These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#401 - 2015-02-13 09:23:17 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
I have removed a rule breaking post.

The Rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.



Edit: My apologies, I left one rule breaking post in this thread in my previous moderation sweep. That oversight is now corrected.

3. Ranting is prohibited.

A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counter productive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#402 - 2015-02-13 13:33:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Liafcipe9000
So far it seems all, if not most, arguments against lowering the level of risk in EVE are justified and legitimate.

All the while the arguments in favour of reducing risk levels have been more like complaints of those who fail to understand that these risks are present as originally intended in EVE Online.

If anyone can provide a reasonable explanation as to why reducing risk levels in EVE would be appropriate rather than take away from the concept and essence of EVE, one that would invalidate arguments against such action, everyone is welcome to provide it.

Until then, CCP please do not act in defense of those who refuse to admit that they misunderstood the environment and atmosphere that was intended. DO NOT be friendly with those who complain. scrap the friendly fire switch.
Aursentris
Council of Stellar Erections
#403 - 2015-02-13 13:36:42 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Perfect solution to all of this, tie corporation tax rates to concord response time. 0 tax corporation means concord does not respond. 1% tax corporation means concord responds at 0.01*that systems response time, you get the idea. Then have a percentage of that tax taken by an npc entity based on the degree of safety. So someone using a green safety and with awoxing turned off would see virtually none of their taxes. However someone using a Yellow safety and awoxing enabled would lose much less tax income.



This... is a ******* great idea. I like it. Pay for security. And raise the taxes of the NPC corps to 40% please.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#404 - 2015-02-13 13:40:46 UTC
Aursentris wrote:
This... is a ******* great idea. I like it. Pay for security. And raise the taxes of the NPC corps to 40% please.


As much as I dislike NPC corps, raising the tax level is going to achieve nothing other than to reduce the number of players. You can entice some NPCs to become real people, but you'll have no luck if you try to force them.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#405 - 2015-02-13 13:52:20 UTC
Liafcipe9000 wrote:
So far it seems all, if not most, arguments against lowering the level of risk in EVE are justified and legitimate.

All the while the arguments in favour of reducing risk levels have been more like complaints of those who fail to understand that these risks are present as originally intended in EVE Online.


It's even more to that. It's that they don't understand the value those risks give THEM.

Ultimately the 'safety' crowd would see EVE 'trammelized' into a "pvp server" and a "pve server", mainly because they think that if that happens they will enjoy being able to do as they please (mine, mission, incursion, whatever) in peace. What they would instead find out is that that stuff is super boring even for them, and that they now had no way to 'measure themselves' against the people they so despised.

This is why every time a new game is announced that is in any way similar to EVE, that contingent proclaims that it will "kill EVE unless CCP does something now" (and that something is ALWAYS, unsurprisingly, more safety/hand-holding). new game comes along, the loud contingent makes their "good bye and I told you so" post in out of pod experience and off they go to play a game that isn't crap....


....Only to QUIETLY slink right back to EVE because that new game got old fast, mainly because it restricted how much players could interact (which is what most MMOs and other types of games do).

The safety crowd is very misguided, they honestly believe that more safety will 'make more people stay', yet totally discount the fact that THEY themselves stayed even when the game was more dangerous.

Quote:

If anyone can provide a reasonable explanation as to why reducing risk levels in EVE would be appropriate rather than take away from the concept and essence of EVE, one that would invalidate arguments against such action, everyone is welcome to provide it.

Until then, CCP please do not act in defense of those who refuse to admit that they misunderstood the environment and atmosphere that was intended. DO NOT be friendly with those who complain. scrap the friendly fire switch.


CCP is a good company, but it's not the same group that created the game. That's both good and bad, good because the game is progressing nicely and at an apparently quicker pace, Bad because this 'new ccp' seems to display some 'conventional game developer wisdom' (like "create a friedn'y environment and more people will play and pay) that would be fine for a regular (themepark) game but not good for THE most un-conventional sandbox space game ever made.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#406 - 2015-02-13 13:53:08 UTC
Aursentris wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Perfect solution to all of this, tie corporation tax rates to concord response time. 0 tax corporation means concord does not respond. 1% tax corporation means concord responds at 0.01*that systems response time, you get the idea. Then have a percentage of that tax taken by an npc entity based on the degree of safety. So someone using a green safety and with awoxing turned off would see virtually none of their taxes. However someone using a Yellow safety and awoxing enabled would lose much less tax income.



This... is a ******* great idea. I like it. Pay for security. And raise the taxes of the NPC corps to 40% please.


That only pushes the income toward LP and trade. People don't blitz mission for bounties and a flat tax trade won't happen.
Theodoric Darkwind
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#407 - 2015-02-13 14:38:45 UTC
If CCP does decide to finally kill off ganking and wardeccing than they need to nerf the income in highsec by at least 90%, we are already at the point where a lot of nullsec players (mainly ones outside the CFC) are using mission/incursion alts to make isk virtually risk free.
Anslo
Scope Works
#408 - 2015-02-13 14:52:23 UTC
Adapt or die. Also lolBL

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]

Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#409 - 2015-02-13 17:10:46 UTC
Anslo wrote:
Adapt or die.

Agreed. Instead of nerfs to actual game mechanics carebears should adapt or die.

Sadly though (as displayed beautifully in the OP), its predominantly just the content-creators who have been asked to adapt or die of late.

Time for a little +13 to conflict I say, and NO MORE -1 paper-cuts to the throat of the game. We don't need CSM's asleep at the switch on protecting ANY part of the sandbox, we need less nice-guy Mike Asariah and Sugar Kyle's, and more Tora Bushido and Sabriz's, standing like Gandalf on the bridge saying "YOU SHALL NOT PASS!".

Unless of course, you actually subscribe to the notion EvE should become Hello-Kitty Online or WoW, and support the trend clearly illustrated in the OP. The point though is there is a clear choice to be made on direction here, and while CCP, CSM's and carebears are pretending the road to nerfdom is not being followed, it clearly is.

Your content-creators in game are Gondor, and they are calling for aid...

Who will answer?

p.s.
Consider this. The most powerful thing the Devil actually did, was convince the world he didn't exist.

F
Serene Repose
#410 - 2015-02-13 17:32:28 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Adapt or die.

Agreed. Instead of nerfs to actual game mechanics carebears should adapt or die.

Sadly though (as displayed beautifully in the OP), its predominantly just the content-creators who have been asked to adapt or die of late.

Time for a little +13 to conflict I say, and NO MORE -1 paper-cuts to the throat of the game. We don't need CSM's asleep at the switch on protecting ANY part of the sandbox, we need less nice-guy Mike Asariah and Sugar Kyle's, and more Tora Bushido and Sabriz's, standing like Gandalf on the bridge saying "YOU SHALL NOT PASS!".

Unless of course, you actually subscribe to the notion EvE should become Hello-Kitty Online or WoW, and support the trend clearly illustrated in the OP. The point though is there is a clear choice to be made on direction here, and while CCP, CSM's and carebears are pretending the road to nerfdom is not being followed, it clearly is.

Your content-creators in game are Gondor, and they are calling for aid...

Who will answer?

p.s.
Consider this. The most powerful thing the Devil actually did, was convince the world he didn't exist.

F
Run that past me again. How do gankers create content? I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff. Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#411 - 2015-02-13 17:38:07 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Adapt or die.

Agreed. Instead of nerfs to actual game mechanics carebears should adapt or die.

Sadly though (as displayed beautifully in the OP), its predominantly just the content-creators who have been asked to adapt or die of late.

Time for a little +13 to conflict I say, and NO MORE -1 paper-cuts to the throat of the game. We don't need CSM's asleep at the switch on protecting ANY part of the sandbox, we need less nice-guy Mike Asariah and Sugar Kyle's, and more Tora Bushido and Sabriz's, standing like Gandalf on the bridge saying "YOU SHALL NOT PASS!".

Unless of course, you actually subscribe to the notion EvE should become Hello-Kitty Online or WoW, and support the trend clearly illustrated in the OP. The point though is there is a clear choice to be made on direction here, and while CCP, CSM's and carebears are pretending the road to nerfdom is not being followed, it clearly is.

Your content-creators in game are Gondor, and they are calling for aid...

Who will answer?

p.s.
Consider this. The most powerful thing the Devil actually did, was convince the world he didn't exist.

F



the most powerful thing a man ever did was convince others that a god exist.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#412 - 2015-02-13 17:40:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Serene Repose wrote:


Run that past me again. How do gankers create content? I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff. Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??


And here lies one of the greatest misconceptions of content - that it has to be a specific 'thing' in the game. Gankers create content by creating conflict, story, purpose, etc. They create content by being part of the risk of EVE Online, something to rally against, a story to tell, etc. Really not that hard to figure out if you put your mind to it, so rather than assuming you're just slow, I'll assume you're being intentionally obtuse and disingenuous.

“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

Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#413 - 2015-02-13 17:47:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Serene Repose wrote:
Run that past me again. How do gankers create content?
By creating a boogie man for people to rail against, by creating conflict and stories.
Quote:
I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff.
What does the Wizard of Oz have to with it?
Quote:
Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??
If the number of gankers has increased, but the number of ships for sale on the market hasn't, what does that tell you?
It tells me that more gankers are required to do the job, by virtue of ganking having been nerfed repeatedly.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.

Serene Repose
#414 - 2015-02-13 17:49:29 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:


Run that past me again. How do gankers create content? I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff. Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??


And here lies one of the greatest misconceptions of content - that it has to be a specific 'thing' in the game. Gankers create content by creating conflict, story, purpose, etc. They create content by being part of the risk of EVE Online, something to rally against, a story to tell, etc. Really not that hard to figure out if you put your mind to it, so rather than assuming you're just slow, I'll assume you're being intentionally obtuse and disingenuous.
You should consider a career as a political spin doctor. I'd work on the vocabulary though. A bit on the "we" side.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Vyl Vit
#415 - 2015-02-13 17:50:55 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:


Run that past me again. How do gankers create content? I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff. Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??


And here lies one of the greatest misconceptions of content - that it has to be a specific 'thing' in the game. Gankers create content by creating conflict, story, purpose, etc. They create content by being part of the risk of EVE Online, something to rally against, a story to tell, etc. Really not that hard to figure out if you put your mind to it, so rather than assuming you're just slow, I'll assume you're being intentionally obtuse and disingenuous.
You just described what a "player" does. So...who's obteuse? (Didn't mean to correct your spelling there while you're busy being smarter than everyone else.)

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.

Serene Repose
#416 - 2015-02-13 17:52:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Serene Repose
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
Run that past me again. How do gankers create content?
By creating a boogie man for people to rail against, by creating conflict and stories.
Quote:
I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff.
What does the Wizard of OZ have to with it?
Quote:
Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??
If the number of gankers has increased, but the number of ships for sale on the market hasn't, what does that tell you?
It tells me that more gankers are required to do the job, by virtue of ganking having been nerfed repeatedly.
So...while we're walking the caverns of your imagination...what "job" is this that needs to be done? More "gankers" to "create content?" Why. That would mean the job isn't being done NOW. SO this "gankers create content" is just a THEORY.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#417 - 2015-02-13 17:52:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Rift
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:


Run that past me again. How do gankers create content? I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff. Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??


And here lies one of the greatest misconceptions of content - that it has to be a specific 'thing' in the game. Gankers create content by creating conflict, story, purpose, etc. They create content by being part of the risk of EVE Online, something to rally against, a story to tell, etc. Really not that hard to figure out if you put your mind to it, so rather than assuming you're just slow, I'll assume you're being intentionally obtuse and disingenuous.



same for carebears then. They create content by being part of the risk of EVE Online, something to rally against, a story to tell, etc.

if gankers didn't have carebears they wouldn't be anything.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#418 - 2015-02-13 17:53:46 UTC
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
Run that past me again. How do gankers create content?
By creating a boogie man for people to rail against, by creating conflict and stories.
Quote:
I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff.
What does the Wizard of OZ have to with it?
Quote:
Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??
If the number of gankers has increased, but the number of ships for sale on the market hasn't, what does that tell you?
It tells me that more gankers are required to do the job, by virtue of ganking having been nerfed repeatedly.



it tells me the ship makers have outsmarted the gankers and the gankers are having a hard time adapting like the ship makers have
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#419 - 2015-02-13 17:59:07 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:


Run that past me again. How do gankers create content? I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff. Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??


And here lies one of the greatest misconceptions of content - that it has to be a specific 'thing' in the game. Gankers create content by creating conflict, story, purpose, etc. They create content by being part of the risk of EVE Online, something to rally against, a story to tell, etc. Really not that hard to figure out if you put your mind to it, so rather than assuming you're just slow, I'll assume you're being intentionally obtuse and disingenuous.
You should consider a career as a political spin doctor. I'd work on the vocabulary though. A bit on the "we" side.


I know that's intended as an angry insult, but given my actual line of work, I'll take it as a compliment.

“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

Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#420 - 2015-02-13 18:03:00 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Lady Rift wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
Run that past me again. How do gankers create content?
By creating a boogie man for people to rail against, by creating conflict and stories.
Quote:
I'm sort of slow with this "man behind the curtain" stuff.
What does the Wizard of OZ have to with it?
Quote:
Gankers have increased considerably over the past year. The amount of ships on the market hasn't. So...do whuh??
If the number of gankers has increased, but the number of ships for sale on the market hasn't, what does that tell you?
It tells me that more gankers are required to do the job, by virtue of ganking having been nerfed repeatedly.



it tells me the ship makers have outsmarted the gankers and the gankers are having a hard time adapting like the ship makers have


Your conclusion does not make sense. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

I am a ship builder. I am also a ship exploder. So have I outsmarted myself? An increase in the number of gankers, but a stability of available ships says that the market is more than capable of compensating for the increased ganking activity. Many ships are cheaper than in the past, and the cost of ships which are frequently ganked has not really changed. This means that an increase in ganking activity is putting more ships through the market without affecting margins. That's adaptation to changing market environments. But please, try to clarify what you meant *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.