These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 New Citizens Q&A

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Planet 6
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#41 - 2016-08-22 20:33:25 UTC
>There are no "solopwnmobiles" in EVE. Everything you can fly blows up if it's shot hard enough.

you are wrong, its called a svipul, there is also a line called the balanced legion, which are of course very balanced.
Piz Caldera
Caldera Mercenaries
#42 - 2016-08-22 20:51:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Piz Caldera
Golden Rules - dont prevent from golden showers, Capsuleers.

Why?
1. People in general dont read, they just click. And die
2. Corps rarely explain their new players how to fly safe, in wars, low or null, or how to prevent ganks in hisec
3. new players or returning players overwhelmed by the magnitude of eve. But no solution to make the game smaller or
Arcadestyle.

But which is the solution:
1. there is no real, good and final solution
2. pain and sorrow give you the great chance to learn, if your mental strong enough to afford virtual loses. Not everybody is, no shame. People get also crazy at playing poker, chess or sim city when natural disaster strike.

Technical:
a solution can be, that new player get marked (if they like and choose self) for x weeks with a symbol everbody can see.
This symbol has the meaning i am new, dont gank or shoot me, dont scam me etc. Other pilots can give mercy.
But will they learn and understand Eve in this way? probably not.
Llish
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#43 - 2016-08-22 20:55:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Llish
Quote:

We play EvE. What is this 'sanity' you speak of?



Ahhhh I just set them up ;p
Chris Kelvin
Pheonix Rising Corp
#44 - 2016-08-22 21:16:13 UTC



* You are not safe in 1.0 security space. CONCORD is there to punish, not to protect. Get used to the idea.


The first statement is true. And the second statement is false... Concord is there to protect!!! Before you all lose your minds, please take a moment to read. This is not meant to change the fundamental message...that is, you should not get the impression Concord will in any way be able to protect you if you do not plan for the inevitable confrontation, it is just meant to push back against the notion that it is always the victim's fault. Concord is there for protection but, in much the same way Police work, they often arrive way too late to impact the outcome. That means that even though you may take appropriate precautions such as fitting a strong tank, not carrying too much value in the cargo bay, and even with boosters and/or friends, a smart ganker can plan for and overcome all of these safeguards including the protection of Concord to blow you up. On the other side of that coin though, the smart industrialist/minor/carebear (that last term, carebear is another way of saying people with a conscience but, it is often used as an insult by the same folks that insist it is always the victims fault) can also outthink the smart ganker and use the Concord forces for an effective layer of defense or at the very least make that ganker pay way more isk than your loss is worth. Bottom line, always protect yourself but, don't buy into the myth that when you get blown up, it's somehow your fault! Using a game to justify a persons bad behavior is a reflection of themselves, not you!!!!!ShockedShockedBlinkAttention Have a wonderful day everyone!
Min Wei
Mandrake Executor Corp
Mandrake Alliance
#45 - 2016-08-22 21:20:54 UTC
I know you mean well and most of the stuff you wrote is helpful but, THANK GOD I did not have access to this info when I started playing. I would have run away with my credit cards unused after the trial like a spring chicken.

I believe EVE is what you make of it. I ignore everyone else's comments of "what EVE is". I like the game much better that way.

Recruiting new EVE members is hard, based on the kill or be killed credo. I brought in 12 new members so far in the last 2.5 months that I play with in other online games. Only 2 are still here. CCP would retain many more subscribers if they had a better chance in High Sec. I lost 10 potentially paying EVE subscribers out of 12 because CCP caters to PvP and Null Sec more than everyone else. The joke called the o7 Show is meant for them not us. When the do the Dev interviews you can tell they don't care about anything but total war 24/7. Fine....but that only lasts for so long before it gets old. EVE is deeper than just a fighting game. It would be so much easier for me to get new subscribers if a few things were more receptive to the NON-war people.

WarDec in High Sec should be by mutual agreement. I almost quit soon after I started because of it. Then I learned to create ALTs and tons of corps to avoid the "bully wars". Nothing ends a war faster than just changing your corp name. I have no interest in fighting, EVER! I'll leave the game when avenues to avoid it are closed. I build the weapons for war, the dirtiest my hands get is counting the ISK from a big ship order.

Why is Low Sec not Low Sec? It might as well be Null Sec. There are NO Concord security forces in Low Sec which in my opinion is crap. Just get rid of the name Low Sec altogether since it is a lie anyway.

I am not ripping on Null or PvP. They are my best customers. I wouldn't be here without them buying the stuff I build. Just give people a chance to get a grip on the exponentially steep learning curve and make some ISK in High and Low Sec (if they add any security) before they go off into the Null Sec sunset.

I'm here to play the game, not be a victim. I am not a $15/month subscriber. I am not a Jita scammer. I am an industrialist. I have spent thousands of US dollars in under 3 months with my multiple combined accounts to get where I need to be quickly. And I will not stop spending either as long as I am permitted to do "my thing" in EVE. I alone spend more monthly than 200 PvP pilots in Null Sec. Are you listening CCP? Follow the money! You LOST 10 of my deep pocket friends (that's guaranteed $15,000-$30,000 US dollars a month). How many more will you lose? That makes me upset because I wanted them to join me in this game. We just want to play without the war theatrics. Are we not worth at least listening to? If not, let me know before I buy another 4 (28) packs of PLEX to sell in a few days.

One last issue. Let me build my darn caps in 0.5 High Sec. I just want to build and sell without getting into some stupid fight every time I test a ship's fittings. Make the weapons disabled or something that makes them acceptable to test fly in 0.5 High Sec. Even better, add Low Security to Low Sec! What a concept!

Thanks for listening. My new love for this game has my emotions in a tailspin. My rant and repetitive over-running sentences are over and I feel better now. :-) Fly safe everyone! o7
Chris Kelvin
Pheonix Rising Corp
#46 - 2016-08-22 22:02:11 UTC
Min Wei wrote:
I know you mean well and most of the stuff you wrote is helpful but, THANK GOD I did not have access to this info when I started playing. I would have run away with my credit cards unused after the trial like a spring chicken.

I believe EVE is what you make of it. I ignore everyone else's comments of "what EVE is". I like the game much better that way.

...



I'm here to play the game, not be a victim.



...

Thanks for listening. My new love for this game has my emotions in a tailspin. My rant and repetitive over-running sentences are over and I feel better now. :-) Fly safe everyone! o7




Just because it bears repeating..... VERY MUCH THIS!!!! Without agreeing to everything in that post BUT..... It would be something of a miracle if the "OTHER" people playing this game had a few resources dedicated to their play style (i.e. Industrialist, explorer and yes, PVE) like the PVP total war crowd does. Please do not bother bringing up the last industrial patch that screwed everyone over with any investment in BPO's and oh by the way, anyone remember the "Team's" concept? You know, the feature that was removed faster than your date's virginity on prom night? And let's not even get into burner missions...that is not PVE FOZZIE!!!!!! it's a PVP simulator....you know, it kinda defeats the purpose if you are not interested in PVP...I know, hard to believe some people (with very deep pockets ...HELLO CCP, MONEY talks dumba$$) have no friction interest in PVP!!!!!!
Le Plebo
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#47 - 2016-08-22 22:42:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Le Plebo
Except all of these rules dont matter when you go cry to the game devs enough


  • I know people I have scammed that have gotten everything back
  • People auto-piloting a pod in highsec that got their implants back
  • I know people that have given me real life threats and never been banned, even published my personal info


The bottom line is, if your paying real money to play and threaten to leave because someone got one over on you, the devs will bend over backwards to make you happy. Regardless of what they say
Cika Brka
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#48 - 2016-08-22 22:45:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Cika Brka
9. If you are a games DEV .. don't play EVE for real because its simply not fair to other players.
Anaxamemnon Thrain
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2016-08-22 23:14:58 UTC
thanks. this was helpful
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#50 - 2016-08-22 23:39:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Chris Kelvin wrote:
* You are not safe in 1.0 security space. CONCORD is there to punish, not to protect. Get used to the idea.

The first statement is true. And the second statement is false... Concord is there to protect!!!
Read it, and you're wrong; mechanically CONCORD have one job and that is to punish people who do one of the following:
  • Aggress a player or structure that is not a legal target in highsec.
  • Remote repair NPC Ships
  • Remote repair Criminal Players
  • Attack CONCORD vessels
  • Have a criminal flag and jump into Hi-Sec Space
  • Have low security status and jump into a Hi-Sec System in the Sanctum Constellation.

    • Lorewise they exist A: to prevent us, the immortal, obscenely rich and powerful capsuleers, from taking over completely and B: to prevent large-scale open warfare between the four empire factions, settling any disputes between the Empires quickly lest they return to their old ways and start murdering and enslaving each other.

    If they were in the protection game they would be encouraging people to check that they've tanked their ships, running regular patrols down the trade routes, breaking up "space gangs" like CODE., taking down scammers etc.


    Min Wei wrote:
    I'm here to play the game, not be a victim.
    Then don't act or look like one, the mechanics are already there, it's your choice whether or not you choose to use them.

    Get ganked, offer a GF in local (it won't feel like a good fight and it's often the last thing you want to say but it goes a long way) and ask some questions; most are more than willing to tell you what they did and how you could have avoided it.

    Get wardecced, contact the wardec corp, they want fights at the end of the day and I'd say most would be amenable to down shipping and bringing a similar number of players in order to get a fun fight. If your corp is full of newbies they may well be willing to do a talk afterwards and go through what people did right and what they didn't as well as provide decent fits for people to play with; they love newbies, especially bloodthirsty ones that are willing to learn.

    In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

    New Player FAQ

    Feyd's Survival Pack
    Jasmine Deer
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #51 - 2016-08-23 00:58:48 UTC
    Abulurd Boniface wrote:
    I have never subscribed to the idea that clicking 'undock' is consenting to PvP.

    I do accept that it can be a consequence but I don't accept that it constitutes consent.

    Having said that I don't have a problem with the consequence of choices, that's what the whole point of the place is.




    My view as well. Saying "You consent" is putting words into my mouth. I preferred Akita T's line on this.

    Like if I was a war zone photographer. Minute I step onto the battlefield I accept that it is though choice and I can be shot, but that doesn't mean I'm giving my consent for it to happen.
    Zora Nightmare
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #52 - 2016-08-23 01:23:07 UTC
    A noble post from CCP, however the punishment for some offenders of the law (CODE) is not equal to the harm and destruction they incur. Make them pay a more relevent price for the price to others they have caused and dont make these "8 Golden Rules" sounds so noble.
    Raiz Nhell
    Tactically Challenged
    The Initiative.
    #53 - 2016-08-23 01:45:20 UTC
    Jasmine Deer wrote:
    Abulurd Boniface wrote:
    I have never subscribed to the idea that clicking 'undock' is consenting to PvP.

    I do accept that it can be a consequence but I don't accept that it constitutes consent.

    Having said that I don't have a problem with the consequence of choices, that's what the whole point of the place is.




    My view as well. Saying "You consent" is putting words into my mouth. I preferred Akita T's line on this.

    Like if I was a war zone photographer. Minute I step onto the battlefield I accept that it is though choice and I can be shot, but that doesn't mean I'm giving my consent for it to happen.




    In this case "clicking 'undock' is consenting to PvP" means that you have made a choice to enter a ship to ship PVP area (i.e. All of EVE).

    You might not get PVP in its many (surprising) forms, but you have consented that it is a possibility...

    Same as stepping onto a battlefield is consenting to the fact that bullets can be addressed "To whom it may concern". Something that many journalists need to learn, having "Press" written on your helmet doesn't make you invulnerable.




    There is no such thing as a fair fight...

    If your fighting fair you have automatically put yourself at a disadvantage.
    Gadrius
    Doomheim
    #54 - 2016-08-23 02:09:56 UTC
    Hmm ... though it is technically covered .. I am slightly disappointed that the Number 1 rule that has been drilled into every newbie I have ever met since the beginning was not directly referenced ..

    "Rule 1 of New Eden: Trust no one. Not even Chribba."
    Mellow Cat
    Doomheim
    #55 - 2016-08-23 03:42:06 UTC
    Yes I like it and I say these are the rules that can help you out...

    so I do approve of them...
    lollerwaffle
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #56 - 2016-08-23 05:01:54 UTC
    Min Wei wrote:
    I lost 10 potentially paying EVE subscribers out of 12 because CCP caters to PvP and Null Sec more than everyone else.


    Catering to PVP in a PVP game? Who woulda thought? If your friends don't like PVP, then EVE isn't the game for them. This isn't an insult, it's just fact. It's like saying boxing as a sport would have more participants if it didn't cater so much to punching people and instead had more non-punching elements.

    Min Wei wrote:
    WarDec in High Sec should be by mutual agreement. I almost quit soon after I started because of it. Then I learned to create ALTs and tons of corps to avoid the "bully wars". Nothing ends a war faster than just changing your corp name. I have no interest in fighting, EVER! I'll leave the game when avenues to avoid it are closed. I build the weapons for war, the dirtiest my hands get is counting the ISK from a big ship order.

    So the game should change one of its fundamental concepts, because some people playing don't like it? You already have lots of vets who are leaving because of the perception that CCP is catering to the "PVP in a PVP game is BAD" crowd (See: Tippia). Sure, CCP could make that change to attract more potential customers (if this were even true), but what about those that these mechanics cater to? Would they then leave in response?

    You found a bunch of ways to avoid unconsensual wardecs, and the knowledge you gained through experience and / or active seeking means that you are equipped to handle things you don't like. Working as intended, no? Just because you have no intention to PVP doesn't mean that those that want to should have their avenues restricted.

    Min Wei wrote:
    Why is Low Sec not Low Sec? It might as well be Null Sec. There are NO Concord security forces in Low Sec which in my opinion is crap. Just get rid of the name Low Sec altogether since it is a lie anyway.

    Lowsec has a whole bunch of different mechanics to null. These include, inter alia, station/gate guns, security loss, inability to use nullsec only things etc. This brings for a different type of playstyle. On one hand you propose that more playstyles should be viable, but say that one of them should be removed? What?

    Min Wei wrote:
    I'm here to play the game, not be a victim.

    AND

    I alone spend more monthly than 200 PvP pilots in Null Sec. Are you listening CCP? Follow the money! You LOST 10 of my deep pocket friends (that's guaranteed $15,000-$30,000 US dollars a month). How many more will you lose? That makes me upset because I wanted them to join me in this game. We just want to play without the war theatrics. Are we not worth at least listening to? If not, let me know before I buy another 4 (28) packs of PLEX to sell in a few days.


    Then don't be a victim. Don't have a victim mindset. Easy.

    Highsec war is part of EVE, just like nullsec conflicts, piracy etc. If your friends aren't prepared for those aspects of it, then either adapt or try something else that caters to their taste. Also, your boastful assumption of "I spend more monthly than 200 PVP pilots in nullsec" is pretty much unprovable by anyone apart from CCP, but I'm inclined to doubt your claim.

    Min Wei wrote:
    One last issue. Let me build my darn caps in 0.5 High Sec. I just want to build and sell without getting into some stupid fight every time I test a ship's fittings. Make the weapons disabled or something that makes them acceptable to test fly in 0.5 High Sec. Even better, add Low Security to Low Sec! What a concept!

    I too would like the ability to use bombs in highsec. Should CCP also cater to my individual needs if I don't want to play by the rules they set? Also, low sec already has a form of security, so no, your concept isn't new.
    lollerwaffle
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #57 - 2016-08-23 05:06:27 UTC
    Zora Nightmare wrote:
    A noble post from CCP, however the punishment for some offenders of the law (CODE) is not equal to the harm and destruction they incur. Make them pay a more relevent price for the price to others they have caused and dont make these "8 Golden Rules" sounds so noble.

    Suggestions?

    First it was "REMOVE SHIP INSURANCE FROM CONCORD DEATHS!! THAT WILL STOP RAMPANT HIGHSEC GANKING!!"

    What's next? What' the 'just one more nerf' this time?

    DISCLAIMER: I am not a ganker.
    Lan Wang
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #58 - 2016-08-23 05:46:12 UTC
    Always fly what you cant afford to lose, no better rush than the desperation of knowing you will have nothing if you lose that fight

    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*
    Lavayar
    Haidamaky
    UA Fleets
    #59 - 2016-08-23 06:25:51 UTC
    Good post!
    Serene Repose
    #60 - 2016-08-23 06:27:41 UTC
    I am compelled to comment.

    We must accommodate the idiocracy.