These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

destroyers - gankers and high sec

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#121 - 2013-09-16 05:26:35 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
even if that bullshit was true, anyone who pulls the "but ccp will make more money if they do x therefore they should do it" is spectacularly misunderstanding the relationship between a consumer and a service provider

I'm not saying that's what they SHOULD do I'm saying that's what every developer HAS TO DO. They have to balance ganking against subscription loss.


No, they don't. To even make that statement means you have to make the assumption that ganking is not just a cause of people quitting, but in fact the primary cause.

Since the latter of those is completely false, and the former is arguable, development resources are better spent on game improvements and add ons, not on retooling existing features.

Rather than reduce a potential negative, they would be better served by making definite positives.

Any game that has a blue (non-pvp) server and a red (pvp) server I have ever played or can think of has always had a tiny red population in comparison to the blue servers so yes, ganking is a primary reason that people will not play an mmo and getting ganked and losing their stuff is a primary reason for people deciding to leave IMO.


CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Alavaria
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#122 - 2013-09-16 05:33:58 UTC
Oh no, gankers are what are killing eve online.

Thankfully, we are only a bit of "rebalancing" away from salvation.

Loyalty is a virtue, participation brings reward.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#123 - 2013-09-16 05:34:11 UTC
Quote:
Any game that has a blue (non-pvp) server and a red (pvp) server I have ever played or can think of has always had a tiny red population in comparison to the blue servers so yes, ganking is a primary reason that people will not play an mmo and getting ganked and losing their stuff is a primary reason for people deciding to leave IMO.


Not only is this speculation based off of anecdotal evidence at best, but it's also utterly untrue.

Of the top 15 highest population realms in WoW, only 4 are PvE realms. Source is wowprogress.com. So, by that metric, we should in fact be ignoring any whining from the people complaining about non consensual PvP, since clearly non consensual PvP is more popular.

Kinda puts you in your place.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#124 - 2013-09-16 05:47:28 UTC
:grainybasketballvideo:

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Alavaria
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#125 - 2013-09-16 05:49:54 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
Any game that has a blue (non-pvp) server and a red (pvp) server I have ever played or can think of has always had a tiny red population in comparison to the blue servers so yes, ganking is a primary reason that people will not play an mmo and getting ganked and losing their stuff is a primary reason for people deciding to leave IMO.

Not only is this speculation based off of anecdotal evidence at best, but it's also utterly untrue.

Of the top 15 highest population realms in WoW, only 4 are PvE realms. Source is wowprogress.com. So, by that metric, we should in fact be ignoring any whining from the people complaining about non consensual PvP, since clearly non consensual PvP is more popular.

Kinda puts you in your place.

This clearly means we need an EVE blue server

Loyalty is a virtue, participation brings reward.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#126 - 2013-09-16 05:50:38 UTC
Alavaria wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
Any game that has a blue (non-pvp) server and a red (pvp) server I have ever played or can think of has always had a tiny red population in comparison to the blue servers so yes, ganking is a primary reason that people will not play an mmo and getting ganked and losing their stuff is a primary reason for people deciding to leave IMO.

Not only is this speculation based off of anecdotal evidence at best, but it's also utterly untrue.

Of the top 15 highest population realms in WoW, only 4 are PvE realms. Source is wowprogress.com. So, by that metric, we should in fact be ignoring any whining from the people complaining about non consensual PvP, since clearly non consensual PvP is more popular.

Kinda puts you in your place.

This clearly means we need an EVE blue server
If rumours are to be believed the blue server is in nullsec Evil

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#127 - 2013-09-16 05:52:16 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Alavaria wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
Any game that has a blue (non-pvp) server and a red (pvp) server I have ever played or can think of has always had a tiny red population in comparison to the blue servers so yes, ganking is a primary reason that people will not play an mmo and getting ganked and losing their stuff is a primary reason for people deciding to leave IMO.

Not only is this speculation based off of anecdotal evidence at best, but it's also utterly untrue.

Of the top 15 highest population realms in WoW, only 4 are PvE realms. Source is wowprogress.com. So, by that metric, we should in fact be ignoring any whining from the people complaining about non consensual PvP, since clearly non consensual PvP is more popular.

Kinda puts you in your place.

This clearly means we need an EVE blue server
If rumours are to be believed the blue server is in nullsec Evil


That would be SiSI, actually. Losses are not real in SiSI, so it amounts to the same thing.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#128 - 2013-09-16 05:54:40 UTC
but blue doughnut.... where nobody shoots at each other, ever.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
#129 - 2013-09-16 05:55:47 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
even if that bullshit was true, anyone who pulls the "but ccp will make more money if they do x therefore they should do it" is spectacularly misunderstanding the relationship between a consumer and a service provider

I'm not saying that's what they SHOULD do I'm saying that's what every developer HAS TO DO. They have to balance ganking against subscription loss.


No, they don't. To even make that statement means you have to make the assumption that ganking is not just a cause of people quitting, but in fact the primary cause.

Since the latter of those is completely false, and the former is arguable, development resources are better spent on game improvements and add ons, not on retooling existing features.

Rather than reduce a potential negative, they would be better served by making definite positives.

Any game that has a blue (non-pvp) server and a red (pvp) server I have ever played or can think of has always had a tiny red population in comparison to the blue servers so yes, ganking is a primary reason that people will not play an mmo and getting ganked and losing their stuff is a primary reason for people deciding to leave IMO.



But this game doesn't run that way, now does it?
CCP has been doing this for over ten years, and subscriptions are still *increasing,* so clearly you have no idea what you're yammering on about, and just as clearly CCP knows how to manage their resources.

Since you are obviously not qualified to discuss game design, why don't you hush up and just enjoy the game? Or toddle off into Cloud Cuckoo WoWnderland, as you choose.

Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.

Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#130 - 2013-09-16 05:56:38 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
but blue doughnut.... where nobody shoots at each other, ever.


Lol, even when I was a noob I didn't believe that, I often find it hard to believe that anyone is that foolish. But when I starting thinking like that, I just take a stroll through Features and Ideas and that thought is purged.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#131 - 2013-09-16 05:57:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
even if that bullshit was true, anyone who pulls the "but ccp will make more money if they do x therefore they should do it" is spectacularly misunderstanding the relationship between a consumer and a service provider

I'm not saying that's what they SHOULD do I'm saying that's what every developer HAS TO DO. They have to balance ganking against subscription loss.


No, they don't. To even make that statement means you have to make the assumption that ganking is not just a cause of people quitting, but in fact the primary cause.

Since the latter of those is completely false, and the former is arguable, development resources are better spent on game improvements and add ons, not on retooling existing features.

Rather than reduce a potential negative, they would be better served by making definite positives.

Any game that has a blue (non-pvp) server and a red (pvp) server I have ever played or can think of has always had a tiny red population in comparison to the blue servers so yes, ganking is a primary reason that people will not play an mmo and getting ganked and losing their stuff is a primary reason for people deciding to leave IMO.




This is true, because mmo players are too chicken **** to deal with loss. Most gamers use games to escape their hum-drum existance. They want to be the superhero in-game that they can't be IRL. That's why most games are themparks, most EVE characters are in high sec (the least sandboxy area of EVE) and why mission running (one of the most popular activities in EVE despite all the other gameplay EVE offers) is the way it is (one ship, alone against a vast fleet of NPCs in a virtual Bruce Lee fight that a low IQ monkey with a concussion couldn't lose at even if he tried).

We KNOW most games are like that. People like me are saying that their shyould be ONE game (and game company) brave enough to say NO to that lowest common denominator BS. A game company willing to say "this here is not a theme park, this is the badlands, love it or leave it".

Alas, because most people are indeed chicken ***** and those people have money, most games will be nothing more than shallow excercises in fake hero-hood and games like EVE will be drawn more and more towards that lowest common denominator. It makes me sad to think about it.
Alavaria
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#132 - 2013-09-16 06:20:36 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
but blue doughnut.... where nobody shoots at each other, ever.

Lol, even when I was a noob I didn't believe that, I often find it hard to believe that anyone is that foolish. But when I starting thinking like that, I just take a stroll through Features and Ideas and that thought is purged.

It'll never be a blue donut as long as N3, which exists to destroy GSF, and GSF both exist.

Loyalty is a virtue, participation brings reward.
Tyrton
Imbecile MIiss Managment and Disasters
Intergalactic Interstellar Interns
#133 - 2013-09-16 11:52:31 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Belana Mawr wrote:

Even if you are not afk and aligned the speed these destroyers take out exhumers is scary, Insta lock and scram... game over


Yeah, it's really super fast if you're AFK.

Me, I've found it really obvious when a gank team rolls in. The spawning and pulling concord, flashy reds in local, blatantly obvious scout alts scanning people for fits... I've seen it take between 3-5 minutes to line up one gank. Ain't nobody got time to align and run in 3 minutes!


If a gank team is on grid with you, the fight is already done. You defeat a gank before that moment.



Dear Lady I hope you are not suggesting an effort on the miners part.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#134 - 2013-09-16 12:55:50 UTC
Jim Roebuck wrote:
I did a quick EFT fit for a Catalyst going for 800 DPS, highest I've managed to get was 612, so you sir are wrong about an 800 DPS Catalyst fit.

You need to use T2 guns, have max skills and use implants to get like 740 ish if i remember rightly. That about the best.

Side note though, in a 0.5 a T1 Cata can take out a hulk with relative ease, and that will set you back ~2m.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#135 - 2013-09-16 12:58:45 UTC
Tyrton wrote:
Dear Lady I hope you are not suggesting an effort on the miners part.

Yea, those evil evil miners... poke 'em with a stick!

...so funny. Roll

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#136 - 2013-09-16 13:02:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
In real life, I can derail a multi million dollar train with a $35 dollar crowbar.

In real life, I can blow up a semi trailer, or even an armored car worth about $2,000,000 with about $5,000 worth of fertilizer.

In real life, I can make napalm by mixing gasoline and packing peanuts (no ****, Styrofoam and gas makes napalm).

In real life, criminals don't have a 100% chance of being caught.

But most importantly, in real life I am not functionally a god.

So please, tell me some more about how using something cost effective to defeat a larger ship isn't realistic, in a game where we can reincarnate after being incinerated in a fiery death millions of kilometers away.


In real life the Titanic was sunk for free.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#137 - 2013-09-16 13:03:38 UTC
Shalua Rui wrote:
Tyrton wrote:
Dear Lady I hope you are not suggesting an effort on the miners part.

Yea, those evil evil miners... poke 'em with a stick!

...so funny. Roll


Please don't they will start calling for sticks to be nerfed.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#138 - 2013-09-16 13:04:20 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is true, because mmo players are too chicken **** to deal with loss. Most gamers use games to escape their hum-drum existance. They want to be the superhero in-game that they can't be IRL. That's why most games are themparks, most EVE characters are in high sec (the least sandboxy area of EVE) and why mission running (one of the most popular activities in EVE despite all the other gameplay EVE offers) is the way it is (one ship, alone against a vast fleet of NPCs in a virtual Bruce Lee fight that a low IQ monkey with a concussion couldn't lose at even if he tried).

We KNOW most games are like that. People like me are saying that their shyould be ONE game (and game company) brave enough to say NO to that lowest common denominator BS. A game company willing to say "this here is not a theme park, this is the badlands, love it or leave it".

Alas, because most people are indeed chicken ***** and those people have money, most games will be nothing more than shallow exercises in fake hero-hood and games like EVE will be drawn more and more towards that lowest common denominator. It makes me sad to think about it.
I don't think that's it at all. Most people play games for fun. And they find fun in doing various things. Industry for example can be fun, but requires a level of semi-afk mining in some cases. As in most games, having your progress smashed because of another player is considerably less fun, so that's why people leave. Personally I just avoid gankers (unless I'm ganking) but I do sometime question if EVE really provides me as much fun as I've had in other games in comparison with the level of input. Next gen consoles are likely to have me reduce my number of accounts.

Oh, and you only love your "badlands" while there are unwilling participants. The reason that PvP servers are so unpopular when there is a non-pvp option is because the PvP server is stripped of it's easy kills. In the end, without carebears, you'd be quite sad that everyone you engage fights back. Remember, you're not Snake Pliskin, you're a basement geek with a keyboard.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#139 - 2013-09-16 13:06:34 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

Side note though, in a 0.5 a T1 Cata can take out a hulk with relative ease, and that will set you back ~2m.


A properly tanked Hulk will not be taken out by a 2M catalyst.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#140 - 2013-09-16 13:06:39 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Varius Xeral wrote:
These numbers pulled from my behind are conservative though, gais

The 5 trillion in damages was provided by Baltec not me.


Not even a drop in the ocean when compared to the thousands of trillions that have been transported in freighters in the last 9 months.