These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Two more accounts unsubbed.

First post
Author
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#181 - 2012-08-07 14:20:25 UTC
Bootleg Jack wrote:
lol, to the contrary, if we could just get another 30k or so bitter vets to leave this game could move into the 21st century instead of the death spiral it is on.


yeah CCP should shed their most loyal players who have stayed subbed for years on end and create content

great plan there

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Bootleg Jack
ACME Mineral and Gas
#182 - 2012-08-07 14:23:11 UTC
Beats adding two new boring ships a year and no other content because the bitter vets are pissed at all change

I'm an American, English is my second language...

Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#183 - 2012-08-07 14:24:33 UTC
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Beats adding two new boring ships a year and no other content because the bitter vets are pissed at all change


the "bittervets" want new ships, filling unique roles, added to the game, the carebears are the ones who moan about new ships being added to the game that can potentially be used to mercilessly murder them in hisec

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Signal11th
#184 - 2012-08-07 14:26:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Signal11th
Rico Minali wrote:
I was intending to read half the post and disregard it as a whine. I was wrong.

I actually agree with alot of what teh OP is saying. Eve IS becoming safer, it shouldnt. Sure some things need balancing, suicide ganking does need to be less prolific but other than that, there should be more pvp not less. Alot of what has been happening is actually reducing pvp and danger.

Miners did need a buff, teh ability to have ships that wont be ganked anythign liek as often. However, it surely wont end suicide ganking as many people will still opt for high yield low tank ships, they will die. That is right, it should be able to happen.

Gate guns that pretty much end lowsec pvp at gates? No thanks. Station games where you can avoid pvp? No thanks. Making easy ways to avoid pvp? No thanks.

Add ways for players to defend themselves, not add mechanics to make them safe. Make more reasons for players to go to dangerous places, not make the places safer. Make the players make themselves safer, dont hold their hands and wrap them in cotton wool.


Keep Eve harsh. When I started in 07 everythign was harder than it is today, and it was even harder before that by all accounts. Stop making it softer, but give people more to play with and let them roll with it. Balance what is needed, but stop making everything safer.




Although I'm coughing in my coffee but for once I agree with Rico. Anyway if you spend anything over 2 years in EVE it's just classed as a habit from then on.

I'm actually finding EVE extremely tedious and boring at the moment.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

Bootleg Jack
ACME Mineral and Gas
#185 - 2012-08-07 14:32:43 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Beats adding two new boring ships a year and no other content because the bitter vets are pissed at all change


the "bittervets" want new ships, filling unique roles, added to the game, the carebears are the ones who moan about new ships being added to the game that can potentially be used to mercilessly murder them in hisec


lol, make more **** up, wait...

let me get my tinfoil hat

I'm an American, English is my second language...

Doddy
Excidium.
#186 - 2012-08-07 14:37:51 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
What's changed in 8 years that makes Eve less dangerous? Is it mechanics, or is it player behavior?


Let's see:

Instakilling, permajamming and instaneuting CONCORD, halving of CONCORD response times, removal of insurance payouts for losses to CONCORD, HP buff to all ships which was supposed to "increase the length of fights" but only served to make ships much safer in hisec, the ability to set stations as autopilot destinations

There's more than that too!


Lets keep this going.

Local tagging (so you can see enemies and outlaws in local the second they jump in), contact list (lets you see the moment an enemy logs on, which if you think about it is pretty broken whatever way you look at it), undock warnings while having agression (talk about dumbing down ...), CONCORD drone jamming, contraband warnings, introduction of noctis and marauders (to cut down loot theft), introduction of carriers (avoid fights), cov ops cloaks (avoid fights esp on haulers), interdiction nullifiers (avoid fights), jump freighters (avoid fights), jump bridges (avoid fights), removal of static plexes (longer escape time for npcers), addition of grav sites (longer escape time for miners), addition of warp to zero (for good reason but it still made things hella safer)
J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#187 - 2012-08-07 14:39:24 UTC
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:

When I was a new player, Eve was incredibly lethal. Jump into a .4, get your face blown off. Rinse, repeat. Your life span was usually dictated by how long you could hold your cloak at a gate. This part of the game was what kept me coming back for more. Extreme risk, extreme danger, extreme loss if you make a mistake.


Logic shows that the mistake you did was jump into a .4. If you just kept jumping into a .4 and getting your face blown off you are pretty much suicidal.
This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.  Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless
Goremageddon Box
Guerrilla Flotilla
#188 - 2012-08-07 14:41:33 UTC
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Beats adding two new boring ships a year and no other content because the bitter vets are pissed at all change


the "bittervets" want new ships, filling unique roles, added to the game, the carebears are the ones who moan about new ships being added to the game that can potentially be used to mercilessly murder them in hisec


lol, make more **** up, wait...

let me get my tinfoil hat



shut up, the goon is right.
Bootleg Jack
ACME Mineral and Gas
#189 - 2012-08-07 14:44:56 UTC
Goremageddon Box wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Beats adding two new boring ships a year and no other content because the bitter vets are pissed at all change


the "bittervets" want new ships, filling unique roles, added to the game, the carebears are the ones who moan about new ships being added to the game that can potentially be used to mercilessly murder them in hisec


lol, make more **** up, wait...

let me get my tinfoil hat



shut up, the goon is right.

and we can tell by the critical points you made...

Guess what, shut up doesn't work on the internets Roll

I'm an American, English is my second language...

Jim Era
#190 - 2012-08-07 14:46:10 UTC
(Q) n (Q);
EVE MUST be dying if you are leaving after playing for so long and paying SO much to CCP.
However could they recover

Wat™

Goremageddon Box
Guerrilla Flotilla
#191 - 2012-08-07 14:49:14 UTC
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Goremageddon Box wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Beats adding two new boring ships a year and no other content because the bitter vets are pissed at all change


the "bittervets" want new ships, filling unique roles, added to the game, the carebears are the ones who moan about new ships being added to the game that can potentially be used to mercilessly murder them in hisec


lol, make more **** up, wait...

let me get my tinfoil hat



shut up, the goon is right.

and we can tell by the critical points you made...

Guess what, shut up doesn't work on the internets Roll


Yes it does, its called the mute/block button.


HAR HAR, u like eeeet?



Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#192 - 2012-08-07 14:52:53 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Well, I find nothing wrong with the vampire MMO per se. The problem was that they said "welp, we're going to pause with the EVE stuff for a few years to work on pretty avatars." If they developed it alongside EVE, without dipping into the resources allocated for the latter (at least to a great extent), then why not? I mean, **** it, I'd play me some vampires. Sounds interesting, and I'd have no problem kicking them a sub if it's a worthy game.

Well if enough people will kick them a sub, why not allocate more resources to it. It isn't irrational.

Oh dear, they're shooting the jita statue, let them eat... er drink... cake. No, blood.

When companies take on new ventures, they find methods to finance them before doing so. What CCP tried to do was take the money that they needed to maintain their cash cow (EVE), not just the surplus generated from operations, and divert it into a new project, and that's something you LOL simply don't do. Go to the bank and get a loan or something, but do not stop buying feed for the headless chicken that draws all the people to your carnival.


As someone who owned or was associate in 3 companies I can tell you that getting a loan - expecially in some EU countries - is quite more challenging than going to a bank and asking for it. And CCP was well financially exposed to begin with.

What happens is actually the opposite, that is you painstakingly pry a damn bank credit from a banker you had to befriend for 6 months and then, after some months they may contact you and demand if fully given back by tomorrow morning or else they force you bankrupt.

CCP is a typical "all goodwill no tangible assets" corporation, it's quite harsh to get abundant credit with that situation.
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#193 - 2012-08-07 14:54:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Pak Narhoo
Richard Desturned wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
What's changed in 8 years that makes Eve less dangerous? Is it mechanics, or is it player behavior?


Let's see:

Instakilling, permajamming and instaneuting CONCORD, halving of CONCORD response times, removal of insurance payouts for losses to CONCORD, HP buff to all ships which was supposed to "increase the length of fights" but only served to make ships much safer in hisec, the ability to set stations as autopilot destinations

There's more than that too!


Hey don't look at me I only shoot stuff that can shoot back. Shocked
Uhmm, ok I shot a hauler once on my other account. But only once!

If you overdo it, you can expect measurements to be taken. No one even CCP denies your suicide killings but when you make it so that it puts off other players in such a way it hurts CCP's wallet, what do you expect?

All of the above where not implemented by just occasional events. Like (legal) drugs, use them with moderation. But in EVE some people just don't know when to stop or give it a rest. Hulkageddon was great, what's now going on is just unsubstantiated hate or group behavior clubbing seal baby's dead just because they can, and profit from it.

I bet you if some alliance(s) would be burning Jita for month's and month's, CCP has to act.
Whimper what you want, the relentless action of a few are the sole reason why your beloved EVE is getting less dangerous.
I don't like it myself but it makes sense from CCP's point of view.

Cept for the tears of some in high sec why not stick largely to low sec and null to crack each others skulls? Not saying high sec should be save. Never it should be that. But if some people keep turning high sec into low sec, don't be surprised if you see more of the above quoted nerfs in place.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#194 - 2012-08-07 14:59:20 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
What's changed in 8 years that makes Eve less dangerous? Is it mechanics, or is it player behavior?


HP buff to all ships which was supposed to "increase the length of fights" but only served to make ships much safer in hisec, the ability to set stations as autopilot destinations

There's more than that too!


- CCP created a whole high alpha class of BCs just for that. They also introduced high sustained DPS ships and buffed existing destroyers to be able to DPS stuff to death before :Concord:
- CCP buffed minmatar (the alpha race) across the whole line.

Sadly CCP was never smart enough to do like most other games and put diminishing returns into "many vs 1", so of course people just bring X + 1 ships to do the job and once enough people use the "bring + 1" strategy to make somebody else's game miserable then CCP nerfs DPS along all the line including 1 v 1.
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#195 - 2012-08-07 15:01:47 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
the "bittervets"...


fear anything that challenges the established order.

As they should.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#196 - 2012-08-07 15:04:45 UTC
Pak Narhoo wrote:


Let's see:


If you overdo it, you can expect measurements to be taken. No one even CCP denies your suicide killings but when you make it so that it puts off other players in such a way it hurts CCP's wallet, what do you expect?

All of the above where not implemented by just occasional events. Like (legal) drugs, use them with moderation. But in EVE some people just don't know when to stop or give it a rest. Hulkageddon was great, what's now going on is just unsubstantiated hate or group behavior clubbing seal baby's dead just because they can, and profit from it.


Exactly.

It's the sheet "If I can do it, I WILL do it again and again with no restraint until the big cop stops me" mentality. Not surprisingly, who you quoted's alliance is known for doing exactly that. "Let's crash something hard again and again in 9000 till CCP nerfs it and then go cry on the forum at how bad CCP is".

Guess which "initiative" is going to be nerfed next?

This one.

Today it's legit, then the genius behind it will create enough followers that CCP will nerf it to below the ground. And then he and the others like him will come on the forum to loudly voice at how ebil the CCP cops are.
Ginger Barbarella
#197 - 2012-08-07 15:05:41 UTC
FAILQUITTERS UNITE!!!!

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac

Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#198 - 2012-08-07 15:07:02 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Sadly CCP was never smart enough to do like most other games and put diminishing returns into "many vs 1", so of course people just bring X + 1 ships to do the job and once enough people use the "bring + 1" strategy to make somebody else's game miserable then CCP nerfs DPS along all the line including 1 v 1.


It'd put a hard limit on the scale of engagements which is never a good thing.

Blob warfare may be relatively unexciting compared to smaller scale fights but it's far more exciting to talk about fights between 2000 dudes than "oh man 4 of my friends and I decided to go roaming"

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

BearJews
Order of Extrodinary Gentlemen
#199 - 2012-08-07 15:09:26 UTC
Can someone explain to me why a sandbox game (as many claim) is supposed to be just PVP? My understanding is Eve plays out according to how you want to play it, not how someone else wants your experience to be.

That's why I come back, that's why I enjoy the game. Sure you can influence my image of the game, but I will do my best to enjoy it how I want to play. To me that is exactly what a Sandbox should be.

When someone says, well Eve was meant to be played X type of way, that instantly means crying.
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#200 - 2012-08-07 15:12:03 UTC
BearJews wrote:
Can someone explain to me why a sandbox game (as many claim) is supposed to be just PVP? My understanding is Eve plays out according to how you want to play it, not how someone else wants your experience to be.



Because in the classic sense there's no "supposed to be" in a sandbox. It's just a toolset to be used according to the player's whim.

This is one of the many reason EVE isn't really a sandbox in the classic sense.