These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Two more accounts unsubbed.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#341 - 2012-08-07 20:29:50 UTC
I never knew that making it more challenging to gate camp noobs in low-sec was the death of Eve! Now I know and can plan for the Apocalypse accordingly.

I fail to see how any of these changes make PVP less rewarding. In fact, they should deter people from gate camping and suicide ganking miners and get them into some meaningful, or at least more engaging, PVP. Hell, you might as well mine if you just want to shoot at things that don't shoot back.
Lexmana
#342 - 2012-08-07 20:33:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Lexmana
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
I never knew that making it more challenging to gate camp noobs in low-sec was the death of Eve! Now I know and can plan for the Apocalypse accordingly.

I fail to see how any of these changes make PVP less rewarding. In fact, they should deter people from gate camping and suicide ganking miners and get them into some meaningful, or at least more engaging, PVP. Hell, you might as well mine if you just want to shoot at things that don't shoot back.

It is ok. It is just because you don't understand the game. But give it some time and you might figure it out.

Edit: nA lot of fun fights occur at gates today. Greyscales ide will make PvP at gates extremely boring (one interceptor tackle and a couple of tornados kill you in one shot). It will basically destroy lowsec PvP.
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#343 - 2012-08-07 20:38:39 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
I never knew that making it more challenging to gate camp noobs in low-sec was the death of Eve! Now I know and can plan for the Apocalypse accordingly.

I fail to see how any of these changes make PVP less rewarding. In fact, they should deter people from gate camping and suicide ganking miners and get them into some meaningful, or at least more engaging, PVP. Hell, you might as well mine if you just want to shoot at things that don't shoot back.

I understand you. It is just because you don't understand the game. But give it some time and you might figure it out.


Ah yes. More condescension from the self-entitled elitists. It feeds my soul.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#344 - 2012-08-07 20:38:42 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
I never knew that making it more challenging to gate camp noobs in low-sec was the death of Eve! Now I know and can plan for the Apocalypse accordingly.

I fail to see how any of these changes make PVP less rewarding. In fact, they should deter people from gate camping and suicide ganking miners and get them into some meaningful, or at least more engaging, PVP. Hell, you might as well mine if you just want to shoot at things that don't shoot back.


If the changes to gate guns went through it would infact be easyer to camp a gate and harder to get them off it.
Jim Era
#345 - 2012-08-07 20:42:06 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:


Ignorance


I think he was actually leveling out with you.
Currently you and I are too new to understand the exact impact a change such as this could have,
(even if it may be none we still cannot predict that)
but some are clearly over-reacting.

Wat™
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#346 - 2012-08-07 20:46:47 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Biased fallacity. Numbers tanked not (just) because of Incarna or lack PvP focus but because of repeated horrible PR down stunts like "greed is good", "fearless" and internal papers leaking out and exposing all sorts of bad news to EvE players.
…except that I'm actually pointing to a much earlier event that set off the initial decrease in numbers. Yes, Incarna most certainly let the full avalanche loose and had the opposite effect of what you'd expect from a summer expansion, but the decrease we're talking about after the 2011 peak has different origins.

In fact, even the Incarna outrage itself was just caused by Incarna and the various snafus surrounding its new MT strategy — those were just he culmination of a series of deeply bungled ideas coming out of the Reykjavík offices.

Quote:
this repeated lies of yours - just to bring water to your mill - are really annoying.
Good thing, then, that i's nothing of the kind, but rather you assuming and expecting that I'm saying something that I'm not saying. So you're barking up the wrong tree here.

Virgil Travis wrote:
Nothing like a game of rugby to help you relax...
That entirely depends on the amount of sick leave you get out of it and what kind of drugs the hospital is willing to part with… P
Lexmana
#347 - 2012-08-07 20:48:28 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
I never knew that making it more challenging to gate camp noobs in low-sec was the death of Eve! Now I know and can plan for the Apocalypse accordingly.

I fail to see how any of these changes make PVP less rewarding. In fact, they should deter people from gate camping and suicide ganking miners and get them into some meaningful, or at least more engaging, PVP. Hell, you might as well mine if you just want to shoot at things that don't shoot back.

I understand you. It is just because you don't understand the game. But give it some time and you might figure it out.


Ah yes. More condescension from the self-entitled elitists. It feeds my soul.

I am sorry but it gets a bit annoying after a while. I know you have read some of the comments explaining it from numerous players on the forum. But you still don't seem to get it. I can only assume it is because you don't understand the game or that you don't want to understand the game but likes to troll the forums with your deep insights on how EVE should be "fixed".
Jimmy Gunsmythe
Sebiestor Tribe
#348 - 2012-08-07 20:51:14 UTC
Nerf Burger wrote:
I usually just ignore tippia's posts.


You would do well to pay attention to Tippia. Yes, he is aggravating sometimes and I don't always see eye to eye on the more abstract concepts, but when it comes to Eve mechanics and whatnot, he's usually right. Show some respect. You might learn something.

John Hancock
Bommel McMurdoc
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#349 - 2012-08-07 21:07:26 UTC
(skimmed through all the pages, actually read page 1 then jumped to last)

8 years this guy has been playing, i'm impressed, genuinely. However, I really don't think it's the pvp that's bothering him. I think it's the constant changes that have happened over the years and the constant adjustments one has to make after all the changes. It can wear a person down faster than trying to read Dostoyevsky's "crime and punishment."

But everyone has to understand, as big as EvE is (EvE universe wide) and as complex as EvE is, there is so much to do.

You wanna conquer space, head to null and conquer what you can but you can't do it alone.

Want to be a tycoon? Manufacture things and sell them. Play the market, buy and sell.

Want to be a combat pilot for a corporation? learn how to fly ships that you can use for missions. Want to be a "bike messenger?" run courier missions for a distribution corp. Want to praise the same gods as the Blood Raiders, go to null and run their missions. blah blah blah.....

Want to explore space? learn how to scan and travel out into space and explore!

Want to be a "bad boy?" Then go and figure out your ways around the cops and evading the law. Want to ransom a hull for iskies, go to low/null sec and trap a miner and say "pay or else."

Each and every single thing you do in the game requires a certain amount of respect for the other things that are happening. Wanna mine? respect that there are pvp'ers or else you lose your lovely mining barge, meaning fit tank mods on that fricken hulk and learn how to scan! Want the complex another explorer is working on? well, then you better fight him/her for it..... or not. Want to make oodles of iskies, respect the market and research it via spreadsheets and study the statistics.

EvE is about survival and conquest... nothing more. Disrespect it or Abuse it and it will turn on you.
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#350 - 2012-08-07 21:44:37 UTC
OP, what specific changes do you suggest?
(Not having been around when PVP was considered better, I have nothing to compare with).
Josef Djugashvilis
#351 - 2012-08-07 22:00:56 UTC
Anslo wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Like I said before, get over it. If I want to explore low sec with probes, go into wormholes, engage in industry or trade in lowsec, or even rat or do missions to relax, I shouldn't have to deal with griefers all the time. I play this science fiction game for FUN, not life.


"I want to go into the explicitly dangerous areas and not be shot because Sandbox"


Dangerous because NPCs? Sure. Dangerous because a gang of 12 neck bears who can't make is in nul and enjoy ruining other people's days because they get stepped on in the real-world while serving fries to others to make their monthly troll-game payments? No. Get out.


Sorry, but I just do not agree with your sentiments.

I am entitled to do whatever I wish to enjoy my Eve experience.

However, other players are perfectly entitled to gank me, scam me, ransom me etc, no matter what I may be doing at the time.

If the right to gank me whenever I leave a station is removed, then we are no longer playing Eve Online, but a pretty, space theme park game.

This is not a signature.
Attica
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#352 - 2012-08-07 22:59:45 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Like I said before, get over it. If I want to explore low sec with probes, go into wormholes, engage in industry or trade in lowsec, or even rat or do missions to relax, I shouldn't have to deal with griefers all the time. I play this science fiction game for FUN, not life.


"I want to go into the explicitly dangerous areas and not be shot because Sandbox"


Dangerous because NPCs? Sure. Dangerous because a gang of 12 neck bears who can't make is in nul and enjoy ruining other people's days because they get stepped on in the real-world while serving fries to others to make their monthly troll-game payments? No. Get out.


Sorry, but I just do not agree with your sentiments.

I am entitled to do whatever I wish to enjoy my Eve experience.

However, other players are perfectly entitled to gank me, scam me, ransom me etc, no matter what I may be doing at the time.

If the right to gank me whenever I leave a station is removed, then we are no longer playing Eve Online, but a pretty, space theme park game.



I agree with your post 100%. Players have the right to do as they wish. I think making .8+ truly safe will solve the problem. Mining will still have to go on in lower systems for the other mineral req's. Of course the gankers wont like this but there will still be plenty of ganking oportunities. Too many rose colored glasses being worn by way too many, gankers and pve-only players alike. To each their own.

Pirate tears are yummier than carebear tears for they come from the deeper well of anguish.
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
#353 - 2012-08-07 23:08:18 UTC
I find it strange such standard generalized whine with no perceivable aim or constructive purpose other than 'stuff used to be better somehow' can generate so many pages of debate.
Frying Doom
#354 - 2012-08-08 00:11:13 UTC
Attica wrote:
I agree with your post 100%. Players have the right to do as they wish. I think making .8+ truly safe will solve the problem. Mining will still have to go on in lower systems for the other mineral req's. Of course the gankers wont like this but there will still be plenty of ganking oportunities. Too many rose colored glasses being worn by way too many, gankers and pve-only players alike. To each their own.

Sorry to say but I think making 0.8+ truly safe is a sucky idea.
Miners for instance now have the ability to have a kick arse tank, mining ship at the cost of some yield.
If they choose not to fly it and get blown up for their greed well that is just risk vs. reward.
Newbies should have protection if they want it, the rest of us should just have to live with our choices.

I like the fact that if someone in Hi-sec has pissed me off I have the ability to try to make them suffer for being an arsehat. I should not profit from the venture unless they are stupid enough to fix billions in mods on the ship but I should be able to do it.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#355 - 2012-08-08 00:11:54 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Malphilos wrote:

So you're saying that if one person bought 700k subs to TOR it'd be healthier (and thus we imply better) than EVE?

Or is this just the straw tangent?

I don't much care, my point is that standard is nonsense and it's being used that way for a reason.


Gonna have to say yes.

But a growing game is heathier than a shrinking one. Which means EVE is doing better than just about any of it rivals.


I recognize you have to say that, I just thought you might recognize it's silly.

MMO.

And you think one person with thousands of accounts is "healthier".

It's silly beyond reason.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#356 - 2012-08-08 00:36:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Tippia wrote:
…except that I'm actually pointing to a much earlier event that set off the initial decrease in numbers.


Which matters with your "PVE expansions = drop in playerbase" how?

Don't forget that I and Akita T even predicted the playerbase drop months before it happened and I even created a chart showing the playerbase trend in the (back then) future.

So try detailing your findings better. Because you only and always talk your very narrow opinion using 10001 rethorical artifices to make it look like iron proof. But you try too hard, it shows too much, it's also what makes you so predictable and exploitable for market manipulations.

Because Incarna was not a "PvE" expansion (many hoped to use have station fights, just saying). Your claims are - as I said above - well packaged lies to prove a point you keep repeating every time the topic comes up: "EvE tanked at PvE expansions and shines at PvP expansions".

Guess what, the avalanche starter, the origin of all the discontent was actually that disaster called "Dominion" that actually was dedicated to null sec sov revamping, hardly a PvE expansion.

Incursions is the only real PvE expansion. Even Tyrannis tanked not because it was PvE oriented but because it totally enraged the players. They were promised:

- Something cool like a strategy game, a la "Risk".
- Something with fights between competing colonies, it was hinted at being the future Dust 514 battlefield.

... and all that we got were some dumb circlets and yet another carpal tunnel inducing click fest.

Add the POS materials fiasco that ruined the back then new PI materials, the utter and complete lack of quality, the lack of any kind of finishing the current expansion before promising "NEW AWESOME" for the next.

And the final the nail in the coffing: their intention to monetize 3rd party websites and free software. Which in few weeks made MANY established applications / website coders to quit in disgust, including me.

That, and NOT the "PvE" or "PvP" flavour is what made EvE lose so many players.

Stop ret-conning story for your agenda.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#357 - 2012-08-08 00:40:23 UTC
OmniBeton wrote:
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
if you get a fight it's because either A) the other side wanted to fight,


I'm quite sure what you meant was "Other side is prepared to fight".
Yep, fighting someone who is willing and prepared is a pain in the butt.
You may, like, loose or something.


No, I'm quite sure you're completely misunderstanding me and/or just interpreting what I'm saying as you see fit.

A smaller group can be prepared to fight and not want to fight because they encounter a larger group. So basically, you're wrong. What I'm saying is, there is little opportunity to engage an enemy, unless said enemy allows it to happen.

So let's not turn this into a "you only want to gank innocent victims" thread.

Intelligence shouldn't be free.   Mining, reloaded.   ADDICTED.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#358 - 2012-08-08 00:41:20 UTC
Malphilos wrote:

I recognize you have to say that, I just thought you might recognize it's silly.

MMO.

And you think one person with thousands of accounts is "healthier".

It's silly beyond reason.


Its also not going to happen.

So it still stands a growing game is a healthy game.
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#359 - 2012-08-08 00:41:52 UTC
Nirnias Stirrum wrote:
I always chuckle at posts that says "gosh darn iv been playing this game for x amount of years" then you check the age of char and its way less. Theres a reason why the term "post with your main" is a popular term.

P.S will we be getting a new topic for every char that you unsub?


Only an idiot would look at a characters age and assume that it's a finite reflection of a player's total age in Eve. Oh wait..

Intelligence shouldn't be free.   Mining, reloaded.   ADDICTED.

Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#360 - 2012-08-08 00:48:38 UTC
Mike Whiite wrote:


If you're longing for a new challenge, maybe you should freeze these characters and start a new one, whitout any help from the alts you have away rom the people you know, you still know the tricks, but you lack the resources and SP. it just might give back some of the thrills you had in the old days.


The above is exactly what I *did* do, with my existing characters. I dumped my 90M+ SP "main" characters and started a second set, just for the challenge. In fact, I specifically made a challenge of it to try and PVP with the youngest character possible with the least amount of SP, just to prove that new players weren't "horribly behind" and disadvantaged to older players. The SP isn't the critical component. It's the pilot. PVPing with a low SP character isn't difficult. SP just gives you more flexibility and choice. I was successfully PVPing with a Vagabond with less than 5M SP. Very easily. With T2 Med. ACs no less.

Intelligence shouldn't be free.   Mining, reloaded.   ADDICTED.