These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Bye bye watch lists
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
candle abra
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2016-03-12 08:40:27 UTC
three quick points:

1) If the removal of the watch list is because a few people want to protect capital ships, then the capital pilots have forgotten the 1st rule of eve:
"never undock, or use, a ship you cannot afford to lose"

2) a quote from star trek II: the wrath of khan
spoken by Mr. Spock: "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".
it appears CCP has made a decision which favors the one or the few and could care less about the many.

3) the vast majority of players will not post their complaints. they will talk about it amongst themselves.
then vote with their wallets. CCP will "wake up" when the subscription base shrinks.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#222 - 2016-03-12 15:03:36 UTC
candle abra wrote:
three quick points:

1) If the removal of the watch list is because a few people want to protect capital ships, then the capital pilots have forgotten the 1st rule of eve:
"never undock, or use, a ship you cannot afford to lose"

2) a quote from star trek II: the wrath of khan
spoken by Mr. Spock: "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".
it appears CCP has made a decision which favors the one or the few and could care less about the many.

3) the vast majority of players will not post their complaints. they will talk about it amongst themselves.
then vote with their wallets. CCP will "wake up" when the subscription base shrinks.


It's a bit more complex than losing ships. The watch list had a chilling effect on escalating combat, as you had instant intel on whether a particular alliance's super pilots were online. That was a legitimate problem that needed to be corrected.

I seriously doubt many people will quit the game over this. Unfortunately, the only way CCP is going to get this message is if they bother to read these conversations and understand that they went about this in the worst way possible.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#223 - 2016-03-12 20:20:32 UTC
Cara Forelli wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
role role role an alt
apply it to a corp ...

locator locator locator locator,
life is one long warp

role role role an alt
apply it for some roles

if you find their home system
don't for get to scream (in the intell channel)

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Tiddle Jr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#224 - 2016-03-12 23:06:16 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:


I seriously doubt many people will quit the game over this. Unfortunately, the only way CCP is going to get this message is if they bother to read these conversations and understand that they went about this in the worst way possible.



i'm sure CCP has been reading both conversations about SP sell and injectors implementation... in the end we got what we got.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Umbari Kado
THE RABID RABBITS
#225 - 2016-03-13 02:09:16 UTC
Watch list (or nerfing it) is not a major problem in itself: it is just one of the symptoms and the tip of an iceberg.

The list of rules grows bigger and bigger, the freedom to do things is more and more limited, changes are incorporated which players don't want or expect, big corporations have a stranglehold on Eve worlds, political correctness is becoming the norm, the game which was supposed to be fun is becoming more and more like a second job...

Sounds familiar ?

If I lose a ship which could cost me weeks or months of saving ISK, simply because it is convenient for some unspecified influence group to NOT have their online status known - then it is an issue for me. OK, I know - "don't fly anything you can't afford to lose" etc. etc.

I am convinced that Eve is dying. It has become to static, too devoid of freedom, too expensive (in terms of ISK and in-game economy) - and too much like a job instead of fun.

I am a patient dude. Anyone who spends 2 years training skills, learning the game etc. can call himself patient. But I don't have to log into Eve to pay rent, comply with myriad of rules and limitations etc. - I have RL for that.

And maybe this is a thing CCP needs to understand: the RL simulation (with all its worst aspects) is already provided by RL.

What Eve needs is some kind of antitrust laws: limit the size of territory a corp or an alliance can have, get serious about pricing of a lot of things - including high grade combat ships, rethink the SP learning curve, stop changing things because small number of influential players wishes so...

Currently a new player has a snowball chance in hell to do much in Eve: null or low-sec is for practical purposes closed to him - which does not mean one can't go there, it is just that he won't be able to do much before he gets either killed, or his corp destroyed by one of the big guys when (and if) he is perceived as a potential threat.

Joining the big guys - sure, always a possibility - and this just maintains current status quo...

Right now I am taking a break from Eve - to wait and see which direction it will go: more towards a free space - or in the direction of a corporate-owned world, where everything is controlled and where freedom does not exist.

I am not holding my breath though: the subscriptions for my accounts are unlikely to be renewed, methinks.
candle abra
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#226 - 2016-03-13 08:17:51 UTC  |  Edited by: candle abra
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
candle abra wrote:
three quick points:

1) If the removal of the watch list is because a few people want to protect capital ships, then the capital pilots have forgotten the 1st rule of eve:
"never undock, or use, a ship you cannot afford to lose"

2) a quote from star trek II: the wrath of khan
spoken by Mr. Spock: "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".
it appears CCP has made a decision which favors the one or the few and could care less about the many.

3) the vast majority of players will not post their complaints. they will talk about it amongst themselves.
then vote with their wallets. CCP will "wake up" when the subscription base shrinks.


It's a bit more complex than losing ships. The watch list had a chilling effect on escalating combat, as you had instant intel on whether a particular alliance's super pilots were online. That was a legitimate problem that needed to be corrected.

I seriously doubt many people will quit the game over this. Unfortunately, the only way CCP is going to get this message is if they bother to read these conversations and understand that they went about this in the worst way possible.



it's a bit more complex? no, it's really not.
goes like this:
a pilot takes the time to train for a combat capital ship.
he's unknown....until he shows up on grid.
his corp/alliance laughs because they won that battle.

the opposing corp/alliance adds the "new" pilot to their watch list (a perfectly legitimate (and smart) move).

next time those two fight....the 2nd corp/alliance holds back some of their forces waiting for the "new" cap pilot to log on.
once logged in, the 2nd corp/alliance is ready for them.
instead of the 1st corp/alliance winning, they lose....big time.
now they are crying. (here's some tissues).

relating to my original post: the "new" cap pilot lost a ship he couldn't afford to lose.
he now complains about how "unfair" it was. blaming the use of the watch list instead of understanding his opponent used better tactics and strategy.
the watch list has been used for this purpose for years without complaint.

the result of the tears is that tens of thousands of other players are affected.
meaning: the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.
when it should read: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

your post only confirms what i originally posted....only more long winded/complicated.

cannot express how wrong it is to remove the watch list from the game.

as a final side comment:
eve is unfair. always has been, always will be.
the sooner everyone understands that, the better off everyone will be.
if the goal of this null alliance is fairness, they're playing the wrong game.
Gavascon
need more power inc.
#227 - 2016-03-13 10:37:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Gavascon
this is starting to make sense to me now.

i am involved in high sec war.
when i war dec a corporation of 100 pilots i'll add all 100 (or as many names as i can find) to my watch list.
i want to know how many pilots are online at any given time.

my target has the exact same opportunity. they can add me to their watch list.
if they don't, the watch list isn't to blame. it's pilot error. or CEO error. or someone within the target corporation's error for not providing my name to their members.

if they begin to lose ships because they didn't add me to their watch list then they should accept the responsibility for not having done so.

if some null alliance failed to add their opponents cap pilots to their watch list and lost a whole bunch of ships because of that...then why should the rest of us suffer? after all, both sides had equal access to add names to a watch list.

as of now, finding an online war target is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
if i'm not added, the current watch list doesn't function.
i can run as many locators as i like.
the locator will tell me where they are and what station they're in....or if they're in space (assuming the pilot isn't in a worm hole).
but won't tell me if that pilot is online.
i may have to go 20 jumps only to learn they aren't online.
what a waste of my valuable time.

once located, if they aren't online....i am forced to sit and wait for this pilot to log in. but, they may not EVER log in during the week the war lasts. in which case, my time is better spent hunting an online target. but i can't, because i have no idea who is playing anymore.


the current situation - regarding watch lists - is unacceptable imho
Laser Saraki
Perkone
Caldari State
#228 - 2016-03-13 10:41:51 UTC
Gavascon wrote:
this is starting to make sense to me now.

i am involved in high sec war.
when i war dec a corporation of 100 pilots i'll add all 100 (or as many names as i can find) to my watch list.
i want to know how many pilots are online at any given time.

my target has the exact same opportunity. they can add me to their watch list.
if they don't, the watch list isn't to blame. it's pilot error. or CEO error. or someone within the target corporation's error for not providing my name to their members.

if they begin to lose ships because they didn't add me to their watch list then they should accept the responsibility for not having done so.

if some null alliance failed to add their opponents cap pilots to their watch list and lost a whole bunch of ships because of that why, in god's name, should the rest of us suffer? after all, both sides had equal access to add names to a watch list.

as of now, finding an online war target is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
if i'm not added, the current watch list doesn't function.
i can run as many locators as i like.
the locator will tell me where they are and what station they're in....or if they're in space (assuming the pilot isn't in a worm hole).
but won't tell me if that pilot is online.
i may have to go 20 jumps only to learn they aren't online.
what a waste of my valuable time.

the current situation - regarding watch lists - is unacceptable imho


Then you should adapt to it.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#229 - 2016-03-13 10:54:01 UTC
Gavascon wrote:
this is starting to make sense to me now.

i am involved in high sec war.
when i war dec a corporation of 100 pilots i'll add all 100 (or as many names as i can find) to my watch list.
i want to know how many pilots are online at any given time.

my target has the exact same opportunity. they can add me to their watch list.
if they don't, the watch list isn't to blame. it's pilot error. or CEO error. or someone within the target corporation's error for not providing my name to their members.

if they begin to lose ships because they didn't add me to their watch list then they should accept the responsibility for not having done so.

if some null alliance failed to add their opponents cap pilots to their watch list and lost a whole bunch of ships because of that...then why should the rest of us suffer? after all, both sides had equal access to add names to a watch list.

Usually when something becomes mandatory it gets nerfed. You can find lots of examples in Eve Online history.
The simplest examples: learning skills and clone upgrades. They were 'mandatory' and they were removed.

Your picture shows watch list as MANDATORY thing for every war. Either you use it and 'do it right' or you don't use it and 'blame yourself'. For me it fits perfectly to removing to allow players some options.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Gavascon
need more power inc.
#230 - 2016-03-13 10:54:15 UTC
adapt?
as you seem to have the cure all answer, please share....
Gavascon
need more power inc.
#231 - 2016-03-13 10:58:23 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Gavascon wrote:
this is starting to make sense to me now.

i am involved in high sec war.
when i war dec a corporation of 100 pilots i'll add all 100 (or as many names as i can find) to my watch list.
i want to know how many pilots are online at any given time.

my target has the exact same opportunity. they can add me to their watch list.
if they don't, the watch list isn't to blame. it's pilot error. or CEO error. or someone within the target corporation's error for not providing my name to their members.

if they begin to lose ships because they didn't add me to their watch list then they should accept the responsibility for not having done so.

if some null alliance failed to add their opponents cap pilots to their watch list and lost a whole bunch of ships because of that...then why should the rest of us suffer? after all, both sides had equal access to add names to a watch list.

Usually when something becomes mandatory it gets nerfed. You can find lots of examples in Eve Online history.
The simplest examples: learning skills and clone upgrades. They were 'mandatory' and they were removed.

Your picture shows watch list as MANDATORY thing for every war. Either you use it and 'do it right' or you don't use it and 'blame yourself'. For me it fits perfectly to removing to allow players some options.


more options? everyone had the same options before this change.. add or don't add.
they have the same options now...add or don't add. the difference is being able to know or not knowing.
common sense....better to know.
Laser Saraki
Perkone
Caldari State
#232 - 2016-03-13 11:04:21 UTC
Gavascon wrote:
adapt?
as you seem to have the cure all answer, please share....

How about moving to bottleneck systems or hubs? You could camp your war target main system. You could PvP in lowsec.

Or choose a different profession.

Plenty of options
veshna wildsun
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#233 - 2016-03-13 11:06:28 UTC
I don't usually post, but I wanted to take a moment to voice my opposition to this change. I won't go over what has been covered so well by many people, but the change is heavy handed and addresses the titan issue, while heavily nerfing game play for solo pilots like myself.

I realize that there is a myth out there that solo pilots do not stick around, but that is un-true and myopic. We are here, and there are a lot of us, and we need to choose our battles carefully, and the watch list was a huge tool in accomplishing that as well as a huge tool to stay connected with the social side of the game. This is a sandbox and established modes of play should be preserved.
Gavascon
need more power inc.
#234 - 2016-03-13 11:12:29 UTC
Laser Saraki wrote:
Gavascon wrote:
adapt?
as you seem to have the cure all answer, please share....

How about moving to bottleneck systems or hubs? You could camp your war target main system. You could PvP in lowsec.

Or choose a different profession.

Plenty of options



lmao
there are alliances who sit in travel choke points.
that's all they do.
what makes it work is the number of outstanding war decs they have.
some have over 100.

i'm a member of a small alliance. it's better to hunt, then sit and wait. hunting is much more challenging too.
plus, there's no guarantee my war target is going to travel through the system i'm "camping" or be in the trade hub.

i'm already a veteran of low/null sec.
not interested in that anymore.

choose a different profession? not to be rude...but who the hell are you to tell me how to play this game?
Jolana Drax
Doomheim
#235 - 2016-03-13 11:48:58 UTC
Gavascon wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Gavascon wrote:
this is starting to make sense to me now.

i am involved in high sec war.
when i war dec a corporation of 100 pilots i'll add all 100 (or as many names as i can find) to my watch list.
i want to know how many pilots are online at any given time.

my target has the exact same opportunity. they can add me to their watch list.
if they don't, the watch list isn't to blame. it's pilot error. or CEO error. or someone within the target corporation's error for not providing my name to their members.

if they begin to lose ships because they didn't add me to their watch list then they should accept the responsibility for not having done so.

if some null alliance failed to add their opponents cap pilots to their watch list and lost a whole bunch of ships because of that...then why should the rest of us suffer? after all, both sides had equal access to add names to a watch list.

Usually when something becomes mandatory it gets nerfed. You can find lots of examples in Eve Online history.
The simplest examples: learning skills and clone upgrades. They were 'mandatory' and they were removed.

Your picture shows watch list as MANDATORY thing for every war. Either you use it and 'do it right' or you don't use it and 'blame yourself'. For me it fits perfectly to removing to allow players some options.


more options? everyone had the same options before this change.. add or don't add.
they have the same options now...add or don't add. the difference is being able to know or not knowing.
common sense....better to know.


Who knows, maybe less automatic intel opens up new possibilities for players to find employment as freelancing Scouts/Recon. With less automatic intel informantion will get a pricetag which could open up new interesting possibilites.

Now I hope CCP realizes that this move was a tad draconic and makes it possible to get somewhat accurate intel in other ways ... I do think the old watchlist felt a bit overpowered though so a complete rollback would not be a good idea in my opinion.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#236 - 2016-03-13 12:42:59 UTC
Laser Saraki wrote:
Gavascon wrote:
adapt?
as you seem to have the cure all answer, please share....

How about moving to bottleneck systems or hubs? You could camp your war target main system. You could PvP in lowsec.

Or choose a different profession.

Plenty of options

None of those are adapting ,
all of them are infact giving up or becoming a hub/pipe humping degenerates

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#237 - 2016-03-14 05:16:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Isaac Armer
Mortlake wrote:
Isaac Armer wrote:


Sure, you wardec 200+ corps and simply fight anyone you see.



No, you don't.

Isaac Armer wrote:


I tried it for a bit. It's incredibly boring.



I'm sorry you were terrible at it. Your bitterness is misdirected, it's not our fault.

Isaac Armer wrote:


The core motivation from what I've seen is to make easy ISK with drops



This reinforces the fact that you know very little about what many of us do, and is probably why you were terrible at it.

Isaac Armer wrote:


Not to have any sort of real challenge when playing.



You're either trolling, or thick as ****. Either way you aren't qualified to comment and have clearly been a victim at some point, an incident that you evidently haven't gotten over.


Morty, I see you wardecced me after I said what I did. I also see you've been too afraid to follow me into LS/WHs to actually kill me. Thank you again for proving my point, you carebear.

I will literally give you the j-sig of the system I'm in if you actually risk leaving HS. I doubt you will take me up on that though, given how risk averse HS mercs are in this game. Jesus, you guys are nearly as bad as miners.
Valkin Mordirc
#238 - 2016-03-14 06:18:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkin Mordirc
Wait


You think people wardec people to make a profit?


MWhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha *Gasp* Huuuuuuuuhahahahahahahahahahahaha



Okay okay,


For realesy.

*giggles*

Like no. For real.


You don't make a reasonable profit by PvPing in highsec. Not because you can make isk. I you can make a bit? Very little.


Trading, missioning, Exploration and EVEEEERRY other Isk making activity is by faaar better then fighting around.


And it totally shows that either A. You a bumfuck idiot that has no idea WHAT he's going on about

B. Your rolling and trollin.

OR C.

BOTH!

I'm hedging my bets on both. ^.^
#DeleteTheWeak
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#239 - 2016-03-14 06:28:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Divine Entervention
Nice, now I can turn my computer off.

Before, I had to keep my computer on 23/7 to make sure the hordes of jealous children couldn't use their stalker list to discover the pattern of my play times.

Granted, they could do what I do, go to zkill and see what times they're normally active to develop an activity-profile, but most of you aren't smart enough to do that.

O look, this guy trying to intimidate me with his "cloaky camping" hasn't been involved in a kill between the hours of 2300-0700 on any day except for saturday nights since april 2013. Yea, he sleep.

#thebest
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#240 - 2016-03-14 13:46:48 UTC
candle abra wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
candle abra wrote:
three quick points:

1) If the removal of the watch list is because a few people want to protect capital ships, then the capital pilots have forgotten the 1st rule of eve:
"never undock, or use, a ship you cannot afford to lose"

2) a quote from star trek II: the wrath of khan
spoken by Mr. Spock: "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".
it appears CCP has made a decision which favors the one or the few and could care less about the many.

3) the vast majority of players will not post their complaints. they will talk about it amongst themselves.
then vote with their wallets. CCP will "wake up" when the subscription base shrinks.


It's a bit more complex than losing ships. The watch list had a chilling effect on escalating combat, as you had instant intel on whether a particular alliance's super pilots were online. That was a legitimate problem that needed to be corrected.

I seriously doubt many people will quit the game over this. Unfortunately, the only way CCP is going to get this message is if they bother to read these conversations and understand that they went about this in the worst way possible.



it's a bit more complex? no, it's really not.
goes like this:
a pilot takes the time to train for a combat capital ship.
he's unknown....until he shows up on grid.
his corp/alliance laughs because they won that battle.

the opposing corp/alliance adds the "new" pilot to their watch list (a perfectly legitimate (and smart) move).

next time those two fight....the 2nd corp/alliance holds back some of their forces waiting for the "new" cap pilot to log on.
once logged in, the 2nd corp/alliance is ready for them.
instead of the 1st corp/alliance winning, they lose....big time.
now they are crying. (here's some tissues).

relating to my original post: the "new" cap pilot lost a ship he couldn't afford to lose.
he now complains about how "unfair" it was. blaming the use of the watch list instead of understanding his opponent used better tactics and strategy.
the watch list has been used for this purpose for years without complaint.

the result of the tears is that tens of thousands of other players are affected.
meaning: the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.
when it should read: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

your post only confirms what i originally posted....only more long winded/complicated.

cannot express how wrong it is to remove the watch list from the game.

as a final side comment:
eve is unfair. always has been, always will be.
the sooner everyone understands that, the better off everyone will be.
if the goal of this null alliance is fairness, they're playing the wrong game.


Your scenario is dealing with little matters. I'm thinking in terms of things like the PL supercap fleet. When all those pilots suddenly come online, the rest of null sits up and takes notice. Knowing that particular super fleets are active means other supers get out of harm's way and fleet fights don't escalate the way they might. Having instant, effortless intel like that has probably prevented far more fights and escalations than what you're talking about. Adding uncertainty to nullsec engagements is a good thing.

That said, it doesn't justify this debacle that is the "buddy list." Stripping away our ability to engage in warfare and bounty hunting activities because of nullsec problems and modifying the system in a way that it doesn't even work properly was a terrible idea. This is the result of CCP addressing the matter completely internally without consulting the player base in general so that we could raise issues they would never consider. The lesson here is that they need to state the problem, the planned solution, and then solicit comments and ideas from us so that they know the full range of their changes rather than guessing.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.