Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mortlake
Devils Rejects 666
2734
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 20:05:50 -
[61] - Quote
Orly?
I was told to remove my signature, so I have.
|
000Hunter000
Missiles 'R' Us
114
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 20:28:54 -
[62] - Quote
before you leave, can i haz the remainder of ur stuffz?
Oh, and ... EVE is DYING!!!!!!!1111ONE!!!!ELEVENTY!!! |
Darth Kendari
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 20:49:47 -
[63] - Quote
http://eve-gatecheck.space/eve/ |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5910
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 23:20:34 -
[64] - Quote
Yebo Lakatosh wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:And yet more justification for not letting Alpha's post on the forums. May I show you where to block the most insolent ones m'lord?
Can we get a "Block All Alpha Clones" button. Consider it a pre-emptive strike.
"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
|
Hazel TuckerTS
University of Caille Gallente Federation
88
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 23:28:27 -
[65] - Quote
Lord Frost wrote:10 year player coming back to nothing but ganks and scrubs. I spent billions trying to set up a citadel. Long hours gathering and consolidating my assets only to have pieces of **** destroy all what you've worked for. I know the risk, but obviously when you can't even haul fuel without getting ganked... well I'm glad to quit once again.
I'm sure I'll get backlash from you all, but this post isn't for you. It's for me and the hopes it reaches someone at CCP. Your game has gone to the wayside. I'm so glad I sold my old toon for $1000 on eBay. Well worth it. At least there are people vested enough in this game to pay that.
Cheers all... and fly safe.
There are far better fames out there than eve.
Give black desert a try
code can lick my kevin schwantz at high noon in jita
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5911
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 23:56:32 -
[66] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:The fact is the HTFU or GTFO campaign has been having an adverse effect for the past 4-5 years. If it weren't for SKINs, skill injectors and F2P - what would the "real" numbers for 2016 be? Unless CCP pulls a rabbit put of the hat I think we're going to see the numbers for 2017 literally fall off a cliff.
How do you explain the earlier years?
And consider that things like ganking were, mechanically, easier in the past. There was insurance for ganking. CONCORD response times have been decreased (i.e. CONCORD responds faster), You can now tank your freighters, etc.
Note that all of these things were supposed to reduce or eliminate ganking and yet it is still here and people are still whining for more nerfs....
In looking at war declarations what do we see. People whined about the costs of war decs, so that was changed and increased. War decs shifted to being more camping trade hubs and roaming the trade routes and less targeted small scale war decs. The increased prevalence of war dec alliances. Then the watchlist removal which really hammered targeted war decs. And what do we see...people are still whining about nerfing war decs even more. Whining about how trade hubs are camped and the trade routes are not safe.
In short there have been attempts to make HS safer to cater these players who whine and whine and whine. And look, number of people logged in is also going down. Hmmmm....coincidence? Maybe.
And then we look at CCPs attempt to quantify the effects of suicide ganking on people's time in game. The results are that getting ganked and also legal PvP increase people's duration in game. I know, I know that study is horribly flawed even though nobody can explain how. Every attempt to do so highlights that the person making the claim is actually ignorant about the analysis. There are valid criticisms about that presentation, but considering the critics of said study know f**k all about statistics they never raise them.* However, these criticisms do not necessarily invalidate CCP Rise's presentation.
The point is player-on-player interaction/competition is good for retention. CCP should be encouraging not discouraging it. If you go and look at PFaID. Alot of the ideas are how to make it "better for a player to ignore everyone else" when you get right down to it. Players who want freighter ganking stopped want less player-on-player interaction. Players who want to make war decs less common want less player-on-player interaction/competition. These suggestions are exactly the wrong way to go to retain players and bring in new ones. Eve was successful because it was a sandbox where you could interact in all sorts of different ways with the players. And as CCP has taken away that functionality, players logged in has been dropping.
*Note in past discussion I have raised these criticisms, but I'm not about to go looking for them, do it yourself.
"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
5911
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 00:03:30 -
[67] - Quote
Mara Pahrdi wrote:Akaro Tripar wrote:All this griefing and ganking in high has to stop or the game crumbles to dust....this is simply not state of the art anymore....in neither way....
I always wonder how people come to this conclusion. I've been living right beside Uedama since late 2011. I'm traveling with haulers and everything else through this system. I've moved billions in bpos through Niarja and Uedama. Not to speak of those pricey rigs I moved all the way from Amarr to Rens in a fast aligning almost untanked Sigil, when that guy manipulated the rig market back in 2012. Anybody in a instalocking Nado could have one shot that thing. Not that I would have cared at the time. Profits would have easily paid for the loss of a Sigil or two including the cargo . All that went boom in HS in the last six years is a Retriever to Immortalis one month into the game, a noobship caught by Tora's guys and a shuttle lately, to that smartbombing Maller pilot in Jita. All my Freighters, Orcas, T1 Haulers, BRs and DSTs are in good health, assembled and in use for years. I don't even bother to insure them. It would just be a waste of isk. I've been mining unmolested for extended periods just a couple of jumps out of Halaima. Sure, I haven't done it lately, but I doubt it's any worse now than 2 years ago. In my opinion, HS is way safer today than it was in 2011.
Same here. I did manage to lose a JF, but it was my fault. I took a risk and paid for it. No raging (well okay at myself for being an idiot), no blaming anyone else, etc. Fortunately I could replace the ship and came up with a way to mitigate that risk.
I have mined on an alt in a 0.5 system. Never been bothered, let alone faced a gank attempt. Hauled billions around and through Niarja and Udama.
Does it take extra work? Yup, that is one of the reasons why their are profits to be had in game, IMO. If we removed all player-on-player interaction that was non-consensual guess what would happen to profit margins throughout the game...they'd drop by alot, IMO.
And if you are an industrial type if you watch your margins go from say 50% down to 10% or even 5% are you going to want to keep doing that kind of stuff?
"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
5911
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 00:09:57 -
[68] - Quote
Akaro Tripar wrote:Mara Pahrdi wrote:Akaro Tripar wrote:All this griefing and ganking in high has to stop or the game crumbles to dust....this is simply not state of the art anymore....in neither way....
I always wonder how people come to this conclusion. Because it's simply the truth? The "fact" that you don't get ganked often only proves that you are lucky nothing more....or don't take the "risk" of flying around..... It's no proof that you don't get ganked flying always the same routes over and over again if the gankrate in others is extremely high.... The solution here is not that the PLAYER has to adept to it....no.... CCP has to make ganking impossible.... And THIS demand is here since the game exists and not new....seems to prove to me that it always was a problem,but ccp ignored it to keep their dream of a "special" game alive.... Well...it's time for a change because of a changed market and cosmetic changes like the alphas will not help to keep the game alive...only a 180-¦ turnaround.....
So let me get this straight, ganking is really just a lottery. There is no thought that goes into, it is just that the gankers decide to gank people randomly?
Bullshit. Gankers pick retrievers because they can be ganked. They avoid procurors and skiffs (unless they are very badly fit). Freighters that get ganked are generally carrying way, way too much cargo value.
You quite clearly ignorant of what goes on with ganking.
Here is a hint: try it. Go ask CODE. if you can go ganking with them. You'll probably learn alot. And that way you can post based on hands on actual experience vs. ignorance.
And making ganking impossible? Thank you for proving my earlier comment that it is players like you who want to limit player-on-player interaction. That you don't understand the basic nature of the game, and that so far to date, research shows that limiting player-on-player interaction actually will reduce player retention rates.
It is views like yours that are the true cancer in EVE.
"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
|
Clockwork Robot
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 00:18:52 -
[69] - Quote
I feel like it's maybe a little too... easy to troll the "hardcore" crowd these days... For all the "git gud" mentality you guys espouse, with the "tearz" silliness... You're all surprisingly thin-skinned over the idea of someone not getting into your style of play. |
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1483
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 00:41:26 -
[70] - Quote
Clockwork Robot wrote:I feel like it's maybe a little too... easy to troll the "hardcore" crowd these days... For all the "git gud" mentality you guys espouse, with the "tearz" silliness... You're all surprisingly thin-skinned over the idea of someone not getting into your style of play. That's ok.
That's balanced by the not hardcore crowd being thin skinned over the style of play to begin with.
Swings and roundabouts.
Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
|
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27577
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 00:42:55 -
[71] - Quote
Clockwork Robot wrote:I feel like it's maybe a little too... easy to troll the "hardcore" crowd these days... For all the "git gud" mentality you guys espouse, with the "tearz" silliness... You're all surprisingly thin-skinned over the idea of someone not getting into your style of play. It's not that people aren't getting the style of play, it's that despite years of nerfs people are still proposing that those playstyles be nerfed further because the people they were aimed were able to adapt in order to continue in their playstyle. They've been under attack from people who think highsec should be not safer, but safe for over a decade
Ganking, wardecs and other highsec shenanigans have always been a part of Eve, highsec was never intended to be safesec and that these activities are allowed is part of that intention. Unfortunately the number of ways to introduce risk to otherwise relatively risk free playstyles has been reduced at the behest of some who indulge in those relatively risk free playstyles; who utterly failed to account for the ability of people to adapt to change.
In the case of changes to suicide ganking and wardecs the often unheeded lesson has been to be careful what you wish for, you might get it.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Bertok Francis
Raiju
19
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 00:59:53 -
[72] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Clockwork Robot wrote:I feel like it's maybe a little too... easy to troll the "hardcore" crowd these days... For all the "git gud" mentality you guys espouse, with the "tearz" silliness... You're all surprisingly thin-skinned over the idea of someone not getting into your style of play. It's not that people aren't getting the style of play, it's that despite years of nerfs people are still proposing that those playstyles be nerfed further because the people they were aimed were able to adapt in order to continue in their playstyle. They've been under attack from people who think highsec should be not safer, but safe for over a decade Ganking, wardecs and other highsec shenanigans have always been a part of Eve, highsec was never intended to be safesec and that these activities are allowed is part of that intention. Unfortunately the number of ways to introduce risk to otherwise relatively risk free playstyles has been reduced at the behest of some who indulge in those relatively risk free playstyles; who utterly failed to account for the ability of people to adapt to change. In the case of changes to suicide ganking and wardecs the often unheeded lesson has been to be careful what you wish for, you might get it. Well, wardecks could use some work; atm the best way to win a war-deck as the defender is by just using an alpha clone hauler alt. Most things can be moved by an iterion 5 and if you tank it right and don't carry plex or anything else stupidly expensive it's not likely to be ganked. So far I have had a few weeks of being wardecked in my 4 or so months of playing and it's pretty much boiled down to "avoid x trade hub for a week" I have never seen a war target in local and a locator agent would usually be useless against me (go ahead and try to find Jxxxxxx so you can kill my 500k isk heron) it would be nice if there was an actual objective or victory condition because as is they seem pretty pointless. |
Clockwork Robot
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 01:02:42 -
[73] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Clockwork Robot wrote:I feel like it's maybe a little too... easy to troll the "hardcore" crowd these days... For all the "git gud" mentality you guys espouse, with the "tearz" silliness... You're all surprisingly thin-skinned over the idea of someone not getting into your style of play. It's not that people aren't getting the style of play, it's that despite years of nerfs, people are still proposing that those playstyles be nerfed further because the people they were aimed were able to adapt in order to continue in their playstyle. They've been under attack from people who think highsec should be not safer, but safe; but refuse to put any effort into ensuring their own safety, for over a decade. Ganking, wardecs and other highsec shenanigans have always been a part of Eve, highsec was never intended to be safesec and that those activities are allowed is part of that intention. Unfortunately the number of ways to introduce risk to otherwise relatively risk free playstyles has been reduced at the behest of some who indulge in those relatively risk free playstyles; who utterly failed to account for the ability of people to adapt to change. In the case of changes to suicide ganking and wardecs the often unheeded lesson has been to be careful what you wish for, you might get it.
Or it could be that people post these topics to troll you. |
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5451
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 01:11:21 -
[74] - Quote
So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin
State War Academy Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 01:28:33 -
[75] - Quote
its true the game is ****. They really need to create penalties for suicide ganking so it will be less of a joke. |
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5451
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 01:35:56 -
[76] - Quote
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:its true the game is ****. They really need to create penalties for suicide ganking so it will be less of a joke. The penalty in high-sec is that you die if you commit a criminal act. Is that not sufficient enough?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
MadMuppet
A Better Corp Name
1170
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 01:46:27 -
[77] - Quote
I would like to see if the people that post these rants ever got more than 5 jumps from Jita, flew through Anamake, or spent their time flying the Jita-Amarr corridor only. In addition, how much time did they spend in autopilot (CCP.. NPE needs to teach people to NOT use autopilot!)
This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27577
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 01:54:00 -
[78] - Quote
Clockwork Robot wrote:Or it could be that people post these topics to troll you. There is that.
Dammit
Bertok Francis wrote: Well, wardecks could use some work; atm the best way to win a war-deck as the defender is by just using an alpha clone hauler alt. Most things can be moved by an iterion 5 and if you tank it right and don't carry plex or anything else stupidly expensive it's not likely to be ganked. So far I have had a few weeks of being wardecked in my 4 or so months of playing and it's pretty much boiled down to "avoid x trade hub for a week" I have never seen a war target in local and a locator agent would usually be useless against me (go ahead and try to find Jxxxxxx so you can kill my 500k isk heron) it would be nice if there was an actual objective or victory condition because as is they seem pretty pointless.
I don't think you'll find many mercs that will disagree, wardecs are broken, the trick to fixing them is to find the balance between the wants of both the mercs, and those that they prey on.
Once upon a time many of those mercs would use the watch-list and locator agents to figure out where and when people were active, and then hunt them down based on that intelligence; the watch-list got nerfed a while back because it was also used to watch for known titan pilots to come online and then go kill them.
Victory conditions are currently between the parties involved, an official one would need to hashed out with the merc community before being implemented
On a related notes mercs generally aren't just in it for padding their killboards, although shiny stuff is always a good kill.
Some of them like the fun of "gud fites" too, and may accommodate what could be seen as "fair fights"* in terms of numbers and ship classes in order to get some, those that do so will may well be open to giving a breakdown of it afterwards in order to show areas for improvement.
Something similar happened in the recent past when a corp beset by wardecs got help with leadership, tactics and doctrines from some of the merc community, both those that had them wardecced, and those that didn't, in order to ensure that everybody had fun.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5911
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 04:55:02 -
[79] - Quote
Ultimately EVE is a boring game. Missions...well they suck. Mining, it is boring as Hell. Most of the game is just boring. What makes it interesting is the freedom to engage in player-on-player interaction. That interaction can be "positive" and cooperative, e.g. incursion fleets, mining fleets, etc. They can be "negative" and non-cooperative, e.g. a player attacking another in LS or NS. They can even be both, e.g. a gate camp will have booth cooperation and helping each other, and non-cooperation and impeding another player. This great big "stew" gives rise to all sorts of things. And when players come and say they want to reduce this player-on-player interaction they want to reduce what EVE is. To the extent that CCP has listened to these players it has, IMO, been to the detriment of the game.
"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
|
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
449
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 06:07:15 -
[80] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Ultimately EVE is a boring game. Missions...well they suck. Mining, it is boring as Hell. Most of the game is just boring. What makes it interesting is the freedom to engage in player-on-player interaction. That interaction can be "positive" and cooperative, e.g. incursion fleets, mining fleets, etc. They can be "negative" and non-cooperative, e.g. a player attacking another in LS or NS. They can even be both, e.g. a gate camp will have booth cooperation and helping each other, and non-cooperation and impeding another player. This great big "stew" gives rise to all sorts of things. And when players come and say they want to reduce this player-on-player interaction they want to reduce what EVE is. To the extent that CCP has listened to these players it has, IMO, been to the detriment of the game.
I agree. When I ran a hi sec corp years back all we used to do was missions. We got war decced and I was able to spring into action. I had a small group of 20 day old noobs and working together we got a couple of battlecruiser kills. More of them came to fight us and our corp fell apart. Looking back it was still a great experience it got us all involved and we had some good convos working out strategies.
Regarding your CCP comments I think they should stick with the dark cold miserable and unforgiving nature of Eve because there are already more than enough tactics and play-styles in place to ensure a 0% loss if you're careful and take the time to listen to others.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
|
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin
State War Academy Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 06:07:20 -
[81] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:its true the game is ****. They really need to create penalties for suicide ganking so it will be less of a joke. The penalty in high-sec is that you die if you commit a criminal act. Is that not sufficient enough?
its really not, since losing their ship is a cost they are willing to pay already just to **** in your corn flakes.
This is a major part of why EVE is **** and a joke of a game for the most part.. Every thinking person seems to understand this except for brainless EVE kool-aid drinkers.
Teckos Pech wrote:Ultimately EVE is a boring game. Missions...well they suck. Mining, it is boring as Hell. Most of the game is just boring.
it really doesn't have to be boring but unfortunately CCP are awful devs and there are church-goer kool-aid drinkers who seem to think everything is fine. |
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
449
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 06:24:19 -
[82] - Quote
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:its true the game is ****. They really need to create penalties for suicide ganking so it will be less of a joke.
you perceive eve as a game? I see it as an experience. My very own mini scifi movie where I log in for a couple hours in the evening and become the star. If tonight's episode is about hauling valuable cargo then id gather intel do some scouting and make sure I was safe just like they do in the scifi films.
Honestly the joke is not on CCP, it's actually on the people who subscribe and haven't got the patience to listen or do things carefully in game.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5462
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 06:54:50 -
[83] - Quote
Insofar as a $10/month subscription goes, it offers pretty good value. I don't get the concept of where something has to be free to have any kind of value. CCP should offer a Gamma clone upgrade that costs 1/2 the price of a regular subscription (PLEX = 2 months), bumps up the skill training and available skills (T2 ships up to and including battlecruisers - but no T3s or battleships). No skill extraction but skill injectors can be used. Would be a good stepping stone to an Omega clone.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
58445
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 07:06:59 -
[84] - Quote
Mara Pahrdi wrote:Akaro Tripar wrote:All this griefing and ganking in high has to stop or the game crumbles to dust....this is simply not state of the art anymore....in neither way....
I always wonder how people come to this conclusion. I've been living right beside Uedama since late 2011. I'm traveling with haulers and everything else through this system. I've moved billions in bpos through Niarja and Uedama. Not to speak of those pricey rigs I moved all the way from Amarr to Rens in a fast aligning almost untanked Sigil, when that guy manipulated the rig market back in 2012. Anybody in a instalocking Nado could have one shot that thing. Not that I would have cared at the time. Profits would have easily paid for the loss of a Sigil or two including the cargo . All that went boom in HS in the last six years is a Retriever to Immortalis one month into the game, a noobship caught by Tora's guys and a shuttle lately, to that smartbombing Maller pilot in Jita. All my Freighters, Orcas, T1 Haulers, BRs and DSTs are in good health, assembled and in use for years. I don't even bother to insure them. It would just be a waste of isk. I've been mining unmolested for extended periods just a couple of jumps out of Halaima. Sure, I haven't done it lately, but I doubt it's any worse now than 2 years ago. In my opinion, HS is way safer today than it was in 2011. Sorry, gotta call bullcrap on this and anybody else who agrees with it.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5914
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 07:46:54 -
[85] - Quote
Bertok Francis wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Clockwork Robot wrote:I feel like it's maybe a little too... easy to troll the "hardcore" crowd these days... For all the "git gud" mentality you guys espouse, with the "tearz" silliness... You're all surprisingly thin-skinned over the idea of someone not getting into your style of play. It's not that people aren't getting the style of play, it's that despite years of nerfs people are still proposing that those playstyles be nerfed further because the people they were aimed were able to adapt in order to continue in their playstyle. They've been under attack from people who think highsec should be not safer, but safe for over a decade Ganking, wardecs and other highsec shenanigans have always been a part of Eve, highsec was never intended to be safesec and that these activities are allowed is part of that intention. Unfortunately the number of ways to introduce risk to otherwise relatively risk free playstyles has been reduced at the behest of some who indulge in those relatively risk free playstyles; who utterly failed to account for the ability of people to adapt to change. In the case of changes to suicide ganking and wardecs the often unheeded lesson has been to be careful what you wish for, you might get it. Well, wardecks could use some work; atm the best way to win a war-deck as the defender is by just using an alpha clone hauler alt. Most things can be moved by an iterion 5 and if you tank it right and don't carry plex or anything else stupidly expensive it's not likely to be ganked. So far I have had a few weeks of being wardecked in my 4 or so months of playing and it's pretty much boiled down to "avoid x trade hub for a week" I have never seen a war target in local and a locator agent would usually be useless against me (go ahead and try to find Jxxxxxx so you can kill my 500k isk heron) it would be nice if there was an actual objective or victory condition because as is they seem pretty pointless.
Malcanis had a very nice post on the issue of war decs. It was a thought experiment that tore away the fig leaves each side wore.
Here is the thought experiment.
The follow up post.
Here is part of the follow up (empasis in the original),
Quote:It's not a proposal, it's a thought experiment designed to illustrate the problem with war decs in the first place. War deccers generally don't like the idea beause it allows industrial corps to spend ISK to protect themselves. The Defending corps generally don't like it because it allows them to protect themselves by spending ISK.
The experiment therefore illustrates the motivations behind both sides. in general, hi-sec war deccers are in it for low commitment, easy kill farming, with any profit being something of a bonus. So a system that requires them to commit ISK and which also allows the defender any agency in determining the terms of conflict is not popular with them.
Likewise, the defenders in general don't want non-consensual PvP at all, and they want CCP to just stop it (see the post directly after the one I made above, for example.) So to them, the war-bond is a regressive step that they see as one more way of putting the responsibility for defending their ships and assets on them, rather than on CONCORD.
In short, the issue with war-decs is that they are non-consensual PvP in a way that, for example, a war between two 0.0 alliances isn't. The 0.0 guys may complain about blobs or coalitions or cloaky camping or whatever, but that's just tactics. They're not complaining about the concept of another entity shooting at them at all. Wardecs on the other hand, typically involve a defender who doesn't want to engage in combat PvP at all. How can you reconcile that desire with the desire for other players to play a FFA PvP game? The War Bond addresses the fig-leaf justifications that both sides put up. Deccers constantly complain that defenders can just quite their corps and reform another, risking nothing and losing nothing but a name. Defenders complain that they have no way to use their playstyle to protect themselves, and that the wardeccers commit nothing and take no real risks.
And yet when offered a mechanism that addresses these complaints, neither of them like it. In true EVE style, each want the other to do all the adapting.
In short there is absolutely no way to address war decs that leave both sides happy. None. If war decs are going to be addressed then one side is going to get screwed. Lately, it has been the war dec side that has been getting screwed. And contrary to the claims of those who want to screw war deccers it has not resulted in a surge of subscriptions or retention. Anybody making such an argument is a mendacious ******* who should be driven from the game after being tarred and feathered.
"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
|
Yebo Lakatosh
Open University of Celestial Hardship Art of War Alliance
50
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 08:47:43 -
[86] - Quote
Akaro Tripar wrote:a changed market and cosmetic changes like the alphas will not help to keep the game alive
Akaro Tripar wrote:cosmetic changes like the alphas Wot did ya just call me and me brothers? Beyond irritable fellow.
I'd be tempted to plea for some well respected higher authorities to smack ya in the cheek, in hopes of 'em hearing my faint voice. But sounds you had that covered already.
They say Alpha clones are only for trying stuff. I say it's just the Hard Mode.
|
Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
461
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 09:40:34 -
[87] - Quote
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:its really not, since losing their ship is a cost they are willing to pay already just to **** in your corn flakes. So everyone that plays EVE is willing to sacrifice their ship for a suicide gank. This is what you mean when you claim the penalties are not sufficient. Seeing as only a very small portion of the player base does it, we can conclude you're quite mistaken.
May as well add:> This is a major part of why EVE is **** and a joke of a game for the most part.. Every thinking person seems to understand this except for brainless EVE kool-aid drinkers.
<^.^> I'm a cat lol
|
Keno Skir
1267
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 10:45:09 -
[88] - Quote
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:its true the game is ****. They really need to create penalties for suicide ganking so it will be less of a joke. The penalty in high-sec is that you die if you commit a criminal act. Is that not sufficient enough? its really not, since losing their ship is a cost they are willing to pay already just to **** in your corn flakes. This is a major part of why EVE is **** and a joke of a game for the most part.. Every thinking person seems to understand this except for brainless EVE kool-aid drinkers. Teckos Pech wrote:Ultimately EVE is a boring game. Missions...well they suck. Mining, it is boring as Hell. Most of the game is just boring. it really doesn't have to be boring but unfortunately CCP are awful devs and there are church-goer kool-aid drinkers who seem to think everything is fine.
^ Still lives on forums of a game he was never good enough to succeed at... Exacting the terrible vengeance of saying how rubbish EvE is 40 times a day..
<Gùï> 250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <Gùï>
<Gùï> Contact me regarding my trusted Alliance Creation Service <Gùï>
|
ACESsiggy
Pandemic Shadow
69
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 10:53:20 -
[89] - Quote
So I guess I'll be seeing you on Star Citizen as well?
Downloading Stellaris on steam currently -- STEAM gaming buddies have recommended it so I'm packing my bags and jumping ship o7
Could never get my buddies to join this game so
GÇ£The open-minded see the truth in different things: the narrow-minded see only the differences.GÇ¥
|
Indahmawar Fazmarai
5547
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 11:02:30 -
[90] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:I didn't offer speculation as to the reason why player counts may be up or down, I merely pointed out that the figures appear to show a trend that is the opposite of that which the poster I quoted was presenting.
How's the word for shameless lies now? "Alternative facts"? I think so... Where's the lie? If you're going to make such an accusation, the onus is on you to point out the lie. Quote:Well, if you're to cherrypick the data to prove your "alternative facts", then you always will be right... but unfortunately, the data are there for everyone else to check & compare. I haven't tried to obfuscate the data source or time period that I used, nor as previously stated have I speculated on any reasons behind the apparent upward trend; I was also very careful with my choice of words, the especially relevant one being appears.
It's very simple. The reason behind the higher PCU now than last year it's not an upward trend, rather a clearly visible spike which is already receding. Spike =/= trend. The trend still is downwards, as it has been since CCP clarified the future development of EVE Online in 2013. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |