Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 31 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Dave Stark
7340
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 09:26:44 -
[151] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Kaelynne Rose wrote:U dont think most highsec corps without POSes, players will just leave them for Lite Corps with WARDEC IMMUNITY? ? I know the question wasn't directed at me, but... Right now there are 4 principal benefits to player corporations: 1. No CONCORD tax. 2. POSes. 3. Hangars/wallet/organizational tools. 4. Being able to declare wars (double-edged sword). There's also the ability to join alliances and set standings, but that's not necessarily a direct benefit. If they extend even one benefit from the first three to these "lite" corps, they will screw up the balance so much that this might indeed be the case. This is why this idea is very dangerous, ominous even.
and pretty much none of those things are a reason for players to join another player's high sec corp.
just make a 1 man alt corp you can fold if wardecced for all the organisational goodness.
high sec in eve, simply doesn't encourage social interaction. in fact, the very design of high sec encourages players to shun it. |
Indahmawar Fazmarai
3713
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 10:32:42 -
[152] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Kaelynne Rose wrote:U dont think most highsec corps without POSes, players will just leave them for Lite Corps with WARDEC IMMUNITY? ? I know the question wasn't directed at me, but... Right now there are 4 principal benefits to player corporations: 1. No CONCORD tax. 2. POSes. 3. Hangars/wallet/organizational tools. 4. Being able to declare wars (double-edged sword). There's also the ability to join alliances and set standings, but that's not necessarily a direct benefit. If they extend even one benefit from the first three to these "lite" corps, they will screw up the balance so much that this might indeed be the case. This is why this idea is very dangerous, ominous even. and pretty much none of those things are a reason for players to join another player's high sec corp. just make a 1 man alt corp you can fold if wardecced for all the organisational goodness. high sec in eve, simply doesn't encourage social interaction. in fact, the very design of high sec encourages players to shun it.
Well, i disagree. What it discourages is to use the current socialization tools, which are aimed at shipsploding rather than PvE.
I am a die hard carebear, and yet I spend most of my time in a fleet. That along with a language channel and TGFB's chat channel allows me to socialize every day.
And yet every single person I speak to, does not belong to my one-man corporation, and most of them owe one-man corporations for the very simple reason that they would get all risk and no reward for assembling into a corporation. Much as they get all penalties and no rewards for being in NPC corporations.
Building your one-man corp is a nobrainer, a completely choiceless option. The whole multiplayer corporations system is retadded from the POV of a PvEr: It punishes everything a PvEr would do and forces him to risk to everything he does not do...
And this is all CCP's doing. It's pure GIGO: we get garbage mechanics, we produce garbage gameplay.
The Greater Fool Bar is now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden! Ingame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2662
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 11:29:33 -
[153] - Quote
Nothing a 75% CONCORD tax couldn't fix.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5010
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 12:21:44 -
[154] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Then CCP really screwed up, because having game mechanics present that when removed would account for a good three quarters of the game's player base disappearing into the ether is pretty bad game design. Most games have mechanics that if removed would lose most of the playerbase. Like for example if you removed guns from most FPS games, they'd probably lose appeal. That's a rather absurd comparison. If you remove guns from an fps game, the game will literally become nonfunctional. Meanwhile, removing, say, NPC corporations from EVE Online would not affect the game's functionality at all. The game would still exist, people could still play out rounds, people would simply die only though falling, and round like CTF would be done by grabbing the flag and running. The point still remains that a mechanic which if removed would remove a large chunk of the playerbase is not bad design.
If you need it though, a better example is Minecraft. Minecraft has creative mode (no risk, infinite resources with no collection required) and survival (risk of death, finite resources which need to be collected). If they removed creative a good chunk of appeal would be lost and whole communities would stop playing as they have no interest in the survival aspect., while the game itself would still be functional That doesn't mean that creative mode is bad game design.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2663
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 13:15:36 -
[155] - Quote
You're talking about various games' core features/concepts there. NPC corporations in EVE aren't a core feature/concept. They're just a game mechanic, and an obscure one at that. If we're going to make a parallel to removing guns from fps games or creative mode from Minecraft, a good EVE example would be the ability to control ships, or maybe the player-driven market. People buy fps games to shoot, people buy Minecraft to play around with creation tools (indeed, most aren't even aware of the survival mode before purchase), people don't buy EVE to be a member of Emperor Family Academy or The Scope or whatever.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Shailagh
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
63
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:04:15 -
[156] - Quote
And we is the place WE THE PEOPLE get to say no this is bad and give feedback? Csm and ccp just gets to decide We all need corplites?
I read some dev post about ccp giving us the sand for OUR sandbox.
Its a fact and obvious WE dont want this in OUR sandbox |
Ned Thomas
Hellbound Turkeys Alliance of Abandoned Cybernetic Rejects
720
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:08:48 -
[157] - Quote
Shailagh wrote:And we is the place WE THE PEOPLE get to say no this is bad and give feedback? Csm and ccp just gets to decide We all need corplites?
I read some dev post about ccp giving us the sand for OUR sandbox.
Its a fact and obvious WE dont want this in OUR sandbox
Well, other than a vague mention in the CSM minutes, there's been no actual talk of this from CCP themselves. As a few CSM members have posted in this thread, I'd say this is as good a place as any to give feedback on the idea.
Vote Sabriz!
|
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
54
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:41:46 -
[158] - Quote
Shailagh wrote:And we is the place WE THE PEOPLE get to say no this is bad and give feedback? Csm and ccp just gets to decide We all need corplites?
I read some dev post about ccp giving us the sand for OUR sandbox.
Its a fact and obvious WE dont want this in OUR sandbox
Good thing YOU dont talk for EVERYONE :p
I only see YOU and a couple of others yelling that it's the end of eve if they would make social corps. |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
2651
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 20:11:39 -
[159] - Quote
Kaelynne Rose wrote:I dont see no thread on Social Corps that are coming soon. Gonnna be like an offical "friends list" where errybody can chat and share catpics and talk about ratting and mining and the weather, but not be in real corp so there is no fear of theft/grief.
Basically like a chat channel but with social media-esqe features.
Youra thoughts on this?
Mine are LMAO at this themepark careabear garbage. Brb lemme tweet that to my fellow Social Corpie Buddies.
Anyone wanna join my socual corp? Gonna be called...EVE IS NOT HARSH, IS IS FOR PANSYS
+ìt's a ******* chat channel . The fact you found the need to make a boohoorage thread about this speaks volumes about what a tough boy you are .
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Kaelynne Rose
WTB Somalians
14
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 00:21:52 -
[160] - Quote
flakeys wrote:Kaelynne Rose wrote:I dont see no thread on Social Corps that are coming soon. Gonnna be like an offical "friends list" where errybody can chat and share catpics and talk about ratting and mining and the weather, but not be in real corp so there is no fear of theft/grief.
Basically like a chat channel but with social media-esqe features.
Youra thoughts on this?
Mine are LMAO at this themepark careabear garbage. Brb lemme tweet that to my fellow Social Corpie Buddies.
Anyone wanna join my socual corp? Gonna be called...EVE IS NOT HARSH, IS IS FOR PANSYS +ìt's a ******* chat channel . The fact you found the need to make a boohoorage thread about this speaks volumes about what a tough boy you are .
Boii you about to get wardecced. Then what u gonna do tomorrow? Drop to npc corp and use chatchannel?
Serioualy tho u bout 2 get decced sp appoligize |
|
Felicity Love
Imperium Galactic Navy
2193
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 00:28:52 -
[161] - Quote
... applauds CCP for making more changes that are no doubt aimed at enriching the "New Player Experience"... because ultimately they are enriching the wallet of this player.
"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.-á-á ( Pick four, any four. They all smell. -á)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5010
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 04:06:19 -
[162] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You're talking about various games' core features/concepts there. NPC corporations in EVE aren't a core feature/concept. They're just a game mechanic, and an obscure one at that. If we're going to make a parallel to removing guns from fps games or creative mode from Minecraft, a good EVE example would be the ability to control ships, or maybe the player-driven market. People buy fps games to shoot, people buy Minecraft to play around with creation tools (indeed, most aren't even aware of the survival mode before purchase), people don't buy EVE to be a member of Emperor Family Academy or The Scope or whatever. It's still a core mechanic that has been there from the beginning. Whatever way you try to spin it, claiming that a mechanic is badly designed because it's removal from the game would cause people to quit is absolutely wrong. You're grasping.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5010
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 04:08:27 -
[163] - Quote
Shailagh wrote:And we is the place WE THE PEOPLE get to say no this is bad and give feedback? Csm and ccp just gets to decide We all need corplites?
I read some dev post about ccp giving us the sand for OUR sandbox.
Its a fact and obvious WE dont want this in OUR sandbox No, YOU don't want this in OUR sandbox. Many of us do, and many also don't care one way or the other.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2665
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 05:44:27 -
[164] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:You're talking about various games' core features/concepts there. NPC corporations in EVE aren't a core feature/concept. They're just a game mechanic, and an obscure one at that. If we're going to make a parallel to removing guns from fps games or creative mode from Minecraft, a good EVE example would be the ability to control ships, or maybe the player-driven market. People buy fps games to shoot, people buy Minecraft to play around with creation tools (indeed, most aren't even aware of the survival mode before purchase), people don't buy EVE to be a member of Emperor Family Academy or The Scope or whatever. It's still a core mechanic that has been there from the beginning. Whatever way you try to spin it, claiming that a mechanic is badly designed because it's removal from the game would cause people to quit is absolutely wrong. You're grasping. Mechanic != core mechanic. Awoxing has been in the game since the beginning too. It seems to me that you're defining "core" by whether or not it's been around for a long time, and by the amount of players that had some sort of interaction with the mechanic in question, instead of how big of an impact the mechanic has on the entire game. I'd argue that the impact of NPC corporations isn't big at all. In fact, I'd wager that the grand majority of players aren't even aware of their existence before they enter the game, as opposed to say, mining, or fighting for territory.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
585
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 06:07:58 -
[165] - Quote
Tear Jar wrote:I know every possible use for bookmarks and shared hangars
No, you don't.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5010
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 12:23:19 -
[166] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Mechanic != core mechanic. Awoxing has been in the game since the beginning too. It seems to me that you're defining "core" by whether or not it's been around for a long time, and by the amount of players that had some sort of interaction with the mechanic in question, instead of how big of an impact the mechanic has on the entire game. I'd argue that the impact of NPC corporations isn't big at all. In fact, I'd wager that the grand majority of players aren't even aware of their existence before they enter the game, as opposed to say, mining, or fighting for territory. No I'm defining it on a lot of things. It's been there for a long time and it's used by a lot of players yes, but it's also key to allowing new players breathing room from wars as well as a fall back for players who lose everything, it adds a social aspect to the game without having to be under a particular player's leadership. You don't think it's a core mechanic because you don't like it, and your basing whether it's good design ore not on whether or not people will quit if it's removed, which is irrelevant to game design. Many mechanics, core or not, in many game would cause players to leave if removed. Removing ganking and bumping would cause many players to quit, so is that also a badly designed mechanic? Removing wardecs would too, badly designed mechanic?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2682
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 12:40:04 -
[167] - Quote
Ganking and wars are core features of the game. Violence and competition for resources is highlighted in all of the game's literature. In fact, people entering the game for the first time might get disenchanted that the violence they were promised isn't actually being delivered. Bumping isn't a core feature, isn't something that's advertised as one, and I doubt anyone would leave if it was removed. In the same way, NPC corporations aren't a core feature, and aren't advertised. In fact, I'd wager that if NPC corporations were removed, all new players who join the game would actually be more accepting of EVE's violence, because the safety blanket they'd otherwise develop an entitlement to at such early ages would no longer be present.
Of course, we're also talking about a gamer generation that posts massive whine threads about "KOS" in the forums of survival games that offer both pvp and pve servers, so maybe I'm wrong here.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11607
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 12:49:15 -
[168] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote: Of course, we're also talking about a gamer generation that posts massive whine threads about "KOS" in the forums of survival games that offer both pvp and pve servers, so maybe I'm wrong here.
It's so much worse on DayZ.
"why did that guy make me drink bleach?"
Because it was funny. Are you not aware of how this game works?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5010
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 13:14:28 -
[169] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Ganking and wars are core features of the game. Violence and competition for resources is highlighted in all of the game's literature. In fact, people entering the game for the first time might get disenchanted that the violence they were promised isn't actually being delivered. Bumping isn't a core feature, isn't something that's advertised as one, and I doubt anyone would leave if it was removed. In the same way, NPC corporations aren't a core feature, and aren't advertised. In fact, I'd wager that if NPC corporations were removed, all new players who join the game would actually be more accepting of EVE's violence, because the safety blanket they'd otherwise develop an entitlement to at such early ages would no longer be present.
Of course, we're also talking about a gamer generation that posts massive whine threads about "KOS" in the forums of survival games that offer both pvp and pve servers, so maybe I'm wrong here. I disagree. I can agree that war decs are a core feature, but ganking is emergent, so not really a feature at all more a byproduct of other features. And I'm sure we'd never hear the end of it if it were even suggested that bumping were removed (in fact, we've not yet heard the end of it). At the end of the day you can sit there and twist definitions all you want to try to fit your argument, but NPC corps are in the game, I doubt they're going anywhere, and if they do they'll be replaced seamlessly by another feature offering the same benefits - such as social corps. They serve a purpose and they serve it well. Just because some people get upset that some people who would stand no change in PvP don't readily avail themselves as targets, doesn't mean CCP designed it wrong.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Kaelynne Rose
WTB Somalians
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 15:18:12 -
[170] - Quote
If you want to be in a corp with multiple chat channels and avoid wars and just pve in safety. Go join a nullbear blueball alliance. You wanna stay in highsec? Get ready for war.
Simple. |
|
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
56
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 15:36:53 -
[171] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Ganking and wars are core features of the game. Violence and competition for resources is highlighted in all of the game's literature. In fact, people entering the game for the first time might get disenchanted that the violence they were promised isn't actually being delivered. Bumping isn't a core feature, isn't something that's advertised as one, and I doubt anyone would leave if it was removed. In the same way, NPC corporations aren't a core feature, and aren't advertised. In fact, I'd wager that if NPC corporations were removed, all new players who join the game would actually be more accepting of EVE's violence, because the safety blanket they'd otherwise develop an entitlement to at such early ages would no longer be present.
Of course, we're also talking about a gamer generation that posts massive whine threads about "KOS" in the forums of survival games that offer both pvp and pve servers, so maybe I'm wrong here.
So what would you suggest that new players start in? a npc corp which is constantly under war and the starting system (ok, the surrounding systems) camped by tengu's and all? That'd be fun and would definately not drive people away ... |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2687
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 16:41:18 -
[172] - Quote
Miomeifeng Alduin wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Ganking and wars are core features of the game. Violence and competition for resources is highlighted in all of the game's literature. In fact, people entering the game for the first time might get disenchanted that the violence they were promised isn't actually being delivered. Bumping isn't a core feature, isn't something that's advertised as one, and I doubt anyone would leave if it was removed. In the same way, NPC corporations aren't a core feature, and aren't advertised. In fact, I'd wager that if NPC corporations were removed, all new players who join the game would actually be more accepting of EVE's violence, because the safety blanket they'd otherwise develop an entitlement to at such early ages would no longer be present.
Of course, we're also talking about a gamer generation that posts massive whine threads about "KOS" in the forums of survival games that offer both pvp and pve servers, so maybe I'm wrong here. So what would you suggest that new players start in? a npc corp which is constantly under war and the starting system (ok, the surrounding systems) camped by tengu's and all? That'd be fun and would definately not drive people away ... Pretty simple solution, actually. First 3-4 weeks, no corp at all, just rookie channel. After that time expires, you get forcefully dumped into a game-created corporation. Random name, no CEO, kind of like the default militia corporation. These corporations can declare war on each other, and do other stuff, like elect temporary leaders, via the vote system. Of course a new player can jump into one right away. Maybe even get a bonus for it. I'd implement a system of rewards and everything. I'm also trying to come up with a similar idea for more experienced players between corporations, but this is just kind of a rough draft that I've had for many years but never gave much thought to because it will never happen anyway.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
57
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 17:16:17 -
[173] - Quote
so basically what you are saying is: this is a sandbox, but only for the things i like. Your suggestion is bad imo because of one word: Force. If you force people into certain things, they'll just leave. If you give them the choice, more will stay.
A social corp is just another choice which might fit some people better. What's wrong with that since its not forcing you to join one? |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2687
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 17:24:19 -
[174] - Quote
Except EVE is already forcing players to do a lot of things they don't really care for. I don't see how telling players that they can't be in a rookie corporation all of their lives is any different from telling players that they'll have to leave high-sec in order to mine Crokite, or get into a fleet with others in order to run incursions, or grind their security status back in order to go back to high-sec after getting into some fights in low. At least with my idea, one more of them would be remotely noble.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
921
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 17:46:36 -
[175] - Quote
Miomeifeng Alduin wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Ganking and wars are core features of the game. Violence and competition for resources is highlighted in all of the game's literature. In fact, people entering the game for the first time might get disenchanted that the violence they were promised isn't actually being delivered. Bumping isn't a core feature, isn't something that's advertised as one, and I doubt anyone would leave if it was removed. In the same way, NPC corporations aren't a core feature, and aren't advertised. In fact, I'd wager that if NPC corporations were removed, all new players who join the game would actually be more accepting of EVE's violence, because the safety blanket they'd otherwise develop an entitlement to at such early ages would no longer be present.
Of course, we're also talking about a gamer generation that posts massive whine threads about "KOS" in the forums of survival games that offer both pvp and pve servers, so maybe I'm wrong here. So what would you suggest that new players start in? a npc corp which is constantly under war and the starting system (ok, the surrounding systems) camped by tengu's and all? That'd be fun and would definately not drive people away ...
That would be awesome. I would roll a second account just for the challenge.
I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
Shut up, Anslo. --everyone
|
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 17:53:07 -
[176] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Except EVE is already forcing players to do a lot of things they don't really care for. I don't see how telling players that they can't be in a rookie corporation all of their lives is any different from telling players that they'll have to leave high-sec in order to mine Crokite, or get into a fleet with others in order to run incursions, or grind their security status back in order to go back to high-sec after getting into some fights in low. At least with my idea, one more of them would be remotely noble.
Except nothing is forcing you to do that. You have the choice to go mine Crokite. You have the choice of doing incursions. You have the choice to grind sec status and go back to HS. The alternative might not be very appealing in some cases, but there is still a choice and not forcing the player. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2687
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 17:59:53 -
[177] - Quote
You'd have the choice to not be in the type of corporation I proposed as well. All you'd have to do is start your own. In fact, I'd even be willing to propose removing the corporation creation fee, so that there's no barrier at all.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5011
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 20:21:50 -
[178] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Except EVE is already forcing players to do a lot of things they don't really care for. I don't see how telling players that they can't be in a rookie corporation all of their lives is any different from telling players that they'll have to leave high-sec in order to mine Crokite, or get into a fleet with others in order to run incursions, or grind their security status back in order to go back to high-sec after getting into some fights in low. At least with my idea, one more of them would be remotely noble. It's completely different. Mining Crokite is choice, you can mine other things, you can buy what you need, you don't even need to mine. If you *choose* to mine Crokite, then you accept that the choice requires you to go to certain space. Same with incursions, if you choose to do incursions, you accept that it requires a fleet. Sec status is different as you can choose not to lose it, plus you don't have to grind it back, you can buy tags too.
What you want isn't choice. After 3-4 weeks you get dumped in a corp where you can be wardecced freely by veteran players - usually ones who specialise in killing players exactly like you. Then the only choices are to be someone's fodder or to keep corp hopping to avoid wardecs, but undoubtedly you're against wardec avoidance too.
Believe it or not, the game isn't about bringing in new players and turning them into unwilling content for highsec wardeccers. People can play however they want. So you don't like how some people play, well boo frikkin hoo, that's the game, deal with it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Indahmawar Fazmarai
3718
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 20:22:15 -
[179] - Quote
Miomeifeng Alduin wrote:so basically what you are saying is: this is a sandbox, but only for the things i like. Your suggestion is bad imo because of one word: Force. If you force people into certain things, they'll just leave. If you give them the choice, more will stay.
A social corp is just another choice which might fit some people better. What's wrong with that since its not forcing you to join one?
That already happens when players master PvE and find themselves in a dead end as the game is forcing them to shipsploding if they want to do anything else.
Yet of course, they didn't learn shipsploding for one or two years and don't feel like starting from scratch. They may not even like shipsploding for ~reasons~. They'd rather keep doing Pve and PvPing other players through other means than shipsploding... but CCP can't be arsed to take PvE as a serious option.
CCP gives garbage mechanics, get garbage gameplay. And less players, of course.
The Greater Fool Bar is now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden! Ingame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar
|
Dave Stark
7343
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 20:39:53 -
[180] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:but CCP can't be arsed to take PvE as a serious option.
after looking at the behaviour of the sleeper scouts, i wholeheartedly disagree with your statement there.
it may have taken a decade, but still... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 31 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |