Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
15
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:34:00 -
[31] - Quote
Saw "Mittani.com" in the header, said "Oy Vey" and took wide pass. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
553
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:38:00 -
[32] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Their corps can't defend them until they are agressed, by which time it is too late anyway. Here's a perfect example of someone hiding behind ignorance of the mechanics as a defense. After playing EVE for maybe two months I could have already told you that what you just said was wrong.
Riot Girl wrote:For suicide gankers, they get concorded, but again, there are no pre-emptive precautions that can be taken against them in high sec. In low sec, the corps could just kill them the moment they appear in local. You can't do that in high-sec. Which is working as intended. That doesn't need to be changed. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
92
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:39:00 -
[33] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Saw "Mittani.com" in the header, said "Oy Vey" and took wide pass.
It is actually quite good as there are authers from all over eve contributing. Say what you want but the name is popular... |
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
92
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:40:00 -
[34] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:The thing is, high sec actually favours the gankers as I understand it. They can steal from miners and there is nothing the miners can do. Their corps can't defend them until they are agressed, by which time it is too late anyway. The miner has been ganked if he fights back and his wreck is looted and salvaged by an alt.
For suicide gankers, they get concorded, but again, there are no pre-emptive precautions that can be taken against them in high sec. In low sec, the corps could just kill them the moment they appear in local. You can't do that in high-sec.
...it is called "Secure Containers"...works...really |
Riot Girl
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:45:00 -
[35] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:After playing EVE for maybe two months I could have already told you that what you just said was wrong.
What is wrong about it?
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Which is working as intended. That doesn't need to be changed.
I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.
|
Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
133
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:46:00 -
[36] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote: For suicide gankers, they get concorded, but again, there are no pre-emptive precautions that can be taken against them in high sec
I think that's the part I disagree with. Its just a lack of adaptation by the player base, which I don't know if its a result of the ignorance of the "how to", or simple refusal to accept that politics and circumstances of the current in game situation need to be adhered to.
Eve doesn't exist in a vacuum. Its driven by player action and player reaction and it requires players to go outside of the scope of "here is what I want to do today and here is how I want to do it" and forces players to say instead "What is going on in Eve right now and how can I take advantage of it". I think this is the part that is sorely missed by most new arrivals which again supports the idea that this most recent patch was a "lets help the noobies" patch in my opinion.
For the lack of a better way to explain it I think I will do it by example.
Your a miner. You want to mine to make ISK. There are two ways you can go about this.
You can figuire out that the Hulk fitted for the most yield is the most profitable ship to mine in, fit it, jump into a asteroid belt and start mining. OR you can deal with the situation at hand.
There is a hulkagedon happening right now hosted by Goonswarm. There are suicide gankers who fit their destroyers a certain way (a bit of research and you can get exact fits with exact DPS). You choose to be smart. You fit a hulk with some tank on it, you find a quiet out of the way belt to mine in, you watch local, you watch for destroyers on directional scanners, you keep your ship aligned and mine with a corp mate who does the hauling for you.
The first way is how new players approach the game, a presumptuous bunch who believes CCP owes them safety. The other is a real Eve player.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4469
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:47:00 -
[37] - Quote
i wonder why so many people are so bent on seeing hisec turned into a carebear paradise, almost like a separate shard
maybe they should try a different game? "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
Matriarch Prime
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:48:00 -
[38] - Quote
I went back and read part one so that I had a good founding of where he was going. I made it about 1/4 of the way through before it was obvious that he just has some strange obsession with suicide ganking miners. Its a very weird "hobby".
I don't think that the game is going down the crapper. Each time I come back to play the game is better and better. You could say that is because the changes cater to me as a high sec player, but I don't see anything wrong with appealing to new players with a more stable high sec system. I imagine a significant portion of new players would eventually find themselves in low and null, if only they were given the chance to get their feet wet before being thrown to the wolves.
Ofcourse, I don't think the developers are trying to hide their intentions. Any good game developer is going to try and make their game better. Good games, no matter how hard, do a good job teaching the basics which are easy to learn, but hard to master.
Back a little more on topic. His whole castle of evidence falls apart when you realize that the miner changes didn't happen in a vaccum. So either CCP is revisioning all of the ship classes one by one to make sure each has a defined role and not simply a "good, better, best" progression: OR they are just doing all that work to hide their carebearing love of miners.
/crumble_tinfoil_hat
I think the truth is obvious. That guy is whacko. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
684
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:49:00 -
[39] - Quote
Quote:i wonder why so many people are so bent on seeing hisec turned into a carebear paradise, almost like a separate shard
maybe they should try a different game?
^ Maybe you should try low sec out or perhaps null, if a safer area is not making the game enjoyable. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4469
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:50:00 -
[40] - Quote
rodyas wrote:^ Maybe you should try low sec out or perhaps null, if a safer area is not making the game enjoyable.
maybe you should accept that all this reduction in risk needs an accompanying reduction in rewards
bye-bye hisec incursions, l4s, etc "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
|
Mallak Azaria
587
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:51:00 -
[41] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.
Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe. Mining Barge buff: CCP-áhas acknowledged that miners in general-áare too stupid to make the correct fitting choices to make ganking them unprofitable. |
Pookie McPook
The Whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:51:00 -
[42] - Quote
Back in the day suicide ganking was a touch and go kind of thing. Your ship could be almost the cost of the ship you were going to kill. It took a degree of work and research to find out if the ship held anything of value and if the pilot was likely to be able to counter your threat before Concord arrived. Nowadays a new pilot in a T1 destroyer can go rip up a sizeable reward without any work and with little comeback. Anything that redresses the risk v reward balance is a good thing.
My rule of thumb is that anything I can do should be made harder. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4469
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:51:00 -
[43] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Trash article on themittani.com nonshocker.
>wants 0.0 turned into **** >wants hisec to be safer "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4469
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:52:00 -
[44] - Quote
Pookie McPook wrote:Back in the day suicide ganking was a touch and go kind of thing. Your ship could be almost the cost of the ship you were going to kill.
yeah and back then you also lost basically nothing in suicide ganking somebody because l0l insurance "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
684
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:54:00 -
[45] - Quote
Andski wrote:rodyas wrote:^ Maybe you should try low sec out or perhaps null, if a safer area is not making the game enjoyable. maybe you should accept that all this reduction in risk needs an accompanying reduction in rewards bye-bye hisec incursions, l4s, etc
Perhaps manageable and deal making.
How much of a reduction in rewards will there be, for no more ninja gankers, or ninja salvagers showing up in missions?
Don't really care about incursions anyhow, but you can contact their representatives to work out a deal. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
133
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:57:00 -
[46] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Riot Girl wrote:I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.
Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.
I agree that this was CCP's intention if we are to believe what they write in the Devblog. Whatever the intent was when those blogs where written and words said, the question is whether or not they where a good idea.
Does adding the risk of getting suicide ganked in high sec make the game better? and if so, for who? How do new players benefit? How does the community benefit? How does the business benefit?
I think old doctrines should be questioned and I'm still trying to understand how suicide ganking benefits the game in any way.
|
Riot Girl
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:58:00 -
[47] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Riot Girl wrote:I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.
Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.
It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense. |
Ghazu
61
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 08:59:00 -
[48] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Riot Girl wrote:I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.
Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe. It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.
What you want them to do? Help you hold it when you pee pee? it is safe enough. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4469
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:00:00 -
[49] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.
once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
Riot Girl
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:02:00 -
[50] - Quote
Andski wrote:once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi I'm not sure what GCC means. |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4469
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:02:00 -
[51] - Quote
Kryss Darkdust wrote:I think old doctrines should be questioned and I'm still trying to understand how suicide ganking benefits the game in any way.
simple: it makes you use common sense so that you can make rational decisions like "hmm maybe I shouldn't autopilot this freighter with 30 billion ISK worth of stuff" "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
Webvan
State War Academy Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:03:00 -
[52] - Quote
hmmmm... I've seen it before - I'll probably see it again. After UO (fel/tram) and then SWG (TEF removal), can't say I'd be surprised. Ah well... |
Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
133
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:07:00 -
[53] - Quote
Andski wrote:Kryss Darkdust wrote:I think old doctrines should be questioned and I'm still trying to understand how suicide ganking benefits the game in any way. simple: it makes you use common sense so that you can make rational decisions like "hmm maybe I shouldn't autopilot this freighter with 30 billion ISK worth of stuff"
Thats it? Really? That's why we have suicide ganking? Seems to me that the trade off, of having suicide ganking in the game as some sort of lesson to not use one of the in game options (auto pilot) is a bit .... silly in comparison to the potentially thousands of players that might subscribe and play this game, making it stronger if high sec was safer and their was a Pure PvE component to the game.
I mean if thats really it, than yeah, **** it. Ban sucide ganking. The trade off is not worth it. I honestly thought there would be more to it than that. |
Ghazu
61
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:10:00 -
[54] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Saw "Mittani.com" in the header, said "Oy Vey" and took wide pass.
Saw your random 2 alt vanity corp tag, thought "lol irrelevant random hisec pubbie" and ignores. |
Riot Girl
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:12:00 -
[55] - Quote
Kryss Darkdust wrote:I mean if thats really it, than yeah, **** it. Ban sucide ganking. The trade off is not worth it. I honestly thought there would be more to it than that. Or ban autopilot. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
553
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:12:00 -
[56] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Andski wrote:once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi I'm not sure what GCC means. That's telling. Please go read up on aggression mechanics before you post your two cents in this thread. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Ghazu
61
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:13:00 -
[57] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Holy crap that was a well made article of nutter and whack job.
I really loved "Having demonstrated that the exhumer change was simply a nerf to aggression dressed up as a "rebalance", a number of important questions remain."
Yeah because it made so much sense to have a deep space non-combat ship with a hull made from the same thing as this set of articles, Tin Foil.
Is there an award for nut job of the year? Normally James 315 trolls a lot, I suppose this could be one really long arse troll. I was waiting for his Final Solution as this really came over as a manifesto. Remember when you went all crazy about issler dainze? |
Matriarch Prime
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:19:00 -
[58] - Quote
Andski wrote:Riot Girl wrote:It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense. once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi
If I rob a bank, the police aren't going to blow up my car and leave me to walk away, and my friends certainly will not be able pick up the bags of money and just walk away.
The current system is nonsense. At the minimum, a high sec ganker should be detained, and fined, and any goods remaining would be returned to the victim.
What happens right now isn't exciting emergent gameplay, its exploitative behavior of an patched together system. The only reason it exists is because of the developer's reluctance to remove player freedom. |
Ghazu
61
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:20:00 -
[59] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Kryss Darkdust wrote:I mean if thats really it, than yeah, **** it. Ban sucide ganking. The trade off is not worth it. I honestly thought there would be more to it than that. Or ban autopilot. But you still can't ban stupid people, which is the most valuable resource in the game. |
Riot Girl
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 09:20:00 -
[60] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Andski wrote:once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi I'm not sure what GCC means. That's telling. Please go read up on aggression mechanics before you post your two cents in this thread.
Or you could just explain what it means and why the previous statement I made that you picked up on was wrong. I'm sorry if it's beneath you to explain something like that to someone who doesn't know better for the sake of a civil discussion. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |