These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Carebear objective.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#41 - 2011-12-23 17:50:21 UTC
Many do not understand why some players so strongly avoid PvP combat. The best reason I have found is they do not get The Rush:

The Rush is a good felling one gets with and after a burst of adrenaline associated with an exciting experience, like PvP combat. Not everyone gets The Rush. Some get no pleasure from adrenaline, and some actually feel bad or sick from it. According to Dr. Drew Pinsky, the difference between these people is genetic. You are born to get The Rush, or you are not. The result is some players will not enjoy PvP and actively seek to avoid it, and no amount of game tweaking will change that, because game tweaking will not change their genes. After all this is a game, people will tend to avoid game activities that make them sick. Instead they do cooperative activities, industry, missions and the like, or just play as solo players.

Also there was a Dev post, I don't remember where, where this comment was made "We understand that there are players who will never leave high sec, and we are fine with that".

Staying in NPC corps to avoid war decs is sort of the same way.

If it was decided to make avoiding PvP part of the game, the changes needed would be small. Make it so you could declare your Corp or Alliance to be "neutral". Such a neutral alliance would have the following characteristics:

It could not hold sov.
It could not war dec, or be war decced.
All members would have a concord tax, just like the tax in an NPC corp.
It could not do moon mining.
It could not own a POCO.
You could not weapon lock a member of such an alliance while in high sec, unless in the same corp.
All members could not weapon lock any player outside their corp in any sec space.
No member could light a cyno, or jump to one, in any sec space.

Something would need to be done about smartbombs, perhaps just blocking them in high sec.

And for a little balance (very little):

A corp leaving a (non-neutral) alliance that has been war decced is still war decced.
A POCO cannot be transferred unless the shields are at 100%.

Yes this would make high sec Happy Rainbow Land. But maybe for the overall health of EVE Online, this would be a good thing. Also high sec is already very close to Happy Rainbow Land, assuming you meta-game sufficiently. Maybe we should just drop the need to meta-game and make it official.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
#42 - 2011-12-23 18:05:15 UTC
Why is OP even playing this game? Seriously. There are many, many better games for all that PVE rubbish. EVE is a PVP game and I hope CCP pay you no attention.


At best PVE is to introduce newbies to the combat mechanics of the game, or to give them ISK for the first few months of play. Unless you count low-sec or null sec PVE which can be worthwhile for older players as well.


When I used to dec high sec corps it was almost entirely to get that kind of response from you, or ISK. Please when you do eventually quit can you reward your victor with a ragey eve mail telling him eve has one less carebear.




I hope the 'War' CCP are referring to is faction warfare which is desperately in need of some attention.

War dec changes I would like to see:

Dec shield nerf

Corp hopping nerf

Possible increase in dec fees, but less exponential increase with more decs
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#43 - 2011-12-23 18:08:18 UTC
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Why is OP even playing this game? Seriously. There are many, many better games for all that PVE rubbish. EVE is a PVP game and I hope CCP pay you no attention.


At best PVE is to introduce newbies to the combat mechanics of the game, or to give them ISK for the first few months of play. Unless you count low-sec or null sec PVE which can be worthwhile for older players as well.


When I used to dec high sec corps it was almost entirely to get that kind of response from you, or ISK. Please when you do eventually quit can you reward your victor with a ragey eve mail telling him eve has one less carebear.




I hope the 'War' CCP are referring to is faction warfare which is desperately in need of some attention.

War dec changes I would like to see:

Dec shield nerf

Corp hopping nerf

Possible increase in dec fees, but less exponential increase with more decs


There are really NO games out there that compare to EVE, PvP or not.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#44 - 2011-12-23 18:39:41 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Unless I get in a PVP ship and a fleet then go out looking for PVP, my objective is to deny them a kill...
Usually, I dock up, go semi-AFK, doing things on my other screen, say some stuff in Local to taunt them and waste as much of their time as possible.
I don't call out for help, I don't escalate it, I don't give them the satisfaction of anything they may want.


This is how it's supposed to be done. Unlike some of my fellow highsec PVP fans, I'm not offended when someone docks up to avoid a fight they know they can't win. Sure I'll talk smack, but in the end we all know that almost every one of the PVP players will run from a fight unless they think there's a chance of winning it.

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
If they take away the ability to dock or find a way to force me to depart from the station, I will simply play an alternative character, account or game.


As will I. No one should have the ability to force action on you. If you choose to do nothing, then that's up to you.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#45 - 2011-12-23 18:47:16 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
The war dec shields are great


No, they aren't. The ability to simply evade every war that comes your way is absurd.

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I see High Sec as an incubator, not just for new players but new corps and alliances too. Make it 100% safe for all that it matters. Mostly, all I see are those kids that want the easy kill there. Low, null and worm hole space should be where the real PVP occurs.


Highsec PVP is far more entertaining. Every single person I've seen say that "real PVP" is in nullsec has a killboard full of kills that have 50+ ships on the winning side. That's not PVP, that PVPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP.

The rules of highsec mean there are a lot more tactical opportunities. You just have to be clever enough to find them.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#46 - 2011-12-23 18:52:26 UTC
Pillowtalk wrote:
If CCP were to open a PVE server it would have 10x the subscriptions of TQ in a month. But they just wanna be vikings too much. =/

What's the end-game for PVE?

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2011-12-23 18:54:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaroslav Unwanted
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Pillowtalk wrote:
If CCP were to open a PVE server it would have 10x the subscriptions of TQ in a month. But they just wanna be vikings too much. =/

What's the end-game for PVE?


shooting red crosses at overview.. oh wait thats actually end game for any "combat" Big smile

Anyway if i read it right.. this thread is about an
Carebear "griefing" those who war dec. them by denying them an target Big smile
say what ??
Shukuzen Kiraa
F4G Wild Weasel
#48 - 2011-12-23 18:56:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Shukuzen Kiraa
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:


It does not matter what carrot or rod CCP uses, I will not PVP against my will.


It seems like you may be playing the wrong game then. I almost want to use a locator agent to find you and show you that you will indeed PVP against your will...lol Twisted
Bartholemu Fu-Baz
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2011-12-23 19:07:13 UTC
Thorn Galen wrote:
I forsee a potentially larger number of cancelled subscriptions in the near future, far more than with Incarna, if what is being posted here is even only just half-true.

Fix lowsec.
Fix Nullsec.
Fix Factional Warfare.
Fix War Declaration processes.
Fix whatever else needs proper fixing.

Stop phucking around with Hisec, you're killing the goose that lays the golden eggs and sadly, CCP knows this.


At the risk of coming off as a carebear (not really, but far from purely a PvPer either), the man's got a point.

The fix to this HighSec "problem" is not to make HighSec suck. Its to make the other options more interesting and profitable, then everyone wins.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#50 - 2011-12-23 19:12:23 UTC
Some ideas I have for making PVP more common without actually forcing it on anyone:

Give NPC corps more drawbacks, such as the inability to dock in stations owned by rival corps, and "tariffs" that are significantly higher taxes charged for operating in empires other than their corp's. Also restrict their access to other corps' agents and occasionally change corp standings so that they might lose access to agents from time to time due to corporate diplomacy. The idea is that if you're going to work for a corp that isn't player controlled, you're subject to the whims of NPC politics.

Change the wardec system so that dec scraping is impossible by allowing corps to be wardecced directly even when they're inside alliances. This means that a holdings corp could be wardecced and would not be able to simply drop in and out of alliances to protect the POS. It means that a corp that has drawn a war can't scrape it off. If the objective is to cost a particular CEO his membership in an alliance, the alliance can avoid the war simply by kicking the target corp out...and the war would remain on the target. This change alone would fix so much in the war system.

Supporting (RR, remote sebo, et cetera) someone with an aggression timer preventing them from docking or jumping should cause you to inherit their aggression timer.

In order to make highsec less desirable than low/null, I'd also suggest preventing any new large POS towers being set up in 0.5 and higher. Yes this is somewhat selfish as we're too lazy to burn down a large POS, but it's also a way to draw a more distinct line between high and low. Want a large tower? Take the risk of lowsec.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#51 - 2011-12-23 19:15:51 UTC
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:
shooting red crosses at overview.. oh wait thats actually end game for any "combat" Big smile


The endgame for most PVP is territory control, reputation, or just a vague sense or superiority. The goal is something other than simply watching stuff blow up in space. PVE doesn't provide any of those: it's just and endless fountain of the same thing over and over with no significant variance.

My point is, what is your goal in playing PVE? How long do you think people will play Eve in coop-only mode?

I'm betting two years at the longest, and most would be gone in 6-12 months.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#52 - 2011-12-23 19:21:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaroslav Unwanted
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:
shooting red crosses at overview.. oh wait thats actually end game for any "combat" Big smile


The endgame for most PVP is territory control, reputation, or just a vague sense or superiority.

I'm betting two years at the longest, and most would be gone in 6-12 months.


Thats mostly politics. Big smile
For regular soldier is just following orders and shooting red crosses at overview.

But yes i acknowledge that there are indeed people who knows how things work in small gank engagement, and they are really good at what they are doing. Big smile
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#53 - 2011-12-23 19:51:28 UTC
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
At best PVE is to introduce newbies to the combat mechanics of the game, or to give them ISK for the first few months of play.

If Pvp players didn't take part in some form of pve they would soon be flying rookie ships to pvp in as they would eventually be out of money, you cannot support your pvp without Pve, mining or mission running. Some people get lucky suicide gank that freighter full of plex, but thats hardly the majority and if you are relying on such things to support pvp for everyone, will thats just a silly expectation, it takes a Pve'r to make that freighter full of plex, and you don't want those guys in your game.
Jojo Jackson
Dead Red Eye
#54 - 2011-12-23 19:59:53 UTC
Fiori 161 wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
[quote=Fiori 161]

CCP wouldn't like losing more customers. Blink


I don't mean to be argumentative, but CCP really does not care what one individual does in order to EMO rage their way out of PVP in a PVP based universe. Shocked

What a singel player does no, but again you miss the point, that maybe 75% of all custumers are PvE highsecers.

If CCP start to give a **** about our will ... we leave.
If we can't play OUR SANDBOX ... why should we play at all?

We simply refuse the attamps of wannabe PvPler to FORCE us into PvP ... this braindead station/gate camping or hot-blobbing stupidity where you AFK 12 hours for 5 seconds of actions.
-> MAJOR WAST OF TIME !

Why the hell can't I fitt capital repairs or shield booster on an Orca ... it's an CAPITAL ship!
Alysane
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2011-12-23 20:09:18 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Some ideas I have for making PVP more common without actually forcing it on anyone:

Give NPC corps more drawbacks, such as the inability to dock in stations owned by rival corps, and "tariffs" that are significantly higher taxes charged for operating in empires other than their corp's. Also restrict their access to other corps' agents and occasionally change corp standings so that they might lose access to agents from time to time due to corporate diplomacy. The idea is that if you're going to work for a corp that isn't player controlled, you're subject to the whims of NPC politics.


lol....what? So your grand idea is to tax NPC corp players more, while also screwing with their corp standings (that probably took weeks to raise) AND limit what agents they can run missions for?

Hate to break it to you, but the only PVP these grand ideas will lead to is Carebears vs. CCP, with Unsubscription and Angry Forum Posts as ammo.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#56 - 2011-12-23 20:12:11 UTC
Jojo Jackson wrote:
Fiori 161 wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
[quote=Fiori 161]

CCP wouldn't like losing more customers. Blink


I don't mean to be argumentative, but CCP really does not care what one individual does in order to EMO rage their way out of PVP in a PVP based universe. Shocked

What a singel player does no, but again you miss the point, that maybe 75% of all custumers are PvE highsecers.

If CCP start to give a **** about our will ... we leave.
If we can't play OUR SANDBOX ... why should we play at all?

We simply refuse the attamps of wannabe PvPler to FORCE us into PvP ... this braindead station/gate camping or hot-blobbing stupidity where you AFK 12 hours for 5 seconds of actions.
-> MAJOR WAST OF TIME !


Question is do those people really enjoy doing solo missions in high sec. Do they wait to be able to log so they can have the fun of doing lvl IVs ? Or are they afraid of unknown ? And chose safer version because its rewarding and they will always win. In other engagement they will die, they will lose, and the will lose a lot, that is why they dont try.
Its basic human nature, you wont pursuit an goal, if that means you gonna suffer again and again. Well unless you are masochist.

At least thats how i see it.
And i am indeed mission runner atm. And when i engage in PvP i ussualy lose, well i always lost, because other are better at what they are doing.
Jojo Jackson
Dead Red Eye
#57 - 2011-12-23 20:21:02 UTC
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:

Question is do those people really enjoy doing solo missions in high sec. Do they wait to be able to log so they can have the fun of doing lvl IVs ? Or are they afraid of unknown ?


Some realy enjoy to do solo missions or mine or probe complex after a hard day. They just want to relax. -> Legitim Sandbox !

Some do incursions with friends or as long as they have low SP fly maybe L4 missions with BC and suport (yes, it happens) -> Legitim Sandbox !

Some just know, that wardacs are just made by pur PvP chars with neutral remot rep and scout chars. They tryed the war till they notice "this suckers don't want fair fights, they just want to grief" and decided "NO THX KKBYE" -> legit point !


As long as this meta game of neutral RR and scout fleets is posible there is simply NO RESON to fight!

Even less, when you as mining & producer TRY to fight back, WAST your SP for some fight skills ... and just notice "****, I need min 4 acc. 1 beit, 2 RR, 1 scout". This is the point where most say: "never again this wannabe e-peen bullshit!". And it's their legit to exclude it from THEIR SANDBOX !

You (common wannabe grief "PvPler"´) allways try to argue with "this is my Sandbox" ... if you claim this -> you MUST except other peoples Sandbox too!

Why the hell can't I fitt capital repairs or shield booster on an Orca ... it's an CAPITAL ship!
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2011-12-23 20:23:21 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

Unless I get in a PVP ship and a fleet then go out looking for PVP, my objective is to deny them a kill, I don't care about the wrecks, the ore or anything else as long as I know they are frustrated and bored, I am happy.
If they take away the ability to dock or find a way to force me to depart from the station, I will simply play an alternative character, account or game.

Not seeing a downside here.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#59 - 2011-12-23 20:24:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaroslav Unwanted
Jojo Jackson wrote:
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:

Question is do those people really enjoy doing solo missions in high sec. Do they wait to be able to log so they can have the fun of doing lvl IVs ? Or are they afraid of unknown ?


Some realy enjoy to do solo missions or mine or probe complex after a hard day. They just want to relax. -> Legitim Sandbox !

Some do incursions with friends or as long as they have low SP fly maybe L4 missions with BC and suport (yes, it happens) -> Legitim Sandbox !

Some just know, that wardacs are just made by pur PvP chars with neutral remot rep and scout chars. They tryed the war till they notice "this suckers don't want fair fights, they just want to grief" and decided "NO THX KKBYE" -> legit point !


As long as this meta game of neutral RR and scout fleets is posible there is simply NO RESON to fight!

Even less, when you as mining & producer TRY to fight back, WAST your SP for some fight skills ... and just notice "****, I need min 4 acc. 1 beit, 2 RR, 1 scout". This is the point where most say: "never again this wannabe e-peen bullshit!". And it's their legit to exclude it from THEIR SANDBOX !

You (common wannabe grief "PvPler"´) allways try to argue with "this is my Sandbox" ... if you claim this -> you MUST except other peoples Sandbox too!


They do, otherwise they wont be grief "PvPer". Most of their talk is based on smack-talk to create some kind of anger in their targets. Because angered target makes mistakes. Cool
I know quite a few "pirates" And they are really great people, they know how to PvP with risk but they also do wardec "industrial" corporation for an extortion pay.

To use one quote : about neut RR
Crying because your enemy is superior in any way to you is really pathetic. Make friends contact some "alliances" which deals with such thing, they will help if you provide people and an attitude to fight back. Big smile
Alysane
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2011-12-23 20:27:27 UTC
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:


Question is do those people really enjoy doing solo missions in high sec. Do they wait to be able to log so they can have the fun of doing lvl IVs ? Or are they afraid of unknown ? And chose safer version because its rewarding and they will always win. In other engagement they will die, they will lose, and the will lose a lot, that is why they dont try.
Its basic human nature, you wont pursuit an goal, if that means you gonna suffer again and again. Well unless you are masochist.

At least thats how i see it.
And i am indeed mission runner atm. And when i engage in PvP i ussualy lose, well i always lost, because other are better at what they are doing.


Not all Carebears in High-sec run missions. Everyone seems to forget about the entire "Industry" profession in high sec that isnt named "mining."

But, to answer your question...im sure every player has a different reasoning behind why they chose to stay in High Sec. for me, it isnt about being "afraid of the unknown," its about consistency and isk generation.

The main goal for just about everyone in Eve is to generate isk.
Yet, whenever these PVP vs Carebear threads pop-up, isk is hardly mentioned at all. In fact, it seems that "tears" are the currency of choice. Which is fine and all, but tears dont purchase ships and equipment.

On the other-hand...whenever PVE activities are mentioned, such as mining, level 4s, Incursions, etc....isk is always brought up as an important part of the discussion. So, you essentially have one side saying "stay in high sec and make steady isk, realtively safe from losing your ships," and the other side saying "join null/low/pirating PVP action and collect tears, because thats what Eve is about!!"

Both are valid points, yet you can see why some people lean towards the former, not the latter.