These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Inside the mind of a high sec industrialist.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#101 - 2013-02-21 22:52:54 UTC
Spetznak Sokarad wrote:

you are the dysfunctional child sitting in the corner of the sandbox - eating the sand


Riiiight.....

I must play the way you want me to play, or I'm just not playing correctly, right?
Spetznak Sokarad
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#102 - 2013-02-21 22:53:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Spetznak Sokarad
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Spetznak Sokarad wrote:

you are the dysfunctional child sitting in the corner of the sandbox - eating the sand


Riiiight.....

I must play the way you want me to play, or I'm just not playing correctly, right?



no... you can just keep eating the sand. ..... but take it easy, there is only so much of it for the rest of us to play in... mmmkay?
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#103 - 2013-02-21 22:58:41 UTC
You're not playing correctly when you resort to exploits to enjoy the game.
Spetznak Sokarad
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2013-02-21 23:02:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Spetznak Sokarad
im not in the camp that wants to change high sec to make ganking easier. they can leave high sec EXACTLY the way it is right now and i would be perfectly fine with that... im not for any changes that wouldnt allow you to play exactly the way you play now....

but low/null need a rather large buff. low and null should be so much more rewarding than highsec, in that, it will create a situation where high sec is more of a beginners sandbox. someone doing the same thing you are in low/null sec should make 10 times the amount you do in the safety of high sec.

you could still stay in high sec, and be perfectly safe, which would be fine. but the people that want to take risk should reap much higher reward. highsec shouldnt be a place where people can grind in safety and get "in game" rich from doing so.

highsec should NOT be a place where people are perfectly happy to stay there for their whole eve career --- unless, of course, they are into the whole "eating sand" thing.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#105 - 2013-02-21 23:13:45 UTC
Alright, finally caught up on the thread. After Monk's rant yesterday got locked, I got to thinking about the validity of some of his points and how to turn that from a rant into an honest, meaningful discussion about bad CEOs and how to not be one.

LHA here is not one. He's carebear to the extreme, but he acknowledges that and from what I gathered in the previous thread and this one is that he sought out others like him and told them up front what his expectations were. He didn't issue his wartime docking policies as a "hide from the bogeyman" paranoia, but a reasoned and purposeful long-term strategy to develop a consistent image of a corp that is not worth going to war with. Assuming what he says to be true, he only recruited experienced and like-minded individuals. He wasn't out there ruining noobs.

I frequently talk about the 18-24 month "now what" phase a lot of highsec residents hit. You've got your golem or tengu or orca or whatever "top tier" ship that was your goal, it's properly fitted and you're at 90% max whatever. Your wallet has been into the ten digit zone for a while now and...well...you just don't see the point in logging in any more. Interest wanes, and eventually you just stop playing. I'm one of five guys who started Eve together; the other four dropped the game in less than two years.

The problem Monk was addressing is that a LOT of that can be avoided by getting younger players engaged with others and helping them find what THEY like instead of trying to fit them to your own mold.

We want to see highsec corps stop being the dead ends that so many of them are. They are stifling the development of many new players and costing us some potentially very good players...all because after a year of being in a corp that has no ambition, they finally shrug their shoulders and leave the game thinking that there wasn't a place for them anywhere else.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Whitehound
#106 - 2013-02-21 23:20:12 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Riiiight.....

I must play the way you want me to play, or I'm just not playing correctly, right?

If you want to be specific then you need to say that you are not fully playing it.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
CJ Dashto
Doomheim
#107 - 2013-02-21 23:23:50 UTC
I'd like to know where this 10% are carebears figure keeps coming from. Either post a link to actual CCP statistics or stop posting out of your ass. Roll

There is validity on both sides of the coin here. The major difference being, as always, the PvPers trying to infringe their playstyle on others while the carebears aren't. Anyone who says that buffing low/null sec will fix things is deluded. It's not the greater risk vs. reward they're looking for, it's just easier ways to troll uninterested PvP targets in high sec. Near as I can tell, the rewards are there. It's the risk they're not willing to take.

Go start trouble in Goon space. Get some alliances together to dethrone GSF and start taking back some of that moon goo. That should keep you guys busy for a couple years.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#108 - 2013-02-21 23:24:50 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:

What I do want to change is people who want to be immune from combat PVP while still engaging in the rest of the game's competitive elements. You are affected by a war, even if you never lose assets. It's the thousands of NPC corp members and one-man corps that can dissolve and reform as soon as a wardec comes into view that are the problem. It's the ability of people to inflict THEIR gameplay on me, without me being able to respond in kind.


That is not a problem, it is working as designed. CCP won't change it, because it is the NPC corps and ability to reform my player corp that keep me, and the other carebears that will not have play style dictated to us, playing this game.

If these mechanisms for avoiding war were not available, then I'd be sure to get a war dec that I'd be locked into, as soon as someone saw me in a belt. Locked into a war, unable to play the game the way I want to play it, I would quit playing. What I believe to be a significant portion of the player base, would stop playing, if they were locked into way with no easy way to avoid it.

There is a reason that CCP has created the mechanisms that it has. Hint, they want casual playing carebears to play.

Well, any respect I had for you just vanished.

I'm forced to deal with your play style. Traders and industrialists have a heavy impact on my gameplay. It's absurd that you think you should be able to simply shake off any wardec in order to keep doing what you're doing, when your actions affect me just as much as mine affect you. I'm not asking that you be locked into a war indefinitely; I want to see it be more than a minor inconvenience to reform a corp whenever something happens that you don't like.

What needs to stop:

- Sheltering in NPC corps to avoid wars while you relentless pour isk and goods into the market, affecting everyone else's gameplay.

- Jumping from one corp to another to shake of wardecs and continue affecting everyone else's gameplay while complaining that the guys who wardec you are trying to impact yours.

- Collapsing and recreating corporations to shake off a wardec that impacts your game in order to keep doing whatever game-impacting thing you're doing.

I feel like this needs to be hammered into your carebear head. WHAT YOU DO AFFECTS ME. Why do you feel like you should be able to use game mechanics to sidestep my reaction to your action?

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#109 - 2013-02-21 23:27:32 UTC
CJ Dashto wrote:
The major difference being, as always, the PvPers trying to infringe their playstyle on others while the carebears aren't.

Utterly and completely false. The amount of isk injected into the system by their activities raises prices across the board, which means I put more on the line every time I go into combat. Carebear activity raises the risk level for PVP.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Primary Me
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#110 - 2013-02-21 23:27:56 UTC
Spetznak Sokarad wrote:
im not in the camp that wants to change high sec to make ganking easier. they can leave high sec EXACTLY the way it is right now and i would be perfectly fine with that... im not for any changes that wouldnt allow you to play exactly the way you play now....

but low/null need a rather large buff. low and null should be so much more rewarding than highsec, in that, it will create a situation where high sec is more of a beginners sandbox. someone doing the same thing you are in low/null sec should make 10 times the amount you do in the safety of high sec.

you could still stay in high sec, and be perfectly safe, which would be fine. but the people that want to take risk should reap much higher reward. highsec shouldnt be a place where people can grind in safety and get "in game" rich from doing so.

highsec should NOT be a place where people are perfectly happy to stay there for their whole eve career --- unless, of course, they are into the whole "eating sand" thing.

And this is the common misconception - 'hi-sec is fine, just boost low/null!'

It can't work that way, say, on average you can make 40 mill an hour in hi-sec, this means, by allowing your null sec dwellers to earn 10 times as much they will be earning 400 mill an hour. A quite night of three hours anom running would net 1 1/2 billion. Have all null sec residents do that three or four nights a week and the economy would melt.

I'll go out on a limb and say that current individual earnings in null-sec are about right, which means that to balance things earnings in hi-sec are going to have to be nerfed.
Arec Bardwin
#111 - 2013-02-21 23:31:57 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
You're not playing correctly when you resort to exploits to enjoy the game.
Get out! Lol
CJ Dashto
Doomheim
#112 - 2013-02-21 23:34:32 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Utterly and completely false. The amount of isk injected into the system by their activities raises prices across the board, which means I put more on the line every time I go into combat. Carebear activity raises the risk level for PVP.


Shocked

That explains a lot. You were absent the day they taught Supply and Demand at school.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#113 - 2013-02-21 23:35:47 UTC
turmajin wrote:
Many players just have no interest in the PvP aspect of the game,but find other parts very interesting


Please list all the "other" aspects of the game. The ones you say aren't PvP.

Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
With the new CSM voting method being toyed with, and the ability of the null sec zealots to corral and focus legions of voters, expect the next CSM to be the most anti-high sec ever.


Ironically, the CSM to blame for the voting changes is Trebor, who is actually pro-highsec. If you didn't read the CSM minutes, he's thinks non-consentual wardecs are mean to the poor carebears and need to be removed.

Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
But the null sec zealots truly believe that this will lead to more subs in the long run (listen to Zebra Crossing's CSM interview with James 315 and be truly frightened), or, they simply don't care if subs are lost, as long as their game play is enriched.


When CCP focused on a quarter-finished, content-less PvE expansion they lost huge numbers of subscriptions. When they realised their mistake and got back to asploding spaceship content, players came back. Seperately, people have started playing Eve because of the noble and glorious endeavours of the Saviour of highsec.

Can you please point to the part in Eve history where carebears mass-unsubscribed?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#114 - 2013-02-21 23:40:32 UTC
CJ Dashto wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Utterly and completely false. The amount of isk injected into the system by their activities raises prices across the board, which means I put more on the line every time I go into combat. Carebear activity raises the risk level for PVP.


Shocked

That explains a lot. You were absent the day they taught Supply and Demand at school.


So what you're saying is that more isk in the system does not result in higher prices?

I'm not sure where you studied economics, but I'd like to suggest that they taught you wrong. As a joke.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Sariah Kion
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#115 - 2013-02-21 23:43:06 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
CJ Dashto wrote:
The major difference being, as always, the PvPers trying to infringe their playstyle on others while the carebears aren't.

Utterly and completely false. The amount of isk injected into the system by their activities raises prices across the board, which means I put more on the line every time I go into combat. Carebear activity raises the risk level for PVP.


I just wanted to stop by and let you know that your tears are especially delicious.

Carry on.

[b]Librarian and Exotic Dancer Extraordinaire Champion of the Working Men and Women of Empire Space Anti-Null Sec Opium Den Movement President[/b] Not the woman high sec wants but the Woman high sec needs. [u]A modern girl for a modern world.[/u]
Spetznak Sokarad
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#116 - 2013-02-21 23:44:18 UTC
Primary Me wrote:
Spetznak Sokarad wrote:
im not in the camp that wants to change high sec to make ganking easier. they can leave high sec EXACTLY the way it is right now and i would be perfectly fine with that... im not for any changes that wouldnt allow you to play exactly the way you play now....

but low/null need a rather large buff. low and null should be so much more rewarding than highsec, in that, it will create a situation where high sec is more of a beginners sandbox. someone doing the same thing you are in low/null sec should make 10 times the amount you do in the safety of high sec.

you could still stay in high sec, and be perfectly safe, which would be fine. but the people that want to take risk should reap much higher reward. highsec shouldnt be a place where people can grind in safety and get "in game" rich from doing so.

highsec should NOT be a place where people are perfectly happy to stay there for their whole eve career --- unless, of course, they are into the whole "eating sand" thing.

And this is the common misconception - 'hi-sec is fine, just boost low/null!'

It can't work that way, say, on average you can make 40 mill an hour in hi-sec, this means, by allowing your null sec dwellers to earn 10 times as much they will be earning 400 mill an hour. A quite night of three hours anom running would net 1 1/2 billion. Have all null sec residents do that three or four nights a week and the economy would melt.

I'll go out on a limb and say that current individual earnings in null-sec are about right, which means that to balance things earnings in hi-sec are going to have to be nerfed.


i would agree with this also...

to put it in layman's terms, im going to compare it too something as simple as jobs in our real life economy -

highsec should be comparable to a job that makes anywhere from 20k to 40k per year

low/null should be from 20k to infinite possibility....all what you make of it.

in high sec, ya, you should be able to make a living in relative safety .... stay there if you like and grind away...every player should have that choice. but if your not willing to put in the extra work/risk/learning that involves working in low/null, dont **** and moan that your only making 40k per year.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#117 - 2013-02-21 23:53:08 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

However, one thing you are wrong about is the sense of security you have for the playstyle to continue.
With the new CSM voting method being toyed with, and the ability of the null sec zealots to corral and focus legions of voters, expect the next CSM to be the most anti-high sec ever.



Perhaps my trust is misguided, but from recent changes to game mechanics, I believe that CCP knows where it's bread is buttered and will continue to ignore all CSM calls to nerf high sec.


Too many exhumers getting ganked = buff to exhumer ehp.
Too many ganks, ability to sell kill rights.
Too many bumpers, a new bounty system.

On the flip side, it isn't like I have quit EVE before. If they make it easier for players to mess with me, and then I start getting messed with too much, it's plenty easy to just stop buying PLEX and using them to add time to my accounts. I'd rather that didn't happen, but it will be far from the end of the world.


I hope you are right that CCP will continue to resist the CSM's screams, and recognize what works in the game.
But I think we are about to witness a sea change.
There is just so much incoherent rage in null right now, and it is focused on high sec.
The plebians in null don't realize that the mess that is null was created by their leadership, not by game mechanics.
Lin Suizei
#118 - 2013-02-22 00:00:59 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
The plebians in null don't realize that the mess that is null was created by their leadership, not by game mechanics.


This has nothing to do with the clearly broken game mechanics which allow risk-averse players to keep printing ISK and impacting the economy while avoiding all non-suicide PvP in highsec.

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#119 - 2013-02-22 00:01:32 UTC
Sariah Kion wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
CJ Dashto wrote:
The major difference being, as always, the PvPers trying to infringe their playstyle on others while the carebears aren't.

Utterly and completely false. The amount of isk injected into the system by their activities raises prices across the board, which means I put more on the line every time I go into combat. Carebear activity raises the risk level for PVP.


I just wanted to stop by and let you know that your tears are especially delicious.

Carry on.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
ashley Eoner
#120 - 2013-02-22 00:03:26 UTC
Quote:
This must be why mining still pays as much or more than missioning, despite the buff to exhumer tank.
IS this sarcasm or do you really believe that mining makes more then missioning per hour when total time spent is accounted for?