These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

In Response to Sugar Kyle - Highsec development

First post First post
Author
Nighthawk The Assassin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#281 - 2015-10-13 15:14:40 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Nighthawk The Assassin wrote:
Bottom line is, unles u pay for their accounts u dont have the right to tell people how to play eve


My guns disagree. As long as they're undocked, they've consented to PvP.


And there it is

Perfect example.

Exactly what is wrong with eve

*undock and you play my version of eve online*

And you wonder why so many players quit the game?

Are you just plain stupid or are you going to say..

Risk Vs Reward

Or

Sandbox?

Same old tired shield bullshit
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#282 - 2015-10-13 15:16:40 UTC
Nighthawk The Assassin wrote:

Exactly what is wrong with eve


It's one of the few things right with EVE, actually.

You're just playing the wrong game. Your refusal to admit it is what's wrong with you, among other things.

"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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#283 - 2015-10-13 15:19:58 UTC
I do not care about what you want. Simple as that, I do not care. You do not matter to me in any way save what you can potentially drop as loot. To me, most of the "players" of this game aren't players at all. You're barely better than NPCs, or destructible terrain, something to be destroyed for my amusement whether you like it or not.

And the very best thing about EVE is that what you want doesn't really matter.

"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.

Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#284 - 2015-10-13 18:17:25 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Memphis Baas wrote:
Maybe they are worried, but there is no correlation between the (decrease in) the playerbase numbers and the "quality" of ideas posted, on these forums or Reddit or anywhere.

Honestly, they have moderators to sift through forums and forward worthwhile ideas, they have the CSM as a feedback mechanism, they have that "why did you cancel subscription" questionnaire (whatever its worth), and they have internal metrics that tell them which kinds of EVE gameplay are popular and which are not.

They can panic if they want to, but listening to forums would be a bad idea.

EDIT: In my opinion, the reduced playerbase isn't because of high-sec; I think it's because the big 0.0 alliances are in limbo as far as starting fun wars, until the sov, structure, and capital ship changes are fully deployed. This thread is pretty much off-topic for this year; this CSM was pretty much elected for nullsec issues, and CCP was going to focus on nullsec changes. And they better hurry with them.



It was stated by Fozzie just before summer that the player number drops were all from High-Sec and there has been increased numbers in Null and Low.

So whether you want to believe Jenn and thing that everything CCPdoes is for the High Sec Carebear, or you want to look at reality that since 2011 we have had nothing but PVP/Null changes/improvements/additions the numbers you see less of every day are a perceived problem with lack of High Sec content and/or security.



Ah, look, the dishonesty alt has returned. The bolded part is the reveal right there.

I never said "everything". I have said that CCP has done a lot for PVE (newsflash, pve isn't jus tin high sec unless I'm imagining these escalation I run all the time) and those of us who actally like EVE PVE understand this,

The loses from high sec were probably all people who shouldn't have been paying EVE in the 1st place, but played it because "there was nothing else" or "EVE could be great one day". Those people are no loss, because it's stupid to play a video game for reasons other than "man I like this video game!".

People like you worry about the issue it for selfish, anxiety laden reasons:

- because you worry that the lack of income for CCP from those incompatible fair weather players is somehow going to hurt you (based on the stupid belief that it was helping you in the 1st place)

and

-(perhaps more importantly) people like you recognize your own kind, and with fewer people like you (and more like me) you know you have less impact on CCPs design decisions.

Man, it must suck for high sec/themepark partisans to see their base of whiney entitled solo/casual political support just evaporate into thin air like that.... However will they get CCP to change EVE to their liking if the game is filled with nothing more than people who actually like playing EVE?11?!?!?



Hey genius... if Low and Null numbers went up, and High-Sec numbers tanked as Fozzie said in the two part interview in May... wouldn't it be a true statement that all the losses of players were from High-Sec? On a macro scale, you can't differentiate between losses/gains in the individual level, only final numbers.

And nothing I said was about what they should or shouldn't do with High Sec. At this point I couldn't care less. So Dishonesty Main (You) comes and puts words in my mouth.

You also keep ignoring what I do in this game even though it has been stated over and over. My main does High-Sec war decs and my alts are all in a WH making blue isk. But you keep ignoring that and lumping me in with a group that you feel is inferior to yours.

Just for fun, go back and re-read your own post from 2 pages back. About how CCP has only changed this game for the benefit of high-sec PVE players and how that is killing the game... Look at the word modifiers you used. The only thing dishonest around here is the value you place on your own opinions.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#285 - 2015-10-13 18:18:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I do not care about what you want. Simple as that, I do not care. You do not matter to me in any way save what you can potentially drop as loot. To me, most of the "players" of this game aren't players at all. You're barely better than NPCs, or destructible terrain, something to be destroyed for my amusement whether you like it or not.

And the very best thing about EVE is that what you want doesn't really matter.



The reason this game is doomed.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#286 - 2015-10-13 18:47:30 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I do not care about what you want. Simple as that, I do not care. You do not matter to me in any way save what you can potentially drop as loot. To me, most of the "players" of this game aren't players at all. You're barely better than NPCs, or destructible terrain, something to be destroyed for my amusement whether you like it or not.

And the very best thing about EVE is that what you want doesn't really matter.



The reason this game is doomed.


Pretty sure that player freedom is the only reason this game exists.

"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.

Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#287 - 2015-10-13 18:50:02 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I do not care about what you want. Simple as that, I do not care. You do not matter to me in any way save what you can potentially drop as loot. To me, most of the "players" of this game aren't players at all. You're barely better than NPCs, or destructible terrain, something to be destroyed for my amusement whether you like it or not.

And the very best thing about EVE is that what you want doesn't really matter.



The reason this game is doomed.


Pretty sure that player freedom is the only reason this game exists.



This game exists because it is a MMO set in space

You can't have MMO without caring even a little bit about all the other parts of the game that aren't YOU.

So your **** poor attitude about players being nothing more than NPCs to you unless they do exactly what you want them too... is killing the game.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#288 - 2015-10-13 19:16:07 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

This game exists because it is a MMO set in space


And of course, what every carebear really wants. The generic, same old same old space game, right? Just dumb the game down until it's indistinguishable from WoW in space.

They have those already, go play them instead. EVE is for people who like player freedom, choices and consequences.

"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.

Crimson Nirnroots
Compliant Munitions
#289 - 2015-10-13 19:32:16 UTC
Nighthawk The Assassin wrote:
Bottom line is, unles u pay for their accounts u dont have the right to tell people how to play eve

period.



That sword cuts both ways, Nighthawk.

Antimatter, now with more Nirnroots.

Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#290 - 2015-10-13 19:32:29 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

This game exists because it is a MMO set in space


And of course, what every carebear really wants. The generic, same old same old space game, right? Just dumb the game down until it's indistinguishable from WoW in space.

They have those already, go play them instead. EVE is for people who like player freedom, choices and consequences.



Where in that sentence is there any reference to carebear?

Where do you get this crap?

You have a one track mind, some perverse fear of people playing this game for its PVE.

Show us on the Raven where the Carebear player touched you... Roll

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#291 - 2015-10-13 23:56:41 UTC
It's the same old story, emergent gameplay vs themepark gameplay.

Themeparkers enjoys safe havens where everything is safe and predictable, so they try to avoid situations that can lead to emergent gameplay scenarios. But even with their efforts, eventually they will face their first unexpected road block created by other players, and then they will quit the game crying about griefing.

The Tears Must Flow

Aquilan Aideron
Wardecs go here
#292 - 2015-10-14 00:10:13 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I do not care about what you want. Simple as that, I do not care. You do not matter to me in any way save what you can potentially drop as loot. To me, most of the "players" of this game aren't players at all. You're barely better than NPCs, or destructible terrain, something to be destroyed for my amusement whether you like it or not.

And the very best thing about EVE is that what you want doesn't really matter.


Dear CCP,

you got yourself some very special folks into your fold. I will grant you that. But if you want more money they better not be allowed to "interact" with me or anyone else in their right minds.

Thanks a bunch
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#293 - 2015-10-14 00:13:59 UTC
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I do not care about what you want. Simple as that, I do not care. You do not matter to me in any way save what you can potentially drop as loot. To me, most of the "players" of this game aren't players at all. You're barely better than NPCs, or destructible terrain, something to be destroyed for my amusement whether you like it or not.

And the very best thing about EVE is that what you want doesn't really matter.


Dear CCP,

you got yourself some very special folks into your fold. I will grant you that. But if you want more money they better not be allowed to "interact" with me or anyone else in their right minds.

Thanks a bunch


Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way back to WoW.

"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.

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#294 - 2015-10-14 02:02:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Screw it, I'll have a go anyway despite really not being all that invested in highsec personally.

Highsec should have unique gameplay that provides reasons for people to play there, just the same as lowsec, nullsec and WHs have unique gameplay. Also, just as both pvpers and pve'ers play in lowsec, nullsec and WHs, there should be viable options for both playstyles in highsec as well.

In my view, there doesn't have to be a design philosophy that highsec is the starter area and players then progress to lowsec, null and/or WHs as they gain experience. Highsec should just as much provide end game opportunities for players and be a viable place to play for someone's entire time in the game.

In terms of unique gameplay via mechanics, currently:

WHs: no local, sleepers, no stations (Thera aside)
Nullsec: sovereignty, high-grade ores in belts, system upgrades, high rated DED sites, capitals, moon mining
Lowsec: FW, level 5 missions, security tag ratting, besieged covert research facilities, moon mining (<0.4), capitals
Highsec: ganking, wardecs, burner missions

While highsec has a much higher proportion of mission agents than lowsec and npc nullsec; there currently isn't really a lot of unique gameplay resulting from the mechanics of the game.

The uniqueness comes more through interaction between players. The mechanics don't really provide much risk, yet I'm strongly of the view that rewards should be risk based, at least from the game design (stupid players will always do stupid things and smart players will always capitalize on that, as it should be).

so, some ideas that would try to increase the uniqueness of highsec:

Incursions
Sansha really has no logical reason to be so pissed with a lot of capsuleers, especially out in sov null. Why is he invading sov systems when the real enemy should be the seats of power of the empires, in highsec?


  • Remove incursions from nullsec and lowsec and make them highsec only.
  • Make them more widespread, disrupting more highsec activity and providing opportunity for more players to get involved.
  • Add a system effect to the incursion that interferes with CONCORD's intel, so that CONCORD is delayed.


Net effect. Highsec gains +1 unique playstyle that provides for high income. The high income is balanced by higher risk from other players, but the players farming the income can affect that level of risk by how they farm the sites. Sansha rats would obviously potentially target all players operating in an incursion area, so gankers would also face higher risk to get the blingy kill, but could at least do so where now they virtually cant.

High grade ores
Move them out of anomalies and into signatures and include more difficult rats in those sites. For the higher reward they provide, they should provide higher risk than they currently do, so the more difficult lowsec/nullsec rats would require either more players to assist in killing them, or better prepared players to solo them.

Mining is about the most mind numbing thing I can possibly think to do in Eve, so in the absence of completely revising mining, add some additional gameplay into finding the belts and then mining them.

Net effect. Not really something unique, just more game provided risk for the added reward and some additional safety in terms of providing sites not instantly warpable without scanning them (gankers and wardeccers would have no problem doing so).

Highsec-Highsec wormholes (A641)
Increase the abundance of A641 wormholes to provide an alternative to gate travel. Wardeccers could use them, gank fleets could use them, haulers could use them. I don't know how much they are used now, but it seems not much. Whether that's because there are only 50 odd of them, or because most people in highsec that are not explorers aren't really interested in scanning sigs down, I'm not sure. But for all the whinging and whining that goes on about how risky it is to haul stuff (it isn't if you are smart about it), this would provide alternatives that prepared players could use, while also providing more options for play for gankers/wardeccers.

In terms of new ideas:

From everything CCP has said over the last couple of years, rich gaming experiences are the things that keep people in the game long term. Lots of people enjoy their solo play and great for them, but on the whole, group play, being part of something bigger, social activities, etc. are the things that make Eve unique.

So if any new play is introduced into highsec, then ideally it should promote group play as much as possible.

Multiplayer combat sites/mission sites
The only thing I can think of is the introduction of escalations in sites in highsec, where the basic site can be completed by 1 person as they are now and they provide mediocre rewards, but they contain a 2-key lock principle (two keys in separate locks having to be turned at the same time to open the escalation), that would provide benefits to group play.

The simplest way would be to have 2 structures in the boss room that both need to be destroyed within a certain timeframe of each other, that time would be too short for one person to kill one structure, then kill the next. They would be positioned far enough apart that it wouldn't be possible to shoot both at the same time (could even be in different rooms like the room arrangement in high rated DED sites) and be difficult like 8/10 - 10/10 DED sites so that it's a real pain in the arse to try to do solo or even with 2 people.

Shooting structures is boring, but at least with other people, it is a lot better. So adding a multiplayer aspect to combat/mission sites that potentially increases reward is really the only new thing I could think to add to HS.

Other then that, remove faction police and make players free-for-all at -2.0. Don't change wardecs, they are fine in my view.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#295 - 2015-10-14 03:14:37 UTC
Nighthawk The Assassin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Nighthawk The Assassin wrote:
Bottom line is, unles u pay for their accounts u dont have the right to tell people how to play eve


My guns disagree. As long as they're undocked, they've consented to PvP.


And there it is

Perfect example.

Exactly what is wrong with eve



So, 'exactly what's wrong with EVE' is it's core game philosophy of freedom.

And there it is

Perfect Example

Of someone who should never have chosen to play EVE online in the 1st place, but rather than acknowledge that truth, hey, lets just get CCP to change the game to suit unreasonable desires.


In all seriousness, this is the bottom line reason fr the disagreements, some people are suited to EVE and want EVE to be, well EVE, and others aren't suited to it, and because they think everything that exists must exist for them, they want EVE to be something different than what it is, even though legions of games that would fit their needs exist.

In other words, intense, Narcissistic level selfishness.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#296 - 2015-10-14 03:18:27 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Nighthawk The Assassin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Nighthawk The Assassin wrote:
Bottom line is, unles u pay for their accounts u dont have the right to tell people how to play eve


My guns disagree. As long as they're undocked, they've consented to PvP.


And there it is

Perfect example.

Exactly what is wrong with eve



So, 'exactly what's wrong with EVE' is it's core game philosophy of freedom.

And there it is

Perfect Example

Of someone who should never have chosen to play EVE online in the 1st place, but rather than acknowledge that truth, hey, lets just get CCP to change the game to suit unreasonable desires.


In all seriousness, this is the bottom line reason fr the disagreements, some people are suited to EVE and want EVE to be, well EVE, and others aren't suited to it, and because they think everything that exists must exist for them, they want EVE to be something different than what it is, even though legions of games that would fit their needs exist.

In other words, intense, Narcissistic level selfishness.


For someone who preaches and lectures others to stop playing a game they don't like you certainly have a lot of "suggestions" and "demands" for things to change.

Hypocritical much?

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#297 - 2015-10-14 08:38:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Hiasa Kite
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
So, 'exactly what's wrong with EVE' is it's core game philosophy of freedom.

And there it is

Perfect Example

Of someone who should never have chosen to play EVE online in the 1st place, but rather than acknowledge that truth, hey, lets just get CCP to change the game to suit unreasonable desires.


In all seriousness, this is the bottom line reason fr the disagreements, some people are suited to EVE and want EVE to be, well EVE, and others aren't suited to it, and because they think everything that exists must exist for them, they want EVE to be something different than what it is, even though legions of games that would fit their needs exist.

In other words, intense, Narcissistic level selfishness.


For someone who preaches and lectures others to stop playing a game they don't like you certainly have a lot of "suggestions" and "demands" for things to change.

Hypocritical much?

She's not advocating change. The suggestions she's making is the same that I've made and every fan of EVE that has entered this argument has made:

EVE isn't for everyone. Instead of playing a game you dislike and demanding it be changed to the detriment of everyone else's enjoyment, why not just play a game that is already more suited to your interests?

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein

Ciba Lexlulu
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#298 - 2015-10-14 11:07:48 UTC
If highsec was originally designed to help newer players, can we code it in the game that once a player reach sufficiently high SP, (say 1 million) they get automatically transferred to lowsec and cannot come back?

CCP also can shrink highsec and 'upgrade' majority of high highsec into lowsec. Once this is done, they can also nerf any type of pvp activity in the new kiddie pool highsec since the area is now purely designed for new players.

Naturally since the highsec residence only have max 1 million SP, they can remove all Level 3 and 4 missions to ensure these new highsec residence can complete the available PVE activities.
Caleb Seremshur
Mortis Angelus
The morgue.
#299 - 2015-10-14 11:32:13 UTC
Ciba Lexlulu wrote:
If highsec was originally designed to help newer players, can we code it in the game that once a player reach sufficiently high SP, (say 1 million) they get automatically transferred to lowsec and cannot come back?

CCP also can shrink highsec and 'upgrade' majority of high highsec into lowsec. Once this is done, they can also nerf any type of pvp activity in the new kiddie pool highsec since the area is now purely designed for new players.

Naturally since the highsec residence only have max 1 million SP, they can remove all Level 3 and 4 missions to ensure these new highsec residence can complete the available PVE activities.


I think runescape serves as a perfect example of what happens when you cater to the weak.

Laugh all you want, they had something ridiculous like 40 million subs at one point.
Ciba Lexlulu
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#300 - 2015-10-14 11:52:37 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Ciba Lexlulu wrote:
If highsec was originally designed to help newer players, can we code it in the game that once a player reach sufficiently high SP, (say 1 million) they get automatically transferred to lowsec and cannot come back?

CCP also can shrink highsec and 'upgrade' majority of high highsec into lowsec. Once this is done, they can also nerf any type of pvp activity in the new kiddie pool highsec since the area is now purely designed for new players.

Naturally since the highsec residence only have max 1 million SP, they can remove all Level 3 and 4 missions to ensure these new highsec residence can complete the available PVE activities.


I think runescape serves as a perfect example of what happens when you cater to the weak.

Laugh all you want, they had something ridiculous like 40 million subs at one point.


I am not sure what you mean. Are you saying if CCP adopt the above model, we will have 39.9 million subscribers in highsec? And they all flying around with less than 1 million SP?