|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 72 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9837
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 15:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Blog wrote:If you have a kill right against someone, you can activate that kill right to make your target a suspect (i.e. give him a Suspect Flag, as explained in the crimewatch blog[link]). This allows anyone in the vicinity of the suspect to engage him legally. OW! That's just nasty! GÖÑGÖÑGÖÑ
GǪoh, and btw: you might want to insert that link. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9837
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 15:48:00 -
[2] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:With this, there will be a way to find out that a corp with 10 members has only two active pilots. IIRC you tried to avoid exactly this (find out how many players are active in a corp) in the wardec price calculation. I suppose the difference is that, with the wardec calculation, you would have gotten that information for free when you GÇ£triedGÇ¥ to dec them and there would be no way to get it wrong. With this system, you first have to find every member in the corp (which may or may not be possible) and then you have to poll each one of them. That's an awful lot of work for information that might not even be accurate. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9837
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 15:51:00 -
[3] - Quote
darius mclever wrote:in times of evewho. this isnt really that a big hurdle anymore. EVEWho isn't exactly accurate, thoughGǪ
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9837
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 15:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:So what is to stop someone like goons from placing a 10 billion isk bounty on someone they dislike, which pays out with 50 billion ISK in ship and implant losses, then restarting the bounty again, until the person they have set the bounty on has had their assets completely wiped out? For one, the target might wise up to the scheme and start flying ships that pay out less than it costs to kill them, making it worthless to pursue him.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9837
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 16:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
Salpad wrote:Sanna Irvam wrote:I worry about high sec haulers. With the new system, if I understand, i can put a 100k isk bounty on a freighter pilot, buying killrights and having a fleet ganking the freighter without Concord coming... Problem ? You understand it wrong. A bounty does not grant anyone kill rights. Or indeed any new rights they didn't already have. If you gank someone in high-sec, CONCORD will pay you a visit, whether or not your gank victim had a bounty on his head. ^^ Needs to be underscored more because it has been a constant point of misunderstanding ever since the first hints about the new system started coming out.
The only thing this new bounty system will do is make it a risky proposal to fly expensive ships, depending on how the ship value is calculated. For instance, if it were straight market value, a jump freighter would pay out ~1.5bn ISK for the hull alone, which is right up on the edge of being profitable on its ownGǪ and then there's the question of what GÇö if any GÇö payout you get for the cargo and whether or not you can scoop up some loot while you're at it.
Salpad wrote:Correct, but Sanna actually did say "buying killrights". I overlooked that part of her post as well. What kill-rights will a freighter pilot have generated? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9838
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 16:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
Moraguth wrote:(I'm just playing Tippia, don't hate on me) Don't worry, it's bound to happen. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9838
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 16:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:OMG, that's way better than blinking brackets :)
I can't wait for all those derp derp DERP moments I will experience when new crimewatch and bounties/kill rights hit the TQ. It will be like reliving first aggro a year ago. Can I shoot him? No, yes, maybe... Oh sh... why is that guy shooting me?! What, sentries don't help me?! They shoot ME? What do you mean it's because I shot somebody last week? I can feel a new EVE meme coming already: GÇ£don't gank people with your freighterGÇ¥. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9843
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 17:05:00 -
[8] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:You now have the power to potentially punish anyone you want for virtually any reason. The price just needs to be right. Think on that. To be fair, they will kind of have to co-operate and choose to fly ships that generate high enough pay-outs to have people try to cash in the bounty on their headsGǪ but other than that, yes.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9844
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 17:23:00 -
[9] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:With all the changes to the mechanics in the game, what will be the results? If the logi's start repping the person with the bounty on their head, what will happen to the status of the logi's? Bounty is not a criminal flag. What happens is that the ganker gets concorded, and the person with a bounty might survive thanks to the reps (and gets kill rights on the attacker).
If the gank victim fights back and enters a limited engagement with the ganker, then the logi runs the risk of flagging himself as suspect for interfering with the LE, but there should be warning popups (or the new safety system) in place to prevent that. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9844
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 17:29:00 -
[10] - Quote
Sturmwolke wrote:Shall I interpret that as a player with bounty on his/her head can only be attacked in lowsec and below by bounty hunters? Or the other way round? You should interpret it as what it says: bounties have no impact on the legality of attacks.
If you engage someone who's not a legal target in the area you're in, you'll get the appropriate criminal or suspect flags for doing so. If he's a legal target for whatever reason, you can attack him at will. At no point does the fact that he has a bounty on his head make any difference.
Quote:Putting the minimum bounty at 100K is too low imo, it [i]will[i] be abused. In what way? Who's going to go after a target when the bounty hardly covers T1 fittings on a n00bship? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9844
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 17:43:00 -
[11] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:So you are saying that the logi's are OK, as long as the victim does not shoot back? Of course. Standard CrimeWatch 2.0 rules apply: the victim hasn't done anything wrong and hasn't (yet) chosen to engage in any hostilities, so he's a completely clean and free target to rep.
Quote:Another scenario: Griefers place bounties on tons and tons of players associated with Incursions. Now, the log's have to make a choice: Do I rep the victim, and risk him shooting back and suddenly I am flagged, or do I watch him die? More accurately: the logis keep repping and if the victim chooses to flag himself, the logis will get the standard warnings or even automatically shut off if the safety system makes it in. It's the victim's choice if he wants to deny himself logi support (and since CONCORD will be around shortly, there's no reason for him to shoot back).
Quote:And the flip side is even if Incursion fleets make it mandatory that victims cannot shoot back, to protect logi's, you KNOW that the griefers will stuff an Awoxer in a fleet. Imagine the griefing capabilities. The Awoxer "victim" is "ganked" by his Bounty Hunter buddies. The logi's start repping him, because it is understood that the victim will not shoot back. But the victim DOES shoot back, and suddenly all those logi's have a suspect flag and are fair game to the gankers. GǪat which point the logis will automatically switch off and the awoxer (and/or gankers) lose their ships.
Quote:Just how long will it be before Incursion logi's will not be repping players with bounties, or simply all players with bounties will be banned from Incursion fleets. Since there's no reason to ban them from the fleets to begin with, I'd guess roughly the lifetime of EVE. Being in a logi doesn't make much difference GÇö they're tough as nails to gank as it is and are too cheap to produce a good bounty payout, so they won't be worth-while targets. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9846
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 18:01:00 -
[12] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: And this is good for the psychopaths in the game. Someone who has done nothing in the game to warrant an attack can be griefed right out of the game "legally". I am not surprised the CSM is onboard with this, given the vast majority are the null sec zealots this was targeted to appease.
People who have done nothing are not punished. People get what they deserve, even if they lack the wit to understand why they so richly deserve it. GǪnot to mention that bounties have no effect on whether or not someone can be griefed out of the game, legally or otherwise. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9846
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 18:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Another question... can killrights be redeemed/activated in nullsec???
^^ The answer better be a resounding NNNOOOO..... there is NO reason to allow this, as a Suspect flag means NOTHING there... It probably can, so it's up to the rightsholder (or renter) to ensure that the target is where it needs to be before activating it.
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Do the math zippy...100M is not enough to make it worthwhile. That will depend on what you're flying. Anything that can be ganked with (just under) 20M worth of ships and equipment will be at riskGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9846
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 18:45:00 -
[14] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Why should they know who placed it?
In any case, it's a slightly pointless idea, the chances are that you'd just find out that the person who placed a bounty on you was just an NPC-corp alt. If you really want someone to know that you've placed a bounty on them, just mail them and tell them. Hell, I'd just set up a bounty-anonymising corp to provide that much-needed service.
Why waste one of your own alt slots when you can use it for something much better and not fear retribution? Bounties placed on anything and anyone for a modest 5% commission fee.
Strata Maslav wrote:When the person has the kill rites activated will they be able fight back against aggressors? Since the killer is flagged as a suspect, he'll be allowed to fight back against anyone trying to shoot him, at which point the two will enter a limited engagement. Anyone trying to interfere with said engagement by providing remote support will also be flagged suspect. Anyone willing to start shooting the killer will be allowed to do so as well, at which point they also enter a limited engagement. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9846
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 19:26:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:At 20% of a large enough bounty, I would consider grinding down the bounty to a less inviting level, with my alts getting the kills, drops, and salvage. It would cost me ISK to do that, but I'd be willing to pay. GǪbut it's not the size of the bounty that makes it inviting GÇö it's the cost of your ship. You're not getting 20% of the bounty; you're getting 20% of the kill value (or the full bounty, if it's lower). You could have a trillion ISK bounty and still be a completely worthless target.
Grinding the bounty level down yourself makes no difference whatsoever until it's well below the cost of ganking the ship you intend to fly.
Solstice Project wrote:As i noted above, there will be people with killrights in highsec for a while, but that'll spiral down to zero. Yes? Why is that a problem? It means people are exercising their kill rights rather than let them sit untouched. This is a good thing.
Evei Shard wrote:Let me see if I understand this right.
You can place a bounty on any player/corp/alliance. There is no sec status requirement anymore for placing the bounty. Standard crimewatch rules will still apply.
So how does this not become a complete replacement of the insurance for ganking? By not being dependent on how much your ship costs, but on how much the target is worth, and by being paid for by players rather than NPCs. So neither the availability nor the pay-out is nearly as ensured as insurance was. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9847
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 19:39:00 -
[16] - Quote
StarRanger 2ndClass wrote:Are the Billboards going to give the names of Most Wanted in that region of space or just in general? Also, it would be cool if you could access a Billboard to see if the guy your looking for came through the system recently so you can try to track them. For good measure, have them activate some flashing red lights and a siren if he's in the system right now.
Solstice Project wrote:The actual issue is, as you seem to acknowledge, that it's taking a spiral down to zero, with nobody left that one could buy killrights from. GǪand why is that, seeing as how they'll be much more common under this new system and seeing as how there will be new incentives to keep collecting them? I'm not ignoring anything. I'm asking you why it will happen and why it will be a bad thing. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9847
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 19:59:00 -
[17] - Quote
Solstice Project wrote:It'll be a bad thing because, after every killright is claimed, there's nobody left to shoot. GǪso the day after EVE closes down. That's not really a worry, now is it.
Quote:That's the point. It's a downward spiral with no fresh content, once it's all used up.
I don't know if you know, but i can tell you *for sure* that most people are way too afraid of risking becoming FFA. Eh, no. There's far too much money to be made from taking a kill right for them to ever run out. With these changes, there will be even more money to make and the old reasons are not going away. So here's how new kill rights will come up: people shoot each other, same as always, and for the same old reasons.
The ones who are generating them right now are already making themselves FFA. Something they're already doing won't stop them from keep doing what they're doing.
Quote:Did i express my concerns in a proper manner ? Yes. They're just not convincing, especially in the face of the increased incentives to shoot people and the increased methods of generating those rights. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9847
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 20:13:00 -
[18] - Quote
Strata Maslav wrote:Can anyone confirm that an aggressing a suspect in highsec allows them to fight back or will you just run away for 15 minutes? Suspects can fight back against anyone who attacks them. Doing so creates GÇ£limited engagementGÇ¥ GÇö the only player-to-player flag left in the game. Anyone butting in on a LE by providing remote support for either side will be flagged as suspect as well, so the suspect is pretty much on his own. The vigilante can get GÇ£supportGÇ¥ in the form of other people shooting the same suspect, but he is also largely SOL when it comes to remote reps and the like unless his logi buddies are really keen on becoming free-for-all targets.
So yes, he can fight back, but with restrictions on what else he can bring to the fight.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9847
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 20:19:00 -
[19] - Quote
Strata Maslav wrote:Ok so here in the new scenario based on this: FLAGSOnce you are engaged you fight back. If they engage in number in come the logistics. By assisting you with [Suspect] Flag they themselves become [Suspect] flagged, but they are able to rep you. You kill off the attackers. Loot their ships and wait for more to show up. Sure, but sooner or later, someone is going to get wind of that could of free-for-all logis and scrounge up a fleet to run in there and do some actual damageGǪ
GǪand either way, more pew-pew so, yay! GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9847
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 20:27:00 -
[20] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:In short... you get free logistics from corp mates, alliance mates, and militia mates!!! Please see the dev comment: CCP Masterplan wrote: Our current thinking on this is something like:
Assisting your own corp mates* in a Limited Engagement is always legally allowed (it won't be punished per se, but you'll still inherit any W/P/S/C flags they have)
But this is still something we're discussing * Excluding NPC corps, and assisting Outlaws in high-sec
Ah, ok. I've missed that comment. So yes, that indeed makes life a bit harder for the suspect.
I'll try to help you shout that one downGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9858
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:42:00 -
[21] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:Alts Voiding Kill Rights Undock in a shuttle. An alt activates the kill right. Blows up shuttle. Kill right completed.
CCP will fix this cleverness quickly, since it voids the entire kill right system on zero day. This is already fixed in the system. If you want control over your revenge, don't make the kill public (or do it under controlled circumstances).
Quote:Boiling a FrogAs I wrote previously, this is another step towards sunshine and rainbows in highsec. Kill rights, rather than encouraging PvP in highsec, will effectively reduce it over the long haul. There'll still be those people who don't give a **** about the mechanics, but there'll be more people who will give up their highsec criminality, because being gangbanged at any time and any place is not desirable. This isn't compatible with your concern about voiding kill rights. The danger of your gangbang scenario basically comes down to what kind of warning the prospective victim will get that he is about to have a bad day. Aside from that insecurity factor, it's no different than being -5, and people manage that just fine.
Violet Giraffe wrote:So as far as I understand, anyone can now be griefed through the new bounty system? No more than they can under the current system. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9859
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:08:00 -
[22] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yeah, cause that'll happen. Yes, because that's how the system works. It's not something that has to happen GÇö those are the mechanics.
How players choose to employ those mechanics is just the game being played. If player choose to create that GÇ£problemGÇ¥ for themselves, then that's their choice. They can also choose not to. The GÇ£fixGÇ¥ exists if you want it. If you don't want it, then there's nothing to complain about.
Quote: don't know how you can honestly stand here and say this isn't a huge deterrent to criminal activity in highsec. By looking at how easy it is to work around and by looking at the added incentives. Oh, and by the fact that people manage to live under worse circumstances.
Quote:I'm not so sure that's the case. Seeing as how bonties have no effect on the rules (which prohibit GÇ£griefing someone out of the gameGÇ¥) nor on the ability to constantly attack peole (since it doesn't change the aggression rules in an way), it will have the exact same effect on griefing people out of the game as the current bounty system does, simply because the current bounty system does the exact same things in that regard.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9859
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:45:00 -
[23] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I don't think CCP agrees with you there. How so?
Quote:You hint a lot at these added incentives. What are they, exactly? Bounties, most notably. Baiting is another one. Killboard scores and ISK are great motivatorsGǪ
I've heard mumblings about a few other ideas people have had, but they'll depend on the exact mechanics so mehGǪ
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9869
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 13:56:00 -
[24] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:If, however, [the carebear] has a brainGǪ Uh-oh. I think I may have spotted a flawGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9884
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 02:26:00 -
[25] - Quote
Plenor Garlin wrote:Thread summary:
- This sucks because it makes high sec more safe.
- This sucks because it makes high sec less safe.
- This owns because it achieves a neat mix of both.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9888
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 20:18:00 -
[26] - Quote
Reticle wrote:Anyone who tells you that they never AFK travel is a liar. I never AFK travel. There's no reason to do it so why on earth would you?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9903
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 15:24:00 -
[27] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:I wanna see this game jumps for 50k active players to 200k active players. Good news: it already has that many. It already supports all play styles, and CCP does indeed fully support all of them GÇö ganking and scamming included. It is also a PvP game, so if non-pvp players are looking for a safe environment, they should probably look at the X series instead. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9906
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 15:43:00 -
[28] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:You can say whatever you want, but we all know that highsec players keep losing ISK without almost any consequences for the attackers. If there are no consequences, it's because the victims choose to make it so. They have the power to enforce or void the consequences built into the system, and if they choose the latter, it's hardly the system's fault.
Quote:I just don't agree that this game should continuing supporting can flipping, loot stealing, bombing of carebears with (almost) no consequences. Of course it should. That's the whole point of the sandbox idea: that you choose the shape of the world. Not supporting it would be horribly restrictive for everyone involved. Why do you want to reduce the gameplay and make the game to support fewer play styles?
Quote:To bring and keep more players, we need to get out this nasty scamming stuff from the carebears. No, we really don't. What we need is for the carebears in question to stop assuming things that are not true and learn how the game works so they can start making intelligent and informed decisions. This game doesn't need to get rid of GÇ£nasty scamming stuffGÇ¥ any more than Counter Strike needs to get rid of GÇ£nasty face-shooting stuffGÇ¥: just because there are fresh produce around on CS_Italy and just because farmville has a massive audience doesn't mean that CS needs to protect people from being shot in the face while they sort melons.
Quote: Lets bring more carebears and let then became PvP players when they want, if they want. This is already how the game works. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9906
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 15:50:00 -
[29] - Quote
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:But you just said that EVE supports all play styles...which it does...uncluding non-PVP activities. Yes? And?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9907
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 15:59:00 -
[30] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:Sorry man, no new player is gonna read 100 wiki pages to avoid scams. As luck would have it, they don't have to. They just have to know that scams exist and that they should check what they're buying before buying it.
Quote:That escalated quickly. GǪif by escalated you mean remained the same as ever, yes: EVE, like all games, is something you need to learn how it works. If you choose not to and then gets confused about it not working like you assumed for no reason whatsoever that it would work, then the problem lies with your assumption, not with the game. Your operating on incorrect guesswork is not a reason to change the game to make your guesses correct GÇö it's a reason for you to stop guessing.
Quote:Really? You really thing EVE revenue is higher than WoW and alikes? No. I'm asking you for a source. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9907
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 16:10:00 -
[31] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:As I never played WoW, I will assume that the learning curve of both games are the same. GǪand that is relevant, how, exactly? Aside from showing that you're fond of making assumptions that don't quite pan out, I meanGǪ
Quote:Sorry, I don't have a source So that's even more assumptions then, and pretty silly and uninformative ones at that. Goodie. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9917
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 17:53:00 -
[32] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:Harder learning curve = few players. So? The fact remains: like all games, you have to learn how EVE works rather than base your playing on assumptions. People operating on incorrect assumptions is not a reason to change the game GÇö it's a reason for them to stop assuming things.
Quote:Its not an assumption, its a fact. WoW revenue is higher than EVEs. I even searched some material for you. This is called cherry-picking, and is pretty meaningless. So here's a counter-fact for you: compared to other games out there, EVE revenue is high. So high (and, more importantly, so consistently high), in fact, that it's soon celebrating its 10th year and having outpaced and outlasted numerous contenders.
Quote:I think this new changes, with some tweeks, are good for the game and bringing (and keeping) new players / $. New changes are occasionally good, depending on what they are. Completely changing the game to try to replace your customer base is not. It has been tried and it meant fewer players and no money. For instance, removing the sandbox from EVE would have the servers shut down in very short order. Reducing gameplay and supporting fewer play styles is not a good way to go for this kind of game. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9919
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 18:04:00 -
[33] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:Please, if you are the assumption police, don't post assumptions. Top tip: GÇ£assumptionGÇ¥ is something that is accepted as true without anything to suggest or prove that it might.
A game with its sandbox as its main selling point losing its customers if it cuts down on the sandbox is not an assumption GÇö it's just the market. Reductions in gameplay and available play styles are exactly that: cutting down on the sandbox:yness of the game.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9921
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 18:24:00 -
[34] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:I did some market research and found that for each scammer, highsec suicide bomber and "baiter", EVE loses 3 other carebears. It's not an assumption, it's just the market. No, it's neither. It's made up nonsense.
Quote:I have friends that I introduced to EVE who left the game because of this "dark" aspect. So? They didn't like the game. So what? How many people have tried CS and left it because they didn't like the GÇ£being shot in the faceGÇ¥ aspect? How many people have tried farmville and left it because they didn't like the GÇ£farmGÇ¥ aspect? People not liking a game is normal. It's not a reason to remove or even reduce the main draw of the game.
Quote:I want to keep the sandbox, players still need to get freedom of action. Just not freedom from consequences (at highsec). Even more good news: there is no such freedom beyond what the players (specifically the victims) themselves create.
Reticle wrote:I can't read your mind, so I don't why you would or wouldn't. I just know that you're lying. No, you're just clueless. Also, you don't need to read my mind to answer the question GÇö you just have to come up with a reason and you can't, so you have to resort to personal abuse to hide your massive cognitive disabilities and your utter and complete lack of anything that could be remotely considered as even being close to something that might, with a bit of luck, be construed as a shred of an argument. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9922
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 18:40:00 -
[35] - Quote
Bodega Cat wrote:Come on now, i mean i understand where you are coming from in your post, but if you are gonna dig in here I gotta say my BS meter is lighting up red big time. Tough. Your meter is broken.
I don't travel AFK. There's no reason to do it, so why would I? So no, we don't all do it and as such, the categorical claim is false by default. Anyone using it is lying.
Quote:If you are asking for reasons i'll give you some... You have to pee, your dog has to go out, you simply must look at an email you just got, or a text or the doorbell rings or a play happens in the football game you had in the background, you want to get some food out of the oven, a drink anything. GǪand none of those would make me travel AFK, because there's no reason to (whereas there are plenty of reasons not to).
Quote:If you are arguing, that you give 100% of your attention to EVE all the time, every time, I just cannot get on board with you. I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying that I don't travel AFK. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9922
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 19:02:00 -
[36] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:Why are your market facts better than mine? Because yours is nonsense with no basis in reality and nothing to back it up.
Nope. And again, trying to change your customer base has been tried (and failed) before.
Quote:By your logic, lets remove highsec from the game. That's not my logic so I have no idea where you got that idea from.
Quote:What about this reason: boring 20 jumps from one system to another. It's a lot of fun having to click 'jump" 20 times and have to watch a ship go from one gate to another. Increasing penalties will allow more players to autopilot in highsec to transport some goods. Not good enough. Clicking jump 20 times is a minute investment that reaps massive benefits GÇö not worth giving up for the minimal gain of being AFK.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9925
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 19:16:00 -
[37] - Quote
Bodega Cat wrote:So you actually do it right? You are the mythical poop socker. No socks or pooping is required, so no. If something comes up, there are plenty of options: dock up, safe and cloak, log off. Flying AFK is simply not a necessary tool in the toobox since it offers no benefits (or rather, the GÇ£benefitsGÇ¥ add up to a negative, which is actually much worse).
Fun fact: I'm taking a freighter from Jita to home as I'm writing this (using custom warp-in bookmarks to boot). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9926
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 19:27:00 -
[38] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:So, you use statistics that were extracted using the current game mechanics to justify that we don't alter the game mechanics? No. I'm using statistics collected from the current players to show what the biggest draw of the game is, since you tried to claim that it was based on assumptions.
Quote:A minute investment? Yes. GåôGåôGåôD GÇö a number of keystrokes that can usually be counted on the fingers on one hand. It takes less than a second to execute. Depending on the ship, an F1 (or even an F1 F1) might be appended as well after a tiny pause, bringing the investment up to, oh, 1.2 seconds instead. That's about as minute as they come. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9926
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 19:41:00 -
[39] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:So, you take a fictional game No. I take EVE. Do you have anything to bring to the table that isn't some insane troll logic strawman argument?
Quote:A better statistics will be: from a sampling from all potential online players (not only EVE), who likes this or that? GǪwhich tells you nothing about what to do with EVE to make it live on and thrive. In fact, doing exactly what they've been doing has made it live on and thrive longer than most so far. What that survey would tell you is WoW, and WoW already has the WoW market saturated GÇö trying to replicate it means you lose, as every WoW clone in existence has shown. EVE has shown how to not do that and still be very successful. Moving away from a winning strategy and towards a strategy that has so far only ever ended in a loss doesn't seem particularly clever, now does it?
The fact remains: the GÇ£darkGÇ¥ side of EVE has consistently shown to be one of its main draws, as has its freestyle sandbox gameplay. So why would you want to remove and reduce those for something that has been shown on multiple occasions not to work well?
Quote:About AFK, master BS alert. Stop having so many bulls in your house then and the problem will go away. Whether or not other players can't sit in front of the game for 20 minutes is pretty irrelevant. The fact is that the categorical claim is false (as categorical statements pretty much always are). If they want to waste time (and assets) on the auto pilot, then that's their problem.
I still don't travel AFK because there's no reason to. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9927
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 20:06:00 -
[40] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:You tried to use statistics to prove the statistics No. I used the statistics to show what the draw of EVE is, since that's the point of contention. Inventing new games and inventing statistics for them because the reality doesn't agree with your wishes, and then trying to pin strawman after strawman on me is your game. It's not working all that well for youGǪ
Quote:You need to understand that not everyone can stay in front of the computer for 20-30 jumps. Irrelevant. One is all that's needed to falsify the claim.
Quote:So, your categorical statement "there's no reason to travel AFK" is false. Nope. There's no reason for me to do it, categorically or otherwise. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9928
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 20:34:00 -
[41] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:You used EVE statistics to prove that the EVE players like the main aspects of EVE. Which is pointless. No, it shows the point being made: that the things you don't like are the draw of the game.
Quote:Keep your posts coherent, don't change your own words between post pages. You said no one have reason to autopilot, Nope. I said I don't travel AFK because there's no reason to.
Quote:And please, stop extracting short sentences and taking phrases out of context from other player posts. Nope. I'll cut you off to correct you in text as well as in speech.
Quote:Do you have data to prove this? Or its another categorical statement? You should probably look up the word categorical if you have to ask. And yes, I do: this thread and your numerous failed attempts at trying to get away from the reality of the situation by spewing out a a random assortment of red herrings and strawman arguments in your wake. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9932
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 20:52:00 -
[42] - Quote
mkint wrote:Tippia why do you keep feeding trolls on a subject that has nothing to do with the threads topic? Same reason as always: Poe's law (or some horrible Lovecraftingly twisted version thereof).
For every troll barfing up some random uninformed idiocy to see if it sticks, there are ten people who genuinely believe the same nonsense, and there's no way of telling which is which. It's therefore a better strategy to set the record straight for those genuine believers, even if it's done via proxy.
Sometimes, the entire line of argumentation gets removed for the benefit of all after the poor troll can't go anywhere and outs himself, but even when that doesn't happen there's an (admittedly minor) lesson to be had GÇö yay, education! In this case, it's an object lesson of why it's unwise to engage in red herring fallacies if you pick a topic that you can master even less than the one you're trying to divert attention away from.
Destiny Corrupted wrote:I'm still catching up on the thread, but I just want everyone to know that watching Tippia tear into the derpo safetybear like a stray dog into a dropped hotdog is giving me a woody. Rule 34 is in effect as always, I see. Maybe I should set up a hideously expensive premium-rate call service for itGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9936
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 21:16:00 -
[43] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:Where does it shows that players like to take risks at highsec? Here. Why do you ask?
Quote:Only 25% of the players said that PvP is an influence factor. No. 25% joined the game specifically for the PvP. The vast majority joined for the interconnected sandbox GÇö something you're arguing should be reduced for reasons you haven't really managed to explain.
Quote:Go back and read your own posts. You mean like the ones saying that I don't AFK because there's no reason to?
Quote:You can manipulate the text as much as you want Thank you. In return, you can keep posting strawman arguments red herrings, or any other fallacies you can think of to try to distract from the simple fact that the things you dislike are the draw of the game and that this has kept the game alive and growing for a decade, as opposed to the games that have tried to WoW-emulation route (and failed horribly as a result). I won't stop pointing out these fallacies, though, usually by interrupting you mid-sentence when you're about to embark on a new one. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9940
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 21:34:00 -
[44] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:I actually joined because I hoped it would be an online version of Frontier: Elite II. Turned out it was nothing of the sort, but it wasn't until I started joining player corps that I managed to stay for more than a few weeks, and it wasn't until I joined goons that I ended up getting hardcore hooked because of PVP. GǪand I'm sure that's far from a unique story, which would explain the disconnect between Gǣ25% joined for PvPGǥ and Gǣ75% enjoy PvPGǥ that CCP's surveys show.
Personally, I joined not so much for PvP but for the opportunity to try to avoid PvP. Unfortunately, it turned out to be ridiculously easy, but I found other things that offered the level of engagement I was looking for.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9940
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 21:39:00 -
[45] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:No, please, use the same statistics that you sent me to justify your arguments. Ok. Then don't try to introduce a new argument that isn't mine, or I'll introduce new statistics.
So, again: here. Why do you ask? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9941
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 21:47:00 -
[46] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:I also think that a safer highsec will bring more players to the game, that eventually will leave highsec to explore other playstyles. History doesn't bear you out. So far, safer highsec has led to people staying in highsec and demanding that it be made safer because it's so scary outside and because the increased safety has given them the incorrect impression that highsec should be completely safe.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9946
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 21:56:00 -
[47] - Quote
Villani Capelli wrote:Discussing with you is pointless if you keep changing your arguments. No, you're confusing me with you again. My argument has been the exact same all along. Your attempts at trying to muddy the water with strawman arguments and red herrings is your problem and if you had stopped doing that, you would have noticed that the change in argument was of your making, not mine. That's why I'm asking you why you're asking about about taking risks in highsec. Since you can't answer, I can only conclude that you've managed to confuse yourself to the point where you no longer know why (or even that) you posed that question.
Such is the problem with straw men: you end up dizzy and short of breath since your sinuses are clogged from the acute hay fever, and you can no longer keep track of what you're doing. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9955
|
Posted - 2012.10.17 07:06:00 -
[48] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:Villani Capelli wrote:Good point, I think its a tech decision, to eliminate LE from the software. LE aren't being removed the from the software, they're simply being used elsewhere. To be precise: LE isn't being removed from the software GÇö it's being added. Right now, we don't have it.
What we have at the moment a tangled mess of 1-v-1 flags that describe who did what to whom and who is therefore allowed to shoot whom as a result. The original idea of LEs when it was discussed back in March and again during the summer was to have LEs work like mini-wardecs with dynamic membership lists. Not quite 1-v-1 flagging and definitely no transferrable flagging trees GÇö just a list of members that were on opposite sides.
The rest was rather similar to the current deal: A gets an S-Flag; B engages A and an LE is set up with sides a and b. Anyone supporting A gets added to the LE on the a side; anyone supporting B gets added to the LE on the b side. Since A is a suspect, he's free-for-all so other may attack him as well, at which point they're also added to the b side of the pre-existing LE. If you support both sides you appear on both lists and everyone in the LE can shoot youGǪ so don't. Or maybe supporting the enemy side of an LE should just kick you out of the LE, brand you a traitor, and C-flag you.
The GÇ£inheritanceGÇ¥ rule is vastly simplified (to the point where you're not really inhereting anything any more): support an a-side player and you end up on the b-list; support a b-side player and you end up on the a-list. You and only you can add yourself to an LE; you and only you can remove yourself from an LE (by letting your P-flag time out). Once you are in an LE with another player through your own actions, that's it GÇö no new checks are made on either side to see if you should be added to some other LE because you're already in one and there's no reason for you to be in two (this is to remove the ability to GÇ£bring alongGÇ¥ a pre-existing LE and auto-add all members of a new LE you butt in on to the fight you're already in: you add yourself to the new LE and the pre-existing members of that LE don't check to see if you're already fighting somewhere else GÇö the only thing that matters is that you're for or against them in this fight).
On top of this, there'd still be the option of flagging anyone anyone suspect if they brought remote support to an LE to dissuade the use of neutral reps; the option having GÇ£implicit membersGÇ¥ of the LE, such as corp members on the b side above (to essentially replicate the current theft flagging); and of course, the ability to spawn an LE without having a suspect flagging at its root (again, theft flagging 2.0 and for things like kill rights).
Yes, it's not nearly as GÇ£neatGÇ¥ as doing it all with s-flags and a single, non-transferable 1-v-1 LE, and this is why CCP is against the idea, but having two distinct sides and a GÇ£possible to count on on one handGÇ¥ number of methods for adding yourself (and only yourself) to either side still seems like a vast improvement. It's not a matter of inheritance or long trees of who did what to whom, but of a single, contained LE and what you do in relation to it. The tricky part in the programming is to enforce that GÇ£GǪand only yourselfGÇ¥ bit by checking whether two players are already in an active LE, and if they are, stop trying to add either one of them to any new lists. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
|
|