Crime & Punishment

My irony meter just asploded.

No, it was pretty much ruled an exploit of unintended game mechanics and patched out within days under those justifications. There was simply no significant time frame between the decision and the changes, similarly to how the CONCORD boomeranging thing was addressed within like a week by the addition of the scramble ray. Meanwhile, war evasion was considered an exploit right up until the end of 2012, which is by far longer than "10 minutes before coming to senses."


You keep saying this to me, keep telling me to quit at every opportunity.

Am I not allowed to voice my displeasure with something?

Or are you one of those people who thinks that master's gentle touch can do no wrong, and that every change CCP makes to EVE is invariably a good change, only because CCP is the authority?

Citation needed. Dec shielding existed for a long time. As for war evasion that's got to be wrong as I know for a fact it was allowed in 2011, neither was it when I started in 2005. To be honest, I can't even remember when they declare it as an exploit, so I'm going to call for "citation needed" on that one too.

Nope, you're free to cry about whatever changes you want, and I'm free to tell you to HTFU or quit, as so many of you brethren do to others.

And sure CCP can do wrong, I've been outspoken about many of their changes. This just isn't one of the wrong ones. It's not even that big a deal, you guys just love to blow it out of proportion, as if this is the single worst change that's ever happened.

I'm sure you'll find it, you guys usually do.

I'm not, but are you? You are here telling me it's wrong, I'm saying it's not. Why are you more right?

I take it by the way you're going to pass on both the "citation needed" parts? We'll just have to take your word for it those are in fact true?

Except you're not being objective when you state what the game's intended purpose is. The intended purpose of the game isn't purely to have people shooting each other. If it was, there would be no industry, no economics, no PvE.

EVE has never been a "cold harsh universe", if it was then losses would actually be significant, which 9 times in 10 they aren't. The main goad of EVE is to be a space based sandbox where you make your own way to your own goal. Whether or not awoxing exists has no bearing on that goal, but the potential increase in player retention is certainly something that's needed for EVE to exist at all, harsh or not.

And everyone is still out to get you, they just can't do it in the overly simple way of "join corp, shoot orca, trollolol, repeat". They haven't removed the ability to steal, or lure people into lowsec, or even convince them to turn off safety (say for example "don't worry, if you turn off safety I'll be able to web your freighter to keep it safe from those gankers when we ship all of our stuff to our new system tomorrow *chuckle chuckle*"). You can still vote yourself into CEO and disband the corp, you can still push them into wardecs with your own friends or give away their POCOs. The only thing that's changed is the amount of effort you have to put in.

Actually, it's because I can't remember either of those things ever being declared exploits, which suddenly made me ask if it really actually happened. Up until now I've not bothered questioning it from the few times I've seen it said, assuming that it was probably right, but then I thought about it and distinctly remember being involved in a few that were never deemed exports. So I chucked around a few searches which turned up absolutely no results. This makes me wonder if it's one of those things that someone space famous claimed once which just stuck, rather than being the actual case. I was kinda hoping that since you're were saying they were declared exploits, that you might have seen a link somewhere and remember where it was.

If anyone else knows where these statements were made, I'll certainly be interested in seeing them.

Except that I did no such thing.


Okay.


So why aren't you arguing for the total removal of pvp from high-sec? It would lead to a much greater level of player retention than just getting rid of awoxing.


All these things you just said are pretty absurd. Not sure if troll bait or what, but they've been discussed to death (and proven wrong) in many various recent threads. Really, dude? Luring people into low-sec is now a solution for high-sec pvp restrictions? Using that logic, we can remove wars and ganking, and then tell people that it's just as viable to kill people in high-sec as it always has been; you'll simply need to "put in more effort" by getting them to agree to your duel requests. If you don't see how this is ridiculous, then we're at an impasse.


Despite their existence (and abundance), it's hard to present such things as evidence without knowing either who said the stuff, or what exactly was said (or both). Like I said, the Falcon thing, about how CCP would rather fold over as a company than let EVE go soft (yeah right, rofl), is pretty fresh, but there are countless others like it from years past.

That is probably a major cause. Too much safe wealth generation in hi sec, and in rented null.

Because there has to be a balance between entertainment and safety. Many players won't be retained if they walk into a game with no risk. With the case of awoxing it's a change to discourage players from automatically rejecting newbies.

Those are just examples of some of the ways you can continue to play the villain. I'm sorry that it's not good enough for you that you might actually have to put in a bit of effort to attack a corp from the inside now.

I would have thought that if it had really come from CCP, it would be linked everywhere when people are using it in situations like this, so someone must have it about. Searches don't even hint at a location of any original post, or even a quotation.

As for what you are saying about Falcon, I believe you are looking for this, which was less that CCP would rather not let the game be too soft but that he would rather not.

But war spying is actually a much greater factor in corporations rejecting newbies, and I'm saying this as someone who has infiltrated (and by extent, been a member of) hundreds of corporations. Awoxing was almost never brought up; war spies were a daily discussion in almost every single corporation.

And with regard to your entertainment thing, I think we can both agree that a much more significant amount of people would prefer it if high-sec was free of pvp. If we don't, then once again, we're at an impasse.


Right, and I agree.

But as per my example, I could also play the villain by getting players to agree to my duel requests, and then kill them without recourse. That should be enough in itself, right? So we don't actually need silly things like wars and ganking to still be in the game. All they're doing is driving away new players, after all.


He literally says "That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office" in his post, though.

The wardeccers and gankers go where the money is. I assure you that if it was more profitable to go after 0.0 residents, they would (or at least most of them would). The thing is, popping the occasional ratting Tengu or even a roaming HAC fleet is nowhere near as lucrative as ransoming an industrial corporation or blowing up a freighter carrying 8b worth of stuff. Safety is not our primary concern.


The issue is that "improved" is quickly approaching "total."