These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Salvos Rhoska
#261 - 2014-03-15 10:30:46 UTC
Any commensurate increase in PvP potential on freighter/resource vessels would have to be met by a reciprocal reduction in performance in the non-combat role.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Mandarine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#262 - 2014-03-15 10:31:08 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
:@ OP and other like minded individuals


What exactly are you proposing?

Please provide a conscise numbered list with specific wording of what exactly it is that you want done.

Please append a short explanation to each numbered entry, if it requires elaboration.

Something similar to this:

1) Change x to y:
-Reasoning and elaboration

2) Implement mechanic z:
- Reasoning and elaboration


This will enable the community to address and consider specifically what it is you are proposing in an informed and organised manner, whereas right now, Inand of thers have no idea what exactly it is you have in mind.

Thanks.



This has nothing to do with gameplay issues, and everything with the motivations of a certain category of people who only enjoy EvE as a platform to inflict emotional harm and others, that is, pursue their RL sadistic tendencies.

Most MMOs pre-emptively trammelize their game to prevent toxic interactions, as it´s the only way to effectively limit the negative impact those people have.

One other possibility would be to selectively IP ban toxic individuals, but this would require quite a lot of GM work, and forbidding playing behind VPNs and proxies. However, this would allow for the removal of Concord, which is only there so as to keep tear harvesting in check.
Erica Dusette
Division 13
#263 - 2014-03-15 10:35:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Erica Dusette
Kyperion wrote:
Erica Dusette wrote:
Kyperion wrote:
If you lost a T3 ship to a badger, you are daft.

No, I lost a T3 ship to the T3 gang for whom the Badger was bait for.

Quite an awesome battle badger fit actually. The guys who murdered me were nice enough to give me it's fit afterward when I congratulated them on an awesome bait.


So it wasn't the badger that killed you, but his friends.... completely not what we're talking about here.

I was merely clarifying what happened for your benefit as you didn't seem to understand how baits are generally run, making the ludicrous assumption that a Badger killed a Proteus 1v1. Oh, and then mentioned -I- may be daft. Lol

But when you think about it this is exactly what this discussion (edit: or actually your comment I was initially replying too) is about. I tried to gank someone who was cleverer than me and who had friends hidden close by. Now yes, I do appreciate that clever use of mechanics, cooperative gameplay, or anything that requires you to use more than one ship is what you're dearly hoping to avoid here, but my proty loss is the perfect example of how you can turn the tables on your gankers.

Oh, and that Badger was genuinely running PI too, so in a sense it was indeed a fighting-industrial ship. Blink

Jack Miton > you be nice or you're sleeping on the couch again!

Part-Time Wormhole Pirate ツ Full-Time Supermodel

▷ worмнole dιary + cнaracтer вιoѕ ▷ вσss
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#264 - 2014-03-15 10:40:39 UTC
Kyperion wrote:

To reply to your many posts about existing 'tools'

.... Conceptually the mining barge makes no sense in the EVE Universe.... In a world gone mad with greed and villainy, where damn near anyone has access to cutting edge military hardware..... Mining Barges wouldn't exist.... they would all be tanked like a Marauder, and probably keep the firepower .... they might sacrifice speed and manuevering for that, but they definitely wouldn't be the puny little things they are now, and the smallest one would not be the toughest one.
A mining ship with the tank of a battleship is already available, it's called the Skiff, and it doesn't require firepower to survive a gank, it requires the person using it to use their head when they fit it.

Quote:
Alternatively they might be small, fast, low signature frigates, with a full flight of light drones and a stealth bombers cloak bonuses.
Firstly why a cloak bonus?, and secondly, it's called a Venture.

Quote:
Freighters would have about 16 turrets moving as slow as they do.

The kind of sandbox ganking proponents claim eve to be has no room for the kind of weak fitting capabilities seen on most mining/merchant ships.
If you want a freighter with 16 turrets that's fine, but you have to be able to live with sacrificing something else to gain those slots, like EHP or cargo capacity. Expect to see them ganking other freighters on a gate near you soon.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Sophie d'Amour
Perkone
Caldari State
#265 - 2014-03-15 10:41:10 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Sophie d'Amour wrote:
but after few times being killed in high space and lost really millions i kind of have enough of EvE.

What were you in, what were you doing, and where were you when you blew up?


To reply to your many posts about existing 'tools'

.... Conceptually the mining barge makes no sense in the EVE Universe.... In a world gone mad with greed and villainy, where damn near anyone has access to cutting edge military hardware..... Mining Barges wouldn't exist.... they would all be tanked like a Marauder, and probably keep the firepower .... they might sacrifice speed and manuevering for that, but they definitely wouldn't be the puny little things they are now, and the smallest one would not be the toughest one.

Alternatively they might be small, fast, low signature frigates, with a full flight of light drones and a stealth bombers cloak bonuses.

Freighters would have about 16 turrets moving as slow as they do.

The kind of sandbox ganking proponents claim eve to be has no room for the kind of weak fitting capabilities seen on most mining/merchant ships.


indeed, they use a armored vehicle to transport money also right.
it likely have a cannon if many rob it with a tank.

in 1600 they transported valuable goods also in massive combat ships.
Salvos Rhoska
#266 - 2014-03-15 10:45:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Mandarine wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
:@ OP and other like minded individuals


What exactly are you proposing?

Please provide a conscise numbered list with specific wording of what exactly it is that you want done.

Please append a short explanation to each numbered entry, if it requires elaboration.

Something similar to this:

1) Change x to y:
-Reasoning and elaboration

2) Implement mechanic z:
- Reasoning and elaboration


This will enable the community to address and consider specifically what it is you are proposing in an informed and organised manner, whereas right now, Inand of thers have no idea what exactly it is you have in mind.

Thanks.



This has nothing to do with gameplay issues, and everything with the motivations of a certain category of people who only enjoy EvE as a platform to inflict emotional harm and others, that is, pursue their RL sadistic tendencies.

Most MMOs pre-emptively trammelize their game to prevent toxic interactions, as it´s the only way to effectively limit the negative impact those people have.

One other possibility would be to selectively IP ban toxic individuals, but this would require quite a lot of GM work, and forbidding playing behind VPNs and proxies. However, this would allow for the removal of Concord, which is only there so as to keep tear harvesting in check.



I'm sorry, but either you did not read my post, or chose to disregard its contents.

In either case, you did not reply in the format I had suggested would be conducive to a more organised and concise discussion of what exactly it is that OP and like minded individuals want done. I proposed it not for my "personal interest", but in order to better facilitate understanding of everyones specific positions and proposals.

Therefore I am forced to disregard the contents of your post, just as you chose to disregard the contents of mine.

I'm sorry, but you really leave me no option in that regard.

It is very confusing to me, why you would deliberately make the choice to respond to my post of which the contents is ONLY a suggestion for a format of discussion, in a fashion that is completely contrary to the only contents of my post, which is to ask for people to use the format I proposed.

Please reformat your post to fit the model I proposed, in order to facilitate discussion on this matter in an organised, informed and concise manner.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#267 - 2014-03-15 10:52:17 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
Conceptually the mining barge makes no sense in the EVE Universe.... In a world gone mad with greed and villainy, where damn near anyone has access to cutting edge military hardware..... Mining Barges wouldn't exist.
That's not really the world of EVE though. Capsuleers might have access to that hardware, but they are a vanishingly small minority and the normal world have long since stopped trying to make make those nutcases behave normally (because, to be fair, they're not even people any more). Instead, they've implemented a single overseer body and generally just let the capsuleers do what they want against each other.

Mining barges still need to exist and for your standard human prospecting company, they do the job just fine. Most regular, standard-human ships that go after them aren't that much of a threat.

Quote:
The kind of sandbox ganking proponents claim eve to be has no room for the kind of weak fitting capabilities seen on most mining/merchant ships.
The kind of sandbox they claim EVE to be already provides those ships with all the defensive capabilities they need, if piloted correctly.
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#268 - 2014-03-15 10:59:00 UTC
******** themepark carebears don't get sandbox games and cry on the forums, nothing new.

The Tears Must Flow
Kyperion
#269 - 2014-03-15 10:59:24 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Mandarine wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
:@ OP and other like minded individuals


What exactly are you proposing?

Please provide a conscise numbered list with specific wording of what exactly it is that you want done.

Please append a short explanation to each numbered entry, if it requires elaboration.

Something similar to this:

1) Change x to y:
-Reasoning and elaboration

2) Implement mechanic z:
- Reasoning and elaboration


This will enable the community to address and consider specifically what it is you are proposing in an informed and organised manner, whereas right now, Inand of thers have no idea what exactly it is you have in mind.

Thanks.



This has nothing to do with gameplay issues, and everything with the motivations of a certain category of people who only enjoy EvE as a platform to inflict emotional harm and others, that is, pursue their RL sadistic tendencies.

Most MMOs pre-emptively trammelize their game to prevent toxic interactions, as it´s the only way to effectively limit the negative impact those people have.

One other possibility would be to selectively IP ban toxic individuals, but this would require quite a lot of GM work, and forbidding playing behind VPNs and proxies. However, this would allow for the removal of Concord, which is only there so as to keep tear harvesting in check.



I'm sorry, but either you did not read my post, or chose to disregard its contents.

In either case, you did not reply in the format I had suggested would be conducive to a more organised and concise discussion of what exactly it is that OP and like minded individuals want done. I proposed it not for my "personal interest", but in order to better facilitate understanding of everyones specific positions and proposals.

Therefore I am forced to disregard the contents of your post, just as you chose to disregard the contents of mine.

I'm sorry, but you really leave me no option in that regard.

It is very confusing to me, why you would deliberately make the choice to respond to my post of which the contents is ONLY a suggestion for a format of discussion, in a fashion that is completely contrary to the only contents of my post, which is to ask for people to use the format I proposed.

Please reformat your post to fit the model I proposed, in order to facilitate discussion on this matter in an organised, informed and concise manner.


1.) Concord response times lowered significantly across the board... but they actively chase criminals out of high sec... as in follow in warp and through stargates. They also pod people with a low enough standing

2.) every ship has a viable PVP combat fitting.... to either run away despite scramble, cloak, or surpise with a hold out pistol capable of taking on any ship in its class or holding out against one class above

3.) Many less NPC in missions, but way tougher, and an AI that uses scramblers/bubbles/stasis etc like a player would

4.) instead of only One PVP tournament, have little ones all over New Eden, set up Ded spaces for matches... actually, this kind of consensual 'arena' combat could eventually replace missions altogether.

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#270 - 2014-03-15 10:59:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
Divine Entervention wrote:


That little girl has zero chance.

Put your daughter on the computer and read what I'm saying to her:

Please do not listen to your daddy. He is a bad person. If you believe the things he tells you, you too will grow up to be a bad person. Call social services and tell them he's a bad person so you can be put in a home with people who will raise you into a good person.

this is about the single most vile thing i have had the displeasure of reading outside of Reddit.
seriously man, im not one with much of a moral code but you should be genuinely ashamed for that comment,
i am for being part of the same community that generated it.

edit: yeah i know im a little late to it but still.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#271 - 2014-03-15 11:05:44 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:


That little girl has zero chance.

Put your daughter on the computer and read what I'm saying to her:

Please do not listen to your daddy. He is a bad person. If you believe the things he tells you, you too will grow up to be a bad person. Call social services and tell them he's a bad person so you can be put in a home with people who will raise you into a good person.

this is about the single most vile thing i have had the displeasure of reading outside of Reddit.
seriously man, im not one with much of a moral code but you should be genuinely ashamed for that comment,
i am for being part of the same community that generated it.

edit: yeah i know im a little late to it but still.


I agree, he should be ashamed of himself for exposing his daughter to eve and then using his own daughter as some sort of leverage in an argument.

His own daughter, for shame.
Yarda Black
The Black Redemption
#272 - 2014-03-15 11:06:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Yarda Black
I haven't read all the posts. Sorry if that leads me to repeat something that has been said between page 3 and here.

Why are people being (insert insult), why the sandbox allows for anything?

Reason 1: Untrue. The badies, and their actions, stick out making them look more present then they really are.

Reason 2: Being nice takes more effort.

Reason 3: Being a (insert same or different insult) is the next step after being nice. Being nice becomes boring after a few years.

Reason 4: Being a (insert yet another insult) can easily cover up failure at pro-PvP - "I wasnt being lame, I was collecting tears".


Seriously; HTFU
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#273 - 2014-03-15 11:08:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
You don't need fantastic new ships or super barges. What you need is balance. The Catalyst does not need 700 dps to kill a frigate (its intended role), ship scanners should not be free 100 accurate perves into every ship fitting.

Change those two things you will see a lot of ganking decrease overnight.

Oh and freighters (which are currently just shuttles) need fitting options.

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..... :)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#274 - 2014-03-15 11:11:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Infinity Ziona wrote:
The Catalyst does not need 700 dps to kill a frigate (its intended role), ship scanners should not be free 100 accurate perves into every ship fitting.
What makes you say that killing frigates is the intended role of Catalysts?
And you do realise that squeezing 700 DPS out of a Catalyst makes it highly unsuitable for most kind of ganking, right?

Quote:
Oh and freighters (which are currently just shuttles) need fitting options.
I'd prefer it if my freighter wasn't nerfed, thankyouverymuch.

Oh, and…
Quote:
Change those two things you will see a lot of ganking decrease overnight.
Why is that needed?
Kyperion
#275 - 2014-03-15 11:12:59 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
:@ OP and other like minded individuals


What exactly are you proposing?

Please provide a conscise numbered list with specific wording of what exactly it is that you want done.

Please append a short explanation to each numbered entry, if it requires elaboration.

Something similar to this:

1) Change x to y:
-Reasoning and elaboration

2) Implement mechanic z:
- Reasoning and elaboration


This will enable the community to address and consider specifically what it is you are proposing in an informed and organised manner, whereas right now, Inand of thers have no idea what exactly it is you have in mind.

Thanks.


To continue

5.) The Empires would actively distrust Pod people... they would not freely let more and more systems fall into the hands of space immortals.... so any system in nullsec should be subject to an invasion, and I'm talking dwarfing the largest incursion ever even imagined.... and this invasion if allowed by the owning corp/alliance/coalition... would drop their sovereignty.

6.) Because of said mistrust, it would be even more important to remain on good terms with the NPC faction(s) of your choice... if you want to remain in high sec... also add a what have you done for me lately component, that represents the growing mistrust of these new breed of undying humans.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#276 - 2014-03-15 11:13:29 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
The Catalyst does not need 700 dps to kill a frigate (its intended role), ship scanners should not be free 100 accurate perves into every ship fitting.
What makes you say that killing frigates is the intended role of Catalysts?
And you do realise that squeezing 700 DPS out of a Catalyst makes it highly unsuitable for most kind of ganking, right?

Quote:
Oh and freighters (which are currently just shuttles) need fitting options.
I'd prefer it if my freighter wasn't nerfed, thankyouverymuch.

Oh, and…
Quote:
Change those two things you will see a lot of ganking decrease overnight.
Why is that needed?

Not interested in conversing with trolls sorry...

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..... :)
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#277 - 2014-03-15 11:14:40 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:


That little girl has zero chance.

Put your daughter on the computer and read what I'm saying to her:

Please do not listen to your daddy. He is a bad person. If you believe the things he tells you, you too will grow up to be a bad person. Call social services and tell them he's a bad person so you can be put in a home with people who will raise you into a good person.

this is about the single most vile thing i have had the displeasure of reading outside of Reddit.
seriously man, im not one with much of a moral code but you should be genuinely ashamed for that comment,
i am for being part of the same community that generated it.

edit: yeah i know im a little late to it but still.


I agree, he should be ashamed of himself for exposing his daughter to eve and then using his own daughter as some sort of leverage in an argument.

His own daughter, for shame.

I sincerely hope that your misinterpretation of my post was deliberate, if not you have genuine issues.

as stated, you should be ashamed. i am.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#278 - 2014-03-15 11:15:00 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
The Catalyst does not need 700 dps to kill a frigate (its intended role), ship scanners should not be free 100 accurate perves into every ship fitting.
What makes you say that killing frigates is the intended role of Catalysts?
And you do realise that squeezing 700 DPS out of a Catalyst makes it highly unsuitable for most kind of ganking, right?

Quote:
Oh and freighters (which are currently just shuttles) need fitting options.
I'd prefer it if my freighter wasn't nerfed, thankyouverymuch.

Oh, and…
Quote:
Change those two things you will see a lot of ganking decrease overnight.
Why is that needed?

Not interested in conversing with trolls sorry...


When he asks you for evidence that he's a troll, just link him the posts where I proved he is one.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#279 - 2014-03-15 11:15:05 UTC
and if killing frigs was a catalyst's intended role, it doesn't follow that it was the only intended role or that ganking is an unintended role
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#280 - 2014-03-15 11:16:20 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Not interested in conversing with trolls sorry...
Then talk to me instead.

What makes you think that Catalysts are just meant to kill frigates?
Do you realise how much a 700-dps Catalyst cost and the consequences of this price tag?
Why does ganking need to be reduced?