| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
1500
   |
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Throughout the history of this game, PvP has mostly revolved around attacking people who are unprepared for PvP, or simply outnumbering your opponent. You make sure you're going to win before you even engage, and there is little risk involved if you plan ahead. This is what your average EVE PvP player has grown accustomed to, and some are quite good at it.
Reading the negative comments on the so-called 'arena' system, you hear a lot of people saying it's more suited to carebears or something, but what could be more hardcore than a 1v1 fight between two ships fitted for PvP, with no friends to save either of them? You are on an even footing with your opponent, and only your personal ability and intelligence can save you.
Why do so many people think that's a bad thing?
"The nice thing about quotes is that they give us a nodding acquaintance with the originator which is often socially impressive." ~Kenneth Williams |
Psychotic Monk
The Skunkworks
542
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
It's not the fair fights people are worried about (although there's no denying that many people feel if you fight fair you're doing it wrong).
The most significant objection to a system of consensual pvp is that it represents a move away from non-consensual pvp, which is a cornerstone of this game.
Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement. |
Vel'drinn
EVE Protection Agency
Unclaimed.
37
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pretty sure only the dudes that think 10 vs 1 PvP being pro have an issue with it.
It seems like a good change but it does remove the scamming aspect which is part of most EVE gameplay.
Duels in Jita are 100% legit right?  |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
1734
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
How is it "more hardcore" than flying out solo and finding a fight?
Why is this mechanic needed?
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
1500
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
Psychotic Monk wrote:The most significant objection to a system of consensual pvp is that it represents a move away from non-consensual pvp, which is a cornerstone of this game.
If they were somehow reducing non-consensual PvP that would make sense, but they're not. People can still engage in it as freely as they ever have. All they're doing is adding even more ship combat on top of it.
"The nice thing about quotes is that they give us a nodding acquaintance with the originator which is often socially impressive." ~Kenneth Williams |
4runner
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Because that means that those who never fight alone or with some sort of ****** tricks in their sleeves would be in risk of loosing their ship now they cant call in others to finish the job.
I've had several very interesting 1v1 fights which usually ends up him warping 2-3 of his friends in to finish his job and and then they pour the smacktalk and bitchin in local about how I got baited and raped and what not lol, but I also have had very good 1v1 fights which results in a good chat in local about the fights and fittings and I respect those players, either way the fight goes haha.
A high sec battle arena would be something I like |
Myrissa Kistel
Planetary Logistics
15
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
Cause 1v1 duals is not really PVP. Might as well open up a chat channel with your oppenent and type in /random, highest number wins.
|
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Operations
3330
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
Psychotic Monk wrote:
The most significant objection to a system of consensual pvp is that it represents a move away from non-consensual pvp, which is a cornerstone of this game.
I feel it's just adding another dimension to the sandbox and no big deal.
Leave it to PvPers to actually complain about this though.
Sad really. Really limited worldview.
I guess I should complain about Ring Mining because it's a move away from traditional belts.
America is the only country to go from barbarism to decadence (and back to barbarism - KI) without civilization in between.
- Oscar Wilde - 1870's |
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din
Dark Therapy
1189
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:26:00 -
[9] - Quote
Bane Necran wrote:Throughout the history of this game, PvP has mostly revolved around attacking people who are unprepared for PvP, or simply outnumbering your opponent. You make sure you're going to win before you even engage, and there is little risk involved if you plan ahead. This is what your average EVE PvP player has grown accustomed to, and some are quite good at it.
Reading the negative comments on the so-called 'arena' system, you hear a lot of people saying it's more suited to carebears or something, but what could be more hardcore than a 1v1 fight between two ships fitted for PvP, with no friends to save either of them? You are on an even footing with your opponent, and only your personal ability and intelligence can save you.
Why do so many people think that's a bad thing?
1: Your first point is wrong in that it is a sweeping remark that assumes everywhere is the same. In hisec that is the way it goes, everywhere else people expect violence.
2: It isnt that people are worried or afraid of consensual pvp, they are concerned that having arenas and so on it takes away the overall feel that New Eden is a place rather than a theme park.
Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
12767
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
Simple: because the existence of non-consensual PvP means that there is no need for consensual PvP. The mechanics for the former means you can have the latter at any time you want already.
To use Malc's new favourite word: consensual PvP is a wedge proposal GÇö you ask for a single unnecessary thing to be added, and then for the unnecessary:ness to expand to include some other portion that seems related; and then expand it further; and further; and then you suggest that, hey, doesn't this really cover all the bases? So why do we need this antiquated non-consensual system?
The core problem is that all suggestion for consensual fights rest on the presumption that engaging in one would lock you out of all other combat, and that simply cannot happen in EVE GÇö there can be no safe havens. As a result, any such system becomes meaningless: why agree to a fight when all the PvP is still non-consensual? Why have an arena for two teams, when nothing can be allowed to restrict others to enter that arena and interfere at will?
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
1056
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
as has been said countless time, the dueling mechanic is adding in functionality they removed with crimewatch. "arenas" are more than likely never going to be something CCP does. if players want to set up an arena system, they have the tools and areas of space to do that now, it just won't be safe from the rest of the eve players.
|
Karrl Tian
Exiled Assassins
Equestria Alliance
162
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:32:00 -
[12] - Quote
I look at pvp as less of an honored duel between skilled combatants and more like a trap-contest between two chessmasters. Someone's always setting a trap and someone's always trying to avoid it while setting their own. The goal is to get the other guy in over is head because he thought he was safe/getting a free kill. The actual skill comes in how well you can set your target up for overcondifence. |
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
1500
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Simple: because the existence of non-consensual PvP means that there is no need for consensual PvP.
I doubt people are going to start having duels instead of wars. Or duels instead of gatecamps. 
Those things will remain unchanged and as popular as ever. What this would bring is even more PvP on top of all the non-consensual sort.
"The nice thing about quotes is that they give us a nodding acquaintance with the originator which is often socially impressive." ~Kenneth Williams |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
1734
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:35:00 -
[14] - Quote
Bane Necran wrote:
Because it's only hardcore for the solo player, not the fleet he runs into that kills him easily. Equal risk to both sides = more hardcoredness.
The whole point of EVE PVP is managing the risk and manipulating the circumstances to your advantage in an environment where no equal treatment is guaranteed.
That is what makes EVE real.
I've done my share of limited-risk, consensual PVP and agreed fights in RvB, and it's ultimately a shallow experience. A tamed simulator of what is out there in non-Concord space. The value people get from PVP is only made possible by the presence of real risk, uncontrollable events.
Agreed 1vs1 is just a subset of PVP.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Natsett Amuinn
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1627
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:37:00 -
[15] - Quote
I think what you're really seeing is a stigma.
"Arena" invokes a rather specific though. WoW, and the segregated PvP world. You "enter" an arena, that is not part of the world and has no impact on it. When you say "arena" in EVE, I believe people automatically think of WoW style arenas, were you would be ported to a "safe" place, to fight for no real loss with someone else.
Instead of arena maybe people should start saying "tournament".
A place IN THE GAME SPACE, that isn't seperated from everything else, were a number of peopel can compete in a structured match, and risk assets for the possibility to gain more assets.
I have no problem with "arenas" as long as they're done EVE style.
That would be tools that allow for players to set up tournaments, the ability to gamble on the outcome, and be able to watch as it happens; when it happesns.
If I can't fly to the "arena" and watch the match unfold, then it doesn't belong in EVE. |
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
1500
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:39:00 -
[16] - Quote
Roime wrote:The value people get from PVP is only made possible by the presence of real risk, uncontrollable events.
But through planning ahead and picking your fights to make sure you're going to win, things become very controlled and lack risk.
"The nice thing about quotes is that they give us a nodding acquaintance with the originator which is often socially impressive." ~Kenneth Williams |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
12767
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:41:00 -
[17] - Quote
Bane Necran wrote:I doubt people are going to start having duels instead of wars. Or duels instead of gatecamps. I'm not talking about behaviour GÇö I'm talking about mechanics.
All mechanics for consensual combat are encapsulated within the mechanics of non-consensual combat, and no consensual combat can ever be allowed to exist outside the real of non-consensual engagements.
Thus, consensual mechanics are either unnecessary or game-breaking. Either way, there's no point in or need to add them.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
1500
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:44:00 -
[18] - Quote
Tippia wrote:All mechanics for consensual combat are encapsulated within the mechanics of non-consensual combat, and no consensual combat can ever be allowed to exist outside the real of non-consensual engagements.
Thus, consensual mechanics are either unnecessary or game-breaking. Either way, there's no point in or need to add them.
The point is more PvP, which even someone who isn't heavy into PvP like myself agrees is good for the game.
"The nice thing about quotes is that they give us a nodding acquaintance with the originator which is often socially impressive." ~Kenneth Williams |
Whitehound
411
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:47:00 -
[19] - Quote
I think it is bad, because it will only show that players with high SPs win over players with low SPs. Also some ships and fittings will win more often than others.
Arenas will get boring after only a year. The large community and the open space of EVE Online allows for far more unknown endings than an arena.
Imagine we had alliance tournaments each weekend and a participation would be cheap. Within a year would we see the same fleet setups repeatedly and many fights would have similar outcome. It would be predictable and boring. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
12767
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:48:00 -
[20] - Quote
Bane Necran wrote:The point is more PvP, which even someone who isn't heavy into PvP like myself agrees is good for the game. GǪand the follow-up point is that the game already fully allows for it. If they aren't doing it now, they're not going to do it later when everything is still the same.
Yes, they might engage in some if it is implemented in a way that breaks the game, but that would not be good for the game regardless.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Natsett Amuinn
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1628
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:49:00 -
[21] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Bane Necran wrote:I doubt people are going to start having duels instead of wars. Or duels instead of gatecamps. I'm not talking about behaviour GÇö I'm talking about mechanics. All mechanics for consensual combat are encapsulated within the mechanics of non-consensual combat, and no consensual combat can ever be allowed to exist outside the real of non-consensual engagements. Thus, consensual mechanics are either unnecessary or game-breaking. Either way, there's no point in or need to add them.
I agree with this. Nothing should be introduced that prevents someone from "crashing your party".
If you have an arena, or tournament tools, then I should be able to actually crash your contest.
The tools to have arena style tournaments would be fine, but not if it also comes with mechanics that prevent others from being douches and interupting it.
Arenas all day long as far as I'm concerned, but I better be able to witness it in person, and be able to crash it if I choose.
Otherwise it doesn't really have any business in EVE.
You can enter someone elses mission space, you should be able to enter someones arena space as well. |
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
190
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
If you want consensual PvP then I want consensual market prices.
Is it wrong to have PvP "enforced" and not consensual? Then why should I've your market prices enforced to me? I want to consensually decide what I've to pay!
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace
1734
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:52:00 -
[23] - Quote
Bane Necran wrote:Roime wrote:The value people get from PVP is only made possible by the presence of real risk, uncontrollable events. But through planning ahead and picking your fights to make sure you're going to win, things become very controlled and lack risk.
Don't you see that someone out there can plan better ahead and pick you, if he thinks he has a chance to win?
My point is that EVE PVP can never be 100% controlled, and mitigating the risk is a player skill, not a game mechanic.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Aza Ebanu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:52:00 -
[24] - Quote
Roime wrote:How is it "more hardcore" than flying out solo and finding a fight?
Why is this mechanic needed?
Because what you speak of is more rare than yeti. |
Pinaculus
Fweddit
I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
206
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:52:00 -
[25] - Quote
I always thought EVE was based around the idea that you consent to PvP of some variety just by logging in and doing stuff. Undock and maybe get shot at. Try to buy/sell stuff and maybe get outbid or price gouged. Try to build a corp, and have it instantly infested with AWOXers and spies. An "arena" is totally superfluous, since PvP is already everywhere. If you want to PvP just go PvP. The whole world is your arena.
I know sometimes it's difficult to realize just how much you spend on incidental things each month or year, but seriously, EVE is very cheap entertainment compared to most things... If you are a smoker, smoke one less pack a week and pay for EVE, with money left over to pick up a cheap bundle of flowers for the EVE widow upstairs. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
12767
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:54:00 -
[26] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:I agree with this. Nothing should be introduced that prevents someone from "crashing your party".
If you have an arena, or tournament tools, then I should be able to actually crash your contest.
The tools to have arena style tournaments would be fine, but not if it also comes with mechanics that prevent others from being douches and interupting it.
Arenas all day long as far as I'm concerned, but I better be able to witness it in person, and be able to crash it if I choose.
Otherwise it doesn't really have any business in EVE. GǪand at that point, it has very little to do with arenas, and rather revolves around the Gǣbetting officeGǥ, presumably some expansion or generalisation of the bounty and war report systems.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
1501
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:57:00 -
[27] - Quote
Roime wrote:Don't you see that someone out there can plan better ahead and pick you, if he thinks he has a chance to win?
The people who know how to pick their fights just move on to easier prey if they see that someone may have planned better. Why take the risk?
Killboard efficiency is srs bsns.
"The nice thing about quotes is that they give us a nodding acquaintance with the originator which is often socially impressive." ~Kenneth Williams |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
420
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:57:00 -
[28] - Quote
Bane Necran wrote:Throughout the history of this game, PvP has mostly revolved around attacking people who are unprepared for PvP,,,
You should always be prepared for PvP.
In response to others, arena combat used to be a reality. And it is odd that a canon that includes a slave/master dichotomy does not have some form of arena combat, especially in the Amarr region. I even think Gladiators are mentioned in a couple missions.
I don't care either way, I just think some of the arguments against it are pretty weak.
This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Montevius Williams
Eclipse Industrial Inc
353
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:58:00 -
[29] - Quote
Myrissa Kistel wrote: Cause 1v1 duals is not really PVP. Might as well open up a chat channel with your oppenent and type in /random, highest number wins.
I dont agree wit hthis. 1 on 1 duels are PvP. To look at real world examples, look at outlaw duels in the old west or Samurai duels. PvP can totally be a one on one affair.
"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB |
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
1501
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 18:01:00 -
[30] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:You should always be prepared for PvP.
And i agree to a point. Like when mining you give up a little yield to make it harder for people to gank you. But just being in a mining vessel makes you far less prepared for PvP than someone in a combat ship.
People have to do other things in EVE, so they can't always be equally prepared for PvP as someone who is out to PvP.
"The nice thing about quotes is that they give us a nodding acquaintance with the originator which is often socially impressive." ~Kenneth Williams |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |