These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Prototype: Dojos

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#381 - 2014-09-25 17:30:56 UTC
Ruric Thyase wrote:


If you can have YOUR unfair fights, why can't I have MY fair fights. Whose entitlement do we have to bow to? Why can't we have both?


What you just said is like saying "I know this is WoW, but I like spaceships, why can you have you elves and unicorns but I can't have my Vindicator to kill wild boars?".

EVE is built around the concept of non-consensual pvp. You can't have your "consensual only" pvp instances because then EVE effectively ceases being a non-consensual pvp game.
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#382 - 2014-09-25 17:31:13 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


Quote:
Fights need to be un-screw-with-able. We strongly feel that if what’s supposed to be a “fair” match given a set of predetermined rules is thrown off course by outside influence, it invalidates the whole premise.


This is the part we are not happy about. This should never happen in EVE.


I say otherwise. My voice counts exactly as much as yours.

The fact that CCP has been working on it as far back as 6 months ago means they are leaning in my side's direction.

The door is that way if you are unhappy.
Bamboozlement
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#383 - 2014-09-25 17:31:16 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

allow me to rephrase then. Everyone who can have a physical affect on someone else in space on tranquility should be subject to the underlying LAW of EVE Online space flight ie "a ship in space can never be safe from unwanted pvp".

The same reason why Tech3s become scannable is the reason why these "unscannable deadspace pockets" should not exist.


But this is just your opinion, stuff like AT and NEO exist and eve players love it.

Just deal with the fact that people are playing the game differently, if eve was 100% sandbox it would be chaos (I would like it tho) we have game limits to keep the gameplay enjoyable/playable.

Asking to gank dojos is stupid, it's against the dojo design itself.

I have a Ph.D
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#384 - 2014-09-25 17:32:13 UTC
Ruric Thyase wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Bamboozlement wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Bamboozlement wrote:


Cloaked people in safes aren't subject to anything, are you new or something?


cloaked people in space can't shoot guns. They can in 'Dojospace'.



My point is, your idea of people can be ganked everywhere is wrong.

Remember this is a sandbox there is no good way to play, as shown by the "blue donut" in null sec. Bear


allow me to rephrase then. Everyone who can have a physical affect on someone else in space on tranquility should be subject to the underlying LAW of EVE Online space flight ie "a ship in space can never be safe from unwanted pvp".

The same reason why Tech3s become scannable is the reason why these "unscannable deadspace pockets" should not exist.



Please provide source of this LAW


http://www.eveonline.com/
Bamboozlement
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#385 - 2014-09-25 17:33:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ruric Thyase wrote:



If you can have YOUR unfair fights, why can I have MY fair fights. Whose entitlement do we have to bow to? Why can't we have both?


We do have both right now. You can run 1v1s and I can backstab you and vice versa. This removes my option to backstab you (and adds a bunch of underhand uses a few of which I pointed out)


Except that you can still gank the non-dojo 1v1, and that player run 1v1s are hard to normalize (implants, mods, neut logis, etc).

I have a Ph.D
Anslo
Scope Works
#386 - 2014-09-25 17:33:50 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Ruric Thyase wrote:


If you can have YOUR unfair fights, why can't I have MY fair fights. Whose entitlement do we have to bow to? Why can't we have both?


What you just said is like saying "I know this is WoW, but I like spaceships, why can you have you elves and unicorns but I can't have my Vindicator to kill wild boars?".

EVE is built around the concept of non-consensual pvp. You can't have your "consensual only" pvp instances because then EVE effectively ceases being a non-consensual pvp game.


You whine a lot about new ideas proposed for Eve. If you don't like them, maybe Eve is not the game for you?

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Bamboozlement
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#387 - 2014-09-25 17:35:43 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Ruric Thyase wrote:


If you can have YOUR unfair fights, why can't I have MY fair fights. Whose entitlement do we have to bow to? Why can't we have both?


What you just said is like saying "I know this is WoW, but I like spaceships, why can you have you elves and unicorns but I can't have my Vindicator to kill wild boars?".

EVE is built around the concept of non-consensual pvp. You can't have your "consensual only" pvp instances because then EVE effectively ceases being a non-consensual pvp game.


Using your flawed logic :

EVE is built around the concept of bad POS management, you can't have your "nice POS management" instances because then EVE effectively ceases being a bad POS management game.

I have a Ph.D
Cy'ferth
Doomheim
#388 - 2014-09-25 17:36:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Cy'ferth
I like the idea of people having their fair fights in eve honestly those who feel eve's unfair nature goes against them i do feel this might make eve's pvp future uncertain.

Because it might encourage people to sit in a station in a queue for pvp (like other mmo's going) and i feel that eve in some respects will suffer because of this. not all areas of eve


IMO.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#389 - 2014-09-25 17:37:28 UTC
Bamboozlement wrote:


Except that you can still gank the non-dojo 1v1, and that player run 1v1s are hard to normalize (implants, mods, neut logis, etc).


We cannot gank them because;

Quote:
Fights need to be un-screw-with-able. We strongly feel that if what’s supposed to be a “fair” match given a set of predetermined rules is thrown off course by outside influence, it invalidates the whole premise.


Just because something requires effort on your behalf does not mean I should have my gameplay negetivly impacted.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#390 - 2014-09-25 17:38:20 UTC
Anslo wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Ruric Thyase wrote:


If you can have YOUR unfair fights, why can't I have MY fair fights. Whose entitlement do we have to bow to? Why can't we have both?


What you just said is like saying "I know this is WoW, but I like spaceships, why can you have you elves and unicorns but I can't have my Vindicator to kill wild boars?".

EVE is built around the concept of non-consensual pvp. You can't have your "consensual only" pvp instances because then EVE effectively ceases being a non-consensual pvp game.


You whine a lot about new ideas proposed for Eve. If you don't like them, maybe Eve is not the game for you?


That's what "change for the sake of change" people always say. Good change doesn't elicit comments from me because they are good changes. Slow but well thought out progress is always the way forward.

Ignoring one of the founding principles of the game (universal non-consensual pvp in space with the policy exception of noob systems and the SOE arc) is not and cannot ever be sound progress.

EVE must change to survive, but if it has to change it's core concept, then that core concept wasn't good to begin with.
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#391 - 2014-09-25 17:38:37 UTC  |  Edited by: LUMINOUS SPIRIT
Cy'ferth wrote:
I like the idea of people having their fair fights in eve honestly those who feel eve's unfair nature goes against them i do feel this might make eve's pvp future uncertain.

Because it might encourage people to sit in a station in a queue for pvp (like other mmo's going) and i feel that eve will suffer because of this.

IMO.


Why? When you lose enough rifters to arena PvP, eventually you will have to go out and make some isk.

And you think arenas will be limited to cheap frigs? I think not. How many ravens/megas etc. can you lose before you have to go out and replanish your isk?

You want to arena-pew with blinged stuff? Go farm LP in FW.

You want your flashy T3s? Go do some WH stuff.

You want to simply buy stuff for isk? Go do incursions or null-bear ratting for isk.

Literally nothing changes - its a conflict driver just in a different format. Market will re-adjust, people will still be specializing in different aras of EVE, only instead of SOV wars being primary sink for materiel, it will be arena's.

And suddenly, content still exists.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#392 - 2014-09-25 17:38:41 UTC
Anslo wrote:


You whine a lot about new ideas proposed for Eve. If you don't like them, maybe Eve is not the game for you?


If you want instanced arenas why don't you play one of the many many games that has them? Why force them into the one game that doesn't cater to them?
Ruric Thyase
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#393 - 2014-09-25 17:39:05 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ruric Thyase wrote:



If you can have YOUR unfair fights, why can I have MY fair fights. Whose entitlement do we have to bow to? Why can't we have both?


We do have both right now. You can run 1v1s and I can backstab you and vice versa. This removes my option to backstab you (and adds a bunch of underhand uses a few of which I pointed out)


The potential abuses you mentioned is a whole other can of worms that isn't really worth getting into because if this thing ever gets beyond its first day of existence, they are things that CCP would flesh out with the help of the community.

Just because I have the option of backstabbing you does not mean that I subjectively value doing so as my preferred way to engage in 1v1 PvP. The added hassle of worrying about neutral logi alts (my own or yours) is not worth my time and organization, thus depriving me of the content of 1v1 PvP. This seems like an alternative to that.

I will say again, I only want this in the scope of 1v1. I want people to be able to mess with the dojo, I don't want people to abuse the deadspace area, I think it is still EVE-like to have the ships destroyed.

If you don't like it, don't use it. If you like it, use it. What wrong with having that option?

Remember when people said the industry changes would ruin EVE? Those were some fun threads. Speaking of which, Im surprised I haven't seen Dinnsdale Pirannah, the resident doomsayer.
Schneevva
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#394 - 2014-09-25 17:39:54 UTC
Wow I mean really? Could you think of a more clever way to suck all the fun out of solo pvp?
Bamboozlement
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#395 - 2014-09-25 17:40:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Bamboozlement
baltec1 wrote:
Bamboozlement wrote:


Except that you can still gank the non-dojo 1v1, and that player run 1v1s are hard to normalize (implants, mods, neut logis, etc).


We cannot gank them because;

Quote:
Fights need to be un-screw-with-able. We strongly feel that if what’s supposed to be a “fair” match given a set of predetermined rules is thrown off course by outside influence, it invalidates the whole premise.


Just because something requires effort on your behalf does not mean I should have my gameplay negetivly impacted.


People that look for fair fights are negatively impacted by your gameplay too.

Again, you complain that they are adding options to the game because it's less targets for you if you don't adapt to the change.

Adapt or die, HTFU like we say in Eve Online.

I have a Ph.D
Bamboozlement
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#396 - 2014-09-25 17:41:25 UTC
Schneevva wrote:
Wow I mean really? Could you think of a more clever way to suck all the fun out of solo pvp?


Most of the fun from solo pvp come from fighting outnumbered, so nope it doesn't. Roll

I have a Ph.D
Ruric Thyase
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#397 - 2014-09-25 17:43:18 UTC
That is not a LAW that is just a link to the evonline website. Please link this LAW to which you refer.

Also Baltec, no one is FORCING EVE to have these arenas. They were introduced on a test server less than 24 hours ago. The people here arguing with you are the people who are saying "We dont mind of this" or "We think this would be fun" I dont think there has been a single post on this thread to the tune of:

"YOU HAVE TO ACCEPT THESE CHANGES OR EVE IS FOREVER RUINED"

Compare and contrast...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#398 - 2014-09-25 17:43:36 UTC
Ruric Thyase wrote:


The potential abuses you mentioned is a whole other can of worms that isn't really worth getting into because if this thing ever gets beyond its first day of existence, they are things that CCP would flesh out with the help of the community.

Just because I have the option of backstabbing you does not mean that I subjectively value doing so as my preferred way to engage in 1v1 PvP. The added hassle of worrying about neutral logi alts (my own or yours) is not worth my time and organization, thus depriving me of the content of 1v1 PvP. This seems like an alternative to that.

I will say again, I only want this in the scope of 1v1. I want people to be able to mess with the dojo, I don't want people to abuse the deadspace area, I think it is still EVE-like to have the ships destroyed.

If you don't like it, don't use it. If you like it, use it. What wrong with having that option?

Remember when people said the industry changes would ruin EVE? Those were some fun threads. Speaking of which, Im surprised I haven't seen Dinnsdale Pirannah, the resident doomsayer.


He would be on your side, anything that reduces non-consensual pvp is good in his eyes.

My issue is with the enforced instance, I should not be barred for getting into it. Make it hard to do sure but not stopped entirely.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#399 - 2014-09-25 17:44:16 UTC
Bamboozlement wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Ruric Thyase wrote:


If you can have YOUR unfair fights, why can't I have MY fair fights. Whose entitlement do we have to bow to? Why can't we have both?


What you just said is like saying "I know this is WoW, but I like spaceships, why can you have you elves and unicorns but I can't have my Vindicator to kill wild boars?".

EVE is built around the concept of non-consensual pvp. You can't have your "consensual only" pvp instances because then EVE effectively ceases being a non-consensual pvp game.


Using your flawed logic :

EVE is built around the concept of bad POS management, you can't have your "nice POS management" instances because then EVE effectively ceases being a bad POS management game.


That grasping for straws is dumb. Non-consensual pvp is a founding, core principle. POSes aren't.

Everything in EVE should evolve WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK of it's core philosophy. Key points of that philosophy are :

-Universal Non-Consensual pvp in space (except in noob systems and the Sisters of EVE arc)

-Meaningful Death penalty (ie things can be actual destroyed)

-'Single Shard' universe (Chinese Eve notwithstanding)

As long as those 3 things aren't screwed with, we can talk about different additions or balance issues. But something that violates any aspect of the core goes right out. Dojos (as presented) are as bad a violation of the core philosophy of EVE online as would be isk and material transfers from Singularity to Tranquility or "plex for pvp invulnerability" would be.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#400 - 2014-09-25 17:44:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Smile

Fair points all around.

Speaking practically, once all loopholes for abuse have been closed, the practical outcome of this would be....

Worst Case Scenario: The new pilots you get won't be completely clueless about combat fittings, and anxiety ridden about losing a ship... thus making your job of showing them how to actually PVP in EVE a little bit easier.
Less time lost explaining the basics, less whining, less irritation for you.


Best Case Scenario: You'll see a lot more pilots in space that have gotten cocky (because they've had some success in the arena) and think they really do know how to PVP and fit accordingly, and are much more willing to commit to a fight than previously.
More fights, more loot, more challenge, more fun.


When this was first discussed years ago I put forth the opinion that if this was ever attempted it would have to be handled carefully... with graphical and game mechanic elements that strictly divorced the players sense that they were fighting with real ships in space. It HAD to be presented as a high tech training simulator in EVE, with zero tangible profit or loss for engaging in its use.

Well, they've gotten part of it right... they just didn't go quite far enough with the concept.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.