These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Returning from a long break,,,,, question about griefers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ZynnLee Akkori
Perkone
Caldari State
#301 - 2014-01-07 16:30:51 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
No, miners should have better inherant protections in highsec meaning their chances of surviving an attack are better without having to replace mining equipment with defensive equipment.


So your argument is NOT that gankers prevent you from having fun but that they prevent you from maximizing ISK/hr?

Brilliant!

Willfully obtuse. The un-fun activity is losing non-combat cargo and non-combat ship in highsec, plus all the time needed to replace everything and get back to the desired non-combat activity. In highsec. If it would cost the ganker extra time repping back up to execute the gank, they would think twice unless the cargo is particularly tasty. Or, if the window to enact the kill were reduced in half, again, the target would have to be a lot more tasty before they pulled the trigger.
Instead people pop empty ships just for giggles. That is only fun for one of the two people involved. They pop boring Veldspar miners. They pop level 1 mission runners. No challenge minimal rewards. In highsec.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#302 - 2014-01-07 16:31:06 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
There's nothing telling them in the NPE "by the way, it's possible for someone to bump you for several hours causing you to be completely unable to align ore move, and it's fully within the rules".

There's a whole bunch of stuff not included in the NPE. The reason for that is to not overwhelm new players with information about things they don't know or care about. That tends to turn people off games pretty quickly.

Oh god.
Angelica Dreamstar
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#303 - 2014-01-07 16:32:17 UTC
ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
No, miners should have better inherant protections in highsec meaning their chances of surviving an attack are better without having to replace mining equipment with defensive equipment.
I don't quite see how that fits into how the game works. Can you explain?

Please add something to your thought process. History has shown that as long miners are getting blown up, people ask for increasing their safety. Where will this end? Why do miners refuse to take care of their safety on their own?

Thanks for including this. It's essential to understanding the issue of your... idea.

bingo, his pig not being a goat doesn't make the pig wrong, just him an idiot for shouting at his pig "WHY ARENT YOU A GOAT!" (Source)

-- Ralph King-Griffin, about deranged people playing EVE ONLINE
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#304 - 2014-01-07 16:33:07 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Because we've seen people like you come and go repeatedly over the years, you and your ilk will be the death of independent gaming devs, you come into an established game and try and change it to suit yourself, and screw all the players who've put time and money into it over the years because they like it the way it is. If you succeed in changing it, you leave for the next big thing after 3 months because you're now bored, leaving the core audience with a broken game. You're like locusts.

Do yourself a favour, move onto a game that is more to your taste, many of us have found one that we like, and you're trying to ruin it. Think of it this way, if you want to see Eve style shenanigans happening on an MMO server near you, carry on along the path you're so blindly following.

This also applies :
Malcanis' Law wrote:
  • Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of ‘new players’, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
  • The secondary corollary is that when new players propose a change, they invariably lack the experience and insight to see how the change would again be exploited by older players far more efficiently than themselves.

    • edit ~ I am aware that your character is 5 years old. That doesn't exclude you from being a newbie.
    First off, nonsense. Nobody I've seen here is trying to change the game to their liking. This is no uncommon on these forums, to see someone state "this is bad" and automatically read it as "this has to GO!". The game evolves buddy, that's just the way it is. People state things they like and they dislike and the devs make changes to keep to game healthy. What you are doing, claiming the game should remain exactly as is is just as bad as claiming a massive change needs to be made.

    And Malcanis law? That's clearly not even remotely the case here. I don't even know how you would think it is.

    The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

    Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
    Kimmi Chan
    Tastes Like Purple
    #305 - 2014-01-07 16:34:30 UTC
    Frumpylumps Faplord wrote:
    in fact, it would benefit the game.


    How exactly?

    "Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

    www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
    Lucas Kell
    Solitude Trading
    S.N.O.T.
    #306 - 2014-01-07 16:34:45 UTC
    Ramona McCandless wrote:
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Ramona McCandless wrote:
    You do not understand.

    I explain it calmly, using a tale you claim to be familiar with and STIlLL you refuse to see.

    Tell me, are you aware of what a metaphor is?
    You didn't explain anything. You simply stated you tell newbies a story which is of no real relevance to their situation..



    I get it already, subtly and metaphor is something you have no knowledge or undertanding of


    Im not about to explain to you what the other 98% of humanity can understand easily
    lol Whatever you want buddy. You spewed a bunch of nonsense and now want to claim I just don't understand. Whatever allows you to stroke your epeen.

    The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

    Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
    Lucas Kell
    Solitude Trading
    S.N.O.T.
    #307 - 2014-01-07 16:35:31 UTC
    Riot Girl wrote:
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    There's nothing telling them in the NPE "by the way, it's possible for someone to bump you for several hours causing you to be completely unable to align ore move, and it's fully within the rules".

    There's a whole bunch of stuff not included in the NPE. The reason for that is to not overwhelm new players with information about things they don't know or care about. That tends to turn people off games pretty quickly.
    Well clearly, they DO care about it.

    The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

    Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
    Ramona McCandless
    Silent Vale
    LinkNet
    #308 - 2014-01-07 16:36:15 UTC
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    nonsense. Nobody I've seen here is trying to change the game to their liking.



    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    If it would cost the ganker extra time repping back up to execute the gank, they would think twice unless the cargo is particularly tasty. Or, if the window to enact the kill were reduced in half, again, the target would have to be a lot more tasty before they pulled the trigger.



    Yup no one suggesting changes to their liking here >.<

    "Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

    "A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
    Kimmi Chan
    Tastes Like Purple
    #309 - 2014-01-07 16:37:33 UTC
    Ramona McCandless wrote:
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    nonsense. Nobody I've seen here is trying to change the game to their liking.



    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    If it would cost the ganker extra time repping back up to execute the gank, they would think twice unless the cargo is particularly tasty. Or, if the window to enact the kill were reduced in half, again, the target would have to be a lot more tasty before they pulled the trigger.



    Yup no one suggesting changes to their liking here >.<


    GRR McCandless beat me to it. LOL

    "Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

    www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
    ZynnLee Akkori
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #310 - 2014-01-07 16:37:57 UTC
    Angelica, that's the issue being debated: How the game works. I believe the game will continue to work and be fun for everyone were the 'security' in highsec increased a little by changing the formula gankers use to determine targets. The gankers would need to adjust to the new reality, and they will always have targets, but they will have to be a little more discriminate. A side effect of this could also be that the loot get's better. There is no way in hell I would ever carry a plex around in my cargo hold as it is now. But if it was more secure..........
    Ramona McCandless
    Silent Vale
    LinkNet
    #311 - 2014-01-07 16:38:04 UTC
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    lol Whatever you want buddy. You spewed a bunch of nonsense and now want to claim I just don't understand. Whatever allows you to stroke your epeen.


    Here is you displaying not understanding.

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    You didn't explain anything. You simply stated you tell newbies a story which is of no real relevance to their situation..


    And Im not your buddy, friend.

    "Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

    "A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
    Lucas Kell
    Solitude Trading
    S.N.O.T.
    #312 - 2014-01-07 16:38:14 UTC
    Kimmi Chan wrote:
    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    So while the gank-supporters are all for the system as-is, people like me are looking for modest changes to highsec. You gank-supporters see the only 2 options as being either the way it is, or 'hello kitty online', but that's just dumb. I don't see why the educated vet's on these forums are so earnest in their support for the bullies in game who like to play the Eve version of the 'knock-out game'.


    Modest changes to highsec? That is NOT what you want. You want it to be safe. It's not. Get over it.
    I may have missed something here, but when exactly did he state he wants complete safety?

    The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

    Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
    Riot Girl
    You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
    #313 - 2014-01-07 16:38:46 UTC
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Well clearly, they DO care about it.

    Not until it affects them.

    Oh god.
    Kimmi Chan
    Tastes Like Purple
    #314 - 2014-01-07 16:39:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Kimmi Chan
    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    They pop level 1 mission runners


    Source?

    There is nothing to be gained from ganking L1 mission runners. Therefore I believe this claim to be unfounded without supporting evidence.

    "Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

    www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
    Riot Girl
    You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
    #315 - 2014-01-07 16:39:53 UTC
    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    Angelica, that's the issue being debated: How the game works. I believe the game will continue to work and be fun for everyone were the 'security' in highsec increased a little by changing the formula gankers use to determine targets. The gankers would need to adjust to the new reality, and they will always have targets, but they will have to be a little more discriminate. A side effect of this could also be that the loot get's better. There is no way in hell I would ever carry a plex around in my cargo hold as it is now. But if it was more secure..........

    You don't get it. CCP is making ganking easier, not harder.

    Oh god.
    Ramona McCandless
    Silent Vale
    LinkNet
    #316 - 2014-01-07 16:40:01 UTC
    Lucas Kell wrote:

    I may have missed something here, but when exactly did he state he wants complete safety?



    When she made it clear that she thought a 41,000+ HP 65%+ Resistance Procurer was insufficent to ward of a catalyst or to mine efficently in

    "Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

    "A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
    Frumpylumps Faplord
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #317 - 2014-01-07 16:41:46 UTC
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Kimmi Chan wrote:
    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    So while the gank-supporters are all for the system as-is, people like me are looking for modest changes to highsec. You gank-supporters see the only 2 options as being either the way it is, or 'hello kitty online', but that's just dumb. I don't see why the educated vet's on these forums are so earnest in their support for the bullies in game who like to play the Eve version of the 'knock-out game'.


    Modest changes to highsec? That is NOT what you want. You want it to be safe. It's not. Get over it.
    I may have missed something here, but when exactly did he state he wants complete safety?


    he never did but the only way those opposed to change can make sense to themselves is if they argue in extremes.
    Kimmi Chan
    Tastes Like Purple
    #318 - 2014-01-07 16:43:32 UTC
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Kimmi Chan wrote:
    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    So while the gank-supporters are all for the system as-is, people like me are looking for modest changes to highsec. You gank-supporters see the only 2 options as being either the way it is, or 'hello kitty online', but that's just dumb. I don't see why the educated vet's on these forums are so earnest in their support for the bullies in game who like to play the Eve version of the 'knock-out game'.


    Modest changes to highsec? That is NOT what you want. You want it to be safe. It's not. Get over it.
    I may have missed something here, but when exactly did he state he wants complete safety?


    Hi sec is already safe enough. I would venture that is 99.999% safe for a person that pays attention to what is going on, fits their ship properly, and does not AFK.

    What Zynn is saying is THAT IS NOT ENOUGH and wants to cut the CONCORD response time in half across all of high sec.

    On the surface it would seem a reasonable request, until the gankers start bring more guns at which point it needs to be made safer.

    And safer.

    And safer.

    And are your starting to see the issue yet.

    And safer.

    "Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

    www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
    ZynnLee Akkori
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #319 - 2014-01-07 16:44:08 UTC
    Kimmi Chan wrote:
    Ramona McCandless wrote:
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    nonsense. Nobody I've seen here is trying to change the game to their liking.



    ZynnLee Akkori wrote:
    If it would cost the ganker extra time repping back up to execute the gank, they would think twice unless the cargo is particularly tasty. Or, if the window to enact the kill were reduced in half, again, the target would have to be a lot more tasty before they pulled the trigger.



    Yup no one suggesting changes to their liking here >.<


    GRR McCandless beat me to it. LOL


    To be honest, I have a LOT of stuff I'd change if I got to be in charge. WiS would be the very next thing to go live. I'd have us able to walk around on a planet surface in a year (integrate DUST maps with PI). I'd also move us to a better game engine to handle massive combat. I'd put in-game penalties in place the punish people who get caught scamming. I'd get rid of the dumb jumpgate cloud-tunnel.... I could go on about market stuff.

    As has just been pointed out, games must evolve, or they die. I'd like to see the game evolve to where it is more friendly to PvE layers, while preserving PvP activites (and ganking).
    admiral root
    Red Galaxy
    #320 - 2014-01-07 16:47:19 UTC
    Lucas Kell wrote:
    And no, generally the AFK ones don't care about the bumping, since they are AFK


    I assure you they're often quite mad when they get back to the keyboard, ranting, pleading for someone else to do something about it and making RL death threats in local.

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    The ones that generally tend to get targeted are relatively new and inexperienced.


    Wow. You just keep on making things up, don't you? You have no idea just how many of us are newbie-friendly and target older players as a result. There's no real satisfaction in making a new player cry, but someone who's been playing for years and should have a clue how to avoid us (ie: noobs)? Those tears are delicious.

    No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff