These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Low sec must be nerfed, high sec must be nerfed? Start thinking, stop crying.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#21 - 2014-01-21 01:30:26 UTC
Galda'ri wrote:
So, you're sitting on the forums just to reply based on the titles? Good to know that i'm the one who doesn't know how to use a forum :)


Well good sir, as the author of this thread, your first few lines failed to draw me into your narrative. While im sure that you have some good ideas, the fact is that without reading your post, I can tell you that it is mainly comprised of recycled ideas spewed forth throughout the years by men with much more respect than yourself. To assume that I based my entire comment upon the title would be .... inaccurate. I base my comments upon the facts that you fail to summarize your manifesto into what us General Discussion common folk call a "TL;DR" or "Too Long; Didn't Read", and also that you good sir, are only one in a long line of false prophets and Eve saviours who base their "fixes" on very little actual gameplay or experience. But I digress...

You see, your feature or idea, although misconceived, may have an actual fan base on whos ears this may not fall deafly. Unfortunately for you, that demographic lies in Features and Ideas. You see, while you claim that I do not know how to use a forum, at least I good sir, know where to appropriately post.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
45thtiger 0109
Brave Collective
#22 - 2014-01-21 01:31:00 UTC
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Is this a 'Nerf Nothing' thread?



Can we do that?!??!!??



I agree with the above quote +100000000000000000000

And another thread incoming for lockage from your faithfully ISD & CCP P

**You Have to take the good with the bad and the bad with the good.

Welcome to EvE OnLiNe**
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#23 - 2014-01-21 02:29:49 UTC
Galda'ri wrote:
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
I would be 100% fine with risk-free highsec mining and mission running if (and ONLY if) accounts that participated in it could not participate in other forms of PVP at all.

That means no buying or selling on the markets or contracts; no using those 100% safely mined minerals to produce ships for PVP, and so on.


A bit harsh but not a bad suggestion no but i like the idea that if high-sec should be made 100% risk free that something like that could be a way to do it, limiting those people in terms of PvP but i think maybe it could be done without straight out throwing them out of PvP. Possibly with a timer of sorts, say that you could choose to be 100% high sec risk free then you'd have a 30days timer on or so, that would restrict you from doing PvP and should you do PvP then you would not be allowed into high-sec areas without being shot by concorde or something like it.



Then they could amass resources through years of AFK mining, then take 30 days off the game, then have hundreds of billions of ISK worth of stuff to sell, all generated risk free and without playing the game.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#24 - 2014-01-21 03:25:21 UTC
My 2 ISK:

People as a whole should spend more time begging for CCP to buff what they enjoy instead of just whining for CCP to nerf everything else.

I blame political attack ads. Heck, I blame advertising in general. Whatever happened to "These are my merits, this is why you should vote for me/buy me product." Now it's just "That other guy/products sucks more than ours!"

It's a mindset. Rather than raising yourself up, you knock the other guy lower to make yourself look better.

Hardly what I'd call "progress."

So how about this?

Nullbears talk about improving null.
Lobears talk about improving low.
Carebears talk about improving hisec.

... and stop worrying so much about what everyone else is doing.

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2014-01-21 03:36:21 UTC
45thtiger 0109 wrote:
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Is this a 'Nerf Nothing' thread?



Can we do that?!??!!??



I agree with the above quote +100000000000000000000

And another thread incoming for lockage from your faithfully ISD & CCP P



How about a nerf everything equally thread ...

... except Fedos, they are awesome.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#26 - 2014-01-21 04:24:18 UTC
... remembers when "Nerf" was just a foam football you bounced off the head of the geek that always sat in the front row of every class... and nobody thought it was "bullying".

P

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Erufen Rito
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2014-01-21 05:03:50 UTC
Galda'ri wrote:
I just rescently took a look at the forums a found dozens of posts about nerfing high sec and nerfing low sec and my question is why?

Sure, there are room for chances and some chances can improve the game but people who are saying stuff like "PvP Should be totally banned from high sec!" and "There should be a penalty for PvP in low sec!" is completely dumb.

Nobody actually stops and thinks, i saw a post today that was old but it existed wich amazed me, basically this guy was accusing every miner in high sec for killing low-sec. Wtf? First of, let's just make a few things clear.

1st: If you make high sec 100% PvP safe Eve would die. Why? Because a lot of players, believe it or not, actually plays Eve as a time killer and enjoys the aspects of mining and manufacturing aswell as mission running.
2nd: If you add a severe penalty (outside of the already implented bounty system) to low-sec pvp, Eve would die. Why? Because low-sec is SUPPOSED to be PvP, it's supposed to be a high risk area to go into.

Now, onto the things i believe should be made better.
For high sec i think that it should be made safer (NOT safe, s-a-f-e-r, for those who starts thinking i'm totally against pvp in high sec) by doing stuff like putting 1 or 2 concorde ship(s) into asteroid belts etc
You had me up until this point.

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165
Josef Djugashvilis
#28 - 2014-01-21 08:26:13 UTC
I would suggest that the only folk who want hi-sec to be completely safe are brand spanking new players (who soon change their opinion) and trolls.

This is not a signature.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2014-01-21 08:41:24 UTC
Galda'ri wrote:
Durbon Groth wrote:
You can please some of the people some of the time...

You know the rest.


Yep but neither actually thinks about the large implications of what they're saying might have, they don't stop and think about the actual financial issue it may cause. They just blurt it out because they think that their way of playing is the right way, when pretty much any way of playing Eve is the right way.



We do think about the large implications and exaclty because of that that we take such conclusions.

High sec cannot be safer. At most you can ask for a larger punishemnt on the perpetrators.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2014-01-21 08:43:02 UTC
Galda'ri wrote:


Eve IS a sandbox because you CAN do whatever you want in Eve, wether it be PvP, PvE, Mining, Manufacturing or w/e but don't start crying because you simply don't like the fact that somebody actually plays the game and makes a "living" in the game by doing something you think is stupid, just because you think it's stupid doesn't mean it is stupid. Personal

And that is the main reason why the rest of your post sux. Eve is a sandbox and I may decide to PVP in high sec. I do it, and I pay huge price for it in the form of massive war taxes that SOMETIMES get us a kill.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#31 - 2014-01-21 09:28:19 UTC
Galda'ri wrote:
Now, onto the things i believe should be made better.
For high sec i think that it should be made safer (NOT safe, s-a-f-e-r,


This is the issue. You think high sec should be made "safer". How much safer?

If you were to poll EVERY high sec resident to discover how long they go between PvP incidents of ship loss you would have an average.

So for this example we'll say that high sec residents lose a ship in a high sec, PvP incident every 6 months. So safer would be what? They should lose one every 12 months? 24 months?

The truth of the matter is that all players can take immediate action to make themselves safer. I know this because in the past 6 years, I have never lost a ship in a PvP incident in High Sec. I did lose a drake on a gate camp in Lo Sec when I was fresh out of the State War Academy. I also came close to losing a ship to a mission baiter (his warp scram burned up from overheating and I was able to get away).

I will crusade forever for the status quo. No more safety. It's safe enough.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#32 - 2014-01-21 09:35:13 UTC
Right, first of, the OP has the right to post his opinion and has the right to expect a civil and healthy discussion as a result. You don't have to agree, but post your arguments in a civil manner please. This goes both ways by the way.

And please keep it within the boundaries of The rules.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Galda'ri
#33 - 2014-01-21 13:42:28 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Galda'ri wrote:
Now, onto the things i believe should be made better.
For high sec i think that it should be made safer (NOT safe, s-a-f-e-r,


This is the issue. You think high sec should be made "safer". How much safer?

If you were to poll EVERY high sec resident to discover how long they go between PvP incidents of ship loss you would have an average.

So for this example we'll say that high sec residents lose a ship in a high sec, PvP incident every 6 months. So safer would be what? They should lose one every 12 months? 24 months?

The truth of the matter is that all players can take immediate action to make themselves safer. I know this because in the past 6 years, I have never lost a ship in a PvP incident in High Sec. I did lose a drake on a gate camp in Lo Sec when I was fresh out of the State War Academy. I also came close to losing a ship to a mission baiter (his warp scram burned up from overheating and I was able to get away).

I will crusade forever for the status quo. No more safety. It's safe enough.


I don't disagree but my thoughts on the point of making it safer is that at the moment, suicide ganking is pretty much just go in, scan, is it worth it, go out, get a ship or the few fleet members needed, shoot the target and that's it. There's no risk to actually attacking the target 9/10 times because of concordes "slow" response time wich in return makes suicide ganking "easy" more or less. As i said, i am not against high-sec PvP but you can't exactly tell me that people doing it. The way i see suicide gankers is lazy PvPer's who doesn't actually wanna work for their kills and i am not saying this is all of them, there are gankers who goes into a belt and attacks a target that is protected by a mining fleet with drones or having capsulers out there to protect them but the majority of suicide gankers are attacking a target that has no real way of defending themselves and yes that is a risk you take when mining but i still think that it's lazy and dull. People do it and that's how it is and this is just my personal view of it, not saying it's wrong or right and i'd happily read any posts with other views on this.

I do not reply to trolls or just straight out dumb posts, so nice try ;D
embrel
BamBam Inc.
#34 - 2014-01-21 13:51:56 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Galda'ri wrote:
Nobody actually stops and thinks, i saw a post today that was old but it existed wich amazed me, basically this guy was accusing every miner in high sec for killing low-sec.

The Highsec Manifesto? Please refer to Him by His correct title of 'Supreme Protector of Halaima, Saviour of Highsec, Father of the New Order and Hero of New Eden, James 315', not 'this guy'.


who's this guy?
Galda'ri
#35 - 2014-01-21 13:57:25 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Galda'ri wrote:


Eve IS a sandbox because you CAN do whatever you want in Eve, wether it be PvP, PvE, Mining, Manufacturing or w/e but don't start crying because you simply don't like the fact that somebody actually plays the game and makes a "living" in the game by doing something you think is stupid, just because you think it's stupid doesn't mean it is stupid. Personal

And that is the main reason why the rest of your post sux. Eve is a sandbox and I may decide to PVP in high sec. I do it, and I pay huge price for it in the form of massive war taxes that SOMETIMES get us a kill.


And again, read the actual post as i am also saying that i am NOT against high sec PvP so i fail to see the point in your post?

I do not reply to trolls or just straight out dumb posts, so nice try ;D
embrel
BamBam Inc.
#36 - 2014-01-21 13:58:11 UTC  |  Edited by: embrel
Andski wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
You mean like PL and goons who just signed the BOTLRD treaty where they won't attack each other in their home systems, which encompasses most of null sec?


"We're not going to invade each other and contest each other's sov" isn't "we're not going to shoot you at all"

PL can still roam through CFC space and hunt ratters or stragglers. Maybe you should actually read the treaty rather than just the title and filling in the rest with your weird fanfic.

Don't worry though next time we'll run all of our deals with other entities through you to decide whether you approve of it and ignore whatever you say~


The "we're gonna shoot you where it doesn't hurt every now and then" is, on an alliance level, as if gankers only kill 1 or max. 2 of the miners drones on a individual level.

I thought in Eve you aim at destroying the other ship & pod... that's on the individual level. On alliance level it's obviously different. There you limit yourselves to some posing.

to me it's a carebear treaty. Obviously these alliances are scared.

EDIT: if I were in a leading position of these alliances I'd do the same:)
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#37 - 2014-01-21 14:20:16 UTC
Galda'ri wrote:
**snip

...but the majority of suicide gankers are attacking a target that has no real way of defending themselves...


I think you might misunderstand how a ganker's mind works. If they scan your ship and find that you are tanking instead of fitting the boat for max yield - they are going to move on. You're absolutely right. Gankers are looking for EASY targets. To make high sec safer - make yourself less of an EASY target. It really is that simple.

If they see you fitting a tank they will move on to look for something easier to destroy.
If they notice that you appear to be aware of your surroundings, for example staying aligned to a celestial, or keeping drones out only in the presence of belt rats, they will likely go looking for something easier to kill.

Again, the easiest way for any pilot to make high sec safer is to make themselves safer and not lobby for any additional changes to CONCORD response times, Mining vessel buffs, or ganker gun nerfs.

The tools to make yourself less defenseless are available. Being defenseless is a choice.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Galda'ri
#38 - 2014-01-21 14:43:57 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Galda'ri wrote:
**snip

...but the majority of suicide gankers are attacking a target that has no real way of defending themselves...


I think you might misunderstand how a ganker's mind works. If they scan your ship and find that you are tanking instead of fitting the boat for max yield - they are going to move on. You're absolutely right. Gankers are looking for EASY targets. To make high sec safer - make yourself less of an EASY target. It really is that simple.

If they see you fitting a tank they will move on to look for something easier to destroy.
If they notice that you appear to be aware of your surroundings, for example staying aligned to a celestial, or keeping drones out only in the presence of belt rats, they will likely go looking for something easier to kill.

Again, the easiest way for any pilot to make high sec safer is to make themselves safer and not lobby for any additional changes to CONCORD response times, Mining vessel buffs, or ganker gun nerfs.

The tools to make yourself less defenseless are available. Being defenseless is a choice.


Well put and i am not suggesting any changes to Concord response times or any of those you mentioned, i merely made some examples but i totally agree with what you're saying.

I do not reply to trolls or just straight out dumb posts, so nice try ;D
RAIN Arthie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2014-01-21 17:33:54 UTC
Good post. I need someone to explain to me the importance of lowsec. I am in null and love it. However for the life of me I cannot figure out why there is a low sec. Shoot someone and lose standings. Hmmm I kinda sorta see the point in that however I do not see the long beneficial future for a corp to pos up there and make it a lifestyle. I am not trolling, i really just don't get it. What is the appeal? With my experience all I know from lowsec is it's somewhere to lose a ship at a gate camp. That all I ever see come out of lowsec.
Galda'ri
#40 - 2014-01-21 17:56:43 UTC
RAIN Arthie wrote:
Good post. I need someone to explain to me the importance of lowsec. I am in null and love it. However for the life of me I cannot figure out why there is a low sec. Shoot someone and lose standings. Hmmm I kinda sorta see the point in that however I do not see the long beneficial future for a corp to pos up there and make it a lifestyle. I am not trolling, i really just don't get it. What is the appeal? With my experience all I know from lowsec is it's somewhere to lose a ship at a gate camp. That all I ever see come out of lowsec.


Well it doesn't take much effort to know what low-sec is and how to get into low-sec where other places such as wh's have a minor/mediocre learning curve for newer players in terms of just getting in there since you have to find the wh's point first.

I do not reply to trolls or just straight out dumb posts, so nice try ;D
Previous page123Next page