Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
spanky herman
Viziam
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:46:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Vigilant A system with my name on it, with 10000 belts of "OMG" rocks and ice worth billions that respawn daily for JUST me.
Did I mention this system can be entered by just me and my corp mates, and cyno is always open, cause there is no other way into said system.
Your system is created and ready - please remember you may neither jump out nor activate mining equipment or concord will respond with force. welcome to our new roach motel system model.
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:48:00 -
[32]
An interest in risk, consequences, and real PvP.
So, no hope. -
DesuSigs |
Vigilant
Gallente Vigilant's Vigilante's
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:50:00 -
[33]
Originally by: spanky herman
Originally by: Vigilant A system with my name on it, with 10000 belts of "OMG" rocks and ice worth billions that respawn daily for JUST me.
Did I mention this system can be entered by just me and my corp mates, and cyno is always open, cause there is no other way into said system.
Your system is created and ready - please remember you may neither jump out nor activate mining equipment or concord will respond with force. welcome to our new roach motel system model.
LMAO !
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:51:00 -
[34]
Some good ideas made in this thread - id start with removing giving out items as mission bonuses and only give out isk as a reward. At the same time remove t1 loot drops from missions and make named drops rarer, only leave wrecks to be salvaged.
This will give the man in empire more isk to buy things but also increase the need to buy things. Ie. it will increase the flow of items like named mods etc. from empire and 0.0 as well as minerals into empire - and isk from empire back into 0.0 and lowsec.
This combined with a clever Mining overhaul which ccp is planning anyways alrdy would make things alot more interesting. Some hints were that belts itself would be removed and exploration belts containing lowend minerals scannable with a onboard scanner, but also highend mineral belts where you need probes to9 find em, replace them.
In such a belt you as a miner are alot safer then in a current belt.
A good implementation of a local change would round this up - cant wait for all this to happen :) -
Boosters and PirateProfessions
|
Kurlieu
Gallente The Ore House
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:52:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Cassandra Valieries No more gatecamps. Simple as that.
I have no problem being scanned down in a mission or while mining and getting popped and podded. Makes it more interesting
But getting instapopped at the gate...meh...
Since gatecamps are going stay in the EVE, I'm gonna stay in highsec
This.
I have an Industrialist (speaking), and a Combat pilot, both over 20M SP. I rather enjoy playing cat and mouse in the belts with my Industrialist, and I don't mind (too much) losing a ship now and again. However, I do mind being popped at a gate by mindless twits. I love solo and small gang PvP with my combat pilot,(giant lagfests not so much) but I really try to avoid gate camps at all costs. My Industrialist has Hulks in low and null, but I make it a point to leave them there. It's not low and null that are problems, it's getting in and out.
The risk/reward is actually better in HiSec as far as I'm concerned, although it's also boring as hell. But to mindlessly lose ships at a gate is all risk and no reward whatsoever.
I feel there are solutions to the "problem" but CCP doesn't seem all that interested. The NullSec folks are happy playing politics and pew-pew, the HiSec folks are happy making money, the LowSec folks are unhappy because they don't have enough targets at their gate camps. Such is life. I guess that's why folks have alts.
|
Korovyov
Luminous Love Brewery
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:54:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Cassandra Valieries No more gatecamps. Simple as that.
This. And blobs. Basically, all the mechanics that punish people for not joining a 0.0 mega alliance. But the second CCP nerfs blobcampwarfare is the second they all ragequit and take their alts which make 50% of the subscription base with them. And then CCP would QQ. So yeah...
got booze? |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:55:00 -
[37]
Like what's been said before: make the rewards SO much better in low sec and 0.0 that the carebears will see all the lowsec/0.0 players getting rich and the greedy scumbags will want to get in on the loot.
The problem is that the risk is binary with PVP: you're either killable (low sec) or you're not. Right now the rewards in 0.0 are ok to good, but the rewards in low sec are horrible in comparison to the risk of flying there. Low sec rewards need to be buffed to the same level as 0.0 and then the problem is solved.
Keep the ore the same, buff the rats. All done. Put triple 1.85m BS spawns in 0.4s and watch the carebears come running in droves to cash in.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. [Vid] I M M O R T A L
|
RedLion
Caldari Polaris Project Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:59:00 -
[38]
It's all about risk vs reward.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The Gallenteans must be destroyed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
Malcanis
RuffRyders Eradication Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:02:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Korovyov
Originally by: Cassandra Valieries No more gatecamps. Simple as that.
This. And blobs. Basically, all the mechanics that punish people for not joining a 0.0 mega alliance. But the second CCP nerfs blobcampwarfare is the second they all ragequit and take their alts which make 50% of the subscription base with them. And then CCP would QQ. So yeah...
What mechanics would make few ships better than many ships?
|
Scagga Laebetrovo
Evil Bastards
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:04:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Korovyov
Originally by: Cassandra Valieries No more gatecamps. Simple as that.
This. And blobs. Basically, all the mechanics that punish people for not joining a 0.0 mega alliance. But the second CCP nerfs blobcampwarfare is the second they all ragequit and take their alts which make 50% of the subscription base with them. And then CCP would QQ. So yeah...
What mechanics would make few ships better than many ships?
Splitting a large number of ships into groups of a smaller number can be promoted by providing objectives in that require few ships and are in more than one location. Scagga is running for the CSM, see his campaign thread to know of his standpoints! |
|
Davina Braben
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:12:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Blastil Edited by: Blastil on 31/10/2008 15:07:22 CCP has been emphasizing getting carebears and industrialists out into lowsec and nullsec in a non-PVP role. At every turn this has fallen through, since it seems carebears are all dead set against risk in any shape or form. This is understandable I suppose. Most people want to log on Friday and Saturday to run a few missions, change production jobs, and chat with a few friends. But without Miners/maufacturers in Nullsec and lowsec, as well as mission runners, Low/Nullsec will forever be gimpped, since PVPers are mostly consumers only. CCP has tried and met with only limited success to get these players into more risky space, so I'll ask this question, aimed mostly at carebears and industrialists.
What would get YOU into Low and Nullsec?
Nothing. If I am carebearing I am carebearing. Looking for PVP <> Carebearing.
It's a totally different mindset to when I am PVPing.
I can't even imagine mixing something as dull as mining (where the focus is shooting the breeze and people tell me they have a good book handy) with the tension that comes from dodgeing other players.
That stuff is only fun when I am a threat too.
|
SSgt Sniper
Gallente MAIDS
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:14:00 -
[42]
making it highsec. ------- CEO of Maids. No I didn't pick the name. I've grown rather fond of it though.Poor PR in progress!
|
Emywn Vanya
Caldari Redemption or Retribution Arcane Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:16:00 -
[43]
Risk V.S. Reward .... puts me in 0.0 space with a hulk. I think most carebears/industrialists don't understand how much money a miner can make in 0.0. I paid off my hulk the first day.
I Don't know how to get more carebears out to 0.0 but from my experience i've had less trouble in 0.0 than in high sec... I haven't lost any cans or ships mining in 0.0... i have in empire. Maybe its just because i'm more careful.
Low sec ... Personally i see no reason to go there as a miner. Better ore in 0.0, less risk in 0.0, and most alliances have pipelines from 0.0 to highsec.
Also anyone who ends up in 0.0 eventually moves away from carebear into a pvp/bear hybrid... so it appears there's not as many carebears as there actually are... you try to pop my hulk and i'll POS my hulk up and come back and blow your brains out.
----------------------- The answer is 42 |
Blastil
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:17:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Korovyov
Originally by: Cassandra Valieries No more gatecamps. Simple as that.
This. And blobs. Basically, all the mechanics that punish people for not joining a 0.0 mega alliance. But the second CCP nerfs blobcampwarfare is the second they all ragequit and take their alts which make 50% of the subscription base with them. And then CCP would QQ. So yeah...
I have to disagree that you can't go into lowsec, and 0.0 w/out being in a mega alliance (well, 0.0 maybe not.) The structure is really that you can solo in highsec, corp up for lowsec, and alliance and NAP your way to victory in 0.0. Right now I'm in a 20 man corp that holds down one system in lowsec for hunting grounds, and farms its self out to 0.0 alliances for extra firepower. We get more PVP that we can handle some times, but you can EASILY handle lowsec w/o a parent alliance, or even a parent coalition.
While gatecamps certainly can be annoying, I would think making more jumps and less 'pipes' in lowsec, along with more recent changes with blockade runners are good ideas...
So far I've seen some good ideas. Might make a CSM post.
|
Jenny Superfood
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:17:00 -
[45]
For the majority of players (not just the "carebears") to go into low-sec and 0.0 you need to do only one thing:
# To kick out every player that's already there. For good. Not just out of the regions, but out of the game entirely.
There is no incentive for many players to go into 0.0 because the players that are already there will do anything and everything in their power to keep the new players out. What's worse, due to in-game mechanics, the defenders have all the advantages.
This has very little to do with areas of Hi-Sec being overly lucrative, this is all about the current population of low-sec and 0.0 being the jerks that they are. Their in-game behaviour has both driven people out of these regions and is preventing people from going (back) into them. Now they're spamming the forums, whining over the fact that they have no one left to be jerks with, citing every conceivable reason under the sun except the truth: Their own behavior. |
Jackie Fisher
Galactic Defence Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:25:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Jackie Fisher on 31/10/2008 16:25:25 Whatever it is needs to be unique to low sec and something that canÆt be traded. For example:
- Add a method of building standings with those factions (including pirate) you have terrible (currently non-recoverable) standings with.
- Add personalised implants û better stats than current ones but only usable by the person who obtained them from the æLP storeÆ û to low sec agents.
|
Chan'aar
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:28:00 -
[47]
My opinion is that there is too much of the "us and them" syndrome amongst both sets of players (carebears and pvpers). It has been my experience that in low sec pvpers from different corps will band together to hunt out any carebears they find (or team up in gate camps).
To me this doesn't seem right for a couple of reasons .. a) if the pvpers truely want fights then they will get better ones from other pvpers rather than the carebears b) if there was only one set of pvpers in an area they would have choice pickings of the carebear targets
I'm not sure if a mechanism can be put in place (I seem to remember some CCP mention of Viceroy's) whereby a set of pvpers could "own" an area of low sec (constellation ?). Then perhaps that set of pvpers could make treaties with sets of carebears for access .. it would then be upto those owning pvpers to keep out both predatory pvpers and competing carebears.
Unfortunately the us and them syndrome takes hold and in my experience a large proportion of the pvpers in low sec are even more risk averse than carebears. They sit in their gate camps and gang up with other pvpbears and gank anyone that comes through for no more reason than to watch the pretty explosions, they don't want fights, they want turkey shoots.
Until that mindset changes low sec will continue to be desolate and unpopulated.
|
Blastil
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:30:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Jenny Superfood For the majority of players (not just the "carebears") to go into low-sec and 0.0 you need to do only one thing:
# To kick out every player that's already there. For good. Not just out of the regions, but out of the game entirely.
There is no incentive for many players to go into 0.0 because the players that are already there will do anything and everything in their power to keep the new players out. What's worse, due to in-game mechanics, the defenders have all the advantages.
This has very little to do with areas of Hi-Sec being overly lucrative, this is all about the current population of low-sec and 0.0 being the jerks that they are. Their in-game behaviour has both driven people out of these regions and is preventing people from going (back) into them. Now they're spamming the forums, whining over the fact that they have no one left to be jerks with, citing every conceivable reason under the sun except the truth: Their own behavior.
I'm seeing more and more of these posts and I'd like to put a direct stop to them- The idea of game mechanics is to afford everyone a slot in this game, and NOT kill someone else's playstyle. If I want to spend a night camping gates, sharing Mimes and making MONEY off camping gates, then I should be able to. As for corps and alliances being "Jerks" and having "all the advantages", I know of only a handfull of corps that would outridght reject you for being a bear, or a new player. I can list you a laundry list of alliances and corps that would take on a PVE or carebear in a moment so long as you put up a few dukes now and then and provided your services as a meat sheild for the occasionall alliance op.
Lets try and keep this productive instead of whine posts about 'OMG TEH GAME IS UNFAIR!'
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:30:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Blastil
Originally by: Cassandra Valieries No more gatecamps. Simple as that.
Would it help to have ships that can get past gate camps, like the new blockade runners will be able to?
If said ships can do lvl4 or mine or rat efficiently, or carry a ship who can, yes. Since it's not the case, the only thing that could solve the issue would be a dramatic boost of sentries. Let piracy be done in belts and mission sites, there will be plenty of targets if the carebears do the math and find out that the superior income will justify the occasionnal ship loss. ------------------------------------------
|
Davina Braben
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:35:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Blastil
Originally by: Jenny Superfood For the majority of players (not just the "carebears") to go into low-sec and 0.0 you need to do only one thing:
# To kick out every player that's already there. For good. Not just out of the regions, but out of the game entirely.
There is no incentive for many players to go into 0.0 because the players that are already there will do anything and everything in their power to keep the new players out. What's worse, due to in-game mechanics, the defenders have all the advantages.
This has very little to do with areas of Hi-Sec being overly lucrative, this is all about the current population of low-sec and 0.0 being the jerks that they are. Their in-game behaviour has both driven people out of these regions and is preventing people from going (back) into them. Now they're spamming the forums, whining over the fact that they have no one left to be jerks with, citing every conceivable reason under the sun except the truth: Their own behavior.
I'm seeing more and more of these posts and I'd like to put a direct stop to them- The idea of game mechanics is to afford everyone a slot in this game, and NOT kill someone else's playstyle. If I want to spend a night camping gates, sharing Mimes and making MONEY off camping gates, then I should be able to. As for corps and alliances being "Jerks" and having "all the advantages", I know of only a handfull of corps that would outridght reject you for being a bear, or a new player. I can list you a laundry list of alliances and corps that would take on a PVE or carebear in a moment so long as you put up a few dukes now and then and provided your services as a meat sheild for the occasionall alliance op.
Lets try and keep this productive instead of whine posts about 'OMG TEH GAME IS UNFAIR!'
That's daft.
You should be able to do anything within the rules of the game.
There should not however be any guarantee that it will yield you any results where other players are involved though.
Astonishingly, people learn and adapt.
It's like playing a Spy in TF2. It might work to begin with but it gets a lot harder when people know you're coming.
|
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:35:00 -
[51]
the truth is that theyll sooner quit the game than go out and become targets and if you cant understand this they might be smarter than you Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Ying Lin
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:46:00 -
[52]
I believe it can be solved by:
1. Less bottleneck routes to Nullsec ... i.e. making it difficult to blockade and entry point into nullsec; having multiple gateways will reduce the chances of encountering a gatecamp.
2. Have pockets of highsec space around the gates and stations by boosting up sentry guns around the gates that will shoot at any aggressor. Which in turn will give the "victim" a chance to survive or run.
I believe giving carebears better chance of surviving an ambush/gatecamp will encourage the carebears to venture into null or lowsec.
|
Cat Molina
Minmatar Psychotic Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:54:00 -
[53]
People play in different ways for different reasons. The Empire Mission Runners/Miners/life-long Empire-dwellers don't want the excitement of low-sec or 0.0. That's why they're in Empire. They're not looking for that adrenalin rush of PvP. Therefore, they will not venture into low-sec or 0.0 unless it becomes Empire. Rewards will not change this, as you are attempting to affect a personal outlook.
Asking what would make these people leave Empire is like asking what would get those 'True Killahs' out in 0.0 to head to Dodixie and run some missions.
Isn't it interesting that people always try to move people out of Empire and never the reverse?
|
Commander Criton
Gallente Surrender The Booty Pirate Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:06:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Cat Molina People play in different ways for different reasons. The Empire Mission Runners/Miners/life-long Empire-dwellers don't want the excitement of low-sec or 0.0. That's why they're in Empire. They're not looking for that adrenalin rush of PvP. Therefore, they will not venture into low-sec or 0.0 unless it becomes Empire. Rewards will not change this, as you are attempting to affect a personal outlook.
Asking what would make these people leave Empire is like asking what would get those 'True Killahs' out in 0.0 to head to Dodixie and run some missions.
Isn't it interesting that people always try to move people out of Empire and never the reverse?
They dont see the reverse as they are trying to solve a population problem in low sec/0.0 which empire does not have. The reason i hear lots is that empire is safer than low sec/0.0 Intresting thing is if people was to use the map option and set it to show ships destroyed in the last 24 hours it shows the hot spots and empire is very HOT lol compared to low sec/0.0. I think more stations better bountys on rats and the markets being better maybe the standard stuff being seeded each day would help this, more npc agents in low sec too would be good. Another reason i get for not going into low sec is that the pvp is fun but the punishment is too harsh that its not worth it.
|
Blastil
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:14:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Cat Molina People play in different ways for different reasons. The Empire Mission Runners/Miners/life-long Empire-dwellers don't want the excitement of low-sec or 0.0. That's why they're in Empire. They're not looking for that adrenalin rush of PvP. Therefore, they will not venture into low-sec or 0.0 unless it becomes Empire. Rewards will not change this, as you are attempting to affect a personal outlook.
Asking what would make these people leave Empire is like asking what would get those 'True Killahs' out in 0.0 to head to Dodixie and run some missions.
Isn't it interesting that people always try to move people out of Empire and never the reverse?
Most people in 0.0 and lowsec DO return to empire for various reasons. In fact, that's why security status is so damn annoying, that's the point. The problem isn't that PVPers have no insentives to go to empire (since the markets in all low and nullsec systems are jokes). I'll tell you right here and now, even the most hardcore PVPers, and 0.0 empire moguls make Jita runs every now and again. No one makes Rancer runs. There really is a one sided flow back to highsec. an thats fine, but it negates the usefulness of 0.0, and the vast, Vast, VAST untapped wildnernesses that exist in EVE. I'd like to think that lack of ambition isn't the problem, so we should find ways to encourage exploration of the whole universe.
|
Cat Molina
Minmatar Psychotic Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:16:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Commander Criton They dont see the reverse as they are trying to solve a population problem in low sec/0.0 which empire does not have.
Yeah. I want more targets too.
Still, I maintain that the only people who will be swayed by increased rewards or ease of survival are those who regularly venture into dangerous areas anyway... just for the thrill.
|
AkRoYeR
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:21:00 -
[57]
Make the whole server 0.0 except for Jita.
|
Cat Molina
Minmatar Psychotic Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:24:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Blastil Most people in 0.0 and lowsec DO return to empire for various reasons. In fact, that's why security status is so damn annoying, that's the point. The problem isn't that PVPers have no insentives to go to empire (since the markets in all low and nullsec systems are jokes). I'll tell you right here and now, even the most hardcore PVPers, and 0.0 empire moguls make Jita runs every now and again. No one makes Rancer runs. There really is a one sided flow back to highsec. an thats fine, but it negates the usefulness of 0.0, and the vast, Vast, VAST untapped wildnernesses that exist in EVE. I'd like to think that lack of ambition isn't the problem, so we should find ways to encourage exploration of the whole universe.
This is true. However, in your own example you mention an existing reward for low-sec: the crappy market. From what I've seen, pirates tend to dislike logging on the alt, shopping, and then hauling the crap in. A careful pilot could make good money running goods to the pirate hubs (especially with the upcoming Blockade Runner changes).
And yet, no one really does this. Why? The reward is there (increased profits; challenge; danger)... so why do so few do it? It's not really that risky, even for a solo w/alt scout pilot.
|
Resivan
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:27:00 -
[59]
At the center of everything is this: You cannot force someone to play the game the way you want them to, you can only force them to stop playing.
|
JabJabVVV
Total Mayhem.
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:28:00 -
[60]
The large 0.0 alliances are the largest industrial entities in the game... running tens (in some cases even hundreds) of moons and multiple stations certainly isn't 'PvP'. It's just that they have to fight at the same time otherwise someone will take their moons and stations from them (and the huge income which they entail).
So your question really isn't valid as they are already out their albeit in a form not identical to the standard high sec industrialist. ----------- When I was a n00b, I spake as a n00b, I understood as a n00b, I thought as a n00b: but when I became pr0, I put away n00bish things. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |