| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 62 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
   |
Posted - 2016.07.30 18:51:47 -
[511] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Of course you do not want accounts linked, it makes spying and scamming so easy a child can do it. The gain is that people can check better for spies and scammers and perhaps create better content in terms of making ships explode rather then see all their hangers cleaned out or get hot dropped for easy kills. Of course it will only clean out the lazy ones, some will still get around it, but it makes it harder and taht is where CCP fails so often.
Well then keep them separate then. I prefer a game with spying, scamming and corp thefts. We have all heard those stories and been impressed by them. Hell the Guiding Hand Social club is still something people point too. That kind of thing would become extremely difficult if not impossible. Then expect Eve to continue to decline...
Explain why Eve grew from 2003-2010 then. We had spying, scamming, corp thefts, all of it back then.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
59
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 18:53:13 -
[512] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Well I have had those war decs too and they don't bother me either, also I had some actively hunting me, I did the Eve strategy of boring them to death. But as I said, show me actual fleet fights by hisec non-merc corps or alliances that have done what you suggested and won. I just have not seen any. I think it is possible to do that if one forces the mercs to fight to defend something which is why I keep pushing the OS for watch list in a constellation, which is ridiculed by the trolls on the Eve forums, one because I proposed it and two because hisec players are there only to be farmed.
Nice absurd criteria you got there. I too like to demand criteria that won't be met to support my arguments.  BTW, I'll leave it to you to figure out why you won't likely see these fleet fights you are asking for. Generally when people say things like I will leave you to work out why, it means that they have no idea. But my expectation is taht they will have multiple ones set up ready to go, but so what, the killboard will not be totally green will it... So your definition of victory of a war deccer is to have all kills and zero losses? I mean that is a nice goal but hardly a justification for elimination/nerf of the war dec system. I think I now understand just how deep your delusions run. I would like to see a reduction in blanket war decs though I am totally happy to see them on 0.0 alliances. I would like to see small corps beating the hell out of each other. So if that is eliminating war decs, I have to ask what the hell?
You know your opinions are so all over the place that I just can't keep track. So I retract my statement saying you wanting to nerf wardecs.
However the bolded part above again shows you just DO NOT GET EVE. Everyone plays by the same rules - there are no special groups in EvE which play by different fundamental rules.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 18:53:30 -
[513] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Another important change which I would link to having linked accounts is having a defind main account which has a special advanatge, you can play two of the characters at the same time in EVE.
I seriously recommend that CCP do this because new players and people who are poor in real life and in game are put at a huge disadvantage with only one character in space. This would mean that people would not be such lemmings jumping through gates for example. Of course in the fragile state that CCP is in they might balk at that, but it is really so important to stop their new players being easy cannon fodder to all the vets with god knows how many accounts.
Ahhh using video games to fight for social justice.
Next stupid idea Drac?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Lucy Lollipops
State War Academy
Caldari State
62
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 18:55:45 -
[514] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Lucy Lollipops wrote:Maybe game developers are between a hammer and an anvil?
Having very few new stable players?
Having the stable players with a big amount of wardeccers/gankers?
So combination of few newer players and the fear fo losing the stable wardeccers/gankers make them hesitate to take any decision so they keep this crappy wardec system and so on?
And how many players are in war dec alliances? Can you provide relative ratios? No? Wow, I'm shocked. My point is I think you are using this issue, fewer players logged in, to push your own personal agenda. You have no facts to back up your claim, so I'm just going to sit here and think it is Bravo Sierra until you do something other than complain. Here is an idea....Go start getting information. Find out how many people are in these war dec alliances. It is not like this information is hidden. It just takes effort...oh...yeah we know about effort and certain kinds of players.
What I know is that I have a hisec char that I use for mine and for some gas huffing, I joined a corp some weeks ago because some persons in it are nice for a little chat and I am wardecced one week yes one week no.
While usually I see more than 10 persons always online, everytime the corp is wardecced the numer drastically lowers to the ceo and a couple of other players that do some fighting and don't care if they lose their ship.
I could keep mining as usual in a similar way to when I do in wormholes, dscanning al time, aligned and so on but I prefer to focus on my other chars and give some more time to irl activities.
It's annoying because you are forced to do some pvp against persons you have no idea who they are how they play even if you didn't train the skills, you are basically in nullsec for one week and there is none left in the corp to chat because everyone is docked or paused to play, or left the corp ( I saw on another char several times logins interesting persons I was chatting with ) and so on.
Only because others have fun to hunt the persons of my corp for cheap and for long...
pretty sad actually. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 18:57:22 -
[515] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Of course you do not want accounts linked, it makes spying and scamming so easy a child can do it. The gain is that people can check better for spies and scammers and perhaps create better content in terms of making ships explode rather then see all their hangers cleaned out or get hot dropped for easy kills. Of course it will only clean out the lazy ones, some will still get around it, but it makes it harder and taht is where CCP fails so often.
Well then keep them separate then. I prefer a game with spying, scamming and corp thefts. We have all heard those stories and been impressed by them. Hell the Guiding Hand Social club is still something people point too. That kind of thing would become extremely difficult if not impossible. Then expect Eve to continue to decline... Explain why Eve grew from 2003-2010 then. We had spying, scamming, corp thefts, all of it back then.
There are cumulative factors impacting Eve, this is just one of many. I saw people dropping out from 2010 who realised that it was not worth it to put so much effort in when it could be wiped out by a single lazy person who they could never identify in game because there was no linking of accounts.
Losing committed players to that issue is a crying shame in my opinion, those are the type of people who create content and events.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 18:58:55 -
[516] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:So a new alliance can't maintain it's internal security and the whole game needs changing? Hell CCP put out a very long video about doing just what you are talking about! Causality
Exactly what Dracvlad sees as a bug, CCP deliberately advertises as a feature. But everyone else (including CCP Devs) except Dracvlad and his coterie of BadsGäó are the brainless ones.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:01:22 -
[517] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
There are cumulative factors impacting Eve, this is just one of many. I saw people dropping out from 2010 who realised that it was not worth it to put so much effort in when it could be wiped out by a single lazy person who they could never identify in game because there was no linking of accounts.
Losing committed players to that issue is a crying shame in my opinion, those are the type of people who create content and events.
In other words, you can't. You just have anecdotal Bravo Sierra based on no actual randomized data set, no actual analysis, in point of fact you have nothing.
By the way, I love your portrayal of the person who engineers a corp theft as lazy. Never mind they had to get into a position of trust to begin with. That means they probably did alot of work for the alliance before turning and stabbing it in the back.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:02:05 -
[518] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Another important change which I would link to having linked accounts is having a defind main account which has a special advanatge, you can play two of the characters at the same time in EVE.
I seriously recommend that CCP do this because new players and people who are poor in real life and in game are put at a huge disadvantage with only one character in space. This would mean that people would not be such lemmings jumping through gates for example. Of course in the fragile state that CCP is in they might balk at that, but it is really so important to stop their new players being easy cannon fodder to all the vets with god knows how many accounts. Ahhh using video games to fight for social justice. Next stupid idea Drac?
I thought you would hate that one, but as a new player which I was in 2009 I ran with a single account and in the end I got another account at the end of 2011. At that point I was able to scout which cut my risk immensely, if new players are just cannon fodder and the game is better played with two accounts then the game company had better work out something otherwise those new players will walk when they realise they have to pay 30Gé¼ a month or grind ISK to pay for plex. How many just go, nope, not for me?
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
62
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:02:46 -
[519] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment tot he game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:04:37 -
[520] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Another important change which I would link to having linked accounts is having a defind main account which has a special advanatge, you can play two of the characters at the same time in EVE.
I seriously recommend that CCP do this because new players and people who are poor in real life and in game are put at a huge disadvantage with only one character in space. This would mean that people would not be such lemmings jumping through gates for example. Of course in the fragile state that CCP is in they might balk at that, but it is really so important to stop their new players being easy cannon fodder to all the vets with god knows how many accounts. Ahhh using video games to fight for social justice. Next stupid idea Drac? I thought you would hate that one, but as a new player which I was in 2009 I ran with a single account and in the end I got another account at the end of 2011. At that point I was able to scout which cut my risk immensely, if new players are just cannon fodder and the game is better played with two accounts then the game company had better work out something otherwise those new players will walk when they realise they have to pay 30Gé¼ a month or grind ISK to pay for plex. How many just go, nope, not for me?
CCP should be catering to people based on their RL circumstances. That is just errant nonsense. I don't care what you did in 2009, it is irrelevant. Your own personal story is of little to anyone but you. I got bad news for you Drac, nobody here, and especially you, is God's special snowflake.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
|
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:04:58 -
[521] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:You know your opinions are so all over the place that I just can't keep track. So I retract my statement saying you wanting to nerf wardecs.
However the bolded part above again shows you just DO NOT GET EVE. Everyone plays by the same rules - there are no special groups in EvE which play by different fundamental rules.
Gankers are, as soon as we started shooting their wrecks bang, wreck EHP went up.
Did I say rules to force that, nope I just suggested that I did not care about 0.0 alliances being blanket war decked, which is why they got the price increased. The 0.0 dominated CSM did that mate.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:05:51 -
[522] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
There are cumulative factors impacting Eve, this is just one of many. I saw people dropping out from 2010 who realised that it was not worth it to put so much effort in when it could be wiped out by a single lazy person who they could never identify in game because there was no linking of accounts.
Losing committed players to that issue is a crying shame in my opinion, those are the type of people who create content and events.
In other words, you can't. You just have anecdotal Bravo Sierra based on no actual randomized data set, no actual analysis, in point of fact you have nothing. By the way, I love your portrayal of the person who engineers a corp theft as lazy. Never mind they had to get into a position of trust to begin with. That means they probably did alot of work for the alliance before turning and stabbing it in the back.
Well seeing as I have seen a few, yeah, I would call them lazy.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Lucy Lollipops
State War Academy
Caldari State
62
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:07:20 -
[523] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment tot he game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality.
Yes, wardeccers and gankers are probably boring every new player and ( I hope not to many ) medium/long players to death.
New long term strategy...annoy/bore your enemies until they quit their subscription. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:08:21 -
[524] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
There are cumulative factors impacting Eve, this is just one of many. I saw people dropping out from 2010 who realised that it was not worth it to put so much effort in when it could be wiped out by a single lazy person who they could never identify in game because there was no linking of accounts.
Losing committed players to that issue is a crying shame in my opinion, those are the type of people who create content and events.
In other words, you can't. You just have anecdotal Bravo Sierra based on no actual randomized data set, no actual analysis, in point of fact you have nothing. By the way, I love your portrayal of the person who engineers a corp theft as lazy. Never mind they had to get into a position of trust to begin with. That means they probably did alot of work for the alliance before turning and stabbing it in the back. Well seeing as I have seen a few, yeah, I would call them lazy.
Seen a few what? People do not get into a position of trust easily in this game....because of spies, scams and corp thefts. So it is the exact opposite of lazy...or they are BadGäó players who let people into a position of trust without first checking.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:09:30 -
[525] - Quote
Lucy Lollipops wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment tot he game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality. Yes, wardeccers and gankers are probably boring every new player and ( I hope not to many ) medium/long players to death.
That is your choice though, isn't it.
As I already noted these players now have a pretty clear method of playing the game. You can avoid them. That you choose not too is your problem, not anyone else's.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:09:44 -
[526] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment to the game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality.
Not at all, projecting your own ignorance on me, why do you guys always get insulting, I know the difference between tactics and strategy, this is baby stuff mate.
The simple issue is that there is nothing in game to enable you to check someone out. How the hell can I find out that the nice helpful guy with a JF and multiple cyno alts is not a PL spy? I can't, the only way is to have something out of game like IP addresses and stuff like that.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Lucy Lollipops
State War Academy
Caldari State
62
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:11:52 -
[527] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Lucy Lollipops wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment tot he game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality. Yes, wardeccers and gankers are probably boring every new player and ( I hope not to many ) medium/long players to death. That is your choice though, isn't it. As I already noted these players now have a pretty clear method of playing the game. You can avoid them. That you choose not too is your problem, not anyone else's.
It's pretty normal you defend what gives you fun.
But what gives you fun probably doesn't make the other players to have the same fun level.
This brokes the toy (maybe, not sure obviously ) on the long run, being all equal on the financial partecipation to ccp life...
Oh, if you think I have any interest for what you do or not you're totally wrong.
I don't care if others are wardecced or ganked or if it happens to me or not.
I've the luck to be very unsocial otherwise I would be much annoyed while play this game for what I saw so far.
So even with my hisec char on the next wardec I will say goodbye to everyone and back to my npc corp with no problem at all... |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:12:05 -
[528] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
There are cumulative factors impacting Eve, this is just one of many. I saw people dropping out from 2010 who realised that it was not worth it to put so much effort in when it could be wiped out by a single lazy person who they could never identify in game because there was no linking of accounts.
Losing committed players to that issue is a crying shame in my opinion, those are the type of people who create content and events.
In other words, you can't. You just have anecdotal Bravo Sierra based on no actual randomized data set, no actual analysis, in point of fact you have nothing. By the way, I love your portrayal of the person who engineers a corp theft as lazy. Never mind they had to get into a position of trust to begin with. That means they probably did alot of work for the alliance before turning and stabbing it in the back. Well seeing as I have seen a few, yeah, I would call them lazy. Seen a few what? People do not get into a position of trust easily in this game....because of spies, scams and corp thefts. So it is the exact opposite of lazy...or they are BadGäó players who let people into a position of trust without first checking.
How can you check in game? It is easy to do, very very easy, I have done it.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:15:26 -
[529] - Quote
Lucy Lollipops wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment tot he game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality. Yes, wardeccers and gankers are probably boring every new player and ( I hope not to many ) medium/long players to death. New long term strategy...annoy/bore your enemies until they quit their subscription.
The watch list changes made a big difference, that just needs to deelop in the minds of hisec players, unless you ahve really upset them, you are not going to be hunted, then it is a simple matter of finding an out of the way place to operate in and that's it.
The only hunting they did with me was a lame attempt with a pretend noob that could not run a site so needed help, so I just played around with it for lol's. And they only went after me because the guy war decked me for something I posted so I just wound him up a little bit more. All during taht war dec I mined on one of my toons and was set up to kill a solo one.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
63
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:21:15 -
[530] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment to the game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality. Not at all, projecting your own ignorance on me, why do you guys always get insulting, I know the difference between tactics and strategy, this is baby stuff mate. The simple issue is that there is nothing in game to enable you to check someone out. How the hell can I find out that the nice helpful guy with a JF and multiple cyno alts is not a PL spy? I can't, the only way is to have something out of game like IP addresses and stuff like that.
LOL - insulting says the person who said I didn't have a brain because I hold a different opinion than they.
Dracvlad wrote:Anyone with a brain can see thst [sic] this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Anyway, no, you may not be able to know if that person is another player's alt with any certainty or with any game provided mechanic. Why should this knowledge be freely available to you? This game is about risk and loss and reward and adventure and choices. |
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:21:22 -
[531] - Quote
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
It's pretty normal you defend what gives you fun.
But what gives you fun probably doesn't make the other players to have the same fun level.
This brokes the toy (maybe, not sure obviously ) on the long run, being all equal on the financial partecipation to ccp life...
Oh, if you think I have any interest for what you do or not you're totally wrong.
I don't care if others are wardecced or ganked or if it happens to me or not.
I've the luck to be very unsocial otherwise I would be much annoyed while play this game for what I saw so far.
So even with my hisec char on the next wardec I will say goodbye to everyone and back to my npc corp with no problem at all...
Once again...
You can easily avoid a war dec. Go to some back water system and do stuff there. Just avoid the trade hubs and the pipes connecting the trade hubs. Yes, it makes things a bit more difficult, but not impossible. You have 3 slots on your account use one for a trade hub alt in a noob or NPC corp. Use Red Frog Freight if you need to move stuff. In a week or 2 the dec will likely drop if you don't give them any kills. And you can still play the game, just be a bit more alert.
In fact, using a trade hub alt and Red Frog (or a hauler alt if you can) will help minimize the incidence of war decs. If you are not seen in trade hubs and the pipes with your main....they probably won't war dec you.
Or...quit. Leave. Go. Get out. If the above is still too much for you...this is not the type of game for you.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:26:27 -
[532] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Then expect Eve to continue to decline, if you have a very strategic game with superb fleet comabt excellent ship types and all taht stuff and yet you drop back to the lack of account linking making it virtually impossible in game to work out who the new recruit is then you are pretty much creating a glass ceiling.
The only people who can survive in that is small core groups who know each other well or big entities that can take the hit. the rest have to accept major hits again and again which often breaks them and at best feeds easy kills to entitled top feeders.
Anyone with a brain can see thst this is a major issue for dynamic new players.
Espionage and destabilization to ones opponent is part of any successful strategy. I think you are confusing tactics with strategy. What you think is a detriment to the game is actually one of it's strongest points. You can affect your opponents in other ways than just the combat environment built into the game. This is what gives the game depth and reality. Not at all, projecting your own ignorance on me, why do you guys always get insulting, I know the difference between tactics and strategy, this is baby stuff mate. The simple issue is that there is nothing in game to enable you to check someone out. How the hell can I find out that the nice helpful guy with a JF and multiple cyno alts is not a PL spy? I can't, the only way is to have something out of game like IP addresses and stuff like that. LOL - insulting says the person who said I didn't have a brain because I hold a different opinion than they. Dracvlad wrote:Anyone with a brain can see thst [sic] this is a major issue for dynamic new players. Anyway, no, you may not be able to know if that person is another player's alt with any certainty or with any game provided mechanic. Why should this knowledge be freely available to you? This game is about risk and loss and reward and adventure and choices.
So have you created a major corp or big alliance and if not why not?
Risk and reward is exactly what I am talking about, the risk is very high and it destroys the reward, the adventure is to have great fleet fights a campaign or two, not see all your caps stolen from your corp fleet hanger, so the choice is don't do it. Keep it small keep it tight. The ceiling of low expectations...
PS That was a general comment on anyone with a brain can see it.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
64
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:26:57 -
[533] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:You know your opinions are so all over the place that I just can't keep track. So I retract my statement saying you wanting to nerf wardecs.
However the bolded part above again shows you just DO NOT GET EVE. Everyone plays by the same rules - there are no special groups in EvE which play by different fundamental rules.
Gankers are, as soon as we started shooting their wrecks bang, wreck EHP went up. Did I say rules to force that, nope I just suggested that I did not care about 0.0 alliances being blanket war decked, which is why they got the price increased. The 0.0 dominated CSM did that mate.
Gankers are not playing by different rules. Did the wreck EHP go up just for the anti-ganking players or just for transport ships? No it went up for all players and all ships. I know people that don't like to leave wrecks as warp in points or mission runners that shoot wrecks from ninja looters. This change came to them as well. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:28:37 -
[534] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:You know your opinions are so all over the place that I just can't keep track. So I retract my statement saying you wanting to nerf wardecs.
However the bolded part above again shows you just DO NOT GET EVE. Everyone plays by the same rules - there are no special groups in EvE which play by different fundamental rules.
Gankers are, as soon as we started shooting their wrecks bang, wreck EHP went up. Did I say rules to force that, nope I just suggested that I did not care about 0.0 alliances being blanket war decked, which is why they got the price increased. The 0.0 dominated CSM did that mate. Gankers are not playing by different rules. Did the wreck EHP go up just for the anti-ganking players or just for transport ships? No it went up for all players and all ships. I know people that don't like to leave wrecks as warp in points or mission runners that shoot wrecks from ninja looters. This change came to them as well.
As I said the change in itself was not wrong, the issue was how it happened and that CCP did not know their game well enough to see where and how it impacted it. Hisec is so far off their rader and taht of the CSM it is silly and that is my main issue.
There is no representation from hisec, no one from AG has any contact with CCP.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:29:22 -
[535] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
So have you created a major corp or big alliance and if not why not?
Ahhh the "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy. Go Dracvlad, go! Your continued use of logical fallacies, passive aggressive insults, and shifting between topics will eventually carry the day!
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Lex Gabinia
Res Repetundae
64
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:33:08 -
[536] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:
Anyway, no, you may not be able to know if that person is another player's alt with any certainty or with any game provided mechanic. Why should this knowledge be freely available to you? This game is about risk and loss and reward and adventure and choices.
So have you created a major corp or big alliance and if not why not? Risk and reward is exactly what I am talking about, the risk is very high and it destroys the reward, the adventure is to have great fleet fights a campaign or two, not see all your caps stolen from your corp fleet hanger, so the choice is don't do it. Keep it small keep it tight. The ceiling of low expectations... PS That was a general comment on anyone with a brain can see it.
So just a general insult to all that disagree with you.
I have not created anything I would consider a "major" corp or big alliance. I have been involved with fairly sizeable corps and part of medium size alliances. I have dealt with corp theft and killing (revenge was sweet I'll tell ya). Also, just because someone has not done something to your arbitrary standards does not preclude them from having knowledge of the mechanics or understanding of the games ethos.
What you do not seem to understand is that it just might be someone else's adventure to be that corp theft and infiltrator. Something the game is designed to provide and even advertises. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:34:41 -
[537] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
So have you created a major corp or big alliance and if not why not?
Ahhh the "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy. Go Dracvlad, go! Your continued use of logical fallacies, passive aggressive insults, and shifting between topics will eventually carry the day!
Was I being aggressive, I was merely asking if he had done it and if so what stopped him? Seems like when I ask a simple question I am being all passive aggressive or something. I wanted to know if he had gone through this type of thing. That is the funny thing about you and others like you, you project your own feelings and actions on others.
He is quite welcome to say no its too much work, that would be evading the question a bit because the work comes n different forms, such as drama management, do logistics, getting an SRP into place, security and verifying new players along with recruitment. Diplomacy and making sure your team is up to it. It is a lot of work.
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:36:37 -
[538] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:
Anyway, no, you may not be able to know if that person is another player's alt with any certainty or with any game provided mechanic. Why should this knowledge be freely available to you? This game is about risk and loss and reward and adventure and choices.
So have you created a major corp or big alliance and if not why not? Risk and reward is exactly what I am talking about, the risk is very high and it destroys the reward, the adventure is to have great fleet fights a campaign or two, not see all your caps stolen from your corp fleet hanger, so the choice is don't do it. Keep it small keep it tight. The ceiling of low expectations... PS That was a general comment on anyone with a brain can see it. So just a general insult to all that disagree with you. I have not created anything I would consider a "major" corp or big alliance. I have been involved with fairly sizeable corps and part of medium size alliances. I have dealt with corp theft and killing (revenge was sweet I'll tell ya). Also, just because someone has not done something to your arbitrary standards does not preclude them from having knowledge of the mechanics or understanding of the games ethos. What you do not seem to understand is that it just might be someone else's adventure to be that corp theft and infiltrator. Something the game is designed to provide and even advertises.
The revenge is always sweet, and good on you. Was I saying standards to you, I was asking a question.
And have you thought that spying and scamming being so easy to do and so destructive could have an impact on people deciding not to bother doing all that work?
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5045
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:36:47 -
[539] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:
Anyway, no, you may not be able to know if that person is another player's alt with any certainty or with any game provided mechanic. Why should this knowledge be freely available to you? This game is about risk and loss and reward and adventure and choices.
So have you created a major corp or big alliance and if not why not? Risk and reward is exactly what I am talking about, the risk is very high and it destroys the reward, the adventure is to have great fleet fights a campaign or two, not see all your caps stolen from your corp fleet hanger, so the choice is don't do it. Keep it small keep it tight. The ceiling of low expectations... PS That was a general comment on anyone with a brain can see it. So just a general insult to all that disagree with you. I have not created anything I would consider a "major" corp or big alliance. I have been involved with fairly sizeable corps and part of medium size alliances. I have dealt with corp theft and killing (revenge was sweet I'll tell ya). Also, just because someone has not done something to your arbitrary standards does not preclude them from having knowledge of the mechanics or understanding of the games ethos. What you do not seem to understand is that it just might be someone else's adventure to be that corp theft and infiltrator. Something the game is designed to provide and even advertises.
Yep, a general insult to anyone who disagrees...like a true passive aggressive weenie.
And one solution to corp thefts is compartmentalization. Basically, do not put all your eggs in one basket. Now, if the argument were that CCP should do more to enable compartmentalization in corps and alliances, I'd agree. If you are to lazy to use that option and get wiped out...well you were lazy and paid the price.
But no, instead we'll keep the less help mechanic and use a sledgehammer to make spying/corp thefts nearly impossible.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
2020
|
Posted - 2016.07.30 19:40:16 -
[540] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Lex Gabinia wrote:
Anyway, no, you may not be able to know if that person is another player's alt with any certainty or with any game provided mechanic. Why should this knowledge be freely available to you? This game is about risk and loss and reward and adventure and choices.
So have you created a major corp or big alliance and if not why not? Risk and reward is exactly what I am talking about, the risk is very high and it destroys the reward, the adventure is to have great fleet fights a campaign or two, not see all your caps stolen from your corp fleet hanger, so the choice is don't do it. Keep it small keep it tight. The ceiling of low expectations... PS That was a general comment on anyone with a brain can see it. So just a general insult to all that disagree with you. I have not created anything I would consider a "major" corp or big alliance. I have been involved with fairly sizeable corps and part of medium size alliances. I have dealt with corp theft and killing (revenge was sweet I'll tell ya). Also, just because someone has not done something to your arbitrary standards does not preclude them from having knowledge of the mechanics or understanding of the games ethos. What you do not seem to understand is that it just might be someone else's adventure to be that corp theft and infiltrator. Something the game is designed to provide and even advertises. Yep, a general insult to anyone who disagrees...like a true passive aggressive weenie. And one solution to corp thefts is compartmentalization. Basically, do not put all your eggs in one basket. Now, if the argument were that CCP should do more to enable compartmentalization in corps and alliances, I'd agree. If you are to lazy to use that option and get wiped out...well you were lazy and paid the price. But no, instead we'll keep the less help mechanic and use a sledgehammer to make spying/corp thefts nearly impossible.
Weenie now, lol.
Yes that works and I and others do that, but timing is everything in terms of this type of event, when things get real is when you start cutting corners, putting stuff so people can use it, taking risks with major assets, you know and that is what they are waiting for. But the issue still is that in game I have nothing to verify if that nice helpful JF pilot is not a PL player....
When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 62 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |