These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Standing and sovereignty. Just remove it?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#21 - 2013-02-08 17:04:28 UTC
Oh another 'Nerf The Big Blue Blob' thread. Here I was expecting something NOT done to death already. At what point are we bludgeoning a deceased equine?

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-02-08 17:36:16 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
luZk wrote:
Would EVE not be much better if your overview could only sort wartargets, neutrals and corp/ally? Perhaps even no corp/ally tickers in overview.?

People would keep long lists in Excel/Google Docs of friendly pilots/corps, updated daily, which you have to check each time you see someone in local

sounds fun


You might call that "target discrimination". It's one of the things that separates competent militaries from incompetent ones. It's one of the things that makes policing so hard. It's one of the things that make communication tools such a vital component of modern life, from ATM machines to guided missiles to little drawings of lions or tigers or bears on your favorite sports teams' jerseys. You know; you could always just ask the target and gauge whether he was hostile based on his response. (No, not just his written or verbal response, his OVERALL response.) I guess you couldn't shoot first and ask questions second, then, though.

I wouldn't say introducing the need to learn to do this "target discriminating" is "dumbing down" the game.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2013-02-08 17:41:26 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Yeah, because making it harder to tell who's friendly and who isn't definitely makes the game more fun.

Are you serious? Of course it isn't "dumbing down the game" but that doesn't make it not ******* stupid.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2013-02-08 17:42:53 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
luZk wrote:
Would EVE not be much better if your overview could only sort wartargets, neutrals and corp/ally? Perhaps even no corp/ally tickers in overview.?

People would keep long lists in Excel/Google Docs of friendly pilots/corps, updated daily, which you have to check each time you see someone in local

sounds fun


You might call that "target discrimination". It's one of the things that separates competent militaries from incompetent ones. It's one of the things that makes policing so hard. It's one of the things that make communication tools such a vital component of modern life, from ATM machines to guided missiles to little drawings of lions or tigers or bears on your favorite sports teams' jerseys. You know; you could always just ask the target and gauge whether he was hostile based on his response. (No, not just his written or verbal response, his OVERALL response.) I guess you couldn't shoot first and ask questions second, then, though.

I wouldn't say introducing the need to learn to do this "target discriminating" is "dumbing down" the game.

certainly makes for a ****** afternoon
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2013-02-08 17:47:57 UTC
you know just because something is necessary in real life does not make it good gameplay in makebelieve

and taking away a functional tool just to make people's gameplay require they have a ****** time doing it the hard way doesn't stop them having blues and doesn't make for entertaining gameplay
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#26 - 2013-02-08 18:18:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Mayhaw Morgan
Benny Ohu wrote:
certainly makes for a ****** afternoon



Benny Ohu wrote:
you know just because something is necessary in real life does not make it good gameplay in makebelieve

and taking away a functional tool just to make people's gameplay require they have a ****** time doing it the hard way doesn't stop them having blues and doesn't make for entertaining gameplay


I can understand how having to deal with such tedium (We might call it "metagaming".) on a regular basis would be a pain in the a** for you.

But, can you understand my perspective? People like myself, who think such things are actually entertaining and who can maybe do them a little more efficiently than you, have our real-world advantage virtually erased by algorithms and resources dedicated to doing just that, making you and me equal. To me, it's like playing a first-person shooter with a perfect auto-aiming function or playing a chess program that never lets me make a bad move.

An interesting question about this game and generally any game is: Which traits/abilities/capacities does it reward and which does it negate or even punish?

BTW, a simple solution to the discrimination problem would be:

[18:11:32]Player_1 > flash
[18:11:45]Player_2 > thunder

Remember that from "Saving Private Ryan" or "Band Of Brothers"?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#27 - 2013-02-08 18:21:16 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:

I can understand how having to deal with such tedium (We might call it "metagaming".) on a regular basis would be a pain in the a** for you.

But, can you understand my perspective? People like myself, who think such things are actually entertaining and who can maybe do them a little more efficiently than you, have our real-world advantage virtually erased by algorithms and resources dedicated to doing just that, making you and me equal. To me, it's like playing a first-person shooter with a perfect auto-aiming function or playing a chess program that never lets me make a bad move.

An interesting question about this game and generally any game is: Which traits/abilities/capacities does it reward and which does it negate or even punish?

BTW, a simple solution to the discrimination problem would be:

[18:11:32]Player_1 > flash
[18:11:45]Player_2 > thunder

Remember that from "Saving Private Ryan" or "Band Of Brothers"?


eve online, a massively multiplayer game, should nerf "making friends" skills in favor of "memorizing lists of names" skills

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#28 - 2013-02-08 18:28:33 UTC
guys guys Eve would be so much more fun if there were no standings or sov or anything. It would be RANDOM and WACKY and MONKEY CHEESE PANTS xD xD xD

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2013-02-08 19:32:55 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Reiisha wrote:
For all the criticism the OP is taking, EVE did actually "work" completely for quite some time and it didnt stop alliances from having fun at the time. Even without moons.

Now tell everyone just how many people were in null when it was "working" then.

So you are saying null has grown by choice and thus is being healthy? Bear

Personally I say standings set should assume an unless fail > pass.
So in otherwords you have to set bad standings to anyone you dont want in rather than setting standing for those you want.
Then at least we could complain of the reddening of hisec and how horrid it is that all those soon to be itty vs and orcas going into your nullsec and using all the stuff will be.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2013-02-08 20:04:26 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Reiisha wrote:
For all the criticism the OP is taking, EVE did actually "work" completely for quite some time and it didnt stop alliances from having fun at the time. Even without moons.

Now tell everyone just how many people were in null when it was "working" then.

So you are saying null has grown by choice and thus is being healthy? Bear

Personally I say standings set should assume an unless fail > pass.
So in otherwords you have to set bad standings to anyone you dont want in rather than setting standing for those you want.
Then at least we could complain of the reddening of hisec and how horrid it is that all those soon to be itty vs and orcas going into your nullsec and using all the stuff will be.

the game should be easier for me because i am friendless and alone so i hate people with social skills

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#31 - 2013-02-08 20:06:20 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
guys guys Eve would be so much more fun if there were no standings or sov or anything. It would be RANDOM and WACKY and MONKEY CHEESE PANTS xD xD xD


Hurr, hurr . . . I know, huh. Just like these forums. How would we know who our friends are if our space emperor had to tell us in an e-mail? This game would be impossible. Worse than teh mathz.

BTW, are we forum friends?
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#32 - 2013-02-08 20:17:44 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
NEONOVUS wrote:
how horrid it is that all those soon to be itty vs and orcas going into your nullsec and using all the stuff will be.

the game should be easier for me because i am friendless and alone so i hate people with social skills

Oh so sorry you forgot the fun of the starter corps.
Really the antisocial ones have all fled to null or start their own 1 man corps.

And yes do explain how you will get people to flock to null if they are worried about being able to get their stuff?
In fact explain why the game was considered so much more fun before the sov grind started?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#33 - 2013-02-08 21:59:15 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
TigerXtrm wrote:
Sov and standing aren't the problem. The core of the problem is the structure grind and indirectly the weird distribution of resource moons.


The weird distribution of moons wouldn't be so much of an issue if CCP didn't insist on 'fixing the issue' by making a moon mineral that only spawns in certain places the new bottle neck & ignoring the players that tell them this will be a problem. They could keep the moon distribution the same, yet balance things out by not having singular bottle neck resources.


It's almost impossible to balance multiple variables such that there are no bottlenecks. Especially with the number of variables in EVE's entire T2 manufacturing space.

My favorite suggestion has been to reset the bottleneck to be the R64s (by removing the tech-heavy re-balance of components), which are well distributed around EVE, and keep an eye on Alchemy's ability to limit long term runaway prices.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2013-02-08 22:06:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Reiisha wrote:
For all the criticism the OP is taking, EVE did actually "work" completely for quite some time and it didnt stop alliances from having fun at the time. Even without moons.
Yeah because people were able to make alliances anyway before the Exodus expansion in 2004
these guys think alliances exist because of the alliance standing ticker, instead of the other way around
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2013-02-08 22:10:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Benny Ohu wrote:
luZk wrote:
Would EVE not be much better if your overview could only sort wartargets, neutrals and corp/ally? Perhaps even no corp/ally tickers in overview.?

People would keep long lists in Excel/Google Docs of friendly pilots/corps, updated daily, which you have to check each time you see someone in local

sounds fun

nah not needed

http://raynor.cl/eve/localScan.php

combined with

http://kos.cva-eve.org


done.
i' m not sure who would be able to offer the most reward to a web programmer to do such a thing for their group
a small alliance, or a large alliance with moons and stuff
perhaps one of our highsec experts could tell us
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#36 - 2013-02-09 01:32:24 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
luZk wrote:
Would EVE not be much better if your overview could only sort wartargets, neutrals and corp/ally? Perhaps even no corp/ally tickers in overview.?

People would keep long lists in Excel/Google Docs of friendly pilots/corps, updated daily, which you have to check each time you see someone in local

sounds fun

nah not needed

http://raynor.cl/eve/localScan.php

combined with

http://kos.cva-eve.org


done.
i' m not sure who would be able to offer the most reward to a web programmer to do such a thing for their group
a small alliance, or a large alliance with moons and stuff
perhaps one of our highsec experts could tell us

goonswarm used to have a program that replaced the cached small portrait of all friendly pilots with a blue icon before standings were shown in local (we checked, it was legal)

so uh yeah we'd just dust that off

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
#37 - 2013-02-09 01:38:34 UTC
Xinivrae wrote:
I smiled when you got to the part about anchoring cans.



I did too Lol

Oderint Dum Metuant
adopt
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2013-02-09 01:44:19 UTC
Yes, why don't we remove two things that brings groups of players together...

...in a multi-player game.

Well done Einstein.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-02-09 01:49:55 UTC
let's remove everything that trivially inconveniences diplomatically incompetent groups like x13

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Harrigan VonStudly
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#40 - 2013-02-09 01:52:48 UTC
OP are you a Snot Shot alt? Blink