Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
None ofthe Above
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 05:23:00 -
[61] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:So, CCP wants to bring in more players in but on the other side does everything possible to keep them out.
Just a short story:
A relatively new player with a few months in EVE with not a bad ship and few totally fresh players all in High sec. A can flipper shows up and starts flying around bumping the newbies (5th or 7th flipper for the day for them). The one with not bad ship comes in so flipper warps out. Newbie picks up ore from the can (stupid move but hey, its a newbie and he have tons of things to learn so he forgets some) and moments later a nice fleet of can flipper with a much better ship and friends arrive. Of course all get owned. And all quit the game because they are sick and tired of can flippers, gankers and other sh*t.
CCP you want more players? Well may be instead of spending tons of money on useless advertisements you think about changing some mechanics of your own game so that people wont quit because your mechanics so flawed for new players and allow the exploits by some terribly bored vets who sit in their Titans and create alts out of boredom to go get their kicks on new players and then complain that there's not enough influx of players in the game.
I do understand an attempt to push players to other then High sectors. But with recent "buff to gankers" strategy all you do is pushing them out of the game.
Can-flipping (and possibly can-baiting) is illegal in Rookie systems.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Rookie_Systems
Most new players and perhaps even the baiters don't necessarily know this, so its not often reported. There probably should be a warning as you enter the system.
More than a few days old players are expected to learn the aggression mechanics as they move out into the rest of New Eden
Tired of the current CSM? Vote for me, I am None ofthe Above!
|
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
381
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 05:51:00 -
[62] - Quote
Mars Theran wrote:Just a heads up here for the unaware. Bored Vets couldn't care less whether new players start playing EVE; in fact, best I can tell, most of them would rather they didn't. This is why people who 'carebear' or come and 'whine' on the forums get told to gtfo and go play WoW. I should have thought that was obvious.
edit: ..not suggesting i'm one who feels that way. Quite the opposite really, but I can't be bothered to argue with those that do.
That's pretty much spot-on. CCP are aware of this but at odds with what to do about it. Malcanis has written a very thorough manifesto which covers Highsec issues in detail - makes a lot of sense. Something needs to be done along the lines that Malcanis outlines, or EvE will hemorrhage new players at an increasing rate. Not a good state of affairs.
o/
The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
Alex Sinai
Constantly Causing Problems Everyone Enjoys
83
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 06:04:00 -
[63] - Quote
I don't have anything against EVE being harsh I enjoy it. For G-ds sake i live in C4. If i would not enjoy all these pvps and decs and surprises I would not be in the game by now. But total noobs should not get that harshness right off the start. It causes a lot of them to leave because they see it not as a challenge but as a flaw and cheating on developers side. It's easy to give advise and troll. How about looking at it from noobs point of view. Don't forget that flipping and ganking significantly increased since the time most of us were noobs. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
4638
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 07:27:00 -
[64] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:But total noobs should not get that harshness right off the start. They don't. They start out in an area which has some very specific rules that filter out some of that harshness, and they are informed that this will end once they step outside in the cold. They also have a corp chat that is full of people who can advise them on the threats and risks and on how to minimise them.
Quote:How about looking at it from noobs point of view. Don't forget that flipping and ganking significantly increased since the time most of us were noobs. No. The constant and rather significant security buffs that have happened since I was a newbie had drastically reduced the amount of ganking going on. Back in the day, I could make good money sitting on the Jita 4-4 undock and steal ganked loot; these days, you can sit there for ages without anything happening.
I can't comment on the can flipping because it never happened to me GÇö it was too easy to avoid for me to ever do it GÇö but if it has increased, I would either attribute it to these increased security measures that drive people towards the path of least resistance or to newbies being more stupid these days and not taking the time to learn how the game works.
The best thing that could happen to new players is if space was made a whole lot less secure and if they were informed of this from the get-go so they could start acquiring the skills to survive in such an environment. It sounds like the biggest problem for new players these days is that they're coddled to the degree that they never properly learn what kind of game they're playing, and when the realisation finally hits them, they get all confused and whiney and demand that it be changed into their incorrect/incomplete image of what the game is GÇö into something it never was GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Tiberius Sunstealer
Phantom Soulreavers Axiom Solaris
100
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 07:41:00 -
[65] - Quote
I applaud CCP. They are deterring customers that would've quit later down the track and saving the customers money. I guess those people that say CCP are greedy are partially wrong. |
Grey Stormshadow
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
882
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 07:47:00 -
[66] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:So, CCP wants to bring in more players in but on the other side does everything possible to keep them out.
Just a short story:
A relatively new player with a few months in EVE with not a bad ship and few totally fresh players all in High sec. A can flipper shows up and starts flying around bumping the newbies (5th or 7th flipper for the day for them). The one with not bad ship comes in so flipper warps out. Newbie picks up ore from the can (stupid move but hey, its a newbie and he have tons of things to learn so he forgets some) and moments later a nice fleet of can flipper with a much better ship and friends arrive. Of course all get owned. And all quit the game because they are sick and tired of can flippers, gankers and other sh*t.
It is better that can flippers can use game mechanics to bait noobs rather than go get tornado and shoot them off the sky without even giving a warning.
Get |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
554
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 08:21:00 -
[67] - Quote
can flipers arent a reall problem, one can say that ganking is becoming one |
Alex Sinai
Constantly Causing Problems Everyone Enjoys
84
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 08:33:00 -
[68] - Quote
Grey Stormshadow wrote:Alex Sinai wrote:So, CCP wants to bring in more players in but on the other side does everything possible to keep them out.
Just a short story:
A relatively new player with a few months in EVE with not a bad ship and few totally fresh players all in High sec. A can flipper shows up and starts flying around bumping the newbies (5th or 7th flipper for the day for them). The one with not bad ship comes in so flipper warps out. Newbie picks up ore from the can (stupid move but hey, its a newbie and he have tons of things to learn so he forgets some) and moments later a nice fleet of can flipper with a much better ship and friends arrive. Of course all get owned. And all quit the game because they are sick and tired of can flippers, gankers and other sh*t.
It is better that can flippers can use game mechanics to bait noobs rather than go get tornado and shoot them off the sky without even giving a warning.
That's an interesting idea. Would be funny for sure. In any case I think these mechanics needs a serious rework. I could not care much about what happens in high sec but if there will be this same pattern going on without improvemet for noobs we will find eve emptier place to live in. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
4639
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 08:40:00 -
[69] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:I could not care much about what happens in high sec but if there will be this same pattern going on without improvemet for noobs you will find eve emptier place to live in. That doesn't make much sense. The pattern was a constant influx of new players back when the game was harder for them GÇö that growth actually became stunted shortly after the NPE improved (but probably for different reasons). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Shazzam Vokanavom
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 08:43:00 -
[70] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Back in the day, I could make good money sitting on the Jita 4-4 undock and steal ganked loot; these days, you can sit there for ages without anything happening.
And herein lies the motivation, "for players to have an easy life."
The very idea that a few million can take down significantly more in assests so easily and with relative impunity is the reason why ganking is an issue.
When you combine that with the numerous conflict mechanics like bounty system and corporate wars that provide no real way to retaliate to such. And yet all the PvP ganker types then complain in other threads, specifically incursions that risk/reward should be an appropriate model. And yet here for an activity measured in minutes that can net them over 100's of millions in profit.
Huge double standard and weakens the risk/reward argument in my view big time. And this umbrella of relative impunity they can manipulate from themselves only makes the process more orientated for the Ganker.
People complain about the loss of insurance for a criminal activity like its an expected right for such nefarious activities in policed empire space. I personally applaud CCP for at last starting to wake up to some sensible realities about crime. And yet in esence it hasn't stopped the activity, it never really would. Losing a few mil for 100's of mill would never have even shown any significance with an insurance claim on the balance sheet. It's just thrown into arguments as a gestural change by CCP that shows a change in movement in this area.
And yet at the same time, they actually increase the capabilities of a recgnised ganking class the Dessie and introduce and new Tier 3 line of BC's with big guns designed to have the DPS to help take down stuff with alpha strikes and yet at a cheaper price than the use of BS's. I'm sure the savings and improvements here likley pay off for the small loss of an insurance claim.
All I continue to see from Gankers as a result is a one sided point of view where they try to suggest how its our fault in trying to orientate the purposes of our role and how we should operate. And yet when the shoe is on the other foot?
Another interesting argument is one of the null/high differences. Null seccers can come into High sec from their space and expect a cheap income as a rsult of this and yet of course if the same was to be said that any industrial tried to make it into HS they that would be considered suicidal based on the orientated IG mechanics. This double standard whilst maybe not apparent to most due to the "nature" of the game is still there.
Then people argue. But we need the "pinatas", EvE would be dull without it, the economy would never function, BS, BS, BS.
To be honest suicide gankers place too much emphasis and importance on themselves in this regard. It really isnt that significant. I also can't see the thrill from shooting a soft target personally, for me it would only be done as a valid war effort, as something that needed doing, not really as a fun challenge (challenge being the key word). There is also far too much "other" PvP and PvE activity that contributes to the demand curve.
Likewise what gankers fail to appreicate is how much the activity of inflicting damage on assests and industrials infrastructure has on removing supply and the industrials capabilities. Especially if they then have to spend time restoring their position. So the economy can be poorly effected as a result, with the price of items increasing or in some cases removing supply. So for the ganker themselves and for everyone else in the game, the impacts of a fwe of these lazy despots is having a negative effect on their purchasing abilities. So by removing competition in a free market your not helping in everyone's interests.
I personally can't wait to see what CCP will be introducing with the New War features and the Criminal responce features in near furture expansions. Especially if they accomodate a working player policing system into the mix. (One that currently affords benefit to the criminal, what a joke). If in the hope it can reinforce some validity to any PvP campaign so a significance of wars and PvP in this regard has more meaning. The nerfing of corp hopping, dropping, dec shielding and the addition of a working bounty system might actually give some much needed purpose back into the game, at least for empire space.
And if in the promotion of fun will at least keep the PvP orientated happy and with targets that might actually shoot back at them. Cosndier the possibility? Think of the adrenaline rush with the idea of risk pilots? Novel idea eh? In this sense CCP have the perfect opportunity to remold the culture and expectations of players and actually provide the PvP fun everyone is actually crying out for, and yet secretly worried they will end up with a huge problem of actually having to fight. |
|
Alex Sinai
Constantly Causing Problems Everyone Enjoys
84
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 08:58:00 -
[71] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Alex Sinai wrote:I could not care much about what happens in high sec but if there will be this same pattern going on without improvemet for noobs you will find eve emptier place to live in. That doesn't make much sense. The pattern was a constant influx of new players back when the game was harder for them GÇö that growth actually became stunted shortly after the NPE improved (but probably for different reasons).
I agree on influx with you but who really calculated how many really stayed in the game from all that influx. I'm not offering to dumb down the game (look at previous pages what it took us to get to a dialogue about it from all kinds of trolls and even one wardec list promise with which I intend to deal accordingly once I can access the game = game already dumbed down to disgusting levels).
One possible reason for this issue with noobs might be differnce between what is advertised as EVE and reality. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
4639
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:05:00 -
[72] - Quote
Shazzam Vokanavom wrote:The very idea that a few million can take down significantly more in assests so easily and with relative impunity is the reason why ganking is an issue. The very idea that you only buy marginal improvement at vastly increased costs is why EVE even works without completely screwing over the little guy.
If a few millions are allowed to take down significantly more in assets, it's because the asset-holder failed in his risk analysis and did something stupid.
Quote:And yet all the PvP ganker types then complain in other threads, specifically incursions that risk/reward should be an appropriate model. And yet here for an activity measured in minutes that can net them over 100's of millions in profit. GǪexcept that it's not measured in minutes unless you're very very lucky and come across some clueless target instantly as you undock. If the targets were smart, the activity could be measured in days or weeks. There is no double standard GÇö it's just targets not taking responsibility for making it easy for the attackers and then complaining that the attackers have it easy.
Quote:People complain about the loss of insurance for a criminal activity like its an expected right for such nefarious activities in policed empire space. Actually, no, they don't. Some people (most notably me) complain about the loss of insurance for criminal activity because in my view, that loss disincentivises criminal activity and I want to see more of it so I have more risk. The gankers themselves have pretty much universally expressed a complete indifference on the matter. Fortunately, these changes have not seemed to stopped the activity (after all, why on earth should it be stopped?), but as with the many previous security buffs, it might have put a further damper on ganking and that just makes the game dull and makes the targets more complacent and stupid. It's not a good direction.
Quote:All I continue to see from Gankers as a result is a one sided point of view where they try to suggest how its our fault in trying to orientate the purposes of our role and how we should operate. And yet when the shoe is on the other foot? When the shoe is on the other foot, the gankers adapt and overcome, unlike the whiners who demanded those changes because they were to incompetent to do so. Meanwhile, people like me GÇö people who want to be at risk from attacks out of nowhere GÇö are caught in the middle as it removes all that risk we want.
Quote:Likewise what gankers fail to appreicate is how much the activity of inflicting damage on assests and industrials infrastructure has on removing supply and the industrials capabilities. Especially if they then have to spend time restoring their position. So the economy can be poorly effected as a result, with the price of items increasing or in some cases removing supply. Actually, I think they're fully aware of it, which is why it's a part of the game that needs to be preserved and even made easier: because it allows doing significant damage to logistics chains that are hidden behind seemingly unrelated entities.
That's not a GÇ£poor effectGÇ¥ on the economy GÇö it's the driving force for the economy. Removing supply and/or increasing demand, and having prices fluctuate as a result is what keeps the market dynamic and interesting, and which makes it the largest and most vicious PvP arena in the game. A massive destruction of property across all sectors of space is needed to keep the economy healthy. Having a player-run economy would be rather pointless if players couldn't affect it. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
277
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:06:00 -
[73] - Quote
Yesterday i brought in a 5-day old newb via wh into the southern coalition deployment system; he learned all sorts of **** real fast like how to get around in a wormhole, be part of a fleet, saw the EVE gate, not use autopilot in nullsec, how to warp within 100k of a station, how to warp away when an -A- carrier launches fighter drones at you, how to jump out of system when they follow you to the gate, not fit a shield booster to his punisher and how to update his clone, in that order.
it was actually kind of a blast, would import more noobs again |
Aubrey Addams
University of Caille Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:11:00 -
[74] - Quote
nearly every player have been can flipped once or twice. they learnt something from it, your friends still standing there after 6-7 canflipping, why? why they haven't go to a system with less traffic? there is map, dotlan, etc. there was time when i mined with hulk, filling up 4 cans, then dock, undock with my orca, and get my cans back, and no1 flipped em. and it was in very high-sec, just i searched a bit for a system with less traffic. sometimes i don't like the harhassment and cruel environment of EVE, but if they quit because of this canflipping, it is better that they leave as soon as possible, or they will whine because of 3 million more things they will face while they spending days in EVE-space. and at least, this game needs a bit of intelligence, maybe your friends lack of it :) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
4639
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:12:00 -
[75] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:I agree on influx with you but who really calculated how many really stayed in the game from all that influx. About 350,000 accounts stayedGǪ
Quote:I'm not offering to dumb down the game Actually, you are. You are suggesting coddling new players when what they really needs is a healthy dose of reality at a much earlier stage so they can decide quickly whether they want to play this kind of game or not.
Quote:One possible reason for this issue with noobs might be differnce between what is advertised as EVE and reality. I don't particularly buy that. EVE is being advertised directly and indirectly as a game of massive battles and of huge scams, and then the new players get horribly offended when they get shot at and scammed.
No, the problem is that they think that an MMO is an MMO is an MMO, and assume that EVE will be just like the rest of them. The problem is that all those other MMOs use similar rhetoric in their advertising without actually offering the gameplay to support it. So they come here and expect to be held by the hand and protected and allowed to GÇ£do their thingGÇ¥, when the whole concept of EVE is pretty much the exact opposite: you make your own way though the world; you create security for yourself; and you are always affecting (and are always affected by) everyone else.
Protecting these new players is doing them a disservice GÇö they need to be educated so they can start protecting themselves.
Put another way: can flippers and gankers in highsec are not a problem; players being surprised by them and refusing to adapt to the realities of the game world is the problem. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Arcathra
Technodyne Ltd.
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:13:00 -
[76] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:So, CCP wants to bring in more players in but on the other side does everything possible to keep them out.
Just a short story:
A relatively new player with a few months in EVE with not a bad ship and few totally fresh players all in High sec. A can flipper shows up and starts flying around bumping the newbies (5th or 7th flipper for the day for them). The one with not bad ship comes in so flipper warps out. Newbie picks up ore from the can (stupid move but hey, its a newbie and he have tons of things to learn so he forgets some) and moments later a nice fleet of can flipper with a much better ship and friends arrive. Of course all get owned. And all quit the game because they are sick and tired of can flippers, gankers and other sh*t. I understand the point you make but in case of can flippers it is very easy to work around them. Don't use jetcans, use an Orca or have a cloaked pilote ready who flips the can back and cloakes again. Of course it is a bit hard for new players but if they start to actually learn the game they will find easy solutions for their problems.
Ganking on the other hand is a different story, because it is too easy and cheap to kill expensive ships without even having a remote chance of fighting back. The mechanics of Mining Barges and Exhumers should be looked at to make the situation more fair. But there is no need to ban ganking altogether, it is an allowed playing style just as mining and mission running.
CCP don't do everything possible to keep new players out. EVE ist a bit different in terms of gameplay because it is a sandbox game that tries to give every player as much freedom as possible. It is normal that there are playing styles that conflict with each other. The ultimate challange for CCP is to find a balance between all those playing styles so that no one feels too restricted. In fact it is more the EVE community itself who seems to try everything possible to scare away new players. Many players think their playing style is the only viable one and they try to scare anyone who isn't playing as them away from the game. The problem is more about missing respect for other peoples playing styles. And that applies to both sides of the fence, carebears and gankers/hardcore PvPers alike. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
278
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:17:00 -
[77] - Quote
Anyways, the reason noobs are especially targeted in highsec is because wardec evasion is trivial thanks to corp-hopping decshields and, of course, NPC corps. New corporations don't know these tricks, making them juicy targets despite the lack of billions of mods that the wardec-safe vets fly around with impunity. Ban NPC Corps, fix wardecs.
The reason suicide ganking happens is because the ganked pilot is usually a lazy idiot unwilling to use a blockade runner or make multiple trips for his billions in space loot, or a Hulkaddon is underway. |
Shazzam Vokanavom
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:31:00 -
[78] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Shazzam Vokanavom wrote:The very idea that a few million can take down significantly more in assests so easily and with relative impunity is the reason why ganking is an issue. The very idea that you only buy marginal improvement at vastly increased costs is why EVE even works without completely screwing over the little guy. If a few millions are allowed to take down significantly more in assets, it's because the asset-holder failed in his risk analysis and did something stupid.
No, the assest holder might have been trying to maximise his role for purpose. And regardless my argument still holds true, otherwise why do Gankers do it? Why do they exclaim huge profits. When destoryers can take down anything in a manner of numbers its really just a numbers game even though other ships might be better suited, but then its a profit caluclation for doing it for some. Shall we do the maths exercise?
Do you really want to be that bored? You also forgetting cargo or distinctive mods which is usually the pretty shiney stuff gankers go for. Which also makes the scouting easier since they dont have to be bothered calculating the total net gains on complicated overall ships fits etc. I'm sure they will try to be picky in this regard to skew things as much towards certainty.
Quote:Quote:And yet all the PvP ganker types then complain in other threads, specifically incursions that risk/reward should be an appropriate model. And yet here for an activity measured in minutes that can net them over 100's of millions in profit. GǪexcept that it's not measured in minutes unless you're very very lucky and come across some clueless target instantly as you undock. If the targets were smart, the activity could be measured in days or weeks. There is no double standard GÇö it's just targets not taking responsibility for making it easy for the attackers and then complaining that the attackers have it easy.
Pretty sure gankers make life easier for themselves, else why concentrate at the trade hubs where activity is rife? Why hang out on the doorstep of Jita 4 -4 or Emporer family in Amarr? Why do we get warnings of being carefull in the Jita/Amarr trade pire. You yourself have been seen on numerous occasions of quoting that the gankers go where the targets are. Scouting is minimsed to look for high paying cargo and shiney mods to make life easier. Whilst I'm not saying there isnt some scouting involved when you compare the time to what the industrial might have to do to generate the cargo and infrastructure that is the target in an effectively competative manner it simply doesn't equate on an equal footing. Otherwise the actual gank is measured in a matter of seconds given Concords responce times. And I guess a few minutes of selling of the loot, maybe make it 15 - 20 mins, so laborious.
tbc .... |
TheBlueMonkey
Natural Progression
12
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:33:00 -
[79] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:All noobs can do effectively is "carebear".
Sing that to the goons or test who regularly take new players straight to 0.0
Truth be told, a new can be doing pvp in null in about a day if they know the right people. |
Shazzam Vokanavom
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:33:00 -
[80] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:People complain about the loss of insurance for a criminal activity like its an expected right for such nefarious activities in policed empire space. Actually, no, they don't. Some people (most notably me) complain about the loss of insurance for criminal activity because in my view, that loss disincentivises criminal activity and I want to see more of it so I have more risk. The gankers themselves have pretty much universally expressed a complete indifference on the matter. Fortunately, these changes have not seemed to stopped the activity (after all, why on earth should it be stopped?), but as with the many previous security buffs, it might have put a further damper on ganking and that just makes the game dull and makes the targets more complacent and stupid. It's not a good direction.
Look further back in this thread, ganker insurance whiner. Glad you agree though. Also read rest of post about trying to promote risk.
Also not trying to irradicate Ganking, trying to see some equality in the argument. Mostly is dimissed due to selfish interest.
Quote:Quote:All I continue to see from Gankers as a result is a one sided point of view where they try to suggest how its our fault in trying to orientate the purposes of our role and how we should operate. And yet when the shoe is on the other foot? When the shoe is on the other foot, the gankers adapt and overcome, unlike the whiners who demanded those changes because they were to incompetent to do so. Meanwhile, people like me GÇö people who want to be at risk from attacks out of nowhere GÇö are caught in the middle as it removes all that risk we want.
Wrong, it is always the targets fault. Look at the history of anyone trying to argue for a change to ganking and the inane hostile reaction to things. And you say adaptability. At the end of the day, you can help reduce the impcat but its not going to stop it. Nor am I advocating for a complete removal. But if your saying that industrials are the best defended ships in the game you need to review your understanding of the game.
I say you need to review your own obstinace to these issues when it comes to comprimise and adapatability. I wont accept the roll over and do what I say role sorry.
tbc ........ |
|
Shazzam Vokanavom
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:41:00 -
[81] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:Likewise what gankers fail to appreicate is how much the activity of inflicting damage on assests and industrials infrastructure has on removing supply and the industrials capabilities. Especially if they then have to spend time restoring their position. So the economy can be poorly effected as a result, with the price of items increasing or in some cases removing supply. Actually, I think they're fully aware of it, which is why it's a part of the game that needs to be preserved and even made easier: because it allows doing significant damage to logistics chains that are hidden behind seemingly unrelated entities.
Would you say that if more supply was available it would increase trading competition?
Would you say that the aspect of suicide ganking you seem to profit from both as a "vulture" looter and a station trader bias your opinion?
Quote:That's not a GÇ£poor effectGÇ¥ on the economy GÇö it's the driving force for the economy. Removing supply and/or increasing demand, and having prices fluctuate as a result is what keeps the market dynamic and interesting, and which makes it the largest and most vicious PvP arena in the game. A massive destruction of property across all sectors of space is needed to keep the economy healthy. Having a player-run economy would be rather pointless if players couldn't affect it.
Destruction is helpful it does generate demand, doesn't have to suicide ganking and again I beleive there is more significant chaos that is contributing to these things in other PvP arenas alone. And I'm advocating change the conflict systems to help promote this destruction.
The idea that it doesn't remove competition however is not. You are simply representing a one sided argument to this. My beleif due to selfish interests as a station trader and wanting to remove competition from your point of view. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
278
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:43:00 -
[82] - Quote
Quote:But if your saying that industrials are the best defended ships in the game you need to review your understanding of the game. Anyone who attacks a industrial ship unprovoked in highsec has a 100% chance of death. That's pretty well defended. |
Irumani
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:50:00 -
[83] - Quote
Alex Sinai wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote:Terrible CEOs ruin the experience of new players. Join a better corp. Terrible mechanics ruin the experience of new players. Join a better game.
Terrible players ruin the experience of themselves. There's no cure for that. You're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, that's what hello kitty online is for.
- CCP Wrangler |
Shazzam Vokanavom
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:53:00 -
[84] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Quote:But if your saying that industrials are the best defended ships in the game you need to review your understanding of the game. Anyone who attacks a industrial ship unprovoked in highsec has a 100% chance of death. That's pretty well defended.
Oh dear, I've been overcome by semantics ........ what an idiot. Contribute much?
Maybe try the "dont let forum alt post line" seeing as you don't agree with me.
Anyone who does "Suicide" ganking should be pretty aware of its outcome and how to do it properly if they want to benefit.
Irrespective of that some simply do it out of spite and shiggles and not for profit. So it seems they don't really care. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
2706
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:56:00 -
[85] - Quote
Thorn Galen wrote:Mars Theran wrote:Just a heads up here for the unaware. Bored Vets couldn't care less whether new players start playing EVE; in fact, best I can tell, most of them would rather they didn't. This is why people who 'carebear' or come and 'whine' on the forums get told to gtfo and go play WoW. I should have thought that was obvious.
edit: ..not suggesting i'm one who feels that way. Quite the opposite really, but I can't be bothered to argue with those that do. That's pretty much spot-on. CCP are aware of this but at odds with what to do about it. Malcanis has written a very thorough manifesto which covers Highsec issues in detail - makes a lot of sense. Something needs to be done along the lines that Malcanis outlines, or EvE will hemorrhage new players at an increasing rate. Not a good state of affairs. o/
It's nice of you to mention my manifesto, but it should be noted that there's nothing whatsoever in it about providing additional protection for people who disregard warning messages. It does have scope for adding more warnings, though. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
278
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 10:02:00 -
[86] - Quote
Shazzam Vokanavom wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Quote:But if your saying that industrials are the best defended ships in the game you need to review your understanding of the game. Anyone who attacks a industrial ship unprovoked in highsec has a 100% chance of death. That's pretty well defended. Oh dear, I've been overcome by semantics ........ what an idiot. Contribute much? Maybe try the "dont let forum alt post line" seeing as you don't agree with me. Anyone who does " Suicide" ganking should be pretty aware of its outcome and how to do it properly if they want to benefit. Irrespective of that some simply do it out of spite and shiggles and not for profit. So it seems they don't really care. CSM forums are reserved for serious discussion so your cowardly alt posting about your poorly reasoned misconceptions on basic concepts of EVE has no place there. If the author of the opinion needs to make forum alts rather then stand behind their beliefs (because deep down they have no faith in what they're presenting and/or they fear space-pixel consequences), then those beliefs certainly aren't worth sharing in a serious discussion. That's what General Discussion is for.
Industrials/Orcas/freighters in highsec enjoy the greatest protection in the game: 100% chance of death for anyone who breathes at them. Not even a Titan can claim that. If you manage to mess that up anyway and die because you turned your ship into a giant pinata and blundered blindly through bottleneck systems, that says more about you then the game mechanics.
Again, the actual problem is that, once learned, nearly every form of PvP in highsec besides suicide ganks is easy to avoid (and even suicide ganks aren't very difficult), meaning noobs who don't know how to evade wardecs and canflip bait are the ones who get preyed upon instead of the NPC corp guy missioning solo in a 6 bil BS |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
4644
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 10:03:00 -
[87] - Quote
Shazzam Vokanavom wrote:No, the assest holder might have been trying to maximise his role for purpose. And regardless my argument still holds true, otherwise why do Gankers do it? Why do they exclaim huge profits. Because it is fun? And your argument doesn't really hold true because it assumes a kind of balance that simply doesn't exist in EVE: bigger isn't better; more expensive isn't more powerful; marginal improvement comes at a huge cost. Again, the fact that you can nuke huge assets with a very small investment is very deliberate part of the balance GÇö it means you have to actually play (a little) smart rather than just buy your way out of trouble.
Oh, and the asset holder trying to GÇ£maximise his role for purposeGÇ¥ is pretty much the same thing as him failing his risk analysis. In almost all cases, his maximisation effort stops at GÇ£cramming the maximum amount of crap into the shipGÇ¥ without doing the second, far more important part: GÇ¥GǪthat the ship can safely handle without turning into a loot pi+¦ataGÇ¥.
Quote:You also forgetting cargo or distinctive mods which is usually the pretty shiney stuff gankers go for. No, I'm not. I'm saying that if you load your ship up with shiny stuff and don't adopt strategies to protect that stuff, you are failing your risk analysis, so it is hardly surprising (and most certainly not an issue) if someone comes along and robs you.
Quote:Pretty sure gankers make life easier for themselves, else why concentrate at the trade hubs where activity is rife? Sure. Doesn't change the fact that the targets are the ones making things easy for the attackers, when they could equally well make it hard for them. I'm also saying that, in spite of this, ganks are rather rare these days: as mentioned elsehwere, you could make a pretty penny stealing gank loot back in the day because it happened with some regularity GÇö these days, it's not worth the (significant) waiting time.
Quote:Also not trying to irradicate Ganking, trying to see some equality in the argument. Problem is: stating that ganking is a problem is not an attempt at seeing equality GÇö it's demanding further inequality in favour of the victims based on absolutely nothing in the way of a rational argument. The actual problem is that the victims refuse to take the matter of security into their own hands and then blame everything and everyone but themselves for that failure. If actual equality was the goal, then ganking would be significanly buffedGǪ and I get the feeling that this isn't the goal for the gank whiners.
Quote:Wrong, it is always the targets fault. EhmGǪ make up your mind? You say that I'm wrong and then you say the exact same thing I'm saying. So which one is it? And I wrong or is it the target's fault? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
4644
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 10:03:00 -
[88] - Quote
Shazzam Vokanavom wrote:Look at the history of anyone trying to argue for a change to ganking and the inane hostile reaction to things. And you say adaptability. Yes. Because no matter how much things change, the gankers have always adapted. No matter how much things change, the targets fail to adapt (and their failure is the driving force behind the change). The hostile reactions come from the ignorance of the targets about the options available to them, and how this ignorance makes them claim the most outrageously silly things without having anything to back it up.
Things like GÇ£ganking is a problemGÇ¥.
The hostile reaction is to their demanding change for no adequately explained reason.
Quote:But if your saying that industrials are the best defended ships in the game you need to review your understanding of the game. Nice straw man.
Quote:Would you say that if more supply was available it would increase trading competition? I would say that more supply without any demand would make industrialists' lives more dull and drastically reduce their income.
Quote:Would you say that the aspect of suicide ganking you seem to profit from both as a "vulture" looter and a station trader bias your opinion? Mu.
Quote:Destruction is helpful it does generate demand, doesn't have to suicide ganking It does as long as people can hide their activities behind layers of anonymity and protection from more organised attacks. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Solstice Project
Cult of Personality
1314
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 10:09:00 -
[89] - Quote
I know new players who started doing exactly that.
Can flipping and ganking.
We need more of these players and less carebears. Inappropriate signature removed. Spitfire |
Shazzam Vokanavom
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 10:11:00 -
[90] - Quote
Whats wrong Tippia, lots of unanswered questions there with nice little avoidance channels.
Struck a nerve?
If your going to avoid the questions, pointless discussing. Adaptation perhaps, to denial as usual. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |