These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

The perfect solution to satisfy PVP and Carebears
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#21 - 2012-06-01 01:16:55 UTC
Senarian Tyme wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Jayrendo Karr wrote:

Says the npc corp alt, ps where you gonna get your ships, the goons gonna just hand them out for free like the saviors they are?


From the quadrillions of stockpiled minerals already in game or the thousands of bot miners, of course.


Just wait until CCP enables a halflife on stored minerals to encourage their use or disposal.


Have you secret knowledge of this. Has this decision been released by CCP somewhere? Why is this the first time I am hearing about the mineral half-life nerf?

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Ituhata Saken
Killboard Padding Services
#22 - 2012-06-01 01:19:48 UTC
Price Check Aisle3 wrote:
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
Says the npc corp alt, ps where you gonna get your ships, the goons gonna just hand them out for free like the saviors they are?

Educate yourself:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/james315/killbobby.avi

James 315 is a god damned hero.


Not sure what makes him a hero but I am definitely left wondering why he bothers targeting in a smartbombing BS.

So close...
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2012-06-01 01:19:50 UTC
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#24 - 2012-06-01 01:26:46 UTC
Abel Merkabah wrote:
I have been reading the forums for the past few days, and I can't help notice all the discussion on Hulkaggedon, ganking, etc...

Well I've solved the problem. Apologies if someone else already posted this.

I'm using carebear definition of PvE below, meaning mining, trading, etc are PvE, not PvP; I personally believe everything but mission running is PvP.

From my understanding, carebears want to be left alone to pursue their own game play...not get ganked, just mine away without being bothered. They want to do PvE without having to participate in PvP...

So here is the solution:

No more ganking, Hi-Security is 100% safe. PvE can go on without being bothered by those pesky PvPers.
But wait, what about the PvPers? If carebears don't have to participate in PvP, then PvPers shouldn't have to particpate in PvE...so I propose the balance is PvPers are given ISK, for no work, equivalent to the average PvE income, everyday. It's only fair, if carebears shouldn't have to particpate in PvP, then PvPers shouldn't have to participate in PvE.

Bam! Problem solved!

/end horrible idea

See it sounds absolutely absurd when you approach it from the other direction...HTFU whiners...


Many alliance leaders got rich on your principal idea.

Milk the carebears to support PvP Ops. Then when they have an 8 figure corp wallet, start an un-winnable war, wait for the disband to happen, take the money and run.

For CCP to do what you suggest? They saw fit to carve up the 500 mill a year people made in passive from datacores. Don't expect them to give anyone passive income.
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-06-01 01:29:37 UTC
Skydell wrote:
Abel Merkabah wrote:
I have been reading the forums for the past few days, and I can't help notice all the discussion on Hulkaggedon, ganking, etc...

Well I've solved the problem. Apologies if someone else already posted this.

I'm using carebear definition of PvE below, meaning mining, trading, etc are PvE, not PvP; I personally believe everything but mission running is PvP.

From my understanding, carebears want to be left alone to pursue their own game play...not get ganked, just mine away without being bothered. They want to do PvE without having to participate in PvP...

So here is the solution:

No more ganking, Hi-Security is 100% safe. PvE can go on without being bothered by those pesky PvPers.
But wait, what about the PvPers? If carebears don't have to participate in PvP, then PvPers shouldn't have to particpate in PvE...so I propose the balance is PvPers are given ISK, for no work, equivalent to the average PvE income, everyday. It's only fair, if carebears shouldn't have to particpate in PvP, then PvPers shouldn't have to participate in PvE.

Bam! Problem solved!

/end horrible idea

See it sounds absolutely absurd when you approach it from the other direction...HTFU whiners...


Many alliance leaders got rich on your principal idea.

Milk the carebears to support PvP Ops. Then when they have an 8 figure corp wallet, start an un-winnable war, wait for the disband to happen, take the money and run.

For CCP to do what you suggest? They saw fit to carve up the 500 mill a year people made in passive from datacores. Don't expect them to give anyone passive income.


I honestly think it is a horrible idea.

I was simply trying to point out the hypocracy of carebears that want to PvE with no PvP influence in EVE. When you try to make the same argument from a PvP perspective (PvP with no PvE), it illustrates how wrong that style of thought is in EVE.

James315 for CSM 8!
oldbutfeelingyoung
Perkone
Caldari State
#26 - 2012-06-01 02:13:17 UTC
There is no solution for this problem
there are always those idiots ,who think their gameplay is the way to do it.
You don,t play this game their way ,they start whining like little childern about risk and isk

R.S.I2014
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#27 - 2012-06-01 02:37:29 UTC
Abel Merkabah wrote:
I was simply trying to point out the hypocracy of carebears that want to PvE with no PvP influence in EVE. When you try to make the same argument from a PvP perspective (PvP with no PvE), it illustrates how wrong that style of thought is in EVE.


You would think so but it fails. Not because of your efforts to illustrate this but because the people towards whom it is directed are hellbent on securing the safety they believe to be their entitlement. They do not understand that they are entitled to play the game. That is what their sub fee pays for and that really is it. That is where the entitlement ends and defending yourself and your assets begins.

So many of the "Hulkageddon forever? WTF?" threads contain suggestions on how to avoid being ganked while mining but instead of reflecting on those suggestions and possibly getting it sorted in their heads that they have options, they wildly claim that no one has any right to tell them how to play the game.

Frankly, I am tired of trading words with them. Not because I hate them but because their attitude is to sub to a game that does not have the game mechanics that they desire so they clamor for changes to the game. If something is broken or not working as intended then by all means post something identifying the issue. If you have a suggestion, post it in F&I. But if your post amounts to "Nerf ganking!" or "Buff my Hulk" because you feel entitled to be safe then you are going to be cut up by people who pay for the game because it is the way it is and just think you are selfish and self-centered.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
SmilingVagrant
Doomheim
#28 - 2012-06-01 02:48:50 UTC
Large Marg wrote:
Nice but it totally defeats what a sandbox mmo is.

Might as well have 2 Eve servers. When you login you can pick PVP which is the existing server or PVE what is safe all the way in to 0.0


Ugh eve trammel. Gross.
Barbelo Valentinian
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-06-01 03:54:07 UTC
Yeah both PvP-ers and PvE-ers alike have to eat a little bit of **** wrt the fact that they have to participate some in the style of play they prefer less.

I'd just caution against taking things too far either way. You ought not to be playing the game if a) you can't handle a little lore and participate with at least grudging enthusiasm in the universe the developers have set up, or b) you can't handle being ganked now and then by the riff-raff.

If you lose the PvE, the persistent world the developers have invented for you as the playground, then what you're talking about is veering away from being an MMORPG, and turning into something more like a chat lobby with instant PvP action. But without PvP the game that's left, just the sheer PvE mechanics of it, is ultimately pretty dull (it could be turned into a great PvE game, but it would need a lot more attention to detail and things to do).
stoicfaux
#30 - 2012-06-01 05:47:36 UTC
Bah, the only way to get carebears and PvP'ers to live together is to wait for Planetside 2 to come out. 'Free' (i.e. mostly consequence free) death penalties in a PvP environment is the only real answer.

Otherwise you're stuck playing Eve where there's more going on than mindless zerging.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#31 - 2012-06-01 07:24:37 UTC
James 315 wrote:
Better idea: Highsec miners get blown up until they find another way to make isk.

Everyone's happy.



Such a troll, how much does Mittani put in your pocket to push his propaganda ?

Tal

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-06-01 07:50:17 UTC
James 315 wrote:
Better idea: Highsec miners get blown up until they find another way to make isk.

Everyone's happy.


Even better idea: You stop pushing how YOU think everyone should be playing in the sandbox on people.

You think everyone should be building a sandcastle for you to kick down. Then cry to mommy when under that sandcastle was a steel fire hydrant you stubbed your toe on. Scream that I should not be allowed to have that big ol mean piece of metal for a foundation.

How about you stop telling others how they should be playing in the sandbox. If they don't want to talk to the kid next to them, fine. If they decide that building a snake filled pit instead of a sandcastle is their thing, fine.

Who the hell are you to tell them, me or anyone else what they should be doing in the sandbox?! X
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#33 - 2012-06-01 08:14:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Samillian
Marlona Sky wrote:
Even better idea: You stop pushing how YOU think everyone should be playing in the sandbox on people.

You think everyone should be building a sandcastle for you to kick down. Then cry to mommy when under that sandcastle was a steel fire hydrant you stubbed your toe on. Scream that I should not be allowed to have that big ol mean piece of metal for a foundation.

How about you stop telling others how they should be playing in the sandbox. If they don't want to talk to the kid next to them, fine. If they decide that building a snake filled pit instead of a sandcastle is their thing, fine.

Who the hell are you to tell them, me or anyone else what they should be doing in the sandbox?! X


Not empty quoting.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law
pussnheels
Viziam
#34 - 2012-06-01 09:12:02 UTC
If you really want a balanced idea that will satisfy most people in both camps , then look at the way how resources are gathered

Moon goo, setting up a installation and reaction looks complicated for a new player but is pretty straight forward and once you got your chain running all one need to do is fuel the pos and empty the storage once a week

Pi commodities one need to invest some time every day to keep your production efficient as possible , depending on how large your production is from15. Minutes to a hour each day on average

Mineral mining , hours upon hours of watching your strip miners chew rocks and listening to some bad jokes of your corpmates

So why not change the mining of low end minerals into something pi like, whilenerfing the current highsec belts dramaticly
Don t do away with exhumers and other i dustrial ships people will still need them in WH and gravsites for the high end minerals
And while you could still use them in belts. Everything bigger than a retriver will be very inefficient

This will hopefully in theory give people the opportunity to go and do something else than mining alone

This is just a idea and all theory so don t flame me
Just think we can discuss this more constructive than flaming each other


I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire
Previous page12