These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2011-06-03 13:42
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-05-07 15:25
  • Number of Posts: 199
  • Bounty: 6,168,832 ISK
  • Likes Received: 228

Lin Suizei

Security Status -10.0

Last 20 Posts

  • In Response to Sugar Kyle - Highsec development in EVE Communication Center

    Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
    And no. Highsec doesn't needs more security. It needs reasons to stay when you are a solo PvE highseccer and intend to keep being for as long as you bear with EVE. That would improve the retention of 50% of current players and 80% of all new players.


    Sure, and I don't think anyone's begrudging them that. Players are still free to do PvE content in highsec by themselves or in a group, and I think there should be more reasons for highsec PvE players to work together (public save-the-carrier events, for example) - but even PvE should remain true to the "everyone against everyone" ideology imo.

    Competition and interaction with players is healthy - but it doesn't have to mean ship to ship PvP. Things like a limited regional mission LP pool, severely limited mining resource availability and shared public events which reward the strongest player might make highsec more exciting, cause competition between players, yet still engage solo PvE types.

    Content is destruction, adversity, danger - and there's no reason solo PvE types can't be involved.

  • I'm worried for the future of CODE and EVE online. in EVE Communication Center

    DrysonBennington wrote:
    Another solution would be to use Jump Bridges where CODE normally operates at. Since a Jump Bridge allows a ship to jump 5ly it would therefore be possible to establish a Jump Bridge network through High Sector to points across New Eden that the freighters could use for a price of course to avoid CODE altogether.


    If only I could like this post more than once...

  • A thought about Boosters: in EVE Gameplay Center

    Quote:
    let me put it in simple way, removing OGB will affect this:
    - fighting outnumbered will eventually disappear


    Doesn't stop the ten or so people solo (true solo: no links, no falcon, no logi, no curse alt, not bait) roaming nullsec every day. Just pick a ship well, pack some exile and you're all set.

  • Astecus, a response to something i read somewhere in EVE Gameplay Center

    Velicitia wrote:
    However, that's all because you (Veers) seem to go out of your way to annoy people.

    I wanna be in a hisec corp, but the problem is they all talk a big game, and then fall apart under the slightest outside pressure. I dec'd a bigger corp, and within days, am getting "wtf, pick on us pro pvp people."


    Veers isn't wrong though. Consider your average elite highsec PvE expert: having invested several billion ISK into his mission-mobile of choice, he is completely uninterested in having any kind of pewing with other players, and cannot fathom the thought that principles might be more important than ISK to the ganker.

    For such a player, why would he join a highsec corp, when he can create a tax evasion corp and just nullify incoming wardecs with the drop-and-reform technique?

    In the dog-eat-dog world of New Eden, isn't this player the best player, abusing all broken mechanics as much as possible until CCP's hand is forced into fixing it, to render himself almost invulnerable in highsec?

  • Announcement From Scott Bacon in EVE Gameplay Center

    Veers Belvar wrote:
    Lots of talk. How is the incursion ganking contest going? Oh wait...it failed. Easier to pick on helpless miners and haulers who can't shoot back, I suppose?


    Clearly, it is the elite combat skills of these hardened, veteran highsec pve experts, which prevents terrible, unskilled gankers from successfully popping highsec incursion runners.

  • Do you have to have a permit to mine in high sec? in EVE Communication Center

    Ferni Ka'Nviiou wrote:
    Or you could just kill them. Y' know, with a Catalyst. A eye for an eye makes the whole world prosperous. Wasn't that how it goes?


    Truly, this is the best option, embracing both the letter and spirit of the Code in bringing emergent gameplay to New Eden - though you'd perhaps be surprised how difficult it is to get a carebear to actually fight back.

    Hell, you could give them a free combat ship and they probably wouldn't get in, citing "principle" or something.

  • Announcement From Gorila in EVE Gameplay Center

    Phaedron wrote:
    while i agree 100% there is one slight issue i have, and that is the person/s whom are getting OOG threats are causing people to respond in a manner that leads to OOG negative experience which could be avoided. that is all.

    if people continue to act in a manner that leads to this type of action-reaction thing and it continues to escalate beyond CCP's control is that the fault of those getting pushed to that last resort response which i am sure no one takes lightly especially the person who gets harassed to the point that they threaten someone in RL ... maybe tone down the anger inducing behavior.


    Hmm. There's two separate issues we should be careful not to confuse:

    - Players deliberately inciting other players to anger, whether to use it to drive an in-game petition or just for lulz.
    - Players who get mad because they lost their mission boat / Orca.

    The first is a bit tasteless, on that we agree: but we also encounter a lot of the second. A lot (having popped quite a few carebears myself, I would argue over 50%) of the rage-mails on minerbumping.com don't involve any provocation whatsoever - people simply start issuing inappropriate threats because someone popped their navy raven or whatever.

    In a nutshell, I agree we shouldn't be provoking other players to the extent that they resort to RL threats - but I'd wager this isn't what's causing the RL threats against New Order aligned players you refer to in your post.

  • Announcement From Gorila in EVE Gameplay Center

    Phaedron wrote:
    while i agree with this, i also disagree that people should intimidate people or make them feel shame for their chosen play style on "blogs" or places where all the purpose is to illicit the kind of attitude or action you are against.


    What about if one non-highsec group defeats another similar group in a battle - should the winner also refrain from posting about it, incase it offends the losers, or casts the losers in a negative light?

    If James 315 defeats a few hundred highsec miners in battle, why should he not make humorous, light-hearted and community-creating blog posts about it?

  • Announcement From Gorila in EVE Gameplay Center

    Veers Belvar wrote:
    Ha! I don't troll, am an expert at all things Eve, and am the farthest thing from an idiot you will ever have the pleasure of meeting. What I do quite effectively is expose you Code folks for the griefers you are. Your entire gameplay revolves around trying to make law abiding PvE players miserable, so that they quit the game in a fit of rage. Thankfully, in the long run your strategy cannot stand. Whether through punishments from CCP, gameplay changes, or resistance from hardened and elite PvE experts like me, code will be relegated to the dustbin of history.


    I loved the part about being a "hardened and elite PvE expert".

    10/10.

  • [Kronos] Factional Warfare Complex Improvements in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sgt Ocker wrote:
    A solo plexer will not try to fight when there is a huge possibility he is going to be outnumbered 6 to 1, who in their right mind would?


    I can think of maybe 2 or 3 people in Placid, though one of them doesn't play as much any more. =(.

    I think your post hits pretty close to the mark though - people don't want to lose (especially with a killboard behind their ego), so they warp out the moment they're at even the slightest disadvantage, and bans on cloaking, warp stabs and timer rollbacks/resets do little to fix this risk-aversion. Timer resets with standings penalties, one of the harshest measures suggested, merely inconveniences the farmer, and causes him to go recycle AFK plexing alts, as opposed to stay and fight - the backwater systems are vast enough they're not likely to be interrupted / the residents are tired of chasing them, add them as a contact with standing and move on.

    That said, without dedicating the resources to a full re-working of Faction War addressing the motivations behind farming (on the same level as highsec wardecs), band-aids like this are probably the best we can do, and personally, I think lowsec residents should be thankful for whatever we get at this stage.

  • Factional Warfare Farmers - Warp Core Stab & similar in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
    As for PVP activity, I meant that warzone control would be more about pvp and less about farmers. But yes, I'd also expect a bit more total PVP and in shinier ships because of the increased ISK in PVPers' wallets.

    Finally, I'm not saying that die-hard farmers would become bloodthirsty PVPers, but at least a few of them would consider joining a FW corp and trying out PVP if pure farming was nerfed.


    That's cool and all, but don't forget these "farmers" are often normal FW players, unwilling to risk their ship unless they have overwhelming advantage, like the Algos - piloted by the CEO of a Gallente Militia corporation no less - who ran away from a Tristan earlier because "you're probably kite fit".

    No matter the nerfs, many of these players - FW players, not just farming alts - simply don't want to face risk, and patching mechanics without patching underlying incentives simply drives these players to quit.

  • Motivation for HS war decs in EVE Technology and Research Center

    afkalt wrote:
    I'll use me as an example - I have a high sec mission alt which you'll never get to fight willingly. Whilst I accept the risk of catalyst death, of course, war? Not ever. I use it to fund another accounts PvP. PvP isn't cheap and the money needs to come from somewhere, that mission bear being vulnerable to more than just suicide raises the question - is it worth the trouble anymore? It's already a big enough pain in the rear to farm isk as it is, having him dodge WTs etc becomes...is it worth it?


    Possibly the most reasonable post in this thread, as much as people don't like to admit this is the reality facing many highsec players today.

  • NERF Hisec? in EVE Communication Center

    leavemymomalone idiot wrote:
    you would have to ask the incursion community about that. i fly a blackbird and jam logis in sites so killmails never go to me. personally i think i indirectly killed several very angry marauders :)


    This is a quality thread by a quality poster.

  • why are people saying Fraction warfare is broken? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Divine Entervention wrote:
    No. You just want me to try a bunch of times so you can get alot of free wins. How about instead of flying t2 frigates with t2 weapons, you fly around in t1 frigates with t1 weapons?

    O whats that, you don't want to lose/die, so you equip your ship in a manner to avoid it's happening?

    Me too. Stabs FTW


    A thousand likes to you, brave capsuleer, boldly embracing the spirit of Faction War more than these elite forum warriors ever will.

  • Top 5 Articles this week on www.minerbumping.com in EVE Communication Center

    Malcolm from Marketing wrote:
    I'd hazzard a guess this is because they people you like to grief in highsec generally dont fight back as opposed to other space.


    Some highsec players will actually get some ECM ships and try and get on some CONCORD killmails, but are only given a reason to do so because James 315, in his benevolence, saw fit to force emergent gameplay upon them.

    Without James 315, these "players" would be functionally equal to the bots they mine alongside, to the point you couldn't tell the difference.

  • Jester Trek Latest Blog in EVE Communication Center

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    KnowUsByTheDead wrote:


    I feel that Cha'ka is being victimized here.


    Well you gotta understand that nobody is forcing him to be here. He can leave at any time, you know.

    Havent you heard? Its the newest in thing in EVE!


    Hi please stop torturing Cha'ka with your emotional abuse and name-calling, which has no in-game benefit for you, thanks.

  • Jester Trek Latest Blog in EVE Communication Center

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Mario Putzo wrote:
    Such as wishing physical harm on Erotica 1? Or are you over that phase of the temper tantrum?


    I have never and do not wish physical harm on Erotica1 :)

    I state that here and now, unequivocably, sincerely.


    If you were in my corp, I'd award you a gold medal for excellence in mental gymnastics (right before awoxing you).

  • Erotica 1 is doing a bonus round as the participant. Stream inside. in EVE Communication Center

    Karon Grandolf wrote:
    So E1 is transferring assets to a new less tainted account. How about making him lose something he really cares about?


    So what do you suggest?

  • Jester Trek Latest Blog in EVE Communication Center

    LordOfDespair wrote:
    A single death threat or wish of disease in a chat room is not the same as a person who devotes his entire gaming time to tricking naive noobs just so he can get off on their misery.


    Confirming "noobs" have accounts from 2009, fly faction battleships and have billions of ISK to double.

    LordOfDespair wrote:
    I agree it is silly to be so upset over something like ISK, but that doesn't excuse the person whos only goal is to cause that kind of reaction in as many people as possible. Not only is it just wrong, it drives people away from the game and gives every other EvE player a bad name. It hurts the community.


    Off-topic, but let's be honest - many bonus room customers don't interact with the community beyond being +1 to the concurrent player count. They will not be particularly missed.

  • Jester Trek Latest Blog in EVE Communication Center

    Malcolm from Marketing wrote:
    When the consequences cross over into real life, that what most people consider a boundary being crossed.


    In this case, I'd consider that the "victim" being unable to distinguish fantasy from reality, and being unable to control his own emotions.

    To quote a fellow upstanding EVE player, "the minute you forget its a game, you lose".

Forum Signature

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.