These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Russian Roulette - CCP vs. Goonswarm
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#181 - 2011-10-29 03:55:20 UTC
elam Bannon wrote:

I am burning hard


Me too....but the wife is dancing around in some flimsy clothing so I got a really good reason.

I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
Taedrin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#182 - 2011-10-29 04:38:43 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Such a shame Goons took the easy route. Destruction takes but an instant. Constructing, improving, that takes more effort, more stamina and better personalities.

Are Goons a reflection on the world? That so many wastes of space can band together to try and spread their misery?


Remember that the goons' original goal in this game was to destroy it. It's just proved a wee bit more difficult than they originally thought. Maybe they are currently just returning to their roots, or maybe they are just doing it "for the lulz". When it comes to the goons, you will never know.

If they are doing it "for the lulz" then they will stop as soon as the next big war comes along. Remember: ~winter is coming~. WIth luck, it will result in lots of destroyed super capitals which means high mineral prices, which means happy miners.
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#183 - 2011-10-29 08:30:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Terminal Insanity
There is no right side for CCP here. They have to choose to ether conform to the highsec or the nullsec people. Nullsec people want eve the way it used to be - brutal and unforgiving. The highsec people want it to become more like WOW (sorry but its true)

If CCP continues to try and please both sides, they'll end up destroying the game for the hardcore players, and they'll never do enough to please the highsec PvE'ers. I imagine even if CCP made all the PVE'ers ships respawn intact, they'd still complain about the existance of killmails, or even the complain about the 5 minute disruption in his mining

If you read their complaints, there is one thing that is very clear: They really never learned to play eve. They dont use dscan. They dont watch local. They dont set standings towards hostile highsec gankers even. Instead of using the tools they were given, they simply complain to CCP, in a bid to make it more like WOW.

They mine in systems with 100 neutrals and never once hit dscan. This type of behavior in 0.0 space would land you with an "Derp" stamp across your forehead and likely your own corpmates would gank you for being a complete idiot. We cant continue to gimp this game down so that a certain group of players can sit in an ice belt for 6 hours straight, only needing to click their mouse to drag the ore into the orca...

The brutality of eve is what made this game popular. The popularity is going to kill eve because the mainstream gamer isnt used to this type of brutality, at all. Even in Mortal Kombat they'd always respawn with a full health bar. They never learned to enjoy risk...


My solution: Turn all of eve into SOV space. Faction Warfare would be just another alliance, but they would fight to conquor areas that would be considered "Highsec". Empire's space would move and shift. Imagine the only way to get from Jita to Amarr would be through 0.0 space? Thats the way it should be =P

If Minmatar and Amarr are at war, why are their borders touching? There should be regions of 0.0 ot at LEAST lowsec between each empire faction!

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Florestan Bronstein
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#184 - 2011-10-29 09:06:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Florestan Bronstein
Terminal Insanity wrote:
The highsec people want it to become more like WOW (sorry but its true)

guess you've never been corpse/graveyard-camped in wow Roll

I came back to eve because wow was too hardcore for me.

(that's a lie but leveling on a wow pvp server made me realize how little advantage older players have in eve and how many options you have to escape/evade "world" pvp in eve).
Florestan Bronstein
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#185 - 2011-10-29 09:13:50 UTC
Red Templar wrote:
Im sorry i dont know what that means. This was not included in our training.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=QFT
Lexmana
#186 - 2011-10-29 10:43:52 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:
The brutality of eve is what made this game popular. The popularity is going to kill eve because the mainstream gamer isnt used to this type of brutality, at all.


That is so true. I believe that EvE still can grow though, but growth needs to be slow so that those who want to turn EvE into something like WoW is kept as a small minority. Some will adapt and appreciate EvE and are likely to stay with the game. The others will leave and no-one will miss them.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#187 - 2011-10-29 11:03:49 UTC
Quote:
There is no right side for CCP here. They have to choose to ether conform to the highsec or the nullsec people. Nullsec people want eve the way it used to be - brutal and unforgiving. The highsec people want it to become more like WOW (sorry but its true)

Nullsec people have "eve" the way it used to be. They left highsec and went to nullsec.

Highsec people don't want highsec to be nullsec. They want it to be highsec.

If they wanted highsec to be like nullsec they'd go to nullsec and then they'd be in nullsec and highsec would still be highsec...

The problem now is nullsec came to highsec saying they want nullsec like it "used to be".

But they came to highsec to do it....

Now highsec peeps are thinking of moving to nullsec because highsec is as tough as nullsec anyway.

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?

Remove gateguns, Concord, wardecs and HTFU.

Make NO difference to miners whatever the **** you do.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#188 - 2011-10-29 11:07:46 UTC
The Apostle wrote:
Quote:
There is no right side for CCP here. They have to choose to ether conform to the highsec or the nullsec people. Nullsec people want eve the way it used to be - brutal and unforgiving. The highsec people want it to become more like WOW (sorry but its true)

Nullsec people have "eve" the way it used to be. They left highsec and went to nullsec.

Highsec people don't want highsec to be nullsec. They want it to be highsec.

If they wanted highsec to be like nullsec they'd go to nullsec and then they'd be in nullsec and highsec would still be highsec...

The problem now is nullsec came to highsec saying they want nullsec like it "used to be".

But they came to highsec to do it....

Now highsec peeps are thinking of moving to nullsec because highsec is as tough as nullsec anyway.

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?

Remove gateguns, Concord, wardecs and HTFU.

Make NO difference to miners whatever the **** you do.



So.... working as intended?


I for one would like to welcome the previously hi-sec mining community to null. Don't forget to ask in the Ships & Modules forum about how to tank your Exhumer vs 0.0 rats!

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#189 - 2011-10-29 11:12:26 UTC
The Apostle wrote:
Tallian Saotome wrote:
mkint wrote:
Nyla Skin wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:

I'm not against Gallente Ice Interdiction. It adds spice to the game. But considering Hilmar has his eyes on highsec and seems to want to make it SAFER, then this ongoing interdiction seems to be forcing CCP into making it safer sooner rather than later (after a good sleep and giving it a good think.)


Do you have any other actual proof of that, besides that one change regarding wardecs?

you don't get it... this is a stealth re-nerf eve-u thread. If you follow the blog to see what links were linked, two of them lead straight to the dec-shield threads.

Whats even funnier is that there IS a grand conspiracy... But its against TEST Shocked

If you pay attention, you will see that Goons overwhelmingly detest TEST, and are trying to provoke the mighty highsec blob into attack, at which point they will use TEST as a meatshield, and let them get ground out of existence.

Once Montolio emoragequites, the interdiction will end because Goons achieved their goal.

Its all so obvious, how can you come up with this mind melting garbage about a plot to overthrow CCP.

This coming from an alliance that was almost reset by Test in Fountain through "lack of effort" and got so scared of the possibility that they sided with Goons to protect their scrawny ass.

I do laugh that it's actually FA that will be the meatshield in any case. You always were. Your screaming banshee leader made sure of that. lolz.



humm let's try to put it simple:

Test - fleets with coalition enemy =PL

Test/PL fleet find FA fleet at some point

By some mistake (is there only one really?) FA shoots "enemy" : why the heck you fly with the enemy?

Results: internet drama

The ones getting ****** on the process? - FA

Goonswarm? - are having some nice fresh vodka drinks and waiting the end of the process Lol
Xpaulusx
Naari LLC
#190 - 2011-10-29 11:14:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Xpaulusx
High sec is fine as is, we have a saying here in New York, don't fix it if it ain't broken , Christ CCP, use your heads for a change Blink

......................................................
Lexmana
#191 - 2011-10-29 11:16:12 UTC
The Apostle wrote:

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?


I believe most players want different sec since it caters to different play styles and help n00bs into the game. But that doesn't mean high sec should be completely safe. It is a PvP game ffs.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#192 - 2011-10-29 11:16:24 UTC
Xpaulusx wrote:
High sec is fine as is, we have a saying here in New York, don't fix it if it ain't broken , Christ CCP, use your heads for a change Blink

It's a Goon op.

It's not broken, so **** it.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]
The Apostle
Doomheim
#193 - 2011-10-29 11:18:46 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
The Apostle wrote:

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?


I believe most players want different sec since it caters to different play styles and help n00bs into the game. But that doesn't mean high sec should be completely safe. It is a PvP game ffs.

EXACTLY. So REMOVE Concord, remove gateguns and HTFU.

Didn't I SAY that....???

I also said it'd make no difference to miners.

PvP'ers DON'T want the change. Why? Cos they''ll ******* die.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#194 - 2011-10-29 11:24:33 UTC
The Apostle wrote:
So REMOVE Concord, remove gateguns and HTFU.

Didn't I SAY that....???

I also said it'd make no difference to miners.

PvP'ers DON'T want the change. Why? Cos they''ll ******* die.


This tbh
Lexmana
#195 - 2011-10-29 11:29:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Lexmana
The Apostle wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
The Apostle wrote:

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?


I believe most players want different sec since it caters to different play styles and help n00bs into the game. But that doesn't mean high sec should be completely safe. It is a PvP game ffs.

EXACTLY. So REMOVE Concord, remove gateguns and HTFU.


That would probably kill EvE and only a few select people wants that. Most players like EvE and that is why they are playing it. It is a different game with a smaller target group than many other games. It is a niche game. And very successful at it too. How many MMOs can show growth every year for almost a decade. Why change such a winning formula?
The Apostle
Doomheim
#196 - 2011-10-29 11:34:59 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
The Apostle wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
The Apostle wrote:

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?


I believe most players want different sec since it caters to different play styles and help n00bs into the game. But that doesn't mean high sec should be completely safe. It is a PvP game ffs.

EXACTLY. So REMOVE Concord, remove gateguns and HTFU.


That would probably kill EvE and only a few select people wants that. Most players like EvE and that is why they are playing it. It is a different game with a smaller target group than other games. It is a niche game. And very successful at it too. How many MMOs can show growth every year for almost a decade. Why change such a winning formula?

Winning formula?

PvP'ers get to kill unarmed vessels claiming it's "sandbox" yadda ya, all the while USING Concord to protect THEIR ass in highsec.

When a miner says "c'mon, fair crack here fella" he's told to HTFU and the usual crap.

So why are you, Mr. "leet", USING Concord to protect YOUR ass in highsec but anyone else is lame, weak, cowardly for saying they want protection.

So Eve is PvP ad nauseum but only if YOU are allowed to die but not ME? amirite?

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]
Nyla Skin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#197 - 2011-10-29 11:58:09 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Nyla Skin wrote:


Do you have any other actual proof of that, besides that one change regarding wardecs?


https://twitter.com/#!/HilmarVeigar/status/121912148896137216

https://twitter.com/#!/ArnarHrafn/status/121939274303143936


Thats nothing actually done, only talk..

In after the lock :P   - CCP Falcon www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies
Lexmana
#198 - 2011-10-29 12:02:11 UTC
The Apostle wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
The Apostle wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
The Apostle wrote:

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?


I believe most players want different sec since it caters to different play styles and help n00bs into the game. But that doesn't mean high sec should be completely safe. It is a PvP game ffs.

EXACTLY. So REMOVE Concord, remove gateguns and HTFU.


That would probably kill EvE and only a few select people wants that. Most players like EvE and that is why they are playing it. It is a different game with a smaller target group than other games. It is a niche game. And very successful at it too. How many MMOs can show growth every year for almost a decade. Why change such a winning formula?

Winning formula?

PvP'ers get to kill unarmed vessels claiming it's "sandbox" yadda ya, all the while USING Concord to protect THEIR ass in highsec.

When a miner says "c'mon, fair crack here fella" he's told to HTFU and the usual crap.

So why are you, Mr. "leet", USING Concord to protect YOUR ass in highsec but anyone else is lame, weak, cowardly for saying they want protection.

So Eve is PvP ad nauseum but only if YOU are allowed to die but not ME? amirite?



You know I haven't done any mining since the n00b mission but I will probably try it later in a WH or something and when I do I will adapt to the situation like I do in all other activities I engage in EvE. If there is a war going I will try to find somewhere safe and watch local and dscan. I will consider a tank and maybe even mine in a BS or at least something cheaper than a hulk. I will weigh in the risk/reward ratio when I choose my strategy. The higher the risk the less profitable mining will be and at some point I will choose some other activity.

I can't understand why some people think there should be risk free semi afk ISK during war-time.

Me personally, would like mining to be more involving and risky so it would be worth doing it only for the fun. Then I would probably mine more and if the goons continue their activities I might even consider mining in highsec.
Richard Hammond II
Doomheim
#199 - 2011-10-29 13:55:49 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:



My solution: Turn all of eve into SOV space. Faction Warfare would be just another alliance, but they would fight to conquor areas that would be considered "Highsec". Empire's space would move and shift. Imagine the only way to get from Jita to Amarr would be through 0.0 space? Thats the way it should be =P

If Minmatar and Amarr are at war, why are their borders touching? There should be regions of 0.0 ot at LEAST lowsec between each empire faction!


already said

x-Socrata-x wrote:
It seems to me that the problem is trying to have a justice system with NPCs. Why not just do away with "high-sec" space, make everything player-owned, and give alliances more options for policing space? This may seem radical, but think about it: wih proper incentives, player alliances may want to build up economic systems and defend them. And with the proper tools, players will be able to defend systems better than CONCORD.

Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.
Richard Hammond II
Doomheim
#200 - 2011-10-29 13:59:16 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
The Apostle wrote:

Thought for today: Why have highsec?
Thought for tomorrow: Why have ANY sec?


I believe most players want different sec since it caters to different play styles and help n00bs into the game. But that doesn't mean high sec should be completely safe. It is a PvP game ffs.


they already wont let ppl can flip in the noob systems, so.... make the rest of the game entirely 0.0 an the noob systems high sec.

I dont understand why they coddle the newbs in one system, then feed em to the wolves once they leave lol

Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.