|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2176
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 00:35:31 -
[1] - Quote
Like I said before crimewatch was ever implemented:
There is no real tactical advantage gained by logistics being neutral. A fleet that was not able to win an engagement in which neutral logistics were used would not have been any more capable of winning if the logistics were not neutral. The only advantage that was ever gained by logistics being neutral was and still is the element of surprise. What people are complaining about when they complain about neutral logistics is local chat not giving them accurate intelligence about enemy numbers.
Since people genuinely don't understand crimewatch or the system it replaced it was never the case that you could not shoot neutral logistics, ever since highsec war was a thing (2004?) you've been able to shoot at the people remotely assisting your war targets. Largely the perception to the contrary was caused by people not from highsec having their overview states not set up to show players as being flagged with aggression. Right up until inferno I routinely heard it from fairly high profile players from Nullsec, lowsec and wormhole space that they believed it impossible to shoot neutral logistics even though it was totally untrue.
This is not to mention that what qualifies as per the game mechanics "neutral logistics" extends well beyond some dude and his Onerios alt. People who ally into wars are "neutral" to the defender in the war. Everyone in the game is "neutral" to another player that has a limited engagement timer for any reason whatsoever. Being at war and having a PVP timer (not even a suspect flag or limited engagement timer) makes every person not in your alliance "neutral" to you.
Crimewatch was a horribly designed system filled with flaws. These flaws are generally considered to be intended and it's trivial to use them to your advantage when you know how to. People who are familiar with those mechanics and encounter them frequently aren't the people who are screwed over by them, the people who aren't dedicated highsec PVPers are. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2176
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 00:40:19 -
[2] - Quote
Mobadder Thworst wrote: Here is the scenario (in old rules). 1) someone pisses me off in a noob corp 2) I war dec his corp for 2 mil a week until it disbands. 3) his noobs all quit after 3 weeks of being told to stay docked because they only got to mine 4 times before they weren't allowed to play for a month.
Except at that point in time you could only declare 3 wars at any given time, so that particular use of wars was fairly unlikely. It was also more likely that the person declaring war wouldn't be a 200 man alliance. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2177
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 01:35:24 -
[3] - Quote
It's not universally the case that players who spend time in highsec doing PVE are not interested in PVP. Obviously there are some people who are just plain not interested in PVP whatsoever, but I don't think that's that's the majority of people and it's definitely not everyone. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2193
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 22:23:55 -
[4] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:That is a serious suggestion. Force all the suspect baiting whackamole mischief out of the docking radii of hub stations and watch **** actually start happening in space. People will have to commit assets offgrid from stations where they'll be vulnerable to interference from other interested parties.
Making it impossible to shoot a suspect while they're at a station won't make people shoot suspects more often. That logic is just totally faulty. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2211
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 03:29:32 -
[5] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Not to derail the thread, but I will admit to being guilty of not being arsed to go chasing after people in Cynabal's and Svipul's, I had so much experience of just that in null sec, though that was before Svipuls. I loved it when the Tier 3 BC's came out then it was just create a screen for them that would kill them if they came in and blap them as they tried to kite, they hated it and it was sweet revenge, problem is that we still did not get to kill them, it just meant that they could not have their fun...
We've killed so many Marmite T3 destroyers it's not even funny. It turns out rapid light missiles turn them into dust pretty fast. Coupled with their tendency to engage anything without thinking about what they're shooting (due to the tendency of war targets to not fight back) it makes them easy targets.
Of course having an entire fleet of Orthruses and rapiers helps too. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2213
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 17:39:36 -
[6] - Quote
Mobadder Thworst wrote:I think the reason it's hard to find a skilled shooter outside the merc organizations is because the crime watch system is so effective at preventing fights. I just think dabbling in PvP to learn is much more inconvenient than it used to be. The end result: newer players are doing it less.
I think people that don't interact with crimewatch very often and weren't around before it existed don't really appreciate how badly crimewatch has affected highsec PVP in general. I feel that the elimination of canflipping in particular was hugely detrimental since it totally eliminated one of the easiest ways for a new player to experience PVP in a way where the newbie himself has some control over who can shoot at him.
That's not to mention the unreasonably short duration of limited engagement timers, which leads to situations where people who want to fight each other and who had been fighting each other only a few minutes earlier suddenly become totally unable to re-engage.
But from its inception crimewatch wasn't designed with gameplay in mind. CCP Greyscale was openly disdainful of highsec PVP gameplay. Not just aggressors in highsec PVP situations, but of PVP in highsec period. Subsequently he created a system without any regard for the resultant gameplay, as was painfully apparent during its development.
The result is a terrible system that leaves no openings for new players and ends most fights before they happen. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2216
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 20:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
There is, most certainly a tend in the MMO community towards spoon feeding people content and telling everyone they're a magical legendary hero in an environment where everyone else is the same magical legendary hero.
I personally don't understand it. If I wanted that kind of power fantasy I'd be playing a single player game. The entire point of EVE is that you are what you make yourself into.
I'm a high price thug for hire for instance. And it's not just a quest line that makes me that, people actually pay me money to do violence to other players.
Subsequently when some carebear says it should be impossible for me to do that because he wants to be able to pretend to be a super special snowflake space captain by leveling his raven undisturbed by other players in the same seamless, single shard universe as him it upsets and confuses me quite a lot. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2217
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 21:51:10 -
[8] - Quote
I'd say that the carebears made their bed and now they have to lie in it. However we also have to lie in it and I'd really prefer not to. I'd also prefer for them to not continue to make it worse. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2219
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 22:16:11 -
[9] - Quote
All kinds of groups have people with those concerns in them. They always have done. That has absolutely no bearing on the current state of play in highsec. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2221
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 01:36:28 -
[10] - Quote
The sound of "Oh **** gotta go don't let me die" accompanied by the sound of crying children/hysterical wife/barfing dog in the background is something everyone has head on teamspeak. |
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2226
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 03:23:14 -
[11] - Quote
Now people are done explaining how they feel that their child crying and other people having more free time and disposable income than them is somehow related to game balance can we continue?
I think it's pertinent to mention that post-inferno alliances lost quite a lot of value for both aggressors and defenders in wars.
Prior to being inferno being in a corporation as an aggressor meant you were limited to 3 wars and you had to pass a corporate vote prior to declaring war, but wars against other corporations were cheap (2 million isk). Alliances could declare unlimited wars and declare war without a vote but always had to pay 50 million as their base fee.
As an aggressor being a small group had benefits, as a defender being a member of an alliance had its benefits.
Presently there's no benefit to being in a small group as an aggressor because you have to pay just as much as the members of a 300 man alliance. As a defender you gain no benefit from being part of a large highsec alliance because the little guys that your alliance membership may have shielded you from before are not just line members of a large mercenary alliance.
Essentially the defenders have lost an incentive to be part of an alliance and the aggressors lost all incentive to not be part of an alliance. Subsequently we end up with the shift that we've seen from there regularly being 150-300 man general purpose highsec alliances to there instead being 150-300 man merc alliances. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2234
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 21:37:43 -
[12] - Quote
There's a bunch of dumb stuff about POSes generally, given that in highsec you can transfer materials to and from them in perfect safety using alts, the ability to trash everything stored in them even when they're reinforced and that it takes very little time and effort to set them up, but dozens and dozens of man hours to destroy them and that they defend themselves even when unmanned just makes them a huge pain in the ass.
I don't think they're a big issue really though. I can charge outlandish prices to blow them up after all. I'm not sure how people feel about moon availability and all that crap though.
Also social corps that cannot be wardeced are a terrible idea. It massively undermines competition between groups of players, undermines the basic stated purpose of war declarations and diminishes the accomplishment of players in real corporations who have built and maintained their collective identity in spite of conflicts with other players.
That kind of crap is one step away from toggleable PVP flags. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2234
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 21:48:26 -
[13] - Quote
I couldn't give a crap about 1 man corps or NPC corps.
People who've made decisions to be in 1 man corps or NPC corps have done so because they don't particularly care to play with other people. And in making that decision they've sacrificed being part of a cohesive group and having an identity beyond themselves and an individual player.
That's totally okay.
If you had corps that could not be wardeced 99% of all highsec corps would switch over to it, instantaneously. Much like they did with the friendly fire toggle. There's absolutely no value to getting people out of NPC corps if all they do is mine or run incursions in perfect safety. That doesn't actually change anything, it just maintains the status quo at the expense of cheapening everyone elses corp ticker. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2239
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 22:59:09 -
[14] - Quote
I'd legitimately rather fight triage carriers than a defended large POS. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2244
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 11:42:37 -
[15] - Quote
For the record it should never be the case that my spy alt is the only competent pilot in a properly fit ship in your entire fleet.
While it's really funny for me it also indicates that you're doing something really wrong with how you train your dudes. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2247
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 12:27:29 -
[16] - Quote
Why would I shoot at people who want to be shot at? They aren't the people who need to be shot, they already know that shooting is good.
The only way people will learn that they like being shot at to begin with is for someone to shoot them. That's what happened to me and it's literally my entire motivation for shooting people in highsec. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2248
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 15:52:45 -
[17] - Quote
A PIS getting taken down without a fight is not necessarily an undesirable outcome. I don't think it's a good idea to have wars affect the functionality of anything. Things should function the sane way when subject to shooting regardless of why they are being shot. POS contents are an issue in other types of space too, lowsec in particular is another area where the safety of the contents is pretty assured.
The only thing a war should do is enable the two involved groups to shoot each other. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2250
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 17:43:54 -
[18] - Quote
Xanthe Alvo wrote: Scammers, corp thieves, awoxers, mission baiters, and gate campers are all part of the meta game. They are playing, and winning at Eve in their own right. Miner bumpers, station huggers and wardeccers are just low skill, risk averse, wannabe PvPers. They're the equivalent of thugs who play the Knockout Game.
What you did there is list off a set of activities all of which are done by the same general group of people. There is no definitive distinction between people who awox or scam and people who declare wars and bump miners. It's the same people. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2250
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 19:18:17 -
[19] - Quote
Bringing Holysheet into an argument is unfair. Some people are just leeches. |
|
|
|