EVE Search - Potential encouragement to PVP

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Potential encouragement to PVP

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Sol Fallstaff	Posted - 2010.11.27 15:57:00 - [1] Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 15:59:13 With the learning skills now removed which i think is a good idea, how about we now make rigs and implants removeable, I think this would get a lot of carebears to dip their toes into PVP rather than run the same ol missions over and over again and then quit through boredom. Downsides - the high end rigs and implants will probably drop in price over time. Upsides - more people will PVP as they wont be that bothered if they lose inexpensive rigs and implants. Markets will be stimulated as more ships and modules are purchased. More players will experience PVP. Yes I know you can use clones but a 24 hour window to change back is far to long imo and having other clones with a certain pvp setup is just too inflexible. Out of curiosty why were the rigs and implants implemented in such a permanent inflexible manner which overall discourages PVP to some.
Antihrist Pripravnik 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2010.11.27 15:59:00 - [2] Rigs are already cheap enough. Especially medium and small ones.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Angry Dogs	Posted - 2010.11.27 16:06:00 - [3] Use a jump clone Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose. I just solved both of your issues
Sol Fallstaff	Posted - 2010.11.27 16:09:00 - [4] Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 16:12:54 Originally by: baltec1 Use a jump clone Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose. I just solved both of your issues Not sure why you would want to keep a game mechanic which stifles choice and discourages players from PVPing, especially a mechanic that affects new players more due to their earning ability. Would of thought that as this game is "supposedly PVP centered" the designers would want to encourage as many players to PVP as they could rather than make it harder or more expensive.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.11.27 16:24:00 - [5] Removing rigs... lets see. You want to encourage new players to try out PVP, and help them out by enabling them to remove the expensive rigs from their mission ship so they can go lose it in PVP. Then they can quit because they lost their only ship, and all they have left is a rookie ship and some large rigs. Sounds like a good idea.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Angry Dogs	Posted - 2010.11.27 16:28:00 - [6] Originally by: Sol Fallstaff Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 16:12:54 Originally by: baltec1 Use a jump clone Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose. I just solved both of your issues Not sure why you would want to keep a game mechanic which stifles choice and discourages players from PVPing, especially a mechanic that affects new players more due to their earning ability. Would of thought that as this game is "supposedly PVP centered" the designers would want to encourage as many players to PVP as they could rather than make it harder or more expensive. What is so unaffordable about a rifter? or a thorax?
Wu Jiaqiu Minmatar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.11.27 16:29:00 - [7] This idea is terrible. Dying in PvP must sting, like hell.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2010.11.27 16:33:00 - [8] Originally by: Sol Fallstaff Originally by: baltec1 Use a jump clone Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose. I just solved both of your issues Not sure why you would want to keep a game mechanic which stifles choice and discourages players from PVPing, especially a mechanic that affects new players more due to their earning ability. Would of thought that as this game is "supposedly PVP centered" the designers would want to encourage as many players to PVP as they could rather than make it harder or more expensive. Without cost the PvP would be meaningless and the adrenalin-rush simply wouldn't be there.. that's what makes the PvP in Eve so good. You can loose your stuff! Without that you'll loose most of the hard core 'PvPers'. So, now some ideas for you why there aren't more people PvP'ing via ship-combat.. 1) most people I personally now log into the game to have some fun with others after a day of work.. they're stressed enough and want to relax 2) some people have their adrenalin-rush in different ways than you. Ever planned something and after hours/days/weeks it worked out to your favor? This can be market/trading or just plain old corp-theft. 3) many people are risk averse and more of the building-a-castle-kind. They don't like to risk something they worked so long and hard for. 4) .. New Eden needs a Public Feature/Idea/Bug-Tracker
Misanthra	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:12:00 - [9] Cheap pvp with implants....if learning a int/mem skill, just run those 2 +3's. Perc/willpower....I'll let you guess which 2 to run. Cheaper blows ups...and for me they happened less. For some reason when I run 4 implants...I get podded alot more. Run just 2 and pod gets home damn near everytime (hell one time pod down to like 35% structure...made 10 jumps back in null sec. ran 2 jc's atleast with split implants, worked well or me and when I don't want those implants, pod, hell eve even ship anymore...only replace 2 +3's to save costs. Rigs...small and medium are cheap as chips. No reason to be broke losing them. Larges...by the time you get your fleet BS money for them should be less of an issue. If that broke...salvage your missions/belts and buy the bpo's (which are quite cheap actually....most smalls perfect me is like an ME of less than 5 (even raw, the bpo is not too parts hungry).
Lubomir Penev Sausages of Truth S I L E N T.	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:14:00 - [10] Who the hell would prefer to fight without hardwirings... The guy you're facing got them, you need them too.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:21:00 - [11] Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP. They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Rashmika Clavain Gallente	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:35:00 - [12] Give an inch and the forum trolls want a mile. [html]http://skilltrainingcomplete.com/users/flair/1417.html[/html]
Jennifer Starling Amarr	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:35:00 - [13] Edited by: Jennifer Starling on 27/11/2010 17:35:48 Rigs: why would you want to remove them? It's a choice to fit them and unless you use T2s or large ones the cost isn't that high. If the rigs cost a multitude of the ship, buy another ship to PvP with. Implants: I agree, why would you have to suffer a 24h training speed penalty if you want to (learn to) PvP? It doesn't make sense that learning to pvp should result in less SP?! Solution: cheap implants that only last for 24-48 hours.
Sol Fallstaff	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:36:00 - [14] All the above comments against this idea are of course your opinion, but nobody has of yet explained why its a good idea to have this inflexability within a ship or a clone. Stating simply that its gotta really hurt a player financialy becuase he dared to attempt to PVP and lost doesnt really cut it as an argument. I'll accept that it is easier to have a pvp ship in hanger with the relevant rigs, but the clone implants should be removeable, or at the very least the time for allowing to clone jump should be drastically reduced. Preferable removeable to reduve a player being able to hop all over the eve universe. As far as I'm concerened the current mechanics are too restrictive.
Tom Gerard	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:50:00 - [15] Good Idea but it too heavily favors Caldari so I must oppose it.
Vertisce Soritenshi O.W.N. Corp OWN Alliance	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:54:00 - [16] This is just an excuse. PvP is already cheap and inexpensive. I can have a fully T2 fitted and T1 rigged Drake up and running for 50 mil to use in PvP. Don't use implants in PvP...the only people who do are the ones that can afford to lose them. There are no excuses for not doing PvP already except for just being a carebear. Using Jump Clones you can jump into 0.0 to PvP and then jump back out into Empire the next day to PvE if you want. No need to make Rigs removable and ruin their already reduced value by flooding the market with them. No need to do the same with implants. Sig.Learning skills vote.
Ava Starfire Minmatar Nordanverdr Modr	Posted - 2010.11.27 17:57:00 - [17] Originally by: Sol Fallstaff All the above comments against this idea are of course your opinion, but nobody has of yet explained why its a good idea to have this inflexability within a ship or a clone. Stating simply that its gotta really hurt a player financialy becuase he dared to attempt to PVP and lost doesnt really cut it as an argument. I'll accept that it is easier to have a pvp ship in hanger with the relevant rigs, but the clone implants should be removeable, or at the very least the time for allowing to clone jump should be drastically reduced. Preferable removeable to reduve a player being able to hop all over the eve universe. As far as I'm concerened the current mechanics are too restrictive. I wish jump clones were removed from the game, personally. I risk my implants when I PVP, why shouldnt you? Yep, losing a few hundred M in implants hurts. That's the point. And if at the frig/cruiser level, you cant afford to lose a few m in rigs, you probably shouldnt be PVPing. Dirty Little Slave, reporting for duty!
Sol Fallstaff	Posted - 2010.11.27 18:07:00 - [18] Anyone got a better excuse to keep the current implant mechanic other than its gotta hurt financially to PVP. ( I'll concede the rigs one ) Nobody in their right mind is gonna PVP with 5% or +5 implants unless of course you are incredible rich. so most players are gonna clone jump to a PVP clone so why have an annoying mechanic that forces people to wait 24 hours to get back to their main clone. People are still gonna use the 3% implants I do. Am just ****ed that If I want to scan or run mission or PVP which of course can be in many different ships which in turn can be used in many different roles within PVP, basically far more roles than 6 clones can ever hope to cover. So why have such a restrictive gameplay mechanic that does noone any favours nor advances the gameplay in any meaningfull way.
alittlebirdy	Posted - 2010.11.27 18:11:00 - [19] Remove isk next... only logical thing to do, if learning skills were hard, or something you had to do or whatever dumb ass reasons were givin... damn ISK fits the perfectly.
Herping yourDerp	Posted - 2010.11.27 18:19:00 - [20] implants meant to be isk sinks, you buy them from LP store, you die you lose them. Rig remove salvaged matterials from the market this idea would screw the market up, and jump clones only cost 100k, so this idea wont work.
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2010.11.27 18:26:00 - [21] Yeah bad idea. I do think that the LP costs on attribute implants should be lowered though I think if they were cheaper more people would be willing to risk them and that would encourage more PVP since people wouldn't be as likely to do the mental math of whether or not they would rather go to null/wh space to shoot stuff or get their best skill time.
Jennifer Starling Amarr	Posted - 2010.11.27 18:29:00 - [22] Edited by: Jennifer Starling on 27/11/2010 18:30:14 Originally by: Herping yourDerp implants meant to be isk sinks, you buy them from LP store, you die you lose them. this idea would screw the market up, and jump clones only cost 100k, so this idea wont work. It's not about the price of rigs, I don't mind losing rigged ships but I do mind jumping into a PvP clone and losing 24 hours of faster skilltraining. No-one in his/her right mind would use +4/+5 implants in PvP and many people who have them and can't/don't want to use jump clones are prevented from doing PvP this way. It would be better for the economy if they did lose some rigged ships every now and then and learned to PvP than stay in highsec, don't you think? A lot of people complain about the lack of people in lowsec to do some casual solo/small gang PvP - well here's one reason of why that is the case.
Brian Ballsack	Posted - 2010.11.27 19:59:00 - [23] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP. They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops. Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please.
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2010.11.27 20:03:00 - [24] Originally by: Brian Ballsack Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP. They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops. Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please. Gates suck. So do docking games. Blind session changes hinder a lot of people. Eve should be more than spawn camping.
Sinister Dextor	Posted - 2010.11.27 20:13:00 - [25] Carebears will come up with an endless number of reasons why they won't want to get into PvP, all of them spurious. Truth is,even though they say, change this or that, or when I have enough sp blah blah blah, they will never willingly risk it. So any change you care to imagine will have zero effect. Forget it, and them.
Feilamya Pain Elemental	Posted - 2010.11.27 20:47:00 - [26] Edited by: Feilamya on 27/11/2010 20:46:50 PVP must be discouraged by high risk. This is the only way to keep it fun. If you disagree, go play UT3.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2010.11.27 20:55:00 - [27] Back in the day you had to put 2x polycarbon rigs on your vagabond and those polycarbons cost 55m EACH and people PvP'd all the time. Not to mention the really old days of 250m Vagas and 10m Invuln IIs and the such. As such the price of equipment does not mean more or less PvP. What needs to be done is that the tutorial needs to emphasize that this is a game slanted towards PvP and that PvP itself is not an evil activity only done by psychopaths that are terrible people in real life. Losing a ship is not a big deal as is - It's not "Play through a pre-set story, become stronger, do endgame". Gameplay is open ended, and you make your own story. Unless you're too afraid of 'pvp grief' to do anything relevant
Marchocias Snatch Victory	Posted - 2010.11.27 21:36:00 - [28] There was a time before rigs. Their introduction did not increase bears reluctance to fight. Removing them will not encourage PvP. Some people just dont want to fight. Pointlessly removing bits of the game, in some attempt to make people do something that thye simply don't want to is ludicrous. ---- I belong to Silent Ninja (Hopefully that should cover it).
ExcalibursTemplar	Posted - 2010.11.27 21:43:00 - [29] Originally by: Marchocias There was a time before rigs. Their introduction did not increase bears reluctance to fight. Removing them will not encourage PvP. Some people just dont want to fight. Pointlessly removing bits of the game, in some attempt to make people do something that thye simply don't want to is ludicrous. Spot on eve is a sandbox game and people should be allowed to do whatever they want as thats the whole idea of a sandbox game.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.11.27 21:54:00 - [30] Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 27/11/2010 21:59:58 Originally by: Brian Ballsack Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP. They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops. Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please. How's that a bizarre assumption? Everytime i want to enter lowsec or 0.0, being prepared for PvP is less of a factor in what fitting and ship to use than beating gatecamps is. I'd be taking all kinds of crazy expensive ships into lowsec and 0.0 if i didnt have to worry about gatecamps. Instead i just take cheap fast aligning frigates or cov ops which no one is ever going to catch. Not only do gatecamps keep me from taking ships i'd actually like to use in lowsec and 0.0, but they keep those ships from maybe ending up on killmails. It's bad for everyone. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Flesh Slurper	Posted - 2010.11.27 22:19:00 - [31] Originally by: Jennifer Starling No-one in his/her right mind would use +4/+5 implants in PvP and many people who have them and can't/don't want to use jump clones are prevented from doing PvP this way. I guess I must be insane. I use +4 implants always when I PVP. I figure the isk loss is worth it if I get podded, rather than loosing some training speed. I also have been relatively good at avoiding being podded, and buy my implants from the LP store so they are a lot cheaper.
Rhes Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.11.28 00:26:00 - [32] If you're not fighting in all +5 implants and T2 rigs you're doing it wrong.
Black Dranzer Caldari	Posted - 2010.11.28 00:58:00 - [33] Rigs and implants are a risk-reward thing. Jesus, what is with people? Not only is there a ton of whining about the general removal of learning skills (along with a good portion of smug holier-than-thou doomsday predictions) but there are also a whole bunch of ideas coming in from people who don't seem to understand why learning skills were removed in the first place. To summarize: High Tier: Rational fans of things I like Mid Tier: Rational fans of things I dislike Low Tier: Irrational fans of things I dislike Shut Up You're Embarrassing Me Tier: Irrational fans of things I like
Kahega Amielden Rifterlings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.11.28 01:03:00 - [34] Quote: Rigs and implants are a risk-reward thing. Jesus, what is with people? Not only is there a ton of whining about the general removal of learning skills (along with a good portion of smug holier-than-thou doomsday predictions) but there are also a whole bunch of ideas coming in from people who don't seem to understand why learning skills were removed in the first place. No one is denying the risk/reward thing...However, training time is (in my opinion, way too) important to many people and unless you're mega-rich, PVP and +5 implants are mutually exclusive.
Black Dranzer Caldari	Posted - 2010.11.28 01:10:00 - [35] Originally by: Kahega Amielden No one is denying the risk/reward thing...However, training time is (in my opinion, way too) important to many people and unless you're mega-rich, PVP and +5 implants are mutually exclusive. Well yeah, but that's.. kind of the point.
Tom Gerard	Posted - 2010.11.28 01:15:00 - [36] I see what you're saying broke. But what I think the problem is with that is that some people don't want the game to be oversimplified. So what I see is that maybe they should just like work on more ways of adding implants to people's so like maybe every station and we've sold implants even if the implants are slightly like overpriced. I mean it's like your idea would be really cool and people like pu pu a lot more. But it would make the game played more like world of work raft. But anyway I think that CCP might end up reading your topic and finding like the good points in it because CCP is really cool about stuff like that expressly when it comes to like the generals forms and will hold your mind magic culture.
CHAOS100 The Ankou Initiative Mercenaries	Posted - 2010.11.28 10:58:00 - [37] Make NPC PVP missions with agents in 0.0. Yeah just like lvl 4's, and once you do some you get to cash in for some $$$ LP. Make it fairly profitable. Example mission: "Roam in X region and kill 5 ships BC class or higher. Must have less than 5 ships involved on the killmail." --------------
fr0gout	Posted - 2010.11.28 11:01:00 - [38] best way to encourage PvP would be to delete ecm from the game
Nick Curso Diabolus Ex Machina	Posted - 2010.11.28 13:45:00 - [39] Originally by: Sol Fallstaff Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 15:59:13 With the learning skills now removed which i think is a good idea, how about we now make rigs and implants removeable, I think this would get a lot of carebears to dip their toes into PVP rather than run the same ol missions over and over again and then quit through boredom. Downsides - the high end rigs and implants will probably drop in price over time. Upsides - more people will PVP as they wont be that bothered if they lose inexpensive rigs and implants. Markets will be stimulated as more ships and modules are purchased. More players will experience PVP. Yes I know you can use clones but a 24 hour window to change back is far to long imo and having other clones with a certain pvp setup is just too inflexible. Out of curiosty why were the rigs and implants implemented in such a permanent inflexible manner which overall discourages PVP to some. Perhaps just stop being a ***got. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Cor Aidan Shore Leave	Posted - 2010.11.28 15:08:00 - [40] Originally by: CHAOS100 Make NPC PVP missions with agents in 0.0. Yeah just like lvl 4's, and once you do some you get to cash in for some $$$ LP. Make it fairly profitable. Example mission: "Roam in X region and kill 5 ships BC class or higher. Must have less than 5 ships involved on the killmail." I think this is closer to a solution that will work. While some folks treat Killmails as some kind of psychological currency, they aren't very useful for purchasing a new ship, ammo, or modules. Currently the tradeoff is something like "I can PvP and earn very little isk (unless I get really lucky and have a small enough gang that the revenue from selling modules from the kill helps us), or I can PvE / play the markets/ sell GTC or PLEX to get isk." I suspect the problem is that PvP in itself doesn't appear to have enough direct income. This is a psychological thing (not practical) because it is indeed possible to be a profitable player-combat pilot. But if you somehow change the psychology to make a pilots wallet blink when they score a player kill, people would not see player combat as a waste of isk but instead simply another method of making isk. The portion of people that combat for the sake of combat (or tears) is small compared to the number of people who would combat "for profit." I admit, though, that despite some musing, I haven't really come up with a reasonable way to implement such a method of direct isk for player combat (and I admit I can't recall if FW attempted this somehow or not. I do know that the bounty system doesn't work for this though).
ZenSun Total Mayhem. Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2010.11.28 16:33:00 - [41] So those people who have spent hundreds of millions on implant sets should not get a field advantage?
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2010.11.28 18:26:00 - [42] But rigs and implants are already removable, so what is it he's asking for again? Originally by: Allestin Villimar Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it. Originally by: Torothanax Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive.
Vertisce Soritenshi O.W.N. Corp OWN Alliance	Posted - 2010.11.28 18:29:00 - [43] Originally by: Mag's But rigs and implants are already removable, so what is it he's asking for again? You do PLAY EvE right? Sig.Learning skills vote.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.11.28 19:02:00 - [44] Originally by: Jennifer Starling No-one in his/her right mind would use +4/+5 implants in PvP I've used +4s continuously since about a week after the LP store was introduced. Most of the guys I fly with do the same. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.11.28 19:06:00 - [45] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 27/11/2010 21:59:58 Originally by: Brian Ballsack Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP. They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops. Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please. How's that a bizarre assumption? Everytime i want to enter lowsec or 0.0, being prepared for PvP is less of a factor in what fitting and ship to use than beating gatecamps is. I'd be taking all kinds of crazy expensive ships into lowsec and 0.0 if i didnt have to worry about gatecamps. Instead i just take cheap fast aligning frigates or cov ops which no one is ever going to catch. Not only do gatecamps keep me from taking ships i'd actually like to use in lowsec and 0.0, but they keep those ships from maybe ending up on killmails. It's bad for everyone. When did you last actually see a gatecamp in lo-sec that wasn't in Rancer or Tama? Even Ammamake hasn't been camped the last few times I've been through it. And if the gate is camped, just burn back to the gate, God, it's not hard. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2010.11.28 19:22:00 - [46] Originally by: Vertisce Soritenshi Originally by: Mag's But rigs and implants are already removable, so what is it he's asking for again? You do PLAY EvE right? So you're telling you can't remove them? Do you play Eve? Originally by: Allestin Villimar Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it. Originally by: Torothanax Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive.
Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2010.11.28 19:33:00 - [47] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Everytime i want to enter lowsec or 0.0, being prepared for PvP is less of a factor in what fitting and ship to use than beating gatecamps is. I'd be taking all kinds of crazy expensive ships into lowsec and 0.0 if i didnt have to worry about gatecamps. Gatecamps are inherently at a disadvantage. The main reason they work is because they pick off people 1-2 at a time as they jump in. Because the camp is stationary, it's very easy for you to tell how many people there are and what kind of ships (you can usually even make a very accurate guess at the fitting too), so you can plan your own fleet accordingly to counter what they have. Most of the campers will also have GCC (or at least be -10), so you'll have gateguns on your side (this denies them effectiveness with drones at the least) and will take no sec loss from attacking them. They'll also often be sacrificing midslots for sensor boosters. If you scout the camp first, then your fleet all jumps in at once, chances are you can kill a few of the campers before they get away. If you're unable/not willing to/don't think you'll have fun getting a fleet together to take on the gatecamp, then you probably won't enjoy lowsec. Even if gatecamps were made nonviable, you'd likely find some other excuse not to enter lowsec (belt camps maybe?). So short of lowsec being changed so that only one player ship at a time was allowed to attack you, I highly doubt that you'll ever make good on your plants to enter lowsec in expensive ships. - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
Zan Altier	Posted - 2010.11.28 20:29:00 - [48] I'm new to the game and i can tell you, the only thing that will get me into pvp is if they brought out a combat simulator and let me fully insure my ships (i.e. ship parts) I know that i will always be at a huge disadvantage to older player so i'll be staying in high sec until i have maxed out my offencive and defencive skills.
dpidcoe Gallente Orion Transport	Posted - 2010.11.28 21:20:00 - [49] Originally by: Zan Altier I know that i will always be at a huge disadvantage to older player so i'll be staying in high sec until i have maxed out my offencive and defencive skills. You're not. It's all about picking your fights and has very little to do with skillpoints (assuming you can competently fly the ship you're in). Of the 100's of fights I've been in, I've never won or lost one because I had 10% more damage than the other guy or he had 5% more agility. I've even made rifter pilots before and gone out to low/null sec killing year+ old players after less then 2 weeks of skill training. It's actually easier with a new character than an older one because people tend underestimate you and aren't as quick to run away.
Zarda Sulan Caldari	Posted - 2010.11.28 22:17:00 - [50] All these poster's here saying you don't need to be a Veteran to pvp- its all LIES! anything under 2 years worth of skills is just cannon fodder for the gatecamps/roaming squads! I have played this game on and off now for a good number of years now and lost many ships exploring low sec/null sec to veterans who blew me away in secs before I could return through the gate or get away. They just say its easy in the hopes that you will get lured into a false sense of security or that you can pvp and go there just so they can blow you away and get that ever important killmail for their bloated ego's. Heck the one time i went out in a drake and got to null sec only for a gate camp to blow me away till i was in my pod- then had the check to say give them 55 mill or they kill me - I was like lol your supposed to do that while I am still in the very baldly damaged drake and not in my pod that's not worth 55 mill. Dumbasses in pvp tbh- it really needs to be looked at and completely revamped. I would do way more pvp if they removed the 24 hour clone time- as one could effectivelly hop into a clone with no implants or cheap combat implants- do a few hours of pvp - then jump back into the clone with the expensive learning implants to carry on training while you log out for work or sleep. That would solve so many issues and really open the door for lots more people to risk pvp. I have even said put a skill in the game that gives - x amount of hours to clone jump skill- like 3 hours per lvl- that means at lvl 5 you only have a 9 hour wait till you can jump back into your skill training clone.(take into account the couple of hours of pvping say 3-5 that means you then only wait 4ish hours to get back into training clone) a lot more practical and would defo do a heck of a lot more pvp that way. Live by the sword, Die by the sword. Live by the pen, Die by the sword. Live by the nuke , Kill the sword!
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.11.28 22:23:00 - [51] 7 jumps in to a 12-jump lo-sec run where are the gate gamps? Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Portmanteau CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.11.28 23:22:00 - [52] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 27/11/2010 21:59:58 Originally by: Brian Ballsack Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP. They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops. Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please. How's that a bizarre assumption? Everytime i want to enter lowsec or 0.0, being prepared for PvP is less of a factor in what fitting and ship to use than beating gatecamps is. I'd be taking all kinds of crazy expensive ships into lowsec and 0.0 if i didnt have to worry about gatecamps. Instead i just take cheap fast aligning frigates or cov ops which no one is ever going to catch. Not only do gatecamps keep me from taking ships i'd actually like to use in lowsec and 0.0, but they keep those ships from maybe ending up on killmails. It's bad for everyone. You are vastly overstating the prevalence and effectiveness of gatecamps, I manage just fine by using less populated entry systems and if if need to get thru somewhere like amamake, i use a scout... it's really not difficult unless you are completely without basic common sense. Really, if traders can manage to keep amamake market stocked (and no, they don't all use JFs) you can surely organise getting a cruiser into losec. Once in losec, camps are very very few and far between and most of the time escapable, nothing is without risk ofc.. just accept that
Kezzle	Posted - 2010.11.28 23:59:00 - [53] Originally by: Jennifer Starling No-one in his/her right mind would use +4/+5 implants in PvP and many people who have them and can't...use jump clones Given the cost of top-end implants, and the fact that it is eminently feasible to get .8 standings with SoE well before you can afford a full set of 5s and hardwires, "can't" has to be the result of some choices limiting the use of JCs, which strikes me as perverse if you actually want to engage in PvP. Quote: ...don't want to use jump clones... Similarly, this seems a perverse mindset. What sort of "don't want" are we talking about, here? OCD inability to relinquish maximum optimised learning speeds for skills that you will get eventually? Some sort of moral objection? The tools exist, you just need to plan your days of play. Having top-end learning-affecting implants is a luxury in a game where the baseline is supposed to be PvP. These things aren't limiters to PvP, other limitations are far more significant. It would be better for the economy if they did lose some rigged ships every now and then and learned to PvP than stay in highsec, don't you think? A lot of people complain about the lack of people in lowsec to do some casual solo/small gang PvP - well here's one reason of why that is the case.
Dlardrageth ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.11.29 00:01:00 - [54] Originally by: Sol Fallstaff Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 15:59:13 [...] I think this would get a lot of carebears to dip their toes into PVP rather than run the same ol missions over and over again and then quit through boredom. [...] And the loss for PVP in general would exactly be where? If they "run the same ol missions over and over again" instead of "dip their toes into PVP" then I'd say good riddance from a PvP point of view when they "quit through boredom". You actually made a good point there on why not to change stuff.
Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2010.11.29 00:37:00 - [55] Originally by: Zarda Sulan hur dur Looking at your two losses on battleclinc, I'd venture a guess that you'd have lost those drakes even if you had every single skill in the game at level 5. - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
William Cooly Sol Enterprises	Posted - 2010.11.29 00:42:00 - [56] Originally by: Zarda Sulan snip Confirming 12 year olds play EVE. If at any point you look at a good sized chunk of a game (like PvP, which is pretty much the one uniting force of EVE) and say, "This needs a complete and total do-over", then what you need to do, my friend, is find a new game. - I RETROLL FOR MAXIMUM DAMAGE.
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.11.29 00:44:00 - [57] Originally by: Dian'h Might Originally by: Zarda Sulan hur dur Looking at your two losses on battleclinc, I'd venture a guess that you'd have lost those drakes even if you had every single skill in the game at level 5. LOL. First you tell people "Go out and pvp, it doesn't matter if you lose!" Then you laugh at their losses
Mara Rinn	Posted - 2010.11.29 01:18:00 - [58] One way of encouraging PvP would be to remove attribute-only implants altogether. Remove only the attribute bonuses on sets such as crystal/slave/etc so they retain their ship-capability modifiers. With this change, the only thing you lose when you're podded is assets, rather than that oh-so-precious SP/hr. Assuming your clone is up to date, of course. -- [Aussie players: join ANZAC channel]
L0ki Arkad	Posted - 2010.11.29 03:01:00 - [59] Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 28/11/2010 22:34:09 7 jumps in to a 12-jump lo-sec run where are the gate gamps? EDIT: 12 jump run made, no aggro. UNPOSSABLE! Obviously this is lies. Everyone knows that every gate in lowsec is camped by fleets of 100 pirates in motherships and even thinking about jumping into low sec will make your ship explode.
Zarda Sulan Caldari	Posted - 2010.11.29 04:22:00 - [60] Originally by: William Cooly Originally by: Zarda Sulan snip Confirming 12 year olds play EVE. If at any point you look at a good sized chunk of a game (like PvP, which is pretty much the one uniting force of EVE) and say, "This needs a complete and total do-over", then what you need to do, my friend, is find a new game. people like you and the poster above you really make me want to play this game or wonder why so many quit to your elitism. blame youself for the failures of this game ****** Live by the sword, Die by the sword. Live by the pen, Die by the sword. Live by the nuke , Kill the sword!
William Cooly Sol Enterprises	Posted - 2010.11.29 04:26:00 - [61] Originally by: Zarda Sulan ****** Woah, you seem pretty mad. - I RETROLL FOR MAXIMUM DAMAGE.
Lost Greybeard	Posted - 2010.11.29 04:36:00 - [62] I'd like to see the timer on JC-swapping reduced to 30 or even 15 minutes to make swapping in, going out to lazor things in the face, then swapping back on lunch break more viable. Other than that, not really seeing a problem with how it works now. Honestly, I use missions for income to feed the pvp monster, so +3 implants only cost like three missions for a set (except charisma, I guess, but screw that anyhow). Not exactly breaking the bank. --- If you outlaw tautologies, only outlaws will have tautologies. ~Anonymous
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2010.11.29 08:11:00 - [63] Originally by: Lost Greybeard I'd like to see the timer on JC-swapping reduced to 30 or even 15 minutes to make swapping in, going out to lazor things in the face, then swapping back on lunch break more viable. Other than that, not really seeing a problem with how it works now. Honestly, I use missions for income to feed the pvp monster, so +3 implants only cost like three missions for a set (except charisma, I guess, but screw that anyhow). Not exactly breaking the bank. Same here. Just make that fast swapping possible only locally to keep people from abusing it for fast travel and I would support it. It would allow people to have a few different implant sets ready in one location designed for different jobs. It might also encourage more use of more specific, narrow speciality and even new implant sets, since you wouldn't be stuck in that set for the next 24 hours limiting your activities and reducing your efficiency in more common tasks during that period. You already risk the implants every time you undock, so I don't see any big reasons why this kind of fast swapping shouldn't be allowed. Especially so since it would make engaging in sporadic PvP much more convenient and accessible, when your main activities at the time are something completely different.

CCP Spitfire	Posted - 2010.11.29 08:14:00 - [64] Moved from 'EVE General Discussion'. Spitfire Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online

Aerion Va'rr The Priesthood The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.11.29 08:51:00 - [65] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Everytime i want to enter lowsec or 0.0, being prepared for PvP is less of a factor in what fitting and ship to use than beating gatecamps is. I'd be taking all kinds of crazy expensive ships into lowsec and 0.0 if i didnt have to worry about gatecamps. Instead i just take cheap fast aligning frigates or cov ops which no one is ever going to catch. Not only do gatecamps keep me from taking ships i'd actually like to use in lowsec and 0.0, but they keep those ships from maybe ending up on killmails. It's bad for everyone. Your doing it wrong, and yes, you can be caught in an interceptor, a dramiel, or whatever fast aligning non-cloaking ship you can think up. You my friend have never encountered a well thought out gatecamp.
ninjaholic NME1	Posted - 2010.11.29 09:04:00 - [66] This won't encourage more PVP. That's like saying lets make implants removable from clones, as it will reduce pod killing. + Support EVE's own IN-GAME fight record tool!
Barbelo Valentinian Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.11.29 16:31:00 - [67] I don't think you will ever be able to "encourage people to PvP", at least not in numbers sufficient. You're either into PvP or you're not. Sometimes people who weren't into PvP can get into PvP, can change, but that's a change that goes on within a person, not something that gameplay tweaks can alter, IMHO. Some people are into building stuff, some are into destroying stuff, some people are into interacting with the fantasy game world, some people are into interacting with other players, some people like to do what they consider as "relaxing" and what others consider as "boring", some people like a trance state, others like adrenalin rush and excitement. Some people carry their everyday moral sense through into games, even as anonymous players, others don't. Having said that, yeah, gate camping ... :) ***** "To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding
Syllein	Posted - 2010.11.29 17:08:00 - [68] Originally by: Zarda Sulan people like you and the poster above you really make me want to play this game or wonder why so many quit to your elitism. blame youself for the failures of this game ****** Ok, I'll bite. I'll even remain polite. First off, SP is not that important, XP is. You have tried low sec and got burned, now ask yourself "what did I learn today"? Rather than learning that taking a slow aligning, poorly fit (assumption based on other comments, can't be bothered to check) battlecruiser into an unscouted+ camped system is a poor decision, you instead jumped to the erroneous conclusion that it was lack of SP that killed you. You died due to lack of experience. You failed to scout the gate. You failed to take a faster, more survivable ship. You failed to plan ahead, do some research, and learn from other peoples experience either here or other forums/ guides. None of this has anything to do with SP (other than a lack of proper fitting skills to adequately fit a ship that is beyond your skills perhaps). If instead you fit and flew something which is cheaper, faster and more suited to solo low sec you may of enjoyed yourself more. A frig pilot who has focused there low (total) SP into frigates, and taken the time to learn how to use those frigates, can (and will) kill older players. If you are good/ lucky you might even catch an idiot BS pilot, and win yourself a solo frig vs. Battleship killmail. It happens more often than you may think. This is not WoW, younger players can be effective in PvP against older ones. You just have to learn how. I suppose it's just easier to blame the game for failing rather than yourself.
Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2010.11.30 01:54:00 - [69] Originally by: omgfreemoniez Originally by: Dian'h Might Originally by: Zarda Sulan hur dur Looking at your two losses on battleclinc, I'd venture a guess that you'd have lost those drakes even if you had every single skill in the game at level 5. LOL. First you tell people "Go out and pvp, it doesn't matter if you lose!" Then you laugh at their losses 1) I don't think I ever said mentioned in this thread that it doesn't matter if you loose. Although I'm a fan of going out and pvping, so I'll give you that one. I was a bit hostile in my reply because his post was quite trollish, especially the part where he insinuated I'm part of some grand conspiracy of vets to trick people into going into lowsec. 2) My intent wasn't to make fun of his fitting or pvp abilities (I don't know much about fitting drakes tbh). One drake loss was in 0.0 to 4 t2 ships and a falcon, the other was in lowsec to a zealot. In both cases I don't think any amount of SP would have saved him. The only thing that could have been done would involve player skill, (e.g. avoiding the gatecamp, tricking the zealot into scram range). - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2010.12.02 17:01:00 - [70] One while I do somewhat agree that you can't make people PVP who don't want/enjoy it. You can adjust the risks to the point where more people will be willing to PVP in circumstances where they wouldn't under the status quo. For example one reason I'm not interested in going to 0.0 is that I like being in my +5 clone and getting the faster skilling. I'm a bit of a min/maxer and really want to increase the size of my toolkit (available ships and weapons) as quickly as I can. The fact that I will end up in a lesser clone for at least 24 hours or will be risking half a bil in implants every time I venture into null (or WH space for that matter) acts as a deterrent for engaging in that type of activity. High and Low sec PVP present what I consider an acceptable risk and so I'll happily engage in PVP with a full plant set in those environments since short of really bad luck or a smart bombing gate camp pods are pretty safe. That said someone's going to get one of my pods someday and it will probably be set up after that for 2 +4s for what ever I'm currently training. which isn't too big of a loss in isk or training time. I'd still like to see a drop on the LP costs of Attribute Implants. I think that doing so would encourage more risk taking. If +5s cost more like 20-30 mil a pop I do think more people would be willing to fly around with them plugged in even in null and WH space. Besides why should the risk adverse carebears be the ones getting the fastest training speeds? Another option would be to give null and WH space an affect to increase training speed. In fact the more I think about it that would be a better solution. Give real tangible benefits to those willing to move out of High sec. Perhaps a sliding scale of learning speed from .4 to null. So you'd get +1 training speed in .4 +2 in .3, +3 in .2, +4 in .1 and finally +5 in null and WH space. Or maybe just +2 in all low and +5 in null since there really isn't that much difference in risk from .4 - .1. That way a null sec pilot would get the same training speed as a highsec carebear when rolling in an empty clone and even faster when they risk plugging in implants. That would be enough incentive to get someone like me to move down assuming I could find a pew pew rich environment.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.