These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The end of Corpmate Awoxxing?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#21 - 2014-10-30 03:53:49 UTC
Persifonne wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Persifonne wrote:
CCP says its cuz players hide in ncp corps[ie their stats on player retention for npc corps == ccps money lost] to avoid safaris.

No ccp its cuz of wardecs. Thats why in npc corps.

So remove wardecs!!


lol Nobody sits in NPC corps to avoid safaris.

Safaris are one of those things where it's entirely in the players' hands - to run background checks (of which they have numerous tool), to have security (again, numerous tools).

CCP is basically stepping in and saying "We must hold the hand of hiseccers to keep those mission runners who pay subs safe. Even though they usually unsub in less than a year."


Read the mins. Ccp is saying thats why people stay in npc corps. Its wardecs so ccp gonna nerf that again?


I know and I'm laughing at how woefully wrong CCP is.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
ll Kuray ll
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#22 - 2014-10-30 03:56:41 UTC
Awoxing and ganking are two things that should be tackled at the same time. Recruiting is a pain in the ass and if you want to build something from scratch finding people to go along with you and not stab you in the back is tough and no sophisticated API checking system will unveil that.

Ganking for me is becoming an ever increasing issue, and good luck to anyone who tries to find a balance between the needs of those that:

Arrow Pay with real money and want to be in their own "leave me alone" world [IMPORTANT!]
Arrow Pay with real money and want to be in the "dark world [IMPORTANT!
Arrow Make enough in game ISK to sub their accounts and want to be in their own "leave me alone" world
Arrow Make enough in game ISK to sub their accounts and want to be in the 'dark' world

I think you take on a different perspective if you pay with real money to play the game.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#23 - 2014-10-30 04:02:41 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Personally I think awoxxing never made much sense. How does it really benefit the game?


Ships blowing up always benifit the game. People produce ships, if ships didn't explode nothing any of us do in EVE would worth anything.

Awoxxing (like all such interactions) teaches players to be aware, to be concerned about who they trust. This is good because being able to trust everyone simply because you're in high sec and in the same corp is boring. Their is this tendency among some to wish for peace and comfort only to find that those things get boring after a while. It's conflict and danger that is interesting. This is why people leave EVE for 'safer' games only to come back when they realise that games without risk and danger is about as fun as riding a roller coaster that doesn't exceed 5 miles per hour.

This is why every epic, every good movie, every good book, every good game is about conflict. It's why real life news media types live by the rule of "if it bleeds it leads". These moves to make EVE safer are actually moves to make EVE a worse game.
Doc J
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#24 - 2014-10-30 04:07:29 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Personally I think awoxxing never made much sense. How does it really benefit the game?


Ships blowing up always benifit the game. People produce ships, if ships didn't explode nothing any of us do in EVE would worth anything.

Awoxxing (like all such interactions) teaches players to be aware, to be concerned about who they trust. This is good because being able to trust everyone simply because you're in high sec and in the same corp is boring. Their is this tendency among some to wish for peace and comfort only to find that those things get boring after a while. It's conflict and danger that is interesting. This is why people leave EVE for 'safer' games only to come back when they realise that games without risk and danger is about as fun as riding a roller coaster that doesn't exceed 5 miles per hour.

This is why every epic, every good movie, every good book, every good game is about conflict. It's why real life news media types live by the rule of "if it bleeds it leads". These moves to make EVE safer are actually moves to make EVE a worse game.


People have the right to play the game in the safe manner they wish or in the conflict/dangerous way. You shouldn't be wanting to impose your belief of "conflict makes the game interesting" on people who say for instance-pay to play the game the way they wish which might actually be in the comfort zone.
Doc J
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#25 - 2014-10-30 04:08:58 UTC
ll Kuray ll wrote:
Awoxing and ganking are two things that should be tackled at the same time. Recruiting is a pain in the ass and if you want to build something from scratch finding people to go along with you and not stab you in the back is tough and no sophisticated API checking system will unveil that.

Ganking for me is becoming an ever increasing issue, and good luck to anyone who tries to find a balance between the needs of those that:

Arrow Pay with real money and want to be in their own "leave me alone" world [IMPORTANT!]
Arrow Pay with real money and want to be in the "dark world [IMPORTANT!
Arrow Make enough in game ISK to sub their accounts and want to be in their own "leave me alone" world
Arrow Make enough in game ISK to sub their accounts and want to be in the 'dark' world

I think you take on a different perspective if you pay with real money to play the game.


Couldn't agree more with this.
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#26 - 2014-10-30 04:13:44 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

Ships blowing up always benifit the game. People produce ships, if ships didn't explode nothing any of us do in EVE would worth anything.

And now the awoxxers have to lose a catalyst to concord once in a while. The sky is surely falling!
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2014-10-30 04:15:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Doc J wrote:
...the comfort zone.


The appeal of EVE to many of us was that there was supposed to be no comfort zone. Anyone that's looking for a comfort zone is playing the wrong game. Looking for comfort zones in EVE is like getting in a plane but never taking off. Unfortunately, it seems that won't be the case for much longer. It looks like a day is coming where EVE will only be EVE by name, but the game it is/was will no longer exist.

EVE was originally created by people who didn't like the PVP restrictions in Ultima Online. Now they're going in a completely opposite direction, and handing it over to the same kinds of people who ruined Ultima.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Persifonne
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2014-10-30 04:17:00 UTC
Point is slippery slope we been going down. Wardecs are next. Once people still stay in npc corps after this change ccp will see its cuz wardecs and supanerf em. Heard here 1st
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2014-10-30 04:19:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Nariya Kentaya
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Grow a pair and shoot whoever you want to shoot.

Suicide gank them. War dec them. Duel them.

wardec has not, will not, and cannot be made viable without CCP punishing "those poor carebears" theyre protecting with changes like this to start with, because anyone who doesnt want a wardec, simply drops corp, simple as that. and no one that has something you want will agree to duel you in what you want them to duel you with, youll only get duels if they have a cheap ship, pr a ship they KNOW cant lose to what you have, leaving the only way to take something from another player to be ganking, but with the way highsec works, most ships arent gankable with less than their value (especially battleships) in ganknados or catalysts, and the only way to hold somebody is by bumping (which is a **** mechanic).

in short, all this does is buff the mission runners who dont want to EVER be exposed to the dangerous side of EVE, ever, and instead do nothing but inject ISK into the economy day in and day out devaluing all the work of every other player.




either way, tried the elite dangerous beta, it was fun, the lack of a player centric market bothers me, huge turnoff, but if EVE keeps making these "improvements", i might just suck it up and move over, if im gonna be in a game that caters to carebears and risk-averse kiddies, id at least like the devs to man up and straight with it from the beginning.

EVE hasnt been a "cold harsh universe" for the last 3 years.
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#30 - 2014-10-30 04:21:44 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Doc J wrote:
...the comfort zone.


The appeal of EVE to many of us was that there was supposed to be no comfort zone. Anyone that's looking for a comfort zone is playing the wrong game. Looking for comfort zones in EVE is like getting in a plane but never taking off. Unfortunately, it seems that won't be the case for much longer. It looks like a day is coming where EVE will only be EVE by name, but the game it is/was will no longer exist.

EVE was originally created by people who didn't like the PVP restrictions in Ultima Online. Now they're going in a completely opposite direction, and handing it over to the same kinds of people who ruing Ultima.

Was awoxxing possible in ultima?
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#31 - 2014-10-30 04:33:38 UTC
Persifonne wrote:
Point is slippery slope we been going down. Wardecs are next. Once people still stay in npc corps after this change ccp will see its cuz wardecs and supanerf em. Heard here 1st

The slippery slope argument can be used for anything, making it rather worthless.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#32 - 2014-10-30 04:33:58 UTC
Doc J wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Personally I think awoxxing never made much sense. How does it really benefit the game?


Ships blowing up always benifit the game. People produce ships, if ships didn't explode nothing any of us do in EVE would worth anything.

Awoxxing (like all such interactions) teaches players to be aware, to be concerned about who they trust. This is good because being able to trust everyone simply because you're in high sec and in the same corp is boring. Their is this tendency among some to wish for peace and comfort only to find that those things get boring after a while. It's conflict and danger that is interesting. This is why people leave EVE for 'safer' games only to come back when they realise that games without risk and danger is about as fun as riding a roller coaster that doesn't exceed 5 miles per hour.

This is why every epic, every good movie, every good book, every good game is about conflict. It's why real life news media types live by the rule of "if it bleeds it leads". These moves to make EVE safer are actually moves to make EVE a worse game.


People have the right to play the game in the safe manner they wish or in the conflict/dangerous way. You shouldn't be wanting to impose your belief of "conflict makes the game interesting" on people who say for instance-pay to play the game the way they wish which might actually be in the comfort zone.


This is the worst possible thinking.

In EVE, it doesn't matter what you WANT to do, it matters what you are strong/clever/ruthless enough to either get away with or make someone else do.

I succeed in EVE as a pve player ebcause I've been smart enough (except for a few times) to outwit the 'bad guys'. I get to do what I want because I put some thoguht into my gameplay before undocking. My whole game is built around not letting other people decide for me what I will do. That's how the game has value, becuase of my efforts.

But others seem to want the powers that be to delvier to them the same success that I only experienced through effort. This is annoying, because if you want success without working for it, why play a sandbox game? Why play a harsh, cold game if you want comfort? Why are these 'comfort seekers' not playing a themepark MMO that is built on the philosophy of giving comfort?

Can we not have ONE game in the MMO genre that treats it's players like adults who can think for themselves rather than kids who need protecting? EVE was that one game when I started playing in 2007 (before all this safe BS), but it seems that with every passing year CCP is mroe determined to turn it ito the same mushy nothingness most MMOs are.
Valkin Mordirc
#33 - 2014-10-30 04:36:37 UTC
If they take out corp aggression, how would a corp provide logi when they are at war? Or when they need to repair a pos? Or Test a fit out?


Sure you can duel, but a POS isnt going to aspect a duel request,


Regardless of that if AWOXing goes, I really don't like the idea of it going, I've awoxed once, and sure it was interesting, but it wasn't my thing, but I think it provides a nice bit of player made creation. It nice to have conflict with players in this game. It's apart of the meta. 
#DeleteTheWeak
Persifonne
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2014-10-30 04:53:11 UTC
And didnt corp kick que tske care of this enough??
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2014-10-30 05:04:34 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Yay another buff to HiSec!!!!


And people said a single hisec rep[ would be useless and have no influence

bwa ha haaaaaa

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Valkin Mordirc
#36 - 2014-10-30 05:55:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkin Mordirc
Also I know it was a sarcastic comment,


But this isnt a buff to highsec,


It's a nerf to the Villain "Meta", which in turn affects the Highsec PVE'ers. The CSM's and CCP should not be removing content, but balancing out, and add new content. For the most part, If I wanted to AWOX I should be able to, it been apart of the game for so long, I can't see why they are taking it away now. EVE doesn't (IMO) to have awoxing taken away.


If you want to make Highsec a better place, add something to it. Don't take it away from the people, just so the little lonely types that want to be secluded in there fantasy isk runs. Those people don't last long in EVE. EVE is about the connection with people you CAN trust. And when you make that connection with somebody, it important because they CAN **** you over, and when they don't it, it makes the game WAY better.
#DeleteTheWeak
Abraham Nalelmir
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#37 - 2014-10-30 06:39:15 UTC
I see it as EVE is under a big nerfing campaign, because it has been around since 10 years, all mechanics have been known and used/exploited, many vets have left the game after "finishing the game", nullsec is at a boring sucks stale status...

It is time to give people "new" EVE that is not like how it was before, and I think the intended audience are the people who are considered carebears/noobs/whatever bad names we have on those guys... because those guys are paying customers as well and they are majority in the game... and they need to get in deeper in the game and it's mechanics...

Of course the older players won't just let those new guys do it because "they need to play as the elders want"... so I think that's a normal act from CCP to do it, even if they did not mean it...

It is like, ok old generation, your time is up, thanks a lot for being part of this game's history, and for all your awesome work you've done, but it is time you let the new younger generation take the initiative in a new looking game with new mechanics and rules.

That's what I saw happened in wormholes, and what will happen in nullsec soon and what might happen in highsec as well.

So either the elders adapt to live under the new rule of the young, or they just get an honorable goodbye party and finally retire.

Again it is how I read this.

In Go.. ECM I trust
Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
#38 - 2014-10-30 06:44:15 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Doc J wrote:
People have the right to play the game in the safe manner they wish or in the conflict/dangerous way. You shouldn't be wanting to impose your belief of "conflict makes the game interesting" on people who say for instance-pay to play the game the way they wish which might actually be in the comfort zone.


This is the worst possible thinking.

In EVE, it doesn't matter what you WANT to do
I'd actually replace 'EVE' with 'any game'. In 'any game', if you start playing and find the rules aren't to your liking, then you can **** right back off on whatever comfort zone you rode in on.

Witty Image - Stream

Not Liking this post hurts my RL feelings and will be considered harassment
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#39 - 2014-10-30 06:47:58 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Yay another buff to HiSec!!!!


And people said a single hisec rep[ would be useless and have no influence

bwa ha haaaaaa

m


Where is DJ from? The guy who was throwing all he had at stopping the change. Out of curiousity
lord xavier
Rubbed Out
#40 - 2014-10-30 07:34:26 UTC
Doc J wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Personally I think awoxxing never made much sense. How does it really benefit the game?


Ships blowing up always benifit the game. People produce ships, if ships didn't explode nothing any of us do in EVE would worth anything.

Awoxxing (like all such interactions) teaches players to be aware, to be concerned about who they trust. This is good because being able to trust everyone simply because you're in high sec and in the same corp is boring. Their is this tendency among some to wish for peace and comfort only to find that those things get boring after a while. It's conflict and danger that is interesting. This is why people leave EVE for 'safer' games only to come back when they realise that games without risk and danger is about as fun as riding a roller coaster that doesn't exceed 5 miles per hour.

This is why every epic, every good movie, every good book, every good game is about conflict. It's why real life news media types live by the rule of "if it bleeds it leads". These moves to make EVE safer are actually moves to make EVE a worse game.


People have the right to play the game in the safe manner they wish or in the conflict/dangerous way. You shouldn't be wanting to impose your belief of "conflict makes the game interesting" on people who say for instance-pay to play the game the way they wish which might actually be in the comfort zone.

This game makes it way to easy to play it safely. The problem isn't the safety not being there. The problem is that players want it to be really easy, as in they don't have to be aware of what is going on. Like the charons and orca's that sit going 0 m/s on a belt in a 0.5/0.6 system with a lowsec gate. Then dont have an evac plan for when you get the 20+ criminal notifications in the middle of your screen.

That is just idiocy. That has nothing to do with the fact it is really safe to actually live in high sec. You just have to not be ******** and know how to actually keep yourself safe. Nothing in eve is handed to us. Some areas are just less safe and require you to pay more attention than others. It is absolutely absurd if you think that there should be a completely, 100% safe zone in this type of a game that allows complete player control. Player controlled markets, player controlled minerals, player controlled content. Now we are starting to cater to the needs of the people who want to play a Single-Player-Online-Role-Playing-Game? What? Are you attempting to **** on me right now? If you want a completely safe game where another player cannot come ruin your game I suggest finding a game that is not an MMO and meant to be played with others for overall content.