These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Serious Discussion] This game's community leaves much to be desired

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Goa Chai
Doomheim
#181 - 2014-03-15 05:53:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Goa Chai
Life in New Eden is kind of like prison life, at first you keep to yourself because you don't know where you fit in, but eventually you learn who you can socialize with and who to avoid, then once you know that survival becomes a matter of looking out for those who look out for you and not drawing attention to yourself, manage that and you might make it through your sentence without getting sh(g)anked and your stuff taken.
Marvin Shields
Division 156
#182 - 2014-03-15 05:53:56 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
Actually thats a damn good idea.... let a strip miner overloaded do X amount of DPS directly to the hull of a ship.... it can disintegrate asteroids after all, why the hell can't they damage ships.


This proposal's been done to death, but it never gets any less fun to think about.

"Die carebear scu-**** MY SHIP! STOP MINING MY SHIP!"
Kyperion
#183 - 2014-03-15 05:54:32 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kyperion wrote:

The only 'defense' CCP's shipfitting mechanics allow for those engaging in PVE... ESPECIALLY miners is a few seconds to GTFO if they detect a bad guy in a belt.

Same for missioners... because for the most part you cannot fit even a combat ship for missions and still have a prayer in a PVP situation... and also because you can almost never overcome a One vs Many situation....

So lets give the gankers what they want... Put some ******* teeth on all merchant ships.... give the Barges deployable defense stations and EWAR mid slots....

Lets see how many of these elite champions of Highsec PVP will still be around when the barges strip miner could target and disintegrate their hull.


"I can't be asked to fit or fly ships correctly, so give me the most overpowered anything possible, that'll show em!"

Yes, because shooting back is OP... ******* idiot
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#184 - 2014-03-15 05:56:25 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kyperion wrote:

The only 'defense' CCP's shipfitting mechanics allow for those engaging in PVE... ESPECIALLY miners is a few seconds to GTFO if they detect a bad guy in a belt.

Same for missioners... because for the most part you cannot fit even a combat ship for missions and still have a prayer in a PVP situation... and also because you can almost never overcome a One vs Many situation....

So lets give the gankers what they want... Put some ******* teeth on all merchant ships.... give the Barges deployable defense stations and EWAR mid slots....

Lets see how many of these elite champions of Highsec PVP will still be around when the barges strip miner could target and disintegrate their hull.


"I can't be asked to fit or fly ships correctly, so give me the most overpowered anything possible, that'll show em!"

Yes, because shooting back is OP... ******* idiot


"8 racks of missiles, Strip Miners that deal dps"

Yeah, sure, totally not overpowered. Roll

"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.
Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#185 - 2014-03-15 05:57:38 UTC
Kyperion wrote:

The only 'defense' CCP's shipfitting mechanics allow for those engaging in PVE... ESPECIALLY miners is a few seconds to GTFO if they detect a bad guy in a belt.

Same for missioners... because for the most part you cannot fit even a combat ship for missions and still have a prayer in a PVP situation... and also because you can almost never overcome a One vs Many situation....

So lets give the gankers what they want... Put some ******* teeth on all merchant ships.... give the Barges deployable defense stations and EWAR mid slots....

Lets see how many of these elite champions of Highsec PVP will still be around when the barges strip miner could target and disintegrate their hull.


A miner could fly a tanked procurer or skiff and laugh at the catalysts crashing off his hull. If they did manage to kill him, he could probably scoop enough loot from their wrecks to buy a new one.

I'll give you a semi-okiedokie on the missioner thing. The PvE game mechanics do favor ship fittings that are not particularly good for PvP. But that can be compensated for in several ways. The most important being what you mentioned: have friends. I would expect some guy and 5 or 6 of his friends to kick my ass. Why should it be any different. But if I have friends and we're all shooting the red crosses together, well then we can fit our ships a little, ahem, differently. Maybe be ready for a visit.

But all that would impact how fast we could run the missions wouldn't it? Ruin the isk/hr. Which sounds like a trade-off to me. The kind Eve seems to promote.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."
Kyperion
#186 - 2014-03-15 05:59:29 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kyperion wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kyperion wrote:

The only 'defense' CCP's shipfitting mechanics allow for those engaging in PVE... ESPECIALLY miners is a few seconds to GTFO if they detect a bad guy in a belt.

Same for missioners... because for the most part you cannot fit even a combat ship for missions and still have a prayer in a PVP situation... and also because you can almost never overcome a One vs Many situation....

So lets give the gankers what they want... Put some ******* teeth on all merchant ships.... give the Barges deployable defense stations and EWAR mid slots....

Lets see how many of these elite champions of Highsec PVP will still be around when the barges strip miner could target and disintegrate their hull.


"I can't be asked to fit or fly ships correctly, so give me the most overpowered anything possible, that'll show em!"

Yes, because shooting back is OP... ******* idiot


"8 racks of missiles, Strip Miners that deal dps"

Yeah, sure, totally not overpowered. Roll


Depends on the bonuses, 8 turrets with no bonuses would be half as effective as your typical gank ship
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#187 - 2014-03-15 06:00:20 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kyperion wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kyperion wrote:

The only 'defense' CCP's shipfitting mechanics allow for those engaging in PVE... ESPECIALLY miners is a few seconds to GTFO if they detect a bad guy in a belt.

Same for missioners... because for the most part you cannot fit even a combat ship for missions and still have a prayer in a PVP situation... and also because you can almost never overcome a One vs Many situation....

So lets give the gankers what they want... Put some ******* teeth on all merchant ships.... give the Barges deployable defense stations and EWAR mid slots....

Lets see how many of these elite champions of Highsec PVP will still be around when the barges strip miner could target and disintegrate their hull.


"I can't be asked to fit or fly ships correctly, so give me the most overpowered anything possible, that'll show em!"

Yes, because shooting back is OP... ******* idiot


"8 racks of missiles, Strip Miners that deal dps"

Yeah, sure, totally not overpowered. Roll


Depends on the bonuses, 8 turrets with no bonuses would be half as effective as your typical gank ship


Out of curiosity, how much would this monstrosity cost? 1, 2 billion isk?

"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.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#188 - 2014-03-15 06:01:06 UTC
Karon Grandolf wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Karon Grandolf wrote:


There are indeed several actions that can be taken as a reaction to a war. Most if not all of them involves dismantling the the lifestyle I was talking about, which is exactly the point.

This does not make them less fun if you were to embrace them, but it doesn't change that the lifestyle is very hard to maintain, compared to the high sec war deccing lifestyle of griefers and mercenaries.

The combat lifestyle can impose on the non-combat through wars, but the non-combat cannot impose on the combat by barring a corp from high sec for a week for instance. You can pay Concord to be passive, not active.

Not to say that it should be possible, but the balance favors the combat lifestyle.


EVE is advertised are a dark and cruel game, why would you expect it to be anything else?

You are playing a combat game, treat it as such.


EVE is also advertised as 'Real' (see C C P Manifest's bio for instance ;))

There was a time when I agreed that EVE was indeed very real. Mostly because it allowed for an ecology of gameplay styles, and social interaction.

I considered it a testament to the social character of the human, that in spite of what EVE allowed of mischief, the most predominant experience in EVE was still people helping each other and coorporate to create something together.

It was possible to play with a group of people, regardless of what kind of gameplay you preferred to engage in.

The environment allowed for it because it was better balanced between the styles of play. None was too dominant.

I believe the current environment leads to more isolated non-combat players than before.

EVE is not only a combat game, even if it's advertised as such.

But more than anything it would be great to have actual data to discuss these issues. I also asked C C P Manifest if they have the data. never got an answer. So we don't know whether they chose not to share or simply don't know themselves.

I agree with Ranger1 that EVE should provide A DANGEROUS AND CHALLENGING ENVIRONMENT. The problem is that it is not.

Big smile

I will agree there is always more room for tools and mechanics to aid people in the more peaceful EVE pursuits to benefit from working together.

However, that isn't as easy as it sounds. There seems to be a pervasive attitude that if you work together and split the proceeds of your work you'll end up only getting half as much. Big smile Mining is the only (sometimes) exception to this misguided school of thought.

The thing is, to be quite honest, gate camps and ganking can be a highly dangerous activity in EVE. I have on occasion worked a good gate camp (null sec defense or low sec pirate at various times). I have also been the guy that shows a gate camp exactly why that activity can make you extremely vulnerable to a well organized counter attack.

Most gate camps are incredibly easy to reverse, or at the very least break up, by any reasonably organized group of players. In fact, my very first kill was in such an encounter about a decade ago... deep in the wastelands of Aridia. It's only gotten easier since then.

But that is work best suited to a group, which is something the majority of industrialists avoid. When operating solo you need to content yourself with simply evading those camps, using the myriad of tactics and tools at your disposal. *

This results in the other hazard of gate camping. Namely utter boredom if you happen to be in an area where people are competent enough not to blunder under your guns.

*Note: I have on many occasions seen players with sufficient skill to bust up a decent sized gate camp solo, but I don't expect that level of game play from the average player. Nor do I consider myself skilled enough to do so. I do, however, prefer to work closely with people that are of that caliber whenever possible.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#189 - 2014-03-15 06:01:26 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
The only 'defense' CCP's shipfitting mechanics allow for those engaging in PVE... ESPECIALLY miners is a few seconds to GTFO if they detect a bad guy in a belt.

Same for missioners... because for the most part you cannot fit even a combat ship for missions and still have a prayer in a PVP situation... and also because you can almost never overcome a One vs Many situation....
First of all, mining isn't PvE.

Second of all, it has nothing (or at least very little) to do with fitting your ship. Notice that he mentions the tools at your disposal, not the modules. Now, granted, many victims seem to forget the modules as well and run around with empty slots and no tank, but defending yourself does not start where the lasers meet your hull — it starts much sooner than that.

If you use the tools at your disposal — local, contact lists, the map, personal chat channels, all the ISK you collect, and most important of all: other players — those few seconds you mention suddenly become minutes, and like it or not, not being around to be a target any more is about as effective a defence as there ever was.
Kyperion
#190 - 2014-03-15 06:03:28 UTC


"Out of curiosity, how much would this monstrosity cost? 1, 2 billion isk?"

Probably a little more than your typical battleship, with similar training requirements to fly, and similar requirements to fly well.

Really there is no excuse not to give Merchant ships some tank and teeth, with the mobile structures we already have had an extreme design shift to self sufficiency.



Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#191 - 2014-03-15 06:04:42 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:
I propose this thread gets locked because OP is attacking the community- ranting, trolling, and surely a couple more things.

I propose that you're proposing this thread gets locked because its exposed the obvious truth about the game, gankers and general asshats in game...

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#192 - 2014-03-15 06:06:20 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Erotica 1 wrote:
I propose this thread gets locked because OP is attacking the community- ranting, trolling, and surely a couple more things.

I propose that you're proposing this thread gets locked because its exposed the obvious truth about the game, gankers and general asshats in game...


In a similar manner to how you always howl about calling the mods when it's continually pointed out to you that you relentlessly lie about everything, and have no clue what you're talking about?

"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.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#193 - 2014-03-15 06:09:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Erotica 1 wrote:
I propose this thread gets locked because OP is attacking the community- ranting, trolling, and surely a couple more things.

I propose that you're proposing this thread gets locked because its exposed the obvious truth about the game, gankers and general asshats in game...


In a similar manner to how you always howl about calling the mods when it's continually pointed out to you that you relentlessly lie about everything, and have no clue what you're talking about?

Or perhaps it's because it shows that the gankers and the asshats (with a few notable exceptions) are in fact two separate groups. Big smile

On a more serious note, as I've said before, if you didn't have the "bad guys" to wail and gnash your teeth about you wouldn't enjoy the game nearly as much. Once this bit of self realization hits home, you will find inner harmony. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#194 - 2014-03-15 06:11:52 UTC
Kyperion wrote:

Really there is no excuse not to give Merchant ships some tank and teeth, with the mobile structures we already have had an extreme design shift to self sufficiency.

They already have that if you choose to.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#195 - 2014-03-15 06:20:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Kyperion wrote:

Really there is no excuse not to give Merchant ships some tank and teeth, with the mobile structures we already have had an extreme design shift to self sufficiency.

They already have that if you choose to.

I'll have to say this, while I think there are plenty of options for a good player to use the ships, modules and tactics to avoid combat effectively I really would'nt argue with a properly balanced branch of hauler/miner vessels that actually depended more on point defense than tank or evasion capabilities.

I'm reminded of merchant ships in WWII that were equipped with anti aircraft guns to act as (more or less disguised) escorts for supply convoys. Granted you "can" throw a gun on some now, but I'm talking about one that actually might have a chance of taking out a Catalyst or two quickly enough to have a small chance of surviving a gank attempt if the player is really on the ball.

Obviously this would involve a lot of balancing issues, but still it would be a new dimension to the eternal struggle between the ganker and the ganked.

Just a random thought, carry on.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#196 - 2014-03-15 06:21:46 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Kyperion wrote:

Really there is no excuse not to give Merchant ships some tank and teeth, with the mobile structures we already have had an extreme design shift to self sufficiency.

They already have that if you choose to.

I'll have to say this, while I think there are plenty of options for a good player to use the ships, modules and tactics to avoid combat effectively I really would'nt argue with a properly balanced branch of hauler/miner vessels that actually depended more on point defense than tank or evasion capabilities.

I'm reminded of merchant ships in WWII that were equipped with anti aircraft guns to act as (more or less disguised) escorts for supply convoys. Granted you "can" throw a gun on some now, but I'm talking about one that actually might have a chance of taking out a Catalyst or two quickly enough to have a small chance of surviving a gank attempt if the player is really on the ball.

Obviously this would involve a lot of balancing issues, but still it would be a new dimension to the eternal struggle between the ganker and the ganked.

Just a random thought, carry on.


They don't have point defense guns in EVE. Drones fill that role, actually. It's observable in battleships especially.

"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.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#197 - 2014-03-15 06:25:47 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Kyperion wrote:

Really there is no excuse not to give Merchant ships some tank and teeth, with the mobile structures we already have had an extreme design shift to self sufficiency.

They already have that if you choose to.

I'll have to say this, while I think there are plenty of options for a good player to use the ships, modules and tactics to avoid combat effectively I really would'nt argue with a properly balanced branch of hauler/miner vessels that actually depended more on point defense than tank or evasion capabilities.

I'm reminded of merchant ships in WWII that were equipped with anti aircraft guns to act as (more or less disguised) escorts for supply convoys. Granted you "can" throw a gun on some now, but I'm talking about one that actually might have a chance of taking out a Catalyst or two quickly enough to have a small chance of surviving a gank attempt if the player is really on the ball.

Obviously this would involve a lot of balancing issues, but still it would be a new dimension to the eternal struggle between the ganker and the ganked.

Just a random thought, carry on.


They don't have point defense guns in EVE. Drones fill that role, actually. It's observable in battleships especially.

You are being a bit obtuse. You know exactly what I mean, or you should. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#198 - 2014-03-15 06:27:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Ranger 1 wrote:
Obviously this would involve a lot of balancing issues, but still it would be a new dimension to the eternal struggle between the ganker and the ganked.

You know full well that everyone will look at it and say “what? less cargo/mining efficiency/AFK?! no way!” and then go back to dying horribly in untanked Macks. Blink

Well… everyone except those who want to hide among unaware miners, of course…
Karon Grandolf
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#199 - 2014-03-15 06:35:10 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Karon Grandolf wrote:


Once again these issues are reduced to a question about a single pilot or a single corp. My interest is the combined result of the interaction between the different styles of play in the game.

I don't wish to complain. I'm sad to see the potential of the game being wasted as a whole. It is very difficult to run a non-combat corp in high sec of significant size. Not because it's dangerous, but because non-combat players find high sec combat boring.

A high sec war is the combat culture imposing on the non-combat. The combat culture impose on the non-combat on their own terms. They change the play for the non-combat to better fit the combat. I do not disaprove of this.

What is lacking is the non-combat culture being able to impose itself on the combat culture on the non-combat terms. Maybe it should be possible to exclude for a period, certain pilots and/or corporations that has become a menace to the industries of high sec? Or just make them legit targets for anyone in high sec for a period.

This could be used instead of a limit to the number of war decs. The more wars, the cheaper it becomes to use this tool. High sec needs mechanics to effectively police itself. The non-combat culture needs tools to bring the dangerous and challenging environment to the combat culture on it's own terms using non-combat tools.


So your plan is to get CCP to do all the protecting for you by banning people who attack you from high sec.

See this is exactly why people like you get shafted time after time. You do nothing to protect yourself and think that CCP should be protecting you. This game is not like that, if you want protection then you have to do it yourself, there are more than enough tools in game to defend yourself with.


No, I want tools that fit the specialization, otherwise the pilots will become more like each other in SP distribution and kind of activity.

I want to discuss ways to adjust the balance between war deccers and their targets in high sec. I don't believe that it is sufficient to call for a cultural revolution if the conditions for such a revolution are not present. In EVE these conditions are given by CCP.

I don't want CCP to protect high sec dwellers, I want tools so that high sec dwellers can protect themselves sufficiently to adjust the forementioned balance.

Maybe CCP is happy with the balance as it is, in that case I'll probly not return to EVE anytime soon. Or maybe I'll return from time to time to engage in PVP, but find other games to enjoy gaming experiences I previously found more available in EVE. There is nothing raging about that either. I find it sad that CCP may not want to support gaming experiences that are more casual. EVE used to offer a more varied experience when it comes to required attention.

Whether or not I'm getting shafted is irrelevant. If I fail to adapt I should still get consequenses on the individual level.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#200 - 2014-03-15 06:37:19 UTC
Karon Grandolf wrote:

I don't want CCP to protect high sec dwellers, I want tools so that high sec dwellers can protect themselves sufficiently to adjust the forementioned balance.


Those already exist. Few people use them correctly anyway. You don't need more safety because you're not properly using the safety you already have.

"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.