Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 13:53:00 -
[61]
"Dr. E explained in our interview that meeting with the council is one of his favorite things in working on EVE. The players are always ahead of the curve, Dr. E explained and they continue to surprise designers with ideas and game play"
So CCP love the way players are always head of the curve? The are delighted to be continuly surprised with ideas and game play WHICH THEY THEN PROMPTLY NERF
CCPs propoganda... again.
SKUNK
|
Kyle Klanen
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 13:56:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine Edited by: Somealt Ofmine on 03/09/2008 13:40:46
Originally by: Kyle Klanen
Here is a CCP dev describing a pvp activity that has been allowed and acceptable since the game began as "Griefing" and you and others claim there has been no large shift in the devs philosophy and the game wont change?
Bud, they're looking at what the war-dec system has become over time. War decs aren't inherantly griefing, they're being used to grief. They aren't saying that they want to remove war-decs. They haven't even said with any specificity what they plan to do with them. So, unless you are using them to grief, you probaby shouldn't get your tighty-whities in a twist just yet. How about we see what they come up with, which, if they are true to form, they will talk about some before it actually goes live.
Define exactly how a wardec can be used for greifing? war deccing a corp to demand ISK to end it? or deccing them to blow up their pos or ships for loot? what about trying to take revenge against a corp thief or other vengeance based motive? those reasons are not greifing its just criminal behavour has been a long accepted method of game play so is this going to change? and even if it does not who decides whether it was "for the lulz" or whether its for criminal extortion or profit making wardecs?
|
Zackalwe
Gallente Jealhimet Elite Army
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 13:58:00 -
[63]
I just read the whole interview and at no point did anyone mention making the game safer to appeal to new players. They said new players are intimidated by the complexity of Eve, not the danger. They also said Eve will not change in complexity to appease new players, just the newbie training will be improved to help them cope.
Pretty sensationalist post by the op having no basis in fact as far as I can see. Although what is new...
|
Roy Batty68
Caldari Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 14:04:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Le Skunk "Dr. E explained in our interview that meeting with the council is one of his favorite things in working on EVE. The players are always ahead of the curve, Dr. E explained and they continue to surprise designers with ideas and game play"
So CCP love the way players are always head of the curve? The are delighted to be continuly surprised with ideas and game play WHICH THEY THEN PROMPTLY NERF
CCPs propoganda... again.
SKUNK
Hey! Negative Nancy! What about Space Trombones?
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Kyle Klanen
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 14:14:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Zackalwe I just read the whole interview and at no point did anyone mention making the game safer to appeal to new players. They said new players are intimidated by the complexity of Eve, not the danger. They also said Eve will not change in complexity to appease new players, just the newbie training will be improved to help them cope.
Pretty sensationalist post by the op having no basis in fact as far as I can see. Although what is new...
My point is not just based on the interview, the interview is just a statement from CCP confirming they want to shift EVE to a mainstream market. When you take that statement and then look at the other factors like a dev in another thread describing certain pvp mechanics as "greifing" and many of the recent changes you can see how at odds these conflicting statements are.
They are not going to change the game yet they are removing pvp mechanics that have been in since day one because now they defined as griefing and although they insist they wont change anything they will remove "daunting game mechanics" so that the game will appeal to the mass market, if the game doesn't appeal to the mainstream now how will it miracuously appeal to it without changing anything?
|
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 14:27:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Le Skunk
So CCP love the way players are always head of the curve? The are delighted to be continuly surprised with ideas and game play WHICH THEY THEN PROMPTLY NERF
Two issues with this: first and most obvious, CCP doesn't do anything promptly
Second, though, if there's no movement in trends, there's no curve to be ahead of. On the nano-front, CVA used to struggle greatly against nanoships. Now we have enough skilled nanopilots of our own, as well as successful enough tactical responses that don't necessarily involve nanos at all. The advantage of the nano pioneers is then lost.
For the innovators to truly have an edge at that point, there needs to be change.
That's a limited example, and I'm not saying constantly moving goal-posts in all aspects of the game is necessarily a good thing, but nerfs don't mean CCP doesn't like player innovation. It's just when innovation by a select few pilots becomes standard fare for a particular aspect of Eve...there has to be a change to allow the innovators to seperate from the pack once again.
Indeed, the true innovators should be excited when a major change hits.
|
Screaming Giggabytes
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 14:39:00 -
[67]
Here is the deal.
Once CCP uses the term 'griefing' the fights already lost.
Griefing implies its a bad thing that needs to be controlled. They are doing that slowly but surely. EvE is less and less a dark and dangerous place where you need your wits to survive.
This is a good marketing move, CCP has already stated they worry about the 7 month gamer, not the multi-year gamer, those are just a bonus. Most people in life are idiots, but idiots who can pay $15 bucks a month, for those 7 months.
I've canceled myself, my mains account is already dead, this alt account dies in a week, and while I can't say it was over the carebear nature of high sec, I was 0.0 only, its sure not making me want to come back anytime soon.
|
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 14:48:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Screaming Giggabytes
Griefing implies its a bad thing that needs to be controlled.
But what is "griefing?" Is pvp "griefing?" CCP hasn't given any indication they feel that way.
Is blowing up a hauler in high sec because there's some really awesome loot that will justify the impending loss to CONCORD considered griefing? CCP doesn't seem to think so...otherwise they'd simply remove the capacity to do precisely that.
Is blowing up a hauler in high sec because it won't cost you anything and it's fun to see that individual nerdrage in local/on the forums considered griefing? I'd say CCP thinks so...hence the nerf to incentive-less highsec ganking.
And that's just mechanics. You start going into the social engineering aspects of Eve and it's obvious CCP has a high threshold of where stiff competitive play ends and griefing begins. It's not some happy-happy land and they're not trying to make it so. Nerfing "grief" play does not mean nerfing pvp.
|
Zackalwe
Gallente Jealhimet Elite Army
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:17:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Zackalwe on 03/09/2008 15:21:26
Originally by: Kyle Klanen
My point is not just based on the interview, the interview is just a statement from CCP confirming they want to shift EVE to a mainstream market.
You tried to justify the "WOW in space" thing by this interview, which clearly doesnt wash when someone actually reads it. Now you say its not the interview but your feeling about the way Eve is moving. I cant argue with that really, just disagree. Also they never said "we want the WOW mainstream market". They said they want to appeal to a wider audience. Thats what MMOs do, they focus on increasing their customer base. If they are smart (and I believe CCP is reasonably smart) they wont sacrifice the existing player base for a chance at a new one. SWG has already provided a shining example of the stupidity of this line of game development.
Originally by: Kyle Klanen
When you take that statement and then look at the other factors like a dev in another thread describing certain pvp mechanics as "greifing" and many of the recent changes you can see how at odds these conflicting statements are.
Certain PvP mechanics in Eve ARE griefing. War deccing a newbie corp for laughs and easy kills is the very epitomy of griefing. But this is Eve, big bad men might try to kill you, even in empire. I have never seen anything from a dev that would suggest wardecs are being axed, despite all the forum poasting to the contrary.
Originally by: Kyle Klanen
They are not going to change the game yet they are removing pvp mechanics that have been in since day one because now they defined as griefing and although they insist they wont change anything they will remove "daunting game mechanics" so that the game will appeal to the mass market, if the game doesn't appeal to the mainstream now how will it miracuously appeal to it without changing anything?
They were talking about the complexity in Eve in general, not particualrly PvP. They already said they will not make it less complex. They said they will work on how to smooth the learning curve for a new player. I would imagine this means improving the starter tutorials, having more ingame guides on Eve-related mechanics that sort of thing.
Lets be honest, the concept of transversal velocity is going to be a hard thing to grasp for the average WOW-head. The first time they enter lowsec and get pwned by a crow without even scratching the shields, they could become disheartened and decide to quit if they dont know why they were so soundly beaten. Now would be a good time for the ingame PvP primer guide to become available, with a big section on transversal and combating very fast ships. A few pointers on ship setups and the numbers to aim for in railgun tracking etc.
If that happened the WOW newb with a bit of promise might learn more about the game mechanics and keep on playing, in the hopes of using his new-found transversal knowledge against someone else. Of course the WOW newb that has no mental capabilities other than standing in a raid-zone and rolling through his damage cycle when he is told to, might not be able to make the adjustment and leaves. Thats fine Eve isnt for everyone, but it would be better to give them more tools to help them at adjusting than they have right now.
|
Sharupak
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:26:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Kyle Klanen If you read the article posted on the EVE news center finally someone from CCP confirms the transition of EVE into the "mainstream" and details how gamers are put off by the game mechanics. If you look at the recent changes and the proposed changes it all makes sense, EVE now has battlegrounds and war decs are going to be nerfed and suicide ganking is being nerfed, the lofty scam was nerfed and very recently the long used tactic of joining a corp to ambush war targets has been declared an exploit even though its been used for years, who knows what other changes are coming even though "the game will not be changed".
Welcome to the world of EVEcraft
Your style of game trolling belongs here ----> A game forum that allows hyperbole to drive game progression _______________________________________________ RuntimeError: ChainEvent is blocking by design, but you're block trapped. You have'll have to find some alternative means to do Your Thing, dude. |
|
Faife
Minmatar Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 15:37:00 -
[71]
if we're doing wow in space, i want my ship to be able to /dance - -
|
Cyd Vicious
8lack Wing IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 16:14:00 -
[72]
Blizzard sent some spy/saboteur in CCP devolepement team...
hey, wait isn't that an exploit?
|
Screaming Giggabytes
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 17:10:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Faife if we're doing wow in space, i want my ship to be able to /dance
With ambulation you will be able to /dance while someone plays the /flute.
|
Drunk Driver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 17:48:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Faife if we're doing wow in space, i want my ship to be able to /dance
I agree.
And I want the thruster animations to be accurate.
. |
Trebor Notlimah
Lone Star EVE Group Veni Vidi Vici
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 18:55:00 -
[75]
Anyone wanna go kill boars in Fountain for XP?
<3 Trebor
|
Mordain
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 20:01:00 -
[76]
I have played EVE on and off since launch. I have tried just about everything. I do see PVP without mutual consent as a dead idea for any game that wishes to reach the masses. When PVP without consent happens one person ( a revenue stream ) is not happy. If this happens enough you get heavy churn of new players, not good for long term revenue. People don't generally return to places where they have felt bullied unless they are forced or have a mental illness. I certainly would not play if I felt this everywhere in the game. I am a casual player which the skill system is inclined for, but the general playstyle is not.
|
Screaming Giggabytes
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 20:12:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Screaming Giggabytes on 03/09/2008 20:12:39
Originally by: Mordain I have played EVE on and off since launch. I have tried just about everything. I do see PVP without mutual consent as a dead idea for any game that wishes to reach the masses. When PVP without consent happens one person ( a revenue stream ) is not happy. If this happens enough you get heavy churn of new players, not good for long term revenue. People don't generally return to places where they have felt bullied unless they are forced or have a mental illness. I certainly would not play if I felt this everywhere in the game. I am a casual player which the skill system is inclined for, but the general playstyle is not.
You can play casually and do just fine in EvE regardless of the rules.
People need to stop calling clueless play 'casual'. Casual means you play when you want and its not your top priority, but it shouldn't mean you are stupid enough to ship 2b in a badger mark II through Jita on autopilot.
What CCP is reaching out for is the clueless demographic, and quite frankly there are far more polished games out there already catering to that group.
If I wanted casual, consequence less pvp I'd play Warhammer.
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 20:39:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Kyle Klanen
Define exactly how a wardec can be used for greifing? war deccing a corp to demand ISK to end it? or deccing them to blow up their pos or ships for loot? what about trying to take revenge against a corp thief or other vengeance based motive? those reasons are not greifing its just criminal behavour has been a long accepted method of game play so is this going to change? and even if it does not who decides whether it was "for the lulz" or whether its for criminal extortion or profit making wardecs?
Well, I'd probably better define griefing first:
Griefing is taking in game actions for no other reason than to inconvenience another player, or hinder their progression. You don't care if you progress in the game at all, you're only interested in keeping the other guy from doing so and making things hard on him. So, how can a war-dec be used to grief?
Pretty simple. If you war-dec just so you can kill some folks, and don't really expect to get anything out of it other than hearing them smack in local and whine on the forums, you're griefing.
By their own admission, BoB are the biggest griefers in the game right now. They don't really expect to get anything out of their "Max" campaign. In fact, it'll probably end up costing them a bundle. They just want to inconvenience the other guy and make him go backwards, and hopefully get a good helping of local smacking and forum whining for their trouble.
I don't think that griefing is wrong, or should be against the rules, by the way. It just is what it is.
Noob griefing is a special flavor of griefing. It's vet players griefing noobs who, because of their lack of character development and resources, can't really fight back very well. It is of concern to game publishers, because it can discourage new players from continuing in the game, and encourage them to buy game currency or characters for money.
If CCP revamps war-decs, it'll be to curtain noob griefing and give newer players more of a chance to "catch on" in the game before they're chased away by vets intent on griefing them. Afterall, high-sec is where the noobs are. The devs don't seem over concerned about BoB griefing out in 0.0, and rightly so.
|
Mordain
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:23:00 -
[79]
To all who are against highsec being 'safe' and carebears living there, I ask why.
Do carebears interfere with your play, or is like a child looking into a window of a candy store with no money in there pocket, knowing they can't have what they want?
This should have very little impact on your play, on the contrary where do you think your ships and ammo come from? A healthy economy which is largely created by carebears.
The attacking of carebears in 'safe' space is more of an inconvenience to the carebears than anything they can do to you.
I think most ppl who hate carebears are people who don't want a fair fight, want to grief or just are bored with the game to the point to which they should quit anyways.
|
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:27:00 -
[80]
Your best statement would be to leave... so go.
Eve is better now than it ever was. The constant re-balancing has made this game what it is. Too often these types of games get abused by idiots and ruin the real integrity of the game itself.
Cheers. --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man. |
|
Roy Batty68
Caldari Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 21:54:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
If CCP revamps war-decs, it'll be to curtail noob griefing and give newer players more of a chance to "catch on" in the game before they're chased away by vets intent on griefing them. Afterall, high-sec is where the noobs are. The devs don't seem over concerned about BoB griefing out in 0.0, and rightly so.
The problem with putting specific definitions on what is or isn't an "acceptable war" is you run the risk of impossing limitations on things that you would have otherwise been ok with, but just didn't think of at the time. For instance, if you specify that someone in the conflict must be doing it for some end profit or to gain access to some resource, that could rule out simple revenge.
The corp thief that just took off with 400 billion isk worth of corp ships and pos structures, and is now thumbing his nose at you from Generic Corp X. How are you going to "profit" from war dec'ing them? The reward is simply making your target or his new corp suffer until you feel you've gotten your vengeance.
Ok. So, we add "revenge" to the list of acceptable war dec'ing terms.
Cool! There's the one size fits all loophole if there ever was one.
CEO>"Yeah. That noob... over there... mining veld. Spam Popcycle..." 2nd>"Spam Popsicle, sir" CEO>"Yeah, him... he's ****ed me right the heck off. He's fly an Abis!" 2nd>"That's an Ibis, sir" CEO>"Yeah, those... I HATE those. REVENGE!!!!"
Ooooooook. So, if it's so easily dodged via human creativity, why try and pigeon hole it in the first place?
Ok, so you say that we'll quantify it somehow. We'll take the average SP of the pilots of each corp and only allow those corps that are "in the ball park" to fight each other, and if they aren't even close we'll tell those bad old griefers to get bent. Hmmmph!
Riiiiiiiiight. Ok, so that corp thief I mentioned earlier? He wants to enjoy those POS parts he stole from you, but doesn't want to run the risk of you war dec'ing him and you blowing up his shiney new Gurista Large Tower. So what does he do? He takes all the unused alt spots from his 4 accounts (8 characters), turns them into 800k SP nubs, and stuffs them in his 1 man corp. That reduces his corps SP average from (his) 33mil SP to around 4mil average.
Suddenly he's untouchable by you or anyone else with a corp that's skilled enough to damage a POS. Great!
It's dangerous impossing such fake bounderies around war decs. It is far more likely to just empower the "griefers" more and restrict the "proper" players from doing anything about it.
It's about freedom in a sense. And freedom makes behaving responsibly, or at least in a non-lame fasion, a completely personal choice. And with choice you get people who are going to be ****heads.
To me it should be about people making good choices to begin with. If some nub puts 2 civilian shield boosters and a med armor rep on his raven, we all have a jolly good time as we point and laugh. He didn't prepare his defenses properly. His bad. He deserved to get popped in a fit like that.
If a bunch of miners or a bunch of noobs get together and make a totally defenseless corp, why is it suddenly the aggressors fault? Why isn't it still the victims fault for not preparing properly? Why are noobs CREATING new corps in the first place? Just as some 2mil SP noob probably shouldn't be flying a battleship because they probably aren't ready yet.
I don't get it. It's virtually the same sort of thing, just on a larger scale. There is nothing wrong with the idea that noobs should join an existing corp until they are ready to strike out on their own.
That's part of evolving. Learning the game and adapting to the environment. Yeah, there are people out there getting their jollys by griefing. It's lame. But, pretty much like suicide ganking, it wouldn't be happening if people weren't making themselves targets.
Nerf evolution?
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Nose Snot
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 22:03:00 -
[82]
I think CCP needs to add a new 'war tactic' and leave WARS to large corps and alliances. It's quite silly to think you will declare war on 1 man or 2 men, or whatever. The devs should add 'CONFLICTS' with a whole new set of rules.
Now, you can declare WARS or CONFLICTS. Conflicts can be against 1 player in ANY corp (including npc corps). But, for example, you can only shoot that ONE player while his entire corp can shoot you. Just the risk you'll have to deal with when you declare a conflict with one person.
Wars should also be changed into something more meaningful, with outcomes, and with disadvantages to corps who dec and then recall without a conclusion. Wars need risk to declaring them, and risks to leaving them.
|
FOl2TY8
Gallente Revolutionary United Front Silex Union
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 22:04:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Wendat Huron Oh No! Exclamation Mark Fortell of Imminent Doom!
Your sarcasm works better if you capitalize every word. Seewhuttadidthur?
---------- The six paths and the four lives.... |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 22:27:00 -
[84]
OP is a newb or a newb 4 life.
The current system protects "greifers" and high sec gankers from the majority of players.
If you think corp is different than a guild or clan you have some insecurity issues.
|
Roy Batty68
Caldari Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 23:50:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Ghoest OP is a newb or a newb 4 life.
The current system protects "greifers" and high sec gankers from the majority of players.
And thanks to the suicide gank nerfs it protects them even better! \o/
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Sickle Steel
|
Posted - 2008.09.04 00:08:00 -
[86]
I cant understand why they would do that.
http://www.videogamechat.net/pics/553-swryfrnofe.png
oh shi...
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |