Jump to content

Permanent Bubble? They nuts?


EntropicDuck

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, GraXXoR said:

perfect. couldn't have said it better.
 

Many (not all) PvPers by nature feel the need to fight and kill in game as a kind of IRL stress relief; the same reason why many of us adults play video games in the first place. Yet they often lack the skills to go up against their peers nor have the desire to face a real challenge (since that's what many of them have failed at in real life)  so all they can do is seal-club noobs/pacifists and whinge when the devs implement areas where they can't PK wantonly.
Oh, and call them the pejorative, "carebears."

Fairly standard "semi legitimised" online bully tactics.

This is another dumbass take on matters.  The whole point of emergant gameplay is players make the choices. If you want to only try to go after haulers with no guns you can, but I dont want a game that 100% favors the pirate in that scenario.  Any good ecosystem needs to have the "prey" survive more often than not unless it does extremely stupid things (flying into pvp spne with no radar is one).  I also not keen on the trem clubbing baby seals. Because you are just completely demeaning the person who isn't the pvper in that way. Why is the hauler a defenseless baby seal? Why didn't he use tools the game gave him to not be clubbed?  If someone willingly flys into the pvp zone unprepared then the fault lies on THEM, not the pirate who shot them and who only targets those types.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blazemonger said:

 

Assuming that carebears, whatever that means, are defacto solo players who do not interact or play with others is at best presumptuous and frankly says more about your mindset than theirs..

 

Qualifying someone who prefers to not engage in combat or will go out of their way to encounter combat a carebear (and in your perspective a sociopath) is both disrespectful and demeaning regarding how someone else chooses to play a game.

 

Engaging in combat is not a prerequisite for being a social person, violence is not a requirement for interaction and co-operation.

 

People get the term carebear wrong so often it's as bad as the term griefing.  In my circle we only call the people carebears in eve if they avoid combat AND complain when they die and blame the game or mechanics.  I know a few people in eve who were the backbone of capital production in a lowsec corp I was apart of. They NEVER pvp'd. In the sense they sought it out. They only built stuff and mined. But they lived in lowsec and accepted they could be shot at and if they died hauling they learned why they died and got better. They were not carebears.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look at you with your "bleh blaah blah..your mindset."

 

Look nerd.  Talk about the issue rather than forum whoring.  This isn't about "qualifying" or being polite.  Engage in combat or not, it is entirely voluntary.  Ride the pipes alone, unarmored, asleep at the wheel.  You die.  It is a choice.  The ad hominin against me does not change the fact the Devs caved their vision to people whining they were inconvenienced by someone elses gameplay.

 

Point of fact is, only thing that is lost when someone loses a fight

A.) is the material in the ship.

B.) Minor amount of time it takes to drop another blueprint.

C.) Cargo if they fall victim to an interception.

 

Everything else is people with their own "I am the captain, I cant lose" mindset being Kyles and Karens.

 

PVP needs to have attention regardless of whatever the Landmark Lobby wants.  People are actively ruining the experience for others by exploiting the mechanics to make up for them losing fights.  Where some get the "reward" from mining/money/building.  Combat's "reward" is the dat phat booty.  The game cannot grow an effective community that does not embrace PVP as a natural part of it.  It is how you develop toxic communities of those that fight and those that don't.  The Dev team should not make further concessions on their vision of the game to appease those that choose not to group actively together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JohnnyTazer said:

I don't for one second believe this.  Not if you played any meaningful time in EvE. 

look up character TOZI if you want and search any killboard you wont find me. and 150millsp and over 70bill wealth. eve gave the tools to avoid pvp if you wanted. still got all my original implants

i havent played in a while due to the increasing push for destruction by the devs, but kakeo will prob sort that before too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, toziop said:

look up character TOZI if you want and search any killboard you wont find me. and 150millsp and over 70bill wealth. eve gave the tools to avoid pvp if you wanted. still got all my original implants

i havent played in a while due to the increasing push for destruction by the devs, but kakeo will prob sort that before too long.

Killboards currently dont go back to 2003, but in any event, I don't care.  If what you saying is true then its the exception not the rule.  And while eve DOES provide the tools, people often complain cause they dont want to use them, or blame others.  And 150mil sp and 70bil is practically nothing from a vets standpoint.  Between me and my friend we have well over 2 billion skillpoints with our characters, and we regularly drop 40-50bil in a single fight.  So you being some lowly hermit is an outlier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

Killboards currently dont go back to 2003, but in any event, I don't care.  If what you saying is true then its the exception not the rule.  And while eve DOES provide the tools, people often complain cause they dont want to use them, or blame others.  And 150mil sp and 70bil is practically nothing from a vets standpoint.  Between me and my friend we have well over 2 billion skillpoints with our characters, and we regularly drop 40-50bil in a single fight.  So you being some lowly hermit is an outlier. 

JT is at it again, waving his tackle around and firing it off willie-nillie...

Whetever floats his boat, I suppose. LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, EntropicDuck said:

PVP needs to have attention regardless of whatever the Landmark Lobby wants.

 

Clearly combat needs to get better for those who seek it and NQ knows that. That said though, combat is not and should not be a requirement to play the game as DU is not a PVP centric game nor should it be. Besides improving the tools and experience for active combatants in the game, NQ needs to provide mechanics and tools for those who prefer to not engage to improve their chances of doing so. And that means jamming, stealth, decoys and other counter measures.

 

NQ has been very clear that while they recognize and see piracy be a part of the game (and they should), the main focus for combat as they see it will be as a tool available to organizations to resolve conflict if all else fails. As such it's a means to an end and not a purpose in itself. That is the level where I expect NQ will bring combat as a mechanic and yes, that will obviously leave room for piracy and "rogue" combat oriented play styles.


Based on the things Entropy said I'd not expect any serious changes in that regard anytime soon though as NQ seems to still be in the pre-design phase, let alone started work on these. I'd say we'll be lucky to see the first changes arrive in 3-4 months time as the first thing to come in (I guestimate in 4-6 weeks) will be the mission system and that is the focus besides the needed continuous improvements and fixes right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Randazzo said:

You're an angry little fella aren't you?

Ironic coming from someone who hasn't made anything but snarky passive-aggressive remarks.

1 hour ago, blazemonger said:

Based on the things Entropy said I'd not expect any serious changes in that regard anytime soon though as NQ seems to still be in the pre-design phase, let alone started work on these. I'd say we'll be lucky to see the first changes arrive in 3-4 months time as the first thing to come in (I guestimate in 4-6 weeks) will be the mission system and that is the focus besides the needed continuous improvements and fixes right now.

Really makes you wonder what part of this game has left the alpha stage if the basis of multiplayer games aka both tradan and shootan are not even in their nascent state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dumpeet said:

Really makes you wonder what part of this game has left the alpha stage if the basis of multiplayer games aka both tradan and shootan are not even in their nascent state.

 

DU is beta only because of the label NQ put on it, in any other way I'd say it's still very much pre-Alpha.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blazemonger said:

DU is beta only because of the label NQ put on it, in any other way I'd say it's still very much pre-Alpha.

So assuming it will be "released" in 2022, they missed the kickstarter timeline by 4 years. How embarrassing for their investors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, dumpeet said:

So assuming it will be "released" in 2022, they missed the kickstarter timeline by 4 years. How embarrassing for their investors.

They'll likely launch in 2021 as their current "roadmap" indicates. It'll be a catastrophe, but they can't stay in pre-release bleeding subs forever. 

 

As I've said before, NQ's inexperience as a game designer is really, really obvious at this point. They don't know what demographic they want because they don't know what game they want to make...It's still just a bunch of vague ideas and rough dates with no actual plan.

 

NQ is developing the game like some stoner with a "great idea for an MMO, trust me" -- a lot of really basic typical first-time developer mistakes: over-ambition, thinking you can improvise design elements instead of having a plan, thinking a tech prototype will scale into a full game...

 

It wouldn't be so easy to "force" NQ to compromise their "vision" if they actually had a vision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, michaelk said:

They'll likely launch in 2021 as their current "roadmap" indicates. It'll be a catastrophe, but they can't stay in pre-release bleeding subs forever. 

 

This is looking more and more likely.  Its sad because the game could still be amazing but they need someone new handling game design - someone who understands why Eve worked or ,at the very least, someone willing to listen to players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, blazemonger said:

Clearly combat needs to get better for those who seek it and NQ knows that. That said though, combat is not and should not be a requirement to play the game as DU is not a PVP centric game nor should it be. Besides improving the tools and experience for active combatants in the game, NQ needs to provide mechanics and tools for those who prefer to not engage to improve their chances of doing so. And that means jamming, stealth, decoys and other counter measures.

 

There is already counters as i posted earlier, there will never be counters that can enable someone showboating on auto pilot in an overloaded ship directly to their destination, those counters you list are not get out of jail free cards they can buy you time but if you still have not designed your ship for the situation you have put yourself into you still die.

 

No on chooses to improve their chances tho, they seem to only choose maxcargo and bigger ship and flying it alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Anomaly said:

This is looking more and more likely.  Its sad because the game could still be amazing but they need someone new handling game design - someone who understands why Eve worked or ,at the very least, someone willing to listen to players. 

Problem is not just not listening to players but when they do, which happens I give them that. They tend to cather to select types of players. One being big spenders and the other being people who pretend that the game would be unplayable and paint up doomsday scenarios if their mining runs had even a slight chance of being hijacked/shot at. Now at least they have thought about the subject to a minor degree looking at Spreeezys interview.

 

Its not just ignoring PvP and letting the world be dangerous in favour of creative mode players. But its also the hesitation, lack of knowing where exactly they want to end up with all of their decisions. Like do they want a builders world with only consensual PvP or should the world be dangerous so people are forced to work together to minimize their risks? Which is more engaging huh? We were promised focus on both building and danger from early days, Crewed ships, big orgs and alliances, friends, bribes, etc. Being the ways to safely get your ores from one planet to the other. A lot of backtracking on early vision and roadmaps has happened. They have to have a big picture and stick to it to a certain degree or they'll end up cathering to nobody

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Zamarus said:

A lot of backtracking on early vision and roadmaps has happened.

That's a weird way of saying that they have failed to deliver on TWO roadmaps set YEARS apart. Even the trailers and system requirements are false, nevermind their "vision" which is just generic sci-fi "everything you would ever want from a space sim" with voxel flavour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Zamarus said:

Its not just ignoring PvP and letting the world be dangerous in favour of creative mode players. 

Most hilarious part, that whole this "possible suffering of creative people" mostly BS, because pure builders (or other people oriented into generation of some sort of metagame content) for most part do not need anything beyond T1-T2 for voxels/fuel, anything else (if needed in small quantities) they can just buy. 

 

Most of SZ pressure lobby comes from... different kind of people, their endangered creativiy lies mostly in placing 1000 L containers for hoarding or giant ultra-expensive ships for bragging about (but never risking them).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2020 at 9:02 AM, Randazzo said:

You're an angry little fella aren't you?

Who? Dumpeet? LOL. Just being their usual chirpy self... Usually on point, but does not suffer fools... 
This is their cheerful, happy-go-lucky face. You should see them when someone shits in their cornflakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2020 at 1:06 AM, dumpeet said:

So assuming it will be "released" in 2022, they missed the kickstarter timeline by 4 years. How embarrassing for their investors.

IKR... If this a beta according to NQ, they'll likely "laugh" in 2021 if they actually finally reach beta quality. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue is simple... NQ fucked up bad. They release a game with no core foundation for proper PvP / PvE... You don't release a PvE Game then attempt to PvP it... Just does not work that way... The be better off wiping beta and starting fresh or create dozens of new ores, tier out everything more and force people to go out into space and start colonizing and protecting. 

 

Until people stop blaming each other (the players) and focus on NQ for fucking up badly it's going be a none stop blame game PvP vs PvErs... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/29/2020 at 10:32 AM, blazemonger said:

 

The questions I have are:

 

Why are "PVP oriented players" so focused on being able to target those who have no counter/recourse? Are you looking for kills more than fight maybe?

 

Why is it that on a good number of occasions, a ship approaching me on an intercept course would turn tail and run as soon as I start moving in their general direction instead of staying on my intended heading? Are you afraid to actually encounter a fight maybe?

Carebears with guns like easy targets. The same folks complaining about a safe zone would camp the Sanct #'s and snipe n00bs as they got in their free speeders. They don't want PvP - they want to grief.

 

To further the point current PvP requires a little more than a head start on rare ore and the ability to fill a cube up. Toss in an extra account and you have it the way carebears with guns like it - a formula of "you can't hurt me, but I can take away 4 weeks of work from you in 2 minutes". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

hopefully eventually soon (tm) the universe will expand,

then the secure space will become the smaller part of the game. 

 

I think that it is better to have players _want_ to leave the secure area for their own goals, be it exploration, greed for riches, take part in events, or maybe even slug it out in pvp after joining. 

Shrinking the secure bubble to force players into pvp will alienate these players before they reach the state of mind where they want to step out of the bubble on their own will.

 

The resources in the secure bubble might be massive, but they are still limited.

With time (lots) industrious players will look for the riches in the pvp area,.

 

Cheers,

Tilda.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, BaconofWar said:

Carebears with guns like easy targets. The same folks complaining about a safe zone would camp the Sanct #'s and snipe n00bs as they got in their free speeders. They don't want PvP - they want to grief.

 

To further the point current PvP requires a little more than a head start on rare ore and the ability to fill a cube up. Toss in an extra account and you have it the way carebears with guns like it - a formula of "you can't hurt me, but I can take away 4 weeks of work from you in 2 minutes". 

Too bad everything you wrote here is way off.  You obviously haven't pvp'd at all.  Second, its a choice to enter the pvp zone defenseless. If a hauler does so, especially with no radar, then I have no sympathy.  But ya know what, I haven't even killed a hauler cause all the content is 100% in the safe zone right now.  Let me guess, your suggestion would be to have the game 100% builing game with no pvp?  I think that game was called landmark and its no longer around.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...