I’m not here to tell you not to be a sheep. I’m just saying natural selection weeds out the weak. If FC wants sheep, which I’m sure they do, then don’t blame the wolves for eating well.
1 Like
I agree with the problem statement in this news blog.
It’s a problem because it means that these powerful groups can respond to activity in a space outside of their operations too quickly, effectively intervening in smaller-scale conflicts and making it nearly impossible for newer groups to get any meaningful foothold in areas of space like nullsec.
However, I disagree with the proposed solution. Right now, PVP favors the creation of major coalitions. Either players lose ships to bigger groups, or they join bigger groups. Either way, they just feed the big groups.
Cowardice, obviously.
I’m going to level with you: I don’t believe this, and I think you don’t believe it either.
You don’t post on your main because you are embarrassed to do so, that’s all.
1 Like
Your opinion is irrelevant to me. I started this conversation to give the game developers a suggestion. This suggestion requires the game developers to implement game changes. Therefore, their opinion is the only one that matters.
Besides, I have a difficult time believing you. Dishonest debate tactics and insults only mean one thing: you know your argument is wrong.
The responses here are telling. I am suggesting game changes. Responses: that is not how the game works. Wow. Are you telling me that game updates are impossible? That Exordium cannot exist? Good luck with your argument.
Go to Null, ask for intentional PvP and you’ll get your plate full.
Cripes, this looks to have been a fun thread, shame I missed it.
I’d say the number 1 driver for intentional PvP is structures.
Try owning some POCOs, or Metenoxen, or other types of PoS, then you can use their armour and hull timers to set up PvP dates with like minded groups.
Have seen plenty of players interested in PVP in null. They just hang around looking for juicy targets. They just don’t stick around when they see a fleet headed towards them. Have not caught any so far.
I think one of the major factors is that pure PVP activity isn’t rewarding economically.
If ship’s HULL is destroyed - the winner gets nothing from it.
This isn’t a problem if HULL’s cost is around 1mil ISK (like T1 destroyers), but if you take Deimos (200mil) or faction cruiser like Osprey Navy Issue (50mil) - paradigm shifts tow non-efficient PVP.
Compare it with Albion Online - there is no HULL concept at all, you are what you’re wearing. So, the other side who is winning get’s 50% of your modules fitted, thus making PVP viable source of income.
In EVE one have to “farm” for PVP ships with modules to even test the waters.
So, if we could somehow address the HULL issue here we MIGHT have a bit healthier PVP environment where everybody are smilingly shooting each other with joy \o/
I’m sure, PAID CCP crew who is responsible for such game design things are aware of it and have smth in their sleeves.. let’s observe and find out..
1 Like
Is a happy happy universe where people happily shoot each other happily with low consequences really what EVE is about though?
A big part of what attracts me to this universe and game are the stakes and consequences.
1 Like
The consequences are dependable on the amount of efforts involved in forms of assets and human real time.
There is a wide range of options:
from “low-poly” FW T1 derpthrone/thrasher fleet beer madness to carefully planned capital escalation with baits and different kinds of setups. So, no conflicting opinions here.
FW offers a lot of intentional fights, if you don’t mind the 10 guys multiboxing with scripts to shoot you at the same time that is
Really?
Stakes and consequences for who? Are you the one risking expensive ships? Or are you part of the fleets destroying expensive hulls with immunity?
PVP in Eve Online is broken. The aggressors have all of the advantages. Home field advantage does not exist. Home systems only make it easier for more powerful groups to find vulnerable players.
Who are the vulnerable players? Those members of small groups and those early in their Eve Online adventure. Either those players stop playing Eve or they join a large group, expanding large groups further.
For an example of home field advantage, C-J6MT is a great example. A friend refers to the hostile players there as cockroaches. Always there feeding. Except when GSF starts taking action against them. Then they scatter and disappear like cockroaches, refusing to engage in PVP defensive strategies.
Hull and fit costs certainly add to the stakes involved. But does it add entertainment value to players equally? Or do the aggressors enjoy the stakes while the defenders worry about replacement costs? Freighter and Marauder gankings in high-security space clearly illustrate this. The defender feels defenseless with billions invested in the ship; the aggressors factored T1 destroyer replacement costs into their operating costs. Fifteen Catalysts with fits is cheap, they already have replacements stocked and ready. The other player? How much time and effort went into that one ship? Did the rewards for flying it offset the initial purchase cost? How soon before they can afford another?
Sovereign null space operates under different rules than high-sec. Still, players are faced with this same math. Bought some Exhumers and a mining barge in C-J6MT for use in a different region. My corporation leadership ordered me to not use stargates or jump bridges leaving C-J with those ships. Too much risk. Why? Aggressors camp their gates and troll the system looking for kills like those.
Aggressors have too much immunity from the consequences of their gameplay. It falls unfairly on defenders. Strong defenders factor this into operating costs. Lesser groups cannot survive the destruction, just cease to exist.
Personally, I would like to see less stalemates, more raging destruction, and almost zero rage-quits in Eve Online. The EULA specifically states this game is for entertainment purposes only. Time to spread the entertainment value more fairly across the entire player community. Make Eve Online more entertaining to the defenders and the small groups.
1 Like
Why not both?
Pretty sure it’s both for me.
You started a thread saying you want more intentional PvP, but all you seem to write about is how you want less unintentional PvP.
It’s the unintentional PvP which makes EvE special too.
Elsewise it seems like you are flying the wrong ships, you won’t have fun in Exhumers, despite what some crazy folk on the forums will claim.
3 Likes
Looking for suggestions to add game mechanics which allow for intentional PVP. Not seeing any player engagement with that concept. Instead, players either tell me Eve PVP game mechanics cannot be changed, or manipulate the conversation another direction. Like this:
Incorrect paraphrase. I accurately describe the current game mechanics, the issues I perceive with them, and the required game mechanic changes to bring intentional PVP into existence. Response: dishonest debate tactics.
You certainly did not accurately describe all the game mechanics which relate to intentional PvP.
You have spent a lot of time saying things which make me assume you are salty about some expensive lossmail.
Well, you don’t need game mechanics for this. In the game, two players can already meet and shoot each other.
So what your job would be is to bring those people together. How about form a league or regular tournament, have people signed up and win prizes? Solo, Teams, whatever… invent some rules that make sure everything goes as fair as you want it to be etc. pp… and then lets go.
1 Like
In the current game mechanics, intentional PVP (both sides engaging) rarely occurs. In healthy combat scenarios, both sides commit to the battle. Both aggressors and defenders believe they have a winning strategy. Good versus Bad, cops versus robbers; human natures engages in their side winning. In Eve Online, aggressors control their battles. Defenders dock up instead of using defensive strategies. Why? Because defenders have no winning strategy. Give them something.
PVP in null space is a perfect example of this. Hostile fleets camp gates and roam. Counter-attacks and defensive strategies rarely occur. Why? Because the aggressors will not stick around if they suspect the defenders might be aggressing them. Nope. Just PVP players cowardly fleeing from someone else’s PVP engagement.
1 Like
Meet different people then. Form a gang, go to HighClass JSpace and find another group that looks strong enough to match you and just ask them for a fight. Many fights among the high-class WH groups occur exactly this way.
When trying to get what you desire, talking to other people is often the first step to getting it. Especially if you want them to be involved. You don’t need “game mechanics” for that, just communication skills.
Another “Do not update Eve” response.
Wrong. Communication skills only apply when both sides honestly engage in the conversation. Expecting other players to respond in local seems to be asking too much of them.
Why ask for game mechanic changes? So the sandbox constraints encourage a different outcome. Why a different outcome? Because too many in the sandbox keep complaining about bad actors interfering with their enjoyment of Eve Online. When the sandbox is for entertainment purposes only, that entertainment value must be reasonably fair and balanced to everyone playing.
Why fair and balanced? Because players come and go. The health of the sandbox depends on the players in the sandbox. The long-term strategy hopes for positive sandbox growth. When too many decide they were unfairly treated, enough to exit the sandbox; the sandbox becomes unsustainable. That condition can only last so long before the sandbox owner must stop operating said sandbox.
In Eve Online, PVP is a critical gameplay mechanic. With daily complaints against that aspect, how many enjoy it? How many leave the sandbox instead?
1 Like
On that note, it is difficult to locate any actual suggestion you’ve made. Saying “Need more intentional PvP,” is like writing to McDonalds suggesting, “Need tastier burgers and fries.” It’s not actionable or even particularly intelligible - hardly a suggestion really, more like a vaguely expressed desire that you have.
Believing… what? That I’m not going to hunt you down and blow up your epithal for the high crime of badposting?
What they are pretty obviously telling you is that you need to learn to play the game instead of expecting the game to be made easy enough to accommodate your current level of inability.
According to who? Some guy whose sole recorded PvP experience is losing a hauler to a gatecamp?
1 Like