These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Eve learning curve and people complaining of dumbing down
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-08-07 11:52:35 UTC
Roime wrote:
I don't mind a safer hisec.

But I hate the people it attracts.

What was this thread about?



lmfao Lol
Pipa Porto
#42 - 2012-08-07 11:53:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
Quote:
You're going to have to pull out some sources for this assertion, I'm afraid.


I don't think we need to have sources to make this assertion, its not that hard to make the connection. It is a fact that there isn't a single modern MMO on todays market that has full loot full PvP throughout the game world and managed to be successful nore has there ever been one in the past. They are all low population failures. All good PvP MMO's have safe areas where the economy can function to attract economic minded players who generally hate PvP.

Games that have been successful like Ultima Online for example, where successful for this very reason. Good PvP backed by a population of economic minded players surviving in safe areas feeding the population of PvPer players.


EVE's anything but a low population game.
Now that SWOTOR's headed to F2P, EVE's the second biggest paid Western MMO after WOW.
Including SWOTOR, it's 3rd. It's the 6th Largest MMO worldwide (including Korean MMOs and FTP).

(It's also got a really weird population curve for an MMO. A steady march upward instead of a strong peak and rapid crash.)

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2012-08-07 11:56:06 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Now that SWOTOR's headed to F2P, EVE's the second biggest paid Western MMO after WOW.


Even WoW isn't a fully "paid" MMO anymore.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2012-08-07 12:01:18 UTC
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
I don't think we need to have sources to make this assertion, its not that hard to make the connection. It is a fact that there isn't a single modern MMO on todays market that has full loot full PvP throughout the game world and managed to be successful nore has there ever been one in the past. They are all low population failures. All good PvP MMO's have safe areas where the economy can function to attract economic minded players who generally hate PvP.

Games that have been successful like Ultima Online for example, where successful for this very reason. Good PvP backed by a population of economic minded players surviving in safe areas feeding the population of PvPer players.


EVE has been a "full loot full PvP" game since 2003, with hisec only having a "buffer" that provides a reasonable level of safety. Since 2009, EVE also has had far more subscribers than UO ever had, even at its peak, and EVE has never experienced a significant decline in subs.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#45 - 2012-08-07 12:03:15 UTC
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
No I mean Curve.. as in, redirect it a bit, but not eliminate it.
Yeah, they're not doing that either.

Quote:
I don't think we need to have sources to make this assertion
Yes you do, otherwise I am free to dismiss them out of hand, call them nonsensical, and be right.

So: do you have any sources to suggest anything even remotely like what you're claiming, or are you just making it up?

Quote:
All good PvP MMO's have safe areas where the economy can function to attract economic minded players who generally hate PvP.
…except in EVE, that design wouldn't work because the economy is entirely PvP-based and is, itself, 100% PvP. Therefore, EVE does not feature any such safe areas: because it would make the game cease up and stop working. Economic-minded people instead choose to make mint of the chaos around them and to employ strategies to keep themselves safe in that environment. It's not the game that keeps them safe — it's their own chose strategies and tactics.

Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
For instance, let's assume we have a a miner with an armed escort in an asteroid belt. Two catalysts land close nearby, obviously ready to strike at the miner. What can his armed escort do?
Pre-lock the targets, launch ECM drones, close to optimal range
Sarik Olecar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2012-08-07 12:10:25 UTC
Another day on the forums, another tearsunami from the nullbears...

It's a good day to be alive.

Big smile

Hows my posting? Call 1-800-747-7633 to leave feedback.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#47 - 2012-08-07 12:13:57 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Now that SWOTOR's headed to F2P, EVE's the second biggest paid Western MMO after WOW.

Even WoW isn't a fully "paid" MMO anymore.

Eh, what did WoW do now...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Pipa Porto
#48 - 2012-08-07 12:14:37 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Now that SWOTOR's headed to F2P, EVE's the second biggest paid Western MMO after WOW.


Even WoW isn't a fully "paid" MMO anymore.


Eh, I think the F2P restrictions are harsh enough that we can compare it to running endless 14d trials.
"Unable to trade via the Auction House, mailbox, or player-to-player."

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#49 - 2012-08-07 12:17:37 UTC
Caitlyn Tufy wrote:

Both things imo point to one nasty conclusion - that waging a war in high sec is annoying. You can limit yourself to ganks, but again, due to CONCORD mechanics, you can't really act on suspicion. For instance, let's assume we have a a miner with an armed escort in an asteroid belt. Two catalysts land close nearby, obviously ready to strike at the miner. What can his armed escort do? Nothing at all, unless they want to lose ships to CONCORD, which also means waiving the insurance. In turn, the only thing the miner can do is run, unless he's tanked enough to survive those two catalysts.


Lock the Catalysts, and as soon as they go GCC, BLAP them with your Nadoes. They'll die to 2 volleys of 650mm AC fire.

Quote:
Or hauling goods. We scout out a gate camp, obviously ready to suicide gank our transport as soon as we come through the gate. In low sec, you'll jump in 20 drakes or whatever, clear out the camp and move on. In high sec? Nope, you're going the long way around and better hope the second gate's not camped.


Dock up and split your cargo to unprofitable levels and make multiple trips past the dangerous nest.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
#50 - 2012-08-07 12:18:07 UTC
High Sec is a safe zone. Its not perfectly safe but its a safe zone, and because it is a safe zone is EXACTLY why High Sec is the most populated area. Go into Eve right now, click on statistics in the star map and look at pilots in the game. 90% of them are in high sec at all times 24/7 365 days a year. There is your statistic. You think they would gather there if High Sec wasn't safe?

Sure their is suicide ganking but its obviously not intended to work as it does today which is exactly why Crimewatch is being changed... aka to make High Sec safer.

This will ultimatly change very little in the game other than severly curve suicide ganking simply because of how the criminal flagging system will work. Changes like those to barges are also indicitive of making both high sec safer for a certain play style.

Pretty much everything CCP is doing right now is a move to make High Sec safer, the reason is obvious to me. As long as High Sec is safe, more people will play this game.

Ultimatly this changes nothing for Null Sec alliances and Sov warfare. Ther wars, their politics and their PvP is unchanged.

Low Sec needs work and I will attest to that, but this is a failure of CCP to meet its vision of Risk Vs. Reward in the game. I think they can fix this and in time I believe they will.

Personally I think CrimeWatch 2.0 is the smartest thing I have seen from CCP in quite a long time.

The reality of Eve is that, if you don't love it like it is today, you should probobly go ahead and unsub. 
Velicitia
XS Tech
#51 - 2012-08-07 12:19:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Tippia wrote:


If they have no interest in it, they shouldn't undock.


And stay off the market, and out of contracts, and refrain from ship spinning, and ...


... hell, might as well just unsub


Kryss Darkdust wrote:
High Sec is a safe zone. Its not perfectly safe but its a safe zone, and because it is a safe zone is EXACTLY why High Sec is the most populated area...



Safer zone... though TBH, after flying in lowsec/nullsec for a while, the rules in hisec give you pause... especially once you realise there's nothing that allows you to protect yourself. You're relying 100% on CONCORD...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Syphon Lodian
Fabled Enterprises
#52 - 2012-08-07 12:19:59 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:

if you don't want to PvP, take active measures to avoid it rather than feeling entitled to absolute safety


lol?

Absolute safety? You haven't played EVE that much have you? There has never been a time where Hi-sec has been "absolutely safe" and it never will be.

lolgoons
Serena Serene
Heretic University
#53 - 2012-08-07 12:21:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Serena Serene
Richard Desturned wrote:
also since hisec should be safe from all nonconsensual PvP I guess the risk/reward balance should be looked at, i.e. removing hisec incursions, l4s and exploration sites


I like that idea, kind of.

Hisec could be safe, but it would have to be less rewarding in every aspect.
No L4 missions .. maybe don't remove incursions and sites, but make them less profitable. Since there can't be PvP there cannot be POSes either (currently there are some for hisec, right? I'm not entirely sure).
Industrialists would have to be less effective as well. I don't know how to do this.. maybe more taxation/fees .. slower production speed.. or something like that.
(Edit: that'd partially alleviate the problem of risk-free mined ore, too. Since, to effectively produce, you'd have to transport it into the lower security areas which either exposes you to the risk or makes you pay someone else to do it for you, which would drop your efficiency.)

It all would have to be balanced in a way that those who choose to do their stuff in lower security areas (low/null sec) would earn (noticably) more isk even including occasional losses due to the lower security (assuming they'll take appropriate measures to protect themselves).

It'd be important to make sure the safe area wouldn't be exploited by botters, too, since they probably wouldn't care to be less effective if they could be completely safe instead, with "working" 24/7 they'd probably still earn a seizable amount of isk.

So, what I mean with all that: if there should be such a safe hisec, it has to be balanced in a way that it couldn't effect the eve-wide economy too much.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#54 - 2012-08-07 12:25:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
High Sec is a safe zone.
No. It's only a safer zone (at least inherently — other parts of space can be made far more safe, but that requires player investment), and only as long as people are motivated by ISK. It relies on people's unwillingness to part with assets to create a very fragile restraint against just blowing up everything.

Quote:
Go into Eve right now, click on statistics in the star map and look at pilots in the game. 90% of them are in high sec
No. You really need to make stuff up like this. There are stats available if you just bothered looking them up rather than pulling them out of your nether regions, you know…

Quote:
Pretty much everything CCP is doing right now is a move to make High Sec safer
…such as?

Quote:
Ultimatly this changes nothing for Null Sec alliances and Sov warfare. Ther wars, their politics and their PvP is unchanged.
…except that a safe highsec would massively influence their warfare for a number of reasons. The entire game is built around a complex web of interdependencies and nothing done in or to any one region will only affect that region. The way the game is set up, that kind of local alteration is completely impossible.

Quote:
Personally I think CrimeWatch 2.0 is the smartest thing I have seen from CCP in quite a long time.
Well, it certainly makes highsec a whole lot less safe. Too bad it does it in rather stupid ways.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#55 - 2012-08-07 12:27:55 UTC
Serena Serene wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
also since hisec should be safe from all nonconsensual PvP I guess the risk/reward balance should be looked at, i.e. removing hisec incursions, l4s and exploration sites


I like that idea, kind of.

Hisec could be safe, but it would have to be less rewarding in every aspect.
No L4 missions .. maybe don't remove incursions and sites, but make them less profitable. Since there can't be PvP there cannot be POSes either (currently there are some for hisec, right? I'm not entirely sure).
Industrialists would have to be less effective as well. I don't know how to do this.. maybe more taxation/fees .. slower production speed.. or something like that.

It all would have to be balanced in a way that those who choose to do their stuff in lower security areas (low/null sec) would earn (noticably) more isk even including occasional losses due to the lower security (assuming they'll take appropriate measures to protect themselves).

It'd be important to make sure the safe area wouldn't be exploited by botters, too, since they probably wouldn't care to be less effective if they could be completely safe instead, with "working" 24/7 they'd probably still earn a seizable amount of isk.

So, what I mean with all that: if there should be such a safe hisec, it has to be balanced in a way that it couldn't effect the eve-wide economy too much.



Assuming we do this, I would argue that POS should be kept in hisec ... HOWEVER you're limited to anchoring a small tower. Gives people a "safe-ish" place to setup a "test" POS, and learn how they work for the most part (without having to log into SISI). Also gives people who've been kicked out of low/null a place to pull themselves back up ... albeit with a severely limited capacity...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2012-08-07 12:28:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Richard Desturned
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
Ultimatly this changes nothing for Null Sec alliances and Sov warfare. Ther wars, their politics and their PvP is unchanged.


Yes it does. Why would you bother taking space where your line members can fund their PvP via running anoms (which are constantly getting nerfed) when they can just fly 10bn faction battleships to run L4s/incursions in hisec on alts? It's already the case that the "optimal" form of nullsec alliance is a sovless alliance funded by technetium moons at the alliance level and empire missions/incursions at the line member level.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#57 - 2012-08-07 12:30:13 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
Tippia wrote:
If they have no interest in it, they shouldn't undock.
And stay off the market, and out of contracts, and refrain from ship spinning, and ...


... hell, might as well just unsub
Richard Desturned wrote:
also since hisec should be safe from all nonconsensual PvP I guess the risk/reward balance should be looked at, i.e. removing hisec incursions, l4s and exploration sites
In fact, let's just repost ye olde PvP-switch copypasta:

A "no PvP" switch in EVE would have to have at least the following restrictions:
· You can obviously no longer lock any player ship.
· You can no longer activate any kind of AoE weaponry or module.
· You can no longer use the market, contracts or the trading window.
· You can no longer access or manage POSes and their services.
· You can no longer mine.
· You can no longer shoot rats.
· You can no longer open any kind of container in space.
· You can no longer use the on-board scanner or scan probes.
· You can no longer be in a fleet.
· You can no longer use salvagers.
· You can no longer access the industry interface.
· You can no longer access player-sovereign systems.
· You can no longer access free-floating permanent sites in space.

That provides a good overview of what a PvP-free existence in EVE would consist of. P
Pipa Porto
#58 - 2012-08-07 12:33:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Tippia wrote:
Velicitia wrote:
Tippia wrote:
If they have no interest in it, they shouldn't undock.
And stay off the market, and out of contracts, and refrain from ship spinning, and ...


... hell, might as well just unsub
Richard Desturned wrote:
also since hisec should be safe from all nonconsensual PvP I guess the risk/reward balance should be looked at, i.e. removing hisec incursions, l4s and exploration sites
In fact, let's just repost ye olde PvP-switch copypasta:

A "no PvP" switch in EVE would have to have at least the following restrictions:
· You can obviously no longer lock any player ship.
· You can no longer activate any kind of AoE weaponry or module.
· You can no longer use the market, contracts or the trading window.
· You can no longer access or manage POSes and their services.
· You can no longer mine.
· You can no longer shoot rats.
· You can no longer open any kind of container in space.
· You can no longer use the on-board scanner or scan probes.
· You can no longer be in a fleet.
· You can no longer use salvagers.
· You can no longer access the industry interface.
· You can no longer access player-sovereign systems.
· You can no longer access free-floating permanent sites in space.

That provides a good overview of what a PvP-free existence in EVE would consist of. P


You forgot:
· You can no longer see local.
· You no longer show up in local.
· You can no longer see other player ships on the overview.
· You no longer show up on other player's overviews.
· You can no longer join a Player Corp.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#59 - 2012-08-07 12:35:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Pipa Porto wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Velicitia wrote:
Tippia wrote:
If they have no interest in it, they shouldn't undock.
And stay off the market, and out of contracts, and refrain from ship spinning, and ...


... hell, might as well just unsub
Richard Desturned wrote:
also since hisec should be safe from all nonconsensual PvP I guess the risk/reward balance should be looked at, i.e. removing hisec incursions, l4s and exploration sites
In fact, let's just repost ye olde PvP-switch copypasta:

A "no PvP" switch in EVE would have to have at least the following restrictions:
· You can obviously no longer lock any player ship.
· You can no longer activate any kind of AoE weaponry or module.
· You can no longer use the market, contracts or the trading window.
· You can no longer access or manage POSes and their services.
· You can no longer mine.
· You can no longer shoot rats.
· You can no longer open any kind of container in space.
· You can no longer use the on-board scanner or scan probes.
· You can no longer be in a fleet.
· You can no longer use salvagers.
· You can no longer access the industry interface.
· You can no longer access player-sovereign systems.
· You can no longer access free-floating permanent sites in space.

That provides a good overview of what a PvP-free existence in EVE would consist of. P


You forgot:
· You can no longer see local.
· You no longer show up in local.
· You can no longer see other player ships on the overview.
· You no longer show up on other player's overviews.
· You can no longer join a Player Corp.

So... you're logged into Sisi?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Pipa Porto
#60 - 2012-08-07 12:37:58 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:

You forgot:
· You can no longer see local.
· You no longer show up in local.
· You can no longer see other player ships on the overview.
· You no longer show up on other player's overviews.
· You can no longer join a Player Corp.

So... you're logged into Sisi?


As I've said several times. There is a Consensual PvP Only switch already available for EVE Players.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto