| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lister Vindaloo
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
0
   |
Posted - 2013.02.05 10:47:00 -
[241] - Quote
Well, this has turned into another "sort this out CCP, they're not playing properly in the sand box" thread. If only all these gankers went into null and waged a multi-front guerrilla war against the blobs rather than complain about not being able to war dec people that are clearly happy to not be involved in war dec mechanics (npc corpers), so what?
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air
The Unthinkables
2894
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 10:47:00 -
[242] - Quote
^lol |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
Cosmic Consortium
3043
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 11:12:00 -
[243] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Nullsec has more PvP ship losses then the rest of EVE combined. The "incusion community" has dropped off the face of the earth since 140m ticks were no longer available.
Just because you don't run Incursions anymore doesn't mean nobody does. Your one-eyed view of the game is obviously biased.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
1271
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:44:00 -
[244] - Quote
Freighdee Katt wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:But the "cost" a veteran player pays for the awesome benefit of protection from war should be higher Why?
Because it's too low lol. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
1271
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:45:00 -
[245] - Quote
Balthisus Filtch wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:
I would prefer to see restrictions on ships you can undock. if you are in an NPC corp you live with trial account restrictions: no industrials, no freighters, no T2 ships.
I like this solution. It would solve the "hiding" problem of long term players exploiting NPC corp mechanics, while still providing new players that entry path to explore and understand the game a bit before they start getting picked on. It would even allow people who have made NPC their community to continue to do so if they valued that community above the restrictions.
+1 from me too, it's a perfect solution as far as i'm concerned. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
1271
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:48:00 -
[246] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:People here make the naive mistake of believing that removing PvP evasion chances will somehow force / "entice" (via penalites) players to adapt and do it.
It has not worked for low sec, it's terrible game design to force or penalize players in subs based MMOs. I've played a number of MMOS both imposing "no retreat", "no escape", "penalties" or multiple of them at the same time and they ALL spectacularly failed.
People who don't want to fight, won't. Period. You can make them sit in a station, you can make them disband a corp, stay in NPC corp, form 1 men corps, join stuff like decshield and so on. But in the end they think: "I am paying for a game, who are you to force me to have no fun and be slaugthered, in a game where being spawn camped has also harsh consequences".
This makes those players believe they are entitled to decide (because they pay a sub) whether they accept a fight or not. And they WELL know that if someone in EvE attacks you is because they prepared super-mega extra overhelming odds anyway.
So, have fun nerfing this and that, in the end you'll just get station sitters and ultimately quitters. Like in every single PvP MMO that attempted this route. Ah the "carebear dollar" myth, where the baseless assertion that people who are absolutely PVP-intolerant form a significant part of the CCP's bottom line is pushed forward, despite riskfree PvE expansions that catered to these people correlating with little growth and being considered failures. It usually signifies the point in these threads where the pro-NPC corp faction has given up on mechanically justifying their retention and instead cries that game balance should take a backseat to CCP's income. People use wardec evasion because it is competitively advantageous to do so, not because it vital to their playstyle. If your goal is to farm ISK, getting into fights or paying ransom or docking is an obstacle towards that, and the best way of getting past that isn't through something crazy involving 'interaction in a MMO' but just a few buttons to join an NPC corp/corphop, assuming you ever leave.
lol, the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.
It's how we know we're winning the argument when they have to fall back on "you just want me to play your way" and "ccp will lose subs and the game will die". Even after it's explained to them that no one cares if they pvp or not.....
I still waiting for the massive carebear unsubs from the NPC AI change. I guess there is a lag time for such events lol.
|
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
3403
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 14:15:00 -
[247] - Quote
Aren Madigan wrote:
See, it really isn't just that. That's the kind of thing that makes me disagree with most people's points on these subjects though, yeah. I mean, I see no problem in people keeping out of wardecs. A lot of them just seem meant to pick on the weak targets and get away with being pirates safely in high sec.
I know of one Corp that has war decced well over FORTY High Sec Industrial Corps since December 1. Yes, forty. Actually it's a small Alliance of 3 Corps with about 42 members that's all.
That's a nuisance to everyone including CCP for having to listen to the rage mails from those decced corps.
Lot's of work is still needed on the War dec machanics, that's for sure.
America is the only country to go from barbarism to decadence (and back to barbarism - KI) without civilization in between.
- Oscar Wilde - 1870's |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3363
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 14:20:00 -
[248] - Quote
Lister Vindaloo wrote: If only all these gankers went into null and waged a multi-front guerrilla war against the blobs rather than complain about not being able to war dec people that are clearly happy to not be involved in war dec mechanics (npc corpers), so what?
Bat country are blue to us.
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd
Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
952
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 14:59:00 -
[249] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Or, you could suck it up and pay the price to kill those you cannot kill legally. Why is that concept so abhorrent to you?.
This is interesting. Would you say CCP set the wardec costs too low or too high? How much do you think someone should pay to "kill the unkillable"?
I ganked a Tengu in a player corp with some guys back when wardecs were 2mil. It cost us an estimated 14mil (plus sec status, but no one cares about that) and the guy lost roughly 500mil, maybe a bit more.
Now wardecs cost 50mil per week on the cheap, but arty Thrashers are still < 2mil a pop.
The best part is that CCP says we're "paying for targets" when we declare war, but those targets are free to drop or hop corp. Some value, huh?
If you're not already part of a bloc, this is the best guy for CSM8. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 15:14:00 -
[250] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:Or, you could suck it up and pay the price to kill those you cannot kill legally. Why is that concept so abhorrent to you?. This is interesting. Would you say CCP set the wardec costs too low or too high? How much do you think someone should pay to "kill the unkillable"?
I think this is actually more part of the 'problem' that war's cannot be 'won'. There are no objectives. It's wider symptom of the whole mechanic I think. Someone wrote a post somewhere I won't try to paraphrase but it was along the general lines that the deck is stacked for the aggressor too much and that there's a problem that the 'victim' corp can't inflict meaningful pain back. I think it was in the mini-threadnaught about the CSM notes sounding like making decs require mutuality.
If we're really wanting to look at this, the whole thing needs looking at imo.
Your tengu anecdote is a perfect example that the mechanic to bring the pain if people want it or not is alive and well. |
Natsett Amuinn
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1756
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 15:19:00 -
[251] - Quote
NPC corp dude making false statements, what a shocker. |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
952
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 15:33:00 -
[252] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:I think this is actually more part of the 'problem' that war's cannot be 'won'.
These sorts of statements always crack me up. Defenders have the exact same toolset as the wardec corps use, and in fact have more now that they can recruit allies and set bounties. Wars need no "objectives" in a sandbox, and they can easily be "won" by defenders.
So what do you think about the wardec costs and "paying for targets"?
If you're not already part of a bloc, this is the best guy for CSM8. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 15:48:00 -
[253] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:I think this is actually more part of the 'problem' that war's cannot be 'won'. These sorts of statements always crack me up. Defenders have the exact same toolset as the wardec corps use, and in fact have more now that they can recruit allies and set bounties. Wars need no "objectives" in a sandbox, and they can easily be "won" by defenders.
I edited in the post I was referencing, it explains it better.
Karl Hobb wrote:So what do you think about the wardec costs and "paying for targets"?
As for what I think about the costs - I don't, I've not thought about them because I really don't care. What I know is that I've seen enough pinyatas explode around mission hubs in a shower of purple and blue tagged mods that there's absolutely no argument that people in NPC corps are somehow 'immune' to PewPew. It just costs 'more' to do - and that is something that people in favour of wardecs seem to have issue with - I'd suggest asking them what they feel on costs rather than me  |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
952
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 16:16:00 -
[254] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:I edited in the post I was referencing, it explains it better.
Actually, it doesn't. It's a **** argument. Everyone in the sandbox has the same tools available to them (for the most part, null-sec is another matter). Adding something for the attacker to defend won't actually change current defender behavior.
Morrigan LeSante wrote:What I know is that I've seen enough pinyatas explode around mission hubs in a shower of purple and blue tagged mods that there's absolutely no argument that people in NPC corps are somehow 'immune' to PewPew.
That's what's called "ganking for profit" and it's an entirely different beast. It is incredibly easy to avoid being a "gank for profit" victim. Wardecs can have more meaning, such as disrupting an alliance's supply lines or interrupting industry, the problem is that it's so easy to evade them.
Morrigan LeSante wrote:It just costs 'more' to do - and that is something that people in favour of wardecs seem to have issue with
Citation needed.
If you're not already part of a bloc, this is the best guy for CSM8. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3776
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 18:09:00 -
[255] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:
lol, the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.
It's how we know we're winning the argument when they have to fall back on "you just want me to play your way" and "ccp will lose subs and the game will die". Even after it's explained to them that no one cares if they pvp or not.....
I still waiting for the massive carebear unsubs from the NPC AI change. I guess there is a lag time for such events lol.
You are good at facts evasion instead. Show me where CCP has nerfed PvP evasion or where they state the next expansion(s) they are going to nerf PvP evasion.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3776
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 18:16:00 -
[256] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:I think this is actually more part of the 'problem' that war's cannot be 'won'. These sorts of statements always crack me up. Defenders have the exact same toolset as the wardec corps use, and in fact have more now that they can recruit allies and set bounties. Wars need no "objectives" in a sandbox, and they can easily be "won" by defenders. So what do you think about the wardec costs and "paying for targets"?
If defenders had good chances, they'd not drop / evade a wardec.
But of course the attacker are assumed to be averagely smart, therefore they will choose:
- indy corps (high potential lost value vs low defense). Attacker has PvP trained players instead.
- defendant will have structures in space while attackers have nothing. They WILL have their own stuff of course but guess what... on alt corps.... to evade PvP! 
- defendant will have logistics and easily disrupted operations often involving bulky / slow ships. Attackers have alt corps for logistics (guess what, to evade PvP!) and their ops are about attacking the others with fast hit and run ships.
This alone grants that defendants with ANY grain of salt are best to just sit in a station and wait it out, while pulling down structures and / or assigning them to alt corps themselves. Same for logistics.
Edit: another factor is "readiness".
Even assuming an hi sec defendant corp to be proficient at PvP, they probably use all their resources in their core business (else they get out-competed). Therefore if they get a wardec, they will probably have PvP ships somewhat parked out of place, part of the pilots busy / doing other in RL because of "peace time", will probably have cut on first line defenses and so on. A wardec gives little warning enough that the defendant could be not ready to respond to attacks in time. Can't assume every corp to have as main core business continuous PvP, those who don't are less prepared to a timely defense even if they wanted and could defend.
This alone suggests the defending corp to evade PvP and then - once ready - eventually wardec the original aggressors. Basically there's something screeching about wardec mechanics where the two ends don't meet well even if they wanted to.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
1285
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 18:55:00 -
[257] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:
lol, the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.
It's how we know we're winning the argument when they have to fall back on "you just want me to play your way" and "ccp will lose subs and the game will die". Even after it's explained to them that no one cares if they pvp or not.....
I still waiting for the massive carebear unsubs from the NPC AI change. I guess there is a lag time for such events lol.
You are good at facts evasion instead. Show me where CCP has nerfed PvP evasion or where they state the next expansion(s) they are going to nerf PvP evasion.
'
Show me where I said any such thing. where do you get this stuff?
Lemme guess, English isn't your 1st language.
|
Chiavette Anninen
State War Academy
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 18:56:00 -
[258] - Quote
None of my RFF freighter alts are in an NPC corp because then I wouldn't be able to web them. I'm pretty sure most of the other RFF pilots' freighter alts are also in player corps for this same reason. What CCP does to NPC corps and wardec mechanics has no impact on RFF operations. Don't drag RFF into your wardec tears thread... |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Air
The Unthinkables
2901
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 19:09:00 -
[259] - Quote
So RFF's secret is that it actually works as a team and is at the keyboard when they haul?
Removing NPC corps - no harm done. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 19:36:00 -
[260] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:I edited in the post I was referencing, it explains it better. Actually, it doesn't. It's a **** argument. Everyone in the sandbox has the same tools available to them (for the most part, null-sec is another matter). Adding something for the attacker to defend won't actually change current defender behavior. Morrigan LeSante wrote:What I know is that I've seen enough pinyatas explode around mission hubs in a shower of purple and blue tagged mods that there's absolutely no argument that people in NPC corps are somehow 'immune' to PewPew. That's what's called "ganking for profit" and it's an entirely different beast. It is incredibly easy to avoid being a "gank for profit" victim. Wardecs can have more meaning, such as disrupting an alliance's supply lines or interrupting industry, the problem is that it's so easy to evade them. Morrigan LeSante wrote:It just costs 'more' to do - and that is something that people in favour of wardecs seem to have issue with Citation needed.
Citation? It's common in any thread, including this one, that people claim it's a problem, or "not enough".
Why do you need concord sanctioned war? Why not a simple threat a-la the miner bumpers, they dont need a war dec to influence and disrupt.
Why is it so important that you be able to attack people without real consequence? Why are they deccing Johnny Industry and not the goons/red federation/etc?
Why is it so wrong that people should be able to play the game their way in the sandbox? Before you answer, keep in mind the station traders, let me know how those wardecs on those powerhouses have panned out for you.
People cannot avoid PvP, people can avoid (to a very limited extent) unwanted PewPew. Why is that a problem? Do you jump willingly into gate camps, or do you take steps to avoid it?
Why do you have an issue with people taking steps within the game to stop you shooting them without consequence? Why do you feel so strongly that this is a great injustice?
The notion is as ridiculous as removing null, making it all Empire on the grounds that "well, you'll just dec each other so no worries" |
EI Digin
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
453
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 19:37:00 -
[261] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:I think this is actually more part of the 'problem' that war's cannot be 'won'. There are no objectives. It's wider symptom of the whole mechanic I think. Someone wrote a post somewhere I won't try to paraphrase but it was along the general lines that the deck is stacked for the aggressor too much and that there's a problem that the 'victim' corp can't inflict meaningful pain back. I think it was in the mini-threadnaught about the CSM notes sounding like making decs require mutuality.
Kill them before they kill you. People aren't going to be happy with themselves when they lose their pimped cynabal or a few t3s to a bunch of noobs in drakes or t1 cruisers. The deck isn't stacked. You just have to hit them where it hurts, their killboard. Groups of bad players have always been able to defeat groups of better players. They just have to try.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:If defenders had good chances, they'd not drop / evade a wardec.
Defenders don't need to bother with wardecs, they can just drop and evade them all they want. They don't need to worry about fighting them. Which brings me to another point...
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Even assuming an hi sec defendant corp to be proficient at PvP, they probably use all their resources in their core business (else they get out-competed). Therefore if they get a wardec, they will probably have PvP ships somewhat parked out of place, part of the pilots busy / doing other in RL because of "peace time", will probably have cut on first line defenses and so on. A wardec gives little warning enough that the defendant could be not ready to respond to attacks in time. Can't assume every corp to have as main core business continuous PvP, those who don't are less prepared to a timely defense even if they wanted and could defend.
The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves. Why bother going through all of that when you can just drop corp? You can't just take out a major component of the game (combat) because it makes people complacent with the current unbalanced situation they are in and causes them to never experience that major component of the game and to avoid it at all costs. Then they dip their toe into the pool and realize it's not all that bad, making them willing to play the game on an equal playing field with everyone else, and play the game the way it was meant to be played.
There's a reason why there are very few big and effective highsec player groups. It's because there is simply no need for people to join them, or for anyone who knows what they are doing to form one. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 19:45:00 -
[262] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves.
For a long time it was the only effective way - neutral RR, the ever pervading fact that no-one EVER fights fair in EvE and so forth.
Did you gamble and undock, or did you just not bother/take other steps - it was a no brainer for years.
There was (and still isnt) much to gain by fighting back for many people.
Undocking and trying to fight was about as smart as shooting a can flipper.
And for the love of god, they CANNOT avoid combat - they can only avoid wardecs. You think that 30 billion paladin would have been saved in an NPC corp? |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
956
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 19:57:00 -
[263] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Citation? It's common in any thread, including this one, that people claim it's a problem, or "not enough".
I haven't seen any posts by people complaining that ganking is too expensive compared to wardecs in this thread. I'm fairly certain Bat Country would contest that point considering how much they make ganking freighters.
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Why is it so important that you be able to attack people without real consequence?
Please explain. Not too long ago my corp wardecced another and we got our asses handed to us. I'd call that some real consequence.
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Why are they deccing Johnny Industry and not the goons/red federation/etc?
Why would you wardec a null-sec alliance? That would be a waste of money since you can simply go to null and shoot them. If we didn't have NPC corps it might be worthwhile since they'd have to put their haulers under a banner of some sort that could be wardecced, but right now it'd be stupid to do so.
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Why is it so wrong that people should be able to play the game their way in the sandbox?
Why is it so wrong for people to bring spaceship PVP to others as a playstyle in the sandbox?
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Why do you have an issue with people taking steps within the game to stop you shooting them without consequence?
I take steps to avoid people shooting me every time I undock, why should I expect less of others?
If you're not already part of a bloc, this is the best guy for CSM8. |
EI Digin
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
453
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:03:00 -
[264] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:EI Digin wrote:The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves. For a long time it was the only effective way - neutral RR, the ever pervading fact that no-one EVER fights fair in EvE and so forth. Did you gamble and undock, or did you just not bother/take other steps - it was a no brainer for years. There was (and still isnt) much to gain by fighting back for many people. Undocking and trying to fight was about as smart as shooting a can flipper. And for the love of god, they CANNOT avoid combat - they can only avoid wardecs. You think that 30 billion paladin would have been saved in an NPC corp?
If you play the game by yourself and your head is buried in the sand you will have no cards up your sleeves if you get into a fight.
You know how that Paladin could have avoided combat? He could have not fit 30 billion worth of stuff onto his ship.
Besides, isn't suicide ganking and bumping even worse than wardecs because you have no way to get back at people once they grief you? Doesn't CCP want the game to be policed by players, not NPCs and GMs? Sounds like the best solution is to warn the corp that bad guys are coming for you and let you guys fight about it for a week or so! |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:04:00 -
[265] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Why is it so wrong for people to bring spaceship PVP to others as a playstyle in the sandbox?
The only thing stopping you doing that, is you. Which has been my point all along.
Unwilling PewPew does not and indeed never has needed a war dec. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:06:00 -
[266] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:EI Digin wrote:The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves. For a long time it was the only effective way - neutral RR, the ever pervading fact that no-one EVER fights fair in EvE and so forth. Did you gamble and undock, or did you just not bother/take other steps - it was a no brainer for years. There was (and still isnt) much to gain by fighting back for many people. Undocking and trying to fight was about as smart as shooting a can flipper. And for the love of god, they CANNOT avoid combat - they can only avoid wardecs. You think that 30 billion paladin would have been saved in an NPC corp? If you play the game by yourself and your head is buried in the sand you will have no cards up your sleeves if you get into a fight. You know how that Paladin could have avoided combat? He could have not fit 30 billion worth of stuff onto his ship. Besides, isn't suicide ganking and bumping even worse than wardecs because you have no way to get back at people once they grief you? Doesn't CCP want the game to be policed by players, not NPCs and GMs? Sounds like the best solution is to warn the corp that bad guys are coming for you and let you guys fight about it for a week or so!
So we at least agree that an NPC corp has no real bearing on unwilling PewPew? Because it doesn't.
You can shoot them (bumpers/gankers) back - again - the only thing stopping you, is you.
If suiciding and other measures were impossible I would agree, but that situation does not exist. |
Spurty
V0LTA
Verge of Collapse
787
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:22:00 -
[267] - Quote
You are unable to pilot this spacecraft due to license restrictions.
You are unable to use this jump gate to low / null sec due to licensing restrictions.
There's plenty of ways to curb sitting in NPC corps
---
GÇ£If you think this Universe is bad, you should see some of the others.GÇ¥
GÇò Philip K. **** |
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
192
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:24:00 -
[268] - Quote
I'm not sure why our name came up in this thread.
but I'll reply to this:
XxRTEKxX wrote:
Why not both? Courier contract and use of capital ships be prohibited unlesz you are in a player corp. I dont have any problems with either. Or courier contracts that require use of a capital ship be restricted to player corps. Then it allows noobs to do lower level courier contract while preventing use of capital ships, orcas included.
Courier contract to RFF or Push are already made to a player corp, and accepted by that corp member (private contract)
We then forward, via item exchange, courier contract, or trade in station, that package to our freighter.
Most RF pilot have their freighter in a player corp already, because it allow for Webbing.
Almost all of those corp are only the freighters + webbing alts. you dec that corp? most have another corp already made to switch their freighter to.
so, what would your proposition change exactly? |
Aren Madigan
EVE University
Ivy League
37
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:40:00 -
[269] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:Don't ignore the 60D results just because the numbers peter off after people get bored. I don't ignore it; I gladly point out Incursion and Tyrannis as the exposure of the 'carebear dollar' myth every chance I get - that catering to carebears is fiscally unwise - and that threats of some 'mass unsub' if riskfree iskfarming was impeded in anyway are hollow because the "PvE-exclusive' gains has a lifecycle of 3-4 months tops. Thankfully, CCP has taken this lesson to heart.
You know, the reason for Tyrannis's failure could also just be that it isn't a particularly immersive or interesting experience either. It just wasn't anything special. You can't really jump to conclusions about why it failed without, you know, actually having a reasonably amount of data from people who left. So while I'm in agreeing that PI would be more interesting with some PvP aspects added to it, I'm pretty harshly against jumping to conclusions for the simple goal of promoting one's own viewpoint.
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: And it's bad economically as CCP's NPE research is overwhelmingly pushing highsec player corporations like EVE UNI and RvB in order to retain newbies, something that wasn't happening with the boring but mechanically overwhelmingly advantageous NPC corp model. .
See, as an EVE UNI player, from my viewpoint, your reasoning doesn't seem to be why they're pushing corps like that at all to me. See, it took me several tries to even stick with EVE because I had no real sense of direction, end goal, or anything. The whole "what do I do now?" that the most recent minutes talk about. Joining a corp like E-UNI goes a looooong way towards fixing that because right now? Features to that end are rather lackluster, and CCP themselves admits it as such.
Anyways, something else you mentioned earlier, I agree with at least ending corp hopping to some extent. Either they stick with their corp and take the disadvantages as well as the advantages, or they're stuck without it for a prolonged period. Or hell, if they are logged to be prone to it, they're stuck with the wardec for a bit. Honestly though, one of my biggest problems with the wardec system is how its more expensive to go after those who can pretty clearly defend themselves over those who often its pretty obvious that its just for the sake of being a prick.
Spurty wrote:You are unable to use this jump gate to low / null sec due to licensing restrictions.
So you want to stop them from going to the places where you CAN shoot them with little or no consequence? Yeeeah... I'm not seeing the logic here if the reasoning is because of not wanting them to avoid such things. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3776
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:41:00 -
[270] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:
The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves. Why bother going through all of that when you can just drop corp? You can't just take out a major component of the game (combat) because it makes people complacent with the current unbalanced situation they are in and causes them to never experience that major component of the game and to avoid it at all costs. Then they dip their toe into the pool and realize it's not all that bad, making them willing to play the game on an equal playing field with everyone else, and play the game the way it was meant to be played.
There's a reason why there are very few big and effective highsec player groups. It's because there is simply no need for people to join them, or for anyone who knows what they are doing to form one.
No, the reason why there are very few big and effective high sec players group is because high sec is the place for those whose conditions don't allow to play any useful part in a group.
The guy who gets 1 hour a day to play is going to pick hi sec not to waste that hour with the nitty gritty things that playing in a social structure involve. He's probably going to do 1 mission or mine some ore and log off.
If he could do all what's needed to be of any use to an organized group, he would probably not be in hi sec but in null or a WH.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |