These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Do I understand this correctly?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#41 - 2011-12-13 03:33:28 UTC
Vernn wrote:
This apparently is a pointless discussion. This is a game, its supposed to be fun. I don't consider someone attacking me repeatedly with no consequence to them to be fun.

Clearly there are greener pastures for me elsewhere.

They have consequences. They die. they lose their ship, and at any point in time when they are in space, you can shoot them.

Or you know, you can move.


If the mob takes over the town, you move. If you get stuck in the middle of things its your own fault.
M5 Tuttle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2011-12-13 03:33:39 UTC
Vernn wrote:
This apparently is a pointless discussion. This is a game, its supposed to be fun. I don't consider someone attacking me repeatedly with no consequence to them to be fun.

Clearly there are greener pastures for me elsewhere.


please do. I have never suicide ganked since i've been playing eve, but things like that are the reason i play it instead of the other mmo's. i would be very upset if enough people who were unable to adapt to game mechanics like yourself were to complain enough that CCP made it impossible to do.
M5 Tuttle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2011-12-13 03:34:56 UTC
Vernn wrote:



1) I can't attack them when they are sitting in a station.

2) Why would I attack them if they are flying a kestrel? The bullets I would shoot could potentially be worth more than their ship. They are griefers. They will not risk anything real. Thats why they do what they do. They are taking advantage of the games mechanics to inflict harm to others. If they had to pay a real price for what they were doing, they wouldn't do it.


1) how are they killing you from the station?

2) they should be easy to kill then.
Tahna Rouspel
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2011-12-13 03:35:14 UTC
OP's right.

There should be consequences for ganking. People with negative security rating should not be allowed in highsec space.

Actions, consequences.

Deal with it, gankers.
Vernn
Winnguard
#45 - 2011-12-13 03:35:18 UTC
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:
Vernn wrote:
This apparently is a pointless discussion. This is a game, its supposed to be fun. I don't consider someone attacking me repeatedly with no consequence to them to be fun.

Clearly there are greener pastures for me elsewhere.


Maybe there are. EVE is not for everyone. Altho 80 percent of EVE population living in high-sec kind of gives away the fact that it is indeed high security.

You just had a bad luck, bad day and bitter experience.



I agree with all that except that it was bad luck. The guy apparently sits there all the time doing the same thing over and over to anyone mining in that belt. Its broken game mechanics. To allow a player that much power with almost no consequence is staggering from a design standpoint.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#46 - 2011-12-13 03:35:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vernn wrote:
This apparently is a pointless discussion. This is a game, its supposed to be fun. I don't consider someone attacking me repeatedly with no consequence to them to be fun.
Have you tried not being attacked repeatedly?
Quote:
Why would I attack them if they are flying a kestrel?
This has already been answered.
Quote:
They are taking advantage of the games mechanics to inflict harm to others.
Yes? So? It's kind of what you'd expect in a PvP-centric game, you know…
Quote:
To allow a player that much power with almost no consequence is staggering from a design standpoint.
…and, again, the reason there are “no consequences” is because you make sure there are none. That's not a design flaw — that's a problem with your choice.
Avid Bumhumper
Beekeepers Anonymous
#47 - 2011-12-13 03:36:17 UTC
Vernn wrote:
If I go into an ice belt in a barge to mine, I can get ganked repeatedly by someone with a -10 security status?

Someone who is supposed to be insta killed by concord can somehow warp to me and kill me over and over again in practically free ships?

I have no problem whatsoever with being ganked, so long as they take the security hit, and after several times concord instagibs them. Keeps the game fun having to pay attention for stuff like that.

However are you seriously telling me that this game has come to the point where I can lose multimillion isk ships in high sec to someone who has -10 sec rating over and over again?

Really?


*stunned*



How long have you played this game and not known this?

2/10. What?

My Tinfoil hat has been sugically implanted, so no,it is not for sale.....
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#48 - 2011-12-13 03:36:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
Vernn wrote:
M5 Tuttle wrote:
Vernn wrote:
Andski wrote:
I guess I worded it wrong, but yeah, crying about unfairness in EVE Online, a game centered in a hyper-capitalistic dog-eat-dog universe, is silly.


No, i'm not crying about general unfairness in all of eve. I am commenting on a very specific situation that defies logic.

Follow me here.

I get the fact that eve is not a carebear game. I do. I am not crying about being blown up. It happens. I am not complaining about the fact that people can suicide gank. If someone wrongs you bad enough you should be able to suicide gank, with a real consequence.

My argument simply is that someone with a -10 rating should not be allowed to kill the same person over and over again in the same spot in high sec.

Yes, I get it. The very nature of eve dictates that you're never truly safe anywhere, and I appreciate the heart pounding moments that can bring to the game. I am not against suicide ganking.

I am against a player with a -10 security rating killing the same people in the same spot over and over again in high sec without any penalty other than losing a ship with almost no value.

I think its a pretty narrow and reasonable complaint.


you understand that the fact that they are in high sec with -10 sec status means that you and anyone else can attack them without getting concorded, right? how is that not enough for you?



1) I can't attack them when they are sitting in a station.

2) Why would I attack them if they are flying a kestrel? The bullets I would shoot could potentially be worth more than their ship. They are griefers. They will not risk anything real. Thats why they do what they do. They are taking advantage of the games mechanics to inflict harm to others. If they had to pay a real price for what they were doing, they wouldn't do it.

Pop him every time he leaves the station for 3 days. He will move. Find someplace more fun.

And there isn't a single ammo in the game that at average market price is worth more than a fit frigate. maybe a few hundred rounds, sure. but a cruiser can pop a frig in about 5 shots easy. Especially because gankers don't fit tank (usually).


And again, he isn't griefing. Unless you take some action to make yourself not a target, you don't have a case for it. he is simply exercising his right to shoot whomever he pleases (while suffering the consequences of losing his ship).
Vernn
Winnguard
#49 - 2011-12-13 03:36:56 UTC
M5 Tuttle wrote:
Vernn wrote:



1) I can't attack them when they are sitting in a station.

2) Why would I attack them if they are flying a kestrel? The bullets I would shoot could potentially be worth more than their ship. They are griefers. They will not risk anything real. Thats why they do what they do. They are taking advantage of the games mechanics to inflict harm to others. If they had to pay a real price for what they were doing, they wouldn't do it.


1) how are they killing you from the station?

2) they should be easy to kill then.



1) I mine ice.

2) He undocks and kills me.

My guess is he undocks, scans for me, sees my ship type (not sure what info scanning gives) warps to me and kills me. If I was sitting in a shuttle in the system I'm sure he would never show up.
Vernn
Winnguard
#50 - 2011-12-13 03:38:29 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
Vernn wrote:
M5 Tuttle wrote:
Vernn wrote:
Andski wrote:
I guess I worded it wrong, but yeah, crying about unfairness in EVE Online, a game centered in a hyper-capitalistic dog-eat-dog universe, is silly.


No, i'm not crying about general unfairness in all of eve. I am commenting on a very specific situation that defies logic.

Follow me here.

I get the fact that eve is not a carebear game. I do. I am not crying about being blown up. It happens. I am not complaining about the fact that people can suicide gank. If someone wrongs you bad enough you should be able to suicide gank, with a real consequence.

My argument simply is that someone with a -10 rating should not be allowed to kill the same person over and over again in the same spot in high sec.

Yes, I get it. The very nature of eve dictates that you're never truly safe anywhere, and I appreciate the heart pounding moments that can bring to the game. I am not against suicide ganking.

I am against a player with a -10 security rating killing the same people in the same spot over and over again in high sec without any penalty other than losing a ship with almost no value.

I think its a pretty narrow and reasonable complaint.


you understand that the fact that they are in high sec with -10 sec status means that you and anyone else can attack them without getting concorded, right? how is that not enough for you?



1) I can't attack them when they are sitting in a station.

2) Why would I attack them if they are flying a kestrel? The bullets I would shoot could potentially be worth more than their ship. They are griefers. They will not risk anything real. Thats why they do what they do. They are taking advantage of the games mechanics to inflict harm to others. If they had to pay a real price for what they were doing, they wouldn't do it.

Pop him every time he leaves the station for 3 days. He will move. Find someplace more fun.

And there isn't a single ammo in the game that at average market price is worth more than a fit frigate. maybe a few hundred rounds, sure. but a cruiser can pop a frig in about 5 shots easy. Especially because gankers don't fit tank (usually).



I'm still out roughly 20 million and by your plan 20 hours of game time. Even if I did kill him he would be out what? A kestrel?

Who's getting the short end of that deal?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#51 - 2011-12-13 03:38:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vernn wrote:
My guess is he undocks, scans for me, sees my ship type (not sure what info scanning gives) warps to me and kills me. If I was sitting in a shuttle in the system I'm sure he would never show up.
…and thus we have concluded that it is, indeed, not griefing.
Quote:
I'm still out roughly 20 million and by your plan 20 hours of game time. Even if I did kill him he would be out what? A kestrel?

Who's getting the short end of that deal?
Him. Largely because you still aren't listing the full loss on his side…
Vernn
Winnguard
#52 - 2011-12-13 03:39:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Vernn
Avid Bumhumper wrote:
Vernn wrote:
If I go into an ice belt in a barge to mine, I can get ganked repeatedly by someone with a -10 security status?

Someone who is supposed to be insta killed by concord can somehow warp to me and kill me over and over again in practically free ships?

I have no problem whatsoever with being ganked, so long as they take the security hit, and after several times concord instagibs them. Keeps the game fun having to pay attention for stuff like that.

However are you seriously telling me that this game has come to the point where I can lose multimillion isk ships in high sec to someone who has -10 sec rating over and over again?

Really?


*stunned*



How long have you played this game and not known this?

2/10. What?




Just came back after several years. Always assumed that if your sec rating was that bad concord wouldn't even let you in 0.5 or higher unless you were in a pod. I don't have any memory of dealing with it in the past.
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#53 - 2011-12-13 03:39:58 UTC
Vernn wrote:
This is a game, its supposed to be fun.


On this point you're completely wrong (and you're the 2nd person I've had to correct on this point today.) EVE is not really a game, per se, it is a virtual world. It is not 'supposed' to be exciting or boring. It is not 'supposed' to be easy or hard. It is not 'supposed' to be fun or excruciating. Any more than life is. But the mechanics need to make sense and be 'fair' or else the integrity of the virtual world and the sense of immersion are compromised.

Botting, exploits and flawed (unfair) game mechanics are poison to virtual worlds. CCP has a long track record of neglect in these areas and that is indeed the single biggest problem holding EVE back from its potential.
Vernn
Winnguard
#54 - 2011-12-13 03:41:15 UTC
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
Vernn wrote:
This is a game, its supposed to be fun.


On this point you're completely wrong (and you're the 2nd person I've had to correct on this point today.) EVE is not really a game, per se, it is a virtual world. It is not 'supposed' to be exciting or boring. It is not 'supposed' to be easy or hard. It is not 'supposed' to be fun or excruciating. Any more than life is. But the mechanics need to make sense and be 'fair' or else the integrity of the virtual world and the sense of immersion are compromised.

Botting, exploits and flawed (unfair) game mechanics are poison to virtual worlds. CCP has a long track record of neglect in these areas and that is indeed the single biggest problem holding EVE back from its potential.




Well, I would personally still call it a game, but what you said is elegantly put, and I agree with your points.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#55 - 2011-12-13 03:41:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaroslav Unwanted
Tippia wrote:
Vernn wrote:
My guess is he undocks, scans for me, sees my ship type (not sure what info scanning gives) warps to me and kills me. If I was sitting in a shuttle in the system I'm sure he would never show up.
…and thus we have concluded that it is, indeed, not griefing.


well griefing as an term is really "new-age MMORPG" abbreviation for PK. at the 90s there wasnt any griefing there were PK and they were "ruining" the game for everyone. Big smile
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#56 - 2011-12-13 03:42:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
Vernn wrote:

I'm still out roughly 20 million and by your plan 20 hours of game time. Even if I did kill him he would be out what? A kestrel?

Who's getting the short end of that deal?

Where the hell do you buy ammo?

Even using the most expensive ammo I can find on the local market, I could fire over 1000 volleys before reaching 20M. And that is a lot of dead Kestrals.

Add to that that for all that time he hasn't been able to gank you, you've now made a profit of many millions (for all those mining barges you haven't lost).
Vernn
Winnguard
#57 - 2011-12-13 03:44:23 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
Vernn wrote:

I'm still out roughly 20 million and by your plan 20 hours of game time. Even if I did kill him he would be out what? A kestrel?

Who's getting the short end of that deal?

Where the hell do you buy ammo?

Even using the most expensive ammo I can find on the local market, I could fire over 1000 volleys before reaching 20M. And that is a lot of dead Kestrals.



It was a metaphor. The point is that no matter what goes down the griefer is the one coming out ahead. WAY WAY WAY ahead. The game gives him the power.
M5 Tuttle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2011-12-13 03:44:53 UTC
I used to play WoW in college back before the first expansion. Back then you could get a nice team of about 5-10 skilled players and camp Blackrock Mountain on weeknights. We'd kill people repeatedly as they trickled in trying to make it to their raids. We'd always have a priest so that we could constantly mind control people into the lava so that they'd have to run all the way back up the chains if they wanted to make it to Blackrock Spire. It was possible to make people HOURS late for their raids. The best was when we would find main tanks, because we know if we could keep him from getting to the instance we could keep their entire raid from starting.

Anyway, **** like this was eliminated with flying mounts and the ability to warp around to instances. This is why I stopped playing it.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#59 - 2011-12-13 03:46:14 UTC
Vernn wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Vernn wrote:

I'm still out roughly 20 million and by your plan 20 hours of game time. Even if I did kill him he would be out what? A kestrel?

Who's getting the short end of that deal?

Where the hell do you buy ammo?

Even using the most expensive ammo I can find on the local market, I could fire over 1000 volleys before reaching 20M. And that is a lot of dead Kestrals.



It was a metaphor. The point is that no matter what goes down the griefer is the one coming out ahead. WAY WAY WAY ahead. The game gives him the power.

Not a metaphor. maybe you meant hyperbole... but it was a bad one at that as it was terribly invalid.

And he isn't bloody griefing!
Vernn
Winnguard
#60 - 2011-12-13 03:47:45 UTC
From wikipedia....

Quote:
A griefer is a player who does things in a game to deliberately cause annoyance ("grief" in the sense of "giving someone grief") for the griefer's own enjoyment. Such a player is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals.


We are talking about griefing, plain and simple. The ganker gets nothing tangible from what he does. And ironically we can see that in eve there really are no "penalties related to in-game goals" for the gankers.