These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

What Is Your Reasoning?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tuireann Naari
Doomheim
#1 - 2012-07-27 04:28:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuireann Naari
So once again the hisec gankers and miners are arguing in GD.

However, I seem to have missed the reasoning behind their positions. I last played in 07 and don't quite know what's all changed since then.

Right now, I have no position, and am a little wary of doomsday scenarios and grandiose predictions.

I want to hear both sides of the issue. Convince me that you are right.

For the proponents of a more risky Hisec:

Why should Hisec be more risky?

What would new players without a support network do when first starting out in the game do in a more risky hisec?

What would stop gankers and more malicious players in the EVE community from pushing the envelope and driving people away from the game simply 'for the lulz'?

How much reward should be in hisec? What all would need to change in order to bring risk and reward in line?

EDIT - New Question: How do the proposed changes to Crimewatch and mining ships reduce risk?

For the proponents of a less risky Hisec:

Why should Hisec be less risky?

How could EVE avoid a Trammel-like issue developing as it did in Ultima Online?

What about players whose playstyle is to take advantage of the weak? How would they still be able to continue enjoying the game?

For those who don't care/like trolling/are drunk:

Coke or Pepsi?

North or South?

Inside or Outside?

Anyways, those are all the questions I can think of. Any legitimate responses would be greatly appreciated.
Grumpymunky
Monkey Steals The Peach
#2 - 2012-07-27 04:35:00 UTC
Pepsi.

Post with your monkey.

Thread locked due to lack of pants.
Theangryhobo
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2012-07-27 04:46:27 UTC
I'm a miner. I don't see why people complain. It's a game. You undock, you risk losing your ship, simple as that. But on a more serious note.....

Pepsi

South

Outside

And also.....Bacon.

.
Tuireann Naari
Doomheim
#4 - 2012-07-27 04:49:48 UTC
Never understood why people would like Pepsi more, it's quite a bit too sweet for my liking.
stoicfaux
#5 - 2012-07-27 04:53:17 UTC  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
Ganking Problem Metaphor:
Buy a junk car. Drive up to someone in a Mercedes. Shoot their car until it blows up. When the cops arrive, they blow up your junk car and you walk away free. You wait out the aggression timers and repeat the process until you have go out of town and shoot rats to prove to the cops that you're a good citizen again. Any citizen who tries to get involved and help out a fellow citizen being attacked ends up getting attacked by the cops.

Somalia has better aggression mechanics than CONCORD in high-sec.


In other words:
* ganking miners was extremely one sided,
* the repercussions for being a criminal were relatively minimal (i.e. a joke,)
* it was profitable,
* aggression mechanics prevented effective retaliation
* gankers bragged about killing miners,
* didn't make sense from a "common sense" and RP point of view
* gankers feel entitled and believe that high-sec ganking should be extremely practical (i.e. easy and mostly safe with a large number of victims.)

Miner Problems:
* Just wanted to PvE against rocks in a PvP game.
* Didn't believe in trading productivity for tank.
* Felt dependent on/went crying to CCP to defend them due to having no control over stupid aggression mechanics and to a lesser degree having no input on ship designs (which is debatable.)
* Were easy to bully because they wouldn't fit a tank and because of stupid aggression mechanics and to a lesser degree having no say in ship design (which is debatable.)
* CCP probably went a little overboard when increasing the tanks on mining barges.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Tuireann Naari
Doomheim
#6 - 2012-07-27 04:55:19 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
* CCP probably went a little overboard when increasing the tanks on mining barges.


So things will balance out and all the whining is crying over unspilt milk?
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#7 - 2012-07-27 04:56:28 UTC
Tuireann Naari wrote:
For the proponents of a more risky Hisec:

Why should Hisec be more risky? To avoid a Trammel-like issue developing as it did in Ultima Online.

What would new players without a support network do when first starting out in the game do in a more risky hisec? Build a support network.

What would stop gankers and more malicious players in the EVE community from pushing the envelope and driving people away from the game simply 'for the lulz? Exactly the same thing that is preventing the, now: the prohibitive cost of meaningless ganking,

How much reward should be in hisec? Very little — L4 and station trading are already rewarding enough.

What all would need to change in order to bring risk and reward in line? Remove mid end minerals from hisec, move the pretty nebulas to lowsec leaving hisec barren and boring.

EDIT - New Question: How do the proposed changes to Crimewatch and mining ships reduce risk? Anyone can shoot the aggressor, leading to either abuse of the system with roaming gangs tricking would-be heroes into aggressing, and thus gradual return to the current crimewatch model, or complete withdrawal of PvP due to the number of passers-by who end up joining fights. The buffed mining vessels means keeping the population in check will be much harder. It is like buffing all the gazelle in Africa to have steel plate shells.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
stoicfaux
#8 - 2012-07-27 05:05:58 UTC
Tuireann Naari wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
* CCP probably went a little overboard when increasing the tanks on mining barges.


So things will balance out and all the whining is crying over unspilt milk?


The game, and the whining, will never be balanced because the players are too smart (e.g. emergent gameplay) to code into a restrictive box. Look at all the bots, RMT, 3rd party apps, abundance of super-caps, drone poo, CCP making major economic changes to counter major economic changes CCP made, scandals, PLEX, market manipulations, faction warfare currency exchange fraud, etc., as evidence.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Soundwave Plays Diablo
Doomheim
#9 - 2012-07-27 07:20:58 UTC
Tuireann Naari wrote:
Never understood why people would like Pepsi more, it's quite a bit too sweet for my liking.


They don't. Coke is the most recognized brand name on the planet. Pepsi is #7.

On a related note, soon™ was #42.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-07-27 07:59:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
Tuireann Naari wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
* CCP probably went a little overboard when increasing the tanks on mining barges.


So things will balance out and all the whining is crying over unspilt milk?



Not really , it is more about 1 or 2 people whining about getting ganked and the rest are people trolling the forums.
As far as CCP over doing the tanks, not even close. The changes were long over due.
Keep in mind ganking miners has nothing to due with making ISK, unlike a gankers normal target.

EVERYBODY KNOWS
Danfen Fenix
#11 - 2012-07-27 08:21:45 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:


Miner Problems:
* Just wanted to PvE against rocks in a PvP game.


This is probably one of the miner vs ganker arguements i've never understood (read: understood, not agree/disagree with)...

Mainly because, you also have mission runners, incursion runners & ratters, some of which all they want to do is PVE against mindless (almost, less so in incursions/WH admitadly) enemies that they can grind through one after the other with basic fits. This isn't really any different to grinding throuch rocks imo, yet no one complains about them (and even I do it. We gotta make money some how P )

Heck, you can even AFK missions with some fits (i.e. double rep myrm, remote rep sentry domi etc)....so why do people see this as an excuse to hate on miners but no one else? Is it simply because one profession doesn't use guns and people can't stand when things arn't being blown up? Smile
stoicfaux
#12 - 2012-07-27 13:06:13 UTC
Danfen Fenix wrote:

This is probably one of the miner vs ganker arguements i've never understood (read: understood, not agree/disagree with)...

Mainly because, you also have mission runners, incursion runners & ratters, some of which all they want to do is PVE against mindless (almost, less so in incursions/WH admitadly) enemies that they can grind through one after the other with basic fits. This isn't really any different to grinding throuch rocks imo, yet no one complains about them (and even I do it. We gotta make money some how P )

How is PvE different from PvP in that context? None of the time you spend in Eve is as productive (or as exciting) as stuff you could be doing in real life. Game PvP is a joke compared to real life PvP, be it stealing, making money, running a school or charity, running for office, programming a MMO, competitive sports, etc..

Quote:
Heck, you can even AFK missions with some fits (i.e. double rep myrm, remote rep sentry domi etc)....so why do people see this as an excuse to hate on miners but no one else? Is it simply because one profession doesn't use guns and people can't stand when things arn't being blown up? Smile

Miners are very easy to find, whereas missions runners have to be scanned down. Mining ships are a "known" variable because their tanks and habits are well known. It's also a lot harder to suicide-gank a mission runner before concord arrives due to their normally larger tanks. OTOH, mission runners can be loot piñatas.

Miners are the easiest victims and are victims that don't/can't easily fight back. Thus they're the "best" PvP targets/victims.

*shrug*

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Majic Pony Love
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2012-07-27 13:09:35 UTC
ISD

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom
Dubstepcat
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2012-07-27 13:13:31 UTC
Tuireann Naari wrote:


Coke or Pepsi?

.



Neither, soda is awful.
Majic Pony Love
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2012-07-27 13:15:21 UTC
Dubstepcat wrote:
Tuireann Naari wrote:


Coke or Pepsi?

.



Neither, soda is awful.


Wild Cherry Pepsi

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom
Halcyon Ingenium
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2012-07-27 13:16:45 UTC
Tuireann Naari wrote:

Coke or Pepsi?

North or South?

Inside or Outside?


Coke, North, Outside.

By the way, since we're already talking, do you want to buy a rifter? I've got the cheapest rifters in Metropolis. If you can find a cheaper rifter, buy it!
Lord Ryan
True Xero
#17 - 2012-07-27 13:16:57 UTC
Real sugar Dr Pepper! Best thing ever!

Do not assume anything above this line was typed by me. Nerf the Truth, it's inconvenient.
highonpop
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2012-07-27 13:35:58 UTC
OP, you haven't played since 2007 and your still paying a sub and posting on the forums?

FC, what do?
Hiyora Akachi
Blood Alcohol Content
T O P S H E L F
#19 - 2012-07-27 13:39:12 UTC
Neither

North

Inside


I don't get the miner changes, any miner who wanted to keep their barge fitted for tank. Anyone who just wanted stupid amounts of ISK didn't and got ganked by ships worth around 7 million.

I see no problem there, the careful live and the greedy DIAF.


HTFU miners.
Lilliana Stelles
#20 - 2012-07-27 13:39:29 UTC
Coke. Pepsi tastes better but it bothers my stomach and tastes weird when mixed with alcohol.

Not a forum alt. 
12Next page