Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:43:00 -
[481]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Windjammer Gosh, you're good.
Windjammer
Getting mad yet?
Perhaps you would like to strike me?
Or we could just continue the debate. I've just managed to prove that carebears are in the minority in Eve using the very numbers you carebears have been toting as the greatest proof that you are in the majority.
So, I guess you're screwed.
I rather think you are the one who is a bit hot under the collar. As far as striking you? Phuuleeze. Unlike you, I haven't even been reduced to cursing.
The only thing you've proven is how silly your arguments can be. You've quoted selections from the 4th quarter 2007 economic report (Demograhics section, pages 4 through 5), added in some numbers you've pulled out of the air (made up on your own) and come to an erroneous conclusion. I'm sure it looks very impressive to you, but it's complete rubbish. What was that you said about quoting people smarter than yourself to make yourself look smarter? Oops. My mistake. You were talking about Ashen and myself. Hmmm. Look up the word hypocrisy.
Where people get the 80% statistic is probably from the last two sentences in the summary of demographics for that report which state, "Most pilots are located in high security areas, or about 70% - 80% at any given time. This number seems to be rather constant between Q3 and Q4 of 2007, and it will be interesting to see if that changes in 2008." Huh. What do you suppose they're doing in high sec?
Your allegation that if a person is in low sec to 0.0 they're not carebears regardless of their activity is.....words fail me.
Windjammer
P.S. I'm almost certain all the above has nothing to do with this threads topic.
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:44:00 -
[482]
u r just being immature about it now ashen.
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:46:00 -
[483]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Mozetta why are you even arguing this ashen? the data shows u were wrong. kian might be an ass about it but hes right.
The data is statistics, which can be manipulated as needed most times to show what you want.
Especially when as he admits he is not even cosnidering the gaps in it because it wouldn't help his argument.
Plus I'm bored.
At least he went to the effort to present some facts tbh.
Actually he posted assumptions and opinions based on statistics.
My facts are: they are making the changes to cut down on grief style PvP combat, opened up faction warfare as an outlet for combat in high sec that makes PvP combat a choice (even offering npc corps to join... but as we can see they don't have the numbers of the regular NPC corporations)
|
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:48:00 -
[484]
Originally by: Windjammer
The only thing you've proven is how silly your arguments can be. You've quoted selections from the 4th quarter 2007 economic report (Demograhics section, pages 4 through 5), added in some numbers you've pulled out of the air (made up on your own) and come to an erroneous conclusion. I'm sure it looks very impressive to you, but it's complete rubbish. What was that you said about quoting people smarter than yourself to make yourself look smarter? Oops. My mistake. You were talking about Ashen and myself. Hmmm. Look up the word hypocrisy.
I made a critical analysis of the data. The results are in my post. The argument I was trying to disprove was that the majority of the population don't like PvP. I think I managed to do that quite well.
Originally by: Windjammer
Where people get the 80% statistic is probably from the last two sentences in the summary of demographics for that report which state, "Most pilots are located in high security areas, or about 70% - 80% at any given time. This number seems to be rather constant between Q3 and Q4 of 2007, and it will be interesting to see if that changes in 2008." Huh. What do you suppose they're doing in high sec?
I dunno? Logging off?
Originally by: Windjammer
Your allegation that if a person is in low sec to 0.0 they're not carebears regardless of their activity is.....words fail me.
Carebear in this particular argument was defined as "person who dislikes pvp". I made the assumption that if you go to a high risk area you don't dislike PvP. You might not want to actively engage in it, but you are not trying to shield yourself from it either. In the context of the argument, it makes perfect sense.
Originally by: Windjammer
P.S. I'm almost certain all the above has nothing to do with this threads topic.
Nor has anything you have written for the last million posts or so. I dunno how many it is really, I like to make up numbers, right?
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:49:00 -
[485]
Originally by: Mozetta u r just being immature about it now ashen.
Nope, told him that till he shows something other than a whinge over changes to the game I'm not wasting much time with him.
And all I see his him admitting to using flawed data sets, and saying that data that would prove/disprove his bias is irrelevant (which shows a fear of it being a disproving bit of data)
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:49:00 -
[486]
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Mozetta why are you even arguing this ashen? the data shows u were wrong. kian might be an ass about it but hes right.
The data is statistics, which can be manipulated as needed most times to show what you want.
Especially when as he admits he is not even cosnidering the gaps in it because it wouldn't help his argument.
Plus I'm bored.
At least he went to the effort to present some facts tbh.
Actually he posted assumptions and opinions based on statistics.
My facts are: they are making the changes to cut down on grief style PvP combat, opened up faction warfare as an outlet for combat in high sec that makes PvP combat a choice (even offering npc corps to join... but as we can see they don't have the numbers of the regular NPC corporations)
yes but u said most people in eve dont like pvp. what kian did was to prove u wrong. he did. u just cant accept it. u r obviously a bit immature.
|
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:50:00 -
[487]
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Mozetta u r just being immature about it now ashen.
Nope, told him that till he shows something other than a whinge over changes to the game I'm not wasting much time with him.
And all I see his him admitting to using flawed data sets, and saying that data that would prove/disprove his bias is irrelevant (which shows a fear of it being a disproving bit of data)
They are not flawed. They are the data sets that YOU HAVE BEEN USING TO 'PROVE' YOUR ARGUMENTS. You just can't accept you have been proven wrong. I suppose it must hurt to be wrong as often as you are.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:53:00 -
[488]
Originally by: Mozetta
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Mozetta why are you even arguing this ashen? the data shows u were wrong. kian might be an ass about it but hes right.
The data is statistics, which can be manipulated as needed most times to show what you want.
Especially when as he admits he is not even cosnidering the gaps in it because it wouldn't help his argument.
Plus I'm bored.
At least he went to the effort to present some facts tbh.
Actually he posted assumptions and opinions based on statistics.
My facts are: they are making the changes to cut down on grief style PvP combat, opened up faction warfare as an outlet for combat in high sec that makes PvP combat a choice (even offering npc corps to join... but as we can see they don't have the numbers of the regular NPC corporations)
yes but u said most people in eve dont like pvp. what kian did was to prove u wrong. he did. u just cant accept it. u r obviously a bit immature.
Key is combat oriented pvp, which the changes affect.
the numbers in the statistics include: mission runners, hauler alts, etc That never engage another player in combat.
The changes affect player vs player combat.
that is the key, non-combat pvp is not being affected.
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:54:00 -
[489]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Mozetta u r just being immature about it now ashen.
Nope, told him that till he shows something other than a whinge over changes to the game I'm not wasting much time with him.
And all I see his him admitting to using flawed data sets, and saying that data that would prove/disprove his bias is irrelevant (which shows a fear of it being a disproving bit of data)
They are not flawed. They are the data sets that YOU HAVE BEEN USING TO 'PROVE' YOUR ARGUMENTS. You just can't accept you have been proven wrong. I suppose it must hurt to be wrong as often as you are.
so where does it show most players engage in player vs player combat and shoot at each other?
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:55:00 -
[490]
Quote:
Key is combat oriented pvp, which the changes affect.
the numbers in the statistics include: mission runners, hauler alts, etc That never engage another player in combat.
The changes affect player vs player combat.
that is the key, non-combat pvp is not being affected.
what r u talking about? u said that most people in eve dont likee to pvp. u where wrong.
|
|
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:56:00 -
[491]
Originally by: Ashen Angel
so where does it show most players engage in player vs player combat and shoot at each other?
It doesn't. It doesn't have to. What it most clearly DOES NOT show is that most people in Eve don't like PvP LIKE YOU CLAIMED IT DID!
ROFL, you are so dense it's almost not funny anymore. Almost.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:58:00 -
[492]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Ashen Angel
so where does it show most players engage in player vs player combat and shoot at each other?
It doesn't. It doesn't have to. What it most clearly DOES NOT show is that most people in Eve don't like PvP LIKE YOU CLAIMED IT DID!
ROFL, you are so dense it's almost not funny anymore. Almost.
u shouldnt go around saying people r dumb either. its rude. he was wrong. dont be an ass about it.
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 00:58:00 -
[493]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Ashen Angel
so where does it show most players engage in player vs player combat and shoot at each other?
It doesn't. It doesn't have to. What it most clearly DOES NOT show is that most people in Eve don't like PvP LIKE YOU CLAIMED IT DID!
ROFL, you are so dense it's almost not funny anymore. Almost.
Tsk tsk: My statement has always been they don't like the player to player combat.
Key word you want to drop: combat
So yes it has to show it.
Because all your whinging is about changes to combat between players.
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:00:00 -
[494]
Originally by: Mozetta
Quote:
Key is combat oriented pvp, which the changes affect.
the numbers in the statistics include: mission runners, hauler alts, etc That never engage another player in combat.
The changes affect player vs player combat.
that is the key, non-combat pvp is not being affected.
what r u talking about? u said that most people in eve dont likee to pvp. u where wrong.
nope my stance has always been ship to ship pvp combat is not the focus of most of eve's player base.
There is no action that is not player vs player conflict.
|
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:03:00 -
[495]
Originally by: Ashen Angel Tsk tsk: My statement has always been they don't like the player to player combat.
Key word you want to drop: combat
So yes it has to show it.
Because all your whinging is about changes to combat between players.
NO!
The argument you put forth was that most of Eve's population does not like PvP. Combat or not, doesn't matter, but let's say you said combat PvP just for the hell of it.
The data shows that more than half of Eve's population regularly move about in high risk areas, meaning they willingly accept the risk of PvP. They don't shelter themselves in high sec LIKE YOU CLAIMED.
The data shows that of those that remain in high sec, a large proportion are new players and alts. Not hard core carebears who don't like PvP LIKE YOU CLAIMED.
This will be my last response to you. Talking to you is like having a conversation with a brick wall. Actually, I think a brick wall would offer more intelligent observations than you do.
Good night, little Angel. I hope you don't drown in your own drool.
@Mozetta: I am so ****ing tired of arguing with this guy I feel no sympathy for your "no insults" crap. Sorry.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:04:00 -
[496]
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Mozetta
Quote:
Key is combat oriented pvp, which the changes affect.
the numbers in the statistics include: mission runners, hauler alts, etc That never engage another player in combat.
The changes affect player vs player combat.
that is the key, non-combat pvp is not being affected.
what r u talking about? u said that most people in eve dont likee to pvp. u where wrong.
nope my stance has always been ship to ship pvp combat is not the focus of most of eve's player base.
There is no action that is not player vs player conflict.
yeah so u meant combat pvp. kian still showed you were wrong.
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:05:00 -
[497]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Ashen Angel Tsk tsk: My statement has always been they don't like the player to player combat.
Key word you want to drop: combat
So yes it has to show it.
Because all your whinging is about changes to combat between players.
NO!
The argument you put forth was that most of Eve's population does not like PvP. Combat or not, doesn't matter, but let's say you said combat PvP just for the hell of it.
The data shows that more than half of Eve's population regularly move about in high risk areas, meaning they willingly accept the risk of PvP. They don't shelter themselves in high sec LIKE YOU CLAIMED.
The data shows that of those that remain in high sec, a large proportion are new players and alts. Not hard core carebears who don't like PvP LIKE YOU CLAIMED.
This will be my last response to you. Talking to you is like having a conversation with a brick wall. Actually, I think a brick wall would offer more intelligent observations than you do.
Good night, little Angel. I hope you don't drown in your own drool.
@Mozetta: I am so ****ing tired of arguing with this guy I feel no sympathy for your "no insults" crap. Sorry.
ok but its not fun reading swear words and insults on these forums. they should be for discussion.
|
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:09:00 -
[498]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Windjammer
The only thing you've proven is how silly your arguments can be. You've quoted selections from the 4th quarter 2007 economic report (Demograhics section, pages 4 through 5), added in some numbers you've pulled out of the air (made up on your own) and come to an erroneous conclusion. I'm sure it looks very impressive to you, but it's complete rubbish. What was that you said about quoting people smarter than yourself to make yourself look smarter? Oops. My mistake. You were talking about Ashen and myself. Hmmm. Look up the word hypocrisy.
I made a critical analysis of the data. The results are in my post. The argument I was trying to disprove was that the majority of the population don't like PvP. I think I managed to do that quite well.
Your analysis of the data is flawed. You polluted the numbers you quoted from the report with assumption, speculation and additional numbers you manufactured on the spot. That technique is not usually lauded as critical analysis.
All this to prove something that is inherently and intuitively obvious. A lot of people in EVE like to shoot at other people for one reason or the other at least some of the time. That's a lot of work you did to try and prove something that didn't require proof and in the process further damage your credibility. Well done.
Windjammer
|
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:11:00 -
[499]
Edited by: Ki An on 20/07/2008 01:13:25
Originally by: Windjammer Your analysis of the data is flawed. You polluted the numbers you quoted from the report with assumption, speculation and additional numbers you manufactured on the spot. That technique is not usually lauded as critical analysis.
Using just raw data without ANY conjecture or reasonable assumption, the data still shows that less than half of Eve's characters only reside in high sec. That was all that was needed to win the argument.
Originally by: Windjammer
All this to prove something that is inherently and intuitively obvious. A lot of people in EVE like to shoot at other people for one reason or the other at least some of the time. That's a lot of work you did to try and prove something that didn't require proof and in the process further damage your credibility. Well done.
Windjammer
I wish you would tell that Ashen idiot that. My argument was with him. Not you.
Edit: Also, my credibility was never in question by anyone but Ashen and maybe you. To be honest, I really don't give a crap what you think of me. I think you're both idiots. I'd expect the same courtesy.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:15:00 -
[500]
Originally by: Mozetta
Originally by: Ashen Angel
Originally by: Mozetta
Quote:
Key is combat oriented pvp, which the changes affect.
the numbers in the statistics include: mission runners, hauler alts, etc That never engage another player in combat.
The changes affect player vs player combat.
that is the key, non-combat pvp is not being affected.
what r u talking about? u said that most people in eve dont likee to pvp. u where wrong.
nope my stance has always been ship to ship pvp combat is not the focus of most of eve's player base.
There is no action that is not player vs player conflict.
yeah so u meant combat pvp. kian still showed you were wrong.
Actually no he showed people would leave empire, but 49% stay in empire.
His assumption is that none of those leaving empire did so for reasons other than to shoot at each other.
|
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:17:00 -
[501]
Quote: Actually no he showed people would leave empire, but 49% stay in empire.
His assumption is that none of those leaving empire did so for reasons other than to shoot at each other.
no u r twisting what he said. what he said was that if 51% of the characters willingly enter risky areas that means they are not anti-pvp. it is pretty easy to understand. it is also easy to understand that of the people who dont enter risky areas a lot of them are alts and newbs. again u where wrong. just accept it. be the bigger man.
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 01:24:00 -
[502]
Originally by: Mozetta
Quote: Actually no he showed people would leave empire, but 49% stay in empire.
His assumption is that none of those leaving empire did so for reasons other than to shoot at each other.
no u r twisting what he said. what he said was that if 51% of the characters willingly enter risky areas that means they are not anti-pvp. it is pretty easy to understand. it is also easy to understand that of the people who dont enter risky areas a lot of them are alts and newbs. again u where wrong. just accept it. be the bigger man.
It means they take the risk, for profit or for combat is not known.
I have a few trade routes that take me into or through low sec. And several others do as well, we accept a higher risk for a shorter time or greater profit.
|
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 08:48:00 -
[503]
Originally by: Mozetta
Quote: Actually no he showed people would leave empire, but 49% stay in empire.
His assumption is that none of those leaving empire did so for reasons other than to shoot at each other.
no u r twisting what he said. what he said was that if 51% of the characters willingly enter risky areas that means they are not anti-pvp. it is pretty easy to understand. it is also easy to understand that of the people who dont enter risky areas a lot of them are alts and newbs. again u where wrong. just accept it. be the bigger man.
Sorry, Mozetta, but that's just a bit off. The economic report was tracking movement of characters which it assumed were main characters. Check this quote out: "The characters that are not accessed or do not move between systems are most likely alternate characters for subscribers. We therefore assume that these jumps show us the movement of main characters on each subscription account and are therefore representative for the movement of the main population in EVE."(4th paragraph of page 4) and "49% of all pilots moved only within high security areas (high-sec)"(1st paragraph of page 5).
That means that the 49% they're talking about who never leave high sec are assumed by the report to be main characters. Like I've said before, Ki An's analysis is flawed. It contains erroneous interpretations and some of the numbers he just made up. The conclusion of such an analysis has almost no hope of being accurate in any way.
Windjammer
P.S. Here's the URL of the report if you want to check it out for yourself. http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q4-2007.pdf Read it and see if what I've said above is true or not. I've referenced the quotes to page and paragraph of that report. It'll take a while to load. Unfortunately someone thought it would be cool to insert a bunch of pictures in the report and as a result it loads slowly.
|
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 09:35:00 -
[504]
Don't trust any statistics you haven't manipulated yourself I guess. Suffice to say that I move through lowsec plenty, currently live in 0.0, yet do not want the pvp threat to be too prevalent in highsec. Because I realize a lot of people play a game not for kicks or to vent frustrations, but to relax. And that is exactly why I myself go back to highseccing from time to time, because that is the best way to play if you simply want to relax. So your great statistic would count me on the wrong side, and I am fairly certain that a lot of other characters play in a similar manner.
And not counting 0.0 miners into the carebear crowd gotta be the greatest joke ever. I find most 0.0 miners to be way worse carebears than your average CNR highsec missionrunner. And if you are reading this, you have arrived at the signature without noticing...
|
Roy Batty68
Caldari Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 11:19:00 -
[505]
Originally by: Ki An Edited by: Ki An on 10/07/2008 15:36:59
Quote: today's suicide gank mechanics are too biased in the ganker's favor
How can CCP realize this? How can any sane person acknowledge this? It's the same mechanics as before.
Caving in to whines?
/Edit: As there is no way to graphically show disagreement with a topic, I'll post an image instead:
I've read most of this thread and still this response is the best.
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 13:15:00 -
[506]
Originally by: Windjammer
Originally by: Mozetta
Quote: Actually no he showed people would leave empire, but 49% stay in empire.
His assumption is that none of those leaving empire did so for reasons other than to shoot at each other.
no u r twisting what he said. what he said was that if 51% of the characters willingly enter risky areas that means they are not anti-pvp. it is pretty easy to understand. it is also easy to understand that of the people who dont enter risky areas a lot of them are alts and newbs. again u where wrong. just accept it. be the bigger man.
Sorry, Mozetta, but that's just a bit off. The economic report was tracking movement of characters which it assumed were main characters. Check this quote out: "The characters that are not accessed or do not move between systems are most likely alternate characters for subscribers. We therefore assume that these jumps show us the movement of main characters on each subscription account and are therefore representative for the movement of the main population in EVE."(4th paragraph of page 4) and "49% of all pilots moved only within high security areas (high-sec)"(1st paragraph of page 5).
That means that the 49% they're talking about who never leave high sec are assumed by the report to be main characters. Like I've said before, Ki An's analysis is flawed. It contains erroneous interpretations and some of the numbers he just made up. The conclusion of such an analysis has almost no hope of being accurate in any way.
Windjammer
P.S. Here's the URL of the report if you want to check it out for yourself. http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q4-2007.pdf Read it and see if what I've said above is true or not. I've referenced the quotes to page and paragraph of that report. It'll take a while to load. Unfortunately someone thought it would be cool to insert a bunch of pictures in the report and as a result it loads slowly.
Linkage - use right click save as , vs loading in your browser (much faster)
|
Draygo Korvan
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 14:12:00 -
[507]
Ashen, ever hear of the phrase: What you don't do, won't hurt you. ?
This applies here. If the nerf to insurance goes through you will see people quit the game. While if it is left alone you will see the subscription trend continue (up). Instead of finding ways of nerfing a valid way of playing, how about you focus on increasing options for the victim, that makes the game more interesting, and perhaps more fun.
Tradable killrights is such one idea, it allows you to pass off a kill right to someone (persumably you can sell this kill right for isk, lessening the isk blow of losing a ship) which increases the pvp options in the game.
Another option is to add a new type of contract called a defense contract. A defense contract is this, a player can set in the contract how long it is and the payout assuming the contract issuer does not die. In addition to a penalty if the contract issuer dies to hostile player action (not NPC's/concord/self destruct). This would be adding a mechanic to the game that allows a carebear to pay a pvper for active protection, where the pvper could end up paying for your loss if he fails.
Another idea would be to introduce modules that would actually transfer a % of your shields to the target ship, instead of healing the target ship sheilds for x amount. So you lose shield as the target ship gains shield. Obviously this module would increase the targets shield much faster than current shield transferers, but would stop working once you are out of shields yourself, it would also be expensive on the capacitor, more so than current shield transferers. This would be one step on making it possible for players to escort ships through highsec by allowing them to begin to counter the dps of the attacking ships.
Instead of focusing on making one profession's life harder, find ideas that introduce new ones and new ways to play the game. This type of thinking is what expands a game, and moves it forward. A nerfing mindset only makes people angry, one group at a time till you are left with only like minded individuals and declining subscription numbers. I'm not saying in some cases a nerf isn't valid, but in this case a nerf is definatly not needed. --
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 14:28:00 -
[508]
Originally by: Draygo Korvan Ashen, ever hear of the phrase: What you don't do, won't hurt you. ?
This applies here. If the nerf to insurance goes through you will see people quit the game. While if it is left alone you will see the subscription trend continue (up). Instead of finding ways of nerfing a valid way of playing, how about you focus on increasing options for the victim, that makes the game more interesting, and perhaps more fun.
Tradable killrights is such one idea, it allows you to pass off a kill right to someone (persumably you can sell this kill right for isk, lessening the isk blow of losing a ship) which increases the pvp options in the game.
Another option is to add a new type of contract called a defense contract. A defense contract is this, a player can set in the contract how long it is and the payout assuming the contract issuer does not die. In addition to a penalty if the contract issuer dies to hostile player action (not NPC's/concord/self destruct). This would be adding a mechanic to the game that allows a carebear to pay a pvper for active protection, where the pvper could end up paying for your loss if he fails.
Another idea would be to introduce modules that would actually transfer a % of your shields to the target ship, instead of healing the target ship sheilds for x amount. So you lose shield as the target ship gains shield. Obviously this module would increase the targets shield much faster than current shield transferers, but would stop working once you are out of shields yourself, it would also be expensive on the capacitor, more so than current shield transferers. This would be one step on making it possible for players to escort ships through highsec by allowing them to begin to counter the dps of the attacking ships.
Instead of focusing on making one profession's life harder, find ideas that introduce new ones and new ways to play the game. This type of thinking is what expands a game, and moves it forward. A nerfing mindset only makes people angry, one group at a time till you are left with only like minded individuals and declining subscription numbers. I'm not saying in some cases a nerf isn't valid, but in this case a nerf is definatly not needed.
1 - the insurance change is not going to equal the profit potential.
It dents it. Replacing a 130mil ship out of the loot spread from a scanned ships still makes it profitable. It makes them work for the return (in time, cost and risk)
Those that do it for kicks wills till do it for kicks, those operating to hurt logistics will still do (the equation there is your loss < target loss then it is a good hit)
It's a raise in the cost of doing business.
Thing is, right now more and more are not bothering to do anything but click target and attack. Suicide attacks will still be viable, just not as profitable unless you pick targets.
All those are also options that CCP has decided to look into.
|
Mozetta
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 15:40:00 -
[509]
Quote: Sorry, Mozetta, but that's just a bit off. The economic report was tracking movement of characters which it assumed were main characters. Check this quote out: "The characters that are not accessed or do not move between systems are most likely alternate characters for subscribers. We therefore assume that these jumps show us the movement of main characters on each subscription account and are therefore representative for the movement of the main population in EVE."(4th paragraph of page 4) and "49% of all pilots moved only within high security areas (high-sec)"(1st paragraph of page 5).
That means that the 49% they're talking about who never leave high sec are assumed by the report to be main characters. Like I've said before, Ki An's analysis is flawed. It contains erroneous interpretations and some of the numbers he just made up. The conclusion of such an analysis has almost no hope of being accurate in any way.
Windjammer
P.S. Here's the URL of the report if you want to check it out for yourself. http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q4-2007.pdf Read it and see if what I've said above is true or not. I've referenced the quotes to page and paragraph of that report. It'll take a while to load. Unfortunately someone thought it would be cool to insert a bunch of pictures in the report and as a result it loads slowly.
ok I read it. nowhere does it claim that the carebears are in the majority. it doesnt claim that their in the minority either. i guess that both sides of the argument can stop using that report as back up for their arguments as it doesnt really support any of the arguments in this thread. kian did an analysis which you think is wrong. i dont really agree with the entire analysis either but i think he has a point when he sais it cant be used to show carebears are in the majority like ashen said.
|
Ashen Angel
Minmatar AA Mining
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 16:09:00 -
[510]
Originally by: Mozetta
Quote: Sorry, Mozetta, but that's just a bit off. The economic report was tracking movement of characters which it assumed were main characters. Check this quote out: "The characters that are not accessed or do not move between systems are most likely alternate characters for subscribers. We therefore assume that these jumps show us the movement of main characters on each subscription account and are therefore representative for the movement of the main population in EVE."(4th paragraph of page 4) and "49% of all pilots moved only within high security areas (high-sec)"(1st paragraph of page 5).
That means that the 49% they're talking about who never leave high sec are assumed by the report to be main characters. Like I've said before, Ki An's analysis is flawed. It contains erroneous interpretations and some of the numbers he just made up. The conclusion of such an analysis has almost no hope of being accurate in any way.
Windjammer
P.S. Here's the URL of the report if you want to check it out for yourself. http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q4-2007.pdf Read it and see if what I've said above is true or not. I've referenced the quotes to page and paragraph of that report. It'll take a while to load. Unfortunately someone thought it would be cool to insert a bunch of pictures in the report and as a result it loads slowly.
ok I read it. nowhere does it claim that the carebears are in the majority. it doesnt claim that their in the minority either. i guess that both sides of the argument can stop using that report as back up for their arguments as it doesnt really support any of the arguments in this thread. kian did an analysis which you think is wrong. i dont really agree with the entire analysis either but i think he has a point when he sais it cant be used to show carebears are in the majority like ashen said.
Debatable: the three top ships are caldari missile boats. And quite common for mission runners, and only the raven being considered by most to be a PvP combat ship (The frigate and cruiser can be used for it, though most seem to sneer at missiles)
Caldari also has the largest player population.
Till they can break down the mission runners from the combat players there will be a question there.
But more telling was the fact mining and industrial ships were also in the the top numbers, versus other racial combat ships finishing out the top slots.
The snapshots also showed most operated predominantly in high sec space (with a portion entering low sec), the 'safe' areas of eve. (with consideration for travel through low sec)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |