These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gedid Tava
Alpha Galactic Group
#201 - 2012-03-24 10:21:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Gedid Tava
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
I'm not entirely sure that some of the posters in these threads even play this game.


Do I really need to point you to blog after blog after blog with awesome stories of getting missioners friends to blow themselves up when they try to assist via guns? I enjoy tears as much as the next guy but I prefer coherent game design more.

Having to rely on neutral-RR as your recourse to aggression is absurd. The system is being retooled for a reason. That reason is "It is poorly designed and needs to be retooled."

I'm not entirely sure that some of the posters in these threads even understand poor game design when they see it. (See what I did there?)
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#202 - 2012-03-24 10:26:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Gedid Tava wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
I'm not entirely sure that some of the posters in these threads even play this game.


Do I really need to point you to blog after blog after blog with awesome stories of getting missioners friends to blow themselves up when they try to assist via guns? I enjoy tears as much as the next guy but I prefer coherent game design more.

Having to rely on neutral-RR as your recourse to aggression is absurd. The system is being retooled for a reason. That reason is "It is poorly designed and needs to be retooled."

I'm not entirely sure that some of the posters in these threads even understand poor game design when they see it. (See what I did there?)

V

Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Sol Tertia wrote:
Two remote repaired ships neither of which is going to die, that sounds like fun for nobody. The point is if you flip a can the friend who's hanging around to provide security should be able to blow you out of the sky not just provide a little repping.

If that friend is in the victim's corporation, he can.

Let's continue to ignore the giant elephant in the room while continuing to yell "no one can assist the poor mission runner without spontaneously combusting, oh the humanity!"

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Sol Tertia
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2012-03-24 10:51:43 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

If that friend is in the victim's corporation, he can.

Why should he need to be in the same corp? Why shouldn't a group of miners be able to have a couple of out of corp PvP alts standing by at a safe spot to warp in and trash a can flipper who wasn't careful enough about checking local?
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#204 - 2012-03-24 11:18:02 UTC
Sol Tertia wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

If that friend is in the victim's corporation, he can.

Why should he need to be in the same corp? Why shouldn't a group of miners be able to have a couple of out of corp PvP alts standing by at a safe spot to warp in and trash a can flipper who wasn't careful enough about checking local?

Because "checking local" is a futile activity in high-sec. The flipper can check however many times he wants, but there's absolutely no way he'll be able to determine with any degree of certainty who the miners' "PvP alts" are. I'd wager to guess that you're fully aware of this, so you're only mentioning it for the purpose of disguising your actual desire: that you simply want miners to mine in peace by outsourcing any and all risk to neutral, unaffiliated third parties.

A perfectly viable defensive mechanic already exists. When a can gets flipped, the flipper is aggressed against the whole corporation that the can belonged to. This is more than enough. If miners are interested in defending their livelihood with their "PvP alts," then they are more than welcome to put said alts into their corporations, and have unrestricted ability to protect their property.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#205 - 2012-03-24 11:27:52 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Because "checking local" is a futile activity in high-sec. The flipper can check however many times he wants, but there's absolutely no way he'll be able to determine with any degree of certainty who the miners' "PvP alts" are.

This is the SAME advice miners and mission runners have been given by suicide gankers. And all of a sudden this advice isn't good?

LOL. Destiny Currupted, you are hilarious!

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#206 - 2012-03-24 11:40:19 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Because "checking local" is a futile activity in high-sec. The flipper can check however many times he wants, but there's absolutely no way he'll be able to determine with any degree of certainty who the miners' "PvP alts" are.

This is the SAME advice miners and mission runners have been given by suicide gankers. And all of a sudden this advice isn't good?

LOL. Destiny Currupted, you are hilarious!


First of all I never gave that advice. Second, it's indeed impossible to prepare yourself for a suicide-gank using local, with a few exceptions:

- Checking local to see if anyone has a current GCC, which is shown by an icon
- Setting standings to known suicide-gankers to be aware of their presence (for example, Goons during the ice interdiction)
- Choosing a desolate region and an empty system, and using local as an early warning tool to prepare yourself for the worst when a neutral enters local

However, just like it's impossible to use local as a foolproof early warning system against suicide-ganks, so too is it impossible to use it as a foolproof early warning system against the "PvP alts" of miners.

But, we weren't talking about suicide-ganking before you came along, were we now?

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#207 - 2012-03-24 11:50:14 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
But, we weren't talking about suicide-ganking before you came along, were we now?

No. We're talking about you, as a hi sec "PVPer" looking for risk-free PVP protecting yourself by checking local.

What has been good for the goose is definitely good for the gander.

Welcome to Eve! Where there are consequences for you actions... Even if you are a grief player.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#208 - 2012-03-24 11:56:33 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
But, we weren't talking about suicide-ganking before you came along, were we now?

No. We're talking about you, as a hi sec "PVPer" looking for risk-free PVP protecting yourself by checking local.

What has been good for the goose is definitely good for the gander.

Welcome to Eve! Where there are consequences for you actions... Even if you are a grief player.


You're right. When I take from someone else's can, I have to suffer the consequences of being aggressed to that person and the rest of his corporation.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#209 - 2012-03-24 12:04:08 UTC
When you take from someone's can you don't have to wait for the weak miner or his indy corp to shoot back. Someone else can take you up on the offer. You will now be able to PVP. Isn't that what you want?

What's the problem?

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Sol Tertia
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#210 - 2012-03-24 12:04:10 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Because "checking local" is a futile activity in high-sec. The flipper can check however many times he wants, but there's absolutely no way he'll be able to determine with any degree of certainty who the miners' "PvP alts" are.

If a system has a static population of 10 or so assorted mining vessels and 3-4 destroyers/battlecruisers it's not unreasonable to assume it might not be safe.
Quote:
A perfectly viable defensive mechanic already exists. If miners are interested in defending their livelihood with their "PvP alts," then they are more than welcome to put said alts into their corporations, and have unrestricted ability to protect their property.

Many corps don't take alts.
Quote:
When a can gets flipped, the flipper is aggressed against the whole corporation that the can belonged to. This is more than enough.

A quick review of these forums indicates that's not the case, currently can flipping carries virtually no risk and virtually everyone except can flippers wants to make the risk/reward equation less of a no-brainer. If you bait newbies into opening fire in order to kill them don't be surprised if a fair few people think that's just not cricket and will happily gib you in return. Don't like it? Bring friends then, you might actually get some good fights.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#211 - 2012-03-24 12:14:14 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
When you take from someone's can you don't have to wait for the weak miner or his indy corp to shoot back. Someone else can take you up on the offer. You will now be able to PVP. Isn't that what you want?

What's the problem?

The weakness of the miner and the weakness of his indy corp are their respective problems. The miner and the corporation don't have to be weak; they choose to be weak by not taking safety precautions. Perhaps if they stopped playing the victim card, and started thinking about how to defend their assets, then they wouldn't be taken advantage of. They have the tools, but they choose not to utilize them.

Sol Tertia wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
A perfectly viable defensive mechanic already exists. If miners are interested in defending their livelihood with their "PvP alts," then they are more than welcome to put said alts into their corporations, and have unrestricted ability to protect their property.

Many corps don't take alts.

That's their problem. Not accepting their own miners' pvp alts is a decision they made on their own volition, and not something that was forced upon them by the mean griefer scumbags.

Sol Tertia wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
When a can gets flipped, the flipper is aggressed against the whole corporation that the can belonged to. This is more than enough.

A quick review of these forums indicates that's not the case, currently can flipping carries virtually no risk and virtually everyone except can flippers wants to make the risk/reward equation less of a no-brainer. If you bait newbies into opening fire in order to kill them don't be surprised if a fair few people think that's just not cricket and will happily gib you in return. Don't like it? Bring friends then, you might actually get some good fights.

It absolutely is the case. The risk lies in the exposure to the whole corporation that owned the can that was flipped. If those "fair few people think that's just not cricket," then they're welcome to join those "indy corps" and help protect their assets and operations.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Mysteriax
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#212 - 2012-03-24 12:19:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Mysteriax
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
[quote=MatrixSkye Mk2]
It absolutely is the case. The risk lies in the exposure to the whole corporation that owned the can that was flipped. If those "fair few people think that's just not cricket," then they're welcome to join those "indy corps" and help protect their assets and operations.


Thats not risk, most of the indy corps have allot of newer players they cant defend themselves from you.
Would be the same if my alliance wardecked and camped you in stations 23/7 you wouldnt be able to do anything because we are simply better, have more pvp'ers and likely more SP.

Sorry but CCP held the hand of grievers to long, its time there is risk for you aswell. A good player would still have no issues in getting the f out after a gank.
Doc Severide
Doomheim
#213 - 2012-03-24 12:20:00 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
It's not the only thing is this game for me. I've been around since the start (well, just a few months shy of the start). In that time I spent about six years in null and two years in wormholes, and also some time flashy in low, but only until the Capital Age swung into full gear sometime around 2007/2008. I did the whole null thing, and still occasionally go to the NPC areas of null on some characters to **** around.

I see a lot of people romanticizing null in these threads, saying how it's where "real men" with "balls" go to pvp. That couldn't be further from the truth. Null is severely underpopulated, and sovereignty mechanics create a massive safety net for large-scale pve grinding and botting. Taking a trip through even an NPC 0.0 region, you'll quickly see that most decent systems either have a bot, or are empty. Yes, sometimes there is small-scale pvp in null, but it's not the standard. You guys start a defense fleet against a single guy roaming in a Vagabond, and no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise, that is the status quo.

You're interested in fair fights no more than the people you accuse of cowardice. And don't tell me I'm wrong; while I know there are exceptions to every rule, I've sat in the same intel channels that you inhabit now, and have read the same "do we hav enuf 4 fleet??" crap over and over again. Ninety-nine times out of one hundred, your goal in a 0.0 pvp battle is to crush the opposing side with overwhelming numerical superiority. The other one percent of engagements is the occasional "goodfite." Sorry, but not everyone has the patience to sift through the shitpile to find that one golden egg. Maybe if you didn't treat null like your own personal ISK-printing fortress of solitude, then I'd be more inclined to take two or three friends for a roam on a regular basis.

High-sec pvp is but one aspect of my game play style, but it's an important one. Why? Because it's most representative of the sandbox nature of this game. If CCP removes non-consensual pvp from high-sec, I'll leave not because of an inability to get easy industrial kills, but because at that point the game's sandbox nature would have become completely sterilized.

You say you don't want the teacher taking away everything that you use to protect yourself with, but in reality, by supporting this change you're simply asking the teacher to allow you to bring your dad to school so he can beat up that bully.

This post is excellent. Please forgive me for calling you clueless in previous post. I was obviously wrong....

(No this is no troll, I am serious)...
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#214 - 2012-03-24 12:21:51 UTC  |  Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
The weakness of the miner and the weakness of his indy corp are their respective problems. The miner and the corporation don't have to be weak; they choose to be weak by not taking safety precautions. Perhaps if they stopped playing the victim card, and started thinking about how to defend their assets, then they wouldn't be taken advantage of. They have the tools, but they choose not to utilize them.

Mining ships (and to an extent mission/PVE ships) are inherently weak. If you want to mine properly YOU MUST FLY a vastly PVP-inferior ship to do these activities.

Sure, you can give ridiculous advice to the miner, such as mine your veldspar in hi sec with 5 bodyguards (5 players who have nothing else better to do than watch over you while you mine in hi sec). But then I have to ask, why couldn't you as well follow impractical advice such as scanning an over-populated local for potential threats? Or, you could always go to a hi sec area that isn't as populated to pick your fights against the weak.

My point is, you have no problems with telling someone to go out of their way to stay safe. But you yourself have a problem when given advice to stay safe that may inconvenience you.

So again I will tell you what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#215 - 2012-03-24 12:41:49 UTC
Mysteriax wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
It absolutely is the case. The risk lies in the exposure to the whole corporation that owned the can that was flipped. If those "fair few people think that's just not cricket," then they're welcome to join those "indy corps" and help protect their assets and operations.

Thats not risk, most of the indy corps have allot of newer players they cant defend themselves from you.
Would be the same if my alliance wardecked and camped you in stations 23/7 you wouldnt be able to do anything because we are simply better, have more pvp'ers and likely more SP.

If you can't defend yourself from a can-flipper, then you probably shouldn't create your own corporation and fill it with week-old trial account miners. Join someone else's corporation instead, learn the ropes, and once you have a decent understanding of game mechanics, go out on your own and pass your knowledge along to those newer players. Alternatively, use some of those indy profits to buy protection.

Remember, just because this is a sandbox, not all play styles are equal. Some are much less efficient than others. Equating the rewards of high-risk and low-risk activities will just sterilize this game. I fail to see how it was ever intended that the guy who signs in for 45 minutes twice a week to mine some 0.9 Veldspar should be afforded the benefits of a much more involved player. The twice-a-week forty-fiver will on average make much less money than the guy hosting escorted mining ops, but this is both balanced and fair.

As far as your threat goes, feel free to follow up on it. I'll even make the war mutual.

MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
The weakness of the miner and the weakness of his indy corp are their respective problems. The miner and the corporation don't have to be weak; they choose to be weak by not taking safety precautions. Perhaps if they stopped playing the victim card, and started thinking about how to defend their assets, then they wouldn't be taken advantage of. They have the tools, but they choose not to utilize them.

Mining ships (and to an extent mission/PVE ships) are inherently weak. If you want to mine properly YOU MUST FLY a vastly PVP-inferior ship to do these activities.

Sure, you can give ridiculous advice to the miner, such as mine your veldspar in hi sec with 5 bodyguards (5 players who have nothing else better to do than watch over you while you mine veldspar in hi sec). But then I have to ask, why couldn't you as well follow impractical advice such as scanning an over-populated local for potential threats? Or, you could always go to a hi sec area that isn't as populated to pick your fights against the weak.

Again, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Don't put words in my mouth. If compensating bodyguards is such a problem, keep in mind that mining wasn't intended to be solely a solo activity. Have enough people mining those rocks, and having a bodyguard or two suddenly becomes quite affordable. If you want to mine alone, well, sometimes losing a can to a flipper is just a cost of doing business.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#216 - 2012-03-24 12:49:21 UTC  |  Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
If compensating bodyguards is such a problem, keep in mind that mining wasn't intended to be solely a solo activity. Have enough people mining those rocks, and having a bodyguard or two suddenly becomes quite affordable. If you want to mine alone, well, sometimes losing a can to a flipper is just a cost of doing business.

And why shouldn't you be required to bring friends to your grief-capade? Why do you require the miner to bring friends but you can't be bothered to do the same?

If you want to mine PVP alone, well, sometimes losing a can ship to a neutral is just a cost of doing business.

Follow your own advice.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Rengerel en Distel
#217 - 2012-03-24 12:52:08 UTC
I could be wrong, but can flipping an npc corp can doesn't agress you to the whole corp. It also doesn't carry over to your fleet, which never made any sense to me. If you have 2 or 3 people grinding missions and a ninja salvager comes in and starts flipping, the people in the fleet should have as much right as whomever got the killing blow to attack.

If you really want to be a high sec pirate, then you should embrace the fact people can/will come at you when you've pirated. If anything, it might bring some of the bored null pvpers up to high sec, and you can have real 1v1 battles you say you crave.

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#218 - 2012-03-24 13:05:37 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
If compensating bodyguards is such a problem, keep in mind that mining wasn't intended to be solely a solo activity. Have enough people mining those rocks, and having a bodyguard or two suddenly becomes quite affordable. If you want to mine alone, well, sometimes losing a can to a flipper is just a cost of doing business.

And why shouldn't you be required to bring friends to your grief-capade? Why do you require the miner to bring friends but you can't be bothered to do the same?

If you want to mine PVP alone, well, sometimes losing a can ship to a neutral is just a cost of doing business.

Follow your own advice.

Who says I wouldn't? In fact, if this change is enacted, I'd bring enough friends to blot out the sun if I had to. Then in three months the carebears would be back on the forums, whining for CCP to implement CONCORD intervention for theft, or pvp flags, or anything else of a similar nature, because we adapted to a change, while they continued to ignore the world around them and got burned in the process.

Rengerel en Distel wrote:
I could be wrong, but can flipping an npc corp can doesn't agress you to the whole corp. It also doesn't carry over to your fleet, which never made any sense to me. If you have 2 or 3 people grinding missions and a ninja salvager comes in and starts flipping, the people in the fleet should have as much right as whomever got the killing blow to attack.


Having fleets transfer aggression rights somewhat defeats the purpose of having a corporation. Also, this was done before, and led to some huge problems. Just check out this link:

http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Lofty_scam

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#219 - 2012-03-24 13:07:46 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Who says I wouldn't? In fact, if this change is enacted, I'd bring enough friends to blot out the sun if I had to.

That's great! Then what problem is it that you have with neutrals shooting at you after stealing a can?

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#220 - 2012-03-24 13:13:59 UTC
As a side note, my corp is primarily an indy corp. And if these changes go through some of us will be dabbling into PVP in hi sec and against grief players Twisted. So yes, these changes are encouraging players to try PVP.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.