These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Nerfs, and the coming of the second shard

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#81 - 2015-02-11 11:04:33 UTC  |  Edited by: xxxTRUSTxxx
The ability to join a corp that cannot have war declared on it already exists in the game.
They're called NPC corps.
So i see social cops as being nothing more than an NPC corp that these guys can name.
they won't have the same mechanics as a real corp so they are no different.

Also the name is terrible.

social corps.

does that mean the current corps are anti-social? Roll

ya know what's funny about this. most of you guys have alts in an NPC corp so you know all too well just how many people play in an NPC corp for years and have zero interest in joining a non NPC corp because they don't want to deal with war decs.

i'd like to see the full idea, best not to leap before you look.
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#82 - 2015-02-11 12:02:22 UTC
F

some may claim it's tears and/or bittervetism, but it's true. EVE is becoming less about risk and more about hand-holding in hisec.
what happened to "EVE is a dark and evil world where only the strong survive"?
Tasspool Harp
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#83 - 2015-02-11 12:33:25 UTC
Liafcipe9000 wrote:
F

some may claim it's tears and/or bittervetism, but it's true. EVE is becoming less about risk and more about hand-holding in hisec.
what happened to "EVE is a dark and evil world where only the strong survive"?


Pfftt. That was just marketing propaganda put out by Drink Starsi to come across as edgy to differentiate themselves from Quafe.
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#84 - 2015-02-11 13:10:05 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
I report, you decide.

F


One sided arguments always show a biased view. Wonder why.

Spin

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#85 - 2015-02-11 13:15:04 UTC
Leannor wrote:
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
I report, you decide.

F


One sided arguments always show a biased view. Wonder why.

Spin


It's one sided because that's the simple truth of the matter. Unless you can name some nerfs to highsec carebearing for us? You know, in the midst of the legions of buffs you lot have been repeatedly given. And not the "refining changes" lie either, since that effected the entire game.

"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.
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#86 - 2015-02-11 13:16:49 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Hiasa Kite wrote:
there's nothing any PvP enthusiast can do to encourage or outright force them into a fight.


This is the same in every area of space, ever.

I spend my time in null, and to be honest if people don't want to fight, they just wont. 85% of the game is baiting people into an engagement.

Risk aversity is everywhere, just outside of high sec more people want more easy kills than most bears.

So very few want good fights, very few indeed.


But then, that is not what this is about - this is about being able to violence people against their wishes and the premier method of doing so - suicide ganking gives zero ****s if it is a "legal" target or not. In fact you're more likely to get a kill because you can blend into the background and not appear a threat until it is too late.

I don't think it's in that bad a place right now, both sides need to work for it to be successful in defeating the other.



for me the biggest issue for risk in eve is you can't even guess at the risk until ti's too late. YOu don't know what ship you're going to encounter when you undock, much less how they're fit, nor if they have mates. So every 'risk' is not risk ... it's either suicide or success. Risk denotes understanding of the situation and being able to assess it. Not sure how EVE can get around that.

If I were to undock, knowing that I was 'near' equal par to the opponent, 'or' that my risk of success/failiure was somewhere between 20% to 80%, then it might make more of a difference. MOst people think that just getting into a good ship and gambling into a fight is both taking risk into account and brave or honoruable is a little misguided. It's just PVP by luck until you know your target.

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#87 - 2015-02-11 13:22:25 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Leannor wrote:
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
I report, you decide.

F


One sided arguments always show a biased view. Wonder why.

Spin


It's one sided because that's the simple truth of the matter. Unless you can name some nerfs to highsec carebearing for us? You know, in the midst of the legions of buffs you lot have been repeatedly given. And not the "refining changes" lie either, since that effected the entire game.



I'm not an expert on the two sides ... you've given one side ... (which I wasn't an expert on either). .. if someone can give the flip side, we can have a discussion. :-)

Tho, I would say, any changes in eve (not sure there can be exceptions really) effect everyone, one way or another. Less miners, scarcity of minerals, prices rise, ship prices rise, less ships around (maybe, eventaully), less kills, more miners, more minerals etc etc ... and vice veras ... (which simply work backwards lol). Either way, you get the same progression ...

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#88 - 2015-02-11 13:23:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Leannor wrote:

for me the biggest issue for risk in eve is you can't even guess at the risk until ti's too late.


Proper planning prevents **** poor performance.

Also, scouting, recon, etc. Having workable intel is always useful in making the correct assessments.

But unfortunately, those things require more effort than just pushing autopilot. One day I really must thank CCP properly for giving us that wonderful button, a better example of a gameplay trap I have never seen.

Leannor wrote:

I'm not an expert on the two sides


Then you really shouldn't be commenting on it, hmm?

"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.
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#89 - 2015-02-11 13:28:48 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Leannor wrote:

for me the biggest issue for risk in eve is you can't even guess at the risk until ti's too late.


Proper planning prevents **** poor performance.

Also, scouting, recon, etc. Having workable intel is always useful in making the correct assessments.

But unfortunately, those things require more effort than just pushing autopilot. One day I really must thank CCP properly for giving us that wonderful button, a better example of a gameplay trap I have never seen.

Leannor wrote:

I'm not an expert on the two sides


Then you really shouldn't be commenting on it, hmm?



I was more referring to the loan ranger PVP, clearly, as was clearly referred in the bit you cut regarding 'knowing what your target is'. THus all 'intel' style PVP is not included. Yes, you need intel. But not always will intel be an option ...

and ... no, I'm not an expert ... and? It's the forum that can teach. Or is teaching not allowed? You have educated me on one aspect. You have put it out there for discussion. Nuetral parties are often best for discussion as they have no bias.

If there is no opposite case to present, I guess your view stands as correct.

And, no need for hostility to those that appear to disagree with you. Roll

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
Drez Arthie
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2015-02-11 13:33:33 UTC
Hisec is not diverging from low/null space to become a second 'shard' because nerfs to the pirate/villain play style have happened in low/null as well:

- warp to 0km
- jump bridges
- jump freighters
- ability to bypass hisec/lowsec edge gates through wormholes

These are only the changes in game mechanics. Changes in player alliance behavior have turned much of null into a safe zone for renters.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#91 - 2015-02-11 13:35:20 UTC
Leannor wrote:

And, no need for hostility to those that appear to disagree with you.


That's not hostility. That's merely (somewhat sarcastically, I admit) pointing out that mouthing off to someone about their "one sided" graph without actually being aware of the reality of the situation is probably not the best idea.

Feyd's graph is, sadly enough, the reality of the situation. PvP in highsec has pretty much never been given a net buff. (and before some screwball comes along and spews about the destroyer buffs, that was peanuts in comparison to the loss of insurance combined with the barge buffs)

"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.
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
SL33PERS
#92 - 2015-02-11 13:43:45 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
It's nice that someone is keeping up on what's happening in high sec. Cuz I don't know whattf.


Highsec is really scary, all these people who I don't know who they are in local, I get cold sweat every time I visit.
Tiffany 'Tiffs' Succeed
Angel Content Cartel
#93 - 2015-02-11 13:44:38 UTC
For sake of having a half decently complete list.

CCP lowered the RoF of sentry turrets in favour of gate gankers and changed facpo spawn mechanics a bit.

Not to sound like defending them.
These are nice gestures, like throwing a mercybone to a dog you purposefully starve to deatb.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#94 - 2015-02-11 13:56:29 UTC
Not on that list is the fact that concord used to be tankable.
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2015-02-11 14:16:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Elenahina
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
It is difficult to envision why anyone would join a highsec industry corp after the proposed social corp change unless they are heavily invested in blueprint research. The balance pass for this ought to include substantive incentives to being in a player corp. Absent of that social corps are a stealth removal of wardecs for non-POS using players.


There have NEVER been substantial benefits to being in a highsec corp provided by the game mechanics. That's part of the problem - even if you're involved in research, it's easier (and in the long run, probably less risky) to pull down your research facility and roll your corp than it is to risk losing everything to a war.

The issue with high sec PVP is not that people are risk averse (well, of that's part of the reason too), it's that there is literally nothing in highsec worth fighting over. Why should they risk assets fighting anyone for anything when it's easier and less risky to NOT fight?

You cannot FORCE people to willingly engage in PvP (you can force them to explode, but that's generally done unwillingly). But if you give them something WORTH fighting for, most people will fight for it. Give high sec corporations something that's worth protecting, and the ones that are serious about it will step up. The casuals will go back to NPC corps (and that's a whole other issue).

Drez Arthie wrote:

- warp to 0km

That was done as a resource conservation method. Everyone was already warping to 0 thanks to bookmarks. That change had no impact on the bulk of your targets - it was done to keep TQ from melting everytime someone tried to copy the 10,000 alliance WTZ bookmarks. If it was really a nerf, the autopilot would wtz as well.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Luna Arindale
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#96 - 2015-02-11 14:29:23 UTC
Well, while I don't generally go to high sec anymore, the Skiff buff seems to be more of an intended buff to nullsec mining than high-sec. Though the problem is that this is a game where ships like that aren't limited to the sec of space they were designed for. As for the corp AWOXing i honestly doubt that will change anything, dumb corps will still be dumb corps and no safety can change that. Besides if you steal all the assets of a highsec corp they will get Concorded if they try to shoot you before removing you from corp.

The wardec changes I am not to familiar with, but no one uses wardecs as actual wardecs, they use them as a way to get easy kills in highsec from people who don't know any better.

Also, If people are so worried about this making highsec safer why don't you go around ganking every ship in every system you fly through instead of declaring one system at a time as your mining permit system. honestly, sometimes those who gank people cry the loudest when ever someone changes something that they like to exploit.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#97 - 2015-02-11 14:31:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Elenahina wrote:
You cannot FORCE people to willingly engage in PvP .
For emphasis.

I think a lot of people are drawn into PVP via war declarations and ganks, when they get the little kick of being in a conflict and trying to save their ship.
There will always be those that go, "Oh well. The human controlled pirates blew up my ship. I better just hop in another one and keep racking up my ISK points."
I have spoken to people who do get no reaction out of being ganked or dying, right from loss one. They really do believe that it doesn't matter and is just a game and they can't be bothered to deal with forming up, making doctrines and other things they see as utter nonsense.

Oh and there are loads and loads of people who start out the game mining, think they will take their time raising skills, getting ships and things.
In the mean time they get blown up repeatedly and believe they will never win a fight. So, it becomes deeply ingrained to dock up or die and never try and fight back.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#98 - 2015-02-11 14:31:08 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
I report, you decide.

F


great marketing though not really accurate.

yeah all the changes you stated are real, tough you seem to forget any of the changes that makes it easier.

DPS output increases, clone cost removal, speed diversity to name few.
Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
#99 - 2015-02-11 14:36:11 UTC
Daerrol wrote:
All I read is "I can't shoot people who don't want to be shot/know what to do anymore" tears. Second shard? Give me a break. The economics alone of highsec-lowsec-nullsec-WH interaction are MORE than enough to disprove that, not to mention lots of residients of other parts of space use highsec for various things.

Here's an idea. If you love PVP that much, come out to Low-sec and shoot people who A: Expect it. B: will shoot back.
Best "I don't like playing your way so you shouldn't like it either" post in the thread. Have a cookie.

Witty Image - Stream

Not Liking this post hurts my RL feelings and will be considered harassment
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#100 - 2015-02-11 16:09:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
I haven't read most of this thread, but I already know that it's a case study in the carebear mentality.

One key facet of this mentality is the rejection of non-consensual pvp. You can tell a person has this mentality when they suggest that "only people who want pvp should be subject to pvp". There is nothing wrong with this belief in most MMOs, that's what they are there for, to shield non-competitive people from competitive types.

The problem is that this is not and has never been one of those types of MMOs (thank the Gods of space and Iceland). In EVE, universal non-consensual pvp, conflict and the dangers that come with that are as much at the core of the EVE experience as the single shard universe is. When CCP dampens (even slightly) the possibilities of conflict, non-consensual pvp and down right treachery, it diminishes what EVE is. Frankly, EVE is on the long road to being "just another game with spaceships" rather than the intense 'mosh pit in space' in started out as.


This is also why I say to my pvping Frenemies that they should not mistake "pve player" for "carebear" automatically. Very many of us PVE players embrace the existence of (and possibilities offered by) the non-consensual pvp nature of the game and we agree that CCP is doing the wrong thing with all these 'safeties' and "friendly fire toggle switches" and "are you sure you wanna do that" pop ups. It is the value of the space loot COMBINED with the satisfaction of outsmarting pvprs who want to stop us (in Han Solo/Indiana Jones style, all Hail Harrison of the Fords) that is at the core of our enjoyment of the game.

When CCP nerfs 'y'all' in an attempt to appease and enable players too weak to excel in the game's existing frameworks (which never works btw, because their weakness wasn't caused by the game, they brought it with them into the game) in hopes that a few more of them stay and pay, they nerf us too.