvp free zones", if you want that go elsewhere.
EVE is not helped by making it safer and easier. CCP has been trying that for years now and it's not working, don't insult us with your "nono, it's just better for the game, honest". |
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
3820
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:23:37 -
[130] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Yes I have. The fact is if somebody wants to kill you they can with absolute impunity and very little cost. Its retardedly easy and risk free which is why so many tards do it. Hmm, it seams you are unaware of the basic game mechanics around ganking. Don't worry, I will break it down for you:
The second you attack a ship illegally in Highsec you can be attacked by everyone on grid without punishment. You have around 20s, less for higher sec systems until CONCORD obliterates your ship from which there is no escape. You will not get any insurance money for the ship and it's wreck can be looted by everyone without going suspect. Meanwhile you get a security status hit which will make you if you get low enough a legal target for everyone while the NPC faction police is chasing you. After the attack you are unable to warp or redock in a ship you undock in the next 15min and CONCORD will destroy it after a few seconds.
Now players are obviously crafty and min/max their way around such restrictions. That does not mean it's "risk free", otherwise there would be no need to use gank alts or disposable cheap gank ships.
There are not a lot of people who still gank in highsec do to constant nerfs which makes it impractical and unprofitable. There are a few left which pick off the fat Freighters which are a obvious side effect of the raised safety. People expect to not get killed in Higshec, since that is usually true.
Infinity Ziona wrote:As for being bad at EvE I am an EvE God. That is all. The god of lies and bitterness perhaps.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
|
Keno Skir
1445
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:26:44 -
[131] - Quote
Bubblegum Finesse wrote:Bjorn Tyrson wrote:
Why not? By forming or joining a corp you are trading the safety of an npc corp for the safety of your chosen group such as it is If they cannot provide that safety then return to the npc group for it.
Yes npc corps can be restrictive. You have no control over the tax, no corp hangars, and you can't anchor structures. But that is a VERY minor price to pay for 100% invulnerability to wardecs don't you think?
There isn't even anything stopping you and your friends from flying and working together. Set up a mailing list, create a private channel, and get in voice coms and you know have access to the majority of the same organizational resources that a corp does. And you have wardec security. So how much more do you want?
The vast majority of corporations are tiny in comparison to the big ones. I'd also guess that the majority of players lie within these corps. You're basically telling the majority of the player base that they cannot create their own corps, whilst the mercenray corps only grow bigger and bigger as they feed on and destroy the smaller corps. Nope, i'm not ok with this.
How do you know if you're ok with it, you didn't understand what he said?
His vision means that starting and joining a player corp will have clear consequences. If you want to be in "your own" corporation rather than the generic NPC one you must run it properly. The player corps will have to mean something, because they will (much like nulsec) be trading the security the other players can provide for the tax they will be paying into the corp. Weaker corps will die out and eventually a new status quo will emerge where only the organized player corps exist. These new larger corps will actually bother to combat wardecs instead of crying and hiding and thus there will be a reason to be in a player corp.
Currently the only reason to be in a player corp is for corp hangers and a group chat. This is why nobody cares when carebears whine about being wardecced. Because they literally chose to be wardecced and are gaining next to nothing aside from a "feeling of togetherness".
Be stupid and ignore the obvious way not to be a target of war if you need to, but don't try to convince me it doesn't exist
<Gùï> 250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <Gùï>
<Gùï> Contact me regarding my trusted Alliance Creation Service <Gùï>
|
renwahh
The Jove
147
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:28:59 -
[132] - Quote
I understand that reading a book or chilling to Jonny hates jazz,(or maybe your a bit weird and listen to the Rick Astley's Christmas album) whilst mining is a great past time to end your busy day of annoying work, repetitive wife syndrome and that fricken mother in-law.
How ever there are some in EvE that to be honest just want to steam roll your day and smash your peace and tranquility to tiny pieces.
IT'S EvE!!!!
1 tank your ship and stop looking at the isk per hour 2 Tank your ship and blow them to tiny pieces and laugh at them warping out 3 Move to a less used system. 4 get a bunch of indy ships and go kill some pirates. (its actually quite funny) 5 QUIT!!
Excuse the caps lock I havent blown up anyone today and the shakes are kicking in
|
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
74
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:38:34 -
[133] - Quote
For anyone advocating the removal or serious modification of the wardec system, remember that without wardecs in high sec you can't have structures in highsec. The most vital role wardecs serve is to keep structures viable in highsec. Structures have to be able to be destroyed and contested or they have to be removed. That would make the OP and people like him even less happy. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
494
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:40:43 -
[134] - Quote
Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
74
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 14:45:32 -
[135] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival.
Shall we remove highsec structures as well? Because you can't have one without the other. Any system that allows structures but doesn't allow wardecs would be so convoluted that the cure would be worse than the disease. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
496
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:07:34 -
[136] - Quote
Zarek Kree wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival. Shall we remove highsec structures as well? Because you can't have one without the other. Any system that allows structures but doesn't allow wardecs would be so convoluted that the cure would be worse than the disease.
I'd personally be fine with structures being exempt from concord response, that pretty much removes the main need for wardecs in highsec.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Vigirr
326
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:11:41 -
[137] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Zarek Kree wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival. Shall we remove highsec structures as well? Because you can't have one without the other. Any system that allows structures but doesn't allow wardecs would be so convoluted that the cure would be worse than the disease. I'd personally be fine with structures being exempt from concord response, that pretty much removes the main need for wardecs in highsec.
What you're saying is that you live in high sec and you don't make use of POS. |
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
642
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:24:55 -
[138] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Alasdan Helminthauge wrote:CCP's own survey has showed that new players who have been ganked are more likely to stay than those who mine all days in peace. [Topic closed] Really? It never started. Topic was war decs, not ganking. As to the actual topic, I'm of two minds. On the one hand, CCP has always gone out of its way to attract the kind of player that has been kicked out of every other MMO for bullying and griefing. The war dec mechanics are slanted in their favor. I'm fine with that. I expect that. It's the way it is and has always been. Adding a special flavor to the game that is very rare in any other game. On the other hand, CCP is shooting itself in the foot by catering only to this small subset of the player base. You don't need to prove how edgy you are as a game company by trying to sell yourself as a science fiction universe when all the mechanics say psychopathic kill-fest. The hardcore EVE players of the past are leaving and not being replaced. I'd never suggest that CCP make this a game of pure safety, but if they want to retain people to the micro transaction supported game they are now selling it as, they need to adjust the balance. Not much. Just a little tweak to keep the people daring to leave the NPC corps for the first time a little more likely to stick around than quit out of frustration. Mr Epeen
I must have missed all the changes CCP brought to the game the last few years, exactly to cater the not so small subset you are referring to. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
499
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:28:53 -
[139] - Quote
Vigirr wrote:What you're saying is that you live in high sec and you don't make use of POS.
So? Aren't structures corporation level assets? I could have said, so what removing wars makes structures invincible and you'd have attacked me for that. I am trying to leave conflict in, when a group tries to take a step up from operating out of an NPC station.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1068
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:35:10 -
[140] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival.
Wardecs have very mixed impact - those I've been involved with off the top of my head went something like:
-Other party declared war - nothing happened whatsoever. -Corp I was in declared war to take down a POS, after RFing it the victims hired a merc corp, most people in my corp suddenly decided they were busy doing something else :( POS was saved. -We declared war - targets all left corp -Other party declared war - everyone in my corp went inactive until it was over -Other party declared war - we got good fights particularly memorial one where we had a megathron fleet slugging it out with their rokhs - we got the upper hand and they eventually conceded. -Other party declared war - **** happened they ended up with everything they owned razed to the ground -Other party declared war - nothing really happened - few people chased each other around highsec without result and the odd miner died who hadn't been paying attention to what was going on in corp. |
|
Vigirr
326
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:42:17 -
[141] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Vigirr wrote:What you're saying is that you live in high sec and you don't make use of POS. So? Aren't structures corporation level assets? I could have said, so what removing wars makes structures invincible and you'd have attacked me for that. I am trying to leave conflict in, when a group tries to take a step up from operating out of an NPC station.
No you're trying to have conflict removed from your personal play style. |
Dracvlad
Tactically Challenged Tactical Supremacy
2952
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:43:45 -
[142] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Alasdan Helminthauge wrote:CCP's own survey has showed that new players who have been ganked are more likely to stay than those who mine all days in peace. [Topic closed] Really? It never started. Topic was war decs, not ganking. As to the actual topic, I'm of two minds. On the one hand, CCP has always gone out of its way to attract the kind of player that has been kicked out of every other MMO for bullying and griefing. The war dec mechanics are slanted in their favor. I'm fine with that. I expect that. It's the way it is and has always been. Adding a special flavor to the game that is very rare in any other game. On the other hand, CCP is shooting itself in the foot by catering only to this small subset of the player base. You don't need to prove how edgy you are as a game company by trying to sell yourself as a science fiction universe when all the mechanics say psychopathic kill-fest. The hardcore EVE players of the past are leaving and not being replaced. I'd never suggest that CCP make this a game of pure safety, but if they want to retain people to the micro transaction supported game they are now selling it as, they need to adjust the balance. Not much. Just a little tweak to keep the people daring to leave the NPC corps for the first time a little more likely to stick around than quit out of frustration. Mr Epeen
Good post, I just had a discussion in alliance about war decs the bumping issue and the freighter wreck EHP, my alliance mate who is ex-PL left the conversation having got annoyed and that was when I talked about the impact of the wreck EHP buff on the emergent gameplay by AG gankers. I understood his prespective agreed with him, but I had a different prespective and was merely looking at it from the balance side of things saying that gankers had bumpers, DST loot scoops and as soon as we started ganking freighter wrecks bam. I was trying to say that why not allow the emergent gameplay of AG gankers to develop instead of killing it stone dead even though I agreed with the buff to wreck EHP. The issue is that people get very emotive over this, even some highly intelligent players which this player definitely is, he is standing for the CSM but he could not listen to me giving a hisec prespective. And this thread is yet another example, you good sir however posted honestly which I respect and I tried to do the same earlier. I have never asked for total safety like you and yet I am accused of it.
I am back in null with a great group, and I have to be blunt the changes that CCP have made to sov enabled a smaller group like this to be able to hold sov and not be a punch bag. CCP got that right even if entosis is rather uggggh.
The War dec system is in fact quite good, sadly the players are not up to it, from a mechanic perspective I am not sure what CCP can do with it because hisec players in the main don't bother and it means that all you see is pipe, hub and mission hub camping and most victims are null sec players doing logi, lol. In affect I would make it so only those who had a structure or sov could be war decked and that is it. Problem solved.
All in all I think we need little tweaks, but also a realisation that certain areas have issues hisec seems rather poorly to me and has been for a long time.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin
|
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1069
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 16:09:03 -
[143] - Quote
Vigirr wrote: No you're trying to have conflict removed from your personal play style.
Mind you one way or another that can be applied to 99% of the people posting :s very few want an actual even playing field without the odds tipped in their favour.
If I had it my way I'd make is so that attacking parties in non-consensual PVP in highsec meant that for a certain duration (maybe not as long as the kill right lasts) they couldn't leave highsec, can't log off in a station or other structure they don't own and if they log off their pod and/or ship stays in space forcing the use of targettable POSes or aggressor corp owned citadels :O (or atleast means they'd have to accept getting their pod blown up).
(As a side effect this would also make the bounty system kind of work though potentially leave some players open to griefing if there wasn't some kind of cooldown period). |
Zarek Kree
Lunatic Legion Holdings
76
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 16:25:12 -
[144] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Zarek Kree wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival. Shall we remove highsec structures as well? Because you can't have one without the other. Any system that allows structures but doesn't allow wardecs would be so convoluted that the cure would be worse than the disease. I'd personally be fine with structures being exempt from concord response, that pretty much removes the main need for wardecs in highsec.
Yes it would. But then nobody would be able to do industry of any kind in highsec because people would blow up structures at will. Most people (like the OP) who have concerns about the wardec system are industrialists who simply want to build in peace. But what you're proposing would force them into lowsec/nullsec, thus defeating the purpose. Like I said, the cure is worse than the disease. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
499
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 16:32:16 -
[145] - Quote
Vigirr wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Vigirr wrote:What you're saying is that you live in high sec and you don't make use of POS. So? Aren't structures corporation level assets? I could have said, so what removing wars makes structures invincible and you'd have attacked me for that. I am trying to leave conflict in, when a group tries to take a step up from operating out of an NPC station. No you're trying to have conflict removed from your personal play style.
No, I regularly take part in conflict in wormholes but I'm sure you will have another reason ready. My reason is to get more casual types logged into eve giving CCP money. I do understand that making structures perma vulnerable will affect some, but currently they can be wardecced and destroyed anyway. What the change does is preserve current structure gameplay.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Vigirr
329
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 16:57:54 -
[146] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Vigirr wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Vigirr wrote:What you're saying is that you live in high sec and you don't make use of POS. So? Aren't structures corporation level assets? I could have said, so what removing wars makes structures invincible and you'd have attacked me for that. I am trying to leave conflict in, when a group tries to take a step up from operating out of an NPC station. No you're trying to have conflict removed from your personal play style. No, I regularly take part in conflict in wormholes but I'm sure you will have another reason ready. My reason is to get more casual types logged into eve giving CCP money. I do understand that making structures perma vulnerable will affect some, but currently they can be wardecced and destroyed anyway. What the change does is preserve current structure gameplay.
No one is buying your bullshit, apart from perhaps yourself.
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
499
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 17:10:01 -
[147] - Quote
Vigirr wrote:No one is buying your bullshit, apart from perhaps yourself.
Like I said, closed minded. It's not most people's fault they want things easy. But as I've said many times, I don't want to change what eve is, only add something or somewhere that people don't feel constantly hunted. That is the experience of many in highsec, fitting to avoid ganks, using d-scan to check for hostiles, but still occasionally being ganked regardless. They are victims, whose existence is trying to prevent being victimised again, doesn't sound like a fun game. On the other hand, experienced eve players know null is where the real safety is, where you can carebear in peace. This leaves highsec as the lol-zone for stupid newbies who don't know concord don't protect them.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Vigirr
330
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 17:12:04 -
[148] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Vigirr wrote:No one is buying your bullshit, apart from perhaps yourself. Like I said, closed minded. It's not most people's fault they want things easy. But as I've said many times, I don't want to change what eve is, only add something or somewhere that people don't feel constantly hunted. That is the experience of many in highsec, fitting to avoid ganks, using d-scan to check for hostiles, but still occasionally being ganked regardless. They are victims, whose existence is trying to prevent being victimised again, doesn't sound like a fun game. On the other hand, experienced eve players know null is where the real safety is, where you can carebear in peace. This leaves highsec as the lol-zone for stupid newbies who don't know concord don't protect them.
So by your own words high sec being far from ideal creates a push to null sec for the people who do put in effort, and acts like a stupid trap for the folks who are braindead zombies.
How is this bad? |
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
3827
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 17:15:59 -
[149] - Quote
No thread on EVEO is complete without a post from dracvlad where he cries about the wreck ehp buff.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
3827
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 17:18:18 -
[150] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Zarek Kree wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival. Shall we remove highsec structures as well? Because you can't have one without the other. Any system that allows structures but doesn't allow wardecs would be so convoluted that the cure would be worse than the disease. I'd personally be fine with structures being exempt from concord response, that pretty much removes the main need for wardecs in highsec. So I can shoot your structure but you can't shoot me shooting your structure? Good game design
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |