These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#121 - 2011-11-09 03:30:01 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:

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.


NBS

"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
#122 - 2011-11-09 03:31:07 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
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).

The example was of how it COULD be done, not what should be done. I was responding to how easy it would be to change if CCP really wanted to. A single paragraph would create the same effect as making code changes and CCP HAS done this MANY times before. It's a simple case of the definition of an exploit or flawed mechanic.

Recent example is decshields. No code change, no fanfair, no massive ragequits. CCP effectively stomped all wardecs for a huge majority of players that relied on being able to dec based on what was once an "exploit".

As for "lots" ragequitting, I'm not so sure. Perhaps the gankers would be pissed and fair enough but I'm betting the vast majority of highsec would rejoice or shrug and the majority of 0.0 would just shrug.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#123 - 2011-11-09 03:33:46 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?



That as more safety has been added, the rate of sub increase has slowed. There is no evidence whatsoever to support the assertion that making hi-sec safer will make EVE more popular. You suppose it will because of your preconceived notions about what makes people play EVE in the first place, but you've ignored the actual data. EVE grew fastest while it was more dangerous.

"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
#124 - 2011-11-09 03:35:09 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
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.

And for the long-term, you're a ******* moron.

So wardecs aren't allowed? Infiltration of corp and internal killing not allowed?

I've ALSO said - moron - that it WOULD require boosts to the wardec mechanics and the removal of the ability to hop corps and stay in NPC making the likelihood of PvP a GREATER possibility.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#125 - 2011-11-09 03:38:10 UTC
Unless the boost is everyone can wardec everyone for free with no timer, your ideas are as useful as what my dog left on the lawn this morning, as are all your horrible ramblings. Idiot.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#126 - 2011-11-09 03:40:39 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
Unless the boost is everyone can wardec everyone for free with no timer, your ideas are as useful as what my dog left on the lawn this morning, as are all your horrible ramblings. Idiot.

You just don't understand his brilliant theories. If CCP just threw in the towel and completely changed the tone and mechanics of the game then Eve would have 11 million subscribers overnight. It's just us old bitter vets keeping this from happening.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#127 - 2011-11-09 03:41:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Ladie Harlot
K Suri wrote:
And for the long-term, you're a ******* moron.

So wardecs aren't allowed? Infiltration of corp and internal killing not allowed?

I've ALSO said - moron - that it WOULD require boosts to the wardec mechanics and the removal of the ability to hop corps and stay in NPC making the likelihood of PvP a GREATER possibility.

I love how in all of your threads when you realize you're losing the argument you resort to name calling. I have a six year old nephew who does the same thing and it's adorable.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
K Suri
Doomheim
#128 - 2011-11-09 03:42:24 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
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?



That as more safety has been added, the rate of sub increase has slowed. There is no evidence whatsoever to support the assertion that making hi-sec safer will make EVE more popular. You suppose it will because of your preconceived notions about what makes people play EVE in the first place, but you've ignored the actual data. EVE grew fastest while it was more dangerous.

But it still grew - albeit slower and it's been said - causation is the question. I'm trying to point out that more recent sub slowdown has NO relation to "safe space" because NOTHING has happened for a very long time to cause it.

There have been MANY other factors that have reduced subs, notwithstanding WiS etc. and for all we know, the slow increase may in fact be offsetting losses because highsec is safer? Who knows?
K Suri
Doomheim
#129 - 2011-11-09 03:45:21 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
Unless the boost is everyone can wardec everyone for free with no timer, your ideas are as useful as what my dog left on the lawn this morning, as are all your horrible ramblings. Idiot.

Why does the timer need to be removed? If you CANNOT leave the corp on a declaration a removal of a timer is not neccessary.

As for what your dog left on the lawn, since we're going down this personal attack road, perhaps your dog grabbed you by the collar and dragged you outside. Just how big is the pile of **** on your lawn?
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#130 - 2011-11-09 03:47:00 UTC
K Suri wrote:
since we're going down this personal attack road

ohgod the irony

CCP just lock the thread now...it's never going to get better than this.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
K Suri
Doomheim
#131 - 2011-11-09 03:47:42 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
And for the long-term, you're a ******* moron.

So wardecs aren't allowed? Infiltration of corp and internal killing not allowed?

I've ALSO said - moron - that it WOULD require boosts to the wardec mechanics and the removal of the ability to hop corps and stay in NPC making the likelihood of PvP a GREATER possibility.

I love how in all of your threads when you realize you're losing the argument you resort to name calling. I have a six year old nephew who does the same thing and it's adorable.

Clever omission of where the name calling started from. You're starting your usual slide from intelligible to terrible once exhausted don't ya know.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#132 - 2011-11-09 03:48:47 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
And for the long-term, you're a ******* moron.

So wardecs aren't allowed? Infiltration of corp and internal killing not allowed?

I've ALSO said - moron - that it WOULD require boosts to the wardec mechanics and the removal of the ability to hop corps and stay in NPC making the likelihood of PvP a GREATER possibility.

I love how in all of your threads when you realize you're losing the argument you resort to name calling. I have a six year old nephew who does the same thing and it's adorable.

Clever omission of where the name calling started from. You're starting your usual slide from intelligible to terrible once exhausted don't ya know.

Resorting to name calling after someone else does makes you look even less mature than doing so once you have run out of arguments.
K Suri
Doomheim
#133 - 2011-11-09 03:48:48 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
since we're going down this personal attack road

ohgod the irony

CCP just lock the thread now...it's never going to get better than this.

The usual request after you **** a thread.
K Suri
Doomheim
#134 - 2011-11-09 03:54:00 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
And for the long-term, you're a ******* moron.

So wardecs aren't allowed? Infiltration of corp and internal killing not allowed?

I've ALSO said - moron - that it WOULD require boosts to the wardec mechanics and the removal of the ability to hop corps and stay in NPC making the likelihood of PvP a GREATER possibility.

I love how in all of your threads when you realize you're losing the argument you resort to name calling. I have a six year old nephew who does the same thing and it's adorable.

Clever omission of where the name calling started from. You're starting your usual slide from intelligible to terrible once exhausted don't ya know.

Resorting to name calling after someone else does makes you look even less mature than doing so once you have run out of arguments.

Oh my. You're expecting me to follow some quaint morality line as I get trolled by people who obviously don't want topics like this discussed.

And that's exactly how they keep getting sticky subjects they don't like debunked. That's exactly how and why people get sick to death of trying to discuss stuff and that's exactly why, over time, the only ones left on Eve forums all agree with each other and CCP sees it as a consensus.

Good to see you fall for the tactic too.
Dirk Magnum
Spearhead Endeavors
#135 - 2011-11-09 04:03:54 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Oh my. You're expecting me to follow some quaint morality line as I get trolled by people who obviously don't want topics like this discussed.

And that's exactly how they keep getting sticky subjects they don't like debunked. That's exactly how and why people get sick to death of trying to discuss stuff and that's exactly why, over time, the only ones left on Eve forums all agree with each other and CCP sees it as a consensus.

But there is consensus: players who play Eve in the original spirit of the game do not support the sterilization of it.

And:
Quote:
Would CCP be doing good for business by making areas - such as high-sec - a safer place to nurture and establish new players and corporations?

You aren't "nurturing" anyone in this game if you make this game easier, you're just setting them up for failure if they ever decide to try the 90% of this game that isn't high sec carebearing.

                      "LIVE FAST DIE." - traditional Minmatar ethos [citation needed]
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#136 - 2011-11-09 04:07:19 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
K Suri wrote:
And for the long-term, you're a ******* moron.

So wardecs aren't allowed? Infiltration of corp and internal killing not allowed?

I've ALSO said - moron - that it WOULD require boosts to the wardec mechanics and the removal of the ability to hop corps and stay in NPC making the likelihood of PvP a GREATER possibility.

I love how in all of your threads when you realize you're losing the argument you resort to name calling. I have a six year old nephew who does the same thing and it's adorable.

Clever omission of where the name calling started from. You're starting your usual slide from intelligible to terrible once exhausted don't ya know.

Resorting to name calling after someone else does makes you look even less mature than doing so once you have run out of arguments.

Oh my. You're expecting me to follow some quaint morality line as I get trolled by people who obviously don't want topics like this discussed.

And that's exactly how they keep getting sticky subjects they don't like debunked. That's exactly how and why people get sick to death of trying to discuss stuff and that's exactly why, over time, the only ones left on Eve forums all agree with each other and CCP sees it as a consensus.

Good to see you fall for the tactic too.

No, I expect you to provide supporting evidence for your arguments, while the ones going with personal attacks get seen for the fools they are, thereby allowing you to gain support.

I love when topics like this get discussed/debated, but not when people can't come up with arguments with anything to support them and so they resort to name calling and stupidity.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#137 - 2011-11-09 04:10:19 UTC
K Suri wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
Unless the boost is everyone can wardec everyone for free with no timer, your ideas are as useful as what my dog left on the lawn this morning, as are all your horrible ramblings. Idiot.

Why does the timer need to be removed? If you CANNOT leave the corp on a declaration a removal of a timer is not neccessary.

As for what your dog left on the lawn, since we're going down this personal attack road, perhaps your dog grabbed you by the collar and dragged you outside. Just how big is the pile of **** on your lawn?


You appear to be mad, sir.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#138 - 2011-11-09 04:12:11 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:

No, I expect you to provide supporting evidence for your arguments,

If you check his post history you'll find that he doesn't like to bother with trivialities like evidence or logic.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#139 - 2011-11-09 04:15:37 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:

No, I expect you to provide supporting evidence for your arguments,

If you check his post history you'll find that he doesn't like to bother with trivialities like evidence or logic.

I try to avoid being biased against the person I debate with, and let each thread be its own.
K Suri
Doomheim
#140 - 2011-11-09 04:26:31 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:

I love when topics like this get discussed/debated, but not when people can't come up with arguments with anything to support them and so they resort to name calling and stupidity.

And of course, it was being discussed/debated until the name calling started. I was not the guilty party. So yes, let's all succumb to hijacked threads and make our own apologies for THEIR behaviour.

And while you are so affording of conciliatory posts, go back and look at the number of times any of the Deklein Co boys **** up threads and forum members are forced to back off by being conciliatory to SAVE the thread for discussion.

All too common and CCP has NEVER stopped them. Perhaps this is another thread for another day.