|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23903
   |
Posted - 2015.03.14 05:08:33 -
[1] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:The definition of griefing is deliberate harassment of other players. There are many forms of griefing available in eve, the only difference between them is that some are tolerated to a certain extent, some are tolerated completely, and some are not tolerated at all. You can argue your pants off if grief dec is tolerated griefing or not, it does not change the plain fact that it is griefing.
*cough*
CCP Rise wrote:
We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed. The strongest indicators for a new player staying with EVE are associated with social activity: joining corps, using market and contract systems, pvping, etc. Isolating players away from the actual sandbox seems very contrary to what we would like to accomplish.
Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23903
|
Posted - 2015.03.14 05:14:36 -
[2] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
EVE is a PvP game.
Eve is a sandbox. Where all play styles are allowed.
Actually he's right. EVE is player vs. player. Everything you do in the game is player vs. player. The play style where player vs. player is unwanted or undesired is not something that the game design encourages. There is no activity in the game where PVP is disallowed.
Edit: fixed quote tags
Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23925
|
Posted - 2015.03.15 03:49:48 -
[3] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Niobe Song wrote:Why do NPC corps bother people so much?
Their risk/reward ratio is hugely skewed.
As a person in an NPC corp, I would agree with this assessment. However, in EVE, if the risk/reward benefit is hugely skewed for something could you really blame someone for choosing it? It would be foolish not to.
Wardecs and NPC corps need to be fixed, no question. Social corps and Awox buttons are not the way.
Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23935
|
Posted - 2015.03.15 14:42:41 -
[4] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:I just want to discuss this one point about people being cowards and not fighting back.
Here is the thing.... why should they?
People constantly bang on about Eve being a sandbox but the moment somebody choses not to their game they result to insults.
Also all a person needs to do is spend a couple of minutes looking at a characters kill board to realise that they will be no match for them and will also assume that they will have neutral alts tracking there movements because this is Eve and everybody has alts.
So why bother fighting when you are certain that you lose?
You call them cowards but I call it common sense.
If you won't defend what is yours, you also relinquish the right to complain. I say "won't" because EVE is a sandbox and not defending yourself is a choice.
As you know, farming kills in the sandbox is possible. Screaming to be left alone on the other hand doesn't work quite as well. Being victimized and farmed for kills is the sandbox working as intended. The question is, what would these so called victims do in the sandbox to change that?
Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23940
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 00:37:41 -
[5] - Quote
Ferni Ka'Nviiou wrote:Risk/Reward ratio in NPC corps is skewed, is it?
Well, how terrible.
It must be really risky for folks who Station Trade in Jita.
It's almost like.... You're talking with your heads in your asses.
You should try your hand at Station Trading and let us know how risk-free the activity is. Station Trading and corps have no relation, since the corporation you're in has no impact. Wardecs and NPC corps, however, are related and this is the crux of the discussion here.
I believe wardec immunity comes cheap at 11% tax. It's not enough. Wardec immunity is a foregone conclusion for most hisec PVE activities. Anything that is a foregone conclusion in a game full of options is unbalanced, by definition. I'm not as quick to blame wardecs over NPC corps as Mr. Epeen is. Both are related to each other, and there is some rethinking that needs to occur there.
Many people will argue against the changes, of course, because they are nice and cozy (not a good basis for an argument, in my opinion).
Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23940
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 00:43:40 -
[6] - Quote
GetSirrus wrote:Sibyyl wrote:Being victimized and farmed for kills is the sandbox working as intended. A well thought out and subjective analysis total supported by faster Concord Response times, increased wardec fees, removal of Boomerang and Brick Tank Procurer. Maybe someone from CCP can interject a better answer than me.
CONCORD is the #1 farmer of kills and tears in hisec.
Edit: Dat killboard efficiency. 99.5% for ISK, 99.9% all else.
Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23964
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 13:12:36 -
[7] - Quote
Niobe Song wrote:But luckily I had randomly chosen CAS when I created my first character and the people there seemed helpful and friendly. They actually do things together. They help out. They have mining groups, a null sec group that teaches noobies to pvp and helps them get jump clones and takes them on roams, a wormhole group, incursion group, a mission running group. Pretty much most of the things you can do in Eve are covered.
CAS is in many respects like a PC corp. It is that way because a few people (like Boiglio) have put in an enormous amount of effort to create resources and activities.
You can't compare CAS to other NPC corps. There is no comparison whatsoever. CAS is exceptional in that regard, and other NPC corps are silent as the grave and functionally unsocial and inactive. This is the standard experience. It is no surprise that players hang out in these, wardec immune and safe and warm most certainly, but they play the game alone and are at the greatest statistical risk of quitting.
#afkleadership -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23966
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 13:22:57 -
[8] - Quote
I think it's a balance. Pushing people into the deep end may cause them to panic and quit. Leaving them perpetually in the shallow end will also bore them and they will leave. NPC corps are without a doubt the boring shallow end.
People will argue from the point of exceptions (veterans hanging out in an NPC corp having oodles of fun), but the exceptions don't contribute much in a discussion about trends (data which CCP has shared with us).
#afkleadership -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23980
|
Posted - 2015.03.17 04:18:02 -
[9] - Quote
Of new players who are subbed:
- 50% of them leave (in ~1 month)
- 40% move into "a very isolated playstyle, mining and/or missioning and they stay pretty much to themselves. They don't trade very much, they don't engage in a very diverse range of activities". These players are involved in "theme park" activities, "sticking to missions and leveling up their raven" (CCP's own words). CCP "can see very clearly" that their NPE directs players in this direction. For "many of them that's not a good fit and they end up leaving"
- 10% move into a "wide range of experiences", "training with other players, in corps much more often, they're talking on fleet chats more often, they're on PVP kills more often". "These people tend to stick with us, they love the game and stay with the game for a long time". If CCP can "get other players to have the experiences this group is having, the better off we will be because for them it is really rich and meaningful and it sticks with them all the time".
Source: Fanfest 2014 - New Player Experience Vision
Y'all want to keep telling Kaarous and Scip that they're making stuff up?
#afkleadership -óߦªß¦ç-ó
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23985
|
Posted - 2015.03.17 19:27:34 -
[10] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Here's a recent thread written by a quitting newbie that might be interesting to discuss in context of this discussion since it touches on joining a player corp: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=412796
Do you think his experience trying to join a player corp is typical or atypical? If it's atypical, we can ignore the situation. But if this sort of thing is common, do you think it's a problem? And if so, what do you think can be done to fix it?
The plural of anecdotes isn't fact.
Brave is currently experiencing a high load of applications. Does this overwhelm your single point of data? Does it invalidate it?
Edit: I'm suggesting that cherry picking random rants on this forum (or reddit) are proof of nothing.
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
|
|
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23986
|
Posted - 2015.03.17 19:53:29 -
[11] - Quote
Awox switch: though I think a few people have put a dramatic twist on this I think this change was made to remove ambiguity from Crimewatch rules.
From CSM 9 Winter Summit notes:
Quote:CCP Masterplan then started talking about the incoming Corporation aggression changes. Switch modes takes 24 hours, and the current state is publicly visible. Swapping between modes also sends a notification to everyone in the corporation.
Sugar Kyle asked whether you would get a notification when you join a corporation with Friendly fire stating that it is enabled for that group. Masterplan showed that the Recruitment window would have a filter window, and that it would show in the application window what the state of Friendly Fire in it.
Masterplan brought up that the name might need to be changed for better clarity as it works differently to how other games handle friendly fire (other games don't penalize you and you can't do damage, opposite on both for EVE).
The change has nothing to with griefing as I'm not aware of any CCP statements in relation to this change that indicate this is their goal. I think too many people (on both sides) are projecting here..
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23987
|
Posted - 2015.03.18 02:04:35 -
[12] - Quote
Eve Uni recruiters join the chat in realtime providing status of applications and they each have time zones they operate in. The E-Uni website even offers you information on queue through the in-game browser. E-Uni chat is one of the friendliest channels you can join.
Here is a key statement he made:
Ignacio Itovuo wrote:I was told that self-sufficiency was key
Why does he have to be told that? Why is being told that a sticking point in his mind for essentially his 'quit' forum post? I'll be honest with you, his departure doesn't seem like a real loss for the game. He applied to the E-Uni, the all-sec accessible, friendliest supportive player corp and removed himself from the process for every wrong reason he could possibly manufacture.
Can you explain to me why you think this person is a good example of a rookie player? To me he's a perfect example of the first "50%".. the kind of player EVE would never have retained in the first place.
Eli Stan wrote:Who is /r/outsideinfluence, by the way? Can we take them at their word BNI is the fastest growing alliance?
From CSM 9 Winter Summit notes I linked earlier:
Quote:CCP Fozzie also noted that they're looking at increasing the member cap again because once again BRAVE is getting close to the cap. They are worried about it getting to the point where it might start breaking things though, so they'll proceed cautiously.
Quote:So BNI seems to be doing very well in terms of recruitment... yet CCP says only 10% of people who try EVE end up in any sort of player corp... What's BNI doing that the rest of the corps aren't?
Someone from BNI simply said the following which I think describes them properly: Security is designed to keep people out. Brave is designed to keep people in.
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23990
|
Posted - 2015.03.19 14:53:34 -
[13] - Quote
If you think aggression (on its own) in a PVP game is broken, then I think a coop server in a different game would be better suited for you. I've yet to see anyone enunciate what exactly is broken about the wardeccing mechanic itself. Everyone gets hung up on station camping which is popular in hisec, lowsec, nullsec, WH. Are we fixing station camping or is there actual feedback about hisec aggression rules specific to wardecs?
The wardec immunity rut is deep enough that players will get stuck in NPC Corps and exclude themselves from most of the activities in the game. People arguing against wardecs forget that all it does is allow lowsec style aggression in hisec. Again, are you arguing about station camping or aggression rules?
Total immunity to wardecs is nice and cozy and safe. Cozy, safe people also don't feel like taking any risks or trying out new things. The NPC corp rut is a perfect recipe for isolation, and eventually quitting the game for 40-90% of players out there. The discussion isn't about why you personally love your NPC corp. That's a topic for a diary. This was about 90% of starting EVE players.
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
EVE:Valkyrie pilot unmasked (her name is Ran)
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23992
|
Posted - 2015.03.19 15:20:12 -
[14] - Quote
I think Thera is a good lesson in why removing CONCORD needs to be better thought out from a trade and market point of view.
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
EVE:Valkyrie pilot unmasked (her name is Ran)
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23993
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 00:55:54 -
[15] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Sibyyl wrote:
Total immunity to wardecs is nice and cozy and safe.
Yeah..but it's not, is it?
If it wasn't safe, then being in an NPC corp wouldn't be a universal choice for haulers, mission runners, incursion runners, and the like.
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
EVE:Valkyrie pilot unmasked (her name is Ran)
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23993
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 01:09:34 -
[16] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:As been stated bazillion of times in this very thread, eve is NOT a PvP game. It's a sandbox game that has some boring PvP in it.
My point is not that EVE is 100% PVP. It is a misinterpretation of what I'm saying. I am saying that nowhere in EVE is PVP a choice. This makes PVP a universally present element in the game.
Why are we talking about it, especially in the context of NPC corps? Because there is a significant contingent of folks, all of whom are concentrated in hisec, who don't seem to understand that point. All aggression in the game, that does not utilize exploits, is 100% within the EULA and you labeling something as "griefing" seems to be deliberate double talk.
You may find PVP to be boring, and that is completely your right. But PVP will come and wreck your ship and send you back to your station without your consent. Even though you may not care about PVP at all, it will touch your game and it will affect you. In that sense, EVE gives the "right of way" to PVP. Some people short circuit that by saying EVE is a PVP game.
Don't believe me? Watch the "This is EVE" trailer and tell me what constitutes 90% of the content in that video.
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
EVE:Valkyrie pilot unmasked (her name is Ran)
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23993
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 01:14:15 -
[17] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Sibyyl wrote:
If it wasn't safe, then being in an NPC corp wouldn't be a universal choice for haulers, mission runners, incursion runners, and the like.
Since it isn't a universal choice for 2 of the 3 professions you mention can we then assume your statement is false?
Feel free to specify what sort of corps you think they belong to while operating primarily in hisec, and I'd be happy to respond to you.
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
EVE:Valkyrie pilot unmasked (her name is Ran)
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
24008
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 17:07:51 -
[18] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Huh. Right now on the Fanfest Stream, a discussion on small gang NPSI as a way to get new players more involved. Hopefully this concept gains more and more interest. Much better way to improve new player retention, IMO, than high NPC corp taxes. 
Yes, being in RvB will make you enjoy EVE more than sitting in a typical NPC corp.
You're telling us as if you made a new discovery today..
#afkleadership Gü+Gü+Gü+ -óߦªß¦ç-ó Gü+Gü+Gü+
EVE:Valkyrie pilot unmasked (her name is Ran)
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25013
|
Posted - 2015.05.23 05:25:41 -
[19] - Quote
I'm going to quote Sabriz in a roundabout way, but disincentivizing something, like 50% tax, is akin to saying "we shouldn't have it in the game at all". It is not a good design.
Instead give PVE bonuses that scale with number of members and time spent by a member in that corp and the lifetime of the corp. Incentivize people to band together and then stick it out. Membership loyalty benefits is a well known and widely used incentivizing tactic.
Edit: grammar
Edit 2: Really surprised by the back and forth discussion above. Here's a suggestion on the front page of GD for a 50% NPC tax.
8.000 dead, 18,000 injured, 130k homes destroyed. PLEX for Good: Nepal Earthquake Relief. USD $15 donated for each PLEX you donate. Loose ISK can be sent to Chribba
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25107
|
Posted - 2015.05.24 23:58:29 -
[20] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Can't tell if serious.
Even after a series of well deserved nerfs, highsec PvP is INSANELY easy. And once you start bringing alts and multiboxing into the equation, it becomes less challenging than a good bit of PvE content. Untanked industrials and barges continue to litter killboards, and one of C&P's better known miscreants has inflicted billions of ISK in damage on at least a dozen highsec badcorps in the past month alone.
Not sure if you're serious. Hisec PVP is an environment where there are predators who themselves are not prey to other predators (for the most part). The option to gank gankers has always been open, and with -5 sec status and below any pilot can freely engage a ganker with no repercussions (except retaliation by an elite PVPer!).
These predators are hunting prey who do not scout their gates, tank their ships, or follow any one of the hundreds of writeups and forum posts you can find to avoid getting ganked.
Do you know why a ganker does not tank his ship against aggression from another player? Because the player base has shown itself to be too timid to proactively aggress the ganker (instead of waiting for GCC to kick in).
Player vs. player is "insanely easy" because other players have created this situation. It has nothing to do with the rules as they exist.
8.000 dead, 18,000 injured, 130k homes destroyed. PLEX for Good: Nepal Earthquake Relief. USD $15 donated for each PLEX you donate. Loose ISK can be sent to Chribba
|
|
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25111
|
Posted - 2015.05.25 06:03:26 -
[21] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
How can I freely engage them with no repercussions when they're always docked up waiting out timers? I've got better things to do than camping out in a system for hours scouting belts, trying to guess which unranked retriever will be targeted next, just so I can possibly kill a 10M ISK destroyer and empty pod before his target pops.
It's like you think I don't understand how ganking works, or that it's done on dedicated alts with empty pods in ships whose loss is already a given.
You are describing stuff you can't be bothered to do, because :effort:. Do you know who do spend hours doing this? Gate campers. Freighter gankers scanning ship after ship after ship on gates. People who hunt explorers. Doing a bunch of boring stuff for the 5-10 seconds of intense activity describes 95% of EVE. This is how the game is designed. Everything requires planning and a meticulous amount of research and patience for it to pay off.
You can't be bothered to do that? Then I don't think you have any right to complain about it.
When you pop a ganker's ship, you're not blowing up a 10M ISK cheap fitted destroyer, you are saving millions and billions of ISK or ore of a potential target. The way you visualize value is completely backwards, and it's no surprise you see no point in suiciding the suicide ganker.
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:There's always going to be easy targets in highsec, whether they be new, casuals, slow learners or just plain dumb. Why are you so attached to farming kills off that crowd endlessly?
Joe Risalo wrote:
You're there in high specifically because the kills are easy.
If you wanted a challenge, you'd go to low/null.
Let's say you logged on tomorrow and all the carebears suddenly started fighting back, to great effect.
You would likely unsub long before you considered accepting the challenge.
The point of war is to fight asymmetric battles. You fight your enemy where they are outnumbered, weak, and easy to kill. EVE allows the basic tenets of warfare to be played out. You're complaining about humans stacking the deck for a favorable outcome.
Unlike low and null, asymmetric warfare is easy to counter in hisec. There are no bubbles, no free-for-all engagement rules, and a constantly-updated and fresh Local list.
And Joe, I don't back out of any challenge. Feel free to test that out. To me, every scar is a victory.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25111
|
Posted - 2015.05.25 06:10:35 -
[22] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
Let's say you logged on tomorrow and all the carebears suddenly started fighting back, to great effect.
You would likely unsub long before you considered accepting the challenge.
Joe, I'll post a quote from reddit which is a better retort than mine to your statement.
Quote:Mud wrestling with pigs don't work, because the pig love it.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25155
|
Posted - 2015.05.27 11:48:24 -
[23] - Quote
All the NPC Corps, with the sole exception of CAS, are quiet, barren, and antisocial. If all of them except CAS were dissolved tomorrow, the players who love to play alone could continue living life in one-person Player Corps. The players who like social environments would have to go find Player Corporations (which happen to be how people get together in EVE).
Explain to me again why anyone is arguing any of the non-CAS NPC Corps should stay?
Oh, right. Wardecs. Wardecs has been what this entire discussion has been about from the start. Wardec immunity and how even 100% tax would not be enough for someone to relinquish that immunity.
(sorry Scipio, I thought I'd create some content by making the discussion as far left of neutral as possible).
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25180
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 00:15:20 -
[24] - Quote
This thread is about wardec immunity and only wardec immunity. Everything else is window dressing (like Ferni says.. a pretty logo and a name).
Feeling antisocial? Don't want to take orders? Make a one-man corp.
Want to collaborate with other players without having to take orders from a Player Corp boss? Sure. But why would you want wardec immunity as a bonus for that? One has nothing to do with the other. Justify your "get off my NPC porch" rant all you want, but what you are really clinging onto is that sweet, sweet wardec immunity.
There is no justification for any corp in EVE to have wardec immunity. I'm sure a system of payment and immunity for players <30 days in age can be worked out with no problems whatsoever.
And if haulers blow up and prices skyrocket in the market, so what? Content is content.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25184
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 02:18:47 -
[25] - Quote
beakerax wrote:Sibyyl wrote:Justify your "get off my NPC porch" rant all you want, but what you are really clinging onto is that sweet, sweet wardec immunity. Some people have posted that they stay in NPC corps because of wardec immunity. Other people have posted that they stay in NPC corps for reasons other than wardec immunity. There are two options: GÇô they're all liars GÇô you are wrong about what these other people find worthwhile
If losing wardec immunity isn't a problem, then the thread can end.
I don't think anyone has an issue with NPC Corps if wardec immunity is removed. It's about as simple as that.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25184
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 02:41:46 -
[26] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Sibyyl wrote:
I don't think anyone has an issue with NPC Corps if wardec immunity is removed. It's about as simple as that.
Well, I imagine the inhabitants of NPC corps would. I can't see them becoming vulnerable without seeing significant drops in membership.
Yes, I believe I said exactly this at the top of the page.
Quote:After all at the point wardec immunity is dropped they become significantly inferior to one man corps in every way whether players want to be social or not.
This would be the system working as intended. Players get exposed to content, they join Player Corps, or make their own. Either way, they get access to new parts of the game, like structures, SOV, you name it.
Why is this such a problem?
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25184
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 03:04:20 -
[27] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:It's not a problem as evidenced by the working examples on non-NPC corps, but with that said why is the inverse an problem?
Why is the ability to select content and risk in this manner so different from any other? Why are wardecs seen as such an important linchpin of a mechanic in themselves that every players needs to be affected by them? for that matter how did that single mechanic become equivalent to the whole of content?
Why can't players decide they have no interest in sov or structures and tailor play accordingly?
I will flip the question on you.
If it is not such a problem, what is the issue with removing wardec immunity? Players are free to "have no interest in sov or structures and tailor play accordingly", but I don't see what all that has to do with having wardec immunity? Can't they continue to have all those aspirations while being vulnerable to wardecs in the same way that everyone else is in the game?
Why would I want wardec immunity removed?
- Because it removes exposure to content from players who are most vulnerable to quitting. We can argue about NPC Corps and quitting, but we all agree that content causes people to stay in the game. Wardecs are content.
- Because it's too powerful. Travel is an essential component of EVE. Travel can consume a significant portion of gameplay for someone who is out in space. Wardecs make travel in hisec for non-haulers 100% safe. Being immune during an activity that constitutes most of your time in space in hisec is too powerful.
- There is no lore or gameplay balancing reason for wardec immunity to exist.
- There is no statistical reason for wardec immunity to exist (see below).
From the horse's mouth:
CCP Rise wrote:We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed. The strongest indicators for a new player staying with EVE are associated with social activity: joining corps, using market and contract systems, pvping, etc. Isolating players away from the actual sandbox seems very contrary to what we would like to accomplish.
Mr. Epeen see the quote above. Your assertion that players will leave is incorrect.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25186
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 03:10:58 -
[28] - Quote
Wanted to reply to this. *rubs your shiny noggin*
Mr Epeen wrote:I'm pretty sure that the sudden loss of a significant portion of the player base is a pretty good justification for keeping immunity. On the other hand, if immunity is removed the people who stay in NPC corps will be wardeccing everyone and utterly destroying any corp less than 500 people.
People won't even bother making player corps. No point to it. Most NPC corps will be larger than the current alliances. The game will be completely changed.
Why would being in an NPC Corp give you a magical ability to bring more people together or create larger fleets than you could in a PC Corp?
Having access to a shared Corp chat with a massive number of players is no guarantee (at all) that you'll get anyone to participate. Even if you did get a massive number of people to participate, you would have no magical ability to have those participants be skilled and good PVPers. If you doubt me, you should look at my corp ticker.
And look at it this way. If someone succeeded in running massive NPC Corp fleets killing war targets all over hisec, then voila.. we just exposed NPC Corpies to content instead of it being solo-ville.
Win-win.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25189
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 04:01:38 -
[29] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:The argument you are making now is that the affected players made the wrong choice somehow and need to be forcibly corrected because someone else knows what their game play time should be spent doing better than they do.
Actually my argument is very stark. I have nothing to say about all of the 1,000 reasons that people have for staying in NPC Corps. I am perfectly fine with those justifications, those players are welcome to these preferences, and I will never ever argue against their right to have these desires. I said earlier that these preferences are irrelevant because they cannot be debated. They are 100% subjective.
I just don't think these players should be immune to wardecs. Wardecs have as much power to force participation as any other aspect of the game - which is to say wardecs can't force you to participate at all. In the sandbox, you can use a variety of methods to deny kills and deny content (hint: docking up is only one such way. There are hundreds).
No player can be forced to PVP through a wardec. Hence, the removal of wardec immunity is not a challenge to any playstyle or player preference in the sandbox.
How can you force a player to do anything at all? It is not possible, you know.. free will, human ingenuity, and all that.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25189
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 04:21:28 -
[30] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:You know as well as I do that if NPC corps were capable of being wardecced, pretty much everyone would keep them perma-decked.
You literally would not be able to undock...
So much for the new player experience...
Doubt anyone is gonna take a 1 hour old.
There are 28 NPC Corps. Given the size of each, the fee to wardec each would be 500M ISK. Are you saying "pretty much everyone" is going to be sinking 14B ISK a week to do this?
Really?
Even if they did, players would abandon NPC Corps. Mission accomplished.
Also, I said this:
Sibyyl wrote:I'm sure a system of payment and immunity for players <30 days in age can be worked out with no problems whatsoever.
New player experience problem solved.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
|
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25189
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 04:33:31 -
[31] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:No... It's idiotic
Sure. Tell me how you really feel 
I was procrastinating changing the brakes on a truck.. for losing what I think is the "feel" for it (for lack of a better word), not having done it in a while. I'm going to stop using posting an excuse and get to it.
Maybe this debate has no end, like all debates of its kind.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25224
|
Posted - 2015.05.29 22:09:47 -
[32] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Anyone here watch Gold Rush?
I love this show so much. My dad recorded season 5 for me while I was out of the country and I am catching up on it during breaks.
I love the kid, and the old fellow who needs subtitles. Such a good show..
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25259
|
Posted - 2015.05.30 15:14:43 -
[33] - Quote
Yuri Ostrovskoy wrote:So over the last 60 pages, why haven't we seen anyone actually offer any incentives to join thier corps? If a player corp is superior, why haven't any of you taken this opportunity to run open recruitment and show us your "better way"? Or is it because the outspoken are actually fine with npc corps, as long as they can pummel them without repercussions?
We're fine with NPC corps, as long as its members can be "pummelled without repercussions" just like everyone else in EVE, instead of enjoying an unjustifiable hisec godmode** buff.
** Yes, Tyberius it's godmode because unless you're flying a hauler you can't be killed in hisec while travelling. Please don't add AP here - we all know that using AP is an invitation for an easy kill. I'm sure you know what instaundocks and instadocks are.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25260
|
Posted - 2015.05.30 17:39:25 -
[34] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:The only benefit to an NPC corp is that you don't get wardecced by the countless griefer corps who specialise in doing nothing but shooting easy targets.
All I wanted in this thread is an honest admission that this is the case. That's all I wanted to hear, thanks!
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25399
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 21:55:05 -
[35] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:With wardecs, the most common reason to dec somone is for easy kills. This is why nearly 90% of all wardecs in which kills were made were won by the aggressor, and why three quarters of wars where kills were scored were completely one sided in favour of the aggressor. Dress up a pig all you want, it's still a pig.
With freighter ganks, the most common reason to blap the ship is for easy kills. This is why 100% of all freighter ganks which end in kills were won by the aggressor, and why 100% of freighter ganks where kills were scored were completely one sided in favour of the aggressor. Dress up a pig all you want, it's still a pig.
Lucas, am I doing it right? By your logic should we ban freighter ganks too?
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25415
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 01:14:19 -
[36] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:I didn't say we should ban wardecs
For an NPC Corp member, what is the difference between a banned mechanic, and a mechanic they are totally immune to? NPC Corps are larger, in orders of magnitude, than any corp in hisec or anywhere else in the game. You say you don't want wardecs banned, but functionally wardec immunity for the largest corps in the game is exactly that.
Quote:It's just a fact that people go after easy targets when declaring war.
This has yet to be used as a justification for any immunity to anything, anywhere else in the game. Why are wardecs so special that they deserve an immunity clause for a select few players in the game? Why are some players immune to this thing in the same security rating system and some others aren't? It makes no sense at all, and there is no justification for it.
Quote:Please by all means proceed to believe that the wardec system is fine as is.
I don't believe that. Wardecs should be fixed, and then wardec immunity should be removed. I don't think immunity should be used as a "patch" for a broken mechanic. Instead, the mechanic should be fixed and no one in the game should be uniquely immune to anything.
What I don't believe is that the nonconsensual PVP aspect, or the overwhelming victory aspect of wardecs is what is broken. EVE is all about asymmetric warfare, and about no-choice PVP, simple as that.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25415
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 01:15:04 -
[37] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:There are significant differences between wardecs and suicide ganking. The most important one is that you can easily avoid being ganked. Wardecs throw a corp into "nullsec".
People don't survive in nullsec?
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25417
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 06:03:04 -
[38] - Quote
Can't rejoin a corp at war for 7 days.
Can't leave a corp in space.
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25422
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 03:01:48 -
[39] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:And yes, there's a justification, they choose to play in that way without the same tool as other players get in player corps and without being able to deploy in-space assets and in return they get to be immune to wardecs. It's a playstyle choice. One you obviously hate, but it's a valid choice nonetheless. Quite honestly, I don't see why people should be force out of that just so a handful of groups can wardec even more players who have no interest in fighting. This is a game. People play it for entertainment. Force players into being fodder for a minority group of what can only be described as griefers, and they will leave. it's really that simple.
I disagree with you, but we are arguing something completely subjective at this point.
We would only hold on to let go
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25423
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 03:08:14 -
[40] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:No. They don't. Your alliance's killboard is a clear illustration of that. Now, just imagine if, instead of losing Atrons and Talwars, you were losing mission battlecruisers and battleships.
Good thing you went for the low effort option in your response. The preemptive smacktalk doesn't lend itself very well to a discussion.
We would only hold on to let go
|
|
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25426
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 15:35:41 -
[41] - Quote
Aza Ebanu wrote:There are plenty of people in player corps. If there aren't enough for you to get your jollies, too bad.
People should not have automatic immunity to a combat mechanism when they are in space. Wardec immunity for NPC corps should be removed. Decc dodging should be removed. The fact that you're arguing someone gets "jollies" is a strawman. Please don't put words in our mouth, or associate emotions or motivations that we actually haven't explicitly stated.
Non-consensual PVP is an essential part of the game. Whether or not a group of players don't want to PVP or are terrible at PVP is beside the point. It's fine if you don't believe that and we can chalk it up to a disagreement. I'm not sure why my or anyone else's "jollies" enters the discussion.
We would only hold on to let go
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25427
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 16:14:56 -
[42] - Quote
Lucy Lopez wrote:Wardeccing isn't a combat mechanism, it's a strategy. If you want to explode NPC corp members in highsec then the sandbox already offers you various strategies for that. What you want is access to the easiest strategy of them all.
The equivalent of saying nullsec is easy because two parties can shoot each other freely.
Easy peasy!
We would only hold on to let go
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25440
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 02:38:09 -
[43] - Quote
Aza Ebanu wrote:Okay let me put this NPC wardec idea to bed. According to lore, you belong to a racial empire corp. This corp is sponsored by the faction, but is not an element of the faction's military. If you go to war with that corp, you are declaring war on that corp's empire. All ships and corps friendly to that NPC corp will defend itself. Therefore, unless you are willing to go up against a bunch of NPCs supporting those capsuleers, you better leave that corp alone. Last but not least, the war dec is an agreement with concord, so they really wouldn't want the empires to fight or be drawn into war with capsuleers or each other.
TL;DR:
NPC corps are relatively neutral organizations of the four empires. Wardeccing an NPC corp is wardeccing an empire faction.
"Mud wrestling with pigs don't work, because the pigs love it."
Having facpo aggress you for wardeccing NPC corps is acceptable. So on those terms you agree with deleting wardec immunity from the game?
We would only hold on to let go
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25440
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 03:17:04 -
[44] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:A bit more precision please, in non-highsec everybody can shoot everybody without noticeable consequences. In a highsec war only the involved corps can initially shoot each other without Concord involvement, which is a huge difference.
And the defender can call in allies. They can invite anyone and everyone to shoot the aggressor without CONCORD. The attacker has no such capability.
Nevil Oscillator wrote:Players exist within a universe where the actions of other have consequences to them but no it is not essential that everyone be taking the same risks for the same rewards. It is for the players to decide what will be out of their depth and if you had no shallow end then there would be no good or bad decision.
And that in my opinion is what Eve is all about.
We are talking about EVE, a non-consensual PVP spaceship game. We shouldn't provide a shallow end for a 5-year old player, just like we don't let 30-year olds stay in Kindergarten. I'm perfectly fine with rookies enjoying wardec immunity for a reasonable period of time. Why does a 5-year old player need this coddling?
If you wanted the shallow end hottub experience, isn't that what station spinning is for?
We would only hold on to let go
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25455
|
Posted - 2015.06.08 03:28:33 -
[45] - Quote
No Joe, we need more ways for NPC Corpies to get blown up, and more reasons for them to undock and have fun.
Restricting them from dangerous areas of space is a nice way to get people to quit from boredom.
We would only hold on to let go
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25457
|
Posted - 2015.06.09 00:29:17 -
[46] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Maybe because they don't want to? Contrary to popular belief, there's a lot more to do in EVE than shoot people, and there are groups who want to exist to do something that isn't pew pew. If the answer is "learn to shoot people", that's effectively writing off players corps as only for people who want to shoot other people, which is pretty much an exaggeration of the problem there is now.
Lucas, your argument depends on mixing the idea that (1) people want to do different things, with (2) people want to be combat free. (1) and (2) are not related at all. People are free to do all kinds of things in EVE, and not a single person is debating their right to do so, even though you keep bringing it up as if people are against Explorers or Miners. No one is arguing that career choice.
What is objectionable is the expectation that you should be completely safe while you are Mining or Exploring or Hauling. People don't have to learn how to PVP at all, but at the very least they have to learn how to not be targets. You are absolving people of that responsibility by appealing to a "think of the kids" reasoning - how weak and incapable these people are, like helpless children. Is this characterization actually true? Are you advocating for coddling?
We would only hold on to let go
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25457
|
Posted - 2015.06.09 00:36:42 -
[47] - Quote
Orion Nex wrote:All I know is that every time I've settled into a group it's been destroyed by high sec war decs. I have no idea what the answer is. I've rarely posted on the forums and it hasn't gone well when I've decided to.
I like your post, but I will point out one thing which I believe is a fallacy. There is no expectation that 100% of corps out there will succeed. I don't see why it's a problem if 90% of the poorly run and poorly defended corps are destroyed by better organized and better armed ones. The non consensual PVP sandbox is a dog eat dog universe.
Does the dial on attackers vs. defenders need to be adjusted? I can be convinced of that, if someone can provide me some statistically backed argument as to why this is necessary. (Yes Lucas, I do see your wardec statistics, but I think the numbers are contrived).
Quote:I think the trolls that war dec high sec corps are similar to people in Dust that create alts to crush noobs in the Academy (a 3 or 4 match beginner mode for new players). It serves no good purpose.
This is a value judgment on your part.. made no less as part of the losing side of a conflict. I don't think this is an objective view. People do stuff in games for various reasons, and within the bounds of the EULA all of those reasons are equally as sound. Being noble, or a great tactician like Robert E Lee instead of like Ulysses Grant.. these are all personal values, not universal ones.
I agree with you, Wardecs need to be reimagined.. but not for reasons of rookie lambs dying to some imaginary slaughter, or because players should be safe anywhere in space (they shouldn't be).
We would only hold on to let go
|
|
|
| |
|