These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Thoughts on improving the game

First post
Author
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#421 - 2016-11-07 11:03:23 UTC
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
is this thread about improving the game for new people or vets?

At this point it's just about whinging and whining because some people don't like the way other people play.
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#422 - 2016-11-07 14:37:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Galaxy Duck
Mark Marconi wrote:
Galaxy Duck wrote:


You're right, they should be taking advice from people who accuse them of being liars, or maybe the folks who think them too incompetent to do basic statistics!

Please continue to try and deflect from the fact that your logic is crap.

P.S. "working" for ISK if for carebears, and carebears are livestock.

The very fact that you consider a sample of 80,000 people to determine whether people actually stay longer or leave due to ganking a basic statistic, means you know nothing about statistics and should not really comment on it.


It's the kind of analysis you'll learn to perform in a basic university-level statistics class.


You sir, have shown on several occasions that you know nothing about the mechanics of this game and should therefor not comment on it.
Steffles
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#423 - 2016-11-07 14:44:25 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

Okay, so you tell us how safe NS where you live is...then back track totally. Great way to shoot your credibility in the foot.

You should consider writing a short fiction or two and see how you do, pretty good at it.

Hey CPP - Time we put highsec back to how it was originally designed - http://i.imgur.com/GT0T0oS.jpg

pajedas
Doomheim
#424 - 2016-11-07 16:57:48 UTC
Xander Jade wrote:
Please comment, and criticism is welcome as long as it is constructive.

I'm sorry to say, that will never happen in GD.

The opposite is glorified in this troll rich environment.

I go out knowing that I'm right and that it's a waste of time to argue with people like Ima Wreckyou and Goofy Duck.

Last post...Cheers!

🐇

Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#425 - 2016-11-07 17:15:37 UTC
You rage-quitting again? Man, you really gotta learn to HTFU, Pajedas.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#426 - 2016-11-07 17:18:06 UTC
pajedas wrote:
Xander Jade wrote:
Please comment, and criticism is welcome as long as it is constructive.

I'm sorry to say, that will never happen in GD.

The opposite is glorified in this troll rich environment.

I go out knowing that I'm right and that it's a waste of time to argue with people like Ima Wreckyou and Goofy Duck.

Last post...Cheers!

Well maybe if you would actually bring arguments to the discussion instead of plain trolling we would get somewhere. Just because your non-arguments and pure assumptions sounded convincing when you stated them in the AG echo chamber does not mean they are even something a normal person would consider an informed opinion worth addressing.
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#427 - 2016-11-07 21:15:28 UTC
http://puu.sh/s9UBy/2673d91913.jpg

^ Pajedas finally took the hint!

Victory for the New Order!
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#428 - 2016-11-07 21:19:54 UTC
Galaxy Duck wrote:
http://puu.sh/s9UBy/2673d91913.jpg

^ Pajedas finally took the hint!

Victory for the New Order!

One of those rare forum killmails Big smile who got the final blow?
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#429 - 2016-11-07 21:23:03 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Galaxy Duck wrote:
http://puu.sh/s9UBy/2673d91913.jpg

^ Pajedas finally took the hint!

Victory for the New Order!

One of those rare forum killmails Big smile who got the final blow?



Lol I think you and Black Pedro should share the credit for completing stomping out his hopes and dreams.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#430 - 2016-11-07 21:23:27 UTC
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:

is this thread about improving the game for new people or vets?

This is "that" thread.
You know the one.
That one that's always been and likely always will be here.
Op changes, conversation never does.
Steffles
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#431 - 2016-11-08 03:27:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Steffles
Black Pedro wrote:

CCP has a vision for Eve Online, and the best they can do is stay true to that vision. Arguably, and forgive me for drifting into personal opinion here, the changes that have caused the most problems for the game have been oneswhere CCP has strayed too from that original vision of a PvP sandbox in pursuit of more mainstream appeal, although certainly the have also made mistakes in execution of many core ideas along the way.

They have indeed strayed too far from the original vision - glad we agree.


Australian Excellence wrote:
Don't know if you noticed, but EvE is a pvp sandbox based game.. If it was up to you, you would let these people sit in Highsec unapposed all day ruining the games economy even more than they already have.

You don't sound like much of a pvper, sound more like a miner... A miner who thinks sitting there all day afk or botting ruining the ore prices doesn't effect other players. Thank the lords you aren't the one deciding things at CCP.

If it was up to me yes absolutely I'd be happy to let people sit in highsec mining, missioning. Why because they pay for the development of EvE and its supposed to be that way - Link - Why are you so emotionally invested in what other players are doing? Why does it make you so salty?

Well I'm not the best PvP'r that's true however I did found the Link and got myself into an EvE Wiki with Infinity Ziona, I spent 7 years declaring war on high sec alliances and corporations on Infinity Ziona, I declared war on Tribal Band and camped their null sec staging for a month or 2 managing a 15/1 k/d solo, I'm currently based in 7RM-N0 which is one of the most dangerous systems in the game. As for mining I did mine my first battleship way back in 2003 in a Thorax with 10 harvester drones and highs filled with miner II's so guilty I guess.

Hey CPP - Time we put highsec back to how it was originally designed - http://i.imgur.com/GT0T0oS.jpg

Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#432 - 2016-11-08 06:09:00 UTC
"If it was up to me yes absolutely I'd be happy to let people sit in highsec mining, missioning. "

Not in James 315's Highsec. No sir.
Steffles
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#433 - 2016-11-08 06:18:16 UTC
Galaxy Duck wrote:
"If it was up to me yes absolutely I'd be happy to let people sit in highsec mining, missioning. "

Not in James 315's Highsec. No sir.

Never heard of him. Sounds like he must be a salty whiney nerd overly emotionally invested in how other people play the game.

Hey CPP - Time we put highsec back to how it was originally designed - http://i.imgur.com/GT0T0oS.jpg

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#434 - 2016-11-08 06:27:24 UTC
Steffles wrote:
They have indeed strayed too far from the original vision - glad we agree.

It says it should be "quite safe" and "don't complain that you can't pirate easily in 0.6".

It does not say at all that it should be perfect safety and that you can just fill your freighter with billions, activate AP and watch netflix instead or mine AFK with your leveled purple Hulk.

I know you and your carebear friends cry endlessly how easy it is. What you mean by easy is obviously "possible at all". There are not a lot of people doing piracy in Highsec and the ones who do it have quite the logistical and mechanical challenge at hand. Those are people who are invested in it and they organised to even be able to to this, solo, small corps or casual players are already locked out of that gameplay do to constant nerfs.

It is obvious to everyone what your goal is infinity, you cry for years for perfect safety. That will never happen and it does not correspond with the vision you yourself posted in the link above.
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#435 - 2016-11-08 07:54:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Mark Marconi
Galaxy Duck wrote:
http://puu.sh/s9UBy/2673d91913.jpg

^ Pajedas finally took the hint!

Victory for the New Order!

Not sure why you celebrate a victory though complete stupidity.

The state of these forums is pathetic, it used to be a septic pit, now it has become the home for idiots, who claim victory through the inability to actually argue a point. It is just emotive attacks, broken logic and reasoning.

These forums have fallen so far from being a septic pit to being controlled by the turds.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#436 - 2016-11-08 07:59:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Galaxy Duck wrote:
http://puu.sh/s9UBy/2673d91913.jpg

^ Pajedas finally took the hint!

Victory for the New Order!

Well to be fair to him, he seems to have his priorities in order somewhat:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=498976&find=unread

While I don't agree with his philosophy for the game, I certainly can't fault him for deciding that family is more important at the moment.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#437 - 2016-11-08 08:11:07 UTC
Mark Marconi wrote:

Not sure why you celebrate a victory though complete stupidity.

The state of these forums are pathetic, it used to be a septic pit, now it has become the home for idiots, who claim victory through the inability to actually argue a point. It is just emotive attacks and broken logic and reasoning.

These forums have fallen so far from being a septic pit to being controlled by the turds.

Calling other turds and and at the same time complaining the forums are septic really shows what the actual problem is here.

We simply call people out for trying to change the game in their favor. We used to ignore the carebears but they already did too much damage so someone has to challenge their ridiculous ideas. I know discussing with someone who actually challenges your idea and brings facts to the table which go against your preconceived notions is not as pleasant as when you talk about them in your AG echo chamber where everyone will agree with you no matter how stupid and unoriginal your idea is.

But maybe you should work on actually bringing some arguments to the table instead of personal insults, gut feelings and plain denial.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#438 - 2016-11-08 08:16:54 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Calling other turds and and at the same time complaining the forums are septic really shows what the actual problem is here.

+1
Steffles
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#439 - 2016-11-08 08:22:40 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Steffles wrote:
They have indeed strayed too far from the original vision - glad we agree.

It says it should be "quite safe" and "don't complain that you can't pirate easily in 0.6".

It does not say at all that it should be perfect safety and that you can just fill your freighter with billions, activate AP and watch netflix instead or mine AFK with your leveled purple Hulk.

I know you and your carebear friends cry endlessly how easy it is. What you mean by easy is obviously "possible at all". There are not a lot of people doing piracy in Highsec and the ones who do it have quite the logistical and mechanical challenge at hand. Those are people who are invested in it and they organised to even be able to to this, solo, small corps or casual players are already locked out of that gameplay do to constant nerfs.

It is obvious to everyone what your goal is infinity, you cry for years for perfect safety. That will never happen and it does not correspond with the vision you yourself posted in the link above.

Uh Huh. It says what it says.

Quote:

quite
adv
1 to the greatest extent; completely or absolutely
you're quite right, quite the opposite
2 to a noticeable or partial extent; somewhat
she's quite pretty


It makes sense that he was using Quite in the 2nd example. Given he then said "You should not be able to pirate easily" it makes sense that he was not referring to partially but rather noticeably.

He says "That's the whole point of high sec" and bolded it for emphasis.

We can then safely conclude that killing people in highsec was supposed to be difficult (not easy), that highsec was supposed to be noticeably safe and that the whole point of highsec was to be a place that was quite safe and not easy to pirate in - a place for carebears to exist in while 0.4 and lower, and null was for pirates and others.

Get that into you :)


As for me liking safety, check Infinity Ziona's killboard, check my alt L Dopa's killboard. I play unsafely. My goal is to remove the absurd safety for gankers in highsec and to cause CCP to return it to its original purpose, so subs go up and the game has more development potential and a longer shelf life. Its a goal that is coming to completion soon. I'd bet isk on it (prior to the no betting isk ruling).

Hey CPP - Time we put highsec back to how it was originally designed - http://i.imgur.com/GT0T0oS.jpg

Raca Pyrrea
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#440 - 2016-11-08 08:55:52 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:


We simply call people out for trying to change the game in their favor.
...
But maybe you should work on actually bringing some arguments to the table instead of personal insults, gut feelings and plain denial.


Isnt that exactly what you do? Trying to keep or change the game in YOUR favor. Whenever opposed by arguments responding insults etc...