These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Sharing a good article.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Josef Djugashvilis
#141 - 2013-03-03 23:24:03 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
1. They were influenced by the months of whines which is why they got an EHP buff dispite the fact that the exhumers already had a tank in line with heavy assault cruisers. They also listened to us and removed an EHP buff they were going to give to the hulk.


I don't know. There has been plenty of "Nerf Hi-Sec, Buff null-sec" threadnaughts going on for quite some time, yet there doesn't seem to be any inclination on CCP part they are going to follow suit on those demands.

Now, it could be that a large percentage of players actually did say in their cancelation reason (when they canceled their subs) that they were quitting because their miner was ganked and then CCP acted on that instead of the forum complaints (as it directly hits their wallet).

But the truth is we don't know. CCP never came out and said we're making these changes because of X reason.

It was just assumed because of the threadnaughts that it was because of that. They might have had other reaons and we wouldn't know. Mabye a magic 8ball that said "Buff Miners" came up during the team meetings.



CCP were quite clear that they buffed mining ships as they said that suicide ganking was never intended to be profitable.

Whether this is a good or a bad thing, I have no real opinion.

Mind you, the squeals of outrage from the gankers were amusing.

This is not a signature.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#142 - 2013-03-03 23:27:10 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
1. They were influenced by the months of whines which is why they got an EHP buff dispite the fact that the exhumers already had a tank in line with heavy assault cruisers. They also listened to us and removed an EHP buff they were going to give to the hulk.


I don't know. There has been plenty of "Nerf Hi-Sec, Buff null-sec" threadnaughts going on for quite some time, yet there doesn't seem to be any inclination on CCP part they are going to follow suit on those demands.

Now, it could be that a large percentage of players actually did say in their cancelation reason (when they canceled their subs) that they were quitting because their miner was ganked and then CCP acted on that instead of the forum complaints (as it directly hits their wallet).

But the truth is we don't know. CCP never came out and said we're making these changes because of X reason.

It was just assumed because of the threadnaughts that it was because of that. They might have had other reaons and we wouldn't know. Mabye a magic 8ball that said "Buff Miners" came up during the team meetings.


They said that mining barge hulls should not be profitable to gank. A lie that a very vocal section of bears kept on repeating that CCP belived and made the primary change in the rebalance. It was a direct response to end the constant flow of terrible threads on the subject.
Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#143 - 2013-03-03 23:27:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Skeln Thargensen
Takseen wrote:
Sure, that could work. I just think back to the types of high risk pve I have engaged in.
Escalations from highsec plexes-Short duration, can be done in a T1 cruiser, high chance of a big payout, no penalty if I have to abandon them.
C1/2 Wormhole anoms-shortish duration, not much loot to carry, nice payout, unique NPC combat I can't get in highsec, no penalty for abandoning, no local. The latter kinda works to my advantage since I'd prefer not to broadcast my presence automatically like I do in lowsec.

Basically if you could do lowsec level 4s in a BC or level 3s in a cruiser as you'd do them in a BS or a BC respectively in highsec, it'd be somewhat tempting to put up with the Dscan hassle. Even better if you could do them pvp fit.


I think that's really key, as if you're in a (high sec) mission fit in low sec then you're in a fail fit. the content just has to be different.

also the damn thing should be able to cycle and set some audible warning of contact for the settings i choose.

forums.  serious business.
Lin Suizei
#144 - 2013-03-03 23:36:56 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Basically if you could do lowsec level 4s in a BC or level 3s in a cruiser as you'd do them in a BS or a BC respectively in highsec, it'd be somewhat tempting to put up with the Dscan hassle. Even better if you could do them pvp fit.


This is an idea which gets thrown around alot, but why encourage more gameplay not requiring player interaction (i.e. encouraging mission runners to come out and run missions alone by making it easier for them to escape, instead of encouraging them to use diplomacy to make missioning in lowsec safe)?

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#145 - 2013-03-03 23:41:08 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:

baltec1,

Firstly, you are no stranger around here. Just as I am known to be pro-carebear, you run on the opposite side of the line. Don't insult yourself by claiming anything else. Your 'selfless acts' of providing miners with fits ran along the lines of fit tank and HTFU. Stop pretending to be the gift to carebears. You're not. Ever since I can remember you've had nothing but disdain and contempt for carebears.

Second, what do you expect people to think of an alliance that, up until the time that one of your own died on a terrorist attack, made it a point to run campaigns based on real-life terrorist attack themes, even though repeatedly you were told that it was in poor taste? You associate with a group of players that have gone out of their way to grief play and come in here pretending like it's undeserved? You poor thing.


At no point have we ever taken part in "grief play".
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#146 - 2013-03-03 23:46:01 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:

baltec1,

Firstly, you are no stranger around here. Just as I am known to be pro-carebear, you run on the opposite side of the line. Don't insult yourself by claiming anything else. Your 'selfless acts' of providing miners with fits ran along the lines of fit tank and HTFU. Stop pretending to be the gift to carebears. You're not. Ever since I can remember you've had nothing but disdain and contempt for carebears.

Second, what do you expect people to think of an alliance that, up until the time that one of your own died on a terrorist attack, made it a point to run campaigns based on real-life terrorist attack themes, even though repeatedly you were told that it was in poor taste? You associate with a group of players that have gone out of their way to grief play and come in here pretending like it's undeserved? You poor thing.


At no point have we ever taken part in "grief play".


Roll

Nope. Not ever. No sirry.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#147 - 2013-03-03 23:47:21 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:


Roll

Nope. Not ever. No sirry.



Why are you taking a drunken guy speaking to goons while wearing a shiney wizards hat seriously?

And whats makes you think we would?
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#148 - 2013-03-03 23:51:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:


Roll

Nope. Not ever. No sirry.



Why are you taking a drunken guy speaking to goons while wearing a shiney wizards hat seriously?

I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that he was drunk during the days it took him to prepare his presentation. But yeah, it's always the alcohol's fault :).

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Josef Djugashvilis
#149 - 2013-03-03 23:54:07 UTC
Please folks, can we skip rehashing the mittani saga?

This is not a signature.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#150 - 2013-03-03 23:59:11 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:

I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that he was drunk during the days it took him to prepare his presentation. But yeah, it's always the alcohol's fault :).



The only people who took that seriously was white knighters such as yourself with an axe to grind. The irony here the people such as yourself arn't joking when you say things like

Quote:
I hereby encourage people to find and kill Alexander Gianturco.
Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#151 - 2013-03-03 23:59:54 UTC
lol he is like the court jester from some local ren fayre nightmare.

no really, i quite like his website, they would never run this article.

still lol @ ren fayre.

forums.  serious business.
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#152 - 2013-03-04 00:02:52 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:

I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that he was drunk during the days it took him to prepare his presentation. But yeah, it's always the alcohol's fault :).



The only people who took that seriously was white knighters such as yourself with an axe to grind. The irony here the people such as yourself arn't joking when you say things like

Quote:
I hereby encourage people to find and kill Alexander Gianturco.


I beg your pardon? I see, retorting to lying now Roll. Please do show where I have EVER said anything like that.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Jensaro Koraka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#153 - 2013-03-04 00:06:01 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Jensaro Koraka wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
So i'm right: PvPers made everybody left these places.

No you aren't. See my last post.

your last post is full of whine....


oops. sorry. this is complaints! Only bears whine.

You guys just keep hurling insults while refusing to rebut my points. Why not just admit you got nothin'?

March rabbit wrote:
However nothing new was told. The only difference between safe haven (high-sec) and low-sec is: CONCORD protection. Protection of one player from another. So all the reasons why bears left low-sec is other players. Who are these players? PvPers.

Once again, that wasn't always the case and that's my complaint. The answer is reversing what killed low, not trammelizing high. We need more low sec systems, jump drives need to either be removed or made unusuable in low, the rewards need to be brought back in line, and high needs to be dethemeparked.

It's like talking to a wall.

Me: "Eve used to be like X and now it's like Y. It was better when it was like X."
You: "You're wrong because it's like Y."
Me: I just said that! That's what I'm complaining about! /facepalm

"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -H.L. Mencken
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#154 - 2013-03-04 00:07:56 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:


I beg your pardon? I see, retorting to lying now Roll. Please do show where I have EVER said anything like that.



I see you still suffer from selective reading.

This subject was resolved last year and resulted in a disgusting show from all sides. Just drop that chip and move on like everyone else did.
Prekaz
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#155 - 2013-03-04 00:14:46 UTC
Article summary:

Captain Obvious observes that other people want to play the game in a fashion that differs from the way he wants them to play the game.

He is upset about this, and too stupid to recognize the irony.
Jensaro Koraka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#156 - 2013-03-04 00:21:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Jensaro Koraka
Skeln Thargensen wrote:
Takseen wrote:
Sure, that could work. I just think back to the types of high risk pve I have engaged in.
Escalations from highsec plexes-Short duration, can be done in a T1 cruiser, high chance of a big payout, no penalty if I have to abandon them.
C1/2 Wormhole anoms-shortish duration, not much loot to carry, nice payout, unique NPC combat I can't get in highsec, no penalty for abandoning, no local. The latter kinda works to my advantage since I'd prefer not to broadcast my presence automatically like I do in lowsec.

Basically if you could do lowsec level 4s in a BC or level 3s in a cruiser as you'd do them in a BS or a BC respectively in highsec, it'd be somewhat tempting to put up with the Dscan hassle. Even better if you could do them pvp fit.


I think that's really key, as if you're in a (high sec) mission fit in low sec then you're in a fail fit. the content just has to be different.

also the damn thing should be able to cycle and set some audible warning of contact for the settings i choose.

Nothing wrong with PvE fits in low sec. People use them in null all the time. The reason it's still viable to do it in null, but not in low is that in null you have way more territory and that makes all the new ways of getting around gate camps less of a problem. In low when you wanted to carebear it up you found a string of dead end systems and camped the entrance to "your space". In null you have an intel channel warning you before people get anywhere near you. You have bubbles to give you more time to uncloak people. Your space is bigger than the range of a jump drive. You also have jump bridges to quickly bring in reinforcements. In low that unbubbled gate camp is the entirety of your defense. Before cloaking and jump drives that was viable. Now it isn't. High sec isn't the only problem. Low sec hasn't seen any non-FW love from CCP in forever.

Prekaz wrote:
Article summary:

Captain Obvious observes that other people want to play the game in a fashion that differs from the way he wants them to play the game.

He is upset about this, and too stupid to recognize the irony.

Summary: Captain Oblivious misses the point, proceeds to hurl insults because he can't counter the argument, and is too stupid to recognize the irony.

Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
CCP were quite clear that they buffed mining ships as they said that suicide ganking was never intended to be profitable.

Whether this is a good or a bad thing, I have no real opinion.

Mind you, the squeals of outrage from the gankers were amusing.

Never? That's odd, I seem to remember CCP complimenting the gankers when it first started happening. Of course, that was when we had original CCP like Oveur and not Punktarded or whatever her name is.

"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -H.L. Mencken
Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#157 - 2013-03-04 00:33:46 UTC
Jensaro Koraka wrote:
Nothing wrong with PvE fits in low sec. People use them in null all the time. The reason it's still viable to do it in null, but not in low is that in null you have way more territory and that makes all the new ways of getting around gate camps less of a problem. In low when you wanted to carebear it up you found a string of dead end systems and camped the entrance to "your space". In null you have an intel channel warning you before people get anywhere near you. You have bubbles to give you more time to uncloak people. Your space is bigger than the range of a jump drive. You also have jump bridges to quickly bring in reinforcements. In low that unbubbled gate camp is the entirety of your defense. Before cloaking and jump drives that was viable. Now it isn't. High sec isn't the only problem. Low sec hasn't seen any non-FW love from CCP in forever.


well okay but that involves a level of organisation that solo high sec missioneers don't have to deal with. and apparently even if they do deal with it it doesn't work so maybe they should make it different to high sec?

same with mining really. why would i bother?

forums.  serious business.
Jensaro Koraka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#158 - 2013-03-04 00:35:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Jensaro Koraka
Skeln Thargensen wrote:
Jensaro Koraka wrote:
Nothing wrong with PvE fits in low sec. People use them in null all the time. The reason it's still viable to do it in null, but not in low is that in null you have way more territory and that makes all the new ways of getting around gate camps less of a problem. In low when you wanted to carebear it up you found a string of dead end systems and camped the entrance to "your space". In null you have an intel channel warning you before people get anywhere near you. You have bubbles to give you more time to uncloak people. Your space is bigger than the range of a jump drive. You also have jump bridges to quickly bring in reinforcements. In low that unbubbled gate camp is the entirety of your defense. Before cloaking and jump drives that was viable. Now it isn't. High sec isn't the only problem. Low sec hasn't seen any non-FW love from CCP in forever.


well okay but that involves a level of organisation that solo high sec missioneers don't have to deal with. and apparently even if they do deal with it it doesn't work so maybe they should make it different to high sec?

same with mining really. why would i bother?

It used to work. I want it to work again. Buffing high sec was a solution without a problem. It caused CCP to ignore the situation for so long that it created its own problem for it to solve.

"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -H.L. Mencken
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#159 - 2013-03-04 00:39:35 UTC
Jensaro Koraka wrote:

Never? That's odd, I seem to remember CCP complimenting the gankers when it first started happening. Of course, that was when we had original CCP like Oveur and not Punktarded.


CCP were fooled into thinking the bare hull of the exhumers were profitable to gank.
Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#160 - 2013-03-04 00:44:29 UTC
poor foolish CCP, masters of the universe and yet... slaves to its inhabitants.

forums.  serious business.