No point to posting anything on here.
You should have posted it into Features & Ideas discussion.
Then telling players in capital letters to “KEEP THIS DISCUSSION CONSTRUCTIVE AND MATURE OR GTFO!” will give you a head start in the troll fest that’s about to come.
We then have threads like yours every 1-2 weeks. People have been complaining about the current state of wardecs repeatedly. Wanting to disable weapons to suppress station games is then just your version of telling others how to play their game. It is however their game, too, and you’ll only get told by others in return how you should play…
Thanks for reply but im not telling anyone how to play their game. You can play however you want within the parameters of the game’s mechanics. My ideas are for changes to certain mechanics.
By wanting to disable weapons within range of stations and stating “No more undock games!” are you however exactly doing it.
Also statements like “Remove the duel system” without any further explanation isn’t really a discussion. It’s throwing an idea out and not even having invested the time to explain why you want to do this.
Never thought Id hear a jarhead talking about making something less hardcore.
Nico Boru, U.S. Army
@Whitehound so are you just going to nitpick everything i wrote/write or do you actually have anything to contribute to this discussion?!
Oh, wars should be cheaper. Having 120+ active wars and no targets gets expensive and old fast. Nobody but Eve-Uni came against us. And they did in a grand rightious fashion several times. Kicked our ass. We kicked theirs. Back and forth in a wonderful way they made Eve worth every second and penny.
Edited for grammar.
I already did contribute. You only don’t like it. You need to accept that changes never go down well when they only intend to remove things or replace existing content. Instead, changes that are most likely acceptable have to include all of EVE, even the game-play you don’t like, like the station games or the duel system. Just because one doesn’t like something doesn’t mean it needs to be removed. Instead, you can expect that there is always a group of people who will like it and you’re only taking a dump on their game when you suggest to remove it.
So how are you going to deal with this?
@Whitehound dont like it? Not true at all. Im open to all and any constructive analysis! I dont have all the answers. Just a few ideas and made this thread in hopes to get people talking.
You seem to like forum drama or trying to take this in that direction. Maybe im reading you wrong. Not sure.
Highsec doesn’t matter. It should only exist as a place to leave.
Start by explaining why you don’t want station games. Then explain why you don’t want the duel system. Continue why you don’t want to use guns near jump gates.
@Whitehound overall, mostly to make it harder to “gank”. In my opinion, you should have to put in more work to kill defenseless ships in hi sec. Shouldnt be so easy.
Ok, so it’s about ganking. That’s actually worse than I feared. I’ll leave this to the experts of ganking to respond.
However, players do warp to stations and gates, and they do fit weapons to their ships. And because this is a PvP game do they also want to use their weapons at these destinations. Your suggestion then is to disable PvP at these places. You really don’t see why this might be a bad idea?
Then where do you expect the fights to take place? Like 15km away from stations and gates? And if so, what happens when someone sits at 20km and shoots into the “no guns” area?
Should we make it harder for the Navy or Air Force aviation, or USMC/Army FIRES to conduct strikes in support of our boots-on-ground ops? There is already a slew of steps to even give permission for something like this to happen.
That is the same as ganking. Most gankers have -10 sec status, so they need time to set it up (time to do the process), they need another asset to keep a target from warping away (this would be your Raven/Grey Eagle/Reaper/Pred), they need to calculate the necessary dps to ensure efficiency (mitigate collateral damage).
In what way is ganking any different than what we do IRL? It is just a different paradigm. Dropping a JDAM on an extremist is no different than dropping taloses on a Charon.
- Army Intel guy.
@Whitehound thats whyi suggest pvp at anomolies to compensate, not to mention you still have asteroid belts, planets, moons… Whats a matter gankers dont want to put in work??
One can already fight there. You’re only asking for PvP-free areas and this is not what this game is about. It is intentional that one can fight everywhere.
Gankers actually do need to work for their ganks.
Speaking of effort, it only takes little to protect oneself against ganking.
hmm, you can already do that?
remove stupid people, problem solved
Most highsec PVPers agree.
You’re talking about <1% of the population. Similar to that of who joins the military. To put it in perspective, compare it to how many Marines there are as opposed to the US population. There is no need to change something that is barely used. Don’t like it? Don’t shoot them.
Get an alt to look for gate camps, or if you are afraid of ganking, don’t fly to areas known for ganking.
As far as I am aware, this is possible, just have to use the mechanics correctly.
Loot needs to be nerfed in EVE. too many isk faucets. The potential to be able to pay for your own game based on your own in-game actions has never been more difficult.
Also used by <1% of people. If you don’t like duels, set them to auto-decline.
For every contract deliverable to citadels, it says in big red letters that you may not be able to deliver to this location. Read the fine print. We both ■■■■■■ ourselves when we signed up for the military, but we can learn from those mistakes and apply them to internet spaceships instead!
@Whitehound well my man, im just some guy with a couple of ideas but in my honest opinion, unless some changes are made, player numbers will continue to dwindle. Ill continue to keep playing hopefully for years to come.