These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Real Criticism of CCP
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#121 - 2013-09-01 09:23:47 UTC
Renault T'Bonin wrote:
Yup, I'm posting anonymously. Make of that what you will.

I own multiple characters, and I'm a fairly rich industrialist in the game. I've headed an alliance, held sov, know how to fight, and date back to 2004.

Recently returned to the game to find a more or less all out war on industrialists. I'm going to state my case, understanding I will be flamed.

Mining, should not be risk free. Mining in empire should not be risk free.

But let's look at this scenario:

A miner gets ganked in a hulk (or covetor). He's ganked by an alt corp or large corp. War is declared within seconds of the successful gank.

*poof*- alt corp gankers are offline for the duration.

Large corp gankers, run back to 0.0 or low sec.

Even kill rights do not mitigate. There is no consequence. Security status loss is a joke for someone willing to suicide (and it's most likely an alt).

Industry types can work around this. Fly only insured covetors, keep 500m or less in my freighter, and use intensive scouting. Ok we get it... no problem.

But when the inevitable happens... we can't fight back. The targets are either NPC corps, stealthy alt corps, or full out alliance connected corporations. Even in corps of hundreds of people... we cannot retaliate. The perpetrators come to empire space specifically to hassle miners, then leave.

And WE want to retaliate! But keeping an alt corp logged off for a month is not retaliation. Declaring war against a 0.0 alliance is not retaliation- the alliance has a tactical advantage in their own space.... a 100 man empire corp is not going to successfully jump all the way into 0.0 and engage a sov holding alliance. Not happening.

While Eve isn't fair... this is one area that needs balance.

So here's what I do not propose:

1. Do not increase the tank on mining ships.

2. Do not speed up Concord.

3. Do not make industry easier.

Here's what I do propose:

1. Have real consequences for criminal acts which force the criminals to face real retaliation. People who play Eve whine all the time about how "Carebears don't want to fight". But they do want to fight! Please make it possible. Not just a little sec status loss and LOL's for the gankers. The current mechanics allow a run and hide scenario which is detrimental to the game.

Most of us into industry, in a serious sense, know how to fight, can fight, and are willing to do so. But we have no targets. We get hit... and buy another ship. We have a situation where an attack is made, and the attackers are shielded by location, or logoff.

It's a serious mechanics issue. And user accounts are being closed because of it- especially newer players. Those of us who have been around since before battleships, will probably deal with the situation. And it's to my advantage if CCP does nothing- I'll make more ISK.

But from a game mechanics standpoint, from the standpoint of new players, it's a real problem especially for growth of the game.


Don't worry, in a few more months, you won't be worrying about industry in high sec.

The null sec cartels want more serfs to feed their needs, and CCP is obliging that by wrecking high sec industry.
Mineral prices are slowly crashing, and null sec gets another massive buff in mineral content on Tuesday (check the patch notes), so mining will be an utter waste of time in high sec.
And as for T2 industry in high sec, what do you think that "contentious item" is that Ripard Teg refers to when writing about the CSM summit this week?
Turelus
Utassi Security
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#122 - 2013-09-01 10:24:16 UTC
Renault T'Bonin wrote:

What an absolutely useless reply.... it's like "goon talking points". Spewed out with the impunity of the group thinking goon. Do you guys have individual opinions? Or just get the same talking points weekly?

Move to 0.0? Did you read my post? Idiot.


And this is where your argument crumbled. The points made were goods ones, attacking a player because they're a member of a hated alliance doesn't work in defending points, debates are not about name calling and insults resorting to that makes this thread no more constructive than every other "wahhh nerf gankers" thread.

Now I do agree with that ganking has become far too easy, I think CCP have gone the wrong route with CONCORD buffs, warp nerfs and all the other mechanic changes which have only become more enforced restrictions.

There needs to be a system where continued criminal actions have lasting and harsh consequences.
A system where the Empires actually take offence to these Capsuleer terrorists in their space and do something about it would be within the realms of lore as well as adding more consequences.
Gank people in Caldari space enough and the State stops you docking in their stations? Sure people will get around this with alts and leaving ships in space but at least it's another harmful consequence. As it stands right now Outlaw status is a joke and not punishment for a ganker (many of which are alts) in any way.

Turelus CEO Utassi Security
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#123 - 2013-09-01 10:26:42 UTC
Easy fix

1) NPC corps can not be joined after a char is 30 days old.

2) A war dec places a 7 day timer on leaving and joining a war dec'd corporation and a corparation who starts a war.

Oh look eve is now real and will stand half a chance next year when 2 new MMO space games go live.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#124 - 2013-09-01 10:44:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Don't worry, in a few more months, you won't be worrying about industry in high sec.

The null sec cartels want more serfs to feed their needs, and CCP is obliging that by wrecking high sec industry.
Mineral prices are slowly crashing, and null sec gets another massive buff in mineral content on Tuesday (check the patch notes), so mining will be an utter waste of time in high sec.
And as for T2 industry in high sec, what do you think that "contentious item" is that Ripard Teg refers to when writing about the CSM summit this week?


I was active in another thread about nerfing HS and it is quite evident that the agenda is to nerf HS, I am not against buffing 0.0 because the stations are not great and the lack of Mexallon is a issue in certain areas of the game (drone areas) so I am not against the mineral content being improved, but there is an aim by certain groups to force people into 0.0 by making some game play impossible in HS and if that is T2 manufacturing then I have to say that CCP are about to makle a serious mistake, I really hope that it is not the case. I used to think that CCP knew that nerfing HS was a bad idea but they have been in the same room with multiple 0.0 movers and shakers that their pressure looks to be having the affect and CCP are losing sight of the simple fact that many players do not want to go to 0.0. And I say that as someone who has spent more time in 0.0 than HS.

EDIT: And your idea of closing Station access in HS is a very good one, actions should have consequences...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#125 - 2013-09-01 12:27:09 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Don't worry, in a few more months, you won't be worrying about industry in high sec.

The null sec cartels want more serfs to feed their needs, and CCP is obliging that by wrecking high sec industry.
Mineral prices are slowly crashing, and null sec gets another massive buff in mineral content on Tuesday (check the patch notes), so mining will be an utter waste of time in high sec.
And as for T2 industry in high sec, what do you think that "contentious item" is that Ripard Teg refers to when writing about the CSM summit this week?


I was active in another thread about nerfing HS and it is quite evident that the agenda is to nerf HS, I am not against buffing 0.0 because the stations are not great and the lack of Mexallon is a issue in certain areas of the game (drone areas) so I am not against the mineral content being improved, but there is an aim by certain groups to force people into 0.0 by making some game play impossible in HS and if that is T2 manufacturing then I have to say that CCP are about to makle a serious mistake, I really hope that it is not the case. I used to think that CCP knew that nerfing HS was a bad idea but they have been in the same room with multiple 0.0 movers and shakers that their pressure looks to be having the affect and CCP are losing sight of the simple fact that many players do not want to go to 0.0. And I say that as someone who has spent more time in 0.0 than HS.

EDIT: And your idea of closing Station access in HS is a very good one, actions should have consequences...


I don't think that CCP is on buying suicide no matter the pressure from player "representatives". They really ought to know where players are, what do they do, and what does that mean concerning nullsec's self-importance.

Nullsec is important... but it's only a small fraction of the game.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#126 - 2013-09-01 15:36:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
Renault T'Bonin wrote:
But when the inevitable happens... we can't fight back. The targets are either NPC corps, stealthy alt corps, or full out alliance connected corporations. Even in corps of hundreds of people... we cannot retaliate. The perpetrators come to empire space specifically to hassle miners, then leave

They came to "your space" to attack you - seems like expecting the same in return is 'balanced', no?
Simply look up which alliance infringed upon your space pixels, find where they live, and go return the favour. Else, watchlists and locator agents will be highly illuminating.
Quote:
It's a serious mechanics issue. And user accounts are being closed because of it

And? Assuming this is true (massive assumption) it takes anywhere upto 20 people to gank a freighter or full-tank Orca, so if you're saying one person is more likely to quit so that 20 people can enjoy themselves, this is a no-brainer for supporting more, easier ganking.

The number of people who can't bear the idea that ganking exists is a very vocal minority - the number of people who joined EvE because it's advertised as a cold and harsh universe is ... well it's all but everyone else. If you want to argue your case, falling on the tired "but I *KNOW* it's better for your company CCP!" is not going to work for you.

Other than that your post is just "I WANT REAL CONSEQUENCES (but have no idea what I want)"

A real solution, is to stop doing it in highsec.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#127 - 2013-09-01 17:05:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Quote:
And? Assuming this is true (massive assumption) it takes anywhere upto 20 people to gank a freighter or full-tank Orca, so if you're saying one person is more likely to quit so that 20 people can enjoy themselves, this is a no-brainer for supporting more, easier ganking.


After orca pilot leaving, they can gank themselves. Ultimately only one ganker will emerge victorious after others leaving, and he wil leave because there will be no one to gank. Lol

Seriously, the ganking is more of economic importance in game, not tears. Destruction was always encouraged by CCP so better stay in station if you are afraid of losing the ship you can't replace.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Louise Beethoven
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#128 - 2013-09-01 17:12:46 UTC
Tara Read wrote:


Are you serious? I drive a 2013 Chevy Camaro, have a job that pays me 100k a year, plus 401k, retirement, medical, dental. I am happily married and in good health at the ripe old age of 25.

I also never mission and use plex to fund my criminal activity. I own over 20 billion in hulls alone all for the sole purpose of destruction.

omg, can I have a locket of your hair?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#129 - 2013-09-01 17:16:55 UTC
Louise Beethoven wrote:
omg, can I have a locket of your hair?
Voodoo is probably against the EULA.
slaughtered Lamb
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#130 - 2013-09-01 18:27:25 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Don't worry, in a few more months, you won't be worrying about industry in high sec.

The null sec cartels want more serfs to feed their needs, and CCP is obliging that by wrecking high sec industry.
Mineral prices are slowly crashing, and null sec gets another massive buff in mineral content on Tuesday (check the patch notes), so mining will be an utter waste of time in high sec.
And as for T2 industry in high sec, what do you think that "contentious item" is that Ripard Teg refers to when writing about the CSM summit this week?


I was active in another thread about nerfing HS and it is quite evident that the agenda is to nerf HS, I am not against buffing 0.0 because the stations are not great and the lack of Mexallon is a issue in certain areas of the game (drone areas) so I am not against the mineral content being improved, but there is an aim by certain groups to force people into 0.0 by making some game play impossible in HS and if that is T2 manufacturing then I have to say that CCP are about to makle a serious mistake, I really hope that it is not the case. I used to think that CCP knew that nerfing HS was a bad idea but they have been in the same room with multiple 0.0 movers and shakers that their pressure looks to be having the affect and CCP are losing sight of the simple fact that many players do not want to go to 0.0. And I say that as someone who has spent more time in 0.0 than HS.

EDIT: And your idea of closing Station access in HS is a very good one, actions should have consequences...


The Goongirls and Icles need more supplies, and ofc CCP is bending over to help... f*** everyone in highsec, sure we are all trial accounts anyway, gotta look after the cash puppies after all. RollTwistedOopsWhat?Shocked

If you are allowed to be a murdering, thieving, scamming, killing, stealing, lying bastard..... Why aren't we allowed to cheat?
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#131 - 2013-09-02 00:52:41 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
I used to think that CCP knew that nerfing HS was a bad idea but they have been in the same room with multiple 0.0 movers and shakers that their pressure looks to be having the affect and CCP are losing sight of the simple fact that many players do not want to go to 0.0.
Players don't have to go to nullsec. But the players that do go to null and spend their ISK to carve out a piece of it, and have to defend it, and have to deal with the idiotic politics involved should have an advantage. The stations that they create and defend should be THE best place for industry. Then POSes. And then at the very bottom, the empire NPC maintained stations. Simply put, player created content should be the best. Not NPC space. HS should indeed be nerfed into the ground. You don't have to leave HS, but you just gotta accept that the rewards are gonna be crap. Which is the price paid for relative safety. At least that's how it would all work in my theoretical view of the game.

And I say that as somebody who has spent the last few years in hi-sec. It shouldn't be easy-mode paradise, it should be a low-wage ghetto.
Neo Hal
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#132 - 2013-09-02 02:07:47 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I used to think that CCP knew that nerfing HS was a bad idea but they have been in the same room with multiple 0.0 movers and shakers that their pressure looks to be having the affect and CCP are losing sight of the simple fact that many players do not want to go to 0.0.
Players don't have to go to nullsec. But the players that do go to null and spend their ISK to carve out a piece of it, and have to defend it, and have to deal with the idiotic politics involved should have an advantage. The stations that they create and defend should be THE best place for industry. Then POSes. And then at the very bottom, the empire NPC maintained stations. Simply put, player created content should be the best. Not NPC space. HS should indeed be nerfed into the ground. You don't have to leave HS, but you just gotta accept that the rewards are gonna be crap. Which is the price paid for relative safety. At least that's how it would all work in my theoretical view of the game.

And I say that as somebody who has spent the last few years in hi-sec. It shouldn't be easy-mode paradise, it should be a low-wage ghetto.


I agree with what you're saying in principle which amounts to higher risk/effort...higher reward. The question is how much disparity should there be between highsec and nullsec? This is more of a game balance question than a game mechanics issue.

In the end nobody will ever be satisfied. The highsec people will always want more and the nullsec people will never feel like they have enough. They will both twist and bend the truth to present whatever makes their case without any objectivity at all. Most people have little or no ability to see any point of view other than their own.

When a player complains about balance they're only presenting information from their own experience...the experience of one player (and all of their alts, LOL). But CCP has a lot more global data available to analyze and therefore can make better judgements than any single player about game balance. As a result, I've been less interested in even engaging in that argument.

I'm content to assume that someone at CCP is watching over this and making appropriate decisions. Big smile
Alaekessa
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc.
#133 - 2013-09-02 02:25:28 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I used to think that CCP knew that nerfing HS was a bad idea but they have been in the same room with multiple 0.0 movers and shakers that their pressure looks to be having the affect and CCP are losing sight of the simple fact that many players do not want to go to 0.0.
Players don't have to go to nullsec. But the players that do go to null and spend their ISK to carve out a piece of it, and have to defend it, and have to deal with the idiotic politics involved should have an advantage. The stations that they create and defend should be THE best place for industry. Then POSes. And then at the very bottom, the empire NPC maintained stations. Simply put, player created content should be the best. Not NPC space. HS should indeed be nerfed into the ground. You don't have to leave HS, but you just gotta accept that the rewards are gonna be crap. Which is the price paid for relative safety. At least that's how it would all work in my theoretical view of the game.

And I say that as somebody who has spent the last few years in hi-sec. It shouldn't be easy-mode paradise, it should be a low-wage ghetto.


I agree, just curious on where NPC 0.0 would fall.

Trash space or streets lined with ISK space?
Master Justasii
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#134 - 2013-09-02 02:42:35 UTC
Summary:

"I mine in Hi-sec and get ganked. I cannot respond IN TIME to successfully retaliate."

The answer and solution are simple and straightforward and require no changes to game mechanics:

Answer to why you cannot retaliate: You are by yourself.
Answer to be able to retaliate: Don't be by yourself.

You could easily have some mates near enough to respond to your distress. If you don't, then, stfu seriously; nowhere is safe in EVE. You undock, you can get blowed up. Get some friends to watch your back, or pay someone to. Seriously, this is the biggest whiney thread I have ever read and the OP deserves to be ganked forever. And seriously, you probably mine for days and days without threat, and then what, once a month you get ganked? I would call that pretty safe and easy mining. STFU OP.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#135 - 2013-09-02 02:43:47 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I used to think that CCP knew that nerfing HS was a bad idea but they have been in the same room with multiple 0.0 movers and shakers that their pressure looks to be having the affect and CCP are losing sight of the simple fact that many players do not want to go to 0.0.
Players don't have to go to nullsec. But the players that do go to null and spend their ISK to carve out a piece of it, and have to defend it, and have to deal with the idiotic politics involved should have an advantage. The stations that they create and defend should be THE best place for industry. Then POSes. And then at the very bottom, the empire NPC maintained stations. Simply put, player created content should be the best. Not NPC space. HS should indeed be nerfed into the ground. You don't have to leave HS, but you just gotta accept that the rewards are gonna be crap. Which is the price paid for relative safety. At least that's how it would all work in my theoretical view of the game.

And I say that as somebody who has spent the last few years in hi-sec. It shouldn't be easy-mode paradise, it should be a low-wage ghetto.

No, because the idiotic politics = blue donut and therefore no risk.

Ask pros like -A-, TEST and RDN. about how riskless their blue donut made them

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#136 - 2013-09-02 02:50:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Felicity Love
... waits for CCP to "turn off" Concord for a few days, with the result being no war decs needed, mining becomes risky again, and people have all kinds of fun for a change instead of worrying about the endless list of "why EVE is broken".

Well, at least those that login will have fun.

The rest aren't having fun anyway, because they won't login no matter what the mechanics are, but that's their choice (read: their problem).

Candyasses. Blink

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Sidrat Flush
KarmaFleet
#137 - 2013-09-02 03:05:29 UTC
Train cloaking skill to level 4 when thats done take a break from mining and fit a combat cloaky ship. Travel to a busy null sec system by looking at the in game map for activity clues.

Realise human behaviour dictates people won't look for a cloaky ship afk or otherwise. Keep an eye on sites gates and belts. Pick targets either with care or abandon and have fun for a while.

Don't forget to update your clone and ensure location of medical clone is agreeable.

Have fun.

Its time to stand up against the bad empire based CEO telling falsehoods about what new characters can accomplish and pushing them towards an in game experience of drudgery and loneliness keeping them in the shadow of ignorance for at nest their own profit at worse apathy towards all the experiences that Eve has to offer.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#138 - 2013-09-02 03:21:32 UTC
Finding cloaky ships eh

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#139 - 2013-09-02 03:21:59 UTC
Alaekessa wrote:
I agree, just curious on where NPC 0.0 would fall.

Trash space or streets lined with ISK space?
If it were up to me (which it is not), I'd say a NPC null station would be about the level of a low-sec POS. Kinda middle of the road productivity. It's more risky getting materials to and from the station, but you never run the risk of losing everything in the station itself. And a POS in NPC null would be the same as a POS in any other part of null (except that you can't protect it with a cyno jammer). So fairly decent. At least in my imaginary view of EvE.

Alavaria Fera wrote:
No, because the idiotic politics = blue donut and therefore no risk.
Ask pros like -A-, TEST and RDN. about how riskless their blue donut made them
Errr... You seem to be contradicting yourself there. What are you trying to say?
Forum Damsel
Doomheim
#140 - 2013-09-02 03:43:34 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Icarus Able wrote:

Read the first post and you will realise you are a dumbass.

Thank you for your wonderful insight, I did read the first post.

The fact of the matter is that most miners won't fight back. I've been in mining corps, I still mine, I also gank other miners on occasion. 90% of them will sit there and whine in local about how CCP should protect them from the bad people, that they're defenceless and that others shouldn't be able to interfere with them.

Please insult me further, it makes me all warm and gooey inside.


when is the last time you've seen a Venture run by a week-old character even know how to put up an effective fight? These are the players who are being persuaded to dump EvE by the gankers.