These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How BF3's turn for the worse resembles EVE's

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#181 - 2012-11-23 09:52:54 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

The base ehp was close to a curse and both would die to a single gank catalyst if they fitted no tank. The mack could fit a tank that made it unprofitable to kill and still had the room for for an mlu.


How many curse kills by a catalyst are there? Maybe, just maybe the game designers take in some other factor besides the pure numbers?

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#182 - 2012-11-23 09:57:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Terminal Insanity wrote:
The 'highsec problem' isnt caused by low or high being too lucritive, or not enough.

The problem is players are trained from the moment they join the game that NPC's are there to save them. They view 0.0/low as 'where the assholes are' and they completely avoid it, because, they say to themselves, "i'm not an *******, im a nice person".


I don't mean evil, but by the attitude constantly shown on the forum, it's very easy for a new player to believe 0.0 is where the assholes are.







Edit:
I have been in a fantastic 0.0 corp with people who would never act on the forums as nasty as those who constanly diss the "lessers" players. Many of the null seccers on this forum don't bring justice to the actual 0.0 playerbase and are heavily hurting all their founded pleas with all sorts of elitism, name calling and other obnoxious behaviors. What can a real new player think when they are addressed as "plankton" by some poster in here?

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#183 - 2012-11-23 10:36:11 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I don't mean evil, but by the attitude constantly shown on the forum, it's very easy for a new player to believe High Sec is where the assholes are.



FYP.


Point is it's all subjective. Sadly there are very few good posters on the EVE-O forums and the vast majority of them tend to be Null Sec players who have came here mainly to troll the bad posting high sec players.

Of course as all things in life there are exceptions, there are PLENTY of bad posting 0.0 guys and I'm sure there are good posting null seccers.

However fact of life is that most people on the internet are bad posters, and the high sec lfiestyle (i.e. basically risk free, no comittments of your assets/information etc) tends to appeal to the type of people who tend to be bad at posting. Whereas in null bad posters tend to get hazed out of their alliance (depending on the alliance, Test are proud of their bad posters).

TL;DR

Most the posts on here that make me die a little inside are from high sec carebears. I really wish the decent high sec players would post more.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2012-11-23 10:49:38 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I don't mean evil, but by the attitude constantly shown on the forum, it's very easy for a new player to believe High Sec is where the assholes are.



FYP.


Point is it's all subjective. Sadly there are very few good posters on the EVE-O forums and the vast majority of them tend to be Null Sec players who have came here mainly to troll the bad posting high sec players.

so your vision of "good poster" is "troll" or "bad poster"? Nice view.

However i guess this is not common for people. So your "fixing" of quote failed.

On the other hand you said "trolling and bad posting for me is sign of a good poster" so i guess this post born to be troll and it's ok Lol

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#185 - 2012-11-23 10:56:36 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I don't mean evil, but by the attitude constantly shown on the forum, it's very easy for a new player to believe High Sec is where the assholes are.



FYP.


Point is it's all subjective. Sadly there are very few good posters on the EVE-O forums and the vast majority of them tend to be Null Sec players who have came here mainly to troll the bad posting high sec players.

so your vision of "good poster" is "troll" or "bad poster"? Nice view.

However i guess this is not common for people. So your "fixing" of quote failed.

On the other hand you said "trolling and bad posting for me is sign of a good poster" so i guess this post born to be troll and it's ok Lol


wat?
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#186 - 2012-11-23 11:10:02 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
There's not a single EvE ship that is not a combat ship. Combat happens.

All ships might be exposed to combat, but not every ship is a combat ship. For example, if I put a Megathron BPO into my shuttle and autopilot to Jita, am I engaging in combat when I inevitably get popped by a Thrasher? I wager that I do not. Similarly, a player using a barge to mine ore is not engaging in combat (though he is engaging in pvp).

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I have tried the "escorts" thing. Do you know why it does not work? It's EFFING BORING! You got to stand there like an idiot for 8 hours for the attack that never came. Who is going to waste their pass-time to sit in a belt corner waiting for possible attacks? Even at the top of the GS sponsored Hulkageddon (the best time to earn by mining) their attack would happen max twice a day (KBs talk) per system.

That's why you pay the escorts. The whole point of business is to make enough money to make a profit after expenses. But remember, you have to ensure that a profit is made. Escorts need to be paid, and be paid well enough to make it worthwhile for them to take on such a line of work. Mining might not make enough to make this realistic, which is why I'd probably be completely fine if CCP boosted mining income to a significant degree, but left mining barges in a vulnerable state. I am not an unreasonable person; I want miners to be happy, just like everyone else. But I don't want them to be given freebies.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Last time I checked, I had to train appropriate non-mining skills for tanking.
Also, your sentence is a bit odd. It's like wondering how unfair is for truck drivers to also carry stuff, when car drivers had to learn how to drive in a road. Both need the "common" stuff, if the car drivers don't come with a 20 tons trailer it's not because truck drivers are imbalanced.

I reread what I wrote, and I have to say that I'm sticking with that statement. It makes plenty of sense.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It comes sorts of natural, because the PvP peeps tend to be competitive and in order to compete they train more and put more effort than the others.

However what I only see in EvE is some players being fanatic at imposing onto the others "the right way" to play, any other option equals to bad names.

I spent quite a bit of time in a WoW "top 5" raiding guild (just on my server, not realm-wide of course). Trust me when I tell you that being hardcore isn't limited exclusively to pvp-focused play styles.

You're wrong about the second part as well. Elitism is present in every multiplayer game. I'm sure this isn't something I'lll need to present an argument for.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#187 - 2012-11-23 15:17:55 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

The base ehp was close to a curse and both would die to a single gank catalyst if they fitted no tank. The mack could fit a tank that made it unprofitable to kill and still had the room for for an mlu.


How many curse kills by a catalyst are there? Maybe, just maybe the game designers take in some other factor besides the pure numbers?

Just goes to show how much smarter curse pilots are than most miners.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#188 - 2012-11-23 17:06:30 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

The base ehp was close to a curse and both would die to a single gank catalyst if they fitted no tank. The mack could fit a tank that made it unprofitable to kill and still had the room for for an mlu.


How many curse kills by a catalyst are there? Maybe, just maybe the game designers take in some other factor besides the pure numbers?

Just goes to show how much smarter curse pilots are than most miners.

thanks mate!

(i was never ganked in curse)


(On the other hand i've never flew it)



Anyway, thanks! Lol

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#189 - 2012-11-23 17:18:20 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

That is because right now people have the choice of alternatives. They can go to low-sec and do those things you mentioned, or they can stay in high-sec and not have to put in extra effort or worry about coordinating with others. If there was no choice, then those people would be forced to adapt.

Granted, it's probably way too late to do something like this. If the game began with that type of mindset, then things would be different, but doing this after ten years would just lead to a massive exodus.


Right. The fact that people will always choose the alternatives means this idea would make the game worse. If players wanted that, they'd already be doing it.

Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Other players can already attack gankers, because the grand majority of them are already outlaws, and new gankers reach that point very quickly. Trust me, it doesn't take a whole lot of kills to get to -5.

So what's the problem? If this changes little, why all the tears?

Because it's NOT the same after the patch. We both know it. Gankers are losing some of their safety.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#190 - 2012-11-23 17:49:38 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Risien Drogonne wrote:

So what's the problem? If this changes little, why all the tears?

Because it's NOT the same after the patch. We both know it. Gankers are losing some of their safety.


What safety?

A gank talos is actualy profitable to gank. I would also like to point out that Bat Country are very much looking forwards to continuing to gank high value targets in high sec while also using the new systems to our own advantage come winter. We will adapt yet again but I am willing to bet that the people whining about us nasty gankers wont. They haven't adapted in the last year thats for sure.
Kiteo Hatto
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#191 - 2012-11-23 17:56:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Kiteo Hatto
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
This is not a single player game. In EVE, player actions have wide-reaching significance. Are you really going to tell me that EVE would be EVE if all everyone did was quietly mine and mission in the corner of their favorite systems? How long would people stay when they realize that they can get the same thing, with a much greater sense of depth, by switching to X3 for a one-time payment of about 20 bucks on Steam, instead of dropping 15 every month per account?



Really, you are the last person who has any right to tell others that eve isn't a singleplayer game and that they should L2P. YOU have ALTS that replace live players, ffs, you can't rely on others to do things that your main can't so you decide to do everything yourself, who the **** is playing a single player eve here.

All your post til page 10 are all how you are this uber elite person who is entitled to things because you kill people who aren't interested in your activities. Please, can't wait to see what your "big bad secret surprise" is for all of us peasant carebears. You really grind my gears.
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#192 - 2012-11-23 18:23:15 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Risien Drogonne wrote:

So what's the problem? If this changes little, why all the tears?

Because it's NOT the same after the patch. We both know it. Gankers are losing some of their safety.


What safety?

A gank talos is actualy profitable to gank. I would also like to point out that Bat Country are very much looking forwards to continuing to gank high value targets in high sec while also using the new systems to our own advantage come winter. We will adapt yet again but I am willing to bet that the people whining about us nasty gankers wont. They haven't adapted in the last year thats for sure.

If it's no big deal, why do we have a 10 page thread full of crying by the gankers?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#193 - 2012-11-23 18:36:01 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Risien Drogonne wrote:

If it's no big deal, why do we have a 10 page thread full of crying by the gankers?


By all means find the posts in which I have whined about the upcoming changes in this here thread.

In the meantime let me again state Bat Country's official responce to the winter expansion.

"Nothing will change, we will continue to kill the stupid, billions will be added to our isk bin, we will kill you in all new ways, winter is coming."
Unoob Udumb
Doomheim
#194 - 2012-11-23 18:36:54 UTC
Risien Drogonne wrote:
Gankers are losing some of their safety.


The funniest part is it's not true for the most-known gankers. Those are already safe most of the time. They are -10 (so you're allowed to attack them when you wish) but they only travel in hi-sec in almost uncatchable ships.


Quote:
A gank talos is actualy profitable to gank.


Except that the moment you see it on grid somewhere, it's going to do its business anyway. Your argument would be receivable if you flew in gank talos accross the universe. Since your ships are brought to you by a neutral alt and only shown when they're going to die from CONCORD, your statement is useless.

And no, Curse pilots are not smarter than miners, it's just that their ship allows them to defend themselves, thus them not being easy-targets for suicide-gankers.

While your efforts to make everyone believe that miners are dumb and you are smart-asses are funny to be witnessed, suicide gankers are still the biggest risk-averse nooblets in this game. There's no risk when your loss is predetermined, remember. Blink
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#195 - 2012-11-23 18:43:55 UTC
Unoob Udumb wrote:


And no, Curse pilots are not smarter than miners, it's just that their ship allows them to defend themselves, thus them not being easy-targets for suicide-gankers.

While your efforts to make everyone believe that miners are dumb and you are smart-asses are funny to be witnessed, suicide gankers are still the biggest risk-averse nooblets in this game. There's no risk when your loss is predetermined, remember. Blink


Just because we accept the risk doesn't make that risk go away.

As for your other comment. You are aware that miners have access to exactly the same defences as everyone else right? Namely, tanking mods. So your comment is fantastically wrong.
Tesal
#196 - 2012-11-23 19:07:25 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Unoob Udumb wrote:


And no, Curse pilots are not smarter than miners, it's just that their ship allows them to defend themselves, thus them not being easy-targets for suicide-gankers.

While your efforts to make everyone believe that miners are dumb and you are smart-asses are funny to be witnessed, suicide gankers are still the biggest risk-averse nooblets in this game. There's no risk when your loss is predetermined, remember. Blink


Just because we accept the risk doesn't make that risk go away.

As for your other comment. You are aware that miners have access to exactly the same defences as everyone else right? Namely, tanking mods. So your comment is fantastically wrong.


You need to stop with the holier than thou attitude.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#197 - 2012-11-23 19:11:28 UTC
Tesal wrote:


You need to stop with the holier than thou attitude.


Never had one. Apologies if it comes across like that.
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#198 - 2012-11-23 19:18:31 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


Just because we accept the risk doesn't make that risk go away.

As for your other comment. You are aware that miners have access to exactly the same defences as everyone else right? Namely, tanking mods. So your comment is fantastically wrong.

If a miner doesn't fit tank, you can gank. If he does, it might cost too much to make it worth it, but you could still do it if you simply bring enough ships.

I see that as fair. CCP doesn't owe you a guaranteed profit margin. The way you want it, the gankers ALWAYS have the complete advantage over miners. That isn't fair.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#199 - 2012-11-23 19:24:58 UTC
Risien Drogonne wrote:

If a miner doesn't fit tank, you can gank. If he does, it might cost too much to make it worth it, but you could still do it if you simply bring enough ships.

I see that as fair. CCP doesn't owe you a guaranteed profit margin. The way you want it, the gankers ALWAYS have the complete advantage over miners. That isn't fair.


No I want exactly what you first put.

What we have now is unprofitable to gank macks even when they fit no tank at all.
Hauling Hal
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#200 - 2012-11-23 19:42:08 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:
You've picked up a videogame that has PvP and PvE in and decided you want to PvE.


Fixed that for you.