What makes EVE feel like a joke of a game to you

[Dom_Arkaral]

Alpha da-fe are pretty awful trolls

my opinion > facts these are 2 clueless players

E: forgot words and autocorrect

[Auto-da-fe]

@Remiel_Pollard

es, you did. Whether you know the rules in advance is irrelevant to whether or not you can break them.

You’re right about EVE, though, after a fashion. EVE doesn’t ‘aggressively’ do anything, but passively, by proxy of not holding your hand, it throws you in the deep end, and you’re expected to sink or swim.

You call it bad game design, everyone who’s been playing it for more than a few months calls it ‘working as intended’, and I suggest if you struggle with that concept, you try something else. Maybe something easy, made by EA, with tool tips for literally everything. Because this game encourages thinking for yourself, and outside the box. If you’d rather be lead around like cattle, and have your hand held, there are a thousand games out there that do this already. In this game, you learn from experience. You lose something, and as a result, you learn how not to lose it. Then you lose something else, and learn another lesson from it.

You’re right that a lot of EVE’s rules are unwritten, but you’re wrong that it’s a problem. That’s part of what makes it what it is. I always try to help people that are willing to learn those rules. You want to change them. I’m here to tell you that you can’t move a rook diagonally, and you don’t get to change the rules when you run out of bishops. Whether you like the analogy or not, it applies. Let me simplify it though, for the simple minded.

Adapt, or die.

O.O
I sympathize! You have been dealing with a classic Strawman Argument! Introduced by ME! I used the word “Analogy” and then proceeded to knock that strawman out of the park, by demonstrating that there are, in fact, no similarities, no analogy, between Chess and EVE Online!

You were, in fact, NOT using Chess as an Analogy but as a Metaphor! You used the example of Chess as a metaphor to express your feelings that you do not want to see EVE Online changed, the way that Chess (appears) to be unchanging!

I see now! I get it! I understand!

Allow me to direct your attention to the “Terms of Service” >>> https://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/terms-of-service-en/
and I quote:

CCP MAY FIND IT NECESSARY ON OCCASION TO MAKE CHANGES TO OR RESET CERTAIN PARAMETERS OF THE PERSISTENT GAME WORLD MECHANICS, INTERFACE OR FEATURES OF EVE ONLINE IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN GAME BALANCE AND ENHANCE PLAYABILITY OR PERFORMANCE FOR ITS SUBSCRIBERS

This is a case in which the metaphor fails. EVE Online is intended to be changed! Again and again, over and over. EVE Online and Chess are as dissimilar as Night and Day.

Also, I would certainly be remiss if I did NOT point out that CCP uses the word "BALANCE.’ That CCP is leading subscribers to believe that their goal is to maintain “BALANCE”. When we hear or read the word “Balance” we still think of the two pans of the scale being in equilibrium! CCP is, in fact, actively, aggressively, misleading players into believing that its goal in the game is “Balance.”

[Remiel_Pollard]

Sorry mate, you’ve had it explained to you in no uncertain terms why you’re wrong plenty of times by plenty of people. Your continued ignorance and denial are your own problem.

You adapt to the rules, you don’t change them to adapt to you. Adapt, or die. That’s all the chess analogy is explaining. Your inability to understand that (or your wilful ignorance of it) doesn’t change its meaning.

CCP can change the rules all they like. You still have to adapt to them.

[Auto-da-fe]

@Remiel_Pollard

Sorry mate, you’ve had it explained to you in no uncertain terms why you’re wrong plenty of times by plenty of people. Your continued ignorance and denial are your own problem.

You adapt to the rules, you don’t change them to adapt to you. Adapt, or die. That’s all the chess analogy is explaining. Your inability to understand that (or your wilful ignorance of it) doesn’t change its meaning.

CCP can change the rules all they like. You still have to adapt to them.

You’ll correct me if I’m wrong, I’m sure … but, isn’t the OP just asking what the rules of Concord are? If all you are saying is “adapt to the rules”, why are you in this thread at all??? why are you attempting to interrupt the OP’s attempts to get the RULES clarified so that they can be Adapted to??? Shouldn’t you be supporting the OP???

The answer is, you don’t support the OP, because you think someone is trying to change EVE. The OP is clearly trying to get information about the game! Your posts are NOT intended to just say “adapt” because the OP is trying to Adapt, your posts are intended to tell CCP NOT to change the game! Your posts are intended to bully people into silence about the game!

Also, if you concede that “CCP can change the Game all they like”, then again, why would you attempt to interrupt FEEDBACK about the game??? Feedback that will help to guide CCP in their sweeping, dramatic, revolutionary changes to the game!

the OP denounces … I say, DENOUNCES … the rise and prevalence of Suicide Ganking! The OP gives negative feedback about “Bumping” and asks why the only counter to this is Multiple Accounts? and then the OP says:

@Alpha_Slow

Additionally, nowhere does the game actually inform you of the differences in CONCORD reaction times, and SGs rely on that for their victims. It seems hard to call that pvp or good for the game.

A request for information! Information about the Rules! a Request that the Rules be clarified so that they can be adapted to!

[Dom_Arkaral]

Seems like you and op are crying foul and are asking for a safe space so your feelings aren’t hurt

I have the place for you

No one can shoot you if you don’t log on

[Hiasa_Kite]

@Auto-da-fe

A request for information! Information about the Rules! a Request that the Rules be clarified so that they can be adapted to!

The base CONCORD reaction time between initial aggression and getting jammed is as follows:

Sec : time
1.0 : 6sec
0.9 : 6sec
0.8 : 8sec
0.7 : 12sec
0.6 : 14sec
0.5 : 18sec

If CONCORD is already spawned and on grid, within 150km of the aggressor, these times are halved.

If CONCORD is already spawned elsewhere in system, it takes an additional 6 seconds for them to despawn and respawn on the aggressor.

Pretty sure that’s a comprehensive description, all from memory. I’m pretty sure it’s all correct but please forgive me if I’m wrong.

[Ramona_McCandless]

Requesting information that is already freely available is… illogical, Captain.

[Anne_Dieu-le-veut]

How come the gankers can figure this stuff out but the safe space needing whiners can’t? The NPE doesn’t tell gankers how many seconds they have until they magically explode or how much DPS they need to kill their target before they do. Hint: They ask or research it (GASP!).

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

Or a mentor guides them.

–Gadget is the 3rd option

[Nana_SkaIski]

Honestly EVE is a game where one poorly designed mechanic is kept in check and regulated by another poorly designed mechanic. Its a marvelous construct.

[Ramona_McCandless]

@Alpha_Slow

This is something that definitely should be explained to the players in the tutorial when you consider the potential for devastating losses.

Yup that irreplacible free Venture. How could they recover from such a loss.

@Alpha_Slow

You shouldn’t have to figure out for yourself what the differences in concord reaction times are, since that is something that only suicide gankers themselves will typically observe.

This is true however as AFK gank targets cant observe jack squat ingame.

[Jonah_Gravenstein]

@Alpha_Slow

You shouldn’t have to figure out for yourself what the differences in concord reaction times are

You don’t have to, Concord response times are well documented and a simple google search away.

[Dom_Arkaral]

You’re trying way too hard

Who knew one could be so over pixels

[Remiel_Pollard]

1. I wasn’t responding to the OP, I was responding to you.

2. I don’t mind changes to EVE, with the caveat that they add to the game and it’s core nature and vision. And just like I’m free to not play the game, and not pay CCP if I don’t like where it’s going, so too is the OP, and so too are you.

3. I’m not interrupting ‘feedback’. I’m not interrupting anything. Everything you and OP have said are freely available to read through on this thread, along with all the criticisms they’ve received. If CCP see any value in your ideas, I’m sure they’ll do something with them. But don’t make the mistake of thinking you have the monopoly on opinion. Just as you have yours, I have mine, and if you can share yours, I can share mine.

4. At the end of the day, this particular OP is trolling. He’s not making a request for information, and he doesn’t have the best intentions for the game in mind. He has his own personal agenda. He has the wrong attitude for this game, and I don’t help people with the wrong attitude. I blow them up in-game, or put them in their place.

[Remiel_Pollard]

It’s not poor game design. You’re just bad at it.

Git gud. Truth hurts.

[Auto-da-fe]

@Remiel_Pollard

I wasn’t responding to the OP, I was responding to you.

I don’t mind changes to EVE, with the caveat that they add to the game and it’s core nature and vision. And just like I’m free to not play the game, and not pay CCP if I don’t like where it’s going, so too is the OP, and so too are you.

I’m not interrupting ‘feedback’. I’m not interrupting anything. Everything you and OP have said are freely available to read through on this thread, along with all the criticisms they’ve received. If CCP see any value in your ideas, I’m sure they’ll do something with them. But don’t make the mistake of thinking you have the monopoly on opinion. Just as you have yours, I have mine, and if you can share yours, I can share mine.

At the end of the day, this particular OP is trolling. He’s not making a request for information, and he doesn’t have the best intentions for the game in mind. He has his own personal agenda. He has the wrong attitude for this game, and I don’t help people with the wrong attitude. I blow them up in-game, or put them in their place.

1. If you’ll take a second and glance back at the posts in question you will see that your Chess Metaphor, used to express your desire that EVE Online NOT change, like chess, was actually directed at the OP and not me. It is that Chess metaphor, and its intent, that is the subject of discussion.

2. You say everyone has an opinion, then you accuse the OP of having a “personal agenda.” An Oxymoron. And your standard Medieval rhetorical device used to reveal Witches and the like.

3. You call the OP a “troll”, and declare that the OP’s attitude is “…the wrong attitude for this game…” Clearly, you view this as a competition, and you are trying to devalue the OP’s Feedback, in order to prevent the game from being changed by the OP’s feedback.

4. It is poor game design! CCP has demonstrated over the years that they are a befuddled company that suffers from Attention Deficit Disorder! Metaphorically speaking, since you like metaphors so much, everything CCP does is a ‘Captain’s Quarters’, its just that they haven’t all been removed from the game!

CCP and EVE Online actively, aggressively, mislead, misinform and misdirect players. CCP clearly states that the design goal for EVE Online is “BALANCE” when what they are actually working towards is a game where one player is kept at a disadvantage in order to provide cheap thrills for other players.

[Remiel_Pollard]

Your opinion is fascinating. What’s even more fascinating is that you continue to assert it after having it being repeatedly completely debunked. Over and over and over and over.

The chess RULES analogy was directed at someone demanding the rules be changed to suit them. The explanation for why it is relevant and why it applies was directed at you. You’re the one who’s been arguing semantics about it.

“You say everyone has an opinion, then you accuse the OP of having a “personal agenda.””

There is no contradiction here. I think you need to look up the definition of an oxymoron, and also learn how not to capitalise words that are not proper nouns.

The OP’s ‘feedback’ devalues itself by being patently and demonstrably wrong. Not going to repeat the explanations for what makes it wrong, you’re just going to have to learn to read better, and learn to admit when you’ve been proven wrong.

It’s not poor game design, you’re just bad at it. If it was poor game design, then it’s a poor game design that has succeeded in the market for longer than WoW has existed. That little factoid kinda puts your opinion to the fire.

But I know you and your kind, with your attitude, won’t budge on this. I don’t expect you to. Which is why you will now find yourself as the butt of little more than my jokes and mockery. It really is all you’re worth at this stage.

Git gud.

Addendum: when you assert that someone is actively, aggressively misleading and misinforming someone, you have to actually provide an example of where a lie has been told. CCP have not omitted any of the rules they’ve written for the game from any of the written material. How to deal with players is not up to them to instruct you on, because the manual for that would be longer than the entire Encyclopedia Britannica. In this game, you get to make your own rules, provided they’re made within the confines of the rules established by CCP. CCP don’t have anything to do with player-generated rules and thus, aren’t misleading anyone if they don’t explain them.

[Remiel_Pollard]

At the end of the day, if the game feels like such a joke to the OP, he should feel free to depart and play something that doesn’t feel like a joke. Why he feels the need to spend time on the forums trashtalking a game that he doesn’t like is a mystery to me, to be honest. That time would be better used doing something else, like playing a game he likes, or getting a life.

[Auto-da-fe]

You’re a bit confused. Denial isn’t a demonstration, its not a refutation, and it doesn’t debunk anything.

You should have taken some time before putting up this last post because its nothing but the most childish DENIAL and baseless accusations.

[Remiel_Pollard]

And your ignorance of the refutations does not mean they have not been made. Repeatedly. Time and time again, for the past 15 years. Make no mistake, the whining you and OP have brought up in this thread is nothing new. It is expected these days. This thread appears once every few months, posted by another twit new to the game who thinks it needs to be remade in the image of some other game that holds their hand and treats everyone like children that don’t know what they’re doing.

Just because you don’t know what you’re doing, though, doesn’t mean you get to dumb down the game. It just means you need to git gud.

EDIT: the reason this post went up so fast is because it was prepared in advance. I predicted your reply to my last almost verbatim. You whining and attitude is so common, it’s easily predictable.