EVE Search - A Carebear objective.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

A Carebear objective.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 449	Posted - 2011.12.23 18:39:00 - [1] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Unless I get in a PVP ship and a fleet then go out looking for PVP, my objective is to deny them a kill... Usually, I dock up, go semi-AFK, doing things on my other screen, say some stuff in Local to taunt them and waste as much of their time as possible. I don't call out for help, I don't escalate it, I don't give them the satisfaction of anything they may want. This is how it's supposed to be done. Unlike some of my fellow highsec PVP fans, I'm not offended when someone docks up to avoid a fight they know they can't win. Sure I'll talk smack, but in the end we all know that almost every one of the PVP players will run from a fight unless they think there's a chance of winning it. Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: If they take away the ability to dock or find a way to force me to depart from the station, I will simply play an alternative character, account or game. As will I. No one should have the ability to force action on you. If you choose to do nothing, then that's up to you.
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 449	Posted - 2011.12.23 18:47:00 - [2] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: The war dec shields are great No, they aren't. The ability to simply evade every war that comes your way is absurd. Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: I see High Sec as an incubator, not just for new players but new corps and alliances too. Make it 100% safe for all that it matters. Mostly, all I see are those kids that want the easy kill there. Low, null and worm hole space should be where the real PVP occurs. Highsec PVP is far more entertaining. Every single person I've seen say that "real PVP" is in nullsec has a killboard full of kills that have 50+ ships on the winning side. That's not PVP, that PVPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP. The rules of highsec mean there are a lot more tactical opportunities. You just have to be clever enough to find them.
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 449	Posted - 2011.12.23 18:52:00 - [3] - Quote Pillowtalk wrote: If CCP were to open a PVE server it would have 10x the subscriptions of TQ in a month. But they just wanna be vikings too much. =/ What's the end-game for PVE?
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 449	Posted - 2011.12.23 19:12:00 - [4] - Quote Some ideas I have for making PVP more common without actually forcing it on anyone: Give NPC corps more drawbacks, such as the inability to dock in stations owned by rival corps, and "tariffs" that are significantly higher taxes charged for operating in empires other than their corp's. Also restrict their access to other corps' agents and occasionally change corp standings so that they might lose access to agents from time to time due to corporate diplomacy. The idea is that if you're going to work for a corp that isn't player controlled, you're subject to the whims of NPC politics. Change the wardec system so that dec scraping is impossible by allowing corps to be wardecced directly even when they're inside alliances. This means that a holdings corp could be wardecced and would not be able to simply drop in and out of alliances to protect the POS. It means that a corp that has drawn a war can't scrape it off. If the objective is to cost a particular CEO his membership in an alliance, the alliance can avoid the war simply by kicking the target corp out...and the war would remain on the target. This change alone would fix so much in the war system. Supporting (RR, remote sebo, et cetera) someone with an aggression timer preventing them from docking or jumping should cause you to inherit their aggression timer. In order to make highsec less desirable than low/null, I'd also suggest preventing any new large POS towers being set up in 0.5 and higher. Yes this is somewhat selfish as we're too lazy to burn down a large POS, but it's also a way to draw a more distinct line between high and low. Want a large tower? Take the risk of lowsec.
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 449	Posted - 2011.12.23 19:15:00 - [5] - Quote Jaroslav Unwanted wrote: shooting red crosses at overview.. oh wait thats actually end game for any "combat" The endgame for most PVP is territory control, reputation, or just a vague sense or superiority. The goal is something other than simply watching stuff blow up in space. PVE doesn't provide any of those: it's just and endless fountain of the same thing over and over with no significant variance. My point is, what is your goal in playing PVE? How long do you think people will play Eve in coop-only mode? I'm betting two years at the longest, and most would be gone in 6-12 months.
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 453	Posted - 2011.12.24 23:54:00 - [6] - Quote Alysane wrote: FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: Give NPC corps more drawbacks, such as the inability to dock in stations owned by rival corps, and "tariffs" that are significantly higher taxes charged for operating in empires other than their corp's. Also restrict their access to other corps' agents and occasionally change corp standings so that they might lose access to agents from time to time due to corporate diplomacy. The idea is that if you're going to work for a corp that isn't player controlled, you're subject to the whims of NPC politics. lol....what? So your grand idea is to tax NPC corp players more, while also screwing with their corp standings (that probably took weeks to raise) AND limit what agents they can run missions for? Hate to break it to you, but the only PVP these grand ideas will lead to is Carebears vs. CCP, with Unsubscription and Angry Forum Posts as ammo. Just how many carebears spend years in NPC corps? Do you really think there are that many solo players out there who put money into Eve for an extended period of time? I'm betting that the volume of rage quits would be insignificant. It's been my experience that most NPC corp members are alts and newbies. The newbies wouldn't know better and would simply accept that they needed to get out of the NPC corp to access most of the game. The alt owners would whine and make one-man corps. My grand idea is to make the established NPC corps act like corps instead of static war shelters with a modest tax. In the player environment, corporate relationships and standings change regularly. I'm suggesting that NPC corps reflect that sort of behavior.
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 453	Posted - 2011.12.25 01:34:00 - [7] - Quote Jojo Jackson wrote: As long as this meta game of neutral RR and scout fleets is posible there is simply NO RESON to fight! I've been pushing for a change to aggression mechanics that would make neutral RR a lot more risky. It shouldn't be stopped, but it should carry risk beyond someone being able to pull a surprise alpha gank on your logi alt. Jojo Jackson wrote: You (common wannabe grief "PvPler"-¦) allways try to argue with "this is my Sandbox" ... if you claim this -> you MUST except other peoples Sandbox too! It's one big sandbox, and we all share it. Build your sandcastles all you want, but DON'T ask for protection from those who want to kick them down. That's the meaning of sandbox.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.