EVE General Discussion

Thats fair, but its not just the ability to PVP that made eve unique, its the PVP RISK. Having a months work on the line when i undock, makes PVP that much more thrilling. When my machariel survives an encounter with 50% structure remaining, FUCKIN AWESOME! If i would just respawn with my machariel and faction/officer fits after i die... it really wouldn't be nearly as fun. WOW players have PVP yes, but they lose nothing from it. They might be 'good' at it, but there was really no risk, and that kind of PVP bores me. I also believe it bores most of the EVE PVP crowd, which is why they became EVE players in the first place.

I grew up playing a lot of Monopoly, Risk, Stratego. I played a MUD where a lvl 20 player could teleport a lvl1 player into a dungeon and slay him. Where the only real protection from assholes like me, were the white knight players who would in turn hunt me. I played on a neverwinter nights server that had pretty hardcore pvp. I'd appear in the middle of town and cast Wail of Banshee, and watch 15 noobs around me drop dead instantly losing their gear. Once i did that a few times, i had monks running around hunting me every time i logged on, and that was a TON of fun. Imagine now if the noobs whined and nerfed death magic so i couldnt do that. No more running for me. Nobody for the white knights to hunt. Back to bordom. (and yes, many of the noobs did complain, and i eventually got banned... google my nwn player name "Nomius Phasha" you can still see the forum posts complaining about me =)

Well, they lose their time and some resources( exp penalty and gear repair, first one assuming they are not max level yet).
You say there is no risk, but really, if you are shooting freighters or can flipping all day then its the same no risk scenario as being a twink in battlegrounds, how many people actually wardec you and fight back when you engage them ?

The new system will let others shoot you, how is that a bad thing if its more pvp for you at the end of the day ? is it bad because you are not the top of the food chain in your current system and your victims can actually do something other than wardec you to get back at you ?

Also, NWN was sick, summon Weird and Gate spells were amazing.

I am neither an old player of Eve nor a newbie. I started playing in 2008. 5 years or so after Eve started and 4 years til now. I have done the null sec thing, the low sec pvp thing, and the hi sec carebear thing. Im currently doing the hi sec thing and heres why.
Null sec is boring. People of null sec lie to themselves. They are up there with hi sec carebears as far as gameplay goes. They rat, run anomolies, and mine to pass the time. When they do go to fight they shoot stationary things like POSes and stations. If a fight does break out you only need to be able to follow orders and the ability to click buttons. The FC is the only one who needs to use his brain.
Low sec is awesome. The people who call low sec home are the real pvpers of the game. But it is broken. Nobody wants to limit themselves and go -10. It wouldnt be so bad if it wasnt such a B**** to gain sec status. Id be there right now pew pewing away. They need to do something to this sec status system to make it not such a punishment to do what this game was intended for..pvp. I personally feel they should do away with the sec status and just add to your bounty when you do things that are against the "law".
Currently hi sec is perfect. I have many options to make the money I need and can still dip down into low or null to lose said money in pew pew. That is a problem. It shouldnt be perfect. They need to either fix the other 2 areas or give some reason for hi sec to not be such a perfect place to live.

I would absolutely love to see CONCORD replaced by player white knighters. Allow players with a high security rating to sign up for CONCORD Response Teams, where they can sit on a CONCORD Titian and be bridged into crime scenes.

Ive played on and off since Beta. I'm a carebear. How does that fit in your argument?

The OP seems to think that this game is a PVP space ship game. The fact that the majority of the game is built around pure economics rather than Pew Pew seems to be lost on most people.

To say people playing in high sec aren't playing the game right is to totally ignore the fact that they are playing the game as CCP created it.

Id like to flip your logic on you. You sir have chosen to play a hardcore PVE game, and then complain about the PVE being too hardcore.

This is a sandbox meaning it is neither pvp or pve it is what you make it.

There is nothing "Hardcore" about EVE PvP.

It is just as I said before:
Waiting games
Camping
Alt/Meta gaming
Timer knowledge

The majority of combat is extremely cheesy and nothing sci-fi-like with nice big explosions. Or large alliance wars. Disbanding the biggest alliances by just pressing a button.............WOOOHOO. Was nice to read the drama, and to see the utter gameplay design FAIL.

If I want to "PvP" I start-up some not to be named tank-game.

I really would like to "PvP" in EVE but not with these cheesy mechanics that require me to become a database specialist. No offense, but that is just not my cup of tea. I want action, consequences, losses and wins. For the majority of the "PvP" folks consequences, losses are not relevant. Wins are meaningless, only too boast their ego on some meaningless killboard that the whole world does not care about.

But that isn't your fault, IMO CCP just planlessly added "stuff" and artificially tried to create a PvP environment. Maybe that works for large alliances, but not for the average Joe that has to grind weeks to get a ship just to have it taken by a cheesy gate camp. And that makes EVE for me not a sci-fi spaceship game with nice battles, just a databas and timer management client.

EVE Online is a sandbox, where you, as a capsuleer are allowed to choose your profession. I do not disagree, the game includes a lot of PvP action, be it on the market, asteroid belts, Planet VI ( http://youtu.be/6k86kx8rR5I ) or deadspace pockets. No matter what profession you have chosen, you are competing with other players in becoming the best of your profession, amassing the most riches, and/or having the best friends.


Your point here is certainly valid, as that is not the way New Eden is, it is a much more dangerous and sinister place. A place where you may lose your ship at a moments notice, and that is the way I would like New Eden to stay.


This.. Is plain insanity, to begin with you escalated the idea provided in the former quote from Faction Police to CONCORD. There is a huge difference between the two, firstly being that Faction Police are the ones that are meant to protect the solar systems from pirates. Given they have way less power and numbers than CONCORD but they occasionally manage to capture a pirate or two. While CONCORD forces are meant to capture cuplrits that have received a Global Criminal Countdown as a result of an illegal act of aggression.

While I can respect your view of any updates CCP may be choosing to do, your rant does not have a clear statement of what you're dissatisfied with. You complain about CONCORD response times being shorter and pirating options being limited, but lack of actual, factual evidence makes this nothing more than a rant. If you could please provide us with a link to the Dev Blog that has sparked this topic, I would gladly read it over and form my perspective to give you.

Regards
B. Eldar

OP,

While I get what you're trying to say, you should consider the bigger picture.

I, along with many others, have been playing Battlefield series since BF1942. And I don't feel that BF3 was significantly worse. Further, BF: Bad Company 1 & 2 don't really belong in the same list as BF3, same as Battlefield: Heroes doesn't belong there.

Were there some changes to BF3, compared to BF2? Yes, many. Were all of those changes bad or totally changing the game? I don't feel they do. For every "negative" change, like the reduction of map size, there was a positive change, line introduction of destructible environments, deeper kit customization, etc.

I'm actually seeing the exact same argument with the Hitman Absolution game released two days ago. Many people rage and moan that it is no longer a Hitman game, and that the series is dead, and so on. And to a degree, they're right. But what they fail to do is recognize that graphics and amount of detail increased since Blood Money, increased so much that with these graphics, the large sprawling levels of Blood Money are just no longer possible on consoles. Yes, surprise surprise, consoles are holding back and harming PC gaming. The developers didn't have a choice. They either had to cut graphics and detail, in which case the game would be laughed at for being visually outdated, or they had to cut the large map into separate pieces.

Having said that, I don't feel like it is no longer a Hitman game. In some ways, it is superior. For example, doing Chinatown level, I found no less than 5 ways to kill the target, not counting directly shooting him. Don't think there was this much variety in the previous version.

And yes, in some ways the game IS inferior - the part I hate the most is the new scoring system. In Blood Money, the highest rank was Silent Assassin. That is, you go in, do your thing and leave unnoticed. The target is dead, and it usually looks like an accident, and nobody suspects anything. By contrast, in Absolution you can go on a shooting rampage, but as long as you score enough headshots and hide enough bodies, you might end up with a score high enough to get Silent Assassin rating. It's all about the points now, not about how you play your game. Which is totally screwy. In the older Hitman titles, a shooting rampage resulted in low rating like maniac or mass murderer.

Also, people don't know what they want. In Blood Money, people whined that disguise system was too strong. So it was changed in Absolution, and now people whine it's too hard. And it is harder, compared to Blood Money, but not gamebreakingly so.

Bottom line: things change. Things that "worked" 10 years ago, and by "worked" I mean were widely accepted, just don't work any more. Why? Simple. People change. WE changed. Average gamer age is now what, 36? Compared to 23 or so 10 years ago? Totally different mentality and priorities now. And games NEED to reflect that to remain popular.

Are games being "dumbed down" across the board? Yep. Is there a reason for it? Yep. An average gamer doesn't have the kind of free time today as they did a decade ago, or two decades ago. I certainly don't.

All those tears must be fogging up OP's monocle. Need a tissue?