| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
37749
   |
Posted - 2015.05.31 11:16:32 -
[1321] - Quote
There is a lot more that has been said than those couple of things. It's all relevant and yes, seeing more players move to player Corps is one of those things that has been said.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
13222
|
Posted - 2015.05.31 11:30:15 -
[1322] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Yuri Ostrovskoy wrote:So over the last 60 pages, why haven't we seen anyone actually offer any incentives to join thier corps?
For my part, I simply haven't seen anyone posting on the NPC side who I'd want to hang out with. The majority of you are only posting here to defend the racket you have going, and I wouldn't be interested in playing the game with people like that. Not sure if i would like to hang out with people from CODE. 
Why might that be?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Nevil Oscillator
191
|
Posted - 2015.05.31 11:34:04 -
[1323] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Compare:
"Hiking is fun. Swimming is fun. Bob won't swim with sharks in the pool. We'll let sharks be taken out of the pool. Bob will be able to have more fun."
"Hiking is fun. Swimming is more fun. Bob likes to hike. We should break Bob's legs and throw Bob in the pool."
See the difference?
What do you expect a piranha to say ? Their perspective and goals are quite narrow |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
37751
|
Posted - 2015.05.31 11:46:43 -
[1324] - Quote
Nevil Oscillator wrote:What do you expect a piranha to say ? Their perspective and goals are quite narrow
Why are CCP piranhas? What's wrong with them trying to increase player retention?
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Nevil Oscillator
191
|
Posted - 2015.05.31 17:38:56 -
[1325] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Nevil Oscillator wrote:What do you expect a piranha to say ? Their perspective and goals are quite narrow Why are CCP piranhas? What's wrong with them trying to increase player retention?
CCP said lets break peoples legs and throw them in water infested with flesh devouring aquatic creatures of course |
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
522
|
Posted - 2015.05.31 22:09:29 -
[1326] - Quote
I have removed a troll post.
Quote:5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
Reminder to keep on topic and be respectful. I've been in this thread too many times already.
ISD Decoy
Commander
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Nevil Oscillator
191
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 00:02:28 -
[1327] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:March rabbit wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Yuri Ostrovskoy wrote:So over the last 60 pages, why haven't we seen anyone actually offer any incentives to join thier corps?
For my part, I simply haven't seen anyone posting on the NPC side who I'd want to hang out with. The majority of you are only posting here to defend the racket you have going, and I wouldn't be interested in playing the game with people like that. Not sure if i would like to hang out with people from CODE. Why might that be?
I think they smart bombed my shuttle once and took my pod down to half armor, using a cruiser that subsequently got concorded. They then sent me a message threatening to do it again if I didn't pay them xxx million isk.
I paid them and it hasn't happened again.
|
Aoife Fraoch
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
68
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 03:19:17 -
[1328] - Quote
I should have known procrastinating on the forums when I took a week off work to focus on study was a bad idea. It also doesn't help that it's for post grad statistics, especially with how its being discussed here.
First things first, there are two presentations that are relevant to this. The first is CCP Rise and the second is CCP Quant. The data sets that the both are discussing are observational sets. This is not experimental data, it will not be neat or easy to use and is by definition a little fuzzy. Fortunately we have this whole field of math dedicated to dealing with these kinds of problems.
Second, for the love of Bob please stop trying to make the data say things it is not saying. Just stop. It gets annoying. Please at least understand what the data actually represents and where it is coming from, how it was collectd and the methods that were used to analyse it.
TL;DR;
- CCP Rise didn't talk about NPC corps in his main presentation.
- CCP Quant's segmentation model didn't account for corp type, only behaviour.
- The segmentation model looked at tenure and game time, unsurprisingly those that did a lot in the game or were social stayed for longer.
- The decision tree did discuss corps and corp size for retention, this was after the player killed node. (Being blown up is MORE 'important' than if you are in a NPC corp)
- My takeway; get people to do more things faster to get them to stay.
The First Bit by CCP Rise (Ganking in first 15 days)
Right so first up they are looking at 80,000 users. And they are looking for deathers in the first 15 days and if the killers were nuked by concord et al. This group was split into killed legally, illegally or not. Retention was then looked at for each of these groups.
So from here in the talk we have 85% not killed (68,000), 13.5% killed legally (10,800) and 1% ganked (800). I am asssuming there was some rounding. And from here CCP Rise notes that Ganked were most likely to stay, followed by legally killed and then not killed. Thats it. Thats all the data says for this one. It doesn't say anything else. From here you might come up with a new hypothesis to test and a new test to design, but thats all (Sounds like it was a comparison of means I guess).
The Second Bit gets interesting by CCP Quant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-jfvjMoe9Y
bit.ly/199jryz
Now this one is interesting. Incidently correlation does matter for this sort of analysis, but it is not the main tools used. I believe he even mentioned Principle Componant Analysis (CPA) for dimension reduction and k-means for the actual clustering. After all what was presented was a multi factor model (Involving a bunch of fun dimension reduction and factor analysis. I suspect eigenvalues were involved too.). The aim of these techniques is to take known data, in this case behaviour stats, and use that to define and understand latent or unmeasurable attributes, like what kind of a player you are.
The bits of the presentation about segmentation are the most relevant to this discusion, and frankly it is very interesting stuff. This is the bit where we can look at player activity and groupings. You can also follow along with how different variables were used to define factors, and then how those factors were then used to identify segments (You may notice that kind of corp is not a variable by the way, these are behavioural variables).
Coming from the slides themselves, here are CCP Quant's key takeaways:
Quote:
Professionals and Entrepreneurs are are very active, playing almost every part of the game. They are the backbone of EVE Online and are thus very valuable to us.
Many players play mainly for the Social element. This is where we can really improve, by enabling these players to interact with EVE outside the client, e.g. through moble playforms.
The Passive segment is basically the last bus-stop. We keep a close eye on the amount of players that transition into the Passive segment, and the path to it.
The part of the presentation about decision trees was also very interesting. The short of that one if that dying in a fire due to another player was a common factor in those that made it from the first three months to the fourth. However this one was also caveted.
Size of the corporation joined was another factor he mentioned as mattering for those that did get blown up (remember this is a decision tree). As well as mining for those who did not get their ship blown up. It seems that if you didn't explode, mining meant you were more likely to stay than those who were not.
However CCP Quant did not make any real hard and fast conclusions in his presentation on this. In fact he made a point of stating that this helped them identify new things to test and, I am assuming this part, based on variables they have identified to test for. |
BrundleMeth
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
435
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 23:09:27 -
[1329] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:BrundleMeth wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Yuri Ostrovskoy wrote:So over the last 60 pages, why haven't we seen anyone actually offer any incentives to join thier corps?
For my part, I simply haven't seen anyone posting on the NPC side who I'd want to hang out with. The majority of you are only posting here to defend the racket you have going, and I wouldn't be interested in playing the game with people like that. I have no racket going...and I am an extremely nice guy... Want to join CODE? Our wardec arm has finally finished reorganizing, and we have a bunch of decs going. Or you can join New Order Logistics, and get started with some ganking. We happily accept alts, although if you're just there to spy on our teamspeak you will probably be purged. The only condition is that you have to guess the password to the minerbumping channel. But it should be a pretty easy guess.
CODE? New Order? That james 315 prick? I'd rather stick knives in my nutz... |
Yuri Ostrovskoy
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 01:18:42 -
[1330] - Quote
ISD Decoy wrote:I have removed a troll post. Quote:5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote. Reminder to keep on topic and be respectful. I've been in this thread too many times already.
Honestly ya just might wanna lock this one down then. We've got to many combative people, myself included, large egos, stubborn "nu-uh"ers, and "well, my turrets bigger than yours, and throws harder shells at her".
The points on both sides have been made, discussed, beaten to death, and on and on. |
Nevil Oscillator
192
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 11:08:31 -
[1331] - Quote
Aoife Fraoch wrote:. Fortunately we have this whole field of math dedicated to dealing with these kinds of problems.
If they can't get the basics right, how do you expect them to understand more complicated concepts ?
|
Nevil Oscillator
192
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 06:40:56 -
[1332] - Quote
I think wardecs would be much more interesting if they were a default of 2 days for 20mil |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
268
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 07:15:24 -
[1333] - Quote
Nevil Oscillator wrote:I think wardecs would be much more interesting if they were a default of 2 days for 20mil
is that 2 days worth of online and undocked time ? or 2 days worth of logged off ? |
Nevil Oscillator
192
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 07:50:09 -
[1334] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Nevil Oscillator wrote:I think wardecs would be much more interesting if they were a default of 2 days for 20mil is that 2 days worth of online and undocked time ? or 2 days worth of logged off ?
Yeah it would be nice to force people to be doing what they would normally be doing while they are wardeced but no.. Wardec allows you to interupt another corporations activities if you have enough firepower to scare them, it doesn't force them to line up and get shot unless their own greed makes them take the risk. With a smaller repeatable wardec it would allow a quick and over with show of force and for a much hated corp to be constantly in threat from it's many victims that want payback. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
268
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 12:40:39 -
[1335] - Quote
Nevil Oscillator wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Nevil Oscillator wrote:I think wardecs would be much more interesting if they were a default of 2 days for 20mil is that 2 days worth of online and undocked time ? or 2 days worth of logged off ? Yeah it would be nice to force people to be doing what they would normally be doing while they are wardeced but no.. Wardec allows you to interupt another corporations activities if you have enough firepower to scare them, it doesn't force them to line up and get shot unless their own greed makes them take the risk. With a smaller repeatable wardec it would allow a quick and over with show of force and for a much hated corp to be constantly in threat from it's many victims that want payback. The smaller charge is less ISK wasted if the wardeced corp simply ducks out of sight and is more accessible to less thrifty corporations.
i asked about the 2 day timer because with a war dec being shorter it's too easy to just log off for 2 days,, but a week. not so easy
you can't force people to play the game as you want and it's rather silly to expect it, some love pvp, some like it and some hate it.
war dec fees are not expensive and there is nothing to stop you retracting the war dec after 24 hours of action leaving you another 24 hours of pew pew, there's your 2 days, If the enemy engages cool, or as you put it get greedy and do silly shite during a war then ya get what ya want kinda. but if they decide to dock up and wait it out there is nothing you can do except extend the war dec until you get what you're expecting from the war dec.
war decs happen for all sorts of reasons, bored, want pvp, it's good for content, so a war now and then isn't a bad thing.
also i've known CEO's to pay a corp to dec his own corp, ya know,, keep things exciting and the members on their toes.
also clears out the lazy fecks who are better off gone. nothing like a war to cut the fat.
hell some of the best friends i've met in EVE where war dec targets in the past, some even joined our corp.
bottom line is 2 days is too short a timer for anyone to really care. there's always low sec and 0.0 no shortage of targets to shoot so why not just head out there and not worry about paying concord for PVP or giving your targets a warning. kinda brings us back to people playing EVE how they want and how forcing people to play to your style isn't always a good thing.
perhaps the current system is as good as it gets?
people are lazy and always want the quick fix answer to everything, there is no quick fix to anything in EVE, no matter what you do there is always going to be some that are upset by it. most get over it and get on with it.
this thread is going in circles now, we all know well why players stay in NPC corps, most threads would have been locked by now. i can only assume that CCP is worried about NPC corps in some way and want to do something about them and this thread is feeding them with some sort of feedback. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
268
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 13:15:30 -
[1336] - Quote
Aza Ebanu wrote:
What the heck is wrong with you? You can do small scale PVP anywhere. Small scale PVP in high sec? The OP is about getting new players into larger scale activities, maybe even PVP like on the commercials, not small scale PVP . That is the silliest excuse for picking on new players I have ever heard. Besides, I remember a game without war decs. It also had small scale PVP.
nothing wrong with me at all  i never said anything about small scale PVP not being able to happen anywhere. i'm not making excuses for anyone picking on new players, i'm not a pick on anyone kind of person anyway.
Aza Ebanu wrote:
I wouldn't mind new players having an area where they can do stuff where people don't have the free range of null sec to kill them while they do mining and PVE. Why not? I've known many players who started playing the game under those conditions. The game was fine then, and those players seem fine now. What benefit does war decing a new player do? What good reason is there to war dec a high sec corp? Only thing I've heard is to attack bots, which CCP could manage on their own.
because you can't create an area where you can make isk without risk that's why. there are many reasons for war decs you're trying to make out there isn't and that's just nonsense.
Aza Ebanu wrote:
And CCP should look at the risk v. reward issue you mentioned. It has been broken for a long time, and risk and reward is a perception so no one is really wrong if they argue on either side. If you have good numbers clearly showing how all riskier types of EVE activities pay off better than less riskier activities, I'd like to see them. I assume you don't have any evidence, and are regurgitating propaganda from a concept that died almost a decade ago. I really wish you could have experienced the old EVE.
there is risk related to reward, how is bringing your corp into a wh, investing billions into it and reaping the rewards from the wh not risk VS reward ? you could be attacked after a few days and lose everything.
what about setting up in 0.0 and spending a lot of effort and time building your little empire and all the time reaping in the rewards of the area moons and so on only to be attacked and lose it all, this is not risk = reward?
i agree it's broken in some areas of the game but not everywhere.
there are many ways to make isk in EVE without any risk at all. so i've no idea why you'd assume i should have some metrics to back up a comment on the forums.
you really wish i could have experienced the old EVE? i'm playing since 2007 is that not old enough lol. 
PS: actually played in 2006, in 2007 i decided to stick around. |
Digits Kho
Sock Robbers Inc.
Low-Class
57
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 14:53:48 -
[1337] - Quote
Shailagh wrote:Im trying to make ccp money here. They have data that shows people that stay in npc corps quit more often. They said corp ceos dont like recruiting noobs cuz of fear of awox, do you believe this is the main reason?
I believe people stay in npc corps (and therefor quit more often) to evade wars.
Are wars the most dangerous aspect to retention (players staying in npc corps) and therefore should be nerfed to increase player corp levels and retention?
Nerf wars to save the noobs and make people join player corps to increase retention and ccps wallet?
I think new players ( we talking about them rite?) dont know about wardecs and more so about their mechanics. I mean when i started playing, i didnt know anything about wardecs till i actualy got my ship shotdown. So, IMO, wars arnt the reason. I was however at one point concerned about the whole low sp thing but after i opened the corp finder i wasnt concerned anymore.
Mby some people just dun know about corp finder lel. |
Nevil Oscillator
192
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 18:20:12 -
[1338] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
i asked about the 2 day timer because with a war dec being shorter it's too easy to just log off for 2 days,, but a week. not so easy
you can't force people to play the game as you want and it's rather silly to expect it, some love pvp, some like it and some hate it.
.
That isn't relevant because having the minimum length for a war dec shorter is of no advantage to the person getting war decced, it doesn't end after 2 days if it is not over.
Wardecs are expensive if your target is a bunch of thrashers ganking with meta 1 guns, how many do you need to kill before it remotely matches your expense ? |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6246
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 18:29:30 -
[1339] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:because you can't create an area where you can make isk without risk that's why. there are many reasons for war decs you're trying to make out there isn't and that's just nonsense. Let's just be clear here, when you say "risk", you mean "risk of another player shooting you in the face", because any activity has risk. As for an area without risk of being shot there's definitely ways to make isk with zero risk of being shot. Try to shoot my traders or industrialists, I guarantee you are unable to do it since they never undock, and yet they make the vast majority of my isk.
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.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Nevil Oscillator
192
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 18:51:44 -
[1340] - 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.
I imagine most war decs are declared by someone who thinks they can win. |
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
25399
|
Posted - 2015.06.03 21:55:05 -
[1341] - 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
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
259
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 00:02:44 -
[1342] - Quote
Sybyyl wrote: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?
Suicide ganks in high sec:
Every ship on a suicide gank mail is a loss, that includes the aggressor's ships.
Not all attempted ganks even result in a freighter being destroyed.
Not all ganks that result in a freighter being destroyed are profitable.
Killrights can help to extend the aggressor's pain and skew the math in favor of the "defender".
Security standing loss does take its toll, also. Sometimes, gankers don't make it to their own party.
But, yeah, other than that, it's pretty much the same as war dec'ing hapless scrubs and carebears. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
465
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 04:40:37 -
[1343] - Quote
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".
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6246
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 06:47:44 -
[1344] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote: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? I didn't say we should ban wardecs, neither did I pick an unreasonable measure of stats. It's just a fact that people go after easy targets when declaring war. It's not their fault, the system doesn't reward you for picking a challenge, so the weaker the target the better. Well done on wildly missing the point though.
Please by all means proceed to believe that the wardec system is fine as is. We already know CCP don't believe it is, so it's going to change. The real question is, when it does will you be too busy closing your eyes sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "lalala" to offer realistic suggestions to how to balance it out?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Aza Ebanu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
77
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 06:52:27 -
[1345] - 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".
So much this. |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1794
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 07:25:09 -
[1346] - Quote
And I'm lost when it comes to this wardec think. I mean I kinda get it, as up until about 11 months ago I was in a position where they seemed scary as I was pretty vulnerable back then to it. One man corp, no backup, assets in space... all that jive.
Of course I also wasn't really worth dropping the dec fee unless someone really wanted to bash my POS. (Or was REALLY annoyed with me)
Then I was recruited into an alliance that does wars. Kind of a radical change and I'll be honest, the first couple months were intimidating. After a while I started to relax a bit, once I realized that there was no boogeyman under my bunk. I did my thing as merrily as I could while trying to learn stuff and was mostly uninterrupted. I did get blapped a few times while suspect baiting, but that was either by my intended target or others who were engaged in similar activities and managed to pick the same target as I did.
Not once did scary warmongers come in and maul me, because I stayed vigilant during the time I was learning. I kept my eyes sharp and GTFO whenever things looked hot. Now, after nearly a year of almost constant war (we sometimes take short breaks) I'm pretty used to it and am learning to become an active participant. I'm still terribad at hunting, but I'm trying.
My point, if you could call it that, is that war isn't the end of the world. You can do stuff while wardecced, you just have to keep a sharp eye on your surroundings and exercise reasonable levels of paranoia. Heck, the war-ponents are clearly marked for you in local, which is more than you can say about some gankers. Unreasonable levels of paranoia prevent you from doing things, cause you to freeze up and hide under your bunk. Fear is what ruins the game for you at that point.
*shrug*
Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
268
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 08:34:13 -
[1347] - Quote
Nevil Oscillator wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
i asked about the 2 day timer because with a war dec being shorter it's too easy to just log off for 2 days,, but a week. not so easy
you can't force people to play the game as you want and it's rather silly to expect it, some love pvp, some like it and some hate it.
.
That isn't relevant because having the minimum length for a war dec shorter is of no advantage to the person getting war decced, it doesn't end after 2 days if it is not over. Wardecs are expensive if your target is a bunch of thrashers ganking with meta 1 guns, how many do you need to kill before it remotely matches your expense ?
how would it not be an advantage if the dec was only 2 days. a 2 day dec wouldn't be designed to wipe a corp out,, it would be a bash and run type of dec. 2 days doesn't bother anyone really unless you've a timer on a pos say. but even then players will stayed logged off and not care about the tower getting bashed.
this is all just talk anyway, i've no data to say a 2 day war dec system would be good or bad or an advantage or not. it just sounds silly and easy to avoid. i'm sure CCP keep it at a week for a reason and the costs the same
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
268
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 08:46:38 -
[1348] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:because you can't create an area where you can make isk without risk that's why. there are many reasons for war decs you're trying to make out there isn't and that's just nonsense. Let's just be clear here, when you say "risk", you mean "risk of another player shooting you in the face", because any activity has risk. As for an area without risk of being shot there's definitely ways to make isk with zero risk of being shot. Try to shoot my traders or industrialists, I guarantee you are unable to do it since they never undock, and yet they make the vast majority of my isk. 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.
hiya lucas hope ya well. yup it's a pig alright, i'm not trying to dress it up at all, us vets can boast about our alts that have great market muscle and how easy us vets find it is to make isk. i never said anything to dismiss that. but it's not the norm lucas, we wouldn't be making isk from them alts if everyone was doing it.
yes i was talking about another player shooting you in the face, not everyone is smart enough to know how to deal with war decs or know how to corner a market. sure you could buy plex and never undock. lol i remember a guy in low sec that never undocked, when someone entered the system he was in he'd type in local,, 10m and i leave you alone, the amount of players that paid was laughable,, he never undocked lol, so yea i get the whole make isk easy without risk but not everyone wants to play that way, we all know people who love the risk. but not everyone, that's my whole point, people play as they want and so they should.
i was never a fan of the war dec system for many reasons but it's needed and i'm not sure there is a better way to do it.
can't get the image of a pig dressed up now lmao,, but so true man and i wasn't trying to dress it up. i honestly believe it's needed but have no idea how to make it better than it is, it's an important part of EVE. |
Demica Diaz
SE-1
144
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 09:26:06 -
[1349] - Quote
Speaking from own experience; As much as I love EVE online I play it very casually. I feel like many corps would just dislike player who hardly is online or is offline for week or two every month. But I feel to add that not all players who sit in NPC corp might be in there just because War Decs. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
467
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 11:09:36 -
[1350] - Quote
Demica Diaz wrote:Speaking from own experience; As much as I love EVE online I play it very casually. I feel like many corps would just dislike player who hardly is online or is offline for week or two every month. But I feel to add that not all players who sit in NPC corp might be in there just because War Decs.
I would say player corps are not the right structure for nomadic and casual players without interest in managing structures ... that's why the "clubs" are needed. Even if you try creating a corp full of casuals, there will sooner than later be conflicts around the shared assets and the roles/competencies. Corps are dictatorships like the corps in RL, if they don't follow a common goal, they will die.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |