| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
    |
Posted - 2008.09.03 19:05:00 -
[271]
 Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby
Originally by: Kin Dahl
I just woke up and jumped on to the forums, and damn, the thread is still going. Which shows there is quite a bit of concern over the recent changes.
Actually it shows that 3 players, who have been heavily advocating nerfing HighSec, are ****ed they didn't get their way.
The rest of the posts are players they ticked off in other posts baiting them 
If you think there are only 3 people who dislike the changes then that might well explain why you're unable to understand some of the arguments against them.
No I am fully aware that more than 3 are upset about their mis-interpretations of CCP's desire for their game, but the reason this (and the other) thread is going on so long is because of a couple of people who can't let go and are sniping at each other.
Both sides.
-------------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
Not it isn't, people should be encouraged to get out in low sec space, but never forced to do so.
|
Tippia
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 19:11:00 -
[272]
Edited by: Tippia on 03/09/2008 19:11:49
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby
If it was a full PvP game there would be no missions, no concord, no market, no mining.
Missions can still exist in a PvP game — just make them a commodity to compete over.
CONCORD can still exist in a PvP game — it's just a price tag for your attack, much like wardecs.
The market is PvP — you compete with other players for the best deal (selling more for higher; buying more for less).
Mining is PvP — you compete with other players for the best mining spots.
|
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 19:24:00 -
[273]
Edited by: Anaalys Fluuterby on 03/09/2008 19:24:26
Originally by: Tippia
Missions can still exist in a PvP game ù just make them a commodity to compete over.
Or so you can invade them, steal from them, get into wardecs with them, etc? Check, Still a PvP game
Quote:
CONCORD can still exist in a PvP game ù it's just a price tag for your attack, much like wardecs.
"Just a price". Kindof like the new rules on suiciding, it is the "price". You can still shoot at anyone you wish and blow them up. Check, still a PvP game.
Quote:
The market is PvP ù you compete with other players for the best deal (selling more for higher; buying more for less).
Check, still a PvP game
Quote:
Mining is PvP ù you compete with other players for the best mining spots.
Hmm, shooting at each other or suiciding not required.. Check, still a PvP game.
Gosh, seems like Eve is still a PvP game. I don't see any "Thou shall not shoot at anyone" rules in the new patch or Dev comments. So what is the fuss about?
But Eve is not 100% PvP, there are RULES and stations to restrict that. This is not Counterstrike.
-------------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
Not it isn't, people should be encouraged to get out in low sec space, but never forced to do so.
|
Tippia
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 19:40:00 -
[274]
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby
Gosh, seems like Eve is still a PvP game. I don't see any "Thou shall not shoot at anyone" rules in the new patch or Dev comments. So what is the fuss about?
The fuss is about them making the price for non-consensual PvP so much higher — to the point where it's no longer viable — for no good reason.
Quote:
But Eve is not 100% PvP, there are RULES and stations to restrict that. This is not Counterstrike.
No, but it's turning into CS, in a bad way.
CS has no consequences for losing — just respawn and keep shooting. That kind of gameplay is detrimental to a game like ≡v≡. If there are the kinds of restrictions you're talking about, then players can hide behind them to create consequence-free gameplay for themselves. It doesn't matter how many ships you blow up — the enemy can just replace them, and won't run out. It doesn't matter how well you lock down a system — untouchable alts can just stroll in and keep the stations running. It doesn't matter how much force you throw at a problem — untouchable logistics ships will keep them going indefinitely.
≡v≡ must not have those kinds of restrictions, or the whole point of a player-controlled universe collapses. Instead, it need costs that can be thrown into your cost-benefit analysis for doing something. What the fuss is about is that the costs now risk increasing to the point where the cost-benefit always comes out as "too expensive".
|
Dantes Revenge
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 19:47:00 -
[275]
Originally by: Ki An
You will have both changes soon. Insurance nerf is coming. Eve is supposed to be cold and harsh, but apparently only for pirates and people living in other places than high sec. High sec is now virtually completely safe.
Isn't Eve supposed to be cold and harsh to everyone? I believe the term 'everyone' includes suicide gankers who have had a win win situation for too long due to abuse of the insurance system. When the insurance changes happen, they will have to scan their targets to see if they are carrying enough to cover their losses.
I'm glad you said "virtually completely safe" since there will still be suicide ganks if the target is fool enough to be carrying several billion isk of stuff in a freighter. You can bet that there will still be fools who will do it and you can also bet there will be suicide gangs near Jita and other main hubs waiting for those fools.
What it will reduce significantly is the 'just for laughs' suicide gank (ie: the goonswarm jihad). Although this will still happen on a smaller scale when enough players amass enough isk and are at a loss what to do with it all.
--
There's a simple difference between kinky and perverted. Kinky is using a feather to get her in the mood. Perverted is using the whole chicken. |
c4 t
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 20:08:00 -
[276]
why is ccp both reducing response times and taking insurance away?
____________________________________________________________________
mostly harmless |
Norrin Ellis
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 20:39:00 -
[277]
Originally by: c4 t
why is ccp both reducing response times and taking insurance away?
Will your insurance company compensate your loss if the loss is incurred due to using the property to commit a criminal act? Mine sure won't.
|
c4 t
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:00:00 -
[278]
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
Originally by: c4 t
why is ccp both reducing response times and taking insurance away?
Will your insurance company compensate your loss if the loss is incurred due to using the property to commit a criminal act? Mine sure won't.
you didnt answer my question. read carefully =D |
Malcanis
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:00:00 -
[279]
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
Originally by: c4 t
why is ccp both reducing response times and taking insurance away?
Will your insurance company compensate your loss if the loss is incurred due to using the property to commit a criminal act? Mine sure won't.
Will your insurance company recompense you for any of the ways ships are lost in EvE? |
Norrin Ellis
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:03:00 -
[280]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
Originally by: c4 t
why is ccp both reducing response times and taking insurance away?
Will your insurance company compensate your loss if the loss is incurred due to using the property to commit a criminal act? Mine sure won't.
Will your insurance company recompense you for any of the ways ships are lost in EvE?
That's an excellent point, sir! It is also why I wouldn't complain if insurance were removed from EVE entirely. |
|
Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari
Firestar Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:06:00 -
[281]
Originally by: Garreck
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama
Explain the existence of CONCORD in your fallacy of EVE.
PvP has rules?
The primary conduit of PvP in empire (War) is an opt-in system. |
Malcanis
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:08:00 -
[282]
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
Originally by: c4 t
why is ccp both reducing response times and taking insurance away?
Will your insurance company compensate your loss if the loss is incurred due to using the property to commit a criminal act? Mine sure won't.
Will your insurance company recompense you for any of the ways ships are lost in EvE?
That's an excellent point, sir! It is also why I wouldn't complain if insurance were removed from EVE entirely.
All it really proves is that the ship replacement mechanism has a name that people read far too much in to. |
Norrin Ellis
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:09:00 -
[283]
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama
Originally by: Garreck
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama
Explain the existence of CONCORD in your fallacy of EVE.
PvP has rules?
The primary conduit of PvP in empire (War) is an opt-in system.
That only holds true for the declaring party, my good man, which is why it's a "pay to grief" system. |
Malcanis
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:11:00 -
[284]
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama
Originally by: Garreck
Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama
Explain the existence of CONCORD in your fallacy of EVE.
PvP has rules?
The primary conduit of PvP in empire (War) is an opt-in system.
That only holds true for the declaring party, my good man, which is why it's a "pay to grief" system.
Except that you can simply leave your corp and be untouchable again. |
Norrin Ellis
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:13:00 -
[285]
Edited by: Norrin Ellis on 03/09/2008 21:13:29
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
That's an excellent point, sir! It is also why I wouldn't complain if insurance were removed from EVE entirely.
All it really proves is that the ship replacement mechanism has a name that people read far too much in to.
Those who are true proponents of a "cold, harsh universe" should be the first to advocate the removal of a ship replacement system.
...unless, of course, they really only care about easy mode for themselves and a hard knock life for everyone else, particularly the new folks and solo players they prey on. |
Norrin Ellis
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:16:00 -
[286]
Originally by: Malcanis
Except that you can simply leave your corp and be untouchable again.
Oh, man! I totally forgot that corporations are nothing more than a mechanic for wardecs and have absolutely no RP or community value to them at all.
Geez! What the crap was I thinking?
|
Christari Zuborov
Amarr
Ore Mongers
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 23:11:00 -
[287]
Originally by: Norrin Ellis
Originally by: Malcanis
Except that you can simply leave your corp and be untouchable again.
Oh, man! I totally forgot that corporations are nothing more than a mechanic for wardecs and have absolutely no RP or community value to them at all.
Geez! What the crap was I thinking?
That's what EvE is now... Gambits of nonsensical confusing mechanics with a dash of WoW sprinkled on top. I hover closer to the quit button daily considering with my last months total login time was less than 5 hours.
|
Iyhi Baal
|
Posted - 2008.09.04 02:06:00 -
[288]
Curse you pod pilot, whoever you are, for linking the wikipedia article on strawman arguments and giving Ki An something to post about.
#################
I see you! |
Roshan longshot
Gallente
Ordos Humanitas
|
Posted - 2008.09.04 02:28:00 -
[289]
$$$ Is what bussness is all about...CCP is in bussness. They know that the empire drewlers are their bread and butter...drive them out...there goes the butter. I hate bread with no butter.
Us that bounce back and forth between 0.0 and empire perfer safe areas to make isk to finance our PvP...I rather not have to watch my back...all the time...I like doing missions for a little bit...I hate ratting....AND I REALLY HATE MINNING...
But the aspect of this post is the same as all the thousands of other post...risk vs reward...suicide ganking has no risk...insurance pays for the ship concord kills...you get minor security hit(which a few hours of ratting in 0.0 fixes)...and some carebear is out millions of hard earned isk, that he has spent hours to days makeing...so where is the risk there....
They could have done better...no insurance to 'bad guys' at all....that really would have ****ed ya off now.
Damn you CCP! Why did you have to make such a good game?? Yes you drew me back AGAIN! Oh well wheres the Omber? |
Hotice
|
Posted - 2008.09.04 02:40:00 -
[290]
Edited by: Hotice on 04/09/2008 02:43:25
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu
When did they make high sec 100% safe?
I said AFTER. When the war dec changes goes through and the 'griefing' is gone, PvP will only happen to you if you want it to. That's 100% safe.
Since your clearly an Oracle or something, riddle me this
Tell me, exactly, how will the changes to wardecs be made. I need a full list of conditions that are usable, penalty mechanics and costs please
Oh thats right, you dont actually know for sure do you?
Change can be a terrible thing, but resistance to it is just futile, pointless and in the end a waste of time
You dont even have to wait for the change to wardecs. Stay in a npc corp when they stop giving out insurance from suicide ganks and you will be 100% safe.
that is a very flawed logic! Even after insurance payout got removed after concord kills the gankers, they can still have the ability to carry the kill. The only reason that they will stop doing suicide ganking is due to their "CHOICE". However, the ability is still there. Thus, it wouldn't be 100% safe, it would be a matter of choice for anybody to attack and kill in high sec against any player. However, you just cannot do that for big risk free isk like it is now(before the last patch).
High sec is not null sec. Anybody doing anything against law will be punished instead of rewarded. This is very simply just like real life. Can you find an insurance company who will payout car insurance money to a murder who trashed his car during run away drive? CCP didn't take any thing away, they just made unlawful actions in high sec suffer some real consequences. If you want to kill somebody in high sec, then go ahead do it. However, stop complaining losing isk and sec standing. This is a harsh game, and most importantly, ccp's game. You can take it or leave it.
.
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |