| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
60
   |
Posted - 2012.12.29 06:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:True enough too, and also some nullseccers seem to want to nerf hisec, cos theyre are running out of cannon fodder, and they just don't realise being cannon fodder is not everybodys idea of a fun time.
Game needs more masochists.
CCP need to give more incentive for masochists to join the game. How about giving clinically diagnosed masochists a discount on their game time? That would improve nullsec and lowsec A LOT!
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
63
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 13:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
Andski wrote:heh, the "everyone wins" welfare philosophy is still dominant on these forums
Totally contrary to the spirit of Eve which is "everyone loses. Except CCP."
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
64
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 10:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:I for one would love to see new content in Null that'll inspire me to go there, at the moment theres None, unless i wanna go there to get instapopped, after flying through dozens of empty systems
. Inspire us Hisec dwellers with something CCP. I'm pleased to see that you're finally on the same page as those of us who live there. The foundation of a lively, interesting and diverse sov 0.0 is the viability of lots of different niches in the player ecology. Manufacturing, R&D, invention and resource gathering are the base of that ecological pyramid.
You mean the plankton, right?
And in this game mostly made up of the masochists who also provide the entertainment for the sadists higher up them in the 'food chain'.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
70
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 13:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:A player built outpost is a "sandbox" feature. (It would be more so if it were destructible) The above was not in reference to one of your statements. Yeah I know I was just making an observation. Frying Doom wrote:
But one about the fact that any form of incentive to go somewhere other than Hi-sec is not a sandbox feature.
Removing huge disincentives to do so might be though 
"You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar."
The point I've been trying to make, with the sadist/masochist remarks, is that there just aren't enough masochists around to make things entertaining enough for the sadists. Its an ecological problem.
People playing this game, who aren't masochists, don't want to see hours of game effort destroyed in what they perceive (rightly or wrongly) as unfair, unbalanced and unprovoked pvp. They just don't see the cost/benefit calculation being in low/nullsecs favor. They'll see the ease with which they can lose ingame toys (what some call 'space ships') being much MUCH greater than the ease of acquiring or replacing those losses. They put in X hours playing the game to get some toys, then see the toys destroyed by other players in the blink of an eye and think "hey now I have to play this game for another X hours so that what? They can get blowed up again? And those X hours weren't even fun? And getting my toys blowed up wasn't fun either? Pfft no I'm outta here."
So they stay away from low/nullsec because they aren't masochists and don't feel that they are playing this game in order to provide entertainment for 'tear seekers'.
Putting more vinegar into hisec won't help. They'll just leave the game and go somewhere else. It'd make it less fun for the non-masochists. If you bring the same level of risk to them in hisec the equation just goes against gameplay entirely.
Putting more honey into low/null WILL help (or possibly making the existing honey more accessible to the players who aren't totally entrenched in those areas).
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
70
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 13:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
Andski wrote:
"EVE Online, the cold, harsh universe where Everybody Wins!"
Thing is there just arent enough people of appropriate personality types to make it work.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
70
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 13:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
Andski wrote:Zaraz Zaraz wrote:Andski wrote:
"EVE Online, the cold, harsh universe where Everybody Wins!"
Thing is there just arent enough people of appropriate personality types to make it work. No, this just isn't an "everybody wins" game. The problem is that there is just too much "honey" in highsec in comparison to lowsec and nullsec, not that there is not enough "honey" in the latter. Lowsec has what are supposed to be the best missions and the most rewarding incursions, yet nobody runs them there because hisec simply offers nearly the same rewards with far, far more convenience.
Profit/loss calculation. Include fun in the equation.
Lowsec/null doesnt have enough appeal to enough players. Its not that high is too good.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
70
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 13:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
Andski wrote:Zaraz Zaraz wrote:Profit/loss calculation. Include fun in the equation.
Lowsec/null doesnt have enough appeal to enough players. Its not that high is too good.
You can insist all you want that the problem isn't with hisec. It is.
The problem, for you, is that you don't have enough targets. Wonder why ppl aren't queuing up to be your target?
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
70
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 13:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
Andski wrote:Zaraz Zaraz wrote:The problem, for you, is that you don't have enough targets. Wonder why ppl aren't queuing up to be your target?
Any targets that were once there have been relocated to hisec for running incursions, running missions, mining ice with only 2 seconds of interaction needed every 20 minutes or otherwise taking advantage of CCP's welfare programs for hisec.
Because no matter how boring it may be its more fun than being your toy
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
71
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 23:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
Andski wrote:DSpite Culhach wrote:Less people will stick their heads in low/null because it takes longer to get the isk for ships. Congrats, even less targets. You know, people who feel that they need to stick their heads out into low/null in ships that are an unreasonable burden to replace are already going about it wrong, no matter how much ISK they can make in hisec. So while we might see less late-generation players cluelessly roaming solo in T3s whose fits they found on Battleclinic, we'd have more nullsec players actually making their ISK in 0.0 rather than funding their PvP with hisec incursions and missions, which means more targets.
But thats the WHOLE POINT!
They don't want to be TARGETS!
You are objectifying other human beings and seeing them as some kind of amazing toy doll that cries when you hurt them.
Heres news for you; other people don't play this game for the purposes of YOUR entertainment.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
71
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 23:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Mister Tuggles wrote:High sec doesn't need nerfed anymore than it has been already. It is the most dangerous place in Eve to live/play.
Fact: 0.0 is over 4 times more dangerous than hi-sec
Only if you want it to be...
By 'dangerous' you probably mean 'risk of getting your ship blown up'. You might want to take 'on purpose' (ie by consensual pvp) or 'by accident' (ie nonconsensual pvp) into that. I think more ship losses in low/null happen when people engage in fights willingly than in high but a LOT more happen in high when people are ganked.
So yes 0.0 is more dangerous when you want danger; but if you want to hole up in your safe system with only blues around and when someone non blue shows up you gtfo then 0.0 is way safer than high.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
71
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 00:03:00 -
[11] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Zaraz Zaraz wrote:purestrain highsec pubbie trash Since more people get ganked in highsec, it is more dangerous?
As I was saying it all depends how you define danger. Those poor hisec pubbies (gods do you use that expression on reddit now as well as sa?) have a different definition to you. So what? Does everyone have to see this game the same way you do?
That is the whole problem on this thread; people who think that other people playing with space toys should play with those toys in the way THEY think they should.
Thats your whole nullsec/hisec argument problem right there. Once you can get over that issue you can get on with enjoying the game the way YOU want to play it.
But other people having fun and relaxing does not, should not, make you have less fun unless you are a sadist. If you are then you need to encourage masochists to play the game instead of trying to turn other players into masochists.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
71
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 00:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:encouraging game balance is a sign of sexual peversion
Well otherwise its gonna end up like this:
Quote:
"Executing the cost-reduction plan CEO Mark Pincus announced in November, Zynga has shut down, pulled from the app stores, or stopped accepting new players to more than 10 games such as PetVille, Mafia Wars 2, FishVille, Vampire Wars, Treasure Isle, Indiana Jones Adventure World, Mafia Wars Shakedown, Forestville, Montopia, Mojitomo, and Word Scramble Challenge. Comments from gamers on the shutdown notices included things like 'my daughter is heartbroken' and 'Please don't remove petville. I been playing for 4 yrs. and I'M going to miss my pet Jaime.why do you want cause depression for me and others. Why do you want to kill my pet?' For players that have invested a lot of microtransactions and/or time, this comes as a heavy blow."
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
71
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 00:23:00 -
[13] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Zaraz Zaraz wrote:
As I was saying it all depends how you define danger. Those poor hisec pubbies (gods do you use that expression on reddit now as well as sa?) have a different definition to you. So what? Does everyone have to see this game the same way you do?
No, you don't get to redefine "danger". Try again.
There are many different kinds of danger. Theres the danger that in fooling around with a girl I'll get her pregnant, theres the danger that some chavs at the bus stop will stab me. Theres the danger that I'll lose my ship in a gf, theres the danger that my hauler will get ganked undocking from Jita44.
These are different kinds of danger and different people see them differently.
I don't need to redefine danger, its diverse enough as it is.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
71
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 10:46:00 -
[14] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Zaraz Zaraz wrote:That is the whole problem on this thread; people who think that other people playing with space toys should play with those toys in the way THEY think they should. Don't you dare presume to tell me what I think. I don't give a damn what you do in this game, I do however care about the mechanics you're exploiting and how they affect me.
I'm not exploiting any mechanics. I only sub for the forums. There are much better games to play.
|
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
71
|
Posted - 2013.01.02 23:51:00 -
[15] - Quote
Watching the two sides square off against each other; the ones who like to puff themselves up about how they enjoy the 'cold harsh' game and aren't afraid to get their internet space toys blown up and aren't they just awesome!!!!! vs the ones who just want to relax and play a game and have fun and its not fair that their internet space toys can get blow'd up by other players leave us alone!!!!!
Guys. Its just a game. Enjoy what you have while you have it. The mechanics get changed by CCP ALL THE TIME! It totally breaks immersion, pretty much every patch (what how did all these ships all across the galaxy get their slot layout and stats changed simultaneously??) Immersion breaking. But its CCPs game; the hammer will swing around wildly and the game will change.
Enjoy what you have. While you have it. Don't bleat and moan about other players having fun; have your own fun. Otherwise its just pathetic.
|
| |
|