EVE General Discussion

 
4 PagesPrevious page1234Next page
 

EvE's Ecology

Author
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#21 - 2017-03-16 12:35:32 UTC
Tisiphone Dira wrote:
Your analogy is about as much good as a frog with a guitar playing stairway to heaven.


Rainbow Connection is pretty solid though.

Cardinal Graelyn

Imperial Liaison, I-RED

Amarr Loyalist of the Year - YC113

#22 - 2017-03-16 18:02:41 UTC
The IDEA that highsec is safe leads players to do unwise things that they would never do if they felt there was a risk.

The TRUTH that highsec is NOT safe means that those unwise actions are punished, severely and without remorse.

Truth, of course, both in Eve and outside it, is that which aligns with reality.

The conflict between the carebear's ideas and reality is what we in the New Order like to call "content".

And without content, Eve truly is dead.

Highsec is worth fighting for.

By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.  www.minerbumping.com

Amarr Empire
#23 - 2017-03-16 23:25:17 UTC
Truth is what aligns with reality, but eve is a game. That means the reality of the game is open to change. Aside from economics, and I'd also push for nerfs to rewards in line, I haven't seen a good argument for why eve should push away 'carebears' when it is trying to grow.

I don't care if HS players can't afford anything better than T1 battlecruisers, but why can't eve have a place which actually is safe?
#24 - 2017-03-16 23:59:18 UTC
We do. It's called an NPC station. Never undock.
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2017-03-17 06:41:17 UTC
Drake Aihaken wrote:
We do. It's called an NPC station. Never undock.


Sounds like enjoyable gameplay.Roll
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2017-03-17 08:05:13 UTC
this whole game is about carebears farming isk anymore
people dont wanna farm isk there is nothing left to do
suicide ganking in cats so cool
corp of 3 guys pvp in t1 frigs even want api wtf
in case they get rifter awox
trying fw seems pretty dead atm
CODE.
#27 - 2017-03-19 03:13:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Revis Owen
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Drake Aihaken wrote:
We do. It's called an NPC station. Never undock.


Sounds like enjoyable gameplay.Roll


As enjoyable as a 100% safe themepark area, which is what you are calling for.

Agent of the New Order http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html If you do not have a current Mining Permit, please contact me for issuance.

Amarr Empire
#28 - 2017-03-19 06:56:44 UTC
Revis Owen wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Drake Aihaken wrote:
We do. It's called an NPC station. Never undock.


Sounds like enjoyable gameplay.Roll


As enjoyable as a 100% safe themepark area, which is what you are calling for.


Difference is some people, in fact many people, do find themepark content enjoyable. I get it, youre worried that people start playing, and that the eve community changes. That more and more players will complain about being 'interacted with', and the reason you like eve could fade. By the way, safe =/= themepark.

If eve never changes only those who love it as it is will remain, and they will hold the game back from making any progress.
#29 - 2017-03-19 10:40:03 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
I don't care if HS players can't afford anything better than T1 battlecruisers, but why can't eve have a place which actually is safe?


Because that's not what EVE is. EVE is a cold, dark universe in which the strong survive and the weak are slaughtered for their enjoyment. Highsec is a grudging acknowledgement of the fact that new players need a place to get started, so the rules of engagement make it undesirable to attack them in most cases. Their ships don't drop enough loot to be worth suicide ganking for economic reasons, and nobody is likely to hate them enough to do it for personal reasons. But that's the closest EVE comes to safety. If you fly an expensive ship or make enemies you can be killed even in highsec.

This design principle is what makes EVE, unlike most games, interesting. Other players are always a factor in your life, there is no opportunity to play it like a single-player game. Violating this core principle would be like proposing a spaceships expansion for WoW. At some point you just have to say "this is not what our game is about, if you don't like it play one of the games that is more to your taste" instead of sacrificing the integrity of your product in a desperate attempt to please every potential customer. And I don't think it's a coincidence that EVE has survived for the past 13+ years while game after game that lacked a consistent and unique identity died.
#30 - 2017-03-19 10:45:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Merin Ryskin
Mr Mieyli wrote:
If we want a living universe full of people then there needs to be an easy mode (with low low reward) in the form of highsec.


There really doesn't need to be this. People playing EVE as a single-player game with no risk add nothing to the game. They "level their Raven" without interacting with anyone else, and then stop playing. Maybe CCP makes some extra money before they get bored and quit, but from the point of view of other players they might as well not exist at all.

The thing that makes EVE a living universe is the fact that it's a PvP game in which everyone is (potentially) a participant in PvP whether they like it or not. There is no separate "shard" where you can go play by yourself, you have to be aware of the other players and accounting for them in your decisions. So, where other games can turn into single players and small groups playing their own separate games on the same server, EVE is all one big world where everyone interacts with each other.
Amarr Empire
#31 - 2017-03-19 10:59:28 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
If we want a living universe full of people then there needs to be an easy mode (with low low reward) in the form of highsec.


There really doesn't need to be this. People playing EVE as a single-player game with no risk add nothing to the game. They "level their Raven" without interacting with anyone else, and then stop playing. Maybe CCP makes some extra money before they get bored and quit, but from the point of view of other players they might as well not exist at all.


So if those players might as well not exist from your point of view, and they give CCP money, why not have them around? I get you don't want eve to lose its identity, me neither, but eve is a big game and surely there's room for all types?

In your last post you're telling me all over what EvE is, what highsec is. EvE is a game, if it was a cold dark universe, I wouldn't be sat in my pyjamas writing this. You say you need to make enemies or fly an expensive ship to die in highsec, this is untrue. Gank groups gank whoever they like because they have fun doing it. In the past a solo ganker would(might?) have wanted to make a profit on their ganks, but now the corp provides you ships why bother? If highsec really is nothing more than a newbie zone, lets rip out all of the well-paying content. Right now eve is just confused as to what it wants to be, it has been since incarna, the buzzword is sandbox and to me that means, do what you like.

What really makes eve interesting is the unpredictability of player interactions, but sometimes people just want a taste of the familiar. Why chase them off somewhere else?
Caldari State
#32 - 2017-03-19 11:06:17 UTC
There's plenty of reason to move stuff through between hisec and nullsec.

With jump freighters, from citadel docking ring to citadel docking ring.
#33 - 2017-03-19 11:30:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
If we want a living universe full of people then there needs to be an easy mode (with low low reward) in the form of highsec.


There really doesn't need to be this. People playing EVE as a single-player game with no risk add nothing to the game. They "level their Raven" without interacting with anyone else, and then stop playing. Maybe CCP makes some extra money before they get bored and quit, but from the point of view of other players they might as well not exist at all.

The thing that makes EVE a living universe is the fact that it's a PvP game in which everyone is (potentially) a participant in PvP whether they like it or not. There is no separate "shard" where you can go play by yourself, you have to be aware of the other players and accounting for them in your decisions. So, where other games can turn into single players and small groups playing their own separate games on the same server, EVE is all one big world where everyone interacts with each other.


First you write about those PvE players are not interacting with anyone else, stopping playing (PvP players dont stop playing the games?), then you write they might not exist at all.

Then you write that everyone interacts with everyone in EVE and you cant play by yourself.

So what of it is fallacy and what is not? One excludes the other.
Did CCP ever wanted to make PvE server?
ISnt everyone essentially a PvP player in a PvP game here??
Brave Collective
#34 - 2017-03-19 14:07:06 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Revis Owen wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Drake Aihaken wrote:
We do. It's called an NPC station. Never undock.


Sounds like enjoyable gameplay.Roll


As enjoyable as a 100% safe themepark area, which is what you are calling for.


Difference is some people, in fact many people, do find themepark content enjoyable. I get it, youre worried that people start playing, and that the eve community changes. That more and more players will complain about being 'interacted with', and the reason you like eve could fade. By the way, safe =/= themepark.

If eve never changes only those who love it as it is will remain, and they will hold the game back from making any progress.


EvE is NOT a themepark game. When are you thickheads going to understand that EvE doesn't have a thempark and should NEVER have one! Go play something else.
#35 - 2017-03-19 14:17:46 UTC
Kaybella Hakaari wrote:
There's plenty of reason to move stuff through between hisec and nullsec.

With jump freighters, from citadel docking ring to citadel docking ring.


This is a cancer that must be removed.
#36 - 2017-03-19 14:38:55 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Revis Owen wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Drake Aihaken wrote:
We do. It's called an NPC station. Never undock.


Sounds like enjoyable gameplay.Roll


As enjoyable as a 100% safe themepark area, which is what you are calling for.


Difference is some people, in fact many people, do find themepark content enjoyable. I get it, youre worried that people start playing, and that the eve community changes. That more and more players will complain about being 'interacted with', and the reason you like eve could fade. By the way, safe =/= themepark.

If eve never changes only those who love it as it is will remain, and they will hold the game back from making any progress.


Then those people should play those games. That does not mean you have to stop playing EVE too. Just play something else if you want that style at the time.. Guild Wars, TESO, WoW are all still running. The way you state this is funny. The more people the better, but more people with no understanding of or trying to change the core concepts of EVE is not.
The Irukandji.
#37 - 2017-03-20 00:16:34 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
I've been reading another thread recently about changes to lowsec and it has got me thinking about the roles of each area of space, and the kinds of players who go there.


Some would say you have it exactly backwards. Nullsec is highly organized. You only think of it as disorganized because you don't belong there. There are very clearly defined power blocks and they dictate every single aspect of your existence. Sure, you get stragglers and opportunists wandering through once in a while, but if they're a threat then they are dealt with.

High sec is the most disorganized - the most chaotic. Sure, there's CONCORD, but that's all there is. It's made up of thousands of tiny entities all pulling in different directions, and some larger groups like CODE or war-deccers/gankers like Marmite or Orphanage gobbling up targets of opportunity, but there is no order. There are just the rules - the mechanics of who can shoot who when, and the certainty that if you attack someone without a valid reason it will cost you your ship - a price many are willing to pay.

Wormholes are like gypsy camps or travelling cruise ships. The people live inside, and they go out and visit strange new people every day and kill them. Then they roll the static and rinse/repeat.
#38 - 2017-03-20 00:22:20 UTC
In terms of danger it's this:

High sec is the safest. Sov Null is nearly as safe as HS today. LS is more dangerous, and WHs are the most. Anyone watching local and/or intel channels in HS or 0.0 will never get in a fight they aren't ready for.

Basically: http://i.imgur.com/BifkJsx.jpg
#39 - 2017-03-20 03:07:33 UTC
Ok. As a ex-miner and ex-ratter that never touched pvp expect for being ganked while mining or hauling i must disagree with people saying high sec should be safe. More safety in high sec means more afk-farmers and that is what is driving this games economy to the ground.
It is what made me quit the game 6 years back. I cheered the Hulkageddon guys for what they were doing.
Highsec, lowsec nullsec. I don't care what you are doing as long as you are actually PLAYING the game.
Goonswarm Federation
#40 - 2017-03-21 20:55:25 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Truth is what aligns with reality, but eve is a game. That means the reality of the game is open to change. Aside from economics, and I'd also push for nerfs to rewards in line, I haven't seen a good argument for why eve should push away 'carebears' when it is trying to grow.

I don't care if HS players can't afford anything better than T1 battlecruisers, but why can't eve have a place which actually is safe?


It isn't pushing them away, it is just a hostile environment for them. It is like expecting a horse to live in the ocean. It can be done for a bit, but after awhile the horse gets tired and drowns (bored) or it gets eaten by ocean predator (the PvP turns of the carebear so he leaves).

What you appear to asking for is a fundamental change to the environment. And in doing that how many current customers might be lost?

Everyone making a push for more carebears assume the game environment can be changed to accommodate these new customers but that such a change would not induce current customers to leave.

I would suggest that some consideration, at least, be given to the notion that there are fewer players because this has already happened to some extent.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

4 PagesPrevious page1234Next page
Forum Jump