I’m all for pointless cute scoreboard isk sinks. But not at the expense of server stability and load. Bounties impact the server, we’ve seen it multiple times in big fleet fights. There are other, less server impacting ways to measure e-peens in EVE that don’t require an in-game functionality.
2 Likes
Now that’s just flat out bone-headed. Sure, you’ve got creative-mode types who never do anything outside of Creative, but most of us play in Survival, where not only can (and DO) other players screw up what you’re building, but ever met a Creeper? Blow your crap right up, they will.
Yes, there is. There have been people who don’t PvP in EVE since its inception. I’m sorry if you don’t like it, but they’re here, they’ve been here, and they’ve been helping to pay the bills and keep the lights on for 15 years now.
I’ll admit, I’m not thrilled about Mutaplasmids, or the mechanics of the hacking mini-game[1], but I think the Scope videos are pretty well-done and contribute to the richness of the setting. Now, if you want to talk about genre elements, great, but anyone who’s complaining about the appearance of magic in their sci-fi has never familiarized themselves with Arthur C. Clarke, one of the absolute giants of the S/F genre.
- Or its limitations, really. I mean, the hacking system should be an extremely useful tool. Need to dock in a station you can’t get into? Hack the access.
4 Likes
I take this as you being surprised?
Well, when you can only think of 
then you’re only fit to work in accounting and no where else.
A game needs to include hurdles for players to over come. If you want to have people’s money and without giving them hurdles, maybe try to sell them insurances.
And when you can only think in terms of your play style, do you belong in a sandbox game that actively seeks to provide a wide array of them?
I mean, I think you do, because I’m sure ‘myopic fool’ is on the list of ‘things you can be in a sandbox’. If you think PvP is the only hurdle out there, you’re definitely the latter half of that.
1 Like
Stop making me agree with you, it was much more fun before, and anything that feels unfun should be nerfed.
This is completely true though, if a mechanic is bleeding players away so starkly, it needs to be changed. I’m leaning much more towards hisec structure ownership meaning you accept the risk of war. Ganking already exists for harrassing those in NPC or possible future non-wardecable corps.
New players should be able to play in an area of space free from wars, but one that limits mission levels and access to player owned structures.
No, you’re wrong. They all accept and agree to PvP and they expose them selves to it.
PvP is not just the act of you shooting somebody else or just you shooting first.
PvP is the acceptance to shot others or to get shot by others. If and how you respond to PvP is irrelevant for it being PvP.
/facepalm…
I take that as a no, even when you cannot express it yourself.
Open to Minecraft players?
Sure.
Open to their play-style (whatever that means)?
Sure
The mechanics of Minecraft?
■■■■ no. And nobody, much less me, ever said so.
You are trolling. Badly.
Stop it.
1 Like
If there aren’t people who don’t PvP in EVE, then you have nothing to complain about, and it’s other people who are quitting over wardecs.
If the ‘minecraft players’ you object to are quitting EVE over wardecs, then they have to be in EVE in the first place.
And once again, for the record: Minecraft players PvP, too. A lot more effectively than you do, it seems.
No, it’s me not believing how somebody would say something so utterly absurd.
If you want the servers to stay on for your PvP, we need new players in the game. We do not need mechanics that, whether by design or by use, drive paying players out of the game. I likely do a hell of a lot more PvP than you do, and I do not want anybody quitting the game for any reason. Fewer players means fewer targets. And I want guys mining and making ships for me to fly and blow up, too.
I have heard a lot of reasons for why folks who like war decs want to see them around, but you are the first person I’ve ever seen actively arguing that this is a good mechanic because it makes people quit the game.
I would check your house for lead paint.
10 Likes
I’m not talking about the person who plays Minecraft per se. Of course can a person play many different games and can adapt to various play-styles.
My question is about including the play-style, which is dominant for Minecraft, into EVE. Obviously is Minecraft targeted at very constructive and creative players, whereas EVE has always pointed out that it focuses on the meaning of loss. Games don’t set themselves apart from one another, by being like one another.
/facepalm x2.
Nobody is advocating turning EVE into Minecraft…
Sorry, but then you’re not fit for the job.
You need to know who you want to make a game for. Apparently you want to make a game for the banks and investors. This just shows how limited your comprehension of game making is.
Greed is what we all have, and we all want to make money. You need to have more than just that though.
Okay, I’m an idiot for taking this guy’s bait.
1 Like
Constructive and creative players… have you looked at the Arataka Research Consortium? Or the Villore Accords? Or the Imperium? An empire, now matter how legitimate or ill-, is something you create, something you construct. It’s a gigantic machine of interactions and moving parts, all having to do their thing, to make it all work.
And EVE sets itself apart not just by focusing on loss, but also on what you can aspire to be.
And, you know, massive battles with more people than some MMO servers have.
2 Likes
@Brisc_Rubal Should we tell him Aryth exists?
2 Likes
Welcome to EVE forums.
This guy is a known troll and thread wrecker.
Now you know.
That’s what I do. You have no base for claiming otherwise and it is silly anyway, because it is you who is more likely to be caring only about what he considers to be “good for the game” within the limited scope of what your voters want. You know … to make sure you get re-elected … like, you know, a politician would do.
And as you are one, in real life, there is no actual reason to believe that you really care about what’s good for the game. The likelihood of your words and actions being driven by the desire to get re-elected is too high to get ignored.
I’m not against social corps. They just need to be gimped properly. There should be way more corps than just two types anyway. Way more than that. Different types of corporations with different abilities and responsibilities, to make sure there is a proper amount of options for people to pick from.
That would be extremely good for the game as a whole, and if it actually mattered I’d have no problem expanding on that.
So you do understand that a game targets a specific group of players. Good. Now take the next step and think about who is in your group and who isn’t. Then look at making a game which targets the group who you want to have, and … shocker … discourages those who don’t fit in. Because believe it or not, what some despise can be the very thing others attract. This has brought many players to EVE in the past. Huge wars, big losses, crime, … those are all things unimaginable for your typical non-PvPer, but it’s this very dislike by the non-PvPers that makes EVE also attractive to the PvPers. It makes EVE their PvP game.