But I could assert equally that my criticism of Vlad’s efforts together with part of your own contribution - are designed and intended to help. Andlaust, too, in his own way sought to help by offering criticism.
Unfortunately, the target of criticism/help does not get to choose how that assistance is delivered.
I am indeed (no, really) short-sighted. I refute anything which seems to me to be unreasonable. I rarely produce ‘nonsense’ (that is, arguments which don’t make sense).
If you have a specific answer to my assertion that, essentially, whining here on the Forum is unlikely to lead to the outcome Vlad appears to desire, then do respond.
It’s actually 2 in the morning here and, had I not been seized by the compulsion to listen to Mozart’s Don Giovanni, I should have been a-bed hours ago. Heigh-ho…and a very Good Night to all!
Working as intended. The entire point of this new expansion was to tell the smaller nullsec groups to disband and join the largest of the blobs, or move to highsec.
The “little guys” are not allowed to partake in the new meta of nullsec.
Did you miss the part where this is the intended outcome, and not a bug or issue?
From the rework of Nullsec Ratting to give half of your ratting isk to roaming fleets, to the lowsec SSC keys that steal the other chunk of your ratting isk since you aren’t a member or renter of a larger group that will have a defense fleet on stand by to push out those roaming fleets.
There is a reason why all of the “new nullsec content” can be described as “sit on X and wait Y minutes for reward but also you can’t use any tactics or in-game mechanics that let you run away alive” style of action. It’s all about “small” fleets that get swatted by the larger alliance’s defense fleet.
And with the recent trend of hiring mobile-developers, all they know how to do are touch-screen phone interfaces and watch-countdown-go-down gameplay, from lowsec FW plexes, to ESS, to the new skyhooks.
It is very tiring, and the sort of tired that sleep doesn’t fix.
Do you have any clue how many times I’ve seen a near identical post in my 19 years playing this game?
People who aren’t whining about the hit to their income come in asking questions and looking for answers. They don’t come in with demands that things be changed because they don’t like the way the meta has shifted. Trust me, calling it whining is being nice.
I’ve explained what it takes to ensure you get mostly positive feedback. Whether you do it or not is entirely up to you, thus all the feedback is 100% on you. Little children demanding Mommy give them the shiney toy shouldn’t get what they want. That’s how we ended up with 2 generations of rotten adults that can’t regulate their emotions and think being told no is abuse.
This is actually incorrect. While it’s true CCP pays no particular attention to their forums, or complaints and suggestions made here, there is value to expressing your opinion, complaints and suggestions here and anywhere that other players may see them.
CCP may not see them here, but somebody else might, and discuss the notion on Reddit, where somebody else sees it and posts it on Twitter, where somebody else sees it and posts a goofy picture of Hilmar along with it. At which point, “critical social media mass” has been reached, and CCP decides they may actually have to look into the issue. (If only to stop the goofy Hilmar pictures circulating.)
CCP doesn’t listen all that well, but they do eventually respond to issues that raise a critical mass of reaction. The forums don’t exist in a vacuum, even though Reddit is probably a better place to post feedback (ie., CCP pays more attention there than here).
If somebody has honest feedback, it’s foolish to tell them “stop doing this, it’s no use”. Especially since the alternative is just more endless “HTFU and adapt, be a tough guy like me!” posturing from keyboard warriors.
As I’ve said repeatedly, the Meta changes for all. It’s the nature of both MMOs and long running games.
Do you understand that the entire point of the original post is that OP can no longer just sit in one system with his multi-billion ISK Marauder and rake in the money?
With the slowed respawn rate of combat anomalies, the risk involved in bringing a multi-billion ISK marauder out to rat the two havens that spawn is not worth the reward, when there aren’t even sanctums to go to.
So rather then find ways to mitigate the risk or to look for other income streams without the increased risk, OP came to the forums demanding that changes be made so his low risk income stream remains.
Please explain how telling him no to this ridiculous level of laziness makes us posturing keyboard warriors.
Yes, you’re right there Kezrai. I felt that the manner and location in which the poster’s suggestions were put was as unlikely to recommend them to those empowered with authority to implement them as their actual content (which, of course, I disputed).
Like you, I don’t believe that’s how it should be.
It was a really sloppy way in which to introduce my amplification of Andlaust’s take on the poster’s suggestions. Uncharacteristically sloppy (I hope). Thanks for the correction.
If you look closely at them, the vast majority of threads posted to these forums follow the vein of reducing risk while increasing reward.
Take the original complaint in this thread. If the reward doesn’t match the risk, then you reduce the risk. Haven’s are easily done in a 250mil Ishtar instead of a 2.5bil Marauder. My 260mil Ishtar does Sanctums as well, just takes a bit of maneuvering and knowing the site, but that’s not relevant here. Granted, a marauder does it 10x faster, but your risk in an Ishtar is 10x less.
On the other side of that coin, if you want to use the Marauder but reduce the risk, then you move to a place where using the Marauder doesn’t provoke as much risk. There are Corporations, Alliances, and Coalitions that do this analysis and relocate every day in space that’s far more dangerous than highsec.
I agree, and it becomes tiresome wading through it all.
It could be argued that, in some cases, reducing risk automatically increases reward by allowing a player who has limited time on their hands to bling out a mission ship or exhumer in order to maximise their income without further investment in time.
Most of the posters know this, so they usually leave out any reference to the potential increase in their income, and focus solely on the reduction of risk, saying, for example, that it’s unfair to new players, causing players to quit, and any number of other frankly dishonest excuses. It’s pure greed.
The OP hasn’t been edited at this point, so from what I can see, it states that the risk/reward balance is actually (in his opinion) reversed from what people here are saying it ‘should’ be.
I don’t engage in this content so certainly invite correction, but the OP is stating that the rewards have been significantly reduced in higher-risk areas (areas prone to raiding/hunting), and that more rewards are available in lower-risk areas (well protected null sov areas with better truesec).
In this case, the rich get richer and the risk-takers on the boundaries are pushed into more secure zones to ‘adapt’. This also seems to follow all the feedback on Equinox which is pretty much all “it’s Scarcity 2.0”. I don’t believe I’ve seen any positive reviews of Equinox resource/Sov changes, actually.
While it’s possible to dismiss all this as “Nullers whining for more, like always” as some people do (all of them non-Null players as far as I can tell), just from reading over the patch notes and changes and checking some of the math/detailed postings shows that Equinox is a pretty massive nerf overall.
“Just HTFU and adapt” is a pretty easy battle cry when it applies to other people doing other activities than your own. From what I can tell, the current iteration of Equinox is most likely to cause the same adaptation as Blackout and Scarcity - adapting by finding a better game to play.
I quite agree that prior to the change, OP’s content was very high risk with very high reward for the area, just as it should be. I also applaud him for risking a marauder in highsec border nullsec, that takes some big balls. However, CCP made a change to the game as a whole that reduced the reward for OP’s content. This is an ultra super common occurence in EvE. Happens every time they change anything, someone’s income gets nerfed. The greatest majority of players simply shrug and adapt, because it’s not the first time it happened, and won’t be the last. You always get a couple every patch that have to come try to get it reversed for “reasongs.”
Those safe zones exist for a reason, to give their players a buffer zone to adapt to any changes in the meta, but they aren’t necessary. There are many, many ways to make ISK in EvE that don’t require any of the mechanic OP is complaining about. Most of them are less risky while being nearly as profitable. One example is that I can pop through a HS-NS wormhole into the right regions, start doing data/relic sites in a cheap Astero, and make just as much as his Marauder. I can make more in a few regions, just depends on what Bob provides that day.
I play all over EvE. In my 13 years actually playing this game, there’s no region I haven’t lived in, no career I haven’t tried. This has nothing to do with grr anyone or anything, because my interests are everywhere.
HTFU is a core tenet of EvE, not just a battle cry. The concept is of such importance the Devs actually wrote a song about it once. Might want to try to understand the core tenets of the MMO you play.
Ooooh, scary threat.
Voting with your dollar is the most powerful way you can impact any business. Let me give you a piece of advice, though. If you’re the only one voting with your dollar, the corporation doesn’t care.
Do you know how much it sucks not playing most of your favorite game franchises because you refuse to give the companies that make them any money? I don’t get to enjoy Diablo, Baldur’s Gate, Fallout, The Elder Scrolls, and many more because I truly hate the business practices of their producers. Don’t, for a second, think you’ll have any impact if you leave, or that you leaving is in any way a threat to anyone. Unless you can organize a mass unsubscribe, I wish you luck with that joke.
Andlaust has responded to you, at length, and I’ll not seek to repeat those of his comments with which I am in agreement. I’ll probably leave the rest, too!
I do take issue with this comment, because it appears to assume that my view is based on a wish to urge upon other people an attitude to which I am a complete stranger. A kind of Hypocrisy.
If I were guilty of such behaviour, and you had pointed it out, I should have owned it immediately. I always acknowledge such things.
The fact is that, as a ganker, my play style has been repeatedly nerfed over the 11 or so years I’ve been playing. I won’t ask you to sort through my posts (ugh!), but you can take it from me that not a single one of them, short or long, constitutes a complaint about a nerf to ganking. Rather, if they mention it at all, there is always a seeking advice for getting around the nerf, adapting, and so on.
If my remarks constitute a ‘battle cry’, then the option to ‘adapt’ is surely not made unreasonably.
Mr Frostpacker snagged a screenshot of the following post I made in 2022. Thanks to him for reminding me!
I used a quote from your post as a starting point yes, but those comments weren’t specifically directed at you. I mentioned “as some people do” prior to that, meaning I was making general statements, but the post was rushed so didn’t make it clearer.
HTFU has it’s place and it’s time (and to the peanut gallery, I was linking Permaband’s HTFU video and pointing out the need for it while they were still off sulking in other games because they couldn’t ‘adapt’.)
My primary point here is not trying to call out anyone’s behavior, just saying that it’s valid to give feedback, it’s valid to tell CCP “I think you screwed up on the risk/reward balance”, it’s valid to post and provide details of how your playstyle has been impacted.
Sure, a lot of those posts are whiny and poor and not up to someone else’s standards. It’s on CCP to keep an eye on things and be able to differentiate between the usual background noise of whiners, and when feedback has risen to “you’re losing your customer base” levels.
At any rate, I agree to an extent with Andlaust - post your feedback, provide your details, but when all is said and done, what CCP really listens to is when you vote with your wallet and your feet.
If you don’t like the changes but keep playing and paying anyway, all you’re doing is telling CCP they’re doing fine.
Exactly this. I’d also add that they respond to negative press attention as well but that’s not really within our ability to control.
It’s for exactly this reason that I’ve chosen not to subscribe ever since the price hike. (For the sake of honesty and transparency I’ll admit that when Equinox released I did resub to see what was new–I wasn’t impressed and will be reverting back to alpha status)
I’ve often taken to the forums to post feedback and agree that it is a valid method of communicating our opinions, ideas, etc to CCP and other players. However, in the end what truly gets their attention are large numbers of paying customers heading for the exits.
