These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 4.7%: Wardecs with a Purpose
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#261 - 2014-11-21 18:11:45 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:

No problem, but I'd like to give new players an actual chance to read those rules of gunfighting so as to enrich this sandbox to better MY gameplay. I'd rather pop a vets tengu or ratting carrier, than a noobies caracal. Selfish, I admit.


Not selfish (or not just selfish...), but generally incorrect. The old conventional wisdom is to 'give people a chance' to learn and then they will do bigger things. The real truth is that people who are engaged right of the bat tend to be the ones who stay and improve and the ones left to "have a chance to read the rules" will get stuck in a rut and eventually leave.

It's the same issue as the one with the NPE/tutorials. Tutorials strangle player creativity. This is because the brain works best when solving a problem, not practicing rote steps (like doing tutorials or otherwise 'learning the game').

Long story short, you want to cultivate carrier and tengu pilots to shoot at, you are better off shooting at them when they are young (not just shoot, but engaging, whether cooperatively or competitively, as this makes their game experience interesting in a way to boring coddled protectionism can't) rather than leaving them alone.

CCP has in the past demonstrated the same flawed thinking you are, probably because that thinking comes from a good place. The path to hell (and a crappy game) is paved with good intentions.



Quote:

The original vision for eve was an all in one scifi mmo that featured WiS, walking on planets, flying in atmospheres, and a host of other things. Actually, that's a lie. The original vision for eve was to be another run of the mill 2 year mmo that no one remembers, in order to get the funds for the real work to begin on Eve 2, which would have all of the aforementioned things. We all know how that turned out...


By vision I mean 'spirit'. The spirit of the game is like that of a biker bar (cold, harsh, and full of bearded freaks waiting to screw you). While perhaps not intending to, people like you want things that would turn it into a hippy drum circle of peace and love and caring. Screw that, if i wanted that I'd be watching movies on lifetime, not playing EVE.
Prince Kobol
#262 - 2014-11-21 18:14:22 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:


So am I. Managed to come out at zero losses though, because I'm not a masochist.

You were going right direction but strayed away in the end, so I repeat the tip.
You manned up, you brought a fleet, you are fighting for your corp like you have no tomorrow without it. Then you notice your grief deccer is using invulnerability exploit on Jita undock and no matter how much you shoot, nobody died. What can you do to make him fight properly? What can you do with your fleet to stop grief dec?


I never bothered playing station games, if they wanted to kill then I let them come to me in on my terms, not there's.

I actually war deced corps so I have been on both sides and not once did I ever play docking games because I wanted a kill.

Your arguments fail on many levels.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#263 - 2014-11-21 18:22:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Basil Pupkin
Prince Kobol wrote:
I never bothered playing station games, if they wanted to kill then I let them come to me in on my terms, not there's.

Which is clearly impossible. Unless you mean staying in lowsec, then true, none of them leet peeveepee bunnies aint going anywhere near risk of losing a ship. But there aren't many playstyles which can just do that.

Prince Kobol wrote:
I actually war deced corps so I have been on both sides and not once did I ever play docking games because I wanted a kill.

Which is what our Devils friend here calls being bad at eve.

Prince Kobol wrote:
Your arguments fail on many levels.

And you don't have any.

By the way, what about the question?
You know, about actions? What can you do with your fleet?

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#264 - 2014-11-21 18:25:32 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
I never bothered playing station games, if they wanted to kill then I let them come to me in on my terms, not there's.

Which is clearly impossible. Unless you mean staying in lowsec, then true, none of them leet peeveepee bunnies aint going anywhere near risk of losing a ship. But there aren't many playstyles which can just do that.


And of course, you have no clue what you're talking about. Devils, for one, have been in lowsec for a while. My first kill after joining them was in lowsec for that matter.

Marmite does so occasionally as well, among others.

Lowsec is easy.


Quote:

Which is what our Devils friend here calls being bad at eve.


No, it's not. Don't you dare put words in my mouth, you lying sack of ****.

"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.
Maekchu
Doomheim
#265 - 2014-11-21 18:29:40 UTC
The purpose is created by players. The wardec is only a tool created by CCP.

It isn't CCPs fault, that people dec without a specified purpose. So it's an useless ISK sink, as long as people make it a useless ISK sink.

Working as intended, I see no problem here.

Now go out there and create content, instead of sitting on the forum!
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#266 - 2014-11-21 18:31:43 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
I never bothered playing station games, if they wanted to kill then I let them come to me in on my terms, not there's.

Which is clearly impossible. Unless you mean staying in lowsec, then true, none of them leet peeveepee bunnies aint going anywhere near risk of losing a ship. But there aren't many playstyles which can just do that.


And of course, you have no clue what you're talking about. Devils, for one, have been in lowsec for a while. My first kill after joining them was in lowsec for that matter.

Marmite does so occasionally as well, among others.

Lowsec is easy.


Quote:

Which is what our Devils friend here calls being bad at eve.


No, it's not. Don't you dare put words in my mouth, you lying sack of ****.


Come back after you read my last reply to you, illiterate shuttlecock.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#267 - 2014-11-21 18:33:49 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
The purpose is created by players. The wardec is only a tool created by CCP.

It isn't CCPs fault, that people dec without a specified purpose. So it's an useless ISK sink, as long as people make it a useless ISK sink.

Working as intended, I see no problem here.

Now go out there and create content, instead of sitting on the forum!


People dec with a specific purpose, which is borderline griefing, and use exploits while they do.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#268 - 2014-11-21 18:34:40 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Come back after you read my last reply to you, illiterate shuttlecock.


The guy who continues to misuse the word "griefing" after having been shown that griefing does not apply to wardecs by CCP's own definition... should not be accusing anyone else of illiteracy.

"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.
Maekchu
Doomheim
#269 - 2014-11-21 18:36:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Maekchu
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
The purpose is created by players. The wardec is only a tool created by CCP.

It isn't CCPs fault, that people dec without a specified purpose. So it's an useless ISK sink, as long as people make it a useless ISK sink.

Working as intended, I see no problem here.

Now go out there and create content, instead of sitting on the forum!


People dec with a specific purpose, which is borderline griefing, and use exploits while they do.

Please tell me more about these "exploits", you're talking about.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#270 - 2014-11-21 18:36:30 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
The purpose is created by players. The wardec is only a tool created by CCP.

It isn't CCPs fault, that people dec without a specified purpose. So it's an useless ISK sink, as long as people make it a useless ISK sink.

Working as intended, I see no problem here.

Now go out there and create content, instead of sitting on the forum!


People dec with a specific purpose, which is borderline griefing, and use exploits while they do.

Please tell me more about these "exploits", your talking about.


He thinks camping trade hubs is an exploit.

"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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#271 - 2014-11-21 18:36:34 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Come back after you read my last reply to you, illiterate shuttlecock.


The guy who continues to misuse the word "griefing" after having been shown that griefing does not apply to wardecs by CCP's own definition... should not be accusing anyone else of illiteracy.



The guy who couldn't read the explanation of the usage while protecting his exploits (understanding he's nothing without them) should really keep quiet.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#272 - 2014-11-21 18:38:44 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Come back after you read my last reply to you, illiterate shuttlecock.


The guy who continues to misuse the word "griefing" after having been shown that griefing does not apply to wardecs by CCP's own definition... should not be accusing anyone else of illiteracy.



The guy who couldn't read the explanation of the usage while protecting his exploits (understanding he's nothing without them) should really keep quiet.


I already told you that I don't do station games. You blithely ignored that, just as you ignored CCP's definition of griefing.

You do that because it doesn't fit your bullshit narrative, and you can't stand to have your nonsense viewpoint challenged by such things as facts.

"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.
Maekchu
Doomheim
#273 - 2014-11-21 18:39:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Maekchu
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
The purpose is created by players. The wardec is only a tool created by CCP.

It isn't CCPs fault, that people dec without a specified purpose. So it's an useless ISK sink, as long as people make it a useless ISK sink.

Working as intended, I see no problem here.

Now go out there and create content, instead of sitting on the forum!


People dec with a specific purpose, which is borderline griefing, and use exploits while they do.

Please tell me more about these "exploits", you're talking about.


He thinks camping trade hubs is an exploit.

Aaaaaaw... How cute. And here I was worried someone actually broke EVE.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#274 - 2014-11-21 18:41:23 UTC
Maekchu wrote:

Aaaaaaw... How cute. And here I was worried someone actually broke EVE.


Nope, just the typical carebear flailing about how anyone is allowed to shoot at 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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#275 - 2014-11-21 18:42:11 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Come back after you read my last reply to you, illiterate shuttlecock.


The guy who continues to misuse the word "griefing" after having been shown that griefing does not apply to wardecs by CCP's own definition... should not be accusing anyone else of illiteracy.



The guy who couldn't read the explanation of the usage while protecting his exploits (understanding he's nothing without them) should really keep quiet.


I already told you that I don't do station games. You blithely ignored that, just as you ignored CCP's definition of griefing.

You do that because it doesn't fit your bullshit narrative, and you can't stand to have your nonsense viewpoint challenged by such things as facts.


I've seen your alliance do them on multiple occasions by my own eyes, who are you trying to trick?
You may not do them, I don't remember exact names of the guys I've witnessed, doesn't change the fact that it's the main thing your alliance does.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#276 - 2014-11-21 18:42:58 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Maekchu wrote:

Aaaaaaw... How cute. And here I was worried someone actually broke EVE.


Nope, just the typical carebear flailing about how anyone is allowed to shoot at them.


Just the typical hisec pansy who praises CCP for leet invulnerability warfare exploit.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#277 - 2014-11-21 18:43:47 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Just the typical hisec pansy who praises CCP for leet invulnerability warfare exploit.


There is no such thing. Stop lying, for once.

"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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#278 - 2014-11-21 18:44:26 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Just the typical hisec pansy who praises CCP for leet invulnerability warfare exploit.


There is no such thing. Stop lying, for once.

"When we exploit it's leet, when others do it's exploit."

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#279 - 2014-11-21 18:45:45 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Just the typical hisec pansy who praises CCP for leet invulnerability warfare exploit.


There is no such thing. Stop lying, for once.

"When we exploit it's leet, when others do it's exploit."


What exploit? Docking? Docking is not an exploit.

"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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#280 - 2014-11-21 18:52:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Basil Pupkin
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

Just the typical hisec pansy who praises CCP for leet invulnerability warfare exploit.


There is no such thing. Stop lying, for once.

"When we exploit it's leet, when others do it's exploit."


What exploit? Docking? Docking is not an exploit.


Your rabid defense already made it apparent to everyone you perfectly know what invulnerability exploit I am talking about.
Sigh, it was a rational thread until Devils came and derailed it protecting their precious asset #1 - the exploit.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.