EVE Search - I Have Done It All: One Pilot's Thoughts And An Eve Career

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

I Have Done It All: One Pilot's Thoughts And An Eve Career

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gimmy Rotten	Posted - 2011.03.04 15:55:00 - [91] Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 02/03/2011 22:56:57 Epic fleet fights, PVP Instructor, Professional Recruiter, Carebear, NRDS, NBSI -10 pirate, Corp Leader, + 1,000 Man Alliance Leader, Mercenary, Asshat, Griefer and at present I perform asset denial along side the corporations that fly under the banner of The Orphanage. . . . Lately, real life has kept me so busy that I have had almost no time to play EVE for nearly a month. This forced break has caused me to reflect on where I have been, where I am and where I might be going. To summarize this and prevent this post from becoming just another incoherent ramble from a jaded vet, I will instead just summarize my thoughts as clearly and simply as possible. No matter where I was, what I was doing or what I was trying to accomplish in game, there was one constant . . . people just don't want to fight unless they have a gross advantage. There is no mechanism in the game that rewards combat. There is no reason for a fleet to stay at a modest 7-10 size and not get any bigger short of not having enough people online. There is no reason not to stay docked and wait for sheer, mind numbing boredom to deter your aggressor but for the small group of close friends there is NO ACTUAL reason to PVP... An environment where skill can meet skill and it ACTUALLY matters who wins. ^^^^^ I have had sooooo few fights like that, it's sad and TBH It gets frustrating CCP added incursions in order to generate an in game reason for people to work together... Well, what about the heart and soul of this game? A reason for people to go out there and actually face each other (as in the random player) and have some fun in the process? Try Factional Warfare
Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:16:00 - [92] Originally by: Gimmy Rotten Try Factional Warfare I have, the Amarr Militia (forgot to mention that) and since I have experience with FW I can only assume that you were hitting the crackpipe before you hit the "Post Reply" button.
ShadowMaiden Amarr Night Witches.	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:24:00 - [93] Originally by: Sader Rykane Add arena pvp where you can only field ships / mods that you purchase yourself. Use alliance tournament rules and automate it. Seriously, I don't know why they haven't added this.. WoW that way ---->
Jennifer Starling Imperial Navy Forum Patrol	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:30:00 - [94] Originally by: ShadowMaiden Originally by: Sader Rykane Add arena pvp where you can only field ships / mods that you purchase yourself. Use alliance tournament rules and automate it. Seriously, I don't know why they haven't added this.. WoW that way ----> Funy that everyone loves the alliance and fanfest tournaments though .. or do you find that a disgusting WoW thing that doesn't belong in EVE too?
Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:39:00 - [95] Here Is An Idea: We have the fleet finder after all . . . Would it be hard to implement a "Wardec" section of the fleet finder for instance? One totally theoretical addition to it might be one where you have the option to join an "Arena" in the form of a fleet that would be at war with all other active "Warfleets" Fleets could vary in size, and even better the FC could specify the size of enemy fleets that they wish to engage. Something like 10, 20, 30+ designations that could be checked upon the fleets conception (like an advert) Such a system could also allow for solo setting which would allow 1v1 or 3v1 (whatever) PVP. Instant gratification. Arena quality PVP. Does not effect the market or ISK system of the game. Does not effect the sandbox outside of giving people some instant PVP gratification in Empire where most of the population currently resides. This is just 1 potential example mind you... One that could come from a pool of ideas complied by EVE's member base. One thing that is good about CCP is that if you make enough threadnoughts on a subject they tend to listen.
Nomaar Caldari Stellar Aberration	Posted - 2011.03.04 18:36:00 - [96] Quote: Reasonably equal numbers. Reasonably equal ship types. An environment where skill can meet skill and it ACTUALLY matters who wins. The only way you can achieve this environment consistently, and on demand, is through instances, which would be poisonous to what EVE is all about. You do identify a problem, but I think the answer lies in making Factional Warfare better.
Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.04 18:53:00 - [97] Did you by any chance read the suggestion directly above your post?
Ily Backbreak	Posted - 2011.03.04 22:38:00 - [98] I read it, such a bad idea. And I understand you're a ***. Get a ship and go roaming mofo, you will finaly find ennemies. But what you're looking for is : "Instant gratification" - not part of a sandbox's idea, it's a long way to get skills, money, technics, ships & items. The only instant gratification I know in EvE is when a pilot get instantly a new clone ! Fair to me. "Arena""instances", no need of it. CCP already organize tournaments... you could also organize yours within your corp and and alliance. "Does not affect the market or ISK system of the game" ; yeah, you want fights for free, you're afraid to loose isk while loosing ships. Or maybe would you fight in spacesuits and spit at your target ? War is expensive FYI.** This is why many players avoid combats. Or you could stay on SiSi, all for free, and don't bother Tranquility's market. WoW is that way >>> or you could try BattleStarGalacticaOnline this way if you prefer lasers >>>
Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.04 23:46:00 - [99] Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 04/03/2011 23:48:39 Hey look, it's another random forum alt talking **. Edit:** Your reading comprehension is abhorrent BTW. You missed everything that I posted and committed yourself to a flurry of pre-prepared, forum warrior twitch responses.
AkJon Ferguson JC Ferguson and Son Ltd Ferguson Alliance	Posted - 2011.03.05 19:17:00 - [100] Have you soloed a large tower in a sub-cap, though? Winning duh

Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.05 19:44:00 - [101] No, but I have shot at more then enough offline WH POS with a small gang of 4-5 BS to know that you wasted a hell of allot of time AFK mining a large POS for what ultimately = 170M isk kill. I am sure that if you made your own thread about your glorious-epic-win KM, you will get mad respect from the EVE Online player base. By all means please do so, I will be more then happy to post in it when I see it.
Aarkana	Posted - 2011.03.05 19:47:00 - [102] Absolutely not true, I have engaged pilots even if I knew I might lose! The problem is directly linked with ship cost. On singularity, I engage more people in on hour then a month worth of pvp on tranquility. So the issue is directly linked with how many times you can actually fight. When a ship costs 100 million to build on TQ it takes the average player about 1 week to earn 100 million. So you can maybe get 4 BS ships, assuming you play all month non stop. If insurance actually replaced your ship after it was blown up and paid all your modules again there would be more pvp. Once insurance issues a ship though there shoudl be no minerals or salvage allowed from your wreck. Concord would just take the stuff and your player would get a new ship. This way you can actually get right back in a fight and continue fighting until insurance runs out. I think TQ simply has penalties for pvp which cost too much to maintain.
AkJon Ferguson JC Ferguson and Son Ltd Ferguson Alliance	Posted - 2011.03.05 19:55:00 - [103] Originally by: Eternum Praetorian No, but I have shot at more then enough offline WH POS with a small gang of 4-5 BS to know that you wasted a hell of allot of time AFK mining a large POS for what ultimately = 170M isk kill. I just did it for the lolmail. Obviously not worth the effort in terms of ISK/hr or whatever. I guess you missed the Charlie Sheen reference. Anyway, ya certainly didn't mean to derail your thread. Carry on.
Kogh Ayon	Posted - 2011.03.05 20:20:00 - [104] Edited by: Kogh Ayon on 05/03/2011 20:23:37 All because there is nothing profitable for a small gang. For a alliance fleet they make profit by taking systems, outposts even just moons. But what does a 10-20man fleet could get? Some T1/T2 loots from a noob drake? And for 2 hours maybe. Drop some money-springs in some specified systems, which would spary 100m isk per 10 minutes, in any names (Tags, salvages, loots, or sleeper stuff). Then there will be gang fights, everytime in all forms. Blob will not be very profitable and if they stay there then there will be a bigger blob :)
Niveon	Posted - 2011.03.06 00:04:00 - [105] Sorry, haven't read the thread, but has anyone thought through just physically limiting the size of corps, alliances and their standings lists? It'd be pretty hard to have people blob if you can only get 10 people per corp, 10 corps per alliance, 10 corps flagged. You could still gather official fleets approaching the node crushing numbers, but if you can't green or blue half the players online, and surely can't remember their names when they're on overview, there'd be much more cause for smaller constant conflict and dispersion of players, no?
Bumblefck Kerensky Initiatives	Posted - 2011.03.06 00:24:00 - [106] Originally by: Bumblefck Have you run high sec anomalies? Excuse me, but would you be so kind as to give me an answer to my question? ?
Kreshin High Flyers RED.OverLord	Posted - 2011.03.06 00:45:00 - [107] OP to sum it up, you ran out of ways to be an ******* in Eve and want the game to change to make things easier for your "asshattery." I base my statement on the fact you're in "The Orphanage" and you complain about everyone seeking fights ONLY if they have a "gross advantage." Yet your "alliance" specializes in camping haulers in empire, using out of alliance logistics when you get a "fair" fight to provide an unfair advantage, and define a group of gamers who focus on abusing game mechanics to obtain an upper hand. From then all, anything you say is hypocritical and a waste of bandwidth. BTW: No you haven't ganked me, the escapades of "the orphanage" are comical at best and add nothing of value or benefit to the Eve Universe. Fail Post, Fail Alliance, Fail Vet. (no I'm not mad bro, just stating the obvious for those who can't see it for themselves.) Move along now .... ----------- Kreshin
Katja Norolyev	Posted - 2011.03.06 01:21:00 - [108] Incoming carebear idea; What if Corps could 'build up' NPC fleet reinforcements for systems they held sovereignty in? The method is already in place (Concord), one just has to balance it properly. So, in theory, an agressive blob rolls into your system while you've only got 10 or so pilots online. The highest-ranking pilot of those online has "corp fleet command" rights, and so those ten pilots can go engage the blob, because they can call in just enough backup to give them a chance, if not an edge. Make such reinforcements expensive to build and modestly expensive to maintain, so that every new corp won't have a massive fleet at their beck and call, and those corps that do will spend them wisely. Only let them be usable for the purposes of sovereign-system defense, so they can't be abused or exacerbate existing numerical imbalance problems. It's almost a sort of 'invasion insurance', that would result in (more) balanced engagements, theoretically. You could even expand the idea; alliances could have (more expensive and difficult to maintain) reinforcements that any (or selected) member corp CEOs could call in to aid in the defense of sovereign systems.
Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.06 04:46:00 - [109] Originally by: Kreshin (no I'm not mad bro, just stating the obvious for those who can't see it for themselves.) And yet... you do seem a little mad bro.
Opertone Caldari World - of - Empire Cassiopeia.	Posted - 2011.03.06 05:54:00 - [110] PvP could be rewarded - if the loot was decent. Sometimes you kill 100 mill Battleship and get nothing of value out of it. PvP is a money waster, not a money maker. First risk of loosing money. Second 90% guarantee of not making money from kills. If only somebody actually paid money for killing enemy ships. Then PvP would be self sustainable. Only because PvP is so expensive every party wants to make sure they have clear advantage. On the opposite in First person shooters online Tank/Soilder is 'free' and you don't worry much about loosing it. You charge straight in. In eve loosing a BS means that you need to carebear another 4 hours and spend 1 hour fitting a new ship and transporting it to PvP area.

Opertone Caldari World - of - Empire Cassiopeia.	Posted - 2011.03.06 05:59:00 - [111] Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Here Is An Idea: We have the fleet finder after all . . . Would it be hard to implement a "Wardec" section of the fleet finder for instance? One totally theoretical addition to it might be one where you have the option to join an "Arena" in the form of a fleet that would be at war with all other active "Warfleets" Fleets could vary in size, and even better the FC could specify the size of enemy fleets that they wish to engage. Something like 10, 20, 30+ designations that could be checked upon the fleets conception (like an advert) Such a system could also allow for solo setting which would allow 1v1 or 3v1 (whatever) PVP. Instant gratification. Arena quality PVP. Does not effect the market or ISK system of the game. Does not effect the sandbox outside of giving people some instant PVP gratification in Empire where most of the population currently resides. This is just 1 potential example mind you... One that could come from a pool of ideas complied by EVE's member base. One thing that is good about CCP is that if you make enough threadnoughts on a subject they tend to listen. Here is an IDEA in stations they have 'simulator' computers you can challenge other people in eve ships for CASH, prestige in ship-free environment. Even instant action team on team. match arcade somthing like this
Smack my hoe	Posted - 2011.03.06 06:14:00 - [112] Edited by: Smack my hoe on 06/03/2011 06:14:00 http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DonPellegrino/Nanofiber_Internal_Structure.avi you should watch that
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.03.06 14:53:00 - [113] Originally by: Eternum Praetorian snip Now, I am not talking about picking on noobs, carebears or whatever else the mindless flamers on these forums may imagine in their tired, tiny and semi-delusional little minds--I am in fact talking about the exact opposite. I am talking about game play as a whole inside of a PVP based sci-fi simulator. 1.) There is no benefit to not staying docked and there is simply no reason to fight. If you simply refuse to play it costs you nothing, your corp nothing and your alliance nothing (unless you're interested in Blob warfare and fleets numbering in the hundreds. Half the people who play this game are not.) 2.) Because there are no in game mechanics supporting PVP in this game, PVP tends to be more about looking for people who are making a mistake (jumping through a gate alone, flying a hauler, running a mission during war, not looking at local) then it is actually PVP'ing other people who want to PVP with you. Reasonably equal numbers. Reasonably equal ship types. An environment where skill can meet skill and it ACTUALLY matters who wins. ^^^^^ I have had sooooo few fights like that, it's sad and TBH It gets frustrating CCP added incursions in order to generate an in game reason for people to work together... Well, what about the heart and soul of this game? A reason for people to go out there and actually face each other (as in the random player) and have some fun in the process? To recap.. high sec: well, people who stay there usually don't seek pvp, so no use to blame them. And making their life worse (lvl4 to low etc pp) won't help to get them into your corner of the sandbox. They'll refuse and rather quit. low sec: people who are there should be prepared for pvp (even if they came for something else like PI or Exploration). Now game mechanics make it pretty hard to do both pvp and pve at the same time, then you got the increased player numbers and you wind up with to many predators chasing anything else. So with the small fry gone or hiding where it can you have to fly around a lot to find others you can shoot. null sec: people who are there probably like politics, caps, their freedom and blobs. With the current game mechanics its possible to blob up and project your force over vast areas of space. There is no need to have small local fleets ready, as the central blob can do it better. Anything else there doesn't support small skirmishes and with the blob on standby the guys from low sec, who run on their teeth in search for prey, don't like you for that ability. whisky: people there like the iskies, the quiet landscape and pvp. No central blob possible, no local as instant intel to dock up. Probably the only place for small scale pvp that's left in Eve. Doesn't even need spawn-point camping to force pvp. Going round and resupply sucks though and the populations density is low at best. ..if you think I nailed that, read this. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.03.06 15:03:00 - [114] Originally by: Kogh Ayon snip Drop some money-springs in some specified systems, which would spary 100m isk per 10 minutes, in any names (Tags, salvages, loots, or sleeper stuff). Then there will be gang fights, everytime in all forms. Blob will not be very profitable and if they stay there then there will be a bigger blob :) FW does that.. seems to lead to blobbing. If you want small scale pvp blur the border towards high sec, remove the travel bottlenecks and on the other side make it so that alliances need small fleets to protect their soft targets and have no way to bring their guns to a knife fight (hotdrop SCs onto a roaming gang). This way the small gang pvpers will orientate more towards the null-bears and make their life hell and give some breathing space to the high sec bears venturing into low sec (if give the chance to get past bottlenecks). Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.03.06 15:13:00 - [115] Originally by: Aarkana snip If insurance actually replaced your ship after it was blown up and paid all your modules again there would be more pvp. Once insurance issues a ship though there should be no minerals or salvage allowed from your wreck. Concord would just take the stuff and your player would get a new ship. This way you can actually get right back in a fight and continue fighting until insurance runs out. I think TQ simply has penalties for pvp which cost too much to maintain. So I would absolutely fight more if I could afford to buy more ships. It would only make ships cost more.. production wise there is a limited capacity of players engaging in that field. It's what also brings down alliances.. or did, a limited industrial backbone to source the war-machine from. If your BS costs you a week to replace, how about going in cruisers or god forbid frigates? If you can have caviar each day, what does a steak mean to you or a bean soup? Right.. nothing, cause you're entitled to caviar.. each day. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.06 15:47:00 - [116] Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 06/03/2011 15:55:20 @ Tres Farmer Your comments are simply not accurately reflecting what the vast majority of people are actually thinking in game. Two day old noobs enter EVE with a strong desire to PVP, but the lessons they immediately learn in game teach them that 1.)They will usually be outnumbered or 2.) If they are the ones with greater numbers they will be bored because no one will engage them. This changes their perspective and behavior patters in game, and leads to a snowballing effect that has brought us to a borderline ridiculous state of game play. If I Were To Build In The Sandbox, CCP Has Given Me Some Very Specific Guidelines Blue Prints that contain ME and PE. I need a specific list of minerals. I need a station and research time (and/or I need to acquire a BPC) I then need to build my item. I then need a ship large enough to transport it. I can also invent. If I Were To Trade In The Sandbox CCP Has Given Me Some Very Specific Guidelines M3 size for goods (packaged and unpackaged) Travel time. Autopilot. Slow Freighter class ships. Distance between star systems and stargate arrangements that encourage trade hubs (deliberate or not, it is present in the game) Buy/Sell orders and market timers. Without becoming a redundant wall of text, the same can be said for missions, sleepers, mining, plexes, contract trading, POS's, POS siege warfare. Literally EVERY ASPECT of EVE has very specific guidelines for players to adhere to. This promotes an optimal gaming experience inside of the sandbox environment for all players of all professions. But If It's Not Sov Based Warfare: All PVP gets is a fleet. That's all we get in terms of PVP game mechanics, a fleet that has no criteria or guidelines. We get wardecs that have no victor, loser, purpose, ISK gain or loss, or rhyme or reason of any kind for that matter. We get a Low Sec with so little incentives that only a tiny % of the gaming population wants to live there. That... or we get sov blobs. Regarding the "PVP fleet game mechanic", if you really think about it all it truly has is a squad position... that's it. No definite DPS, fast tackle or logistics positions. It only has spots that commanships need to be in order to run gang links. Beyond that there is NO In Game Mechanism that helps guide it intelligently within the sandbox environment. IF CCP let any other aspect of this game run with so little guidelines it would be both nonfunctional and self imploding. Much like the present state of PVP and blob warfare is currently. Now why is that?
Brooks Puuntai Minmatar Solar Nexus. -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2011.03.06 16:17:00 - [117] Welcome to human nature. Where safety in numbers means higher chance of survival. Adding arena style PVP in EVE is a horrible idea. Also PVP in EVE shouldn't be instant gratification, if it was then it would become mundane and p much a grind that would mean nothing. Lastly trying to argue your point while being in "The Orphanage" is pretty fail. Considering it contradicts everything your saying.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.03.06 17:14:00 - [118] Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Your comments are simply not accurately reflecting what the vast majority of people are actually thinking in game. Two day old noobs enter EVE with a strong desire to PVP, but the lessons they immediately learn in game teach them that 1.)They will usually be outnumbered or 2.) If they are the ones with greater numbers they will be bored because no one will engage them. This changes their perspective and behavior patters in game, and leads to a snowballing effect that has brought us to a borderline ridiculous state of game play. Usually they get told that they should blob up to fight the older player with his 20M (usable) SP for that particular setup he's flying and that they can beat him this way Or that they can tackle for the fleet or scout and that even if they die (repeatedly), they will be important and useful, even with low SP. Essentially.. the noob gets told that he should blob up if he want's to be on the winning side. Now, why didn't you got that? Originally by: Eternum Praetorian snip But If It's Not Sov Based Warfare: All PVP gets is a fleet. That's all we get in terms of PVP game mechanics, a fleet that has no criteria or guidelines. We get wardecs that have no victor, loser, purpose, ISK gain or loss, or rhyme or reason of any kind for that matter. We get a Low Sec with so little incentives that only a tiny % of the gaming population wants to live there. That... or we get sov blobs. I give you that there are no specific written down recipes within Eve for fleets, though each month/season sees other flavours.. this means, the sandbox there is functional. Much more than in any other area of the game. You get the tools and can make up your own recipe. Small changes to some module/ship and whole gang formations are rendered obsolete, fits go back to the drawing board.. etc pp. Wardecs usually have a reason.. at least the ones I attended. Either it's 'move your crap out from here' or 'give me money' or 'you look stupid' or 'you might fight back, let's try that'. Once the purpose was fulfilled the wardec was dropped.. even the 'you look stupid' ones. Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Regarding the "PVP fleet game mechanic", if you really think about it all it truly has is a squad position... that's it. No definite DPS, fast tackle or logistics positions. It only has spots that commanships need to be in order to run gang links. Beyond that there is NO In Game Mechanism that helps guide it intelligently within the sandbox environment. IF CCP let any other aspect of this game run with so little guidelines it would be both nonfunctional and self imploding. Much like the present state of PVP and blob warfare is currently. Now why is that? If you got a problem with mismatching opponents (all scales, from the alliance blobbing a 100 man fleet to the 3 guys popping that shuttle at a gate) then you need to change the mechanics that lead to this kind of behaviour.. the fleet mechanic itself is not the problem for that, or do you really think any restrictions put into that thing will render the 'strength in numbers' obsolete? Also, what do you tell those people enjoying those big clashes? If you want intelligent fleets hire competent FCs. If you want matching engagements get some game rules changed so they can occur. That's why I listed the above points. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Lain Umi	Posted - 2011.03.06 18:57:00 - [119] they just gotta tweak some numbers to keep the current sandbox feel and make pvp fun. station humping can be prevented by taking away docking rights after engagement. stargates need to regulate pilot numbers better. and something needs to be added to make camping less advantageous.
Eternum Praetorian True Creation The 0rphanage	Posted - 2011.03.06 19:29:00 - [120] Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 06/03/2011 19:30:42 Originally by: Tres Farmer Now, why didn't you got that? You are talking like someone who currently resides in null sec, but since you are posting on your alt who can tell? I will just say that although people think that their epeen grows bigger in 0.0... the bottom line is that 90% of EVE population does not live there. Your account does not match my own experiences in game (unless we are talking about low SP 0.0 recruits) and I have allot of experience with nooblets whom are new to the game. But ofc who wants be objective and look at both sides of the coin when you can instead just be loud and appear to be universally correct in the eyes of your Cheetos-on-fingers-keyboard-pounding peers. Amiright?



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.