These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Changes to War Mechanics

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#961 - 2012-05-05 19:21:19 UTC
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#962 - 2012-05-05 20:17:40 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
(...)
HERE HERE!!!

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of all this crap about how high sec should be less friendly and how carebears should be the primary targets.
There is plenty of pvp available in low and null sec but it appears that those sov holding entities are too afraid of risking losing there OH SO SPECIAL sov.
Those of us in high sec are supposed to be the ones carebearing about, yet we seem to be the ones risking the most. Sure, there's pvp in low sec, but it seems pretty sparce. I remember when I first started playing Eve you couldn't even think about going into low sec because you knew there was a gate camp right on the other side. Now, you can fly around in low sec for an hour and maybe have a chance at catching a fight. I'm against gate camps in low sec, but i'm not against pvp.

CCP seriously need to get their p's and q's in order and realize that they need to be focusing on wars where wars are meant to be. Factional warfare in low sec, sov warfare in null sec.

Seriously CCP... Stop focusing on what you can do to make high sec more pvp engaging and in exchange focus on making low and null more pvp engaging.

And as far as protecting SOV holding alliances...CUT THE CRAP!!!! They knew the risks of forming a well known organization and claiming SOV, but yet those of us in small casual corps in high sec are supposed to be the ones that don't realize the risks of being in a player corp?

The war dec system should be used as a meaningful use to cut supply lines, decimate trade, and annihilate opponents that threaten your interests.

You should be focusing on forcing the alliances to fight for sov back and forth instead of focusing on making high sec corps the primary targets of easy killmail padding.

The alliances control enough of the game. Allowing them to control high sec through burn jita, hulkaggedon, the Gallente Ice capades, etc. etc. while allowing them to remain completely protected in SOV is beyond me.

There is no reason why goons and test should be spending all there time in high sec interupting non-interfering parties when they should be deep in null fighting each other to retain their interests.

This isn't the US auto industry. In Eve, there's no such thing as too big to fail. In fact, most of what Eve presents is failer. Y'all need to focus on a constant and epic battle in null sec and stop trying to make constant and annoying ganks and wardecs easier in high sec.

Oh, and for the love or christ stop allowing the alliances to control EVERYTHING, because if you don't your oh so special game will die out sooner than you think... There are many types of play styles in Eve and if you keep trying to mix them all so much than you're gonna end up losing one of them and much like dominos, if one falls they all fall.


Solid +1. It apears that now that CCP is up to fix broken stuff, the only trick in the bag is to rob content from hisec to fix whatever is broken elsewhere. Wardecs are borken? Allow free for all hisec griefing. FW is broken? Hand over T2 poduction to them.

God forbids to add new stuff! They fuked the game by adding unnecessary supercaps and now it is unthinkable to actually ADD GAMEPLAY rather than STEAL FROM HISEC AND HAND IT OVER TO THE SQUEALIN' MINORITIES.

Who fukking pays this game? Nullsec or hisec? Who fukking gives CCP that nice payroll monies? Hisec or nullsec? When will CCP stop sucking nullsec's c*cks? What does it takes untl hisec gets the respect it deserves for paying 75% of this bloody game? How it comes that 4.5 million dollars a month is not enough to NOT BE ROBBED EACH TIME SOMEONE ELSE NEEDS A NEW TOY?
Pugwa Ikwakin
Doomheim
#963 - 2012-05-06 02:18:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Pugwa Ikwakin
Xorv wrote:
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.


EVE is the only sandbox MMO that is, what I would consider successful at the moment. Themepark is kind of a broad term, I think you're more referring to the carrot-on-a-stick mechanic. Works for many, not for all. To be quite fair you don't get to fly in fleet warfare everyday so that can, in itself, be seen as a theme for the park. But let's not get into semantics.

I personally am not arguing to remove PvP from highsec, but there has to be a way to concede from wars. EVE has an awkwardly destructive community, most other sandbox MMOs feature durability as a way to remove items over time, in EVE, things are destroyed. Do you really doubt that some people would wardec people into leaving their corp/quitting? The danger of EVE is great, it's the only thing that keeps the game alive.

I've never used dec shields and the like before, but the fact that there's really nothing stopping a corp from poopsocking my corp into oblivion 'for tears', rather than having a purpose seems kind of like poor gameplay to me.

This is hypothetical, but I know it will happen eventually at a worse rate than it happens now.

Highsec is already more dangerous, suicide ganking isn't exactly profitable anymore but it's still as effective as it ever was, if not more due to the tornado and blaster changes for the catalyst.

Flew 40 jumps through nullsec through pipe systems, the only drag bubble I saw was misplaced and at the low-sec gate, and I laughed at the campers in my t3. They were the only people I saw along the way.

Saw a few in low-sec that didn't aggress me due to GCC and gateguns.

Non-consensual pvp is easy to get in highsec, that same tengu could have been alpha'd by a tornado for massive profit. One cheap destroyer can kill numerous types of ships.

Again, not against ganking in the least, it's good for business, and fun. Not a fan of griefing though, even being the griefer. These two things are different.

If you're worried about an influx into the economy via highsec carebearing, perhaps you should gank some incursion fleets. The isk they spend on new ships benefits the t2 market, faction ship market, increases prices due to higher rate of consumption, and the tax they spend removes isk from the economy(albeit a small amount.) Ask yourself less what carebears have done to your economy, but what you can (and have) done for your economy.

But it's not like there aren't alliances in null profiting from mining, and not being ganked. Like I said, null is safer than highsec.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#964 - 2012-05-06 09:25:16 UTC
Pugwa Ikwakin wrote:
Xorv wrote:
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.


EVE is the only sandbox MMO that is, what I would consider successful at the moment. Themepark is kind of a broad term, I think you're more referring to the carrot-on-a-stick mechanic. Works for many, not for all. To be quite fair you don't get to fly in fleet warfare everyday so that can, in itself, be seen as a theme for the park. But let's not get into semantics.

I personally am not arguing to remove PvP from highsec, but there has to be a way to concede from wars. EVE has an awkwardly destructive community, most other sandbox MMOs feature durability as a way to remove items over time, in EVE, things are destroyed. Do you really doubt that some people would wardec people into leaving their corp/quitting? The danger of EVE is great, it's the only thing that keeps the game alive.

I've never used dec shields and the like before, but the fact that there's really nothing stopping a corp from poopsocking my corp into oblivion 'for tears', rather than having a purpose seems kind of like poor gameplay to me.

This is hypothetical, but I know it will happen eventually at a worse rate than it happens now.

Highsec is already more dangerous, suicide ganking isn't exactly profitable anymore but it's still as effective as it ever was, if not more due to the tornado and blaster changes for the catalyst.

Flew 40 jumps through nullsec through pipe systems, the only drag bubble I saw was misplaced and at the low-sec gate, and I laughed at the campers in my t3. They were the only people I saw along the way.

Saw a few in low-sec that didn't aggress me due to GCC and gateguns.

Non-consensual pvp is easy to get in highsec, that same tengu could have been alpha'd by a tornado for massive profit. One cheap destroyer can kill numerous types of ships.

Again, not against ganking in the least, it's good for business, and fun. Not a fan of griefing though, even being the griefer. These two things are different.

If you're worried about an influx into the economy via highsec carebearing, perhaps you should gank some incursion fleets. The isk they spend on new ships benefits the t2 market, faction ship market, increases prices due to higher rate of consumption, and the tax they spend removes isk from the economy(albeit a small amount.) Ask yourself less what carebears have done to your economy, but what you can (and have) done for your economy.

But it's not like there aren't alliances in null profiting from mining, and not being ganked. Like I said, null is safer than highsec.


The potential risks in nullec is higher, but also are the means to eliminate that risk to a point that it can't be eliminated form hisec. Nulslec alliances can work out to 100% safety form reds, whereas such beast is unexistant in hisec. There are no chokign points, no firewalls, no doors, no intel networks to stop them. Also most hisecccers are on their own, exposed to PvP every single time they leave station.

And yet some think their lfie is too safe, too comfy, they get too many rewards for their risk-taking.

Hiseccers are the blue collar workers of EVE, dismissed by the CCP government and looked down by the nullsec elite. They're many, they're unorganized, they're uninvolved. They are not as much players as True Players, the polically correct elite that attends Fanfests and patrols the forums and votes the CSM; the little minority that grieves and scams and bullies and gives CCP news headlines and shapes New Eden by stealing from hisec to fix the issues the elite creates itself.

But then this situation leads to conflcit. You can't tell 75% your customers that their 4.5 milllion dollars a month are not worth it and they're good only to be abused and looked down. In the best case, they will leave. In the worst case, they will undertake what lone wolf types can undertake: metagaming.

Hisec is taking way too much stick. Drop a few carrots before it's too late, or plain stop taking from hisec to fix whatever issues creates the elite.

WE are paying YOUR bills. Stop threading on us!
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#965 - 2012-05-07 18:15:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
shal ri wrote:
lets not even talk about the blob factor that goes with a pos bash. its not needed. leave the blobs to low/null.

@ dream five

its easy to fix holes with concord. just make them more reactive and powerful and there u go job done. wars are a diff matter as it not only has its own rules to worry about but also the general game rules that come into play. ie making a new corp, players dropping out or joining up, and startin an alliance.

how is CCP goin to stop ppl from makin a new corp to dec alliances/corps with any set of rules they put in place without making yet another hole for ppl to use.

in the end its coming up with the best set of rules that covers most of the issues that will work out


Yeah you have to think a bit harder on this one and formulate your goals more clearly. I still think CCP hasn't formulated their goals clearly enough in regards to wardecs. In particular the part where you can engage players in corps but not in NPC corps doesn't make any sense and they know it. Make it so that either you can permagrief people by allowing individual wardecs, or make it so you can't grief people out of player corps and only allow to engage POSes.
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#966 - 2012-05-07 18:17:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Xorv wrote:
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.


Ad hominem. Xorv's credibility just took another big hit.
Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
#967 - 2012-05-07 20:54:49 UTC
Captain Thunk wrote:
War decs currently only catch the afk, because of the plethora of warnings, helpful hints and information that goes into warning either side of the others presence. It takes minimal effort to skirt around the aggressors and people are naturally drawn to the path of least resistance. Aggressors too are drawn to this path which is why you find 99% of them in or on the route to Jita. If you take the time to look at how Eve wars ended up in this position you will find the reasons behind why war decs aren't currently used as intended. A long time ago, when such things were more popular, fighting could occur all over high sec, as a noob in 2006 I would frequently be flying around in my punisher gasping in awe as fighting errupted at a gate, lasors zapping and missiles zooming everywhere. This was because at the time, being in a war and knowing who and where you enemy was took a certain amount of effort. Both sides had to peruse killboards and build a memberlist of the corp(s) oppossing them and add them to their addressbook. This took time and effort, the reasoning was because back then you didn't see standings or war target symbols in the local list. You literally wouldn't know a war target was in your system unless you show info'd everyone in local, had them in your addressbook or they suddenly appeared on your overview. This made the whole scenario more dangerous and exciting, even when you didn't see the green light of your addressbook warning you then there was still the possibility of one of the corps members lurking in your system that you hadn't found on a killboard and added to your list.


I'm in favor of returning to this. Victory should favor the prepared... not the lazy.

Whomever said, "You only get one shot to make a good impression," was utterly wrong. I've made plenty of great impressions with my Autocannons 
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#968 - 2012-05-07 21:05:56 UTC
It's unlikely that you'll ever see CCP do anything to make local less effective as an intel source, in fact people keep talking about making local sortable by standings, so even in busy highsec systems with hundreds of people in them it will be trivial to know that a war target is in system with you.

People constantly whine about how heavily neutrals are used in highsec wars, but the exact reason they are used is that it's so easy to determine the location numbers, and disposition of an enemy that it's extremely difficult to make engagements happen if either side suspects that the other is in a stronger position. The only option if you actually want to fight when two fleets have perfect intel on eachother at all times is to camouflage as much of your strength as possible via neutrality.

It sucks balls.
Kile Kitmoore
#969 - 2012-05-08 23:35:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Kile Kitmoore
Now that your pegging Wardec costs to corp. member counts is there a problem with the way EVE calculates the number of players in a corp.? Should this calculation not be tied to active accounts?


If somebody has already asked, please accept my apologize.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#970 - 2012-05-09 02:06:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Xorv
Dream Five wrote:
Xorv wrote:
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.


Ad hominem. Xorv's credibility just took another big hit.


Lol Dream Five has called my credibility into question, by latching on to a single part of my post like a starving dog to a scrap of meat, I'm ruined! Roll How many more "big hits" do I have before I reach 0 credibility like yourself?

And what exactly would you call someone that showed up to a baseball game and insisted on playing cricket, or wrestling competition and insisted on rock, paper, scissors... when you come to Sandbox PvP game demanding Themepark PvE that's the equivalent of what you are doing. I would say calling those people fools would be very charitable.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#971 - 2012-05-09 02:28:26 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
Xorv wrote:
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.


Ad hominem. Xorv's credibility just took another big hit.


Lol Dream Five has called my credibility into question, by latching on to a single part of my post like a starving dog to a scrap of meat, I'm ruined! Roll How many more "big hits" do I have before I reach 0 credibility like yourself?

And what exactly would you call someone that showed up to a baseball game and insisted on playing cricket, or wrestling competition and insisted on rock, paper, scissors... when you come to Sandbox PvP game demanding Themepark PvE that's the equivalent of what you are doing. I would say calling those people fools would be very charitable.


Last time I checked there was low and null sec.

People like yourself keep persistantly mentioning the pvp centric crap, yet you forget that you have all the available pvp you want in low sec, and much higher profits at arguably minimal risks in null sec.

It's funny that you attempt to push more pvp on high sec players, yet you seem to not want to take any risks and pvp where pvp is free.

Hmm? Is it just me, or are you trying to get you kicks with the least amount of risks? Sounds very high sec'y carebearish to me.

CCP make a great decision to implement a high sec area where players can generally be more safe. This has helped to greatly increase their membership numbers.
Start taking away from what high sec is and that membership start to go down.

However, players in null sec keep suggesting that CCP make high sec less friendly, yet they refuse to realize that they've essentially attempted their best to turn their null sec zones into a more profitable high sec.

So, instead of CCP spending all their time protecting the major alliances from wardecs through costs, and instead of pushing more pvp on those who don't want it....
Perhaps CCP should be working on a way to make null sec what it's supposed to be and find a way to make the alliance battle it out.

Null sec is supposed to be the most hostile of hostile territories with massive battles for SOV happening on all fronts and the larger you become and the more you grow, then the more you have to defend.
However, they seem to enjoy allowing the alliances to instead get all their pvp jollies from ganks in high sec.

It's null sec and low sec that need to be fixed, not high sec.
pashared
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#972 - 2012-05-09 02:41:27 UTC
I dont think these changes are ready for TQ: you should take some more time and really make somthing that matters.

as i see it now it will be released, explioted, nerfed and patched and we will be back business as usual with a shite war dec system. might as well leave it as is.


no where in eve should be safe, not high sec not noob systems.


IMHO: if large null sec alliances have the time and ISK to goof off in high sec they are not being challeged or engaged enough thats for sure.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#973 - 2012-05-09 15:13:01 UTC
pashared wrote:

no where in eve should be safe, not high sec not noob systems.

.


Why?

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
pashared
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#974 - 2012-05-09 16:27:25 UTC  |  Edited by: pashared
Vincent Athena wrote:
pashared wrote:

no where in eve should be safe, not high sec not noob systems.

.


Why?



because EVE is a game of weighted risk from day one. every time you undock your putting your money on the table for someone to take.

and as far as high sec goes, a little attention and common sense goes a long way.


thats why war decs are soO important, it allows high sec to govern itself resource wise. my frist corp said "your not really playing eve unless your war dec'ed" what that really means is your not playing eve unless there is some risk.



War Dec's create risk. EVE is a game of risk from the ground up. the sooner a players learns that the better, becuase if not you end up with aged players not understanding the game they play untill they loose somthing. then they really find out if they like eve or not.



no free to play, dust on pc!!!!
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#975 - 2012-05-09 16:53:32 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
Xorv wrote:
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.


Ad hominem. Xorv's credibility just took another big hit.


Lol Dream Five has called my credibility into question, by latching on to a single part of my post like a starving dog to a scrap of meat, I'm ruined! Roll How many more "big hits" do I have before I reach 0 credibility like yourself?

And what exactly would you call someone that showed up to a baseball game and insisted on playing cricket, or wrestling competition and insisted on rock, paper, scissors... when you come to Sandbox PvP game demanding Themepark PvE that's the equivalent of what you are doing. I would say calling those people fools would be very charitable.


Looks more like you are the one who keeps hanging onto your generic "PVP sandbox" blanket statement. The devil is in the details. "PVP sandbox" is a completely meaningless statement without going into details. Your continued insistence on generic hand waving fits the definition of demagogue.

dem·a·gogue/ˈdeməˌgäg/
Noun:
A political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

And arguing with demagogues is like wrestling with a pig in the mud - you get dirty and the pig likes it.
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#976 - 2012-05-09 16:56:09 UTC
pashared wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
pashared wrote:

no where in eve should be safe, not high sec not noob systems.

.


Why?



because EVE is a game of weighted risk from day one. every time you undock your putting your money on the table for someone to take.

and as far as high sec goes, a little attention and common sense goes a long way.


thats why war decs are soO important, it allows high sec to govern itself resource wise. my frist corp said "your not really playing eve unless your war dec'ed" what that really means is your not playing eve unless there is some risk.



War Dec's create risk. EVE is a game of risk from the ground up. the sooner a players learns that the better, becuase if not you end up with aged players not understanding the game they play untill they loose somthing. then they really find out if they like eve or not.



no free to play, dust on pc!!!!


That's in theory, in practice people can drop out to NPC corps and ignore all of the above. So this definitely doesn't apply to mining or logistics, so this only effectively affects POS-related activities. That's why i keep saying, don't bother player corp members with dropping out or allow individual wardecs. The exercise of forcing people to drop out of corp is dumb.
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#977 - 2012-05-09 16:59:16 UTC
pashared wrote:
I dont think these changes are ready for TQ: you should take some more time and really make somthing that matters.

as i see it now it will be released, explioted, nerfed and patched and we will be back business as usual with a shite war dec system. might as well leave it as is.


no where in eve should be safe, not high sec not noob systems.


IMHO: if large null sec alliances have the time and ISK to goof off in high sec they are not being challeged or engaged enough thats for sure.


Actually a safe space where you can recover from losses is required in order for the game to function otherwise it will be possible to permagrief players into quitting and CCP is smarter than allowing that. EVE will then turn into a game of self-elimination.
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#978 - 2012-05-09 17:04:48 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Xorv wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
Xorv wrote:
EVE is a Sandbox MMORPG built around PvP, it is totally inappropriate to have separate zones for PvP and PvE. High Sec must be made more dangerous or converted into a trade/newbie zone. Fools asking for otherwise should STFU and go play a Themepark MMORPG.


Ad hominem. Xorv's credibility just took another big hit.


Lol Dream Five has called my credibility into question, by latching on to a single part of my post like a starving dog to a scrap of meat, I'm ruined! Roll How many more "big hits" do I have before I reach 0 credibility like yourself?

And what exactly would you call someone that showed up to a baseball game and insisted on playing cricket, or wrestling competition and insisted on rock, paper, scissors... when you come to Sandbox PvP game demanding Themepark PvE that's the equivalent of what you are doing. I would say calling those people fools would be very charitable.


Last time I checked there was low and null sec.

People like yourself keep persistantly mentioning the pvp centric crap, yet you forget that you have all the available pvp you want in low sec, and much higher profits at arguably minimal risks in null sec.

It's funny that you attempt to push more pvp on high sec players, yet you seem to not want to take any risks and pvp where pvp is free.

Hmm? Is it just me, or are you trying to get you kicks with the least amount of risks? Sounds very high sec'y carebearish to me.

CCP make a great decision to implement a high sec area where players can generally be more safe. This has helped to greatly increase their membership numbers.
Start taking away from what high sec is and that membership start to go down.

However, players in null sec keep suggesting that CCP make high sec less friendly, yet they refuse to realize that they've essentially attempted their best to turn their null sec zones into a more profitable high sec.

So, instead of CCP spending all their time protecting the major alliances from wardecs through costs, and instead of pushing more pvp on those who don't want it....
Perhaps CCP should be working on a way to make null sec what it's supposed to be and find a way to make the alliance battle it out.

Null sec is supposed to be the most hostile of hostile territories with massive battles for SOV happening on all fronts and the larger you become and the more you grow, then the more you have to defend.
However, they seem to enjoy allowing the alliances to instead get all their pvp jollies from ganks in high sec.

It's null sec and low sec that need to be fixed, not high sec.


+1.
pashared
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#979 - 2012-05-09 20:46:58 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
pashared wrote:
I dont think these changes are ready for TQ: you should take some more time and really make somthing that matters.

as i see it now it will be released, explioted, nerfed and patched and we will be back business as usual with a shite war dec system. might as well leave it as is.


no where in eve should be safe, not high sec not noob systems.


IMHO: if large null sec alliances have the time and ISK to goof off in high sec they are not being challeged or engaged enough thats for sure.


Actually a safe space where you can recover from losses is required in order for the game to function otherwise it will be possible to permagrief players into quitting and CCP is smarter than allowing that. EVE will then turn into a game of self-elimination.



this is nothing new, and if your unwilling or cluless enough to put yourself in a position where all you have is a noob ship n 0 isk, then maybe eve is not a game for you.


I loath gankers in high sec, and make sure im never a victim( thou now by saying so i might be sought out and blowed up for saying that =þ challege accpeted ??) ive even disco domied a mac or two. and ive been able to do so because eve is the game it is.

anyways getting of topic here, if you wanna delve mor start a new thread of eve mail me.



no free to play, dust on pc!!!!!!
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#980 - 2012-05-09 22:40:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Athena
pashared wrote:
my frist corp said "your not really playing eve unless your war dec'ed" what that really means is your not playing eve unless there is some risk.

It helps to define what risk in Eve is. Its time and isk. If you lose a ship, what you have lost is the isk to replace it, or the time to make the isk to replace it.

Seen this way, anything that takes isk away, or reduces the rate at which it can be made, is risk. Consider two cases:

1) I make 30 million an hour but lose a 100 million isk ship every 10 hours.

2) I make 10 million isk an hour and cannot possibly lose a ship.

Is #2 less risk than #1? No, because after 10 hours of play I have less isk.

So why would I choose #2? Because I do not like stress. I play games to relax. I do not play to get The Rush as I do not get The Rush. (According to Dr Drew Pinsky, that's genetic. You are born to get The Rush, or you are not).

If you stay in a PC corp, the risk will be war. If you drop to a NPC corp the risk is the NPC tax. In so many other ways, there is risk of not making the best isk in high sec. Having war or combat of any sort is not needed for there to be risk.

Before you say "Play a different game"; what multiplayer spaceship game would you suggest?

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction