These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

so this is there real future for new players? gate camp?

First post
Author
Caldari State
#341 - 2017-02-14 18:36:35 UTC
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:
So what your saying is that you saw the warning, you knew it was more dangerous, you ignored those warnings, and took the risk regardless... and then... got surprised when your choices had consequences? well best way to learn about the dangers of low-sec is to get a crash course in it, most people get that lesson at one point or another, and that lesson has always worked perfectly fine.

some people take that loss and choose to stay in high-sec, some people make the jump and head to null, some people want to BE that guy, and move into low... what would you suggest that is a better way to teach of the dangers that are out there than letting people choose for themselves and experience it?

they give you the warning, you made the choice to ignore it. its been a while since i've seen it, but if i remember correctly I think the warning even explicitly tells you that concord will not respond in low-sec. so if you are claiming ignorance of that, then its an ignorance of your own making by wilfully ignoring the warnings that where given. if you would ignore those warnings, then what makes you think putting more warning in place wouldn't also get ignored?

I said (in different terms) I was unable to contextualize the warning, so it had no real meaning to me.

It was just one more random piece of information, equivalent to the entirely meaningless "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" (at least it's possible now, though it takes too much grinding time - back then it wasn't possible).

I'm not offering a "magic wand" for dealing with this information overload issue because there isn't one. For example, I mentioned in an earlier post that perhaps a compulsory 3-month stint in EVE Uni would be enough to get new players ready for EVE ... but that's not a practical solution. Actually it just highlights the problem with information and experience.
#342 - 2017-02-14 18:48:11 UTC
Sink or swim.

EVE is no easier or less risky for new players than vets, in proportion.

We've all been there, as new, once upon a time..

Just stick with it, suck up your losses, pursue your goals.
Goonswarm Federation
#343 - 2017-02-14 18:50:36 UTC
Hakawai wrote:
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:
Hakawai wrote:

For alts of experienced players - that's why I said to send "new-player profiled" ships back the way they came. if they go the wrong way I'd expect instant destruction, new player or not.

you mean like that big warning sign that pops up the first time you try to jump into low-sec? the one that says "warning, if you jump through this gate you will be entering a dangerous area"
That warning that you actually have to click on in order to dismiss and continue your jump?

how much more of a warning sign do you need, than the game itself stopping your jump and giving you a big ol warning sign that you have to dismiss in order to continue?

If you don't know about the dangers of the 0.5 to 0.4 interface, how can you process that information?


Wut?

I had no trouble. I saw the pop-up and read it. Closed it and turned my ship around.

What kind of special snowflake are you?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Caldari State
#344 - 2017-02-14 19:05:19 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Wut?

I had no trouble. I saw the pop-up and read it. Closed it and turned my ship around.

What kind of special snowflake are you?

I seem to be braver than you.

How did you ever manage to get out of highsec? Or are you still there?
Amarr Empire
#345 - 2017-02-14 19:06:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde
Quinn Hatfield wrote:

Alas, not everyone has the ability to socialise with others or to learn from their mistakes, this particular subgroup of gamers would be much better off playing either single player games where there is no risk of such interference, or multiplayer games where things like ganking and scamming are verboten in order to pander to the delicate sensibilities of their customers.

BTW the mechanics aren't overly convoluted, nor is beating an opponent by using your knowledge of the rules of the game schadenfreude.

You place much too much faith in your assumption that CCP allows ganking and scamming in order to sell PLEX and alt accounts. CCP allows these actions because that's part of the original design brief of the game; that brief being to create a game that is harsh, unforgiving and challenging. The original CCP team were "refugees" from the trammelisation of Ultima Online, that original dev team being some of the scammers and gankers that the Trammel expansion drove out of UO.



You seem to conflate playing a multiplayer game, and striving for ingame goals, with gaming a multiplayer game for out-of-game and very much RL goals, such as making complete strangers rage and quit, just because you can, and because you can only feel good about yourself by having some random joe lose hours if not days of ingame progress : the very definition of Schadenfreude (which is a result, not a mechanic, look up the definition).
It all goes far beyong gatecamps, as scams and awox rely on emotional manipulation, not ingame mechanics.

CCP came to encourage those actions (which were seldom encountered before 2006 I'd say, when the griefer community finally coalesced around some heros like Lofty29) because they saw that griefing required multiple accounts to be carried out properly, and that the masochists who enjoy this "game" also need multiple accounts, for at the very least scouting, and more generally not putting all their eggs in the same basket.
When did "Power of 2" first appeared? hmm...

UO was trammelized because the griefing subcommunity was only interested in making people rage by exploiting game mechanics, and were therefore killing the game (can't proactively defend yourself by buying more accounts in a twitch-based game, which EvE isn't, but UO is/was). If EvE's devs really come from UO and this griefing sub-community, It will probably go full circle at some point in the future, when CCP gets sold to investors who decide to try and make this "game" more mainstream by removing grief addicts and the mechanics that enable them.
It will fail horribly, as sadism and masochism are propping up crappy gameplay, which will appear in all its crappiness should players have to "play nice" (the basis of all social games and sports) and play pretend being pod pilots, instead of carrying out their RL impotent fantasies of domination in a multiplayer game by playing RL-based mind tricks on complete strangers (eg pretending wanting to help, pretending recruiting in good faith...)


In b4 sub-80IQ comparisons with chess (simple rules, no multiple accounts, balanced engagement) and FPS (no multiple accounts, balanced engagements, twitch-based)

"You would not be the first "ganker aligned" player to be found to having some issues. Here's a dark secret: there are some in AG who, because of battling gankers, have managed to get to know a few of them, found they had issues, and helped them" HW

Goonswarm Federation
#346 - 2017-02-14 19:10:50 UTC
Hakawai wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Wut?

I had no trouble. I saw the pop-up and read it. Closed it and turned my ship around.

What kind of special snowflake are you?

I seem to be braver than you.

How did you ever manage to get out of highsec? Or are you still there?


Really? Or just more stupid? Apparently you couldn't figure out the warning.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Goonswarm Federation
#347 - 2017-02-14 19:15:49 UTC
Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde wrote:


CCP came to encourage those actions (which were seldom encountered before 2006 I'd say, when the griefer community finally coalesced around some heros like Lofty29) because they saw that griefing required multiple accounts to be carried out properly, and that the masochists who enjoy this "game" also need multiple accounts, for at the very least scouting, and more generally not putting all their eggs in the same basket.
When did "Power of 2" first appeared? hmm...


Not true at all. Learn your history. EVE has been a game that has allowed “griefing” from the get go.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

#348 - 2017-02-14 19:22:23 UTC
Eve has been a game with very little conflict generators, now that we have lots of them i think its time to reconsider if spawn camping is a meaningful conflict generator.
Amarr Empire
#349 - 2017-02-14 19:23:24 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:


Not true at all. Learn your history. EVE has been a game that has allowed “griefing” from the get go.


As a 2003 player who was in the beta, I probably know more about EvE history than you do :^)

Do you suffer from comprehension issues? "seldom encountered before 2006" = griefing was allowed from the start but was not as heavily practiced, before around 2006

So, while it was allowed, the community hadn't made it a staple.
Then came "Power of 2", and elaborate scams and awoxes really developed.

Wonder why? really makes u think

"You would not be the first "ganker aligned" player to be found to having some issues. Here's a dark secret: there are some in AG who, because of battling gankers, have managed to get to know a few of them, found they had issues, and helped them" HW

Goonswarm Federation
#350 - 2017-02-14 19:29:03 UTC
Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


Not true at all. Learn your history. EVE has been a game that has allowed “griefing” from the get go.


As a 2003 player who was in the beta, I probably know more about EvE history than you do :^)

Do you suffer from comprehension issues? "seldom encountered before 2006" = griefing was allowed from the start but was not as heavily practiced, before around 2006

So, while it was allowed, the community hadn't made it a staple.
Then came "Power of 2", and elaborate scams and awoxes really developed.

Wonder why? really makes u think


Anyone can claim to be an older player while posting with a forum alt. Yes, I'm calling you a liar.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Amarr Empire
#351 - 2017-02-14 19:50:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde
Aves Asio wrote:
Eve has been a game with very little conflict generators, now that we have lots of them i think its time to reconsider if spawn camping is a meaningful conflict generator.


Removing spawn camping would be bad for business, as it would lessen the need for scouting, and scouting is one of the main reasons to get a secondary account.

As previously said, the crappy gameplay is offset or gamed by the use of multiple accounts simultaneously logged in. Change gameplay in a way that makes sense in the play-pretend universe that's supposed to be technologically extremely advanced (ex ability to know what's on the other side of a gate, or to check whether a pod pilot has a trustworthy contract history, etc etc), and you remove the need or appeal for multiple accounts.

"You would not be the first "ganker aligned" player to be found to having some issues. Here's a dark secret: there are some in AG who, because of battling gankers, have managed to get to know a few of them, found they had issues, and helped them" HW

Minmatar Republic
#352 - 2017-02-14 19:58:30 UTC
Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde wrote:
Aves Asio wrote:
Eve has been a game with very little conflict generators, now that we have lots of them i think its time to reconsider if spawn camping is a meaningful conflict generator.


Removing spawn camping would be bad for business, as it would lessen the need for scouting, and scouting is one of the main reasons to get a secondary account.

As previously said, the crappy gameplay is offset or gamed by the use of multiple accounts simultaneously logged in. Change gameplay in a way that makes sense in the play-pretend universe that's supposed to be technologically extremely advanced (ex ability to know what's on the other side of a gate, or to check whether a pod pilot has a trustworthy contract history, etc etc), and you remove the need or appeal for multiple accounts.

And in doing so, make it ever easier to dodge gate camps. Dodging gate camps is a good thing, but like any game play mechanism, you need to actually play for it, rather than being granted vital information for free.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein

Snuffed Out
#353 - 2017-02-14 20:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Lan Wang
Aves Asio wrote:
Eve has been a game with very little conflict generators, now that we have lots of them i think its time to reconsider if spawn camping is a meaningful conflict generator.


it is, ill tell you why, tama gets dropped on by a lot of groups often, its an easy fight dropping on tama, you hardly need to gather intel to find out what they have on grid and ships are expensive, so removing things like tama camps is removing content not just from campers but also pvp groups.

how about we remove highsec mission running because thats not a conflict generator either, lets remove warpcore stabalisers, insta-warping and cloaky mwd tricks because lets face it they are anti-conflict also, that sound better for you?

lets remove concord too as they are not conflict generators either?

edit: its not spawn camping....spawn camping is unavoidable, last i checked you can avoid gatecamps pretty easily

Hiasa Kite wrote:
And in doing so, make it ever easier to dodge gate camps. Dodging gate camps is a good thing, but like any game play mechanism, you need to actually play for it, rather than being granted vital information for free.


do you actually think its hard to avoid a gatecamp? if you do you should really go play something like viva pinata till you decide to pick up all the feathers you've been dropping around the floor

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Amarr Empire
#354 - 2017-02-14 20:10:59 UTC
Hiasa Kite wrote:

And in doing so, make it ever easier to dodge gate camps. Dodging gate camps is a good thing, but like any game play mechanism, you need to actually play for it, rather than being granted vital information for free.


Your reasoning is based on the postulate that spawn camping is a valid game mechanic. It also misses the fact that the ingame map provides real-time info about New Eden (except gate camps... wonder why? artificial conflict points requiring a scouting account to avoid them? heh)

People like me will continue to come out on top of spawn camping situations by not logging in, rather than buying scouting accounts : )

"You would not be the first "ganker aligned" player to be found to having some issues. Here's a dark secret: there are some in AG who, because of battling gankers, have managed to get to know a few of them, found they had issues, and helped them" HW

Minmatar Republic
#355 - 2017-02-14 20:12:10 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
Hiasa Kite wrote:
And in doing so, make it ever easier to dodge gate camps. Dodging gate camps is a good thing, but like any game play mechanism, you need to actually play for it, rather than being granted vital information for free.


do you actually think its hard to avoid a gatecamp?

No, which is why I'm against nerfing them.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein

Goonswarm Federation
#356 - 2017-02-14 20:14:25 UTC
Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde wrote:
Hiasa Kite wrote:

And in doing so, make it ever easier to dodge gate camps. Dodging gate camps is a good thing, but like any game play mechanism, you need to actually play for it, rather than being granted vital information for free.


Your reasoning is based on the postulate that spawn camping is a valid game mechanic. It also misses the fact that the ingame map provides real-time info about New Eden (except gate camps... wonder why? artificial conflict points requiring a scouting account to avoid them? heh)

People like me will continue to come out on top of spawn camping situations by not logging in, rather than buying scouting accounts : )


How can somebody who claims to have been playing since 2003 not realize that doing what you want is the basic element of the game. That is just about anything you want to do is a "valid game mechanic"?

Second, good, glad to read you won't be logging in.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Snuffed Out
#357 - 2017-02-14 20:15:20 UTC
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
Hiasa Kite wrote:
And in doing so, make it ever easier to dodge gate camps. Dodging gate camps is a good thing, but like any game play mechanism, you need to actually play for it, rather than being granted vital information for free.


do you actually think its hard to avoid a gatecamp?

No, which is why I'm against nerfing them.


It sounded like you wanted them nerfed, sorry if i read that wrong

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Gallente Federation
#358 - 2017-02-14 20:19:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Hatfield
Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde wrote:
You seem to conflate playing a multiplayer game, and striving for ingame goals, with gaming a multiplayer game for out-of-game and very much RL goals,
I have no problems distinguishing where Eve stops and real life begins, in one I have spaceships and freedoms that are unavailable in the other.

Quote:
such as making complete strangers rage and quit, just because you can, and because you can only feel good about yourself by having some random joe lose hours if not days of ingame progress the very definition of Schadenfreude (which is a result, not a mechanic, look up the definition).
Explosions and the collection of assets, via means foul or fair, are very much ingame goals, for there to be a winner, there is inevitably a loser. People being sore losers is not the fault of the winner.

I'm well aware of the definition of schadenfreude, it is pleasure derived from another's misfortune; which is very much part of the human condition. Pretty much every competitive game in existence demonstrates aspects of schadenfreude, because winning is pleasurable, losing not so much.

The point I was making is that using knowledge of the rules of a game to your advantage is not schadenfreude, it's good strategy.

Quote:
It all goes far beyong gatecamps, as scams and awox rely on emotional manipulation, not ingame mechanics.
The emotion that scams rely on is greed, people who fall for scams often think that they're the one doing the screwing, not the one being screwed; this is called irony.

Awoxing is actually extremely difficult to pull off these days, mechanics changes put paid to that.

Quote:
CCP came to encourage those actions (which were seldom encountered before 2006 I'd say, when the griefer community finally coalesced around some heros like Lofty29) because they saw that griefing required multiple accounts to be carried out properly, and that the masochists who enjoy this "game" also need multiple accounts, for at the very least scouting, and more generally not putting all their eggs in the same basket.
When did "Power of 2" first appeared? hmm...
MoO would like a word with you, they were "griefing" in 2003, so much so that CCP had to step in and scatter them to the winds.

Quote:
UO was trammelized because the griefing subcommunity was only interested in making people rage by exploiting game mechanics, and were therefore killing the game (can't proactively defend yourself by buying more accounts in a twitch-based game, which EvE isn't, but UO is/was). If EvE's devs really come from UO and this griefing sub-community, It will probably go full circle at some point in the future, when CCP gets sold to investors who decide to try and make this "game" more mainstream by removing grief addicts and the mechanics that enable them.
It will fail horribly, as sadism and masochism are propping up crappy gameplay, which will appear in all its crappiness should players have to "play nice" (the basis of all social games and sports) and play pretend being pod pilots, instead of carrying out their RL impotent fantasies of domination in a multiplayer game by playing RL-based mind tricks on complete strangers (eg pretending wanting to help, pretending recruiting in good faith...)
Revisionist history much? UO was trammelised because the screaming carebear hordes couldn't deal with the concept of non consensual PvP.

If you were half as familiar with the history as Eve as you claim to be, you wouldn't be questioning where the original CCP dev team came from; because you'd know that some were indeed "griefers" from UO.

I don't burn bridges, I merely steal a bolt a day.

#359 - 2017-02-14 20:24:43 UTC
Eve has a niche with 0 competition BECAUSE of its harshness. If it were to lose that, it would become lost in the shuffle of endless WoW wannabes.

There is no griefing in this game I can think of that does not have either a counter or a way to avoid it. Adapt.
#360 - 2017-02-14 20:26:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Nakovi Kitsune wrote:
Eve has a niche with 0 competition BECAUSE of its harshness. If it were to lose that, it would become lost in the shuffle of endless WoW wannabes.

There is no griefing in this game I can think of that does not have either a counter or a way to avoid it. Adapt.
Are you suggesting that people may have to put some effort into their leisure activities?

That's simply outrageous.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Forum Jump