|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Faylee Freir
Defining Harassment
Slaver's Union
138
   |
Posted - 2015.08.21 15:12:04 -
[1] - Quote
I think this is a waste of time. None of your proposed changes do anything to directly benefit anyone that isn't a merc, griefer, and/or content creator. You take away without actually doing anything to balance the other side of the coin, which is silly. Why would any high-sec dwelling person that isn't "like me" agree to your platform and vote for you? The other part to this is that Aegissov is in need of fine-tuning and most everyone is concerned with more important things than war costs and agent relocation. Kudos to you though...
HTFU
|
Faylee Freir
Defining Harassment
Slaver's Union
140
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 02:46:25 -
[2] - Quote
admiral root wrote:Faylee Freir wrote:I think this is a waste of time. None of your proposed changes do anything to directly benefit anyone that isn't a merc, griefer, and/or content creator. You take away without actually doing anything to balance the other side of the coin, which is silly. Why would any high-sec dwelling person that isn't "like me" agree to your platform and vote for you? The other part to this is that Aegissov is in need of fine-tuning and most everyone is concerned with more important things than war costs and agent relocation. Kudos to you though... You lost any shred of credibility you had when you said "griefer". Griefing is prohibited under the ToS and EULA, and rightly so - report that stuff to CCP if you ever see it. Many of the changes would help restore balance to the game as a whole, so that it's more viable for non-highsec residents to do their thing in the space they normally live in. It's the current imbalance that has so many players using highsec alts to make obscene amounts of isk in almost-perfect safety and anyone who can't see that is either blind or selfishly milking highsec for every last dime before it does ultimately get fixed. The rule should be that you make the most money in nullsec and wormhole space as they're the most dangerous places mechanically. The exceptions are that there's no accounting for a confluence of a fool loading 50 billion into a freighter in Jita and the loot fairy smililng on the ganker, and that greedy people will always fall for scams in Jita.
Please, off your high horse. Let's not all act innocent here. With activities and line of harassment and griefing left for us to determine as part of some mysterious "grey area" I think that it's all in the attitude of the people involved.
HTFU
|
Faylee Freir
Defining Harassment
Slaver's Union
140
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 23:27:19 -
[3] - Quote
Damnskippy wrote:Noragen Neirfallas wrote:Leto Thule wrote:The entire "us vs them" scheme is whats out of whack. New players are introduced into a false sense of security from undock 1; beliving that high security space represents a supposed safe zone, when the reality is quite contrary. EVE and "safety" should be explained (and shown to be) mutually exclusive terms at the outset. NPC corps should be defaulted at war just like FW. This will accustom new players to the certainty that eve isn't safe anywhere no matter what. No matter what side of the coin you are on, that is a fact. I think the core problems we have are brought about by players thinking the contrary.
Everyone needs to make ISK. Bearing isnt a bad thing. Expecting to print ISK with no risk is the bad part.
Remove highsec incursions. There is no baby step here as running these gives zero reason to ever go anywhere else.
Agree with reducing ore in highsec, ice too, and make ice scannable again.
Personally id like to see a bit more motivators for highsec war. Standings, LP, or something to get people interested in actually fighting. Agree with the caps and scaled costs.
Tax the **** outta npc income.
Go read my damed sov lite post Leto and tell me what you think of the update  . I agree there needs to be a motivator like a resource to drive the conflict and that way the us vs them will change from predator/prey to group/other group. I like being in a corp with a bunch of dedicated bears who occasionally pvp to protect themselves. It's fun (and cheaper) and grants you differing perspectives however there is no game mechanic reason beyond a shared hanger (which is badly implemented) for us to all be in the same corp. It would make more sense to have our own corps and use a chat channel and mailing list with the half a dozen organizers having access to the same corp hanger...
Again it's just broken when the mechanics discourage the grouping up of the industrial players who provide us with the mans to make the things blow up That is an excellent point. Their should be some incentive to corp up and stick around once someone decides to war dec you. Currently if you don't want to fight, you don't lose anything but a ticker and hanger access by jumping corps.
Well so far all we have are propositions that put more risk and consequence into hisec which is fine but Bronson needs to also provide us with some changes that actually promote joining and staying in a corp (even when the times get rough with wardecs and such).
If you really are a voice for hisec, you need to beef up your platform. I mean it is all about balance, right?
HTFU
|
Faylee Freir
Defining Harassment
Slaver's Union
142
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 13:20:45 -
[4] - Quote
You still never responded to how all of your platform is pointless and a waste of time. There are a LOT of hisec residents that don't like wars at all and don't want to see any conflict drivers added. They want complete peace and your platform is completely one-sided in that fact. Your changes are only going to appeal to the small 0.01 percent of players within this forum, which is why this is a joke...
You need to get on board with fixing and polishing a lot more than making this game riskier if you want to be a true representative for hisec.
- What are your suggestions for making it WORTH joining and staying in a corp (even when it gets rough)?
- What do you think about corp and faction standings and should they be changed in any way?
- What do you think about the corporation UI and do you have any suggestions on how it can be less of a headache to manage?
- What do you think about (freighter) bumping?
- What do you think about hyperdunking?
HTFU
|
Faylee Freir
Defining Harassment
Slaver's Union
143
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 00:51:31 -
[5] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:Tengu Grib wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:
5. I'm on the fence on hyperdunking. It's legal (for now), and it does satisfy risk v reward criteria (the hyperdunnker is still losing X number of ships), but it feels somehow...off to me in a way I can't quantify. I am not opposed to it in it's current form, but I am willing to discuss possible changes if someone can provide concrete reasons as to why it's any worse than regular suicide ganking.
Gotta run to work. I'll address more posts later. Thanks for the feedback.
Hyperdunking is hilariously easy to prevent, and even easier to stop dead in it's tracks. Anyone in local can come save you. Anyone in any chat you have friends in can come save you. And if you start calling for help early, you'll have 15 minutes to 30 minutes for help to arrive, and it won't take much for them to save you. Even your newbro friend in a t1 frigate can save you. There's no problem with Hyperdunking beyond people utterly failing to protect themselves. I'm willing to discuss self-defense tactics in regards to Hyperdunking with anyone who asks, but this isn't the place. And this is precisely what I meant by concrete posting. If someone could provide a post this concrete in opposition to hyperdunking, I'd consider pushing for a change. I have yet to see one anywhere, which is why I'm letting my head trump my gut feeling on this. Thanks.
I didn't ask because I want to see it changed. I was just curious on your stance. I obviously approve of it :)
HTFU
|
|
|
| |
|