Why so dangerous?

Communications Center General Discussion
21

Just for the likes of @Punctator I’m going to leave this here.

CCP Falcon wrote, and I believe his opinion reflects that of CCP in general:

Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion.

It’s not a case of not “catering to the tearfilled entitled”, it’s a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on.

Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don’t feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you’re not suppose to feel safe in New Eden.

Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It’s a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent.

While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you’re going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who’ve had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it’s enough to make your head explode.

The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It’s about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things.

True, we’re working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we’re trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you’ll always start out as the little fish in the big pond.

The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what’s around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden’s abundant natural resources, or the other people who’re also fighting their way to the top.

EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you’ve discovered.

EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who’d rather curl up and perish.

EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it’ll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It’ll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it’ll ask for answers.

Give it an answer and maybe it’ll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you’re on the ground again and it’s asking more questions.

EVE is designed to be harsh, it’s designed to be challenging, and it’s designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time.

Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced.

That’s the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence.

Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you’ll ever experience.

TL;DR

HTFU or GTFO

2 Likes
22

Talk is cheap. CCP talks a lot.

Good quality programming and game design is considerably more expensive. That’s why you see a lot more talk and a lot less quality programming and design work in EVE.

CCP hasn’t lived by HTFU, they don’t develop by it, they don’t run their company that way. Mediocrity and “don’t rock the boat” is the corporate mantra.

(Note that is Jonah quoting CCP Falcon above, it just attributed improperly when I quoted it)

That quote is BS when they made null safer and more profitable, iteration after iteration, for years. When they made high sec less lawless, citadels, jump freighters, Rorq panic buttons, yadda yadda yadda.

Bad game design is bad game design. If your core game design fails to attract and retain people, then you don’t walk around parroting “We intend to stay true to our vision!”. Yes, I know the decision makers at CCP feel 'reality checks are for noobs, we have vision!"

Failed project after removed feature after downsized team after “the investors sold out the company” tells me just how much their ‘vision’ is worth.

When your player base is in free fall, you don’t say “Our vision is great, it’s the players that are bad!”. You start looking for what’s wrong with your vision and making it into something more than a few tryhards feel is worth paying for.

3 Likes
23

A ‘game’ that relies on having customers caters to them. This allows the game to grow their revenue and thus their enterprise. The EVE game grew by letting players develop successful playing styles. Many did this by engaging in various activities having various levels of difficulty and then selecting a balance among them to suit their preferences. EVE provided the casual gamer a place to spend a few spare hours a week running missions and tinkering with their ships ‘fit’ or by finding and mining raw materials. Those wanting more difficulty also found that in exploration and running WH combat or relic complexes. Things have changed and risk levels have increased. Increasing risk may cost the developers the ‘casual’ type player as her ‘Hulk’ is trapped in an ARK system while she is off vacationing. And, then, as she tries to leave the system it is overwhelmed and destroyed by a swarm of invaders. I doubt she finds that a ‘fun’ way to spend her hard earned entertainment dollar. Was she supposed to gather 20 or more of her in game friends to help her fight her way past the huge swarm?
Most of us fall into the ‘casual gamer’ category at least some of the time and few in that category can devote hours and hours to learning the latest game dynamic the developers throw out there in an ill considered attempt at creativity.
I enjoy EVE. I have never seen such low player counts. I hope that newcomers will at least balance out the players that have been lost so that EVE survives. Otherwise I’ll have to pretend I like the games on my phone.

1 Like
24

OuYe
OuYe1373×882 384 KB

they are more hardcore in some aspect then eve ever was.

1 Like
25

I think EVE needs more Nudity…and all ships should have well marked, easy to find toilets. Does no one ever poop in space?

3 Likes
26

There are obviously risks and penalties for the suicide gankers, namely the loss of their ships, of security status, the kill rights on them (which many players have no clue how to use properly), the possibility that the gank might fail, that other pilots might interfere with the gank or steal the loot…

That they make so much profit from their ganks that all those risks and penalties can simply be factored in as operational costs is a problem with the victims that carelessly fly their ships through high sec as if it was safe. The gankers cannot inflict more damage than the victims have chosen to fly with. What’s absurd is not the amount of damage they may inflict, but rather the value that some players choose to fly with through dangerous space without taking the possibility of being ganked into consideration.

What the suicide gankers do in high sec they could do in low sec too without having to worry about stuff like losing their ships to CONCORD. It’s precisely because (unlike low sec) high sec has CONCORD, that they have to use cheap ships there. If you want to be killed by more expensive ships then fly through low sec instead.

There is no significant imbalance in the game mechanics in this regard. The “imbalance” comes from the players themselves, more specifically from the way many pilots fly through high sec as if it was safe and from the huge difference in the knowledge of the game mechanics that usually exists between the gankers and their victims. Your posts clearly show how little you know about it all yourself, which there would be nothing wrong with if it wasn’t because you pretend the game should be changed to make it easier for you instead of you learning to properly play it.

If anything, you might blame the game complexity for the difficulty many players have to figure how to fight the gankers or avoid being suicide ganked, but that complexity is precisely one of the things that contributes to the game depth that makes it interesting. You cannot pretend it should be dumbed down to make it easier for you and more difficult for those that might kill you.

5 Likes
27

Almost all of those ‘penalties’ are nothing more than a slight inconvenience for most gankers. Their Targets are usually checked and selected by alt scouts that provide a warp-in point, their ships are fit for max DPS so that cost is negligible, most gankers are already operating in High Sec with a negative security status and killrights don’t really mean much due to lousy Bounty mechanics, also there isn’t much chance of anybody else interfering with the gank attempt since it’s usually a very quick surprise attack. About the only thing that really matters is getting Concorded before completing the gank due to miscalculating the target’s defensive capabilities.

As for reward, they can have an alt or buddy pick up the loot dropped from the wrecks which, if the loot fairy is good, they can sell for a profit. There’s very little risk involved with the whole operation.

Yeah, I agree targets can make themselves less desirable by fitting for max defense as well as not carrying large expensive loads. However even doing that won’t deter a gank attempt if all they’re after is boosting their killmail stats.

No, I disagree. They don’t do it in Low sec because then the cost of their ship would be increased and they’d spend more time finding viable targets. Also they’d lose the element of surprise due to everybody being viewed as an eminent threat, and there’s a really good chance that the target will fight back. The reason cheap ships with bare fits work in high sec is because most targets aren’t expecting or prepared for an attack. And if it’s a large target, the gankers would just get a couple more buddies to help.

The imbalance in game mechanics is that they also hide behind Concord, meaning those who openly attack known gankers without an active killright will also get concorded.

However I do agree with everybody in high sec should be more aware and fit their ships for max defense while maintaining situational awareness, then the gankers wouldn’t have an easy time getting kills relatively risk free.

28

sorry i will not answer rest of your post because it is some joke.
what ships? catalist or bomber is NOT a ship - what a cost? this ships have no cost at all this days.
what player penality? on alpha accounts? 10 no skill ■■■■ catalists kill skiff most tanked most advenced industral ship - this is balance? this is ■■■■. I understand why some people defend it - suicide is power and free money with no risk and penalitys with no stress at all. Just fly hit f1 and earn money. be a hero. todays eve is for such people.

1 Like
29

Nope. Not unless the skiff is anti-tanked. The same tool that gankers use in determining the economics of a gank can be used by those seeking to avoid being ganked.

1 Like
30

Those penalties all have the effect of a direct or indirect ISK loss and/or making it easier for other pilots to kill or mess with the gankers.

Potential victims may take advantage of penalties that result in an ISK loss by limiting their drop value to not be profitable targets.

Anti-gankers and criminal hunters in general may take advantage of the penalties that make the gankers easier to kill by catching them jumping gates, or start shooting/disabling them before they start ganking someone.

What makes those penalties just a “slight inconvenience” for the gankers is the inability/unwillingness of the victims or other pilots to take advantage of them. That’s a problem with those other pilots, not with the risks and penalties associated with suicide ganking.

What do bounty mechanics have to do with this?

Either they let their sec status drop below -5, in which case they’re free to kill anytime anywhere and KRs become unnecessary, or KRs can be used to kill them, bounty or not bounty.

How do those things not mean much? For those like me that do hunt them, the low security status or availability of KRs means A LOT and makes all the difference…

I do that all the time. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Thanks for letting me know how they work. Much appreciated.

There are multiple and significant risks involved with the whole operation.

At the looting stage, which is what you mentioned right before saying this, if the victim dies, the risk is others may loot the wreck too, exactly like they do. Or, depending how they do it, their looter may get killed when he goes suspect.

The issue here is that those risks require the participation of other players for them to be effective and not mere operational costs, just like it’s other players and not the game mechanics by themselves what makes the risk of going to low sec effective.

What you cannot pretend is the game mechanics be changed to replace the inability/unwillingness of other players to take advantage of the risks and penalties the gankers have to deal with to make them actually meaningful and effective, so the players themselves don’t have to. That’s plain wong.

It’s not just a matter of making yourself a less desirable target. That helps and may be the right thing to do when hauling with a T1 industrial, for example, but may not be the best option and sometimes not even an option.

It’s mostly a matter of situation awareness and fitting and flying your ship to be as uncatchable as possible regardless of EHP or cargo value, i.e. check zKill and intel channels and pay attention when flying around, to be aware of gankers and their scouts, adding to contacts the ones you consider appropriate, so you may notice them in local; scout in advance and use d-scan when appropriate; use instant dock/undock bookmarks; fit for lower than 2s align times and/or cov ops cloak for traveling when possible, or use cloak+MWD when not; etc.

So stop pretending high sec is or should be safer than it is, and use the tools at your disposal to fly according to the level of risk you’re willing to assume in each case. Pretending the game should be changed so you or someone else doesn’t have to learn to avoid being ganked is not acceptable, sorry.

You disagree with what that I said here? You’re wrong here too, but doesn’t matter because nowhere did I say anything about the reasons they prefer to gank in high sec instead of in low sec…

What I said is that using expensive ships to gank is an option in low sec, but not in high sec, because the latter has CONCORD but the former does not, i.e. that whining about their ships being cheap is pointless and ridiculous because that’s precisely a consequence of they adapting to the risks and penalties associated with suicide ganking that do exist…

What? How is CONCORD working the same for everybody an imbalance? Did you mean inconvenience maybe (for those that might want to kill them)?

Also, weren’t you complaining at the beginning of your post about the penalties associated with suicide ganking, such as having low sec status, not meaning much? You know outlaws can be shot at will without CONCORD intervention, right? Don’t you see an incoherence here?

31

That’s not what you should feel sorry for. Your ignorance and inability/unwillingness to learn/understand should be more of a concern, but that would require you to be aware of it to begin with…

2 Likes
32

If not ships, what are they? Bathtubs?

10 no skill ■■■■ catalists kill skiff most tanked most advenced industral ship - this is balance?

Ten low SP (T1) Catalysts ain’t killing a Skiff unless it’s poorly tanked, and even then they’ll be lucky; furthermore you appear to be suggesting that one player should be able to take on ten players and reliably beat them because of their ship choice?

Kindly join Balos in the I have no idea corner.

3 Likes
33

Should be a separate forum for them.

34

That would be incorrect. A semi-tanked Skiff in 0.5 dies to 7-8 600DPS Cats…3 if it’s untanked.

That being said, Punctator is way over-reacting; I blame space madness aka mining…

35

600 DPS ain’t a low SP Catalyst, that’s a T2 fit with decent skills, I would class a low SP fit as a T1/meta fit pushing 350-400 DPS, but otherwise your point is taken; I’ll alter my post accordingly.

1 Like
36

this simulation is in alpha stage so resists are lower and ehp is lower then in omega and it is heavy tanked. and it happend.

cheap ■■■■

hisec
hisec1062×1123 272 KB

38

Have you flown for CODE?

39

Before you get lost in the number of cats and fits needed to gank a Skiff, let me point out that the issue here is that Punctator thinks that being able to gank a Skiff with 10 catalysts is… “unbalanced”… because… a Skiff is “the most tanked most advenced industral ship” and a catalyst is “NOT a ship”… Says it all, really, doesn’t matter whether the number of cats is 6, 8, or 10…

5 Likes
40

actualty you should tell sorry for telling all this ■■■■ earlier.

41

So you can’t even answer one simple question. No surprise there.

Dry you eyes miner.