These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

My take on the "This game is going carebear, I'm quitting!" attitude as of late.

Author
Eternal Error
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2012-08-07 16:52:51 UTC
1.) We didn't need another thread for this.
2.) Your are almost correct. It's not nullsec that is broken (at least not in the manner you're talking about), but lowsec with respect to highsec. The rewards are barely increased, while the risk increases by several orders of magnitude.
Pipa Porto
#82 - 2012-08-07 18:14:52 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
I say give the Skiff it's WCS bonus back (give it some illusion of survivibility in dangerous space) and reduce the Mack's tank to that of a Hulk (it's the other side of the Yield/Cargo coin; why should it have a tank buff on top?).

Yeah, well I guess cargo isn't considered as "great" as yield, so it gets a bit of tank.

Like Skiff tank is worth 2
Hulk yield is worth 2
Mack cargo is worth 1, so it gets 1 point of tank.


Problem is that that 1 point of tank pushes it over the magic "enough to be unprofitable" EHP limit.

It also has a better yield than the Skiff so, right now, it's a 3pt ship.

Give the Mack a 60k Cargo (or 100k, who cares), a Hulk-like tank, and a Skiff's yield. Make each a 2pt specialized ship.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

reamau
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#83 - 2012-08-07 20:38:02 UTC
Same old whining, about how the other side has it too easy.

Like many players that have been around more than a few days, I've tried all different aspects of the game. I've seen that everyone blames someone else for having something that affects them.

Some examples from this thread alone:

Miners cry about getting ganked with no recourse.
Gankers cry about miners being too safe.
Gankers cry about can't go to null because _____ (lack of targets, blobs,etc)
Null dwellers have elitist complex towards all things empire, regardless of how 'safe' their current happy home might be.

The reality is that this game is built around the cycle of ships getting blown up and replaced. Everything else just feeds that cycle... whether its mining or industry, or whatever isk source to purchase.

How do you think plex gets to market? RMT to get isk to buy ships/stuff. Why do you think CCP encourages certain gameplay styles? Blowing up ships = more plexes sold (just don't buy from farmers!).

No tinfoil hat here, CCP wants that ship exploding cycle to keep churning, since that ultimately fuels their bottom line.



Inferno: almost as fun as chewing used medical syringes.

Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2012-08-07 21:07:51 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:

Ganking's just a different style of play. No better or worse than mining. Gankers aren't trying to ban mining (or who would they gank?), or make it impossible to profit from, but miners sure are trying to get ganking banned.


LOL! Seriously? Gankers are doing their dang best to make sure miners are as easy to gank as possible. Just look at the tears that were flowing with regard to the improvements in mining tankability. They were still going to be gankable, especially the Hulk, but that didn't stop the gankers from raising holy hell on the issue. So I find it absolutely hysterical that you claim that gankers aren't trying to influence how effectively ganking can occur.

I did like the strawman arguments about entirely banning mining on one side and getting ganking banned on the other, though (neither of which I have seen argued for).
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#85 - 2012-08-07 21:44:28 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
I say give the Skiff it's WCS bonus back (give it some illusion of survivibility in dangerous space) and reduce the Mack's tank to that of a Hulk (it's the other side of the Yield/Cargo coin; why should it have a tank buff on top?).

Yeah, well I guess cargo isn't considered as "great" as yield, so it gets a bit of tank.

Like Skiff tank is worth 2
Hulk yield is worth 2
Mack cargo is worth 1, so it gets 1 point of tank.


Problem is that that 1 point of tank pushes it over the magic "enough to be unprofitable" EHP limit.

It also has a better yield than the Skiff so, right now, it's a 3pt ship.

Give the Mack a 60k Cargo (or 100k, who cares), a Hulk-like tank, and a Skiff's yield. Make each a 2pt specialized ship.

You take this too far.

CCP wanted to buff mining ship and threw a bunch of buffs at em.

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
#86 - 2012-08-07 21:45:19 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:

Ganking's just a different style of play. No better or worse than mining. Gankers aren't trying to ban mining (or who would they gank?), or make it impossible to profit from, but miners sure are trying to get ganking banned.


LOL! Seriously? Gankers are doing their dang best to make sure miners are as easy to gank as possible. Just look at the tears that were flowing with regard to the improvements in mining tankability. They were still going to be gankable, especially the Hulk, but that didn't stop the gankers from raising holy hell on the issue. So I find it absolutely hysterical that you claim that gankers aren't trying to influence how effectively ganking can occur.

I did like the strawman arguments about entirely banning mining on one side and getting ganking banned on the other, though (neither of which I have seen argued for).


The Hulk was initially getting a number of buffs that haven't made it to now. The Hulk as is on SISI is pretty much fine.

The Mackinaw's too tanky because it hits the magic unprofitable number while doing everything better than the Skiff.

The Skiff could use some buffs because who cares. The Mack does everything the Skiff does as well or better (except working as Bait with a Cyno).


As for being gankable, yes, a Damnation is "Gankable" ...technically.

If you haven't seen the people yelling for banning ganking (esp ganking as a profession), you haven't been looking. They were especially prevalent when this HAG first got started.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Plaude Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2012-08-07 22:06:27 UTC
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
DMG 1 is the bible IMHO.

1. Gary Gygax himself warns of both min maxers and monty hauls in that book.
2. No one will play a video game thats not a monty haul.

I had a +3 sword the first day I played DDO. It was also the last day I played DDO. Eve is the least "Monty Haul campaign" video game I have ever played, but there has to come a point where you can earn oodles of cash or too many people would quit. Since it takes a while to achieve that, almost every player is a die hard min/maxer.

"Almost" being the keyword. I know I'm not a min/maxer in any game I play. Whether it's EVE, D&D or whatever, I rarely min/max, because I find it more fun to actually have a challenging fight, than one that just ends after drawing your weapon. That doesn't mean I don't know how to min/max, though.

New to EVE? Want to learn? The Crimson Cartel will train you in the fields of _**your **_choice. Mainly active in EU afternoons and evenings. Contact me for more info.

Pankas Carter
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#88 - 2012-08-07 22:10:30 UTC
Plaude Pollard wrote:
"Almost" being the keyword. I know I'm not a min/maxer in any game I play. Whether it's EVE, D&D or whatever, I rarely min/max, because I find it more fun to actually have a challenging fight, than one that just ends after drawing your weapon. That doesn't mean I don't know how to min/max, though.


+1

Min/Max and excessive optimization are not fun, to me. Games should not be less fun than my real job.

Adama: Starbuck, what do you hear? Starbuck: Nothing but the rain. Adama: Then grab your gun and bring in the cat.

Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#89 - 2012-08-07 22:22:00 UTC
There is a reason why people stay in high sec... The think there are save and yes there are.. Pirate
O'Sheagada
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2012-08-07 22:37:26 UTC
Take away jump freighters. Make logistics routes more of a reality. Make people slow boat from gate to gate. Null sec = blobs.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#91 - 2012-08-07 22:41:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:

3) Hunters go where the prey are. Hence, the high sec ganking. It's not that pirates LIKE this mode of play. Most don't. But it's the only way for them to access targets.

4) The idea that the situation is the way that it is due to 'over fishing' of targets by pirates: not the case. It's CCP's fault for incorrectly designing the risk/reward system. Players understand the system, and they exploit the rules to their most efficient result. If it were more efficient to be in lowsec, including taking into account the risk of death, they would do it. But CCP has deemed this issue unimportant and has since ignored it.

So, TL,DR: why do we have the situation as it is today? It's CCP's fault for not designing the game correctly.


This is a problem because null has targets as well. But the pirates are not willing to go to null just like the carebears are not willing to go to low.

I see the pot calling the kettle black. So yes the pirates exploit the rules to their favor as well. By attacking in high sec instead of null. They are afraid of targets that can shoot back.

If most pirates do not like this mode of play then go into null and have your fun.
Oh wait that is not fun is it. It is only fun to shoot at targets that do not shoot back.


The problem with going out to null is you can travel for ages & not find any targets, or they hide when you do. We go for targets in highsec because there's an abundance of targets & most of them don't suspect that there's an attack incoming. It has nothing to do with only wanting to shoot stuff that won't shoot back & a lot to do with just wanting to shooting another player.

And... Since when is attacking people in highsec exploiting the rules?

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Aadris
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#92 - 2012-08-07 22:47:22 UTC
You need to remember that certain types of players are very vocal and others tend to keep quiet.

Didn’t CCP say only 10% of people look at the forums? I assume even less actually bother posting. Just like the comments you see on news websites, youtube videos etc, it’s mostly the people at the extreme ends of any viewpoint that tend to speak up, the moderates and the slightly more considered people stay quiet or get drowned out or flamed by the idiots. Extremists always make the most noise and present the simplest worldviews, same thing happens in politics.

For every griefer that thinks the sky is falling because mining barges got a HP buff (lol) there are 100 people that don’t give a ****.

What you see on the forums doesn’t represent what the majority of the playerbase thinks, just the few that make the most noise.
Pipa Porto
#93 - 2012-08-07 22:50:12 UTC
Aadris wrote:
What you see on the forums doesn’t represent what the majority of the playerbase thinks, just the few that make the most noise.


There's a saying in American Politics. "Decisions are Made by those who Show up."

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Markarian Aurelius
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#94 - 2012-08-07 22:55:29 UTC
Somebody in this thread made a very good point a few pages back (sorry, too lazy to go back and quote it), but there's too much of an ISK faucet in highsec to make it worth going anywhere else. Between L4 missions, lots of asteroid belts, and ice belts that never depelete, why would someone go to lowsec for industrious activities? Sure, they might want a POS to do research or build caps, but that's about it.

If you want to breathe life into lowsec there are several things you can do:

1.) Make asteroid belts in highsec much smaller and limit it to Veldspar only. They will exhaust quicker and require people to go to lowsec to get minerals. Also remove the unlimited ICE FFS!
2.) Nerf the income of missions in highsec. That means both loyalty points and bounties. Make it worth it to go to lowsec to mission and force players to band together to give protective cover for their buddies.
3.) Nerf the amount of manufacturing and research slots in highsec stations.

The proposed changes to lowsec gate guns will already make it impossible to static camp entry systems for the exception of pounce campers.

Surely, this will shake the economy for a little while, but it will slowly make Eve players much more well rounded. They will have to participate in certain types of PVP more often outside of wardecs. This change would also spur mini-trade hubs in lowsec where you can sell things at higher prices than in highsec, thus offsetting the occasional losses to industrialists from living in lowsec.

You will also see fewer 1-3 man alt corps that don't interface with the community other than selling whatever it is they produce/make. I positive that if you do this there will be far less highsec ganking, lowsec dwellers will be happier because their traffic will have gone up and they'll have stiffer opposition, and you'll also show the perma-carebear how much fun pvp can be. Eve is a PVP game. It should be played like one.
Whar Target
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2012-08-08 00:10:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Whar Target
Surfin's PlunderBunny wrote:
Lilianna Star wrote:
Shalua Rui wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
The current changes make it such that you cannot profitably gank Tanked MLU Mackinaws, so there's no reason to ever use the Skiff (the Mack mines more, tanks enough, and has the cavernous ore hold). There's no reason for the Mackinaw to have a better tank than the Hulk.


The way I understood it, Procs/Skiffs shouldn't be used in highsec at all now... not that I would mine lowsec, no matter the ship.


If you're caught in low/null in a miner, even in a skiff, you're dead. So no reason to tank it.


Not if the attacking party forgot something important... like that time I forgot to bring ammo Shocked

Which is much easier to do given how poorly the new inventory system handles ship changes and likes to leave the old cargo hold open...
Eternal Error
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2012-08-08 00:17:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternal Error
Markarian Aurelius wrote:
Somebody in this thread made a very good point a few pages back (sorry, too lazy to go back and quote it), but there's too much of an ISK faucet in highsec to make it worth going anywhere else. Between L4 missions, lots of asteroid belts, and ice belts that never depelete, why would someone go to lowsec for industrious activities? Sure, they might want a POS to do research or build caps, but that's about it.

If you want to breathe life into lowsec there are several things you can do:

1.) Make asteroid belts in highsec much smaller and limit it to Veldspar only. They will exhaust quicker and require people to go to lowsec to get minerals. Also remove the unlimited ICE FFS!
2.) Nerf the income of missions in highsec. That means both loyalty points and bounties. Make it worth it to go to lowsec to mission and force players to band together to give protective cover for their buddies.
3.) Nerf the amount of manufacturing and research slots in highsec stations.

The proposed changes to lowsec gate guns will already make it impossible to static camp entry systems for the exception of pounce campers.

Surely, this will shake the economy for a little while, but it will slowly make Eve players much more well rounded. They will have to participate in certain types of PVP more often outside of wardecs. This change would also spur mini-trade hubs in lowsec where you can sell things at higher prices than in highsec, thus offsetting the occasional losses to industrialists from living in lowsec.

You will also see fewer 1-3 man alt corps that don't interface with the community other than selling whatever it is they produce/make. I positive that if you do this there will be far less highsec ganking, lowsec dwellers will be happier because their traffic will have gone up and they'll have stiffer opposition, and you'll also show the perma-carebear how much fun pvp can be. Eve is a PVP game. It should be played like one.

You are correct in identifying the problem, but incorrect in solution.

1.) Veldspar is one of the more profitable ores. You don't need to limit the highsec ores or somehow change the highsec belts, you need to do an across the board rebalance of mineral requirements on all the BPOs so that lowsec ores are actually valuable (iirc scordite is currently giving some of the ABC ores a run for their money)

2.) highsec vs. lowsec LP is fine from what I've seen (although I admit I haven't looked at it extensively). Lowsec NPC bounties and mission rewards definitely need a boost, but you can't boost them too far without approaching nullsec profitability. Nerf highsec a small amount (~3-8%) and boost lowsec a larger amount (~10-20%) to start. I'm willing for changes like this to happen slowly and to observe the effects on lowsec and the economy as long as CCP acknowledges the issue.

3.) I really don't think this is an issue. Even the lowsec ME slots are full for 1+ weeks, PE slots are fairly easy to find but not ridiculous, and a lot of manufacturing takes place in POSes as is. I'm not opposed to it, I just don't think it's needed. Focus on 1.) and 2.) first.
Taranius De Consolville
Doomheim
#97 - 2012-08-08 00:24:41 UTC
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Lilianna Star wrote:
At first, this complaint confused me. Why are you trying to make a business out of ganking in high sec? Why do you think this is a good thing? Why do you care if other people are playing differently than you?

But then some part of me called back to my days of being a Dungeon Master and what the root of this could be.

There was always one thing that my dungeon master's guide said that stuck with me. And that was about the party stealing situation. Going by memory, I'll quote:

"When your thief steals from your party, it is more often than not a huge red flag that they aren't getting enough opportunities to flex their skillset. They don't just want to be a fancy locksmith. They want to clever, thieving and practical in far more situations than picking locks."

Similarly, the dungeon master guide that people more often than not won't tell you what they want. Even if they try.

Bringing us back to EVE, why are gankers and pirates so focused on ganking in high and low sec when they can gank without fear of CONCORD and other factors in nullsec?

Well, this comes back to the analogy I was making. Have we considered that null sec is what is broken and not high sec? Right now, nullsec is in a stagnant state. Large alliances have complete dominance and can only compete with each other. Piracy is almost non-existant except in gate camps and suicide ganks. And people with piracy skillsets aren't given enough opportunities to flex their abilities and be a pirate.

I couldn't even begin to pinpoint where or what the problem is with nullsec and how to fix it. But I think we, as a community, need to begin focusing our whine posts where it deserves to be. And let carebears be carebears.

Please tell me if I am right or way off the mark.


Here is the technical structure for why the current situation is the way it is:

1) Eve is a precise rule set. Besides hacking the game, everyone is playing with the exact same rules. When players discover that something is 1% better, everyone piles on, ignoring all other processes of similar focus. Hence, industry being the way it is.

2) Risk is almost completely binary at the moment: High sec, little risk, lowsec/0.0, massive risk. Hence, 'carebears' stay in high sec almost exclusively.

3) Hunters go where the prey are. Hence, the high sec ganking. It's not that pirates LIKE this mode of play. Most don't. But it's the only way for them to access targets.

4) The idea that the situation is the way that it is due to 'over fishing' of targets by pirates: not the case. It's CCP's fault for incorrectly designing the risk/reward system. Players understand the system, and they exploit the rules to their most efficient result. If it were more efficient to be in lowsec, including taking into account the risk of death, they would do it. But CCP has deemed this issue unimportant and has since ignored it.

5) So, you're sort of on the right track. Pirates don't stay in lowsec because there's no targets. Targets don't go into lowsec/0.0 beacuse there's no need. CCP has designed the game where the targets can avoid PVP 100% of the time (Jump Freighters, for example). There are no trees in space. Nothing to hide behind, no clutter if you will to camoflage yourself amongst and hide from your prey. In high sec, at least there's a little bit of traffic at the gates. There used to be much more back in the days before WTZ. Enough to clutter the overview and allow an unassuming player to blend in and wait for his target.

So, TL,DR: why do we have the situation as it is today? It's CCP's fault for not designing the game correctly.


You = full of it

You come to high sec to gank easy targets rather than grab ten mates, go to another region in null from ur alliance home and pick a fight, because u dont have market hubs and stations to fall back to when your enemy fights back

so stop with all this *noobs and **** goes were the prey is*

end of
Russell Casey
Doomheim
#98 - 2012-08-08 01:51:33 UTC
Taranius De Consolville wrote:


You = full of it

You come to high sec to gank easy targets rather than grab ten mates, go to another region in null from ur alliance home and pick a fight, because u dont have market hubs and stations to fall back to when your enemy fights back

so stop with all this *noobs and **** goes were the prey is*

end of


If you're a miner, you go where the asteroids are.

If you're a ratter, you go where the rats are.

If you're an explorer, you go where the anoms are.

If you're a mission runner, you go where the agents are.

If you're a trader, you go where the markets are.

If you're a pirate, you go where the clueless people with lots of cash are.
Shameless Avenger
Can Preachers of Kador
#99 - 2012-08-08 01:54:34 UTC
Surfin's PlunderBunny wrote:

Not if the attacking party forgot something important... like that time I forgot to bring ammo Shocked


I've done that... more than once. And one time I put cristals on the damnation's cargohold.

"This is the Ninja. He will scan you down; he will salvage your wrecks and there shall be no aggro"

Lilianna Star
Vagrant Empress
#100 - 2012-08-08 02:08:59 UTC
Russell Casey wrote:


If you're a miner, you go where the asteroids are.

If you're a ratter, you go where the rats are.

If you're an explorer, you go where the anoms are.

If you're a mission runner, you go where the agents are.

If you're a trader, you go where the markets are.

If you're a pirate, you go where the clueless people with lots of cash are.


My last excursion to Goonswarm territory didn't have any pirates in it.