EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Concord

First post
Author
Minmatar Republic
#101 - 2017-04-27 14:48:50 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Read the post you just quoted "Since then CCP have done some changes to the above quote" to paraphrase.
A rookie going from a career agent to the Arc system or between arc systems is 'on the arc'.

Bullshit.

That is not stated anywhere. Doofus #2

Seriously, your sarcastic troll remarks are pathetic. For a so called 'Vet', you not only excel at being pigheaded, you're also blind as a bat as well.

Definitely time to do the same as Dracvlad's forum signature and just block you.


DMC
Minmatar Republic
#102 - 2017-04-27 14:52:35 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Quote:
Teros Hakomairos
Doomheim


Has to be one of the best things I've seen this week lol. Minus one troll toon.

Unfortunately you're still here. All hail the Troll Queen Jenn aSide.

Dracvlad's forum signature is right, definitely time to block you as well.


DMC
ChaosTheory.
#103 - 2017-04-27 15:25:56 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Quote:
Teros Hakomairos
Doomheim


Has to be one of the best things I've seen this week lol. Minus one troll toon.

Unfortunately you're still here. All hail the Troll Queen Jenn aSide.

Dracvlad's forum signature is right, definitely time to block you as well.


DMC


Of course you should, as this would be a whole lot easier on your fragile ego than going back and understanding why you end up being wrong so much (and confronted for being wrong so much by so many people not named Jenn).

Only a liar calls the truth "trolling".
#104 - 2017-04-27 15:46:50 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
It's possible Eve would be a more generally popular game if it was less punishing and if High Sec was "safe" as opposed to "safer". I find that somewhat unlikely though, and the only way to find out is to introduce a change that is almost guaranteed to drive off a large portion of the existing player-base.

This is a player base that has been loyal for years, and is heavily invested in the game as it exists right now. Messing with this in any substantial way is not a good idea, and especially not in the kind of sudden changes OP is ranting about.

"Safe" games are boring. On the flip side wasting my time is extremely irritating.

Most PVE players that I know welcome and actively seek a challenge. What irks us to no end is somebody coming to waste our time. Most other games call this griefing. That ganked metric has been debunked several times already. Even if true all it says is that PVP players like PVP (um, duh?).

Before you get your knickers in a twist I think that making hi-sec a PVP free zone is an awful idea and for the most part hi-sec is reasonably safe enough to be attractive to PVE players. Of course in my perspective there are a couple of glaring exceptions.

The consequences for suicide ganking are not harsh enough to prevent what I and what I suspect most PVE focused players consider grief play. Unfortunately I do not have a good answer how to solve that without damaging the flavor of EVE. Maybe if there was some alternative that made hi-sec piracy viable I could point in that direction.

Wardecs are a bigger problem and one that's actively harming the retention of PvE players. Out of the last nine weeks my main's corp was wardec'd only one made any legitimate effort the rest were tradehub killboard padding (griefing). The week with the real threat was mildly amusing for an evening but the rest was pretty lame (station games). Spent most of it playing an alt or operating elsewhere.

A good indicator of player retention is guild participation. The hands-down best way for a PVE player to deal with a wardec is to drop corp, log out or dock up. Wardecs actively discourage PVE folks from social engagement. Any mechanic that encourages not playing directly harms retention.

There needs to be a way for a corporation to exempt themselves from wardecs without making it crushingly expensive for small corps. Tie it to POS ownership or make it consensual or something.

Here's another statistic for you: Players that exclusively PVE or PVP are rare. Most MMO players at least dabble in many aspects. Most PvE players will voluntarily engage in PvP eventually but if don't let them dictate the pace at which they do it they'll just find another game that doesn't insist on wasting their time.

After all that hot air I am not advocating any change unless CCP sees the need for it. They seem to be struggling with how to appeal to PvE players and mostly I think that's because they don't understand what motivates us. What I wrote above is my small attempt to give some insight.

"PvP is the most rewarding" -- CCP_Ghost. Thanks for the spit-take Lol

Cade Windstalker wrote:
Ever heard of Star Wars Galaxies? That is literally the case study for why massive shifts in your game's core gameplay are a *terrible* idea no matter how justified you may feel in the changes in question. If you actually look at a lot of what was changed there it made a lot of sense. It was going to do exactly the sort of things you're talking about here. Open up the game to more players, make it more accessible, address a lot of things that may have been seen as a barrier to a new player, ect.

It utterly killed the game and was a contributing factor in the dev behind the change's suicide.


http://kotaku.com/5057189/star-wars-galaxies-designer-jeff-freeman-dies

"Freeman's brother tells the Escapist that 'personal issues', not the fury SWG players were at the root cause of his decision to take his own life."

SWG was one of those cult classic games. Very loyal but very small fan base. Once WoW demonstrated the revenue potential of MMO's "very small" became "very uninteresting" to the money folks.
#105 - 2017-04-27 19:39:48 UTC
Benje en Divalone wrote:

....

The consequences for suicide ganking are not harsh enough to prevent what I and what I suspect most PVE focused players consider grief play. Unfortunately I do not have a good answer how to solve that without damaging the flavor of EVE. Maybe if there was some alternative that made hi-sec piracy viable I could point in that direction.

Wardecs are a bigger problem and one that's actively harming the retention of PvE players. Out of the last nine weeks my main's corp was wardec'd only one made any legitimate effort the rest were tradehub killboard padding (griefing). The week with the real threat was mildly amusing for an evening but the rest was pretty lame (station games). Spent most of it playing an alt or operating elsewhere.

A good indicator of player retention is guild participation. The hands-down best way for a PVE player to deal with a wardec is to drop corp, log out or dock up. Wardecs actively discourage PVE folks from social engagement. Any mechanic that encourages not playing directly harms retention.

There needs to be a way for a corporation to exempt themselves from wardecs without making it crushingly expensive for small corps. Tie it to POS ownership or make it consensual or something.

Here's another statistic for you: Players that exclusively PVE or PVP are rare. Most MMO players at least dabble in many aspects. Most PvE players will voluntarily engage in PvP eventually but if don't let them dictate the pace at which they do it they'll just find another game that doesn't insist on wasting their time.

After all that hot air I am not advocating any change unless CCP sees the need for it. They seem to be struggling with how to appeal to PvE players and mostly I think that's because they don't understand what motivates us. What I wrote above is my small attempt to give some insight.

"PvP is the most rewarding" -- CCP_Ghost. Thanks for the spit-take Lol


I guarantee you that CCP understands how the various participants in their game think and what they want, probably better than most players do and almost certainly better than most players think they do.

While we're sharing fun facts... fun fact, most MMOs very intentionally have single-player friendly content and a large portion of any MMO is probably being played by people who have little to no interest in going outside of this sort of bubble. There's a reason WoW has made it very very easy to play fairly solo, and even easier to find quick groups to play group content with without having to do any of the organization work yourself.

The only 'solution' to the problem of permanent wardecs that I've seen floated that's at all reasonable is basically letting player corps join NPC alliances in exchange for having to pay taxes as if you're in an NPC corp and not being able to anchor structures or take advantage of any of the other corp-only mechanics beyond the organizational ones.

Benje en Divalone wrote:
http://kotaku.com/5057189/star-wars-galaxies-designer-jeff-freeman-dies

"Freeman's brother tells the Escapist that 'personal issues', not the fury SWG players were at the root cause of his decision to take his own life."

SWG was one of those cult classic games. Very loyal but very small fan base. Once WoW demonstrated the revenue potential of MMO's "very small" became "very uninteresting" to the money folks.


Not the root cause is not the same thing as not being a contributing factor. I doubt we'll ever know to what extent it was but I personally have a hard time believing that that level of public ridicule and vilification could have helped.

SWG wasn't actually that small or niche, especially not back in its heyday. It peaked around 300k subscribers and was running a fairly health ~200k when the NGU dropped in late 2005, when WoW was just starting to take off. There were plenty of MMOs that were just launching (including Eve) and WoW hadn't really taken hold yet as this big phenomenon at the time.

What killed SWG was badly the NGU was handled and how many fundamental changes it made to the gameplay in a very very short span of time. It disconnected older players from the game and failed to draw in any new ones because who wants to join a game that's very visibly falling apart?
CODE.
#106 - 2017-04-28 05:46:16 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Quote:
Teros Hakomairos
Doomheim


Has to be one of the best things I've seen this week lol. Minus one troll toon.

There should be killmails for forum PvP. CCPls?
CODE.
#107 - 2017-04-28 05:55:26 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Quote:
Teros Hakomairos
Doomheim


Has to be one of the best things I've seen this week lol. Minus one troll toon.

Unfortunately you're still here. All hail the Troll Queen Jenn aSide.

Dracvlad's forum signature is right, definitely time to block you as well.

Not sure why you even bother to discuss here. It seams it makes you very angry if people call you out for the bs you spew. And because it actually is bs and you probably even know it, you can't even defend your posts, get annoyed instead and start to block people.

Until the next post where you will start with the same bs all over again without any lesson learned... who is the troll here?
Minmatar Republic
#108 - 2017-04-28 08:11:57 UTC
Hahaha, keep skiing down that Bandini Mountain of BS you trolls keep spewing out.

I don't have to defend anything, the proof was already linked, it's your problem you lack reading comprehension.



DMC
Caldari State
#109 - 2017-04-28 08:58:34 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hahaha, keep skiing down that Bandini Mountain of BS you trolls keep spewing out.

I don't have to defend anything, the proof was already linked, it's your problem you lack reading comprehension.



DMC

Oh the irony.

You are one of the most vile people on the forum the way you attack people.

At least I'm happy to admit I don't find some people or opinions to be worth much and am happy to say so. You're just a typical hypocrit. Offer nothing of value and just spew bile everywhere. For way too long. CCP should have never reversed your permanent ban after you cried about being banned for abusing another player.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Goonswarm Federation
#110 - 2017-04-28 09:53:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Yebo Lakatosh
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Definitely time to do the same as Dracvlad's forum signature and just block you.
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Dracvlad's forum signature is right, definitely time to block you as well.
Dracvlad's forum signature seems to be an exclusive club for the wisest and most rational capsuleers. I often dream of being invited to this elite company.

Though it will only happen spontaneously, as I fail to find the entertainment value in the recruiter's posts, and I always get bored halfway before it would provoke a reply from me. Or maybe I'll just need to work harder to be worthy.


Ima Wreckyou wrote:
There should be killmails for forum PvP. CCPls?
I really exprected more from you than such bitter cynism. We have lost a potential content creator, not to mention the revenue to the devs! You guys should also know better than anyone that it's pointless to expect things from CCP, and you should take the matters in your own hands.

That miner could have been saved! We -knew- his endangered opinion will only meet resentment, but no other way out was offered to him. We are all at fault here. But I think I know the solution to avoid such a senseless waste of forum-lives!


Start selling Forum Permits!

It only costs 10 million ISK, and valid for a FULL year. Displaying your Forum Permit in your signature ensures that Agents of the Forum will side with you during any discussion where the holder of the document displays ignorance of facts, sense and methods to forumulate at least an argument that looks valid from a certain distance. Of course it also guarantees that the Agent's under no circumstance will resort to sarcasm during discussions that permit holders are involved in.

Wish I could think of someone good enough with words who could draft the details of such contract..

Elite F1 pilot since YC119, incarnate of honor, integrity and tidi.

Tactical Supremacy
#111 - 2017-04-28 10:06:11 UTC
Yebo Lakatosh wrote:
Dracvlad's forum signature seems to be an exclusive club for the wisest and most rational capsuleers. I often dream of being invited to this elite company.


ROFL, brown nosing much methinks...

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, Linus Gorp

#112 - 2017-04-28 11:17:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Artemis Ellery Sazas
For years and almost every ganking thread that has been created, the pro gank community have always said ganking is not profitable, is just for the lol's and therefore should be allowed. Miner ganking I agree, hauler ganking completely disagree. Hauler ganking is extremely profitable. High sec should not be 100% safe either. Long ago I used to be a ganker, but imo it's as boring as hell.

If you look at certain systems, Poinen, Uedama and Niarja in particular, the amount of isk made from loot drops, compared to total isk in ships lost by gankers is staggeringly one sided. These groups say they are "protecting" high sec players and enforcing what they feel is the proper amount to haul. In reality, it's the easiest and quickest way to make billions per hour, while risking very, very little in the way of assets of their own.

In my eyes, the true gankers are the "miner gankers" that are doing it more for the lol's than isk. This type of combat should be kept in the game and even somewhat encouraged, while the hauler gankers need a major hit with the nerf bat.

So since almost all gankers claim it's for the lol's and not profitable, ganking should be allowed to continue in high sec. I would propose even delaying Concord response slightly during criminal activity. However, any criminal activity resulting in a ship being killed means there are no longer loot drops from the targeted, destroyed ship.

This idea should not be an issue for gankers, since they are only doing this activity for fun anyway, while still creating risk for high sec players as miners, haulers and pvers can still be ganked with the possibly of even less Concord intervention.

Ganking will most likely never go away, but this is a way to make sure it's for fun and not for the isk faucet currently being used by the giant null sec alliances.

For those who will whine that they can't afford to keep losing a 3 mil isk catalyst during a gank without getting loot in return, they better find a different career, like mining perhaps. Big smile
#113 - 2017-04-28 12:54:22 UTC
Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:
For years and almost every ganking thread that has been created, the pro gank community have always said ganking is not profitable, is just for the lol's and therefore should be allowed.

....


I have never seen anyone state this in any seriousness and I've certainly never seen or heard any indication CCP take this seriously. Ganking is done for profit or for secondary reasons in the rare cases it's unprofitable (out of corp booster ganking, for example).

CCP have specifically balanced ganking around cargo capacity vs tank, that was the entire tradeoff they created with freighters getting low slots.

Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:
If you look at certain systems, Poinen, Uedama and Niarja in particular, the amount of isk made from loot drops, compared to total isk in ships lost by gankers is staggeringly one sided. These groups say they are "protecting" high sec players and enforcing what they feel is the proper amount to haul. In reality, it's the easiest and quickest way to make billions per hour, while risking very, very little in the way of assets of their own.


Again, file under "things not to be taken seriously". Some people gank miners for the sake of ganking miners, but most of the time ganking is entirely for profit. Anyone who thinks it's the quickest and easiest way to make money in Eve though has another thing coming...

There's a lot of time and effort, never mind the number of people/characters required, to gank most high value targets. If ganking was really so amazingly profitable more people would do it, there's certainly enough older players with experience. The reality is that you need to spend a ton of time sitting and waiting for each gank, and realistically spending the same amount of time in a Carrier ratting in Null gives similar profits for the time spent.

Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:
In my eyes, the true gankers are the "miner gankers" that are doing it more for the lol's than isk. This type of combat should be kept in the game and even somewhat encouraged, while the hauler gankers need a major hit with the nerf bat.

So since almost all gankers claim it's for the lol's and not profitable, ganking should be allowed to continue in high sec. I would propose even delaying Concord response slightly during criminal activity. However, any criminal activity resulting in a ship being killed means there are no longer loot drops from the targeted, destroyed ship.

This idea should not be an issue for gankers, since they are only doing this activity for fun anyway, while still creating risk for high sec players as miners, haulers and pvers can still be ganked with the possibly of even less Concord intervention.

Ganking will most likely never go away, but this is a way to make sure it's for fun and not for the isk faucet currently being used by the giant null sec alliances.

For those who will whine that they can't afford to keep losing a 3 mil isk catalyst during a gank without getting loot in return, they better find a different career, like mining perhaps. Big smile


Also file under "things not to be taken seriously". This entire suggestion is a misinformed joke if it's even serious in the first place.
#114 - 2017-04-28 14:26:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Artemis Ellery Sazas
Quote:
Ganking is done for profit or for secondary reasons in the rare cases it's unprofitable (out of corp booster ganking, for example).



Go miner ganking for 6 months and tell me how profitable it is, if your lucky you'll break even.


Quote:
Some people gank miners for the sake of ganking miners, but most of the time ganking is entirely for profit. Anyone who thinks it's the quickest and easiest way to make money in Eve though has another thing coming...



This is not miner ganking, it's mostly DST hauler ganking, which is super profitable and in one case done with 7 alphas. At least do some research before commenting.
#115 - 2017-04-28 15:22:34 UTC
Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:
Quote:
Ganking is done for profit or for secondary reasons in the rare cases it's unprofitable (out of corp booster ganking, for example).



Go miner ganking for 6 months and tell me how profitable it is, if your lucky you'll break even.


Seems like a failure in target selection to me. The whole point of the balance around mining ships and hauling ships is that not everything can be ganked profitably if the 'defending' player is smart with their fit and how much they keep in their hold.


Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:
Quote:
Some people gank miners for the sake of ganking miners, but most of the time ganking is entirely for profit. Anyone who thinks it's the quickest and easiest way to make money in Eve though has another thing coming...



This is not miner ganking, it's mostly DST hauler ganking, which is super profitable and in one case done with 7 alphas. At least do some research before commenting.


Anyone who manages to make a DST an easy gank target should go take Eve Uni's Fitting 101 course. DSTs can get more EHP per M3 than almost anything else in the game when fitted and flown correctly.

Even then a ganker has to find a target they can gank, which requires sitting on one or more gates with one or more accounts with ship and cargo scanners for potentially hours until something comes along that's worth ganking. Plus you then have to split the profits between however many people/accounts participated.

I'm pretty well versed in the economics of ganking, it's really not as great as you're making it out to be. LolPirate
#116 - 2017-04-28 15:32:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:
Quote:
Ganking is done for profit or for secondary reasons in the rare cases it's unprofitable (out of corp booster ganking, for example).



Go miner ganking for 6 months and tell me how profitable it is, if your lucky you'll break even.
The profit isn't necessarily in the loot drop; I know for a fact that more than a few of the gankers that target miners are also in the business of selling mining ships and equipment, they consider the cost of ganking miners to be a marketing expense. Twisted

Your problem is thinking too small, in a game where pretty much anything goes people can and do explore the devious side of themselves.

Quote:
Quote:
Some people gank miners for the sake of ganking miners, but most of the time ganking is entirely for profit. Anyone who thinks it's the quickest and easiest way to make money in Eve though has another thing coming...



This is not miner ganking, it's mostly DST hauler ganking, which is super profitable and in one case done with 7 alphas. At least do some research before commenting.
Right back at ya. Roll

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

CODE.
#117 - 2017-04-28 15:39:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Ima Wreckyou
Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:
This is not miner ganking, it's mostly DST hauler ganking, which is super profitable and in one case done with 7 alphas. At least do some research before commenting.

Please show us the 7 alphas and how often they gank something valuable. Then after they divided the profits from what actually dropped - the gank ships (because you know, they are individual people if they use alphas) show us what that insane ISK/h looks like over the period the where online.

I bet a lot it's way way lower than even mining
ChaosTheory.
#118 - 2017-04-28 15:46:13 UTC
I don't care about gankers wallets, the only way gankers affect me (on the odd occasion I have no choice but to deal with high sec, it really is my least favorite part of EVE) is that they are just another obstacle to be overcome, to avoid and to be defeated (publicly if at all possible).

The people who spend time worrying about how hard or how easy that game is for people they obviously dislike are really saying "I can' beat these people on my own, I need leverage". This is not to say that sometimes people like that might accidentally have a point, just saying that the last person you want to solicit an opinion from is someone who doesn't like the thing in the 1st place.

CODE.
#119 - 2017-04-28 15:56:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Ima Wreckyou
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hahaha, keep skiing down that Bandini Mountain of BS you trolls keep spewing out.

I don't have to defend anything, the proof was already linked, it's your problem you lack reading comprehension.

That is rich for someone who has a clear problem reading the very thing he cites. Do you really think you fool someone with this bs? As always you just show to everyone what a liar you are.
CODE.
#120 - 2017-04-28 20:55:52 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:


Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Blah.

DMC


In every. Damn. Thread.

Just skip over it, if there's anything of substance in there, it's not worth wading through his verbosity to find it.

Highsec is owned by players now. Systems 0.5-1.0 are New Order Territory. All miners and other residents of Highsec must obey The Code. Mining without a permit is dangerous and harmful to the EVE community. See www.MinerBumping.com

Forum Jump