open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Reasons that killing suicide ganking is Good.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Praleon
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:07:00 - [1]
 

I don't normally chime in on these kinds of topics because standard internet trollery is far beneath my general concern, and I know that 95% of the responses will be thus.

That being said, EVE Online is a video game that tries to simulate life in a futuristic universe with empires, rules, society, etc.

I will dismantle this and all similar posts from 3 perspectives, simulation-wise, game balance-wise, and meta-game wise.
1) Simulationist
One part of an Empire is "Law"... to hold any credibility, all empires must enforce laws that protect peaceful life within them. If they don't? Well, that makes them just about as useless as your average 0.0 space corp... completely incapable of controlling what happens in its own space. That's why 0.0 corps don't turn their space into 0.5, 0.7, or 1.0.

In its current state, the game allows you to "suicide gank" innocent people and take, potentially, every last thing they have. The POINT of CONCORD shooting you down when you do this is to PROTECT the assets of ANYONE in their space. That's what a "government" does, and it's what this simulates.

TECHNICALLY, they should stay at the scene and revive the damaged ship, protect the wreckage, and/or return the contents of the destroyed ship to the original owner... which is what the police would really do if we were to gang up and wreck a semi on the highway in real life. If we want to rob a semi truck in said fashion, we'll have to do it out in the boonies somewhere and clear out before the police arrive. They are SIMULATING the safety of controlled space in this fashion, and the proposed changes PERFECTLY REINFORCE THIS CONCEPT.

2) Game Balance
"I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here...

As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode.

What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere."

This kind of retort indicates absolutely minimal thinking about the repercussions of the behaviors of players in the game. I've never been suicide ganked. As a matter of fact, I didn't buy an obelisk because of suicide ganking being present in the game. They will in fact kill suicide ganking, as, it is not an intended method of taking people's things away from them. 0.5-1.0 space is considered "safe space" and is a place for people to play the game when they DO NOT FEEL LIKE MESSING WITH YOU.

Now, how is it not balanced? It allows those who are trying to SAFELY MAKE A LIVING to be ruthlessly GANKED by those who already HAVE MADE A LIVING in EVE. This is one of EVE's forms of griefing. The dev's have CLEARLY COMMUNICATED that they intend 0.0 and lowsec to be the place for PVP. Already in game is the ability to war dec someone's corporation in high sec, to steal someone's jetcanned minerals, and to salvage other people's wrecks. These things should be enough.

To be continued:

Praleon
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:09:00 - [2]
 

People doing these BORING activities in hi-sec are PAYING THE WAGES so that they can begin to participate in PVP, or at least work on the sidelines of PVP. They deserve to be completely robbed for this?

Game balance wouldn't have it such that you and your gang of 10 guys get a big reward for blowing up a ship that CANNOT BE FITTED TO DEFEND AGAINST YOU. Game balance would not have you harvest a sack of BPOs from an innocent traveller and be able to turn massive profit from that which you got with little to no risk. RISK vs. REWARD. You want big reward? Go set up some moon mining operations out in 0.0, explore, invent, and haul. Steal from those who are doing it there. That's where the RISK comes in for you. This dude tugging BILLIONS of ISK worth of tritanium in Hi-Sec? He's gonna make like 15% profit for 3 hours of infinitely boring work with no risk. You want to be able to cut in on his profit and add a ridiculous risk to turn his 3 hour SNORE-A-THON into a 3 hour, potentially GAME RUINING LOSS? TOUGH ****. Those days are over, and CCP's wise for it.

3) Meta-Game
The game above the game... where CCP earns money by attracting customers, and, we have more fun as the population and size of the game universe increases... can only be positively influenced by this change... If a group of 5 miners quit because they all lost their 100 mil ISK hulks and tons of minerals for the 4th time, that's 5 less players contributing positively to the in-game economy. That's $75 USD less for CCPs wallet, and that's 5 people walking around, anytime being asked about EVE saying, "Well, the game is okay, but, people who have been playing it for 3+ years pretty much run it and will kill you for no reason with you having no recourse. They'll blow up your ships and take everything you've got by suicide ganking, etc. I do not recommend the game"... and believe me, EVE ONLINE has enough of those walking around.

So what if you quit? When you're asked about EVE Online you're going to say "omg it suxors because u used to be able to steal from innocent people and have no punishment but then they put police in and i have to hack it out in 0.0 now and lolz it sucks." Really? You and your suicide gank-squad's $75 USD is FAR LESS IMPORTANT than the miner and hauler player's $75 USD, because they are RESPONSIBLY PLAYING THE GAME rather than EXPLOITING POOR GAME AI AGAINST FELLOW PLAYERS. You and your mates are giving people incentive to QUIT the game, while he and his mates are helping people afford better ships for less money. Period.


To conclude...
These forums, and all proposed changes to this MMO and any other MMO I've played (DAOC, DDO, WOW, LOTRO, Planetside, Tabula Rasa, etc etc etc) are always plagued by ELITISTS who are so afraid that they'll lose their superiority that NO CHANGE is good, and by TROLLS/GRIEFERS, who only want to play the game to boost their own ego by annoying and hurting other people.

OMG CCP "caved" and listened to its important user-base instead of it's self-assuming-of-importance 0.0/suicide gank crowd? LOL. Give me a break. CCP is doing a great job of LISTENING TO ITS USERS. If they didn't they'd be like the other MMOs out there, that blindly just do their own thing. CCP should listen less to its old players and more to its new. I'm neither, I'm a couple years in...

EVE is the best MMO out there. Don't let your own lack of insight ruin it because you are SO concerned with trying to seem elite and hardcore. And for this issue? Take your ELITISM and HARDCORENESS out to lowsec (empty) and 0.0 (too hot for you? Oh, I thought you were good at this game.)

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:09:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Praleon
I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here...

As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode.

What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere.
QFT

Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:09:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Praleon

To be continued:



Please don't.

Soporo
Caldari
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:09:00 - [5]
 

It's not killing Suiciding, your thread title is wrong. It's just forcing doods to be more choosy.

Winterblink
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:10:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Praleon

To be continued:



Please don't.


Too late.

Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:11:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Winterblink
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Praleon

To be continued:



Please don't.


Too late.



NERF COPYPASTA TBH!

Qui Shon
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:32:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Praleon
I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here...

As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode.

What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere.
QFT


CCP lost it's integrity back with T20 and related issues. You can't loose integrity twice.

Suicide ganking isn't being killed at all btw, it's just being given proper costs.

drf1
Amarr
Mythos Corp
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:34:00 - [9]
 

Is suicide ganging about to be nerfed?

Why i see aroung people arquing about that?

Kyra Felann
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:36:00 - [10]
 

Your "simulationist" point is not very good. CONCORD does not enforce normal laws. They don't enforce laws on the planets and probably not in stations either. They don't enforce any given empire's laws. They enforce laws for capsuleers, who are citizens of no empire. Comparing a capsuleer's wreck to a semi truck on the highway is just silly.

Second, the laws of a society far in the future are going to be different from those of the modern day. You are comparing it too closely the laws on one planet in a small group of civilized countries in the modern day to the laws of an interstellar UN-like peacekeeping force in the far future after the post-Eve gate collapse dark age.

That said, insurance companies paying out for suicide ganking or CONCORD interventions in general makes no sense. Self-interest definitely still exists in the future and Pend Insurance should probably have been bankrupt long ago with as many suicide ganker ships as it pays for.

Mika Meroko
Minmatar
Crayon Posting Inc
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:36:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Mika Meroko on 06/08/2008 19:37:42
Originally by: Soporo
It's not killing Suiciding, your thread title is wrong. It's just forcing doods to be more choosy.


this


and for you people who pull the cold harsh thing out...


is it cold or harsh that FAILED sucide ganks cost you next to nothing?...(insurance)


answer me that question before you keep thumping your chest.... and how CCP is backpaddling...


Should FAILED suicide ganks be rewarded??? and cost nothing?

Roy Batty68
Caldari
Immortal Dead
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:41:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Ki An
COPYPASTA


I'll take, "What do you get when you mix an Olive Garden with a Kinko's for 900$, Alex"...


This thread is now about carbs and carbon paper... imo...


SurrenderMonkey
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:43:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Praleon


In its current state, the game allows you to "suicide gank" innocent people and take, potentially, every last thing they have. The POINT of CONCORD shooting you down when you do this is to PROTECT the assets of ANYONE in their space. That's what a "government" does, and it's what this simulates.



False. Concord is the police. The point of police isn't really to protect anyone. The point of police, generally speaking, is to (in concert with district attorneys and the judicial system) punish offenders.


Quote:
TECHNICALLY, they should stay at the scene and revive the damaged ship, protect the wreckage, and/or return the contents of the destroyed ship to the original owner... which is what the police would really do if we were to gang up and wreck a semi on the highway in real life.


I like when people selectively apply the, "Well, in real life..." argument. You are aware that in "real life" the police can be evaded, yes? And that this isn't possible in Eve? In real life, the police do not spawn on top of you a few seconds after you commit a crime. And, contrary to this...

Quote:
If we want to rob a semi truck in said fashion, we'll have to do it out in the boonies somewhere and clear out before the police arrive. They are SIMULATING the safety of controlled space in this fashion, and the proposed changes PERFECTLY REINFORCE THIS CONCEPT.


...fairly absurd assertion, it turns out that in "real life" urban centers are generally the most crime-ridden - not rural "low sec" areas. In "real life" someone can probably rob that semi-truck without the police ever knowing about it until someone finds the driver's corpse in an alley the next day.

You should think long and hard about whether you really want "real life" standards applied to Eve's police. I think you'll find that, on the whole, if concord were to simulate RL police, there'd be little reason to pirate anywhere BUT high sec.

Quote:

2) Game Balance
"..."

This kind of retort indicates absolutely minimal thinking about the repercussions of the behaviors of players in the game. I've never been suicide ganked. As a matter of fact, I didn't buy an obelisk because of suicide ganking being present in the game. They will in fact kill suicide ganking, as, it is not an intended method of taking people's things away from them. 0.5-1.0 space is considered "safe space" and is a place for people to play the game when they DO NOT FEEL LIKE MESSING WITH YOU.


CCP has stated on more than one occasion that there is not supposed to be any perfectly safe space.

Additionally, you prattled on about repercussions at the start of that paragraph, but you didn't actually mention any. What repercussions? Is the fact that Praleon didn't buy an obelisk because he fears a suicide gank supposed to be considered a repercussion?

Quote:

Now, how is it not balanced? It allows those who are trying to SAFELY MAKE A LIVING


So you really think it should be possible to "make a living" in Eve with absolutely no risk of loss while afk piloting between systems? Really? And it's not just "a living", either. It's vast sums of money.

Quote:
to be ruthlessly GANKED by those who already HAVE MADE A LIVING in EVE.


You say this like it's a bad thing.

Quote:

This is one of EVE's forms of griefing. The dev's have CLEARLY COMMUNICATED that they intend 0.0 and lowsec to be the place for PVP.


They've also communicated on several occasions that Eve is a harsh world where the only safe place should be docked inside a station.

Quote:
Already in game is the ability to war dec someone's corporation in high sec, to steal someone's jetcanned minerals, and to salvage other people's wrecks. These things should be enough.

To be continued:



So jetcan miners should have to suffer, mission runners should suffer, anyone in a player corp should suffer, but haulers shouldn't?

Gabbot
Gallente
Thanos and Killjoy Productions
Huzzah Federation
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:43:00 - [14]
 

tbh with all these nerfs to small-scale pvp CCP would need to offer up some redeeming feature for pvpers.
If they dont, they have just proved, that no matter what the feature is, aslong as you whine enough about it. Theyll change it.Rolling EyesRolling Eyes

Schalac
Caldari
Apocalypse Reign
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:46:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Praleon
and that's 5 people walking around, anytime being asked about EVE saying, "Well, the game is okay, but, people who have been playing it for 3+ years pretty much run it and will kill you for no reason with you having no recourse. They'll blow up your ships and take everything you've got by suicide ganking, etc. I do not recommend the game"... and believe me, EVE ONLINE has enough of those walking around.
If you want to know, I've posted a fitting for a caracal that you can be in with a days training that I use for suicide ganking.http://www.battleclinic.com/forum/index.php/topic,21220.0.html If those 5 players are going to quit over a suicide ganking then they weren't really cut out for EVE in the first place.

SurrenderMonkey
Posted - 2008.08.06 20:05:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: SurrenderMonkey on 06/08/2008 20:11:06
Originally by: Praleon
People doing these BORING activities in hi-sec are PAYING THE WAGES so that they can begin to participate in PVP, or at least work on the sidelines of PVP. They deserve to be completely robbed for this?


They deserve to be at risk to be robbed, yes. All the whining makes it sound like this happens to most people several times a day. No one is getting suicide ganked so much that they're going bust from it (unless they have, for some reason, collected all of their assets into one ship). If that were the cause, they'd stop hauling.

Quote:
Game balance wouldn't have it such that you and your gang of 10 guys get a big reward for blowing up a ship that CANNOT BE FITTED TO DEFEND AGAINST YOU.


There's a REALLY easy way for players to prevent this from happening. By, you know, not carrying that much at once. "Don't put all your eggs in one basket" is pretty conventional wisdom, but for some reason Eve carebears think they deserve a free pass to ignore it.

Quote:
Game balance would not have you harvest a sack of BPOs from an innocent traveller and be able to turn massive profit from that which you got with little to no risk. RISK vs. REWARD. You want big reward? Go set up some moon mining operations out in 0.0, explore, invent, and haul. Steal from those who are doing it there. That's where the RISK comes in for you.


Do you really want to make this about "Risk Vs. Reward" while you're arguing in favor of COMPLETE SAFETY for high-security operators? Complete safety, equating to no risk, must have a very detrimental impact on the potential reward in any Risk Vs. Reward paradigm.

Quote:
This dude tugging BILLIONS of ISK worth of tritanium in Hi-Sec? He's gonna make like 15% profit for 3 hours of infinitely boring work with no risk.


Holy ****. This is possibly the dumbest thing I've ever read. Congratulations. You think 15% profit on MULTIPLE BILLIONS inside 3 hours for ZERO risk is reasonable? Did you even think about how much money that is? Since it was billions, plural, that's over 100 million per hour at a minimum. High sec mission runners make less money and bear more risk. Way to fail.


Quote:
You want to be able to cut in on his profit and add a ridiculous risk to turn his 3 hour SNORE-A-THON into a 3 hour, potentially GAME RUINING LOSS? TOUGH ****. Those days are over, and CCP's wise for it.


First of all, since his profit (judging by the numbers you used) is ****ing absurd by anyone's standards, it clearly needs some cutting into one way or another. Over 100m per hour? Christ.

Secondly, anyone who puts themselves in a position to suffer a "game ruining loss" has it coming. It's not hard to avoid.

Finally, they've made it pretty clear that it will still be possible, just more difficult and more expensive. You can bet your ass that I would GLADLY eat a paltry 100m battleship loss to inflict a "game ruining loss" on someone. Forget the isk income, I'd do that for great justice.

Quote:

3) Meta-Game
The game above the game....blah blah blah conserving characters....



This isn't supported in reality. Eve's player base has been pretty steadily growing despite its rather harsh environment. It's not only possible, but likely, that this is because a lot of people find its environment attractive, and that changing that will have a detrimental effect on the game's population.

The rest of this section was a pretty pathetic strawman, so I won't bother.

Cogswin Iannyen
Caldari
Mafia Redux
Posted - 2008.08.06 20:09:00 - [17]
 

You compared EVE to real life.
You, sir, fail at smart.

Praleon
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:43:00 - [18]
 

"First of all, since his profit (judging by the numbers you used) is ****ing absurd by anyone's standards, it clearly needs some cutting into one way or another. Over 100m per hour? Christ."

So a guy can work and earn hundreds of millions with HUGE investment... I didn't think about the numbers, because they weren't to be nitpicked... if you really look at it, the maximum amount of tritanium you can carry in a Freighter is around 100m. That's about 250 million worth... the 15% markup was my estimate for what you get doing simple tritanium flips, buy cheap, haul to hub, sell. the 15% he makes is going to be what? 37.5 million ISK for 3 hours work?

Far less than mission runners can roll in that time, far less than even a good miner can do... HI-SEC HAULING is not a mega-billionaire profession. It's simply not.

What YOU are arguing for, is the ability for one MORON to blow someone up in the space of what, 7-9 minutes, tops, and make over 100 million ISK by killing a guy who isn't fighting back?

Think before you type.


Oh, and, OH MY GOD, I compared a video game to real life? Really? That's a huge mistake? You do realize, honestly, that games (all forms, from board to 3d FPS) are made to mimic real life in order to create stories and suspension of disbelief.

When the POLICE roll up and watch people murder and steal from me, they aren't CONCORD POLICE anymore. They are DUMB AI. CCP is making them more like what they are called, and less like stupid AI.

Wake up, kids, CCP is making the changes to make this LESS VIABLE, and I'd wager, mostly impossible.

It's simple: Hi-Sec: Low Risk, Low Reward. "ZOMG WHAT RISK IS THERE IN HAULING?" What if you buy low to sell at a high order, and someone beats you to it, leaving you with inventory? You risked 3 hours of your time and lost ISK. You don't have to be BLOWN UP to fail at the market economy. "SAFETY" doesn't necessarily mean your corporal safety. The RISK in business comes from SUPPLY AND DEMAND, not HIGHWAY PIRATES.

Low-Sec: Pointless.
0.0: High Risk, High Reward. Belt rat for 30 minutes, earn 10 million ISK or more. Catch a hauler out there, earn whatever he was hauling. Gatecamp and rob passers-by of tech 2 modules all day... etc etc etc

You're going to call hi-sec hauling "free ISK" when in fact it takes MORE THOUGHT, CALCULATION, and TIME to earn the SMALLEST RETURN when compared to most other professions in EVE.

I can explore down a radar site in 2 or 3 hours, spend virtually no ISK (a batch of probes? pfft), and roll back out with over 50 million ISK in invention supplies, in HIGH SEC. That's on my toon with lowbie exploration skills, I did it last tuesday. NO RISK.

I can run 3 level III missions in a 40 million ISK ship and earn back over 13 million ISK. That's one level IV mission. NO RISK.

Yet you're going to pick on the guys who do the super-boring low-profit hi-sec, 3 hour trade run for a few extra mil? I'm not saying there aren't incedible deals here and there where you luck out and earn 100 mil on a trip, but, there are also pirates that you pop and get a module worth that much, so, SO WHAT? You just want an easy pass that allows you to feel like a "cool pirate"

Now, I want you to go look up a word. "Hypocrit". In the dictionary...

Then, I want you to think about saying:
"OMG CCP caved to whine posts" IN YOUR OWN WHINE POSTS THAT ARE BEGGING FOR CCP TO CAVE IN THE OTHER DIRECTION. Obviously you think it's a valid strategy and that CCP should, or you wouldn't POST.

Bottom Line: CCP made a good call here. The only people who don't want it are those who want to be able to earn 100 million ISK in 12 seconds from the hard work of others. The ones who DO want it are the ones who want a valid way to earn small amounts of money without being SCREWED WITH BY TROLLS.

Game over. Quote some more and try to make some more quips, kids, you're all failing hard.

-Pra

Praleon
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:48:00 - [19]
 

Oh, and of note... I'd like to offer a rendition of the EVE Universe that suicide gankers would have us enjoy:

"Maleatu Shakor elected Prime Minister of Minmatar Republic

The final ballots have been counted in the Minmatar Republic elections, with lone candidate Maleatu Shakor winning by default.

At his inaugural speech this afternoon, Prime Minister Shakor said:

"Sons and daughters of Matar, make no mistake abo-" *EXPLOSION* "ROFL I TAKE YOUR PLANET LOOT NOW. HA HA HA. THERE WAS A STORY THAT WAS HAPPENING BUT WE GOT INSURED SHIPS AND BLEW UP EVERY1 lol NOW that guy doesn't have to worri about his FAEC. lawl. Eve is cold and harsh lolz. Thems the breaks. wtf no tech 2 modules at inaugural speeches this game sux, i'ma whine on the forum now. CRIME should happen everywhere liek in real lief, dont campare eve 2 reel life lolz. police dont help people hahahahhahhahahahah they collect taxes. 9/11 was faked worse than the moon landing."

Larkonis Trassler
Doctrine.
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:58:00 - [20]
 

Angry troll is angry.
-1/10

I don't even know where to start with this tbh. You fail on so many levels.

Praleon
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.08.07 02:01:00 - [21]
 

"The point of police, generally speaking, is to (in concert with district attorneys and the judicial system) punish offenders."

SurrenderMonkey... your point is invalid... You can't just pick and choose officer duties to call "the point of police". The police actually do exist to keep you safe, unfortunately for your paper-thin argument. They don't exist to hurt criminals, but to prevent them from hurting more people, and, where applicable "Serve and Protect" by doing things like breaking up domestic disputes, stopping maniacal drivers, preventing drunk driving, and, as they have done for me before in real life, retrieving stolen goods from criminals and returning them to their original owner.


The main point of this line of conversation goes back to game balance. Starting players need a "leveling" area, and, older players who have fallen on harder times need a "safe spot" to build their bank back up. Suicide ganking short-circuits those things and, as "cold and harsh" as you want to seem, stripping away all of someone's assets and the CONCORD POLICE just watching it happen isn't good for the game. That makes people HATE eve online. "omg they are soft"... you can say that after it happens to you.

And, to everyone in general:
As a matter of fact, if you're so HARD and they are so SOFT, instead of just calling people carebears and running your mouths about how awesome you are... simulate the loss for yourself... no, really, go on... take about 75% of the stuff you have in the game, and trash it right now. You seem to think it's their fault they lost it, so will it be your fault that you lost yours... and, in the same boat, surely you can still speak your "harsh and cold" rhetoric... but with absolutely no loss in hi-sec to speak of, well, it seems that your opinion is quite silly, right?



It's good game design to allow players to choose their level of risk. Maybe the rewards should be tweaked, sure, that's a seperate argument entirely. Caldari are INCREDIBLY good at mission-running by comparison to most other races... therefore, less risk, more reward for them? You see? There are billions of little "balance" things we'd have to get into if we go down that road.

For this discussion, they are simply saying "Hi-sec is the lowest possible risk we can realistically create and the game still be fun... and 0.0 is the highest possible risk the community at large creates. Have fun in your sandbox, we've divided it by age and aggression level, some people want to build sand castles, others want to play rugby with chainsaws, but not in the same space, kids."

What this does, is allows them to make a more clear-cut decision on just how much "reward" should be available in the more clearly defined "risk" areas... but, when someone can be "murdered" in "safe" space, who is to say the RISK isn't greater in certain spots/professions because of the generally misconceived safety under which everyone is operating?

Not hard logic to follow. Sorry for the lengthy posts, I only get a couple opportunities per day to hit these forums and I like to try to pre-empt whatever will come up between visits. I get to actually play EVE this way :).

TrulyKosh
Gallente
Dinochrome Brigade
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2008.08.07 02:04:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: SurrenderMonkey


This isn't supported in reality. Eve's player base has been pretty steadily growing despite its rather harsh environment. It's not only possible, but likely, that this is because a lot of people find its environment attractive, and that changing that will have a detrimental effect on the game's population.




Really? When was the last time you saw 60,000 players online? It may just be my personal experience, but Eve took a big hit when AoC was released and so far did not recover from it.

SurrenderMonkey
Posted - 2008.08.07 02:24:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Praleon
"The point of police, generally speaking, is to (in concert with district attorneys and the judicial system) punish offenders."

SurrenderMonkey... your point is invalid... You can't just pick and choose officer duties to call "the point of police".


I'm not "picking and choosing", I'm being "realistic" (since you idiotically decided to drag reality into this). How often do you hear about, for instance, the police saving someone just before they're murdered? Roughly never? Me neither.

You are the one picking and choosing here. Incidentally, staff members have said the *exact* same thing about Concord in the past - that they're not here to keep you from being popped, just to mete out punishment after the fact.

Quote:

The main point of this line of conversation goes back to game balance. Starting players need a "leveling" area, and, older players who have fallen on harder times need a "safe spot" to build their bank back up. Suicide ganking short-circuits those things and, as "cold and harsh" as you want to seem, stripping away all of someone's assets and the CONCORD POLICE just watching it happen isn't good for the game. That makes people HATE eve online. "omg they are soft"... you can say that after it happens to you.



It can't happen to me. There is never any point during which I'm in a position to lose anything that would significantly impact me. It's not a matter of being "hard", it's a matter of not playing like an idiot - something you seem to want a free pass to do.

Quote:
And, to everyone in general:
As a matter of fact, if you're so HARD and they are so SOFT, instead of just calling people carebears and running your mouths about how awesome you are... simulate the loss for yourself...


As I just mentioned, it's not about being "hard", it's about exercising the tiniest bit of wisdom to protect your assets, as opposed to, say, loading your entire game-life into one paper-thin ship and AFK piloting it across 20 jumps. Most players with at least a room-temperature IQ will never be in this position.

Quote:
no, really, go on... take about 75% of the stuff you have in the game, and trash it right now. You seem to think it's their fault they lost it, so will it be your fault that you lost yours... and, in the same boat, surely you can still speak your "harsh and cold" rhetoric... but with absolutely no loss in hi-sec to speak of, well, it seems that your opinion is quite silly, right?



They wouldn't lose theirs in the first place, so you're not demonstrating anything relevant here. You're basically making a plea to emotion on the basis that they'd feel differently if a 100% avoidable situation happened to them. Fail.

Quote:

What this does, is allows them to make a more clear-cut decision on just how much "reward" should be available in the more clearly defined "risk" areas... but, when someone can be "murdered" in "safe" space, who is to say the RISK isn't greater in certain spots/professions because of the generally misconceived safety under which everyone is operating?

Not hard logic to follow. Sorry for the lengthy posts, I only get a couple opportunities per day to hit these forums and I like to try to pre-empt whatever will come up between visits. I get to actually play EVE this way :).



If they're operating under the perception that they're entirely safe, that is their fault. No one has ever claimed that is how it is.

Sergeant Spot
Galactic Geographic BookMark Surveying Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:01:00 - [24]
 

If you want to freely blast away, then get the hell OUT of high sec, and vigorously IGNORE the folks that live in high sec.

I've been saying this for years: If you are seeking pvp, then IGNORE the high sec carebears.

I never have, and never will, understand how folks can be so obsessed with such a limited target selection.

Rawne Karrde
Bre-X Interstellar Shipyards
Ejectile Dysfunction
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:07:00 - [25]
 

Thank you CCP for finally balancing these carebear "pvp'ers". Suicide ganking is not dead, just has much more realistic consequences.

CHAOS100
The Ankou
Raiden.
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:23:00 - [26]
 

TL;DR

Here's my translation without reading:
1. Empire should be safe so people can play EVE hello-kitty style without worry!
2. I want empire to be safe so I can haul my lootz i spent 400 hours running level 4 missions in high sec for!
3. Eve should not involve risk for anyone, whether they are dumb or not!
4. Eve should be more like WOW in order to be better!

soldieroffortune 258
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:26:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Sergeant Spot
If you want to freely blast away, then get the hell OUT of high sec, and vigorously IGNORE the folks that live in high sec.

I've been saying this for years: If you are seeking pvp, then IGNORE the high sec carebears.

I never have, and never will, understand how folks can be so obsessed with such a limited target selection.

Play nice while you butcher each other




(im going to assume that is your sig, since it isnt popping up in the quote brackets)

but LMAOLaughingLaughingLaughing that made me spill a very cold cup of water downstairs, lol

Praleon
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:42:00 - [28]
 

*sigh*
"Here's my translation without reading:
1. Empire should be safe so people can play EVE hello-kitty style without worry!
2. I want empire to be safe so I can haul my lootz i spent 400 hours running level 4 missions in high sec for!
3. Eve should not involve risk for anyone, whether they are dumb or not!
4. Eve should be more like WOW in order to be better!"

1. Blah blah blah, copy paste, "hello kitty" recycled carebear comment. *yawn*
2. Blah blah blah, empire space is too safe cuz i'm hard with my 600 0.0 corpmates and 10+ man gatecamps, i fight like a man, etc etc.
3. blah blah blah extraneous extrapolation which is clearly untrue if you read (which you admittedly didn't. good job) Rolling Eyes
4. blah blah blah, recycled "WOW is for noobs" reference which has zero pertinence. *yawn*

Don't bother replying to my structured arguments and justifications if you are gonna bring such weak sauce to my table. It works like this: Point...counterpoint, or statement, retort. If you have nothing to bring but recycled "World of Warcraft" jabs and post of the month "hello-kitty" micromemes, go find an unstructured post to troll on, lest you just look like a moron trying to sheep along with the "cool kids". Thanks!

Hieronimus Rex
Minmatar
Infinitus Sapientia
Hav0k.
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:44:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Praleon

Simulationist POV



It's unclear what EVE is meant to simulate. A sci-fi fantasy that doesn't exist? How is this a simulation at all? Also it's unclear why EVE should try to simulate anything. It should just try to be a good game.

Originally by: Praleon

Balance POV



What did anything you said have to do with game balance? Anyone can be a victim of suicide ganking. More expensive ships (T2 industrials, freighters) are more resistant to suicide ganking, as they should be. So I don't see how it isn't balanced without any change to CONCORD response time.

Also, you can fit your ship to defend gankers, try adding some hardeners. If you increase your HP enough you won't be worth killing. Carry your rare BPOs around in a well tanked battleship or a fast interceptor. These are simple examples of how to defend against suicide ganking. Also, you can modify your cargo to prevent suicide ganking, or use couriers to avoid the issue altogether.

Originally by: Praleon

Meta-Game POV



EVE is a great game because it is elitist and hardcore. Game knowledge gives you a huge bonus (thus the elitism) and you can lose a lot in a very short time (hardcore element). Without these things it would just be a terrible online mining simulator.

Also I'm not believing you on the ragequit stuff until you can provide numbers. "ZOMG I GOT SCAMMED IM QUITTING" doesn't mean they actually will.

okarukas
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:55:00 - [30]
 

Some say suicide ganking is cold and harsh pvp, but to me it is pvp for the weak those who are scared to take on a player that might win the fight. For those who take joy from hurting people.

Now they cry out as eve just got colder and harsher for them.

You want to pvp go join bobís max op or the NC. For what I have scene on my friends pc it is a rush ok only last a few minutes but what a rush, facing capital ships like there is no tomorrow, knowing full well that everyone who is there is there to fight to protect or take.

If you donít want the big fleet battles join a mercenary corp your war target might or might not fight back but at lest you know that youíre fighting for a cause (ok not your own but at lest you get paid)

Yes you might loss all you have but then the rewards can be great.

This is my own point of view and not that of my corp and or alliance for there point of view please contact the leadership


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only