These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[CSM8] Ripard Teg for CSM8

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Yuri Wayfare
Suddenly Ninjas
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
#121 - 2013-02-22 00:51:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Yuri Wayfare
rodyas wrote:
Its probably not a good idea, to bring up my raging hard on, if you aren't gonna offer to help me out with that problem. Blue balls is indeed a medical crisis.

+1 sir, +1 indeed Lol

rodyas wrote:
No reason to get mad at me really. Like I said, you and fawn I believe are CCP dream's characters actually.

You like linear game play, only need a low amount of SP to be effective, and only log into the game to destroy vets.

Nah. The reason I got mad at you is because you dismissed Fawn so off-handedly. It belittles the experience of new players who add meaningful content to the game. Spare them a thought. They tend to grow up into knowledgeable, valuable members of the community.

I do enjoy destroying 'vets', for whatever the hell that even means in this game. But I get my best kicks out of the type of player who convos me after a gank and asks me how he or she can get in on the business. Getting people involved is the best reward.

I don't see how that is linear, but you're welcome to expand on that if you want.

rodyas wrote:
Also tutelage is a good word.

Yes it is! My enjoyment of EVE Online has increased significantly since I joined a good corp and received tutelage in the ways of this crazy, weird game of ours. And running in a pack of like-minded sociopaths has also improved my efficiency to no end. It's textbook "encourage social gameplay" really.

But I was a self-taught ninja before that and that sort of gameplay should never be dismissed. I get riled up when people suggest that things like suicide ganking or ninja salvaging (including baiting and ganking) are the preserve of the multi-million skill point élite, picking on the poor newbies. In my experience that is simply not the case.

"Suddenly, trash pickers! HUNDREDS of winos going through your recyclables." -Piugattuk

Be careful what you wish for.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#122 - 2013-02-22 01:04:17 UTC
Yuri Wayfare wrote:


But I was a self-taught ninja before that and that sort of gameplay should never be dismissed. I get riled up when people suggest that things like suicide ganking or ninja salvaging (including baiting and ganking) are the preserve of the multi-million skill point élite, picking on the poor newbies. In my experience that is simply not the case.


Sadly I have become enlightened and no longer see the game SP wise anymore.

But if you read Jester's blog religiously you will see he did talk about how hard it is for new people to catch up SP wise. The SP gain is a very slow one and almost not worth it.

I usually felt the same way. I would prefer for the game to still be complex and not so linear, but the SP gain is very cumbersome.

The only thing you have to worry about since, you have solved the low SP stuff, is CCP nerfs. Most players like lvling up different ships to counter that. But with the slow rate of SP it is hard to do that. Especially with you so involved with PVP in this game.

But fair warning, your ganking style does rely on meta gaming, for it to work well. So you will probably have to develop better methods and stronger operations, or else CCP might come along and take ya for a trip.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#123 - 2013-02-22 01:06:13 UTC
Yuri Wayfare wrote:

Nah. The reason I got mad at you is because you dismissed Fawn so off-handedly. It belittles the experience of new players who add meaningful content to the game. Spare them a thought. They tend to grow up into knowledgeable, valuable members of the community.


To be fair, Fawn did ask for a vet to take her on, so shouldn't get so angry at it really.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Yuri Wayfare
Suddenly Ninjas
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
#124 - 2013-02-22 01:33:18 UTC
rodyas wrote:
Sadly I have become enlightened and no longer see the game SP wise anymore.

But if you read Jester's blog religiously you will see he did talk about how hard it is for new people to catch up SP wise. The SP gain is a very slow one and almost not worth it.

I usually felt the same way. I would prefer for the game to still be complex and not so linear, but the SP gain is very cumbersome.

I don't understand how you jive those utterly opposed ideas. EVE is and remains a revolutionary game in that a low-SP character can take on a high-SP character with a more than fair chance of winning - if said low-SP character is specialized to the task. And even more so if said low-SP char has some friends around.

I'm not experienced in "proper PVP" but it is my understanding that low-SP characters who have specialized into tackle, scouting, ECM or whatnot are considered valued members of the fleet.

rodyas wrote:
To be fair, Fawn did ask for a vet to take her on, so shouldn't get so angry at it really.

Yeah. Because seeking out help totally destroys her New Player Experience Roll Isn't that what EVE should be all about in the first place?

"Suddenly, trash pickers! HUNDREDS of winos going through your recyclables." -Piugattuk

Be careful what you wish for.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#125 - 2013-02-22 03:19:37 UTC  |  Edited by: rodyas
Yuri Wayfare wrote:
rodyas wrote:
Sadly I have become enlightened and no longer see the game SP wise anymore.

But if you read Jester's blog religiously you will see he did talk about how hard it is for new people to catch up SP wise. The SP gain is a very slow one and almost not worth it.

I usually felt the same way. I would prefer for the game to still be complex and not so linear, but the SP gain is very cumbersome.

I don't understand how you jive those utterly opposed ideas. EVE is and remains a revolutionary game in that a low-SP character can take on a high-SP character with a more than fair chance of winning - if said low-SP character is specialized to the task. And even more so if said low-SP char has some friends around.

I'm not experienced in "proper PVP" but it is my understanding that low-SP characters who have specialized into tackle, scouting, ECM or whatnot are considered valued members of the fleet.

rodyas wrote:
To be fair, Fawn did ask for a vet to take her on, so shouldn't get so angry at it really.

Yeah. Because seeking out help totally destroys her New Player Experience Roll Isn't that what EVE should be all about in the first place?


Suppose with the fleet setup in mind, then that specialization can work and such.

Most players in this game create alts so they are more useful in different scenarios as well, keeping the SP lower too.

I mostly like the idea of being versatile with my main to an extent I suppose, so specializing for one ship is almost a bore. Plus only using that ship to pwn vets, can work for some, but I enjoy more parts of the game really.

Like I said, I did like the idea of faster SP gain but it is hard to balance it though.

I am mostly annoyed since CCP decided to go all out for one idea, and throw the rest out. Sure there can be specialization, but in promoting that, they don't ask for any other play styles or ideas? Much like the faster SP gain, for people who want multiple roles on one character.

Just like you, I mostly specialized in the beginning for a Battleship since, I thought they were cool. But the more ya do, or the more ya learn, different doors seem to open. Then CCP comes along, and says, no more opening doors, just pick one ship and fly that one.

Different people have different ideas, about what EVE should be about. But one thing out there, is that disrespect is most likely gonna be met with disrespect in return.

But like I said, it seems CCP really liked the idea, of young hot tempered people, flying around and pwning people, so no worries I suppose.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Ripard Teg
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#126 - 2013-02-22 06:43:09 UTC
OK, let me first start by addressing the suicide ganking issue.

Fawn, it's pretty clear from what you write that you're not going to vote for me no matter what I say. But the ironic thing is that I am philosphically sympathetic to your aims. Looking at what New Order Logistics is up to, you're pretty much doing just what I put into my blog: you're putting multiple Catalysts on the field for most every gank. As far as I can tell, your first solo kill on this character was two days ago and I'd guess it mostly happened on the strength of the T2 blasters you used. But most of the time, you're making ganking social and putting a lot of players and a lot of ISK on the field. I totally respect that: it's how I'd like ganking to work.

I was particularly impressed by this kill:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16434966

Matter of fact, if you want to tell the story of how that happened, I'll make it my blog's Kill of the Week this week and tell your corp's story so that I present both sides. Write up what you like about what your corp does and as long as it's within reason, I'll publish it.

Am I wrong? For right this second, I'm willing to admit that I'm under-informed on this topic. Most of my experience with ganking is null- and low-sec residents that were using ganking for fun but mostly for profit. They'd pick high-value targets such as juicy haulers or mining barges with expensive dead-space shield reppers and go after them. The rest of my experience with this topic is with efforts like Goonswarm Shrugged and the like: ganking for strategic aims. What you're doing with your corp feels like something new and I freely admit that I don't have a good feel for how widespread it is. But I'm absolutely willing to learn. As a result, to educate myself I've started a thread in C&P to learn more about this issue and some of your corp-mates have already been good enough to chime in there. I'm willing to be shown that I'm wrong. Fair?

Thanks for your feedback! I hope you find a candidate that you agree with. Next post: other stuff since my last one.

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
Ripard Teg
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#127 - 2013-02-22 07:10:52 UTC
Dyvim Slorm wrote:
These are a few questions I put to Malcanis and I would be interested in your response to them as well:

I was wondering as to your view regarding the balance between high, low and null.

It's my *perception* (and I use that word advisedly) that null and low have almost swapped places. Back in the "good old days" we used to have a clear path for training new pilots, start them in highsec, then move them to low to harden them up and then to null once they had proved their worth.

It does seem now that the path is more high -> null -> low as it certainly appears that null is a better environment to train rookies in the next stages rather than low.

Do you have a view on how the balance would be corrected, or the perception changed if this is incorrect, or if it even needs changing?

This is such an excellent question that I'm going to answer it separately and out of order.

My gut feel is that low-sec is now balanced just about right. It's the other two that need sorting. I'll start with high-sec, which right now is too good. Lots and lots of people are making better incomes in high-sec than they can make in low- or null-, which is kind of silly. I do support being able to make a decent living in high-sec: the new players need a solid means to advance their careers to other parts of space if they wish to do that. But right now, high-sec income exceeds null- and low-sec income in a lot of cases to the point where you have lots of null-sec pilots (including myself) turning to high-sec for their income sources. That's kinda silly.

With the exception of incursions which are a separate case (more about them in a sec), whatever income I can make in high-sec, I should be able to match in any part of low- or null. I'm risking much more by trying to make an income there, so I should be rewarded for it. But there are locations in null -- my own home space of Syndicate being one of them -- where it's impossible to support yourself. You have to look to less risky space if you want to make ISK. That's kinda dumb, in my view.

So in general, for income, it should be high-sec income < low-sec income < null-sec income < upgraded null-sec income.

That's is how it is for incursions today, but high-sec incursions should be riskier for the ISK being made. The incursion sites themselves are balanced fairly well, but if I were a junior game designer, I'd look for ways to increase the risk in other ways. One idea that I saw somewhere that I found kind of intriguing would be to significantly delay CONCORD response in incursed constellations. But I don't want to get too specific because I'm not a game designer. All I have to work from here is my feeling that in all areas of the game, you should be rewarded more for risking more. That's not always the case.

I've written a lot on the many ways I think null-sec is broken. Just check my blog for pretty much any post titled "0.0" to get some idea of my sense of this one. Hell, the very first page of that link -- aside from the few ship fittings -- lay out my thinking nicely.

I'll also have a bit to say about the null-sec manufacturing issue on my blog in the next week or so.

Great, great question! Can you point me at Malcanis's response? I'd love to see it, but damn his thread is huge. Blink

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2013-02-22 07:24:43 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:
Fawn, it's pretty clear from what you write that you're not going to vote for me no matter what I say. But the ironic thing is that I am philosphically sympathetic to your aims. Looking at what New Order Logistics is up to, you're pretty much doing just what I put into my blog: you're putting multiple Catalysts on the field for most every gank. As far as I can tell, your first solo kill on this character was two days ago and I'd guess it mostly happened on the strength of the T2 blasters you used. But most of the time, you're making ganking social and putting a lot of players and a lot of ISK on the field. I totally respect that: it's how I'd like ganking to work.

I was particularly impressed by this kill:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16434966
I just want to hug you right now.
Ripard Teg
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#129 - 2013-02-22 07:38:33 UTC
Yuri Wayfare wrote:
Do you have a concrete example of play which is being punished right now if you do it solo instead of in a group?
I'm definining "punish" as the opposite of "reward" here. Take L4 missioning: that is much easier, much less riskier, and more profitable with a second and third ship on the field. The last time I ran missions, three was the sweet spot in fact: that's where you maximized your profit. Two or one was less profitable; you weren't being rewarded as well, ergo you were being "punished" slightly.

Malcanis wrote:
lots of interesting stuff about super-carriers and titans
I'm looking at 13 supers lost in Asakai relative to the number of supers that were on the field, which was quite literally hundreds. There were also something like 100 hictors on the field IIRC and talk of Jita being denuded of Devoters during the fight. How does this combination of events happen without more than a handful of supers dying, and those dying one by one over the course of several hours?

How to fix it I'm not sure, but it's clear that there's some broken mechanics there. Asakai could have and should have been a devastating loss to the CFC of the type we read about at the height of the fall of the old NC when massed fleets of NC and Russian supers slammed into each other. Instead, what is likely to be the biggest super battle of 2013 didn't even kill as many supers as were likely built that week. That's a problem.

That said, I don't think I'm a fan of titans having a 50 warp strength either. That makes the best weapon against a titan an RvB fleet. While awesome, I'm not sure that's the right way to go...

admiral root wrote:
Given that you are so tragically out of touch with reality that you compared video game violence (in a game where violence is not permitted or accepted but widely celebrated) with vicious atacks on women IRL, how can anyone seriously believe that you'll be any closer to reality when dealing with CCP?
This is a truly excellent troll. Do Goons make fun of you when you are in fleet with them and you start complaining about their behavior on comms? Why yes, I am familiar with SMA. I used to be in LAWN, after all.

Fractal Muse wrote:
He sees no issue with demonizing an issue and, at the same time, marginalizing the brutal impact of **** if it gets his point across. This is crass, callous, and inappropriate behaviour to be had by someone who would be representing the playerbase at the CSM.
Did you actually read the blog post in question? Based on what you wrote here, I don't think you did, and I think you should.

Vendrin wrote:
Question for you Ripard. With Sony announcing the PS4 release as Q4 2013, how do you think this will affect Dust development and investment?
Given that CCP and Sony are direct partners, I should hope that Sony shared their plans with CCP and CCP is ready for them. That said, I'm not a DUST player, I'm an EVE player. I hope DUST succeeds mostly because I recognize how much of the company is invested in the necessity of DUST succeeding. Plus I think the concept is cool in its own right. But at the end of the day, I'm going to stand on the side of EVE 'cause that's the game I play.

And I'm caught up. If I didn't answer your question and you think I should, point me at it. Thanks for all the great questions!

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
starvoid
Perkone
Caldari State
#130 - 2013-02-22 09:21:21 UTC
I've been reading your blog for quite some time.. because of it's content and not because I'm a fan.
Anyone who has, will understand that you should have ran for CSM ages ago because of your balanced and clearly experienced views.

I'm all for constructive arguments but the negative opinions presented in this topic by some clearly "biased" individuals is the reason I go out and kill other players... though you seem to manage nice kills with words alone ;)
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#131 - 2013-02-22 10:32:16 UTC
Ripard Teg gets a very bad rep among the New Order circles, but I'm not afraid to say that while I do disagree with some of his views, Ripard will be pretty high up on my voting list.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#132 - 2013-02-22 10:55:34 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Ripard Teg gets a very bad rep among the New Order circles, but I'm not afraid to say that while I do disagree with some of his views, Ripard will be pretty high up on my voting list.
If the New Order Circle people want to go after anyone, they should be going after Trebor, who's already on record as saying he would support consensual-only PvP in highsec if it would retain new subscribers.
Jinrai Tremaine
Cheese It Inc
#133 - 2013-02-22 12:14:52 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Ripard Teg gets a very bad rep among the New Order circles, but I'm not afraid to say that while I do disagree with some of his views, Ripard will be pretty high up on my voting list.


The New Order has inherited James 315's persecution complex, and he's chosen to point it and them in Ripard's direction in response to Ripard's blog posts about non-consensual PvP. Never mind that those were primarily about hisec wardecs from dedicated PvPers to inexperienced PvEers rather than suicide ganking, or everything else that Ripard's said in favour of other non-consensual PvP, ganking afk miners etc etc. James 315 has called him a carebear, that's apparently all that matters.

As for Fawn's original complaint,

Fawn Tailor wrote:
I just listened to the crossing zebras interview, I'm astonished that someone with your experience is so ignorant of the current state of the game. These quotes are taken directly from that interview.

Ripard Teg wrote:
These guys who are doing these freighter ganks and mining barge ganks, they're not doing it with 3 or 4 million skill points...

Wrong. I am.

Ripard Teg wrote:
... they're doing it with 20, 30, 40, 50 million even a hundred million...

Wrong. Both of the alts I use for ganking (scout\warpin and dps) combined don't even come close to that.

I'm a new player, you don't stand for players like me, you stand for the whiners. I won't vote for someone who doesn't take the time to do their research before making a decision on what this game needs.


I don't want to come across as an apologist for Ripard, but as someone who has done that research themselves (well, someone who's been following the New Order's activity for some time now to be more accurate) I think it's important to note that you probably wouldn't be doing what you're doing now with your few million SP without the support structures for information and ISK in the New Order that were set up and are run by players who do have many millions of SP. I don't think it's unfair to suggest that a new player acting on their own without that support is unlikely to have built a pure gank skillplan that gets them to the point of solo ganking barges so quickly, or be able to do so effectively with -10 security status, let alone the information the NO provides on setting up/manipulating CONCORD prior to a gank. It's also those same many-million SP veterans that provide the funding that lets the New Order offer reimbursement for gankers.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that - it is exactly what EVE should be about, in fact (IMO, at least). Veterans taking in new players in roles that work with their low SP and benefit both players, developing skills and passing on info so the newbies can take up more of the load themselves. I wouldn't go as far as Rodyas and suggest you're a pawn either - you clearly enjoy what you're doing and as far as I can tell James doesn't really have any ulterior motive beyond liking to shoot things that can't shoot back. I just think it's important to bring that context up in regards to your complaint that Ripard is discounting newer players' abilities.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#134 - 2013-02-22 12:25:03 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Given that you are so tragically out of touch with reality that you compared video game violence (in a game where violence is not permitted or accepted but widely celebrated) with vicious atacks on women IRL, how can anyone seriously believe that you'll be any closer to reality when dealing with CCP?
This is a truly excellent troll. Do Goons make fun of you when you are in fleet with them and you start complaining about their behavior on comms? Why yes, I am familiar with SMA. I used to be in LAWN, after all.


So you have no answer, then? All you have is a wild accusation based on an alliance that I've been in for all of 10 minutes.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Dyvim Slorm
Coven of the Morrigan
#135 - 2013-02-22 12:33:01 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:


Great, great question! Can you point me at Malcanis's response? I'd love to see it, but damn his thread is huge. Blink

Thank you for such a detailed answer here the link to Malcanis's reply https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2623610#post2623610

I do disagree with you on one of your points as I would say that lowsec is way under an appropriate reward level. I see your are in NPC null rather than Alliance null so perhaps that colours your judgement somewhat, but at present I can see little in lowsec that would tempt highsec corps into lowsec when it's much easier to be an Alliance pet.

Here's something I put in Marc's CSM thread which explains my view https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2620803#post2620803

One other question which is a bit of a hobby horse of mine, what's you view on Insurance as to me it seems an absurdity which was brought in back in the days when ISK was hard to come by. We're awash with ISK now and frankly what insurance company would ever insure us in any case?
Fawn Tailor
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#136 - 2013-02-22 12:44:54 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:
Am I wrong? For right this second, I'm willing to admit that I'm under-informed on this topic.

I'm not entirely sure how someone can be under-informed and still be right.

Ripard Teg wrote:
Fawn, it's pretty clear from what you write that you're not going to vote for me no matter what I say.

I respect honesty and straight talking. I have 3 votes, one of those would have been yours had you just admitted you were wrong in what you said during your interview.

Ripard Teg wrote:
But the ironic thing is that I am philosphically sympathetic to your aims. Looking at what New Order Logistics is up to, you're pretty much doing just what I put into my blog: you're putting multiple Catalysts on the field for most every gank. As far as I can tell, your first solo kill on this character was two days ago and I'd guess it mostly happened on the strength of the T2 blasters you used. But most of the time, you're making ganking social and putting a lot of players and a lot of ISK on the field. I totally respect that: it's how I'd like ganking to work.

Then why are you talking about fixing something that isn't broken? How do you propose to 'fix' Highsec ganking so that it continues(an activity that you seem to support) and simultaneously provide a safer environment for the people who complain about getting ganked?

You can't have it both ways.

As for your guess "it (solo barge gank) mostly happened on the strength of the T2 blasters you used..." in fact, It mostly happened because I've been:

  • practicing ganks with fleet-mates
  • asking questions of the many helpful and more experienced players around me
  • investing in a targeted skill plan and finding out how to adjust attribute values to make the most of my time
  • watching how solo gankers work and bothering them with my inane questions
  • getting one-on-one training from some really exceptional players
  • scouting locations and bookmarking safespots
  • ship-scanning multiple targets days in advance
  • putting the time in to find out how to use d-scan and combat probes
  • understanding the mechanics of Concord and response times in different security systems
  • mapping out the best systems to target using dotlan
  • learning to use EFT and Pyfa to analyse my targets
  • ... amongst other things.


SP and ISK let me ship the weapons I needed, I put a lot of work in and had a lot support from a great community, outside of skilling up or having money, so that I could do a "simple" solo barge gank. I'm not a particularly good Eve player, but I'm persistent and I was fortunate enough to get some great guidance and financial support right from the start. I'm also not suggesting that a solo barge gank is any big deal, it's just something I wanted to do so I put in the time to learn how to do it.

This guy is a relatively new player and has taken what he's learned in New Order Logistics and is making decent ISK out of solo ganking, he's also providing a lot of good information to the people he's ganking to help them avoid becoming a casualty.

What you said in your interview was essentially that there was a problem with older players with masses of SP putting the hurt on newer players with less and you categorically stated that it was only the case that these more experienced players were engaging in this activity.

This is categorically not the case, SP has very little to do with it. On the gankers side, you need to invest time in learning everything I just outlined above.

On the gankees side, you just have to be pretty much entirely ignorant of your surroundings and content to trust that merely being in Highsec is enough to grant you some special "can't be blown up" privilege. You need to read these excellent posts concerning the ignorance with which many players approach Eve to understand that the "problem" of people being blown up in Highsec isn't with game mechanics, it's with player attitude.

I come across people every other day who are incredulous that they left their ship unattended in Highsec and that it got destroyed.

There is no middle ground here where you're going to please everyone Ripard, you either stand with the players who, like yourself, are willing to tackle Eve head on, despite it's difficulty, and support changes that are going to attract and encourage that kind of player or you support those who don't want to have to trouble themselves with putting in too much of an effort.

In my admittedly limited experience, the players that fall into that latter category are not predominantly "new players", they are players of all levels. The things they have in common are that they feel that Eve and the other players in it should change to suit them, they are loud and they will probably vote (if they bother to vote) for someone who promises to support making the changes they want so that they can put in even less of an effort than they already do.

Please, do not pander them.

Highsec Mining Permits - Ask me How! Salvaging Permits also available! www.minerbumping.com
Yuri Wayfare
Suddenly Ninjas
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
#137 - 2013-02-22 12:47:24 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:
Yuri Wayfare wrote:
Do you have a concrete example of play which is being punished right now if you do it solo instead of in a group?
I'm definining "punish" as the opposite of "reward" here. Take L4 missioning: that is much easier, much less riskier, and more profitable with a second and third ship on the field. The last time I ran missions, three was the sweet spot in fact: that's where you maximized your profit. Two or one was less profitable; you weren't being rewarded as well, ergo you were being "punished" slightly.

Thanks for clearing that up. By that definition though, any reward for group play is a de facto punishment for solo play. You state in your OP that you don't want to punish solo players but you do want to reward groups. I don't see any way to reconcile those positions?

And just to be clear, I don't think they need to reconciled in the first place. I feel that any content should be balanced to provide a low baseline reward for solo play, which scales up exponentially (to a certain ceiling) as more pilots become involved. Solo players are "punished" because they earn less and/or take longer to do so - and I think that's no more than fair.

"Suddenly, trash pickers! HUNDREDS of winos going through your recyclables." -Piugattuk

Be careful what you wish for.
Fawn Tailor
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#138 - 2013-02-22 13:01:08 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:
What you're doing with your corp feels like something new and I freely admit that I don't have a good feel for how widespread it is. But I'm absolutely willing to learn. As a result, to educate myself I've started a thread in C&P to learn more about this issue and some of your corp-mates have already been good enough to chime in there. I'm willing to be shown that I'm wrong.

My apologies if my response to your post seems overly aggressive or negative, I do appreciate that you're making some kind of effort here, I'm not personally opposed to you in any way and I have read your blog with interest since my involvement in the game.

Two things I would suggest, firstly is that you don't rely on Eve forums for your feedback, particularly if you want to connect with new players.

The kind of players you'll be hearing from are ones like Admiral Root, and quite frankly, I wouldn't wish him on anybody.

In all seriousness, these forums are kind of intimidating, if you really want to find out what new players are thinking, maybe post a survey on your blog site and simply ask, would they, if they could, like to blow up other players in Highsec without the victims permission to do so?

Secondly, if you really want to learn more then you're welcome to come along ganking with me, feel free to convo or mail me in game.

Also Buck Futz is a legend, you really should try to talk to him sometime.

Highsec Mining Permits - Ask me How! Salvaging Permits also available! www.minerbumping.com
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#139 - 2013-02-22 13:51:40 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:


That said, I don't think I'm a fan of titans having a 50 warp strength either. That makes the best weapon against a titan an RvB fleet. While awesome, I'm not sure that's the right way to go...


What, specifically, is wrong with it? I think it would be a great thing to be able to tell a new player that he can help to hold down a $6000 spaceship until another Devoter can be rushed in from Jita, rather than have to tell him "stay out of the way, you can't be of any use in this fight"

Re: Asakai - as well as all those supers killed, there were a whole bunch of capitals destroyed too. This was probably one of the top 3 or 4 most expensive battles in EVE's history in terms of total losses. It's not so much that it wasn't bloody enough as that it doesn't happen often enough. But it's naive to ever expect that supers willl be committed so often that losses will exceed or even approach the replacement rate. This doesn't happen with any other class of ship, let alone ones that take such a huge individual investment.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Jinrai Tremaine
Cheese It Inc
#140 - 2013-02-22 14:01:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Jinrai Tremaine
Fawn Tailor wrote:
In my admittedly limited experience, the players that fall into that latter category are not predominantly "new players", they are players of all levels. The things they have in common are that they feel that Eve and the other players in it should change to suit them, they are loud and they will probably vote (if they bother to vote) for someone who promises to support making the changes they want so that they can put in even less of an effort than they already do.

Please, do not pander them.


You do realise that everything you've written there could also apply just as well to the New Order, right?


  • Players of all levels

James 315 has been EVEing for many years, Gevlon for over a year, you yourself are new, as a group you have players or alts of players of all sorts of SP levels and playstyles.

  • they feel that Eve and the other players in it should change to suit them

That seems to be James' campaign platform in a nutshell. Nerf hisec, force players who want more than a pittance in income to come out to lowsec/nullsec even if they don't like those playstyles. James has even said players who won't play like he wants them to should quit.

  • they are loud and they will probably vote for someone who promises to support making the changes they want

Blatantly yes.

  • so that they can put in even less of an effort than they already do

Again, James/the New Order want more targets in belts in Low and Nullsec where Concord won't force gankers to lose ships or wait between attacks or scan ships for tank, they want rid of anomalies/grav sites to make it easier to find miners to attack. They want to reduce Concord response time, sec status penalties for ganking and bring back the old boomerang exploit to make it easier to gank in what's left of hisec.

Indeed, we definitely shouldn't pander to them.

Apologies in advance for side-tracking the thread, but I couldn't let that level of irony pass without comment.