EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

40 days Alpha-Clone review

First post
Author
Federation Uprising
#121 - 2017-01-10 13:18:10 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Thylarctos Sturzka wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
Something like prohibiting scams against characters less than six months old.


How? Leaving aside whether it would be a good idea to have that kind of protection, how would you do it?

The same way character bazaar scams are prohibited and enforced. Tell people don't do it.

Margin scams where overpriced buy orders fail, those are okay. Someone did the math and thought they'd get away with something clever. It uses game mechanics.

Docking rights games should be prohibited against characters younger than six months, or perhaps 1 year. So if the hauler character messages the contract owner, they should get their ISK back and have the option of submitting a ticket.

Social engineering scams based in chat text should be prohibited altogether. Those prey on the basic trust people have in others.

Between fifteen new players and one scammer who causes them to leave, I would rather keep the new players and ban the scammer (and all their accounts), perhaps after two offenses. They are one leaky hole in the bucket that hemorrhages players. It is also the type of policy change that over time will improve the reputation that is passed by word of mouth.

You advertise large fleet fights. Infiltrating organizations and taking their stuff. You don't advertise tricking new players who don't know what's going on because it's wrong.


so in this particular case, how could you control the newbro not to be scammed?

the scammer could not control that the people that would accept his contract to be more than 6 mo. only.

if you insist on this, we still gonna see quiting thread like this only by different OP.

Just Add Water

Aureus Alae
#122 - 2017-01-10 13:18:41 UTC
human invention is the thing that makes eve interesting. I lerned something today from this post too.
Goonswarm Federation
#123 - 2017-01-10 13:20:38 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
It's not all the same. As an example alternative, you can make a courier contract and then shoot the courier in space. This isn't a matter of making EVE a child's playpen. It's a matter of cleaning up the ways you can betray players.

That is understood. I don't understand why. If you make a contract, and then shoot the courier, then you betray them. If you make a contract, and then shut the doors and prevent him from completing the contract, then you betray them.

They are just different means to the same end. I don't see why one method is apparently ok with you, and the other isn't.
#124 - 2017-01-10 13:28:21 UTC
Nat Silverguard wrote:


so in this particular case, how could you control the newbro not to be scammed?

the scammer could not control that the people that would accept his contract to be more than 6 mo. only.

if you insist on this, we still gonna see quiting thread like this only by different OP.


delivery bin sounds good.

Neuntausend wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
It's not all the same. As an example alternative, you can make a courier contract and then shoot the courier in space. This isn't a matter of making EVE a child's playpen. It's a matter of cleaning up the ways you can betray players.

That is understood. I don't understand why. If you make a contract, and then shoot the courier, then you betray them. If you make a contract, and then shut the doors and prevent him from completing the contract, then you betray them.

They are just different means to the same end. I don't see why one method is apparently ok with you, and the other isn't.

Rise said something about players staying in the game longer if they were shot within their first three months. Pretty sure you can't say the same about players who were scammed within their first 40 days.
#125 - 2017-01-10 13:38:40 UTC
Roggo II Seuchenvogel wrote:
Ion Kirst wrote:
Roggo, why are you still here?

You quit, but are so curious about the answers to your whine. Ha, you can't let it go. You've gotten some compassion, and harsh criticism. You even got a rep to reply.

So with all your limited Alpha skills, how could you be really good at anything? You can't, and obviously were weren't.

But somehow, you sure gained the knowledge to do many things in such a short time, and made a lot of isk.

IMO, you are an Alpha made by someone with a Omega account. That's the only answer I can come up with.

-Kirst



I normally play a game called RIFT (for 2,5 years now) You can find me under the name "Roggo" on server Brutwacht. In Nov. Trion published an unfinished expansion, so I decided to have a longer break until christmas time. If they were able to fix the biggest problems I would buy the expansion, if not I woult start to play a new game. In the meanwhile I heared that EVE is f2p now and I just tried it out. But one week ago, I bought the RIFT expansion, so for the next year "I have my game".

After two weeks of playing EVE I decided to make a review, because when I started I missed such a thing to get an impression. I know Iam a bit late, but as I said, I currently spend most of my sparetime in RIFT. And when I open an article, I also spend the time to discuss with the people and share opinions.

If you want you can log in onto Rift (partly f2p) and we can play together.^^ Its funny, in Rift I spend 90% of the time with PvP.^^


Confirming Rift is a panda bear riding, cleavage showing, hello kitty sympathizing, hand holding, rail riding grindy tween fest. I am now un-surprised you did not cut it in EvE.

There isn't enough HTFU to adequately smother this thread Pirate

<○> 250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <○>

<○> Contact me regarding my trusted Alliance Creation Service <○>

Tactical Supremacy
#126 - 2017-01-10 13:41:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Neuntausend wrote:
Case in point: Can flipping. In the olden days, nasty evildoers would steal from a miners jet can to coerce them into a CONCORD-legal engagement. Then barges got bigger cargo holds, and the nasty evildoers had to find a new way. They opted to just suicide gank them, with no chance to fight back. Is that any better?

Case in point: Ganking. In the olden days, people would often use artillery tempests to gank freighters. They would wait on the gate, the freighter would decloak maybe 20km off of them, they'd fire, die and get insurance for their battleships. Then the insurance was taken away for suicide ganks and this was not worthwhile anymore. So people had to find a new method. They found catalysts to work, but catalysts need to be in range. This takes a while, so the freighter would have to be held in place. How do people do that? They bump the freighter around. For 5 minutes, 10 minutes, half an hour? Is that any better?


I want people to look at this part very closely because this poster is being very liberal with the truth.

What ended can flipping was not the changes to barges, but it was a factor, but the change to the crimewatch system where the person nabbing the can went suspect to all, not just creating a limited engagement with the person who had their can flipped, but what often happened is that the noob player would go he stole my can I will steal it back, which then created a limited egagement with the person who stole his can resulting in him getting blown up in his mining or transport ship. Once the can flipper went suspect to all they stopped doing it.

CCP did a revamp of destroyers, they really buffed the DPS, so a Catalyst went from 220 DPS to 580 DPS give or take a few based on fitting and skill, I often wondered why that adjustment to destroyers happened, because they ended up with a DPS higher than most cruisers at the time and many BS were about 800 DPS. The insurance was removed that is true, but they introduced BC's that could do the alpha damage of the BS before they removed insurance.

Bumping freighters in hisec is a strange one because people suddenly started doing it, from what I understand it was not allowed being a sort of exploit, but then people started to do it to bump mining ships away from asteroids, the GM's allowed that then they started bumping freighters to stop them from getting into warp and CCP allowed that then we got into other events that were not accepted previously but became allowed such as hypdunking which is now blocked by mechanic changes. Bumping was never a response to losing insurance.

EDIT: I don't think ganking is an issue for most Alpha players you get ganked while mining you are in a Venture and you have loads of them, The exception is in terms of those doing hauling, this will be a major issue for you people just as this hauler scam was a major issue for the OP.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin

#127 - 2017-01-10 13:41:40 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
It's not all the same. As an example alternative, you can make a courier contract and then shoot the courier in space. This isn't a matter of making EVE a child's playpen. It's a matter of cleaning up the ways you can betray players.

That is understood. I don't understand why. If you make a contract, and then shoot the courier, then you betray them. If you make a contract, and then shut the doors and prevent him from completing the contract, then you betray them.

They are just different means to the same end. I don't see why one method is apparently ok with you, and the other isn't.


I guess the difference is that you have to risk something if you want to shoot him
- You have to risk that the the courier accepts the contract but delivers it XX hours later when you are maybe offline
- You have to risk that you will be shot down while waiting
- You have to risk, that the courier escapes or takes an unexpected route
- If you want to kill him in highsec you risk the loss of your ship

With the docking scam you have to risk nothing. You wait until the contract is accepeed, press a button and thats it. You can even go offline and wait until the deadline is over.
Goonswarm Federation
#128 - 2017-01-10 13:46:57 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
However even the marks play this game specifically because they like it over all the other choices of MMOG to waste time on.


TBH, there are a lot of stuff where EVE is unique. Enough even that even if they somehow decided to remove scamming, wardecs and ganking, the game would still be pretty much alone in it's space MMO where the economy runs based on player interaction with next to nothing not being crafted by players, a rather large collection of different ships to fly and freedom of doing nearly whatever you want in more than half the game universe. I'm not saying such a change should be done but even if it was, EVE would still be rather unique so that mean players can potentially like enough things in it to go over a dislike of all 3 mentioned features.
Goonswarm Federation
#129 - 2017-01-10 13:50:23 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Rise said something about players staying in the game longer if they were shot within their first three months. Pretty sure you can't say the same about players who were scammed within their first 40 days.

Scams may hurt player retention, they may help it, or they may not do anything for it at all. I suppose that will have to stay open to speculation. It's easy to query a database to see who has been involved in a fight and who hasn't. It may be much more difficult to do the same for scams, because the database can only show the movement of assets or the outcome of a contract, not however the intentions behind it.

Does loosing most or all of their measly irrelevant assets and ISK drive players away? Most likely. Can or should it be prevented, though? I don't think so.

Newbies will occasionally get wrecked in about every part of the game that involves competition with other players. They cannot win in a fight, they cannot fly proper haulers and get ganked, they cannot compete on the market, they cannot discern between an opportunity and a scam, they have crappy income, they don't know how to fit their ships, and they don't know wtf. But without getting in those situations, they won't learn either. We should not pamper them. Same rules for everyone.

#130 - 2017-01-10 13:50:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregorius Goldstein
Neuntausend wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
It's not all the same. As an example alternative, you can make a courier contract and then shoot the courier in space. This isn't a matter of making EVE a child's playpen. It's a matter of cleaning up the ways you can betray players.

That is understood. I don't understand why. If you make a contract, and then shoot the courier, then you betray them. If you make a contract, and then shut the doors and prevent him from completing the contract, then you betray them.

They are just different means to the same end. I don't see why one method is apparently ok with you, and the other isn't.


Shooting down the courier can be countered. I could scout/bait on my battlenereus. I could bring an escort. (jay) Perhaps I just fly a longer route or just happened to find a wh that connects the relevant systems? A lot of funny things can happen with a scam that relies on shooting a ship down.

That "you can't enter station" scam is rather lame, blunt, boring. I didn't fall for it and I think I won't in the future. I just liked the "lure and shoot" version better. A question of style if you want to put it that way. And I have a lot of funny ideas what one could do with the delivery bin. Deliver 1000 homeless to the staging of Alliance X? Challenge excepted. Quiting a corp in rage and taking everything not nailed down with you is good, dumping everything at the station of a bitter rival even better.
#131 - 2017-01-10 13:55:16 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
Rise said something about players staying in the game longer if they were shot within their first three months. Pretty sure you can't say the same about players who were scammed within their first 40 days.

Scams may hurt player retention, they may help it, or they may not do anything for it at all. I suppose that will have to stay open to speculation.

[a bunch of rhetoric on a bad claim]


No it doesn't have to stay open to speculation. This thread is an example of how the citadel courier scam hurts retention. The scam citadel owner can find other more engaging ways to get players' ISK.
#132 - 2017-01-10 13:58:19 UTC
Keno Skir wrote:

Confirming Rift is a panda bear riding, cleavage showing, hello kitty sympathizing, hand holding, rail riding grindy tween fest. I am now un-surprised you did not cut it in EvE.

There isn't enough HTFU to adequately smother this thread Pirate

you seem to know a lot about Rift
#133 - 2017-01-10 14:18:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Doesnt matter if its boring if it generates so much discussion. Lol

CCP may cave in on this mechanics someday and it will be a shame because it is slightly more sophisticated than doubling ISK, and I dont see many people falling for that. Usually the warning is enough for people to be careful enough and tell themselves its a TRAP!

But those new players who dont really read warnings or think that CCP is a bunch of overprotective parents that treat everyone in the game like they would be their asthmatic, allergic children (spoiled by game industry?), are more prone to fall over their feets wanting to grab ISK for their new shiny toys.
Goonswarm Federation
#134 - 2017-01-10 14:26:11 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
What ended can flipping was not the changes to barges, but it was a factor, but the change to the crimewatch system where the person nabbing the can went suspect to all, not just creating a limited engagement with the person who had their can flipped, but what often happened is that the noob player would go he stole my can I will steal it back, which then created a limited egagement with the person who stole his can resulting in him getting blown up in his mining or transport ship. Once the can flipper went suspect to all they stopped doing it.

I would say that's debatable. Even with a suspect timer, it would still be doable, but good luck finding any jetcans to flip at all these days. People still suspect-bait, so they obviously are not afraid of being blinky yellow. The reason for that is that most highsec-dwellers are way too scared to attack a suspect, so you can sit in a belt, blinking yellow and nobody will do anything, although they could probably roast you with all the drones they have in the belt. Ultimately, it doesn't matter why it's not possible anymore anyway - it's not possible anymore, and the only reliable way to kill a mining barge now is to gank it, which is what people are doing.

Quote:
CCP did a revamp of destroyers, they really buffed the DPS, so a Catalyst went from 220 DPS to 580 DPS give or take a few based on fitting and skill, I often wondered why that adjustment to destroyers happened, because they ended up with a DPS higher than most cruisers at the time and many BS were about 800 DPS. The insurance was removed that is true, but they introduced BC's that could do the alpha damage of the BS.

I think the main contributor was the weapon rebalance, but I may be mistaken there. However, Catalysts are mainly being used because they are cheap. That is however only true when they are T1 fit. Assuming all fives (which on a gank alt is not the standard) a Catalyst with T1 guns, Fed Navy Antimatter and T1 Magstabs, no rigs does 330DPS, 385 with heat, for just 1.7-ish M. With T2 guns, Void, T2 Magstabs and two rigs does 600DPS, 680 with heat for 10M - not even twice the DPS for 6 times the price. The 600DPS Catalyst sure is a thing, but it's not the standard. It's either el-cheapo T1 fit if you have the manpower, or battlecruisers if you don't for the most part.


Quote:
Bumping freighters in hisec is a strange one because people suddenly started doing it, from what I understand it was not allowed being a sort of exploit, but then people started to do it to bump mining ships away from asteroids, the GM's allowed that then they started bumping freighters to stop them from getting into warp and CCP allowed that then we got into other events that were not accepted previously but became allowed such as hypdunking which is now blocked by mechanic changes. Bumping was never a response to losing insurance.
Bumping was indeed a weird one back then. Nobody was really sure how CCP would see it, and they probably didn't know themselves. It was only clarified to be an exploit after the whole James 315 Minerbumping thing, and even then only if there was no end game to it. So - if you bump a ship to keep it from warping in order to destroy it further down the line, that's fair game. If you bump a ship just to bump a ship and annoy the **** out of the pilot it's not. That being said - ganking Freighters with a horde of 70 catalysts would be near impossible without bumping, unless he was autopiloting. And if gankers could still use Battleships for cheap, they'd most certainly prefer that as it's way easier if you don't have to bump and manage ranges, but can just shoot once and be done with it. So, I do believe that the insurance change is a major contributor to the freighterbumping - if CONCORDOKKEN-insurance was still a thing, bumping the freighter would not be required.
Goonswarm Federation
#135 - 2017-01-10 14:33:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Rain6637 wrote:
Neuntausend wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
Rise said something about players staying in the game longer if they were shot within their first three months. Pretty sure you can't say the same about players who were scammed within their first 40 days.

Scams may hurt player retention, they may help it, or they may not do anything for it at all. I suppose that will have to stay open to speculation.

[a bunch of rhetoric on a bad claim]


No it doesn't have to stay open to speculation. This thread is an example of how the citadel courier scam hurts retention. The scam citadel owner can find other more engaging ways to get players' ISK.

And there are a dozen threads that "prove" that getting shot in PvP hurts player retention. Don't act like you haven't seen any ragequits over ganks lately. Yet you consider the possibility, that this is just one side of a coin, and CCP knows the other one.

If a player gets blown up he may stay, or he may quit. If more people stay than quit, that means it may help player retention.

If a player gets scammed he may stay, or he may quit. If more people stay than quit, that means it may help player retention.

The only difference is, that CCP claim to know that more players stay rather than quit in the case of getting blown up, while we have no word on the matter of scamming - most likely because it's difficult to tell. Forum posts are not a good indicator, because typically you will see more posts made by players who quit, so they can complain than you would see posts made by players who stayed, telling you that they stayed for this or that reason. I would even go as far to say that many players don't even realize right away exactly why they stayed, whereas players who quit probably can tell you right away why they quit.
#136 - 2017-01-10 14:34:58 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Neuntausend wrote:
Case in point: Can flipping. In the olden days, nasty evildoers would steal from a miners jet can to coerce them into a CONCORD-legal engagement. Then barges got bigger cargo holds, and the nasty evildoers had to find a new way. They opted to just suicide gank them, with no chance to fight back. Is that any better?

Case in point: Ganking. In the olden days, people would often use artillery tempests to gank freighters. They would wait on the gate, the freighter would decloak maybe 20km off of them, they'd fire, die and get insurance for their battleships. Then the insurance was taken away for suicide ganks and this was not worthwhile anymore. So people had to find a new method. They found catalysts to work, but catalysts need to be in range. This takes a while, so the freighter would have to be held in place. How do people do that? They bump the freighter around. For 5 minutes, 10 minutes, half an hour? Is that any better?


I want people to look at this part very closely because this poster is being very liberal with the truth.


That's what you get for engaging with it at length
Goonswarm Federation
#137 - 2017-01-10 14:39:07 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Neuntausend wrote:
Case in point: Can flipping. In the olden days, nasty evildoers would steal from a miners jet can to coerce them into a CONCORD-legal engagement. Then barges got bigger cargo holds, and the nasty evildoers had to find a new way. They opted to just suicide gank them, with no chance to fight back. Is that any better?

Case in point: Ganking. In the olden days, people would often use artillery tempests to gank freighters. They would wait on the gate, the freighter would decloak maybe 20km off of them, they'd fire, die and get insurance for their battleships. Then the insurance was taken away for suicide ganks and this was not worthwhile anymore. So people had to find a new method. They found catalysts to work, but catalysts need to be in range. This takes a while, so the freighter would have to be held in place. How do people do that? They bump the freighter around. For 5 minutes, 10 minutes, half an hour? Is that any better?


I want people to look at this part very closely because this poster is being very liberal with the truth.


That's what you get for engaging with it at length

Please read my post on the matter and try to fathom the idea behind discussing a topic, instead of just throwing out snarky oneliners claiming something is wrong without backing it up.

If you think I'm wrong, please tell me where and why, and accept that I may do the same. Yes, this involves words, often many of them, and words are hard. But you said you like hanging around on the forums, so I would suspect words are kind of your thing.
#138 - 2017-01-10 14:43:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Wanda Fayne
Neuntausend wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
It's not all the same. As an example alternative, you can make a courier contract and then shoot the courier in space. This isn't a matter of making EVE a child's playpen. It's a matter of cleaning up the ways you can betray players.

That is understood. I don't understand why. If you make a contract, and then shoot the courier, then you betray them. If you make a contract, and then shut the doors and prevent him from completing the contract, then you betray them.

They are just different means to the same end. I don't see why one method is apparently ok with you, and the other isn't.


One is good strategy and gamesmanship, and the other is just bad mechanics.
One has risk, chance of failure or the unforeseen, and the other is just bad mechanics.
One is worthy of a killmail, a marker in history, an interactive visual experience for all parties...
And the other is just bad.

edit
Roggo II Seuchenvogel wrote:

With the docking scam you have to risk nothing. You wait until the contract is accepeed, press a button and thats it. You can even go offline and wait until the deadline is over.


Pretty much this.

Where is the risk?

your comments just confirms this whole idea is totally pathetic

-Lan Wang-

-

Locator Agents cease to function on Offline Players:

#139 - 2017-01-10 14:43:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
I think that if they would get a very safe environment, when you would only shoot a weak NPCs and dont have to fear about other nasty capsuleers, it would get boring really fast.

The way it is now they can have an urge to retaliate or maybe at least to get back their ISK somehow, resulting in more player activity. Of course some will go play other game when they realize they only want a mirage of safe heaven to escape the reality. In EVE reality seeps thru game mechanics left there by developers working on malicious scheme to give players freedoms. Cool
Goonswarm Federation
#140 - 2017-01-10 14:59:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Wanda Fayne wrote:
One is good strategy and gamesmanship, and the other is just bad mechanics.
One has risk, chance of failure or the unforeseen, and the other is just bad mechanics.
One is worthy of a killmail, a marker in history, an interactive visual experience for all parties...
And the other is just bad.

edit
Roggo II Seuchenvogel wrote:

With the docking scam you have to risk nothing. You wait until the contract is accepeed, press a button and thats it. You can even go offline and wait until the deadline is over.


Pretty much this

Ganking unsuspecting nooblets is a marker in history now, who knew?

I get what you are saying, though. And yes, it's not risky and doesn't require much in terms of skill and organization, and the victim doesn't have a lot of options once trapped. However, the same can be said about ISK doubling scams, trade contract scams, market scams, ... - that's just how most scams are.

They have another thing in common: They rely heavily on very bad choices. In case of the citadel courier scam, the victim gets a window, that basically says "If you click this button you may loose a bajillion isk". The victim clicks the button and looses a bajillion ISK - big surprise. It's silly, but I don't think a game mechanic needs to protect players from their own bad choices. If you make a bad move in a game, you may loose. If you make a good move, you may win. Not all of these moves have to be fascinating, intricate schemes. Sometimes it's just enough if your move is not stupid, and the other guys is.

And on the "interactive" part: Realistically it goes like this: The victim takes the contract jumps a gate and dies. That's it. There's not much in terms of interaction either. Yeah, he may have a now very pretty explosion, but that's about it.
Forum Jump