These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

This is Eve . Wow.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kent Reeves
#101 - 2011-11-09 02:51:33 UTC
K Suri wrote:
A few years ago I saw logins of 48-50k. I'm STILL seeing logins at 48-50k.

The arguments against ANY change (such as suicide ganking) is stifling development.

Is a crystal ball really needed? As I also pointed out , CCP has had to change direction to KEEP the base. What they were doing to GROW the base was shelved by, you guessed it, players that didn't want CHANGE.

EVE is a harsh mistress, and if you ignore her quirks she will bite you on the ass. Suicide ganking is completely avoidable if the pilot chooses to take the measures (not that I'm defending the ganking).

As I stated before, I choose to play EVE simply because it is unique and harsh. It's not a game for the timid, nor was it ever intended to be.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#102 - 2011-11-09 02:51:38 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Could you safely provide for a "wowlike" experience in highsec without affecting the game intent, history or attraction?


The answer is no, it is not possible wih the resources CCP have available, and it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different.

You not getting my point yet?

"it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different."

It HASN'T happened with this mindset.
It WON'T happen with this mindset.

It COULD happen if we CHANGED the mindset.


No it couldn't. Unless you know something about CCP receiving a massive no-strings cash influx from somewhere. Did Hilmar win this weeks Euromillions lottery?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#103 - 2011-11-09 02:52:19 UTC
This one would fail at 0:37

 Though All Men Do Despise Us
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#104 - 2011-11-09 02:54:02 UTC
Kent Reeves wrote:
K Suri wrote:
A few years ago I saw logins of 48-50k. I'm STILL seeing logins at 48-50k.

The arguments against ANY change (such as suicide ganking) is stifling development.

Is a crystal ball really needed? As I also pointed out , CCP has had to change direction to KEEP the base. What they were doing to GROW the base was shelved by, you guessed it, players that didn't want CHANGE.

EVE is a harsh mistress, and if you ignore her quirks she will bite you on the ass. Suicide ganking is completely avoidable if the pilot chooses to take the measures (not that I'm defending the ganking).

As I stated before, I choose to play EVE simply because it is unique and harsh. It's not a game for the timid, nor was it ever intended to be.

Well, not entirely avoidable (mistakes happen, even if every precaution is taken), but a lot of the risk can be removed.
K Suri
Doomheim
#105 - 2011-11-09 02:54:37 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Could you safely provide for a "wowlike" experience in highsec without affecting the game intent, history or attraction?


The answer is no, it is not possible wih the resources CCP have available, and it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different.

You not getting my point yet?

"it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different."

It HASN'T happened with this mindset.
It WON'T happen with this mindset.

It COULD happen if we CHANGED the mindset.

If CCP made ganking impossible tomorrow why do you think subscriptions would substantially improve?

Didn't say substantially but since you asked, suicide ganking is just ONE issue that may be causing newer members to do a "fuckthisiamouttahere" or even holding them out. It's a guesstimate. I don;t know. Hence the OP. Have a read.

But you are completely overlooking the crux of the thread. It's this stifling of ANY attempt by CCP to adapt for a greater share of the pie that is causing the problem. They MAY need to bring changes in a very gradual (and I've used the term Salami Slice) manner to attract more players.

CCP had WiS ripped out from under it's feet, so in order to grow, they now need to make FiS more attractive to a larger audience. Is a "wowlike" space inevitable?
K Suri
Doomheim
#106 - 2011-11-09 02:56:20 UTC
Krios Ahzek wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Could you safely provide for a "wowlike" experience in highsec without affecting the game intent, history or attraction?


The answer is no, it is not possible wih the resources CCP have available, and it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different.

You not getting my point yet?

"it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different."

It HASN'T happened with this mindset.
It WON'T happen with this mindset.

It COULD happen if we CHANGED the mindset.



If EVE was more like WOW, this cool promo video would fail at exactly 0:30 seconds and then we'd be stuck with 2:19 of a guy shooting a rock with a laser

So 48k users logged in on Saturday night to mine? You're linkys as analogies are starting to get quite silly.
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#107 - 2011-11-09 02:57:12 UTC
LFG Level 50 Logi for a 30-man Sansha Kuvakei raid

 Though All Men Do Despise Us
K Suri
Doomheim
#108 - 2011-11-09 02:59:08 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Could you safely provide for a "wowlike" experience in highsec without affecting the game intent, history or attraction?


The answer is no, it is not possible wih the resources CCP have available, and it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different.

You not getting my point yet?

"it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different."

It HASN'T happened with this mindset.
It WON'T happen with this mindset.

It COULD happen if we CHANGED the mindset.


No it couldn't. Unless you know something about CCP receiving a massive no-strings cash influx from somewhere. Did Hilmar win this weeks Euromillions lottery?

Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

The Old Farts Club made every effort to make sure that didn't happen.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#109 - 2011-11-09 02:59:59 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Could you safely provide for a "wowlike" experience in highsec without affecting the game intent, history or attraction?


The answer is no, it is not possible wih the resources CCP have available, and it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different.

You not getting my point yet?

"it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different."

It HASN'T happened with this mindset.
It WON'T happen with this mindset.

It COULD happen if we CHANGED the mindset.

If CCP made ganking impossible tomorrow why do you think subscriptions would substantially improve?

Didn't say substantially but since you asked, suicide ganking is just ONE issue that may be causing newer members to do a "fuckthisiamouttahere" or even holding them out. It's a guesstimate. I don;t know. Hence the OP. Have a read.

But you are completely overlooking the crux of the thread. It's this stifling of ANY attempt by CCP to adapt for a greater share of the pie that is causing the problem. They MAY need to bring changes in a very gradual (and I've used the term Salami Slice) manner to attract more players.

CCP had WiS ripped out from under it's feet, so in order to grow, they now need to make FiS more attractive to a larger audience. Is a "wowlike" space inevitable?



But historically, EVE grew consistently despite being even more "hostile" than it is now. If anything, the correlation is that making hi-sec safer = slower growth.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#110 - 2011-11-09 03:03:31 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Could you safely provide for a "wowlike" experience in highsec without affecting the game intent, history or attraction?


The answer is no, it is not possible wih the resources CCP have available, and it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different.

You not getting my point yet?

"it's not possible to do without wrecking what makes EVE different."

It HASN'T happened with this mindset.
It WON'T happen with this mindset.

It COULD happen if we CHANGED the mindset.


No it couldn't. Unless you know something about CCP receiving a massive no-strings cash influx from somewhere. Did Hilmar win this weeks Euromillions lottery?

Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

The Old Farts Club made every effort to make sure that didn't happen.


You didn't seem to want to reply to my serious posts, so I thought I'd give you one in your own style in the hope that it would be more palatable. Perhaps I should have thrown in some more labelling, wild generalisation and ad-hominems?

I'm so sorry.


Seriously though, why do you play EVE when there are dozens or hundreds of other games that will give you the experience you seem to want. Does it offend you so much that this one game has a different philosophy to all the rest?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#111 - 2011-11-09 03:05:07 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

rofl...completely removing suicide ganking is more than a "minor mechanic change". How long have you been playing Eve?

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#112 - 2011-11-09 03:11:11 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

rofl...completely removing suicide ganking is more than a "minor mechanic change". How long have you been playing Eve?



Apparently completely re-writing EVE's PvE to be worth doing as the focus of a game experience rather than a means to an end would be a "minor code change".

The things one learns at 3AM...

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
K Suri
Doomheim
#113 - 2011-11-09 03:12:13 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

But historically, EVE grew consistently despite being even more "hostile" than it is now. If anything, the correlation is that making hi-sec safer = slower growth.

You contradicted yourself. Highsec has been made safer over time and subs grew.

Nullsec is about to be made safer and potentially highsec as well. The former was to keep the playerbase, the latter may be to retain and grow the playerbase.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#114 - 2011-11-09 03:14:21 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

But historically, EVE grew consistently despite being even more "hostile" than it is now. If anything, the correlation is that making hi-sec safer = slower growth.

You contradicted yourself. Highsec has been made safer over time and subs grew.

Nullsec is about to be made safer and potentially highsec as well. The former was to keep the playerbase, the latter may be to retain and grow the playerbase.

There is no contradiction.

He did not say growth stopped, he said growth slowed, which is 100% accurate.


As always, correlation does not equal causation, but using only correlation what he said is accurate.
K Suri
Doomheim
#115 - 2011-11-09 03:15:13 UTC  |  Edited by: K Suri
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

rofl...completely removing suicide ganking is more than a "minor mechanic change". How long have you been playing Eve?

lol. How long you been playing Eve?

Here's an example.

CCP NEWS
Gentlemen, killing an unarmed vessel in highsec is now considered an exploit if done without using wardec or aggression mechanics. Any player doing this will be temp banned and then permabanned if they repeat the offense.

At $50 per hour, that's a total cost of about $0.80c

And how many things have been announced thus in Eve's history?
K Suri
Doomheim
#116 - 2011-11-09 03:20:00 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

But historically, EVE grew consistently despite being even more "hostile" than it is now. If anything, the correlation is that making hi-sec safer = slower growth.

You contradicted yourself. Highsec has been made safer over time and subs grew.

Nullsec is about to be made safer and potentially highsec as well. The former was to keep the playerbase, the latter may be to retain and grow the playerbase.

There is no contradiction.

He did not say growth stopped, he said growth slowed, which is 100% accurate.


As always, correlation does not equal causation, but using only correlation what he said is accurate.

wtf?

EVE grew consistently despite being even more "hostile" than it is now

He said subs GREW despite more "safeness" being added. What bit did I get wrong?
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#117 - 2011-11-09 03:20:03 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

rofl...completely removing suicide ganking is more than a "minor mechanic change". How long have you been playing Eve?

lol. How long you been playing Eve?

Here's an example.

CCP NEWS
Gentlemen, killing an unarmed vessel in highsec is now considered an exploit if done without using wardec or aggression mechanics. Any player doing this will be temp banned and then permabanned if they repeat the offense.

At $50 per hour, that's a total cost of about $0.80c

And how many things have been announced thus in Eve's history?

Except that couldn't be done. Right now, ganking is allowed (and through the method of allowment ie mild penalties, encouraged as a gameplay option) and more than a simple exploit declaration would be needed.


In fact if they went this route, a lot of people would rage quit... and a few would probably burn down CCP headquarters (mild exaggeration, meant as a joke for those who cannot tell).
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#118 - 2011-11-09 03:20:33 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

rofl...completely removing suicide ganking is more than a "minor mechanic change". How long have you been playing Eve?

lol. How long you been playing Eve?

Here's an example.

CCP NEWS
Gentlemen, killing an unarmed vessel in highsec is now considered an exploit if done without using wardec or aggression mechanics. Any player doing this will be temp banned and then permabanned if they repeat the offense.

At $50 per hour, that's a total cost of about $0.80c

And how many things have been announced thus in Eve's history?

I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm still laughing about the idea that removing suicide ganking, something has come to define the cold, harsh universe that CCP advertises, would be a "minor mechanic change".

You're either a new player and uninformed about the game or a really bad troll.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#119 - 2011-11-09 03:21:58 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

But historically, EVE grew consistently despite being even more "hostile" than it is now. If anything, the correlation is that making hi-sec safer = slower growth.

You contradicted yourself. Highsec has been made safer over time and subs grew.

Nullsec is about to be made safer and potentially highsec as well. The former was to keep the playerbase, the latter may be to retain and grow the playerbase.

There is no contradiction.

He did not say growth stopped, he said growth slowed, which is 100% accurate.


As always, correlation does not equal causation, but using only correlation what he said is accurate.

wtf?

EVE grew consistently despite being even more "hostile" than it is now

He said subs GREW despite more "safeness" being added. What bit did I get wrong?

You missed the part that he said that subbed grew when EVE was more hostile, many years ago. And as safeness was added (starting with the Concord buff if I remember right), sub rate decreased.

Pretty much, you missed his whole post.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#120 - 2011-11-09 03:28:21 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Oh **** off. The changes being suggested are minor mechanic changes and would cost a few bucks at best. They STOPPED the massive new development that MAY have brought in new subs in a big way.

rofl...completely removing suicide ganking is more than a "minor mechanic change". How long have you been playing Eve?

lol. How long you been playing Eve?

Here's an example.

CCP NEWS
Gentlemen, killing an unarmed vessel in highsec is now considered an exploit if done without using wardec or aggression mechanics. Any player doing this will be temp banned and then permabanned if they repeat the offense.

At $50 per hour, that's a total cost of about $0.80c

And how many things have been announced thus in Eve's history?


OK but if that's the case, the unarmed vessel can't be participating in any PVP activities either. No mining, no transporting, no missioning (except for no LP or ISK), no trading, no plexing, no incursions. Doing any of thise activities will now earn an aggression timer.

In short, you're an idiot.