These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

SOE hubs just became war zones?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#81 - 2013-12-11 20:26:14 UTC
Casanunda wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
I see the prospect of "profit" in suicide ganking has come up, and by the usual suspects.

Let this sink in: Suicide ganking wasn't designed to be profitable

That's not me saying that. That's not some carebear saying that. That's not some highsec CSM saying that. Look at the flag next to the post.
Regardless of the intended design suicide ganking is only profitable because the victims make it profitable, even then the loot fairy takes the potential of profitability down to circa 50%.

Quote:
If you want to gank ships "just because" then you are taking the sandbox into the realm of being all about bonking kids with the pale and shovel and less about sand, and that threatens the sandbox. The people screaming "sandbox" now will be screaming nerf later if CCP (mommy) has to intervene and put further control on the pale and shovel. You want 1 minute invulnerability on undock or ships being randomly deposited cloaked outside of stations like at a gate? Keep up the "ganking just for tears" thing.
No we don't, but people who whine about ganking would probably be very happy with that state of affairs. Luckily CCP knows their target demographic and it's extremely unlikely they'll introduce measures even close to that.

Quote:
You see if you want "real world" jollies projected into a game (like ganking for no reason when would have been outside instead keying new cars), and in that real world there's profit to be concerned about, real world people are going to be forced to intervene somehow and nobody is going to be thrilled about it.
Let me get this straight you're equating the destruction of pixels, that incidentally belong to CCP, to the destruction of real world items? That's two very different things, damaging or destroying real world items is a criminal offence, punishable in a real world court of law, doing the same to pixels is not.

Get some perspective, oh and it's Pail, not pale.



Say what you want. People looking for more than a quick gratification don't want to feel like they are paying to babysit.

And yeah it's hard to equate griefing with real world vandalism for people who have always been too afraid to actually go outside and break something. Back in my day, we did just that. And we ran from the cops too. I guess with all the surveillance and new laws in place, the MMO is the only place left. CCP means "Crowd Control Productions" so of course the game has to be a collection point for people who would otherwise be vandals in a society that breeds lowlifes.

Thank you for the spelling help. Cool

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#82 - 2013-12-11 20:29:58 UTC
Our energies are best spent preparing for the coming overthrow of the U.S. government. Or race war. Whichever comes first.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#83 - 2013-12-11 20:51:19 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Our energies are best spent preparing for the coming overthrow of the U.S. government. Or race war. Whichever comes first.


It'll all start with an argument about which is better, Tolkien or Ayn Rand.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#84 - 2013-12-11 21:10:35 UTC
Discriminating pirates choose Apanake, and they don't get CONCODOKKEN'ed in the process

Would you like to know more?
Abisha Baboli
#85 - 2013-12-11 21:17:53 UTC
Casanunda wrote:
Abisha Baboli wrote:
just don't get it, aint the reason people are in high sec, because they not like PvP?.
forcing them into PvP content, makes a unhappy customer, and guess what those do one day?

stats will show, sooner or later, but keep in mind each lost customer is a lost profit need for new content.

If they don't like PvP there's thousands of other games out there to play. Highsec is not, never has been, and never should be a PvP free zone, its safety is relative when compared to the other areas of space. People are in highsec because that's where the industrial backbone, markets, and easy money is.

Imagine highsec as a walled city during the 30 Year War, relatively safe when compared to what lay outside those walls. The barbarians were still knocking at the gates, sometimes they got through and razed the place to the ground.


yea their are 100's of other space games available right......
their is only like what 20 space games ever released man
Ginger Barbarella
#86 - 2013-12-11 21:21:29 UTC
Joia Crenca wrote:
It looks like someone's ganking SOE mission runners in each of the hubs. A group of destroyers bounces out, then a dozen local chat icons turn blinking red. So if someone was wanting PVP excitement in high-sec space, it's here now. PVE-centric players ... well, we'll have to see if CCP gets worried about the casual players unsubbing too quickly for their financial comfort.


You're always going to have people that think it's cute to knock down old folks and steal their social security (pension) checks. These guys stay in NPC corps and have basically zero consequences to their actions. Win/win for them.

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#87 - 2013-12-11 21:25:20 UTC
Ginger Barbarella wrote:
Joia Crenca wrote:
It looks like someone's ganking SOE mission runners in each of the hubs. A group of destroyers bounces out, then a dozen local chat icons turn blinking red. So if someone was wanting PVP excitement in high-sec space, it's here now. PVE-centric players ... well, we'll have to see if CCP gets worried about the casual players unsubbing too quickly for their financial comfort.


You're always going to have people that think it's cute to knock down old folks and steal their social security (pension) checks. These guys stay in NPC corps and have basically zero consequences to their actions. Win/win for them.


I wonder why people join spacepixelroleplayinggames and move directly to "roleplay victim".
Milan Nantucket
Doomheim
#88 - 2013-12-11 21:42:39 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
highsec gankers may say they are all about PVP and "risk" but they dare not risk being on the receiving end of a gank.


We make the risk. We are the risk.

It just stands to reason that people who are all about risk will understand how to take measures to mitigate risk as well.


You are actually wrong. Most of us gankers used to be miner's, missioners, or some other boring as hell occupation... then we decided to make our own content. So yes we've been ganked.
Josef Djugashvilis
#89 - 2013-12-11 23:50:57 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
PVE-centric players ... well, we'll have to see if CCP gets worried about the casual players unsubbing too quickly for their financial comfort.


Screw those people. I hate that attitude so much, it is literally the reason why I gank, scam, and grief as hard as I do.

Because people try to hold my gameplay hostage by threatening to quit because they don't like how I play. If they want a kiddie ride, there are plenty of other games to play. In fact, there is EVERY OTHER game to play. So they can get the hell out of my game.


Your game?

The ego is strong in this one.

This is not a signature.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#90 - 2013-12-12 00:12:11 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Our energies are best spent preparing for the coming overthrow of the U.S. government. Or race war. Whichever comes first.


It'll all start with an argument about which is better, Tolkien or Ayn Rand.



That's not even an argument.

If you say anything besides "Tolkien, DUH!", you should be black bagged.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jill Chastot
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#91 - 2013-12-12 00:20:25 UTC
"Just"

HA


I laugh too much at this topicLol

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unread OATHS wants you. Come to the WH "Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter. Once you accept this you will truely enjoy this game."
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#92 - 2013-12-12 00:23:52 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
PVE-centric players ... well, we'll have to see if CCP gets worried about the casual players unsubbing too quickly for their financial comfort.


Screw those people. I hate that attitude so much, it is literally the reason why I gank, scam, and grief as hard as I do.

Because people try to hold my gameplay hostage by threatening to quit because they don't like how I play. If they want a kiddie ride, there are plenty of other games to play. In fact, there is EVERY OTHER game to play. So they can get the hell out of my game.


Your game?

The ego is strong in this one.


There are plenty of carebear games out there. Nearly everything else on the market caters to your ilk.

We have one game. EVE. Quit trying to put your chocolate in my peanut butter, I like it the way it is.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Josef Djugashvilis
#93 - 2013-12-12 00:37:46 UTC
Dear Kaarous, why do you persume that the 'other me' is in any way a care-bear?

If it helps put your mind at ease, I have never mined, not even once.

Can I join your pixel hard-man club now please?

You are still my favourite poster, never stop posting.

Eve in simple terms, you undock, you accept the risk of being ganked anywhere anytime.

This is not a signature.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#94 - 2013-12-12 00:40:51 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quit trying to put your chocolate in my peanut butter...



Better to read that in a forum than to hear that in prison.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Josef Djugashvilis
#95 - 2013-12-12 00:43:07 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quit trying to put your chocolate in my peanut butter...



Better to read that in a forum than to hear that in prison.


Very witty [:)

This is not a signature.
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
#96 - 2013-12-12 00:49:06 UTC
Abisha Baboli wrote:

yea their are 100's of other space games available right......
their is only like what 20 space games ever released man


What may or may not have any bearing is that two of them that will (most likely) directly compete with eve will coming out in the near future.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#97 - 2013-12-12 00:49:58 UTC
Quote:
Dear Kaarous, why do you persume that the 'other me' is in any way a care-bear?


Advocate for them, become one. As far as I can tell anyway.

That is however a digression.

It's "my" game, insomuch as it is the game of everyone who still believes in non consensual PvP.

The people who don't, can leave for all I care. But they don't get to mess up this game with their bullshit. If they want consent only PvP, there is literally every other game out there for them.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#98 - 2013-12-12 01:18:36 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
Dear Kaarous, why do you persume that the 'other me' is in any way a care-bear?


Advocate for them, become one. As far as I can tell anyway.

That is however a digression.

It's "my" game, insomuch as it is the game of everyone who still believes in non consensual PvP.

The people who don't, can leave for all I care. But they don't get to mess up this game with their bullshit. If they want consent only PvP, there is literally every other game out there for them.



So are you saying that we need someone's consent to engage in meta-game 'rules pvp'? That we can't have non-consensual game mechanics changes?
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#99 - 2013-12-12 01:27:33 UTC
Going back to the thread, I keep hearing about bling ships, and while lessening the value of your ship is a way to lower your personal risk (not eliminate, only lower), that only goes as far as others being slower to do the same.

Destroyer ganking is profitable by a wide enough margin, that even removing the 'just ganking for tears' element, we could have people mostly running t1 ships with t1 mods and still be enough to pay for new destroyers and the time involved in the gank party.

It would be sad, but interesting to see the effect on the game if the ganks increase by 3 or 4 times the rate we're seeing now. (Also, while someone may replace their officer mod once, they might not do it after the next gank, so if enough blingers give up, will those that sell those mods be stuck with unsellable deadspace loot?)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#100 - 2013-12-12 01:28:56 UTC
Joia Crenca wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
Dear Kaarous, why do you persume that the 'other me' is in any way a care-bear?


Advocate for them, become one. As far as I can tell anyway.

That is however a digression.

It's "my" game, insomuch as it is the game of everyone who still believes in non consensual PvP.

The people who don't, can leave for all I care. But they don't get to mess up this game with their bullshit. If they want consent only PvP, there is literally every other game out there for them.



So are you saying that we need someone's consent to engage in meta-game 'rules pvp'? That we can't have non-consensual game mechanics changes?


Are you suggesting that forum campaigns to legislate the other party out of existence is how carebears engage in PvP?

If so then I agree. The last time any of them actually fought back against me with anything but words was making a thread asking for Catalysts to have one less turret.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.