These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Steps to survive Freighter bumping from Mach

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#141 - 2014-12-04 04:49:15 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

The nerf war threads are because wardeccs make PvE corps essentially useless. Not sure how that relates to suicide ganking and bumping.


Resources should always be contested. So-called PVE corps should recruit Capsuleers who can shoot guns.

You must understand very little about game balance if you are looking for conflict-free ISK in this game. Every instance of conflict-free ISK should be hunted down and eliminated (in other words, coded out).

Coded out. I crack myself up. Ohh.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#142 - 2014-12-04 04:55:49 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:

The nerf war threads are because wardeccs make PvE corps essentially useless. Not sure how that relates to suicide ganking and bumping.


Resources should always be contested. So-called PVE corps should recruit Capsuleers who can shoot guns.

You must understand very little about game balance if you are looking for conflict-free ISK in this game. Every instance of conflict-free ISK should be hunted down and eliminated (in other words, coded out).

Coded out. I crack myself up. Ohh.



There is a staggering amount of conflict free isk in the game. Nearly all PvE is done conflict free. Ratting, missions, mining, solo plexing fw, etc....these are all done conflict free 99% of the time. If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#143 - 2014-12-04 04:57:21 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
EVE logic:

A level 4 mission runner does something stupid, and takes on a mission that sends them into lowsec. They don't scout, aren't dilligent, and lose their battleship to someone probing them down and shooting them.

They come to the forums to complain, and everyone says "You were an idiot, you willingly took a non-PVP ship into a dangerous system. HAHAHA, don't let the door hit you on the way out."


Then a freighter pilot does something equally dumb, and flies through Uedama when there have been 77 kills there in the last hour. They don't scout, are not dilligent, and lose their freighter to someone's cunningly planned gank trap.

They come to the forums to complain, and people say totally different things.

Possibly because you have come up with totally different stories.
Uedama is not low sec.
Uedama can not be bypassed.
Telling someone to log off and come back in a few hours is not playing the game
Nor was it someones cunningly planned gank trap but a boring simple rote game of whack the pinata and see what falls out.

This is why people say different things. One involved player choice to accept the mission then take a BS into low sec rather than a MWD/Cloak HAC with a PVP fit that can still mission (Hi OP Ishtar btw).
The other the player has the choice of.... Log off and don't play for a few hours. Fly through Low sec which is even more stupid. Or fly into Uedama.
In the second case, assuming they are still going to play the game and not simply quit, flying through Uedama is their only choice. A scout wouldn't really help them out, everyone knows there are gankers there because it's literally the only high sec route between two areas and is 0.5 sec to boot.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2014-12-04 04:58:10 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
There is a staggering amount of conflict free isk in the game. Nearly all PvE is done conflict free. Ratting, missions, mining, solo plexing fw, etc....these are all done conflict free 99% of the time. If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.


And you'll always find me calling for their removal as well.

Two wrongs don't make a right. I feel like you should try and be consistent in calling for buffs and nerfs.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#145 - 2014-12-04 04:58:16 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
- it's not a ship designed for solo play.


Source please.

Profit favors the prepared
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#146 - 2014-12-04 04:59:58 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
There is a staggering amount of conflict free isk in the game. Nearly all PvE is done conflict free. Ratting, missions, mining, solo plexing fw, etc....these are all done conflict free 99% of the time. If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.

The potential for conflict is there, and that's what matters.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#147 - 2014-12-04 05:02:25 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
There is a staggering amount of conflict free isk in the game. Nearly all PvE is done conflict free. Ratting, missions, mining, solo plexing fw, etc....these are all done conflict free 99% of the time. If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.

The potential for conflict is there, and that's what matters.


Potential for conflict is everywhere.....you can always be shot at. The actuality of conflict is not there. The fact that people feel safe AFK carrier ratting in a 3 billion isk ship in Dekklein while doing laundry and playing minecraft should tell you that the potential is theoretical, not practical.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#148 - 2014-12-04 05:03:14 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
There is a staggering amount of conflict free isk in the game. Nearly all PvE is done conflict free. Ratting, missions, mining, solo plexing fw, etc....these are all done conflict free 99% of the time. If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.


And you'll always find me calling for their removal as well.

Two wrongs don't make a right. I feel like you should try and be consistent in calling for buffs and nerfs.


So how would you change the game to make isk earned from conflict? Force everyone into an Evewide FW where all isk comes from blowing up other people?
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#149 - 2014-12-04 05:04:30 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.


I have to say, there are two parts of the Veers character that really stand out as brilliant. First, there's the narcissism. The need to constantly "up the ante" whenever a conflict is presented. Second is the subtle way new arguments are introduced.

For instance, here we have the suggestion that isk is earned through conflict. Really, well played.

Idiotic, but well played.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#150 - 2014-12-04 05:06:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Veers Belvar wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
There is a staggering amount of conflict free isk in the game. Nearly all PvE is done conflict free. Ratting, missions, mining, solo plexing fw, etc....these are all done conflict free 99% of the time. If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.

The potential for conflict is there, and that's what matters.


Potential for conflict is everywhere.....you can always be shot at. The actuality of conflict is not there. The fact that people feel safe AFK carrier ratting in a 3 billion isk ship in Dekklein while doing laundry and playing minecraft should tell you that the potential is theoretical, not practical.

It is the nature of potential to be theoretical. Its very definition, in fact.

While you might have plenty of stories about people making gobs of ISK without ever having a player glance in their direction, I have plenty of stories about people verbally assaulting me for hours and then rage-quitting the game permanently after taking their first-ever pvp losses in wars I've personally conducted. As long as this can happen, no one is safe, even in high-sec.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2014-12-04 05:12:56 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
So how would you change the game to make isk earned from conflict? Force everyone into an Evewide FW where all isk comes from blowing up other people?


All the biggest money making opportunities would be there in CONCORD-less SOV-less lowsec. Every single bit of ISK you earn should come with blood, sweat, and tears with you either shooting someone or running away narrowly avoiding getting shot at by another person.

Don't you think the answer is a bit more complicated than that? There are questions like, why would anyone SOV then, and so on. I'd be happy to debate you in more detail in EVEmail, but I doubt we'll solve SOV, ganking, and why-lowsec-is-flavorless-mud all at once.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#152 - 2014-12-04 05:15:23 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.


I have to say, there are two parts of the Veers character that really stand out as brilliant. First, there's the narcissism. The need to constantly "up the ante" whenever a conflict is presented. Second is the subtle way new arguments are introduced.

For instance, here we have the suggestion that isk is earned through conflict. Really, well played.

Idiotic, but well played.


It would help if you would actually read through the posts before throwing around words like "narcissism." Had you done so, rather than gone looking for the flamethrower, you will have noticed that someone objected to the existence of conflict-free isk.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#153 - 2014-12-04 05:25:18 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.


I have to say, there are two parts of the Veers character that really stand out as brilliant. First, there's the narcissism. The need to constantly "up the ante" whenever a conflict is presented. Second is the subtle way new arguments are introduced.

For instance, here we have the suggestion that isk is earned through conflict. Really, well played.

Idiotic, but well played.


It would help if you would actually read through the posts before throwing around words like "narcissism." Had you done so, rather than gone looking for the flamethrower, you will have noticed that someone objected to the existence of conflict-free isk.


Flamethrower? How kinky.

So you agree that all methods of acquiring isk should involve at least a sliver of conflict?
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#154 - 2014-12-04 05:27:43 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

How is it "harassment" if it's a legitimate gameplay activity? Like I said, peoples' intentions aren't for you to judge. Well, you have the right to, but no one capable of rational thought is going to view your stance as anything but subjective.



It is objective because I know the people in real life and I know what they say out of game and what they plan as well as the innocent denial they spin in game and in forums :D Most of them are real life TT gaming associates and generally younger and part of D&D/Pathfinder/40K gaming groups I help run.

For example one group (who all went to the same boys boarding school in my local town) chose to pursue a 17 year old girl in WoW because they were able to identify her new WoW character from her out of game social media. They managed to "befriend her" out of game giving her advice and commiserating with her about being bullied whilst continually spawn camp/stalking her in game until she quit.

NOW .. I never said the people freighter bumping where of this type, just that these people DO exist in EVE - because I know some of them personally. I think freighter bumping is a sign CODE have too many wanna be PvPers with too much time on their hands than anything else.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#155 - 2014-12-04 05:31:59 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
If you want a game where isk is earned through conflict....go somewhere else.


I have to say, there are two parts of the Veers character that really stand out as brilliant. First, there's the narcissism. The need to constantly "up the ante" whenever a conflict is presented. Second is the subtle way new arguments are introduced.

For instance, here we have the suggestion that isk is earned through conflict. Really, well played.

Idiotic, but well played.


It would help if you would actually read through the posts before throwing around words like "narcissism." Had you done so, rather than gone looking for the flamethrower, you will have noticed that someone objected to the existence of conflict-free isk.


Flamethrower? How kinky.

So you agree that all methods of acquiring isk should involve at least a sliver of conflict?


Not at all. That would wipe out manufacturing and station trading, for starters. It would turn Eve into World of Tanks. Personally I think we should have less conflict in PvE, so people feel safer grinding away at it for isk. That would make people a lot more comfortable with losing ships in PvP. The problem with PvE right now is that it entails time, effort, and risk, which creates risk aversion and incentivizes isk hoarding.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#156 - 2014-12-04 05:41:42 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
The problem with PvE right now is that it entails....effort.....


Just to paraphrase.

I think this might be the perfect quote to end the Veers toon on. So I'm just going to assume that after this, you faded off quietly into the night.

Goodbye Veers. I'll miss you.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#157 - 2014-12-04 05:42:27 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
The problem with PvE right now is that it entails....effort.....


Just to paraphrase.

I think this might be the perfect quote to end the Veers toon on. So I'm just going to assume that after this, you faded off quietly into the night.

Goodbye Veers. I'll miss you.


Roll
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#158 - 2014-12-04 05:49:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

How is it "harassment" if it's a legitimate gameplay activity? Like I said, peoples' intentions aren't for you to judge. Well, you have the right to, but no one capable of rational thought is going to view your stance as anything but subjective.

It is objective because I know the people in real life and I know what they say out of game and what they plan as well as the innocent denial they spin in game and in forums

You can't just go ahead and project the behavior of a select few individuals on an entire society. If you do that, then how about we label all miners as terrorists, just because chances are that a current-day ISIS member probably sucked at a Veldspar rock in his Covetor at some point?

Veers Belvar wrote:
Not at all. That would wipe out manufacturing and station trading, for starters. It would turn Eve into World of Tanks. Personally I think we should have less conflict in PvE, so people feel safer grinding away at it for isk. That would make people a lot more comfortable with losing ships in PvP. The problem with PvE right now is that it entails time, effort, and risk, which creates risk aversion and incentivizes isk hoarding.

EVE isn't a traditional MMO in which the pvp component has no risk and happens in an arena-like environment. Players aren't supposed to feel comfortable about losing ships in pvp, because the desire to avoid loss is one of the driving factors behind EVE's economy in the first place. Destruction gives meaning to creation in EVE, because unlike real life, EVE actually operates on the broken window parable. Less conflict and less destruction is going to hurt the desire for economic growth, because there will be no point to it. And then everyone is going to suffer. You see, we don't have raids and such to carry this game in the absence of player-created content. But I do notice that with each passing day, more and more people seem to want to turn this game into another WoW clone, because that's all they know, understand, or are emotionally able to deal with.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#159 - 2014-12-04 05:55:11 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
[quote=Hasikan Miallok]

EVE isn't a traditional MMO in which the pvp component has no risk and happens in an arena-like environment. Players aren't supposed to feel comfortable about losing ships in pvp, because the desire to avoid loss is one of the driving factors behind EVE's economy in the first place. Destruction gives meaning to creation in EVE, because unlike real life, EVE actually operates on the broken window parable. Less conflict and less destruction is going to hurt the desire for economic growth, because there will be no point to it. And then everyone is going to suffer. You see, we don't have raids and such to carry this game in the absence of player-created content. But I do notice that with each passing day, more and more people seem to want to turn this game into another WoW clone, because that's all they know, understand, or are emotionally able to deal with.


I question the relationship between destruction and economic growth. Fabulously rich Eve players don't suddenly stop wanting isk...they go buy themselves one of every ship, capital ships, officer mods, etc... If the isk is flowing there is no reason to keep it in your wallet. If anything, destruction makes people feel vulnerable, and encourages them to use cheaper ships and keep a bigger isk reserve. If CODE blows up your 1.3 bil freighter are you really gonna go out and buy another one? Or are you instead going to try to get the job done in a cheaper ship. Ditto for mission running...if you get blown up, are you really going to be using a 30 billion isk full officer fit machariel? Or will you get the job done with a cheaper ship.

In my view, more risk and destruction causes more risk aversion, and less demand for fancy things.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#160 - 2014-12-04 05:59:46 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
I question the relationship between destruction and economic growth. Fabulously rich Eve players don't suddenly stop wanting isk...they go buy themselves one of every ship, capital ships, officer mods, etc... If the isk is flowing there is no reason to keep it in your wallet.

And after they have one of everything? What happens then?

I can tell you, because I've played other games that reached this type of conclusion. People get bored, and stop playing.

Do you know what removing destruction would do to EVE? It's not that it would outright destroy it, but rather that it would give EVE a clear beginning and a clear end. Think about what that would mean.

Veers Belvar wrote:
If anything, destruction makes people feel vulnerable, and encourages them to use cheaper ships and keep a bigger isk reserve. If CODE blows up your 1.3 bil freighter are you really gonna go out and buy another one? Or are you instead going to try to get the job done in a cheaper ship. Ditto for mission running...if you get blown up, are you really going to be using a 30 billion isk full officer fit machariel? Or will you get the job done with a cheaper ship.

In my view, more risk and destruction causes more risk aversion, and less demand for fancy things.

You're talking about very basic economic relationships here. The things you describe are entirely natural, and shouldn't be viewed as negatives. It's completely normal for the poor to try to save, and for the rich to spend more in order to increase their wealth. That's how capitalism works, for better or for worse.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted