These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Create Battle Arenas
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
bunzing heet
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#341 - 2015-11-17 18:02:01 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
like what sort of rules do you want?


It's not really about what rules I want. Different areas of the game have different rules to create different game experiences. Arenas would be no different, just a different ruleset to create a different environment to play in that some would find more to their likeing. That's very sandbox.



actually its not
this will pull people in the arenas and if they are in a arena they are safe from players who are not in it
this goes against what eve stands for
a open world where anything can happen all the time anywhere
like the man said you wanna battle in a arena?
make 1
make the rules as you see fit
anyways i thought this was about players who had a shortage in time
seems to me that you are pushing this idea because YOU really want it
and you are using every exuse you can come up with for that purpose
give us reasons why arenas are a good idea and
not that list that was given previous because that allready got shot down
confince us or stop posting

Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#342 - 2015-11-17 18:13:52 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
If you can create arenas in the game right now, YET you also say that arenas would suck all the PvP into them... why isn't everybody already in such arenas?

At least one of the arguments need to be wrong. And I personally think both are.


Formal arenas would kill PvP. Being safe, guaranteeing you know who you are fighting against, not being able to be scammed/screwed over while in the arena kills EVE.

People are in player made arenas now. Alliances/groups create events all the time. Do you pay attention?


A) You're only "safe" for the duration of the match; and having around 50% chance of your ship being blown to pieces can't be considered "safe" by any standard.

B) You assume you will know who you're against. You totally made up that point, we didn't ever mentioned that as part of our idea of arenas.

C) You still maintain the flawed argument, as I stated before, that there are arenas already in the game. If so, why isn't everybody already in them? (as you claim they would just to counter our request for arenas). Seriously, try to see the contradiction here because it's very clear.
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#343 - 2015-11-17 18:20:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenji Noguchi
bunzing heet wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
like what sort of rules do you want?


It's not really about what rules I want. Different areas of the game have different rules to create different game experiences. Arenas would be no different, just a different ruleset to create a different environment to play in that some would find more to their likeing. That's very sandbox.



actually its not
this will pull people in the arenas and if they are in a arena they are safe from players who are not in it
this goes against what eve stands for
a open world where anything can happen all the time anywhere
like the man said you wanna battle in a arena?
make 1
make the rules as you see fit
anyways i thought this was about players who had a shortage in time
seems to me that you are pushing this idea because YOU really want it
and you are using every exuse you can come up with for that purpose
give us reasons why arenas are a good idea and
not that list that was given previous because that allready got shot down
confince us or stop posting



Currently you're safe when inside a POS or a station. Is that anti-EVE? However you can be attacked when entering or leaving the POS or the station. It would be no different for the arena that we ask (for example the "dojo" structure). You could even have your argument turned against you as now the gankers have a clear place where juicy targets concentrate (ships with tournament fittings are probably nice ganking targets).

And about the "you can already do this" argument. Then why do you oppose it? It's like opposing the existence of Corporations because you can essentially do everything a corporation does right now with a web forum, some 3rd party tools, and lots of scripts and programming. The corporation system just does all that stuff orders of magnitude easier to organize and maintain. That's why we're asking for this, it's the same in the arenas-tournament case.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#344 - 2015-11-17 18:26:16 UTC
bunzing heet wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
like what sort of rules do you want?


It's not really about what rules I want. Different areas of the game have different rules to create different game experiences. Arenas would be no different, just a different ruleset to create a different environment to play in that some would find more to their likeing. That's very sandbox.



actually its not
this will pull people in the arenas and if they are in a arena they are safe from players who are not in it
this goes against what eve stands for
a open world where anything can happen all the time anywhere
like the man said you wanna battle in a arena?
make 1
make the rules as you see fit
anyways i thought this was about players who had a shortage in time
seems to me that you are pushing this idea because YOU really want it
and you are using every exuse you can come up with for that purpose
give us reasons why arenas are a good idea and
not that list that was given previous because that allready got shot down
confince us or stop posting




Why? Your list is the same superstitious tripe that does not make any rational sense that has been knee-jerked from the beginning.

An arena that can be attacked and destroyed because it's tied to structures isnt safe from action in the wider game world. While details are few and fluid it's already less safe than a cloaked ship.

Again, the "make one" argument was discussed earlier in the thread. There are good reasons to have the client provide the heavy lifting on the backbone, work that already has its own development team, and this particular style of PvP is one of the most public and visible in EVE thanks to the Alliance Tournaments and New Eden Open, and now even the Amarr thing. If it alleviates the reputation EVE has for toxic playstyles and boring "spreadsheets in space" non-action it can bring new players. If it's functioning is tied to the wider world it drives conflict and content.

People are safe from you in The arena? Get on in there, or hunt someone else. Make your space more attractive. Destroy the arena. Different rules don't make people safe, just differently vulnerable.

Far from being something I want, it's merely something I am neutral on. I joined the conversation because it seems like an inoffensive addition with some potential benefits, and " it might be more fun and deprive me of targets" an inadequate argument against it.

I can't convince unreasoning people of anything no matter how obvious. I am reasonable, however, and if you have a compelling argument against the idea other than fear of losing targets to a more fun activity, put it out there.
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#345 - 2015-11-17 18:35:50 UTC
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
A) You're only "safe" for the duration of the match; and having around 50% chance of your ship being blown to pieces can't be considered "safe" by any standard.

B) You assume you will know who you're against. You totally made up that point, we didn't ever mentioned that as part of our idea of arenas.

C) You still maintain the flawed argument, as I stated before, that there are arenas already in the game. If so, why isn't everybody already in them? (as you claim they would just to counter our request for arenas). Seriously, try to see the contradiction here because it's very clear.


Being safe for the duration of the match is infinitely safer than you are now. No more watching local, no more need of scouts, no more need for intel channels, you are taking content out of the game.

Have you ever checked out the in game event page? 'Arenas' are set up a lot. Most alliances/corps duel each other for fun, and stop when you get into structure. That's the same as an arena today.
bunzing heet
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#346 - 2015-11-17 18:42:12 UTC
ok let me put it like this

arena in eve = people in arena
people in arena = people not in space flying around
people not flying around = reduction in content
reduction in content = people leaving eve
does that make any sense to you?

btw posses arent safe you can shoot them
i know from the war against white noise (took only a week)
those are my reasons for NOT having arenas
you know what im just gonna say ........no
so -1

Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#347 - 2015-11-17 18:44:40 UTC
so how would this idea benefit players who "dont have much time"?

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#348 - 2015-11-17 18:45:53 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
A) You're only "safe" for the duration of the match; and having around 50% chance of your ship being blown to pieces can't be considered "safe" by any standard.

B) You assume you will know who you're against. You totally made up that point, we didn't ever mentioned that as part of our idea of arenas.

C) You still maintain the flawed argument, as I stated before, that there are arenas already in the game. If so, why isn't everybody already in them? (as you claim they would just to counter our request for arenas). Seriously, try to see the contradiction here because it's very clear.


Being safe for the duration of the match is infinitely safer than you are now. No more watching local, no more need of scouts, no more need for intel channels, you are taking content out of the game.

Have you ever checked out the in game event page? 'Arenas' are set up a lot. Most alliances/corps duel each other for fun, and stop when you get into structure. That's the same as an arena today.


You watch local, need scouts, and watch intel channels when considering if leaving your POS or station? The answer is the same for arenas. So, again, no, arenas are not safer.

Yet again, about the "already in game": If that's the same, why do you oppose something that makes it easier to organize?

Also, stopping at structure is actually safer than destroying the ship as in an arena. How can you be for that but against arenas?
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#349 - 2015-11-17 18:51:32 UTC
I am aware POS aren't safe. That's why I suggested arenas be tied to them.

Arena in EVE=people in arena=people in EVE=good.

You assume people will never leave the arena. False assumption.
You assume people joining for the arena would join without it. False assumption.
You assume that unhappy people in EVE now who would stay for an arena will stay without. False assumption.
You assume no possibility of outside interference. False assumption.
You assume no possibility of arenas affecting the world. False assumption.

There are many details which can invalidate your one main argument against the concept, that being that people will find it more fun than playing as your target. Do better.
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#350 - 2015-11-17 18:51:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenji Noguchi
bunzing heet wrote:
ok let me put it like this

people in arena = people not in space flying around


You assume that's the outcome. Why not "people in arena=people not unsibscribing from the game"
If they like flying in space MORE than the arena, they will do so.
If they don't, why do you oppose this? You actually admit you want people to enjoy the game less than they could just so they are forced to follow your playstile? The answer is that currently they probably don't play it anyway and leave.

bunzing heet wrote:

btw posses arent safe you can shoot them


And why couldn't you just shoot arenas? Just make them destructible, we don't oppose that. In fact, I support the idea.
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#351 - 2015-11-17 18:56:15 UTC
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
You watch local, need scouts, and watch intel channels when considering if leaving your POS or station? The answer is the same for arenas. So, again, no, arenas are not safer.


...yes...yes I do. Do you not continually watch intel before starting to do whatever you are going to do for the day?
bunzing heet
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#352 - 2015-11-17 19:00:54 UTC
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
bunzing heet wrote:
ok let me put it like this

people in arena = people not in space flying around


You assume that's the outcome. Why not "people in arena=people not unsibscribing from the game"
If they like flying in space MORE than the arena, they will do so.
If they don't, why do you oppose this? You actually admit you want people to enjoy the game less than they could just so they are forced to follow your playstile? The answer is that currently they probably don't play it anyway and leave.

bunzing heet wrote:

btw posses arent safe you can shoot them


And why couldn't you just shoot arenas? Just make them destructible, we don't oppose that. In fact, I support the idea.


its actually the opposite
if people can fight in a arena we will be forced to use it because it will influence gate travel
so with arenas we will be forced to follow that playstyle
and why make it that complicated
its very easy as is
go low sec -warp to beacon -fight
so why arenas when there are soooo many things allready that basicly do the same thing

Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#353 - 2015-11-17 19:05:03 UTC
bunzing heet wrote:
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
bunzing heet wrote:
ok let me put it like this

people in arena = people not in space flying around


You assume that's the outcome. Why not "people in arena=people not unsibscribing from the game"
If they like flying in space MORE than the arena, they will do so.
If they don't, why do you oppose this? You actually admit you want people to enjoy the game less than they could just so they are forced to follow your playstile? The answer is that currently they probably don't play it anyway and leave.

bunzing heet wrote:

btw posses arent safe you can shoot them


And why couldn't you just shoot arenas? Just make them destructible, we don't oppose that. In fact, I support the idea.


its actually the opposite
if people can fight in a arena we will be forced to use it because it will influence gate travel
so with arenas we will be forced to follow that playstyle
and why make it that complicated
its very easy as is
go low sec -warp to beacon -fight
so why arenas when there are soooo many things allready that basicly do the same thing


I don't get why it would affect gate travel. I don't think it would.

And (yet...again) the "already in the game" argument. If it's already in the game then why oppose it? And why is not everybody doing that?

The answer is because it's not "already in the game".

There is nothing in the game that can provide you with a true 1v1 experience.
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#354 - 2015-11-17 19:11:01 UTC
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
I don't get why it would affect gate travel. I don't think it would.

And (yet...again) the "already in the game" argument. If it's already in the game then why oppose it? And why is not everybody doing that?

The answer is because it's not "already in the game".

There is nothing in the game that can provide you with a true 1v1 experience.


Why should you be promised a safe true 1v1 experience?
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#355 - 2015-11-17 19:21:22 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
I don't get why it would affect gate travel. I don't think it would.

And (yet...again) the "already in the game" argument. If it's already in the game then why oppose it? And why is not everybody doing that?

The answer is because it's not "already in the game".

There is nothing in the game that can provide you with a true 1v1 experience.


Why should you be promised a safe true 1v1 experience?


I didn't say "safe". I just said "true".
bunzing heet
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#356 - 2015-11-17 19:22:00 UTC  |  Edited by: bunzing heet
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
bunzing heet wrote:
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
bunzing heet wrote:
ok let me put it like this

people in arena = people not in space flying around


You assume that's the outcome. Why not "people in arena=people not unsibscribing from the game"
If they like flying in space MORE than the arena, they will do so.
If they don't, why do you oppose this? You actually admit you want people to enjoy the game less than they could just so they are forced to follow your playstile? The answer is that currently they probably don't play it anyway and leave.

bunzing heet wrote:

btw posses arent safe you can shoot them


And why couldn't you just shoot arenas? Just make them destructible, we don't oppose that. In fact, I support the idea.


its actually the opposite
if people can fight in a arena we will be forced to use it because it will influence gate travel
so with arenas we will be forced to follow that playstyle
and why make it that complicated
its very easy as is
go low sec -warp to beacon -fight
so why arenas when there are soooo many things allready that basicly do the same thing


I don't get why it would affect gate travel. I don't think it would.

And (yet...again) the "already in the game" argument. If it's already in the game then why oppose it? And why is not everybody doing that?

The answer is because it's not "already in the game".

There is nothing in the game that can provide you with a true 1v1 experience.


it is in game
its called new eden
you want to 1v1 come to pure blind and ask anyone to 1v1 you
there has to be some kind of danger in doing something in eve otherwise it just doesnt fit in
if you dont get why it has influence over gate travel then answer me this
why would people travel for combat when you can get easy safe and fair combat in your arena
hence influence over gate travel

Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#357 - 2015-11-17 19:25:57 UTC
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
I didn't say "safe". I just said "true".


Why should you be promised true 1v1?
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#358 - 2015-11-17 19:38:59 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
I didn't say "safe". I just said "true".


Why should you be promised true 1v1?


We want it. Why shouldn't we?
Kenji Noguchi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#359 - 2015-11-17 19:41:18 UTC
bunzing heet wrote:

it is in game
its called new eden
you want to 1v1 come to pure blind and ask anyone to 1v1 you
there has to be some kind of danger in doing something in eve otherwise it just doesnt fit in
if you dont get why it has influence over gate travel then answer me this
why would people travel for combat when you can get easy safe and fair combat in your arena
hence influence over gate travel


There is danger. Your ship will be blown up about 50% of the time by your opponent.
Not counting you can be ganked when leaving or entering.
There is not just "some kind of danger"; there is A LOT of danger.
I still don't get where do you get the "safe" part from.
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#360 - 2015-11-17 19:51:06 UTC
Kenji Noguchi wrote:
We want it. Why shouldn't we?


EVE is at its core designed to be harsh, cold and unfair. You're allowed to scam, take advantage, steal, lie, etc. How does a game mechanic guaranteeing fair fights fit into that?