These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

My Sandbox is Becoming a Themepark

First post
Author
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#381 - 2014-03-01 04:56:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
No, not really. There isn't a better alternative to undocking that makes you much safer.

There is for autopilot.

The safer alternative is not undocking.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#382 - 2014-03-01 05:02:50 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
No, not really. There isn't a better alternative to undocking that makes you much safer.

There is for autopilot.

The safer alternative is not undocking.


The difference being that using warp to zero doesn't equate to not playing the game.

Unless you really love that market interface, anyway?

"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.

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#383 - 2014-03-01 05:05:43 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
No, not really. There isn't a better alternative to undocking that makes you much safer.

There is for autopilot.

The safer alternative is not undocking.


The difference being that using warp to zero doesn't equate to not playing the game.

Unless you really love that market interface, anyway?

There are people who do. And oddly enough thats all they do. At least on that character.
Tacomaco
No Taxes just fun
#384 - 2014-03-01 07:47:55 UTC
hellokittyonline wrote:
EHP of miners was buffed because we were suiciding too many miners, CONCORD was buffed because we were suiciding too many industrials


Hm, maybe CONCORD should work like the real police. They don't always catch the criminals. This would mean you could use better ships to kill all this buffed miners and industrials.

But if they catch you, they should throw you in jail for some time and pay a fine for the damage you caused. Because when you run somebody over with your car, the police doesn't just get your car, they throw you in jail.

Any PvP-ers with balls want to try it this? Escape CONCORD or go to jail?


hellokittyonline
New Order Mining Authority
Safety.
#385 - 2014-03-01 08:08:41 UTC
Tacomaco wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:
EHP of miners was buffed because we were suiciding too many miners, CONCORD was buffed because we were suiciding too many industrials


Hm, maybe CONCORD should work like the real police. They don't always catch the criminals. This would mean you could use better ships to kill all this buffed miners and industrials.

But if they catch you, they should throw you in jail for some time and pay a fine for the damage you caused. Because when you run somebody over with your car, the police doesn't just get your car, they throw you in jail.

Any PvP-ers with balls want to try it this? Escape CONCORD or go to jail?



We already know how to escape concord, but CCP nerfed it. Also HOLY AWESOME THANK YOU GUYS FOR DISCUSSING. I've been at work all day and it's awesome to see that this thread has actually evolved into a somewhat coherent discussion.
hellokittyonline
New Order Mining Authority
Safety.
#386 - 2014-03-01 08:26:12 UTC
Rowells wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:
PTL;DR - Make players have to learn about the game and its mechanics in order to be successful.

So, force players to do something they may or may not want to do. That doesnt sound very sanbox-like to me. If they don't want to learn anything new that's up to them. Examples of people who do not like being forced into a different playstyle:

Mission runners
Miners
Industrialists
Traders
Non-mission PVE'ers
PVP'ers
Player leadership
Everybody

Summary: Nobody wants to be forced into a playstyle they don't like. If i have found a way to have fun and do it well (reducing risk/increasing effectiveness through skills, investments, tactics) then who is anyone else to tell me to do it any other way? I have multiple accounts just for this reason. Sometimes I enjoy blowing things up/getting blown up. Sometimes I enjoy crunching numbers and streamlining processes for my own benefit. A player should NEVER be forced to play a different way simply because someone else wants them to.

If someone doesn't want to play like you do, that is essentially a sandbox at it's best. Making someone play a different way than they want is not a sandbox.


Choosing to remain ignorant about game mechanics is not a "play style". The fact of the matter is, whether you like it or not, learning how to defend yourself (ex: dont shoot flashies in a PvE ship and don't autopilot shineys in an untanked industrial) is (and should be) a basic requirement of every profession.

Claiming that you should be able to make poor decisions and not face the consequences is extremely selfish. You are playing a multiplayer game. Remember other players contribute to your game by buying your goods and conversely selling you the items that you need in order to be successful. So you should be able to play by yourself and not return the favor? I support industrialists every day by literally BLOWING isk on ships. The only reason you can even sell goods is because myself and others like me either blow up someone elses goods, or lose our own.

Now with this being said is it really fair for you to be able to reap the rewards of a thriving multiplayer environment and in turn not contribute?
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#387 - 2014-03-01 08:57:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
hellokittyonline wrote:

Choosing to remain ignorant about game mechanics is not a "play style". The fact of the matter is, whether you like it or not, learning how to defend yourself (ex: dont shoot flashies in a PvE ship and don't autopilot shineys in an untanked industrial) is (and should be) a basic requirement of every profession.

Claiming that you should be able to make poor decisions and not face the consequences is extremely selfish. You are playing a multiplayer game. Remember other players contribute to your game by buying your goods and conversely selling you the items that you need in order to be successful. So you should be able to play by yourself and not return the favor? I support industrialists every day by literally BLOWING isk on ships. The only reason you can even sell goods is because myself and others like me either blow up someone elses goods, or lose our own.

Now with this being said is it really fair for you to be able to reap the rewards of a thriving multiplayer environment and in turn not contribute?


For the first paragraph: and how do changes to PVE teach players common sense? Roll

For the second paragraph: And because it's a MMO means that you should not be allowed to play it on your own and for yourself? This makes you a person I would frown at in RL for being an attention whore. This is a sandbox, where people may interact with each other and can do so when and where and how they like, but you are not forced to interact with each other in every instance/minute you play this game. Claiming that and going so far to demand that and accuse other people of them playing the game wrongly "is extremely selfish" on your part. You are free to demand your favor back, but you should not expect it to be returned. You are not forced to blow up ships or fancy-bling them with shiny modules, it all happens because you want it to. And the same logic should be applied on how other players play this sandbox. If you can do that, that is. Roll

For the third paragraph: Yes, it is. Besides, you are lying to yourself by thinking that. Every dumb player contributes to the game by giving gankers easy targets and juicy kill mails. They pour money into the market by buying expensive mods to compensate for things™. They put certain modules on the market that you cannot get otherwise. Industrialists provide you with the stuff to blow up and pay with ganked barges, freighters, POS or mineral speculation price surges.

And since I have read it again, nerf Concord that is: m0o. Enough said to that part.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

hellokittyonline
New Order Mining Authority
Safety.
#388 - 2014-03-01 08:59:19 UTC  |  Edited by: hellokittyonline
Organic Lager wrote:

I want a fighting chance, i want the high sec gankers to put as much at risk as i am. I want a chance to learn something in pvp that isn't well i shouldn't have done that and now i'm boned by someone who does this for a living.

Yet again another common misconception. The only risk you face is that of your own ignorance.

Also, you may not realize this but if I am baiting your mission then I also have an easily-scannable, PvP incapable ship, floating in space worth 15-20x that of your mission boat. That is equally susceptible to all of the same risks that you are complaining about. The key difference is that I have invested the thought required to understand how best to minimize this risk (using knowledge, modules, and mechanics that you have equal access to).

FURTHERMORE, you fail to realize the inherent risk of what I do in that I need 3 accounts in order to even be mildly capable of participating in the profession I have chosen and that my profession guarantees me absolutely no success, while your profession only requires one account, and as long as you put in the time your reward is guaranteed.
hellokittyonline
New Order Mining Authority
Safety.
#389 - 2014-03-01 09:01:26 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:

Choosing to remain ignorant about game mechanics is not a "play style". The fact of the matter is, whether you like it or not, learning how to defend yourself (ex: dont shoot flashies in a PvE ship and don't autopilot shineys in an untanked industrial) is (and should be) a basic requirement of every profession.

Claiming that you should be able to make poor decisions and not face the consequences is extremely selfish. You are playing a multiplayer game. Remember other players contribute to your game by buying your goods and conversely selling you the items that you need in order to be successful. So you should be able to play by yourself and not return the favor? I support industrialists every day by literally BLOWING isk on ships. The only reason you can even sell goods is because myself and others like me either blow up someone elses goods, or lose our own.

Now with this being said is it really fair for you to be able to reap the rewards of a thriving multiplayer environment and in turn not contribute?


For the first paragraph: and how do changes to PVE teach players common sense? Roll

For the second paragraph: And because it's a MMO means that you should not be allowed to play it on your own and for yourself? This makes you a person I would frown at in RL for being an attention *****. This is a sandbox, where people may interact with each other and can do so when and where and how they like, but you are not forced to interact with each other in every instance/minute you play this game. Claiming that and going so far to demand that and accuse other people of them playing the game wrongly "is extremely selfish" on your part. You are free to demand your favor back, but you should not expect it to be returned. You are not forced to blow up ships or fancy-bling them with shiny modules, it all happens because you want it to. And the same logic should be applied on how other players play this sandbox. If you can do that, that is. Roll

For the third paragraph: Yes, it is. Besides, you are lying to yourself by thinking that. Every dumb player contributes to the game by giving gankers easy targets and juicy kill mails. They pour money into the market by buying expensive mods to compensate for things™. They put certain modules on the market that you cannot get otherwise. Industrialists provide you with the stuff to blow up and pay with ganked barges, freighters, POS or mineral speculation price surges.

And since I have read it again, nerf Concord that is: m0o. Enough said to that part.

Nobody is forcing you to PvP or even suggesting that it should be such. I am merely suggesting that one should not be able to completely avoid PvP without having to give it any forethought or taking any precautions.
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#390 - 2014-03-01 09:06:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Lephia DeGrande
To say Eve become a Themepark is just a stupid excuse to make such Threads.

Eve development stands still since the Incarna Expansion, so you can easily say, Eve Online is a Themepark make it a Sandbox, which makes more sense.

To be honest i am all for more Sand, but we should demand more Toys, we do have some kind of freedom, especially in Nullsec but only in SOV Space and yes it is player driven, but not created from players.

The tools to make "some Eve ours" are limited, i know most bitter vets here in forum will disagree, but thats the truth.

CCP give us TOOLS, to create our own rules beyond the Sandbox, but instead player beging for some meta changes to gank more easily in Highsec...
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#391 - 2014-03-01 09:18:21 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:


And since I have read it again, nerf Concord that is: m0o. Enough said to that part.


I find it really funny that whenever people talk about changing the heavy handed, immersion breaking, binary mechanic of CONCORD, people like you bring up a 20 man gatecamp.

Freaking hilarious.

"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.

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#392 - 2014-03-01 09:21:44 UTC
hellokittyonline wrote:

Nobody is forcing you to PvP or even suggesting that it should be such. I am merely suggesting that one should not be able to completely avoid PvP without having to give it any forethought or taking any precautions.


Well, as stated, it is already impossible to avoid PVP all the time. Roll Gankers, Duellers and Wartargets are everywhere and if you are shiny enough or not cautious enough, they get you, which means that you are already forced to PVP and to make forethought or take any precautions. But common sense is not something everyone is gifted with and regardless of the game changes, this fact will never change.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#393 - 2014-03-01 09:29:09 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:

Nobody is forcing you to PvP or even suggesting that it should be such. I am merely suggesting that one should not be able to completely avoid PvP without having to give it any forethought or taking any precautions.


Well, as stated, it is already impossible to avoid PVP all the time. Roll Gankers, Duellers and Wartargets are everywhere and if you are shiny enough or not cautious enough, they get you, which means that you are already forced to PVP and to make forethought or take any precautions. But common sense is not something everyone is gifted with and regardless of the game changes, this fact will never change.


2 of those things you listed are entirely voluntary and avoidable.

So yeah, it damn near is possible to avoid PvP all the time. If you add in not flying too much bling and not autopiloting/being afk, that takes care of the vast majority of ganks.

"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.

hellokittyonline
New Order Mining Authority
Safety.
#394 - 2014-03-01 09:32:04 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:

Nobody is forcing you to PvP or even suggesting that it should be such. I am merely suggesting that one should not be able to completely avoid PvP without having to give it any forethought or taking any precautions.


Well, as stated, it is already impossible to avoid PVP all the time. Roll Gankers, Duellers and Wartargets are everywhere and if you are shiny enough or not cautious enough, they get you, which means that you are already forced to PVP and to make forethought or take any precautions. But common sense is not something everyone is gifted with and regardless of the game changes, this fact will never change.

Then don't be shiney enough (without an appropriate tank) and be cautious.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#395 - 2014-03-01 09:34:34 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

2 of those things you listed are entirely voluntary and avoidable.

So yeah, it damn near is possible to avoid PvP all the time. If you add in not flying too much bling and not autopiloting/being afk, that takes care of the vast majority of ganks.


Fortunately, Duellers and Wartargets are not the majority. And, as you say, if you don't fly too much bling or autopilot, you actively do something to avoid PVP, which was fluffykitty's point, wasn't it? Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#396 - 2014-03-01 10:03:19 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

2 of those things you listed are entirely voluntary and avoidable.

So yeah, it damn near is possible to avoid PvP all the time. If you add in not flying too much bling and not autopiloting/being afk, that takes care of the vast majority of ganks.


Fortunately, Duellers and Wartargets are not the majority. And, as you say, if you don't fly too much bling or autopilot, you actively do something to avoid PVP, which was fluffykitty's point, wasn't it? Roll


You confuse "not acting like a mental deficient" with "actively" doing anything.

"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.

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#397 - 2014-03-01 10:17:51 UTC
That's a matter of perspective, I daresay. If you argue with that logic, it can also be said that mindlessly attacking everything that's not docked in station or jumped or in warp is "acting like a mental deficient" and not "actively doing anything".

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#398 - 2014-03-01 10:47:47 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
That's a matter of perspective, I daresay. If you argue with that logic, it can also be said that mindlessly attacking everything that's not docked in station or jumped or in warp is "acting like a mental deficient" and not "actively doing anything".


No, and your deliberate mischaracterization aside, there is a difference between doing something right, and not doing it wrong.

"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.

Tacomaco
No Taxes just fun
#399 - 2014-03-01 11:00:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Tacomaco
hellokittyonline wrote:
Far too many players are mindlessly farming NPCs in an all-but-0-risk environment and there is no longer any incentive for those players to enter a risky environment


So, the OP problems is: Too few targets to gank. You do know there is the other side of the fence than your point of view, right? Most of people don't run around with guns, police does that.

Or too risky to gank them in high-sec and wants from CCP easy mode gank for high sec.

How about you should get your character locked up for a week when you attack miners with some 2mil crap of ship in staid of just loosing that cheap ship? And when you log in, your character is in a prison cell.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#400 - 2014-03-01 11:10:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Highsec is safe enough as it is. It may even be 20% too safe. However, Crimewatch 2.0 isn't to blame for highsec's supposed safety - it didn't really make things safer; it simply untangled the crime system and made it more straightforward and accessible. The safety switch system may feel like it's making things safer, but in reality it keeps people like me who actually bother to answer new player questions from having to repeat the same long and drawn-out explanation of things 20 times. Saying "just keep your safety green if you don't ever want anyone to be able to legally attack you" is so much easier than what I'd have to say otherwise.

With regards to ships blowing up or not, please don't quote information from 2011 when it's now 2014. That's just silly and you know it. Additionally, be sure that you aren't misquoting the line about exhumers and barges blowing up at historic low levels, deliberately saying "ships" to be generic when CCP and the CSM were specific about it being mining ships.

As for nerfing highsec's profitability, don't confuse highsec incursions with highsec income as a whole. With the sole exception of Incursions (since nobody runs nullsec Incursions, which would level out the data) nullsec is much more profitable than highsec. If nobody in nullsec wants to capitalize on that profitability, it's not anyone else's fault but their own.