These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How many more players must we lose to bullying

First post
Author
Zarek Kree
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#81 - 2017-03-29 01:36:23 UTC
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
GTFO is not a good business incentive for CCP. Such elitist meme is bullying which is why Eve has a toxic community.


GTFO then. Lol
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#82 - 2017-03-29 01:39:01 UTC
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:

you do know that in the early days, back in beta, high sec didn't even exist right? that implies that the "natural" state of eve. as originally designed, had ZERO safety mechanics in place.

even a after that happened concord was MUCH slower, and much weaker, it was only after the dev's caved to player pressure that it was made as overly safe as it is now.

so saying that the "replacement dev's are ignorant" is blatantly false. if anything they should be pushing high-sec back, to make it even more dangerous, if they really wanted to respect the original spirit of the game.



If memory serves, the "player pressure" that dev's supposedly caved to was not the complaints of the incompetent but the uncontrolled and rampant toasting of CONCORD by players who were organised and disciplined.

It seems to me the Empires are losing their hold on high and low security space, lore-wise, perhaps in preparation for the overweening power of capsuleers to reduce hisec to a few starter constellations. That would work very well, since endless harvesting of the crumbs in the rookie pond is the problem as i see it.

Declaring others flawed because they disagree can be funny, but still irrelevant.




Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

Kaeden 3142
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#83 - 2017-03-29 02:29:26 UTC
Zarek Kree wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
GTFO is not a good business incentive for CCP. Such elitist meme is bullying which is why Eve has a toxic community.


GTFO then. Lol


Typical Roll
Tamoyo Hoshi
GeneSia-IRC
#84 - 2017-03-29 04:02:31 UTC
Nigel Carruthers wrote:


Learning how to avoid wartargets and ganking IS one of the most basic fundamental aspects of the game.


Agreed. But if you want a continous state of war then the place for it is Null, not High sec.
Just coming back to the initial topic that was continous wardec.

Nigel Carruthers wrote:


you do know that in the early days, back in beta, high sec didn't even exist right? that implies that the "natural" state of eve. as originally designed, had ZERO safety mechanics in place.



That only reinforces that the game needed some degree of safety for begineers or some types of players.

The real hard truth is that many people wants some safety for themselves.
Otherwise they would just move to places without such rules as Low or Null.


Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#85 - 2017-03-29 04:30:15 UTC
Zarek Kree wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
GTFO is not a good business incentive for CCP. Such elitist meme is bullying which is why Eve has a toxic community.


GTFO then. Lol


No u. Are you enjoying holding a game company hostage and watching them slowly starve to death?

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Uniraver Avaniel
HIgh Sec Care Bears
Brothers of Tangra
#86 - 2017-03-29 04:50:55 UTC
I totally agree with you.
That mechanic needs to be reworked.

When first starting to play I put up a corp for me and my brother in highsec,
within a month we got a wardec that lasted for what felt like an eternity.

We didn't loose a single ship or died to a single gank, but we just could not play the way we wanted anymore, running missions and mining, so we both quit for a good few years.

Yes, that's lost revenue.



What's noticeable from the mostly one-sided point of view in these replies it's obvious that only a certain group of players are active in this thread..
This is however not the consensus among players, so don't give up!
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#87 - 2017-03-29 04:57:16 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Zarek Kree wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
GTFO is not a good business incentive for CCP. Such elitist meme is bullying which is why Eve has a toxic community.


GTFO then. Lol


No u. Are you enjoying holding a game company hostage and watching them slowly starve to death?



Expecting a game company to stick to the spirit of the game they made rather than turn it into the McDonalds/Justin Bieber friendly BS folks like you want is not "holding a game company hostage".

It's frankly hoping that said game company stops selling out and maintains one of the very few MMOs left that treats players like they can think for themselves.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#88 - 2017-03-29 05:03:49 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Highsec was designed to be relatively safe not harsh and terrifying.

Have you been to Highsec in the last couple of years? I mean it takes only a hand full of brain cells to make sure you are almost 100% secure without having to worry about anyone. So you are either extremely exaggerating the situation to push your agenda for a full removal of ganking or you are just bad at EVE.

Also to suggest that Highsec is more dangerous or terrifying compared to other places where people completely stop undocking because they have a guy with a cloak in local is just laughable and you know it.
Elenahina
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2017-03-29 05:13:13 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
DRDNOUGHT wrote:
you talk about the expectations of a seasoned player like you or myself, surely to guarantee the future of our game we need to keep those new players and allow them to develop into guys that can stand on their own two feet.....that's what empire is about....they have the options there if they want to war but should be protected if they don't.....


Think of the children...


Screw the children. Kill them all and let Bob sort them out.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#90 - 2017-03-29 05:13:13 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Zarek Kree wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
GTFO is not a good business incentive for CCP. Such elitist meme is bullying which is why Eve has a toxic community.


GTFO then. Lol


No u. Are you enjoying holding a game company hostage and watching them slowly starve to death?



Expecting a game company to stick to the spirit of the game they made rather than turn it into the McDonalds/Justin Bieber friendly BS folks like you want is not "holding a game company hostage".

It's frankly hoping that said game company stops selling out and maintains one of the very few MMOs left that treats players like they can think for themselves.


Touchy.

"treats players like they can think for themselves", I suppose thats why they've added, citadels, safety settings, simplified scanning, simplified map, and a simplified tactical overlay, as well as skill injectors. I know you don't want to see it, but CCP is milking eve for all its current players are worth with the endless introduction of microtransactions. What I want is not to turn eve into McDonalds, whatever that means, but to make it appeal to more than only the narrow niche that currently play it.

The reason eve has stuck around so long is because its playerbase has become so incredibly cut off from the outside world, that player feedback essentially means you getting your way. CSM for example and the heavy null representation. You are holding this company hostage whether you admit it or not. If you weren't you'd be interested in seeing eve grow and would try to do that in a way that doesn't hurt what you like about eve now.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#91 - 2017-03-29 05:34:23 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:


Touchy.

"treats players like they can think for themselves", I suppose thats why they've added, citadels, safety settings, simplified scanning, simplified map, and a simplified tactical overlay, as well as skill injectors. I know you don't want to see it, but CCP is milking eve for all its current players are worth with the endless introduction of microtransactions. What I want is not to turn eve into McDonalds, whatever that means, but to make it appeal to more than only the narrow niche that currently play it.


That part I highlighted is the important part. All the BS you mention like safety settings and simplified stuff. That was CCP trying to broaden the appeal of the game. That was CCP giving people like YOU what you said "the new players" needed.

What I and others have been telling you is that it doesn't work. CCP has failed to attract new players while systematically pissing off and pushing away those who actually liked it. That's the stupid part.

And make mo mistake, a dumbing down of EVE is what you want, you know, so that you can "relax" in the game....in the name of the children of course.


Quote:


The reason eve has stuck around so long is because its player base has become so incredibly cut off from the outside world, that player feedback essentially means you getting your way. CSM for example and the heavy null representation. You are holding this company hostage whether you admit it or not. If you weren't you'd be interested in seeing eve grow and would try to do that in a way that doesn't hurt what you like about eve now.


You don't have a clue of what you are talking about. And I don't have anything to do with the CSM. It's not nulls fault that high sec people can't take their heads out of the sand long enough to vote.

I'd like to see EVE grow. There has to be a lot of people out there that would appreciate a sci fi game that expects a player to have some common sense. What I do know is that it's just plum insane to think that the path to EVE growing is with people who can't even handle so much as a unfriendly glance from another player, and yet these are the people CCP have been trying to get to play EVE.
Gogela
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#92 - 2017-03-29 05:55:09 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Highsec was designed to be relatively safe not harsh and terrifying.

Have you been to Highsec in the last couple of years? I mean it takes only a hand full of brain cells to make sure you are almost 100% secure without having to worry about anyone. So you are either extremely exaggerating the situation to push your agenda for a full removal of ganking or you are just bad at EVE.

Also to suggest that Highsec is more dangerous or terrifying compared to other places where people completely stop undocking because they have a guy with a cloak in local is just laughable and you know it.

This is the truth.

/1.0highsecganker

Signatures should be used responsibly...

Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#93 - 2017-03-29 05:59:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mieyli
Jenn aSide wrote:
All the BS you mention like safety settings and simplified stuff. That was CCP trying to broaden the appeal of the game. That was CCP giving people like YOU what you said "the new players" needed.

What I and others have been telling you is that it doesn't work. CCP has failed to attract new players while systematically pissing off and pushing away those who actually liked it. That's the stupid part.

And make mo mistake, a dumbing down of EVE is what you want, you know, so that you can "relax" in the game....in the name of the children of course.


I was only pointing out that for being thinking game, theres plenty of attempts by CCP to remove the thinking. It also shows eve is not what you think it is, if its a thinking game why remove the thinking. I understand they are doing that trying to appeal to a broader market and doing it in that way IS dumb. Eve is a hard game, making some parts more accessible is not the issue. You're right, I do want a dumbing down of EvE, but this is the very important detail you have to read: I only want it in a small pocket, so you can safely ignore it, and so I'm not stuck there at all times. No change to you.

Jenn aSide wrote:
You don't have a clue of what you are talking about. And I don't have anything to do with the CSM. It's not nulls fault that high sec people can't take their heads out of the sand long enough to vote.


It was a general 'you', not intended at you specifically. It would be ridiculous to imply that you personally have CCPs ear of course. I am saying that eve is so cutoff from the outside, that the only feedback CCP get is from existing, likely long time, players. These players like eve as it is, so any changes CCP make have to keep them happy. Any criticism of what eve is, is met with "change to fit the game, not the other way".

Jenn aSide wrote:
I'd like to see EVE grow. There has to be a lot of people out there that would appreciate a sci fi game that expects a player to have some common sense. What I do know is that it's just plum insane to think that the path to EVE growing is with people who can't even handle so much as a unfriendly glance from another player, and yet these are the people CCP have been trying to get to play EVE.


Be honest, nobody cares about an 'unfriendly glance', but they may care about their ship (whatever the price tag) being destroyed if they are trying to unwind. CCP are trying to get these people playing eve, because unlike yourself CCP aren't happy to just sit with eve as it is and go "well, its perfect as it is so we're done here guys".

Oh by the way, drop the BS, it only makes you sound mad. Calling everything I write BS is a great way to completely avoid it.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Lara Agnon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2017-03-29 06:05:53 UTC
Just one more thing about the wardec thingy:

You are afraid you'll lose your precious ships while in war?
You don't want to lose any isk at all?
You still want to play the game during war?

Why not take that opportunity to prepare for the next war and train to fight back?
Create fits for pvp fleet, define roles for boost, rep, scouting, tackling, dps.
Buy the ships, fit them and make sure they are ready to go.

Now wait for your next wardec. Your corp mates whine and complain that they cannot undock anymore, the game mechanic sucks and so on.

Schedule PvP training sessions to get your corpies entertained. Because you don't want to lose isk meet at the test server.
Explain (or let someone with pvp experience) the pvp mechanics, how to move, rep, etc.
Create two teams who can fight each other in training sessions.

People will be entertained during the wardec, your corp will be prepared to fight next time, and i am pretty sure many will actually enjoy it.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#95 - 2017-03-29 06:09:59 UTC
Lara Agnon wrote:
Just one more thing about the wardec thingy:

You are afraid you'll lose your precious ships while in war?
You don't want to lose any isk at all?
You still want to play the game during war?

Why not take that opportunity to prepare for the next war and train to fight back?

They won't prepare to fight because while some people just want to watch the world burn, others just want to cry about it.

This thread is a perfect example. Players, playing perfectly within the rules of the game get labelled as bullies, while the criers are too lazy to even just drop Corp back to an NPC Corp.

How is that sort of mentality going to take any opportunity if they can't even take the one that makes them immune to wardecs all together?

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#96 - 2017-03-29 06:50:07 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Zarek Kree wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
GTFO is not a good business incentive for CCP. Such elitist meme is bullying which is why Eve has a toxic community.


GTFO then. Lol


No u. Are you enjoying holding a game company hostage and watching them slowly starve to death?



Expecting a game company to stick to the spirit of the game they made rather than turn it into the McDonalds/Justin Bieber friendly BS folks like you want is not "holding a game company hostage".

It's frankly hoping that said game company stops selling out and maintains one of the very few MMOs left that treats players like they can think for themselves.

the whole gtfo thing usually only comes out when someone comes in complaining about core aspects of eve. It is better that the core aspects remain along with the integrity of the game rather than pander to people who are only half interested. If I went on some other game's forums and said I hated everything about it and wanted to change it to whatever I want, I think GTFO is a perfectly valid response. We play this game and presumably we mostly like it the way it is.

Head over to new citizens Q&A sometime, every player that posts saying they are new and need help with something get it. Eve has many problems and even more solutions. Us players love offering our solutions to help others get through their problems. And I don't know if you've ever been to fanfest or an evemeet, but every time I've been everyone has been awesome. beers and high fives all around. Everyone is blue in RL.

now I'll admit freely and have in the past that many parts of the wardec system are just broken, however there is no good easy way to fix it either. pretty much anything I've ever seen proposed is easily abused. Risk free isn't a good thing, however mitigated risks work with the system of eve, and there are many ways to mitigate risk. By most definitions I'm a giant freaking carebear and yet no one bothers me. Why? because I've learned to mitigate the risks. Also I don't mind a war, my usual day to day operations don't require me to undock. and if I want to undock it is a perfectly good excuse to go run around in low/null/wh space for a week.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
Somethin Awfull Forums
#97 - 2017-03-29 07:13:41 UTC
Is it good for EVE that 90% of its potential will never be realized because of PvP mechanics that have no integrity buffer? No and I'm a decade old carebear of the extreme, having bitched about bump mechanics, overkill alpha strategies and all maner of poor PvP that puts the run to people. I don't support the sales that amplify 'real cost loss' and I don't see the logic in maligning people who build and fall but here it is in a nutshell. EVE Online has never sold itself as anything but a dog eat dog, blood war of a video game. All too often MMO's will solicit as PvE and let PvP rule and ruin their game. EVE and CCP for better or worse are living by the sword, dying by the sword. Adapt or die.
Kaely Tanniss
Black Hydra Consortium.
#98 - 2017-03-29 07:15:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaely Tanniss
OP..Tldr.. if the way Eve is played is not what you like..why are you playing it?

Would you buy season tickets to hockey if you thought it was too violent? Of course not. Find a game that suits your style and stop whining about it. Quit expecting the world to change for you and either accept what it is or go elsewhere. There are plenty of tame games out there. Stop trying to make people believe it's something more than your own want for reward without risk. To come here and expect the game to change for you is not only selfish, but just plain ridiculous. We pay for the game too..the difference is, we know what eve is, accept it, and embrace it. If you can't accept it..if it's not the kind of play style you like..take your money and your tears elsewhere. Roll

This is obviously not the "safe place" your looking for....

If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#99 - 2017-03-29 07:22:00 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Touchy.

"treats players like they can think for themselves", I suppose thats why they've added, citadels, safety settings, simplified scanning, simplified map, and a simplified tactical overlay, as well as skill injectors. I know you don't want to see it, but CCP is milking eve for all its current players are worth with the endless introduction of microtransactions. What I want is not to turn eve into McDonalds, whatever that means, but to make it appeal to more than only the narrow niche that currently play it.

The reason eve has stuck around so long is because its playerbase has become so incredibly cut off from the outside world, that player feedback essentially means you getting your way. CSM for example and the heavy null representation. You are holding this company hostage whether you admit it or not. If you weren't you'd be interested in seeing eve grow and would try to do that in a way that doesn't hurt what you like about eve now.

I'm not sure I buy any of that. Citadels are more risk than the old system of npc stations and outposts, that can't be blown up. Asset safety can make them more or less risky than POS. I'll admit I never used the pos system much as it annoyed me to no end. I will say I'm not sure I like the vulnerability system with citadels, seems like it just takes too long to blow em up. Are the scanning, map, and tactical overlay simplified or just cosmetically different? I don't consider streamlining the UI to be dumbing things down. Skill injectors are just another take on the character market, I like it a lot better as I can tailor the pilots, if it wasn't around I probably would have just used MCT to learn the skills the good old way.

if you have examples of how we are "holding the company hostage" I'm all ears. Seems CCP goes and does what they want most of the time regardless of player feed back. seems they shot themselves in the foot a few times along the way.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Black Pedro
Mine.
#100 - 2017-03-29 08:03:31 UTC
Uniraver Avaniel wrote:
I totally agree with you.
That mechanic needs to be reworked.

When first starting to play I put up a corp for me and my brother in highsec,
within a month we got a wardec that lasted for what felt like an eternity.

We didn't loose a single ship or died to a single gank, but we just could not play the way we wanted anymore, running missions and mining, so we both quit for a good few years.

Yes, that's lost revenue.



What's noticeable from the mostly one-sided point of view in these replies it's obvious that only a certain group of players are active in this thread..
This is however not the consensus among players, so don't give up!
All you and your brother had to do was click once each and the war would go away and you could go back to mining and missioning in relative safety. Why would you sit in a station for a week or more if you didn't want to fight?

It's a serious question. CCP has provided a 100% effective and instant way to get out of wars. Why don't new players just use that instead of whining about it on the forums or quitting the game? Is it just that new players don't understand the mechanics? Or have the been trained to view corps as purely a social entity from other MMOs rather than the competitive 'team' they are in Eve Online? Is this something either stricter controls on corp creation, or better education can fix to keep players in the game?

But more fundamentally, the reality is that Eve online will never let you "play the way you want" in isolation from the other players. It is a competitive PvP sandbox game for crying out loud. You are always going to be in competition with other players who may want the resources you are after or the stuff that you have. The sooner players realize this, and how this vulnerability to other players contributes to creating our shared virtual universe and economy, the better. The ones that refuse to accept that and demand a "safe space" where they can do their thing? Well they are the ones we tell to HTFU or GTFO. Why should CCP or the players who love Eve tolerate calls from these selfish players to break the core ideas of the game design to suit their personal whims?

CCP has stuck to their guns for almost 14 years now and isn't going to suddenly change now. Aze asked CCP Fozzie last week about wars on the Talking in Stations after-chat and it was clear from his answer that wars are nowhere near being on anyone's agenda to work on meaning we will have to live with them as is for several years more at least. But the fact is they are largely working fine, and while I have issues with a lack of conflict drivers to give meaning and objectives to wars, the idea that one group of players can interact and disrupt another group of players (thus preventing them from "playing how they want") is completely intended and will be present in any future war revamp.

Bullying. Meh. Let's not devalue the term by applying it to novice players in a PvP video game, or players that are just playing the wrong video game. There is a 'quit' button in the Eve client and a power button on every PC running the game. Just use them if you consider yourself being "bullied" and those supposed bullies will magically disappear unlike for victims of real-life bullying.