These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Barge Fairy Tale

First post First post
Author
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1701 - 2012-07-28 15:20:15 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Misanth wrote:
Herr Wilkus, I'm too lazy to log in all my accounts to give you +likes, but pretend you just got a heap of them. Not only for the OP, replies was made of win as well. P

See, that's the problem. People who suicide gank high-sec miners are the laziest PvP'ers. Now that it is no longer so easy to gank high-sec miners, gankers find it easier to whine on the forums instead of actually learning to PvP.




people outside of hisec are more tolerant of getting killed by surprise, they do not make that same delightful squeal that miners do when their exhumers are popped

miner ganking is not about profit or killboard padding

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Dave Stark
#1702 - 2012-07-28 15:31:28 UTC
ISD TYPE40 wrote:
I've cleaned up some of the troll posts in this thread, please keep things civil, thank you.




Troll posts removed - ISD Type40.


nobody really cares if you deleted half the thread.
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1703 - 2012-07-28 15:32:08 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:

No need to be an expert to realise a simple buff to some "pixels" will not and suddenly make bots be smarter.
Thinking or pretending the other way around is just being idiot, paranoid, lacking totally of software knowledge (this is harder than be able to count up to 3) and talking out of an hairy pubbie arse.


Since you're such a smart hairy assed pubbie does buffing the most easily botted profession make botting easier or harder? You haven't explained why the bot argument is a bad one yet either internet security expert who graduated from MIT magna *** laude.

Penalizing bots should not be prioritized over giving non-botting players (AFK or otherwise) wider and more relevant choices.


How exactly does homogenizing mining ships give non-botting players wider more relevant choices? Its like saying you can pick door 1, 2, 3, or n but the same thing is behind each one.


Saying that they are homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#1704 - 2012-07-28 15:34:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Misanth wrote:


No, the problem was two folded, part CCP's and part miners fault.
* Miner fault - they used the most expensive ship in the game, untanked, and then got supermad they lost so much pixels in their "safe" space. They could've used a more reasonable alternative, but they refuse to and just flat out only want to use the ship that has the best mining yield. Mentality issue.
* CCP's fault - for not having a good step between the Hulk and the low-end mining ships. If the barges had a bit boosted yield, and the step wasn't so far to the Hulk.. this would've been alot less of an issue.

I agree with you that the price difference between a Hulk and a gankers loss was completely off, but that was not the gankers fault. Miners put themselves into this position, and you know what, they will do again in these new ships (go untanked, for max yield). This will not change unless there's a reasonably cheap alternative with very close to the same yield as the top end mining vessel. Irony is, the fact that people use endgame ships (essentially, Hulks is the capital/supercapital of mining, it's The Max yield ship), that are/should be expensive, and then feel it cost too much to lose just show they have wrong mentality to begin with. Imagine if I would ask the same for my supercapitals. Hey, I want to be able to fly them in level fours in highsec, under protection of CONCORD! It is actually what miners were requesting.


MMOs reflect the real world in many wicked ways. One of them is the kind of player playing it.

You have the top alpha male on one side, if it was for him, all would be hard core and a matter of domination and proof of his masculine hormones overabundance. They are relatively rare. They often are extremely accomplished people in RL as well, maybe retired already and can dedicate tons of time to the game. They also achieve ten time more per unit of time than others.

Then there's a plethora of "more calm water" players with various degrees of committment, endurance, ability to form their own objectives (something quite needed for a sandbox game). They are still quite rare, they are the free minds, often in alliance or harsh conflict with the above. Some of them entertrain into more or less wicked manipulations both of the markets and of the other people listed below. Some of them are cheaters, awoxers etc.

Then there's the "populace", who "just want to live and let leave", who "just want to do their honest job", "just work hard and feed the family". They need their hands driven by somebody else, they are easily used and manipulated, they are the honest tax payers. Not because they are inherently good, but because they were manipulated into being honest and into believing in "the State", in "the Good Values" and other similar mass sociology brain washing.
This is where the tens of millions subscribers are, they are the sheep, the material to be used and abused by those in command. Many of them are very mediocre players (which does not mean they are necessarily "casual") but they form "zergs" and generally meatshield to sacrifice (I am trespassing into Machiavelli now).

At the base of the above are the subsidized, the welfare people. They will indeed think they have to buy the best expensive product (Hulk) and an iPad, because "you are cool and elite with them". They just cannot be self sufficient, the (European) State provide them with the basic life needed things in exchange for their life and sweat.
We have whole subsidized categories in RL, I won't mention any because the last time I got flamed to the ground for speaking the cold truths.
They are predictable and go after blind guides adoption (see the 0.0 Halada's miners guide deadspace fitting used in hi sec Hulks!).
You simply cannot demand those guys will smarten up, they just can't. They may be amiable persons, good workers, friends but they just won't walk the extra mile, they are the anti-emergent player.

MMO companies for their own survival rely on all sorts of players with varying degrees of composition.

EvE relied on the first two kinds for some years and this made EvE of a niche MMO.
But then, 5000 players were not enough to grant the game continued expansion and improvement.

So, CCP opened the doors for the other kind of players.


So, you have to sort of deal with it.
The latter players are simply not able to walk the extra mile some in this thread demand them to.
This is why CCP are creating "canned content" for them.
The only ways to keep those players is to WoW-ify the game a little in order to tangibly scale up the subs numbers.
Or to educate them, but this is extremely hard, it's a process that takes years and is extremely, harshly and sometimes punished with RL death, because strong RL powers WANT to have unwashed masses to control, drive and feed onto.

Imagine what would happen if suddenly, the honest tax payers, the family fathers woke up and started thinking.
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1705 - 2012-07-28 15:46:12 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:


The Mack is the official "not supported by a Hauler ship." Why should CCP design a ship specifically to cater to AFK people?


Because there's demand for it?

Why shoud Dodge build pickups? Or why Harley Davidson builds noisy chromed motorbikes?


There's demand for a HS Dread. It comes up in the EffandEye forums all the time. CCP's not making those at the moment.

Why should CCP design a ship specifically to cater to AFK people? Game design reason, please.


Because a large portion of playerbase wants it? Is "cash income" a game design reason enough?


No it is not. Game design reason is a reasonable expectation, give it.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1706 - 2012-07-28 15:51:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
Everyone knows there's only 4 T1 destroyers currently so there's a lot space for new destroyers. How about new Miner Killer role? Ship that can kill mining ships in hisec without Corcord ruining the fun. That should be fun.
stoicfaux
#1707 - 2012-07-28 15:51:45 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:

people outside of hisec are more tolerant of getting killed by surprise, they do not make that same delightful squeal that miners do when their exhumers are popped

miner ganking is not about profit or killboard padding

Then it's just about griefing. And that's why it is so hard to support the pro-miner-ganking-in-highsec viewpoint.

Griefing is a sub-class of PvP. It's normally not a desirable state of PvP from both a fun factor and subscription point of view.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1708 - 2012-07-28 16:03:22 UTC
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:


Saying that they are homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest.


Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Bunnie Hop
Bunny Knights
#1709 - 2012-07-28 16:05:29 UTC
The OP sure used alot of words to say WAAHHH. Cry on, its lovely.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1710 - 2012-07-28 16:09:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
La Nariz wrote:
Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too.


Just wait a month and CCP introduces new Miner Killer destroyers. 20% per level to immunity against Concord.
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1711 - 2012-07-28 16:09:57 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Misanth wrote:


No, the problem was two folded, part CCP's and part miners fault.
* Miner fault - they used the most expensive ship in the game, untanked, and then got supermad they lost so much pixels in their "safe" space. They could've used a more reasonable alternative, but they refuse to and just flat out only want to use the ship that has the best mining yield. Mentality issue.
* CCP's fault - for not having a good step between the Hulk and the low-end mining ships. If the barges had a bit boosted yield, and the step wasn't so far to the Hulk.. this would've been alot less of an issue.

I agree with you that the price difference between a Hulk and a gankers loss was completely off, but that was not the gankers fault. Miners put themselves into this position, and you know what, they will do again in these new ships (go untanked, for max yield). This will not change unless there's a reasonably cheap alternative with very close to the same yield as the top end mining vessel. Irony is, the fact that people use endgame ships (essentially, Hulks is the capital/supercapital of mining, it's The Max yield ship), that are/should be expensive, and then feel it cost too much to lose just show they have wrong mentality to begin with. Imagine if I would ask the same for my supercapitals. Hey, I want to be able to fly them in level fours in highsec, under protection of CONCORD! It is actually what miners were requesting.


MMOs reflect the real world in many wicked ways. One of them is the kind of player playing it.

You have the top alpha male on one side, if it was for him, all would be hard core and a matter of domination and proof of his masculine hormones overabundance. They are relatively rare. They often are extremely accomplished people in RL as well, maybe retired already and can dedicate tons of time to the game. They also achieve ten time more per unit of time than others.

Then there's a plethora of "more calm water" players with various degrees of committment, endurance, ability to form their own objectives (something quite needed for a sandbox game). They are still quite rare, they are the free minds, often in alliance or harsh conflict with the above. Some of them entertrain into more or less wicked manipulations both of the markets and of the other people listed below. Some of them are cheaters, awoxers etc.

Then there's the "populace", who "just want to live and let leave", who "just want to do their honest job", "just work hard and feed the family". They need their hands driven by somebody else, they are easily used and manipulated, they are the honest tax payers. Not because they are inherently good, but because they were manipulated into being honest and into believing in "the State", in "the Good Values" and other similar mass sociology brain washing.
This is where the tens of millions subscribers are, they are the sheep, the material to be used and abused by those in command. Many of them are very mediocre players (which does not mean they are necessarily "casual") but they form "zergs" and generally meatshield to sacrifice (I am trespassing into Machiavelli now).

At the base of the above are the subsidized, the welfare people. They will indeed think they have to buy the best expensive product (Hulk) and an iPad, because "you are cool and elite with them". They just cannot be self sufficient, the (European) State provide them with the basic life needed things in exchange for their life and sweat.
We have whole subsidized categories in RL, I won't mention any because the last time I got flamed to the ground for speaking the cold truths.
They are predictable and go after blind guides adoption (see the 0.0 Halada's miners guide deadspace fitting used in hi sec Hulks!).
You simply cannot demand those guys will smarten up, they just can't. They may be amiable persons, good workers, friends but they just won't walk the extra mile, they are the anti-emergent player.

MMO companies for their own survival rely on all sorts of players with varying degrees of composition.

EvE relied on the first two kinds for some years and this made EvE of a niche MMO.
But then, 5000 players were not enough to grant the game continued expansion and improvement.

So, CCP opened the doors for the other kind of players.


So, you have to sort of deal with it.
The latter players are simply not able to walk the extra mile some in this thread demand them to.
This is why CCP are creating "canned content" for them.
The only ways to keep those players is to WoW-ify the game a little in order to tangibly scale up the subs numbers.
Or to educate them, but this is extremely hard, it's a process that takes years and is extremely, harshly and sometimes punished with RL death, because strong RL powers WANT to have unwashed masses to control, drive and feed onto.

Imagine what would happen if suddenly, the honest tax payers, the family fathers woke up and started thinking.


a shame that no matter how much they Trammelize hisec, they will never compete with WoW

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1712 - 2012-07-28 16:12:18 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:

people outside of hisec are more tolerant of getting killed by surprise, they do not make that same delightful squeal that miners do when their exhumers are popped

miner ganking is not about profit or killboard padding

Then it's just about griefing. And that's why it is so hard to support the pro-miner-ganking-in-highsec viewpoint.

Griefing is a sub-class of PvP. It's normally not a desirable state of PvP from both a fun factor and subscription point of view.



those who unsub because they can't stand getting ~griefed~ will unsub for some other reason

this game is not for everyone

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Drone 16
Holy Horde
#1713 - 2012-07-28 16:13:58 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
Misanth wrote:
Herr Wilkus, I'm too lazy to log in all my accounts to give you +likes, but pretend you just got a heap of them. Not only for the OP, replies was made of win as well. P

See, that's the problem. People who suicide gank high-sec miners are the laziest PvP'ers. Now that it is no longer so easy to gank high-sec miners, gankers find it easier to whine on the forums instead of actually learning to PvP.




people outside of hisec are more tolerant of getting killed by surprise, they do not make that same delightful squeal that miners do when their exhumers are popped

miner ganking is not about profit or killboard padding


This man speaks truth!

It was never about risk v. reward; that is just a convenient excuse with which to lobby CCP.

It is about generating easy tears, at least R.D. has the integrity to say what all the other pro-gank posters are really thinking.

I tip my shades to you , sir.

It puts the peanutbutter on itself or it leaves the bonus round... - E1's greatest Hits

Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1714 - 2012-07-28 16:22:05 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:


Saying that they are homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest.


Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too.


And?

Saying they are homogenizing mining ships still does not make it so. They are homogenized now if you mine for more than a few months...because then you'll have trained to be either in a hulk, or mining ice in a mack. That seems pretty homogenized. Quit posting numbers and put together a better synthesis of all the aspects of the proposed changes.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1715 - 2012-07-28 16:28:45 UTC
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:


Saying that they are homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest.


Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too.


And?

Saying they are homogenizing mining ships still does not make it so. They are homogenized now if you mine for more than a few months...because then you'll have trained to be either in a hulk, or mining ice in a mack. That seems pretty homogenized. Quit posting numbers and put together a better synthesis of all the aspects of the proposed changes.



Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too. I'm just going to say the same damn thing until you provide some evidence otherwise. I posted yield numbers either that showed they all have similar yields.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1716 - 2012-07-28 16:31:59 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:


Saying that they are homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest.


Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too.


And?

Saying they are homogenizing mining ships still does not make it so. They are homogenized now if you mine for more than a few months...because then you'll have trained to be either in a hulk, or mining ice in a mack. That seems pretty homogenized. Quit posting numbers and put together a better synthesis of all the aspects of the proposed changes.



Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too. I'm just going to say the same damn thing until you provide some evidence otherwise. I posted yield numbers either that showed they all have similar yields.


Yes, you did. And yield isn't everything. I did provide proof, by the way, just not in the form you seem to understand. You're letting numbers blind you to any other line of reasoning. Quit posting numbers and provide a better argument.
Thronde
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1717 - 2012-07-28 16:34:06 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
This is where CCP acknowledges that gankers, as a group, are too chickenshiz to gank barges using wardecs, or venture out into gankland where wardecs are not needed and Concord cannot touch you.


99% of miners dont go anywhere where there is no CONCORD and will jump corp when wardeced. CCP are about to make mining as risk free as its possible to get in space as well as very bot friendly.


I fail to see how that's MY problem.

Dec every hi-sec corp.

This change means cheaper minerals for me, which = cheaper cap fleets.

~deal with it~


lmao ex-widot



We can't help that retards sometimes slip through the checks. The issue was alleviated quickly in that case however.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#1718 - 2012-07-28 16:41:22 UTC
When/if this change goes through, I expect massive gankings throughout HS (mostly out of spite). Then I expect those miners who expect CCP to fix their problems to come to the forums and whine again.

Then I can say "CCP this would not have happened if you had done a reasonable reballance rather than just add tank (simplification of all that is wrong with the changes)".


stoicfaux
#1719 - 2012-07-28 16:45:06 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:

those who unsub because they can't stand getting ~griefed~ will unsub for some other reason

this game is not for everyone

Right. And when CCP tallies the votes (aka subs,) who do you think has a bigger voice? The high-sec gankers? Or the high-sec miners? I think it's pretty obvious that CCP values the miners' concerns over the high-sec gankers' concerns.

The real question is: will the high-sec gankers unsub over the mining ship changes? Because, you know, this game isn't for everyone.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#1720 - 2012-07-28 16:45:08 UTC
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:


Saying that they are homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest.


Saying that they are not homogenizing mining ships doesn't make it so. They are doing the opposite of what you suggest. Oh look I can make a blatant statement without proof too.


And?

Saying they are homogenizing mining ships still does not make it so. They are homogenized now if you mine for more than a few months...because then you'll have trained to be either in a hulk, or mining ice in a mack. That seems pretty homogenized. Quit posting numbers and put together a better synthesis of all the aspects of the proposed changes.

And with the changes on SIsi, the only ships you ever need to fly are the Hulk for fleet ops, and the Mack for solo and afk.

The others will only be useful for poor people and those without the skills for the other two. And odd PvP doctrines... but that is not CCPs intention.