These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123Next page
 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

Author
Gonada
Fixers Corporation
Pillars of Liberty
#21 - 2012-06-06 21:35:41 UTC
Lady Spank wrote:
Ditra Vorthran
Security Status 0.0

State War Academy [SWA]
Member for 11 months, 21 days

You deserve no respect. Post with your main or GTFO.



Ill post with my main arswipe, 2003 char , OP is telling it like it is, you gtfo.

Sandbox means you can do whatever you want. Period.
Tallon Sylph
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2012-06-06 21:37:55 UTC
TLDR, I assume you're mad about something though.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#23 - 2012-06-06 21:39:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Gonada wrote:
Sandbox means you can do whatever you want.
No. It means everyone can do what they want, which will include things you do not want them to do (to you) and which will keep you from doing what you want. Or, to use my new favourite Malcanis quote: sandbox doesn't mean you can succeed at everything you attempt; it means you can attempt anything you want to succeed at.


You should probably note that the OP never even mentioned the word…
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#24 - 2012-06-06 21:42:38 UTC
Nicely put OP.

Though I guess most of those who would benefit most from reading it stopped at about the second paragraph Smile
Svarek
#25 - 2012-06-06 21:44:23 UTC
This is humorously like real life, where the foundations of society always get looked down upon and trod upon.
And yet those high and mighties above them seem to entirely forget where everything they use comes from - the despised classes.

Yes, there's a lot of Carebear hulk miners. Yes, a lot of those miners are unreasonable. And yes, nobody really likes them.
But they're the minority of miners, I think, and the ones we just love to hate.

BUT-

Players too often, I think, make the mistake of hating and looking down on ALL miners instead of realizing that the ones they hate are the people who never got into Eve past the first few industrial tutorials, and simply got bigger ships after that point. They still play the game in a very simplistic way, and their attitudes don't fit into the universe. They're still producers.

More importantly, all miners are producers. They have a vital, vital role in the Eve universe, and it boggles my mind how some people can apparently forget it, and bite the hand that feeds them. Miners always have my respect until they lose it, I think, even if they're the ones at the wrong end of my guns.

Whoops.

Cavel Avada
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2012-06-06 21:51:13 UTC
Svarek wrote:
This is humorously like real life, where the foundations of society always get looked down upon and trod upon.
And yet those high and mighties above them seem to entirely forget where everything they use comes from - the despised classes.

Yes, there's a lot of Carebear hulk miners. Yes, a lot of those miners are unreasonable. And yes, nobody really likes them.
But they're the minority of miners, I think, and the ones we just love to hate.

BUT-

Players too often, I think, make the mistake of hating and looking down on ALL miners instead of realizing that the ones they hate are the people who never got into Eve past the first few industrial tutorials, and simply got bigger ships after that point. They still play the game in a very simplistic way, and their attitudes don't fit into the universe. They're still producers.

More importantly, all miners are producers. They have a vital, vital role in the Eve universe, and it boggles my mind how some people can apparently forget it, and bite the hand that feeds them. Miners always have my respect until they lose it, I think, even if they're the ones at the wrong end of my guns.


Well said. The other big mistake people seem to make is trying to lump all miners together because of the comments/actions of a few on the forums. There are quite a few players who never go near the forums.
Wingmate
Perkone
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-06-06 21:54:50 UTC
well said, OP.

i think it's worth reinforcing one of his points. i think it's ridiculous that people consider PvP to be the endgame, and that if you're not interested in PvP, you're a noob/moron/worthless/ruining the game. i'm one of those people that just doesn't enjoy PvP as much as other things in this game, and so i don't seek it out. now, i live in null, so i still shoot stuff from time to time - usually in defense of others in my alliance - but i don't go roaming 20j away looking for something to kill.

do i get looked down upon by members of my corp? sure. do those same members know who to talk to when they need to make isk to finance their pretty explosions? sure. everyone's got a different focus, and you can excel at those different parts of the game without being some super-duper PvP pilot.

it really does boil down to respect. people say it needs to be earned, and that's true - EvE is the last place to look for a handout (although if you think differently, i've got loads of mex i am liquidating at rock-bottom prices!). there's a difference between saying that people need to earning respect, however, and just automatically assuming you're better than everyone else because they don't follow your profession. there's a difference between treating someone neutrally and treating them like metal scraps. i feel that most pilots in eve approach someone with the opinion that they're worthless, and wait for them to rise up to their 'level'. i've found that it's better to approach them as neutral, and let them derp their way down to obscurity or rise above the muck.

i make spreadsheets for pretty cheap. contact me for more info.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=197433

Metal Icarus
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#28 - 2012-06-06 22:01:20 UTC
Lady Spank wrote:
Ditra Vorthran
Security Status 0.0

State War Academy [SWA]
Member for 11 months, 21 days

You deserve no respect. Post with your main or GTFO.


So, you think earning respect from your enemies means you can demand respect from everyone else?

This coming from someone whose alliance sold the tournament last year?

Holy crap your ego is MASSIVE, it might be leaking a little bull-****. You should fix that.

I agree with OP. Miners mine so I dont have to!
Gonada
Fixers Corporation
Pillars of Liberty
#29 - 2012-06-06 22:17:39 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Gonada wrote:
Sandbox means you can do whatever you want.
No. It means everyone can do what they want, which will include things you do not want them to do (to you) and which will keep you from doing what you want. Or, to use my new favourite Malcanis quote: sandbox doesn't mean you can succeed at everything you attempt; it means you can attempt anything you want to succeed at.


You should probably note that the OP never even mentioned the word…



Your just reiterating what I said, I agree, totally
Ditra Vorthran
Caldari Imports and Exports
#30 - 2012-06-06 22:21:41 UTC
James 315 wrote:
OK, I'll play along. Do you agree with all of the following?

1. Hulks should not be buffed in any way, shape or form.
2. Suicide ganking should not be nerfed again.
3. Wardecs, awoxing, can-flipping, and every other form of highsec PvP should not be nerfed again.
4. Highsec mining should not be buffed again.

If you disagree with any of the above, you are a carebear, and your whole post is moot because you suffer from the "one more nerf" syndrome which effectively means you do, in fact, want an invulnerable mining ship, etc.

If you agree with all of the above points, good for you. It's the carebears who give the other 0.0000001% of highsec miners a bad name. Smile


Wow, attention from *the* James 315 himself. :)

Hmm...unfortunately your questions are a bit more complex than a simple agree/disagree can cover, but I'll do my best to answer without being too wordy.

I agree to what you're saying, since the problems are more with the underlying mechanics of the game itself.

In point #1, I agree because it's not a matter of how 'buffed' Hulks are. The strength of a Hulk (or lack thereof) is not the problem. It has more to do with the underlying mechanics of mining, locations of asteroid belts, and so on.

As for point 2, I agree, as there's nothing really wrong with the suicide ganking mechanic as it stands.

For #3, that's way to complex a question to answer with an agree/disagree.

4. I guess it depends on what you define as a buff. Again this issue is much more complicated and subjective than an agree/disagree. Also, what I might call a change to make mining more interesting, you might interpret as a buff.

"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#31 - 2012-06-06 22:22:56 UTC
Gonada wrote:
Your just reiterating what I said, I agree, totally
What you said and what I said differs on a few critical points. You might have meant the same, but it didn't quite come out that way.

Also, the OP isn't quite telling it like it is for much the same reason.
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#32 - 2012-06-06 22:28:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Tippia wrote:
Gonada wrote:
Sandbox means you can do whatever you want.
No. It means everyone can do what they want, which will include things you do not want them to do (to you) and which will keep you from doing what you want. Or, to use my new favourite Malcanis quote: sandbox doesn't mean you can succeed at everything you attempt; it means you can attempt anything you want to succeed at.

You should probably note that the OP never even mentioned the word…


And two new favorite quotes for me! Lol

The OP is a good example of a player that has seen a lot of different aspects of EVE, but hasn't been around long enough to see it change (or not change at all in other ways). Without historical perspective it's much harder to understand the full impact of mechanics and gameplay, leading to ridiculous claims like 'suicide-gankers will halt the production of ships by chasing away all miners'.

Seriously, the only way in EVE to make players stop mining, is if CCP removes all asteroids from the game. Roll
Three guesses what the 'PvP-ers' in null are currently making billions of ISK with: A, B, C

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!

Grumpymunky
Monkey Steals The Peach
#33 - 2012-06-06 22:33:38 UTC
Upset about something posted on GD?

Looking for respect from strangers over the internet? What?

Post with your monkey.

Thread locked due to lack of pants.

Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#34 - 2012-06-06 22:41:08 UTC
Grumpymunky wrote:
Upset about something posted on GD?

Looking for respect from strangers over the internet? What?


As opposed to people looking to disrespect people over the internet.
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#35 - 2012-06-06 22:52:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
James 315 wrote:
OK, I'll play along. Do you agree with all of the following?

1. Hulks should not be buffed in any way, shape or form.
2. Suicide ganking should not be nerfed again.
3. Wardecs, awoxing, can-flipping, and every other form of highsec PvP should not be nerfed again.
4. Highsec mining should not be buffed again.

If you disagree with any of the above, you are a carebear, and your whole post is moot because you suffer from the "one more nerf" syndrome which effectively means you do, in fact, want an invulnerable mining ship, etc.

If you agree with all of the above points, good for you. It's the carebears who give the other 0.0000001% of highsec miners a bad name. Smile


Wow, attention from *the* James 315 himself. :)

Hmm...unfortunately your questions are a bit more complex than a simple agree/disagree can cover, but I'll do my best to answer without being too wordy.

I agree to what you're saying, since the problems are more with the underlying mechanics of the game itself.

In point #1, I agree because it's not a matter of how 'buffed' Hulks are. The strength of a Hulk (or lack thereof) is not the problem. It has more to do with the underlying mechanics of mining, locations of asteroid belts, and so on.

As for point 2, I agree, as there's nothing really wrong with the suicide ganking mechanic as it stands.

For #3, that's way to complex a question to answer with an agree/disagree.

4. I guess it depends on what you define as a buff. Again this issue is much more complicated and subjective than an agree/disagree. Also, what I might call a change to make mining more interesting, you might interpret as a buff.


#1 I'm pretty sure James means simply buffing the yield:tank ratio. It certainly is what most carebear miners are whining about when they come with 300M ISK ship-arguments. Underlying mining-mechanics have little to do with this.

#2 As it stands? Funny thing about suicide-ganking is that it simply forces the players to adapt , which the smart ones always do, quickly establishing a new equilibrium. As such it's never truly unbalanced.

#3 No it's not. He's simply asking your opinion about non-consensual combat and shenanigans it high-sec.

#4 This is even simpler: mining is all about profit (with gankers being a calculated risk). Boosting high-sec mining is comparing this profit with low and null-sec (and WH for the truly desperate). The fact that there are almost no miners in low-sec should make this a no-brainer.

edit: when people talk about adding new mechanics for an EVE-profession, they usually mean 'CCP give us a way to make more money in a fun way' , while they should be asking for a way to have more fun while still making some money.

Ganking cuts in mining profits, when you're asking for new mechanics to deal with this, you're basically asking for #1.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!

0ccupy 4-4
Doomheim
#36 - 2012-06-06 23:04:10 UTC
ITT: OP puts together a good post pretty much saying not all miners are clueless bot-like creatures. Buttmad nerds come out of woodwork and say that respect is earned in this video game (grr) over and over and talk about sandboxes.
Ditra Vorthran
Caldari Imports and Exports
#37 - 2012-06-06 23:07:43 UTC
Tobiaz wrote:

#1 I'm pretty sure James means simply buffing the yield:tank ratio. It certainly is what most carebear miners are whining about when they come with 300M ISK ship-arguments. Underlying mining-mechanics have little to do with this.

#2 As it stands? Funny thing about suicide-ganking is that it simply forces the players to adapt , which the smart ones always do, quickly establishing a new equilibrium. As such it's never truly unbalanced.

#3 No it's not. He's simply asking your opinion about non-consensual combat and shenanigans it high-sec.

#4 This is even simpler: mining is all about profit (with gankers being a calculated risk). Boosting high-sec mining is comparing this profit with low and null-sec (and WH for the truly desperate). The fact that there are almost no miners in low-sec should make this a no-brainer.


Allright, I'll go with those definitions:

1. No, the Hulk doesn't need to be changed. It wouldn't make any difference.

3. Again, a very complex question, but looking at it conceptually, no. Non-consensual combat (and related activity) should be allowed in High Sec. Hell, it *needs* to be there. Otherwise Eve High Sec becomes the Elwynn Forest in space.

4. Really that's a question of "Where is it more profitable to mine." I feel that mining in 0.0 really needs a buff. I spent some time in 0.0 and by and large the mining there is *terrible*, aside from a few choice ores. Gnesis and Spoduman? Are you serious? People mine in High Sec because it's 'safer,' easier (logistically), and therefore, more profitable overall. Toss in the High Sec ore vs. 0.0/Low Sec ore yields, and yes, mining is heavily balanced in the favor of High Sec.

This is less than a question of price, which is determined by the player, something that CCP ultimately has no control over, and more a question of value added to the game. 0.0/low sec ores currently add little value relative to their High Sec counterparts. This must change if 0.0/Low Sec mining is to be a large scale viable alternative to High Sec mining.

"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus

Shaampoo
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2012-06-06 23:13:32 UTC
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
There have been a lot of “Miners don’t belong in EvE” posts
Who ever said that is either a troll on a idiot

I pvp fairly regularly and have kill one or two hulks in hi sec ( failed more often than that )

But miners are needed for miners and stuff

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#39 - 2012-06-06 23:20:59 UTC
Miners belong in eve, they just also must be scourged relentlessly by their betters as well, made to realize the depths of their inferiority and made to understand their opinions on the rest of the game are wrong.

In other words, respect is the last thing you should give to a miner. One does not respect plankton, after all, no matter how much sea life relies on it in one way or another.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2012-06-06 23:24:23 UTC
I agree with everything the OP said. It's not a bad post.


I also agree with this:

James 315 wrote:
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
In conclusion, only ask for one thing. Not a ‘safe’ Eve, nor an invulnerable mining ship. Not even faster CONCORD response times or that ‘Death Ray’ that was bandied about at Fanfest.

All I want is respect. Respect for my role, respect for the value I bring to EvE.

OK, I'll play along. Do you agree with all of the following?

1. Hulks should not be buffed in any way, shape or form.
2. Suicide ganking should not be nerfed again.
3. Wardecs, awoxing, can-flipping, and every other form of highsec PvP should not be nerfed again.
4. Highsec mining should not be buffed again.

If you disagree with any of the above, you are a carebear, and your whole post is moot because you suffer from the "one more nerf" syndrome which effectively means you do, in fact, want an invulnerable mining ship, etc.

If you agree with all of the above points, good for you. It's the carebears who give the other 0.0000001% of highsec miners a bad name. Smile



Both good reads.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement

Previous page123Next page