These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Where's Red Frog an Push on this nerf NPC thing?

Author
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#261 - 2013-02-05 19:37:43 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
I think this is actually more part of the 'problem' that war's cannot be 'won'. There are no objectives. It's wider symptom of the whole mechanic I think. Someone wrote a post somewhere I won't try to paraphrase but it was along the general lines that the deck is stacked for the aggressor too much and that there's a problem that the 'victim' corp can't inflict meaningful pain back. I think it was in the mini-threadnaught about the CSM notes sounding like making decs require mutuality.


Kill them before they kill you. People aren't going to be happy with themselves when they lose their pimped cynabal or a few t3s to a bunch of noobs in drakes or t1 cruisers. The deck isn't stacked. You just have to hit them where it hurts, their killboard. Groups of bad players have always been able to defeat groups of better players. They just have to try.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
If defenders had good chances, they'd not drop / evade a wardec.


Defenders don't need to bother with wardecs, they can just drop and evade them all they want. They don't need to worry about fighting them. Which brings me to another point...

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Even assuming an hi sec defendant corp to be proficient at PvP, they probably use all their resources in their core business (else they get out-competed). Therefore if they get a wardec, they will probably have PvP ships somewhat parked out of place, part of the pilots busy / doing other in RL because of "peace time", will probably have cut on first line defenses and so on. A wardec gives little warning enough that the defendant could be not ready to respond to attacks in time. Can't assume every corp to have as main core business continuous PvP, those who don't are less prepared to a timely defense even if they wanted and could defend.


The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves. Why bother going through all of that when you can just drop corp? You can't just take out a major component of the game (combat) because it makes people complacent with the current unbalanced situation they are in and causes them to never experience that major component of the game and to avoid it at all costs. Then they dip their toe into the pool and realize it's not all that bad, making them willing to play the game on an equal playing field with everyone else, and play the game the way it was meant to be played.

There's a reason why there are very few big and effective highsec player groups. It's because there is simply no need for people to join them, or for anyone who knows what they are doing to form one.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#262 - 2013-02-05 19:45:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
EI Digin wrote:
The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves.


For a long time it was the only effective way - neutral RR, the ever pervading fact that no-one EVER fights fair in EvE and so forth.

Did you gamble and undock, or did you just not bother/take other steps - it was a no brainer for years.


There was (and still isnt) much to gain by fighting back for many people.

Undocking and trying to fight was about as smart as shooting a can flipper.


And for the love of god, they CANNOT avoid combat - they can only avoid wardecs. You think that 30 billion paladin would have been saved in an NPC corp?
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#263 - 2013-02-05 19:57:26 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Citation? It's common in any thread, including this one, that people claim it's a problem, or "not enough".

I haven't seen any posts by people complaining that ganking is too expensive compared to wardecs in this thread. I'm fairly certain Bat Country would contest that point considering how much they make ganking freighters.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Why is it so important that you be able to attack people without real consequence?

Please explain. Not too long ago my corp wardecced another and we got our asses handed to us. I'd call that some real consequence.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Why are they deccing Johnny Industry and not the goons/red federation/etc?

Why would you wardec a null-sec alliance? That would be a waste of money since you can simply go to null and shoot them. If we didn't have NPC corps it might be worthwhile since they'd have to put their haulers under a banner of some sort that could be wardecced, but right now it'd be stupid to do so.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Why is it so wrong that people should be able to play the game their way in the sandbox?

Why is it so wrong for people to bring spaceship PVP to others as a playstyle in the sandbox?

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Why do you have an issue with people taking steps within the game to stop you shooting them without consequence?

I take steps to avoid people shooting me every time I undock, why should I expect less of others?

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#264 - 2013-02-05 20:03:52 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves.


For a long time it was the only effective way - neutral RR, the ever pervading fact that no-one EVER fights fair in EvE and so forth.

Did you gamble and undock, or did you just not bother/take other steps - it was a no brainer for years.


There was (and still isnt) much to gain by fighting back for many people.

Undocking and trying to fight was about as smart as shooting a can flipper.


And for the love of god, they CANNOT avoid combat - they can only avoid wardecs. You think that 30 billion paladin would have been saved in an NPC corp?

If you play the game by yourself and your head is buried in the sand you will have no cards up your sleeves if you get into a fight.

You know how that Paladin could have avoided combat? He could have not fit 30 billion worth of stuff onto his ship.

Besides, isn't suicide ganking and bumping even worse than wardecs because you have no way to get back at people once they grief you? Doesn't CCP want the game to be policed by players, not NPCs and GMs? Sounds like the best solution is to warn the corp that bad guys are coming for you and let you guys fight about it for a week or so!
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#265 - 2013-02-05 20:04:15 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
Why is it so wrong for people to bring spaceship PVP to others as a playstyle in the sandbox?


The only thing stopping you doing that, is you. Which has been my point all along.

Unwilling PewPew does not and indeed never has needed a war dec.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#266 - 2013-02-05 20:06:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
EI Digin wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves.


For a long time it was the only effective way - neutral RR, the ever pervading fact that no-one EVER fights fair in EvE and so forth.

Did you gamble and undock, or did you just not bother/take other steps - it was a no brainer for years.


There was (and still isnt) much to gain by fighting back for many people.

Undocking and trying to fight was about as smart as shooting a can flipper.


And for the love of god, they CANNOT avoid combat - they can only avoid wardecs. You think that 30 billion paladin would have been saved in an NPC corp?

If you play the game by yourself and your head is buried in the sand you will have no cards up your sleeves if you get into a fight.

You know how that Paladin could have avoided combat? He could have not fit 30 billion worth of stuff onto his ship.

Besides, isn't suicide ganking and bumping even worse than wardecs because you have no way to get back at people once they grief you? Doesn't CCP want the game to be policed by players, not NPCs and GMs? Sounds like the best solution is to warn the corp that bad guys are coming for you and let you guys fight about it for a week or so!


So we at least agree that an NPC corp has no real bearing on unwilling PewPew? Because it doesn't.

You can shoot them (bumpers/gankers) back - again - the only thing stopping you, is you.


If suiciding and other measures were impossible I would agree, but that situation does not exist.
Commander Spurty
#267 - 2013-02-05 20:22:35 UTC
You are unable to pilot this spacecraft due to license restrictions.

You are unable to use this jump gate to low / null sec due to licensing restrictions.

There's plenty of ways to curb sitting in NPC corps

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#268 - 2013-02-05 20:24:14 UTC
I'm not sure why our name came up in this thread.

but I'll reply to this:


XxRTEKxX wrote:


Why not both? Courier contract and use of capital ships be prohibited unlesz you are in a player corp. I dont have any problems with either. Or courier contracts that require use of a capital ship be restricted to player corps. Then it allows noobs to do lower level courier contract while preventing use of capital ships, orcas included.


Courier contract to RFF or Push are already made to a player corp, and accepted by that corp member (private contract)

We then forward, via item exchange, courier contract, or trade in station, that package to our freighter.

Most RF pilot have their freighter in a player corp already, because it allow for Webbing.

Almost all of those corp are only the freighters + webbing alts. you dec that corp? most have another corp already made to switch their freighter to.

so, what would your proposition change exactly?
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#269 - 2013-02-05 20:40:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Aren Madigan
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Don't ignore the 60D results just because the numbers peter off after people get bored.
I don't ignore it; I gladly point out Incursion and Tyrannis as the exposure of the 'carebear dollar' myth every chance I get - that catering to carebears is fiscally unwise - and that threats of some 'mass unsub' if riskfree iskfarming was impeded in anyway are hollow because the "PvE-exclusive' gains has a lifecycle of 3-4 months tops. Thankfully, CCP has taken this lesson to heart.


You know, the reason for Tyrannis's failure could also just be that it isn't a particularly immersive or interesting experience either. It just wasn't anything special. You can't really jump to conclusions about why it failed without, you know, actually having a reasonably amount of data from people who left. So while I'm in agreeing that PI would be more interesting with some PvP aspects added to it, I'm pretty harshly against jumping to conclusions for the simple goal of promoting one's own viewpoint.

Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
And it's bad economically as CCP's NPE research is overwhelmingly pushing highsec player corporations like EVE UNI and RvB in order to retain newbies, something that wasn't happening with the boring but mechanically overwhelmingly advantageous NPC corp model. .


See, as an EVE UNI player, from my viewpoint, your reasoning doesn't seem to be why they're pushing corps like that at all to me. See, it took me several tries to even stick with EVE because I had no real sense of direction, end goal, or anything. The whole "what do I do now?" that the most recent minutes talk about. Joining a corp like E-UNI goes a looooong way towards fixing that because right now? Features to that end are rather lackluster, and CCP themselves admits it as such.

Anyways, something else you mentioned earlier, I agree with at least ending corp hopping to some extent. Either they stick with their corp and take the disadvantages as well as the advantages, or they're stuck without it for a prolonged period. Or hell, if they are logged to be prone to it, they're stuck with the wardec for a bit. Honestly though, one of my biggest problems with the wardec system is how its more expensive to go after those who can pretty clearly defend themselves over those who often its pretty obvious that its just for the sake of being a prick.

Spurty wrote:
You are unable to use this jump gate to low / null sec due to licensing restrictions.


So you want to stop them from going to the places where you CAN shoot them with little or no consequence? Yeeeah... I'm not seeing the logic here if the reasoning is because of not wanting them to avoid such things.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#270 - 2013-02-05 20:41:24 UTC
EI Digin wrote:

The problem is that wardec evasion is that it has been such a good way to defend yourself from group pvp that people simply never learn how to or don't bother to use any sort of tactic to defend themselves. Why bother going through all of that when you can just drop corp? You can't just take out a major component of the game (combat) because it makes people complacent with the current unbalanced situation they are in and causes them to never experience that major component of the game and to avoid it at all costs. Then they dip their toe into the pool and realize it's not all that bad, making them willing to play the game on an equal playing field with everyone else, and play the game the way it was meant to be played.

There's a reason why there are very few big and effective highsec player groups. It's because there is simply no need for people to join them, or for anyone who knows what they are doing to form one.


No, the reason why there are very few big and effective high sec players group is because high sec is the place for those whose conditions don't allow to play any useful part in a group.

The guy who gets 1 hour a day to play is going to pick hi sec not to waste that hour with the nitty gritty things that playing in a social structure involve. He's probably going to do 1 mission or mine some ore and log off.

If he could do all what's needed to be of any use to an organized group, he would probably not be in hi sec but in null or a WH.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#271 - 2013-02-05 20:46:51 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

lol, the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.

It's how we know we're winning the argument when they have to fall back on "you just want me to play your way" and "ccp will lose subs and the game will die". Even after it's explained to them that no one cares if they pvp or not.....

I still waiting for the massive carebear unsubs from the NPC AI change. I guess there is a lag time for such events lol.


You are good at facts evasion instead. Show me where CCP has nerfed PvP evasion or where they state the next expansion(s) they are going to nerf PvP evasion.

'
Show me where I said any such thing. where do you get this stuff?

Lemme guess, English isn't your 1st language.


I supposed you'd make the logical jump from: "the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.", that is :words:

to demonstrating that they are actually wrong (with CCP actually implementing PvP evasion nerfs), which needs :facts:
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#272 - 2013-02-05 20:51:58 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

lol, the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.

It's how we know we're winning the argument when they have to fall back on "you just want me to play your way" and "ccp will lose subs and the game will die". Even after it's explained to them that no one cares if they pvp or not.....

I still waiting for the massive carebear unsubs from the NPC AI change. I guess there is a lag time for such events lol.


You are good at facts evasion instead. Show me where CCP has nerfed PvP evasion or where they state the next expansion(s) they are going to nerf PvP evasion.

'
Show me where I said any such thing. where do you get this stuff?

Lemme guess, English isn't your 1st language.


I supposed you'd make the logical jump from: "the people you are talking about aren't just good at pvp evasion, they're good at discussion evasion as well.", that is :words:

to demonstrating that they are actually wrong (with CCP actually implementing PvP evasion nerfs), which needs :facts:


In other words, you jump to completely nonsensical conclusions.
Stonecrusher Mortlock
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#273 - 2013-02-05 21:04:12 UTC
We need to do away with the fact null alliances use NPC corps to freely move there stuff avoiding the one way people could hurt them, attacking there supply lines Aka war dec and shoot the haulers moving things.

But they just use NPC corps to avoid that.
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#274 - 2013-02-05 21:06:37 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
If suiciding and other measures were impossible I would agree, but that situation does not exist.

Please cite these "other measures" one can use to non-consensually blow up ships in high-sec, since we've already ruled out wardecs.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#275 - 2013-02-05 21:19:39 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
No, the reason why there are very few big and effective high sec players group is because high sec is the place for those whose conditions don't allow to play any useful part in a group.

The guy who gets 1 hour a day to play is going to pick hi sec not to waste that hour with the nitty gritty things that playing in a social structure involve. He's probably going to do 1 mission or mine some ore and log off.

If he could do all what's needed to be of any use to an organized group, he would probably not be in hi sec but in null or a WH.

A miner who plays one hour a day is still useful to any corp because he helps to supply minerals to the corp's home station. Or maybe the miner can fly a T1 cruiser and gets involved in a fight to help defend his corp's honour. It doesn't matter how often you log in, how old your character is, or how insignificant your contribution is. Your presence helps out your corporation. Groups like mine have proven this to be true.

Player groups are not monolithic in this game, as much as solo players would like to believe they are. They consist of multiple players all looking to achieve different goals. However, players usually have a shared goal that they are all trying to achieve together as a group, mostly being safe in the space that they live in. If you live in already safe places like highsec there is very little effort required in reaching your common goal, so you are mostly free to do what you like.
Ginger Barbarella
#276 - 2013-02-05 21:32:27 UTC
Thorn Galen wrote:
Reuben Johnson wrote:
(wrote some stuff ), where's Red Frog and Push on this issue. It's you're boats they want.


They're a bunch of pretty intelligent folks who find they have no need to resort to these GD Forums for issues which are not real.

I have used Red Frog Freight on more than one occasion and as far as I am concerned, they have their act together, are totally reliable and I highly recommend them.



This. +1

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#277 - 2013-02-05 21:55:35 UTC
EI Digin wrote:

Player groups are not monolithic in this game, as much as solo players would like to believe they are. They consist of multiple players all looking to achieve different goals. However, players usually have a shared goal that they are all trying to achieve together as a group, mostly being safe in the space that they live in. If you live in already safe places like highsec there is very little effort required in reaching your common goal, so you are mostly free to do what you like.


Your corporation (and to a degree, GS) are an exception not the rule. Most are still well stuck at being either a worthless "casuals industrials compound" ready to crack at the first sneeze OR quite involvement required, "if you are online you are on voice comms" or /kick.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#278 - 2013-02-05 23:55:23 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Your corporation (and to a degree, GS) are an exception not the rule. Most are still well stuck at being either a worthless "casuals industrials compound" ready to crack at the first sneeze OR quite involvement required, "if you are online you are on voice comms" or /kick.


Highsec-only corps are especially fragile if they are wardecced as most competent people will leave because they can choose not to be shot at by being in their own one man corp or an NPC corp. You can't make a good highsec corporation if the game style rewards players if they leave the second things get tough. It would certainly help corporations form and stick together and potentially form alliances if they had a sense of purpose, to kill those who try to kill them or face real consequences.

And of course some player groups would form (or already exist) that don't require 100% commitment, because true leaders take hints on how to run a successful corporation by those who have already succeeded. Tryhard corporations tend to get run into the ground or make enemies with more powerful more player-friendly corporations. You won't see any changes in highsec corp leadership styles as long as there is no point to being in a corporation if you want to live in highsec.
Kaethe Kollwitz
#279 - 2013-02-06 00:00:25 UTC
I think this is where i come in.

[URL=http://runners-alliance.weebly.com/index.html]1. THIS IS NOT AN ALLIANCE!![/URL]  - [URL=https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=202586&find=unread]2. FREE PRIZE GIVEAWAY[/URL]

FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#280 - 2013-02-06 00:08:50 UTC  |  Edited by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
My standard argument against NPC corps as they currently exist:

Eve is about consequences. The Butterfly Effect trailer. The Retribution expansion. This recent quote by GM Karidor:

GM Karidor wrote:
If you have a bone to pick with someone, declare a war and take the risk that your target may actually taste blood and fight back (or finds allies for that part).


War is an essential part of Eve's set of consequences...Except every player presently has the ability to opt out of war entirely. And yet those same players are free to continue engaging in all those highsec activities that affect the rest of us by way of resource availability and market prices. In its current state, the NPC corp system is effectively a license to impact the gameplay of combat-oriented players without them being able to respond in kind. It's antithetical to Eve.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.