EVE General Discussion

How many of your friends lated a year? Why did they leave? How many PLEX are redeemed each month, as compared to the total number of subscriptions?

I hazard to guess that your perceptions are highly skewed.

Why should barges have to fit tanks when ganking ships don't have to fit tanks? It is a nonsensical double standard that CCP is fixing.

Blaming the victims for being victims is the wrong way to think about it. The real issue is that ganking required community and pride (i.e. coordination, teamwork, ingenuity, etc.,) whereas security in high-sec was heavily dependent on artificial mechanics implemented and maintained by CCP which discouraged community involvement in making their own security (i.e. Socialism.) With CrimeWatch, the victims can still "deserve" to be ganked by flying with too much cargo/bling, however, the high-sec community now has better tools to enforce security themselves in high-sec, and, provided they have will to do so, can make high-sec as safe as they want it to be. Meaning, instead of passively relying on the fail that is CONCORD, high-sec players can now work together in much the same way that gankers work together.

tl;dr The long success of ganking in high-sec has caused CCP to (finally!) realize that players (not CONCORD) are the best means of getting high-sec victims (via community) to see to their own security.

Anyone believing that CrimeWatch is an unfair and heavy-handed nerf to ganking is simply trying to preserve a simplistic, lopsided, and out-dated PvP paradigm that isn't worthy of a PvP Sandbox game in today's modern MMO market.

We'd be fine with CCP implementing game mechanics that required gank ships to fit tanks. We'd just start to fit those tanks instead of whining about it.


You mean, the tools they already had, because of, you know, that whole "gankers being outlaws" thing?


Crimewatch is a nerf to ganking because of the looting mechanics. Granted, this can easily be gotten around, so it's more of an inconvenience than a nerf. The people Crimewatch really hurts are the can flippers and loot ninjas. On the other hand, it will lead to increased baiting and carebear tears, but that's likely to have a negative effect over the long term as CCP caves in to more carebear whining and implements further nerfs to the pvp play style.

Kill rights are a nerf to the mercenary and bounty-hunting professions. Yes, an actual nerf. This has been discussed to death so I won't bother to do it again.

Losing hauls to suicide-ganks is also a known cost. Haulers should be aware that hauling X amount of stuff in a Y amount of EHP ship will result in a loss Z percent of the time. The risk in hauling is that the stuff you're hauling might get stolen or destroyed, and your haul will be unprofitable. This is why you haul as much as you can, in reasonable amounts: to spread the losses over the long term and make a net profit.

There are plenty of experienced pilots outside Hisec. Go hunt them.

Oh wait, you don't want to do that because it is hard .... and you can't unilaterally dictate the terms of engagement.

You might lose. It's only fun when other people lose, not when you lose.

Yeah. Tough guys...

Old Guard? New Guard? ffs, Battlefield 3 is barely even past the burping stage.

Also, I'm getting a bit sick of these entitled threads about old school PvPers who know all about how the game is meant to be played, and this-and-that about Highseccers and Carebears. Grow the f up.

That's kind of like HTFU if you don't get it, and I mean it in the same way.

Seriously, you have it your way and EVE really will die; and by that, I mean you and the others like you will hang on till the very end when they shut the servers down because keeping them up is a waste of money, even if it does please the likes of you.

Selfish.

I don't even disagree with certain elements of the 'Old Guards' rhetoric. It's great that many of you want ships rebalanced, and POS redone, and Nullsec made more interesting, and players able to do more, build more, and be less dependent on NPC devices. Great.

And maybe yes, Highsec is getting a little too safe, (I think you're starting to act like your namesake), and Concord and Crimewatch, and blah, blah, blah is just too much to deal with. Yada...yada..yada. Who cares. Ganking will still happen, players will have more tools to fight gankers, (never been possible without ganking and suiciding before), and all that jazz.

Whatever.

What pisses me off, is your attitude like you made this game, and you deserve to have everything your way. You didn't; you don't. Whatever is in the best interest of EVE is the best thing to do, whether it suits you or not. Whether it suits me or not. One persons opinion is just that.

In the end, whatever keeps EVE going for the next 10 years, and the ten after that, will make me happy so long as it doesn't destroy the game itself. Whatever that is; I don't expect I'll know until it's gone.

Either way, you paid for a sub, or two, or ten, and got your game out of it. You didn't make anything, and it doesn't entitle you to anything that supercedes the best interests of the game, other players, and its availability to a wider audience.

I've said my piece now I guess, and I'm feeling rather better. Tension breakers are nice don't you think?

Carebears pay the bills for CCP and you want to drive them away from the game? Here is the deal. You let carebears play Hi-Sec they way they want and you can play Null-Sec/Low-Sec the way you want. They mine your ore. They build your ships. They buy your plex. That's the deal. Don't like it. Walk with your money to somewhere else. The truth of the matter the majority of player play in hi-sec and pay the bills of the game you play.

Maybe you should re-examine the context of that statement before you go making statements. It's in reference to the design, coding, and deployment and maintenance of the game itself.

And, for your interpretation: Nothing lasts. You build it, it gets blown up, you build it again. You take the space, someone takes it from you. One Alliance rises to the top, only to be toppled by someone else, who then leads their Alliance to that position or walks away laughing.

The only thing you make is a history of player activity. Nothing is truly persistent that is made by players in this game, and those things that were made players and still sit in some hangar somewhere unused, have a dozen, a hundred, or even thousands of identical copies made by other players elsewhere.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but all you got is history.

..and besides which, aside from leading large fleets and running massive Alliances, I've done all of those things.

That's hogwash. Players quit because they lost ships. That is a question they ask you when you quit your EVE subscription.

Null-Sec, Low-Sec, Hi -Sec or any-sec... People Rage quit because they lose a ship and CCP knows it. Doesn't matter if you are a care bare or a PVP player. People quit because they a lost ship.

Now CCP keeps subs because people can afford to replace ships. In fact that keeps them in business, but the fact of the matter is that people keep playing EVE because they know how to keep ships not how to lose ships. If losing ships meant playing EVE more then our ships would automatically explode when we undocked.

I disagree. In risk analysis, the loss of the hauler and contents is the potential loss. The known cost is the time invested performing the haul: that is going to be lost one way or another. There is a non-certainty involved with the loss of a hauler full of valuable stuff. That non-certainty does get close to 1.0, but there are numerous methods one can use to foil the attempts of gankers (one of my favourite is getting nerfed in Retribution, sadly).



And that Z percent there represents the probability of failure. The risk is thus X ISK x Z %/attempt = ISK per attempt risk of hauling X in that hauler.



Exactly right

Just be aware that Risk = Cost of failure x Probability of failure.