These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Can't believe how many CSM/CCP employees want a theme park

First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#401 - 2013-01-18 16:12:46 UTC
Whitehound is one of these people who join a PvP game then gets angry when PvP happens to him. Or a dedicated troll.
CerN Frostwolf
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#402 - 2013-01-18 16:15:30 UTC
As a newbie, the thing that dragged me into the game the most was the hostility of the game. That I always have to watch my back, that I can kill or be killed at any time. I love the risk and the punishment, and the way it makes my heart beat!
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#403 - 2013-01-18 16:22:43 UTC
CerN Frostwolf wrote:
As a newbie, the thing that dragged me into the game the most was the hostility of the game. That I always have to watch my back, that I can kill or be killed at any time. I love the risk and the punishment, and the way it makes my heart beat!


The hostility, and freedom to lie, backstab, scam, metagame and cause massive setbacks to others is what made me start playing, and is why I've stuck around for six years. If that kind of stuff starts getting diminished, I'll probably lose a lot of interest
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#404 - 2013-01-18 16:28:16 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Whitehound is one of these people who join a PvP game then gets angry when PvP happens to him. Or a dedicated troll.

He lost a one billion ISK pod to the New Order just recently. I think he may be angry because PVP happened to him.
Whitehound
#405 - 2013-01-18 16:39:14 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Whitehound is one of these people who join a PvP game then gets angry when PvP happens to him. Or a dedicated troll.

He lost a one billion ISK pod to the New Order just recently. I think he may be angry because PVP happened to him.

That's probably a lot of ISKs to you, isn't it?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#406 - 2013-01-18 16:51:31 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Whitehound is one of these people who join a PvP game then gets angry when PvP happens to him. Or a dedicated troll.

He lost a one billion ISK pod to the New Order just recently. I think he may be angry because PVP happened to him.

That's probably a lot of ISKs to you, isn't it?


Whitehound has started overheating his damage control in this thread.

A billion isk is a lot to lose as a result of stupidly afking in highsec because you think (or wish) it was 100% safe
Lin Fatale
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#407 - 2013-01-18 16:54:26 UTC
question:
what do you think, how can we solve the blop issue?

answer:
we need tools to manage our mega coalitions, share standings and ****, so that it is ubar easy to have a coalition with 30 alliances w/o any kind of work


CCP can you please think the other way around?
what would happen if you throw out the alliance System?
- Maybe you get much smaller blocks because it is to hard to handle the standings?
- corps are on the sov map -> more identity/motivation on corp/player level
- if you wanne have 10000 blue corps --> then hell you should work for it
- more drama, cuz of standing fuckup --> more conflicts
Merouk Baas
#408 - 2013-01-18 17:01:47 UTC
Having the interface be **** and not let your group form into an alliance isn't going to PREVENT people from grouping up, or disband existing groups.

Do you think the Goons will simply disperse if CCP makes the alliance interface ****? Do you think the Russians, Aussies, Swedes, French, Germans, and other groups will stop playing with their people and intermingle with you because all of a sudden the interface is ****?

If the alliance interface gets removed, they'll just make an out-of-game API-based red/blue app. NOT hard to do.
Ghazu
#409 - 2013-01-18 17:03:29 UTC
ok fine, make the alliance system be shite, but in return move all lvl 4s to lowsec.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984

Lin Fatale
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#410 - 2013-01-18 17:18:20 UTC
ofc it will not prevent people from grouping up and it should not be
just saying it should be harder to group up and not easier

with the current alliance system its just
10 alliance set each other blue --> mega blop in 1 minute
and you dont even know 99% of the other corps


if there were no alliance system, and each corp ceo has to set standings
you will think twice if you want to maintain a big blue list
you would have drama, cuz half of them are inactive anyway

the groups would be smaller, definitely



its just like some other tools, and nothing else is the alliance system
do you think someone would be able to move a cap fleet around in some minutes w/o dotlan/other tools?

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#411 - 2013-01-18 17:21:56 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
There is no "blob issue".
It's all in your head.

If you want a style of gameplay where smaller groups dominate there's a place for that. It's not nullsec, so stop trying to change nullsec to what you want it to be.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

killorbekilled TBE
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#412 - 2013-01-18 17:23:41 UTC
Lin Fatale wrote:
question:
what do you think, how can we solve the blop issue?

answer:
we need tools to manage our mega coalitions, share standings and ****, so that it is ubar easy to have a coalition with 30 alliances w/o any kind of work


CCP can you please think the other way around?
what would happen if you throw out the alliance System?
- Maybe you get much smaller blocks because it is to hard to handle the standings?
- corps are on the sov map -> more identity/motivation on corp/player level
- if you wanne have 10000 blue corps --> then hell you should work for it
- more drama, cuz of standing fuckup --> more conflicts


i approve of this

:)

Whitehound
#413 - 2013-01-18 17:25:59 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Whitehound has started overheating his damage control in this thread.

A billion isk is a lot to lose as a result of stupidly afking in highsec because you think (or wish) it was 100% safe

Good to know. However, when you do up to 2b ISK per day with trading then you'll think differently and will care little about it.

Anything else? I'd really like to get back on topic.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#414 - 2013-01-18 17:27:19 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Whitehound is one of these people who join a PvP game then gets angry when PvP happens to him. Or a dedicated troll.

What if a dedicated troll was to PvP him? Shocked
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#415 - 2013-01-18 17:37:55 UTC
Keep wardecs.

In my last corp, we were a really small group of pvpers, and we wardecced a hisec indy group for two weeks (this was before wardec changes). We tailed them, tracked them, blew up their pos, kept them docked, baited them out, everything. They didn't jump to dec shield. Eventually we extracted a surrender free from the CEO, with the benefit that we would train their members to pvp. We eventually poached away all the promising candidates from the indy corp.

Furthermore, you should not remove the ability for hisec pvp entities to hurt nullsec ones by wardeccing them and harassing their logistics. One of the CSM said "well thats pointless they should use alts." But not everyone in nullsec has dedicated hisec alts that they can keep out-of-corp fulltime. Furthermore, the alts often form their own corp, which can be tracked and wardecced.

I only did wardecs for a few months and doubt I'll ever do them again, but I was horrified that more than one CSM would seriously consider removing them entirely.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#416 - 2013-01-18 20:25:31 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Whitehound has started overheating his damage control in this thread.

A billion isk is a lot to lose as a result of stupidly afking in highsec because you think (or wish) it was 100% safe

Good to know. However, when you do up to 2b ISK per day with trading then you'll think differently and will care little about it.

Anything else? I'd really like to get back on topic.


This is verging on "I didnt want that billion isk anyway", tinged with a bit of attempted e-peen over your ok income

Losing half of your daily income because you didnt understand what the game was is a big hit no matter how much you make
Whitehound
#417 - 2013-01-18 21:04:21 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Whitehound has started overheating his damage control in this thread.

A billion isk is a lot to lose as a result of stupidly afking in highsec because you think (or wish) it was 100% safe

Good to know. However, when you do up to 2b ISK per day with trading then you'll think differently and will care little about it.

Anything else? I'd really like to get back on topic.


This is verging on "I didnt want that billion isk anyway", tinged with a bit of attempted e-peen over your ok income

Losing half of your daily income because you didnt understand what the game was is a big hit no matter how much you make

Go on, I am listening... What else is wrong with me? I am sure there is more you want to tell me.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#418 - 2013-01-18 21:05:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Natsett Amuinn
Lin Fatale wrote:

just saying it should be harder to group up and not easier

Yes, that's always been the best way to develop your game.

Perhaps you didn't here, CCP wants to focus on making the interface and the way we interact with the game LESS tedius and difficult.

Basically the opposite of what you tihnk they should do.



Lin Fatale wrote:

do you think someone would be able to move a cap fleet around in some minutes w/o dotlan/other tools?


Perhaps you didn't here, CCP wants null corps to be able to move large forces around quickly and easily, and that's why they made things like titans and cynos that do exactly that.

Any place you can get to in "minutes" using the tools that get you there, are intended to get you there in "minutes".
No one's using titan bridges to hot drop supers on a roaming gang, people hotdrop subcaps on roaminng gangs, because CCP said "here guys, use these to hotdrop other players fleets."; so we do.

What CCP doesn't want, and what doesn't happen, is for one alliance to be able to use those tools to steam roll another alliance and take their space in an afternoon.


The GSF did not "just take" NC. space, and it sure has hell did not happen in a day.

It would be a huge discredit, and frankly insulting, to NC to say that we just rolled over them and took their space. No one from NC ever came to the forums and cried that "it's bullshit that GSF is hotdropping supers into the middle of our space."

I do not recall -A- crying on the forums about the HBC hotdropping supers into the middle of their space and flipping all of there sov overnight. There's a lot of other **** that was happening that had nothing to do with titan bridges and super cap fleets. A big part of HBC strategy to break -A- didn't even have anything to do with actually shooting ships. It's one of those things that makes EVE so ******* awesome.



No one is writting stories about that little 50 man engagement.
You're telling me this is bad for EVE?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ-l-QGC3g0


If you want to be a part of null you need to learn to work with others or be big enough that you don't have to. Just because you play EVE doesn't mean you should be able to come to null, claim sov, and play in your own little world that doesn't invovle having to deal with the people around you.

The CFC, GSF, -A-, etc. are not composed of a couple of large corpse, they're composed of a bunch of alliances that are composed of a crapton of SMALLER corporations.

The GSF is not 6000 Goonwaffe members. Goonwaffe is the large corp (CCP gives us the ability to build multithousand man corporations, guys) around which many, many small corporations work.

When the GSF takes a system, they do not take control of that system, it's given to a SMALLER entity that works with the GSF. There are lots and lots of small (50-100 man corporations) that hold sov in null.


People like you are whining that you can't do something that thousands of other people have been doing for years. CCP intentionally ******* up the game is not going to make it "fair" for you, and that is exactly what some of you want CCP to do.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#419 - 2013-01-18 21:23:09 UTC
There is clearly a difference between grief play and PVP.





Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#420 - 2013-01-18 21:27:40 UTC
Whitehound wrote:

In which part of EVE are you right now? I am asking, because you complain about not having enough risks and the players around you being harmless.

If you cannot see low-sec and null-sec as the answer to your problem, then CCP will give you a push and no amount of complaints will change it! It will happen because of you, and you not finding the right challenges, and not because the subject says so.


Lately? Mostly hi sec, WHs and low sec. I still have some stuff in NPC nullsec but no time to play long enough to make it fruitful for me.

So, what would that mean to me? I want EvE to be EvE in hi sec too, that's simple. Each place its dangers and its potential. Hi sec less dangerous, OK, but not SAFE.