EPTWhich brings me to this question: If I were to find a wormhole into stain, would you (hatchery, I guess) let me scan there or would I have to sneak around you too? Would there be an option of mutual benefit?
EVE Corporation - Page 1868
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
Which brings me to this question: If I were to find a wormhole into stain, would you (hatchery, I guess) let me scan there or would I have to sneak around you too? Would there be an option of mutual benefit? | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4172 Posts
| ||
|
Flyingdutchman
Netherlands858 Posts
On July 27 2014 19:08 spinesheath wrote: Turns out one can loot nullsec data sites fairly well without a data analyzer II. On my second trip into null I only had a relic analyzer II, hacking V is still like 9 days away. Still managed to pull about 70 mil from mostly data sites. Which brings me to this question: If I were to find a wormhole into stain, would you (hatchery, I guess) let me scan there or would I have to sneak around you too? Would there be an option of mutual benefit? Oh no that is fine, as long as you don't forget to show the secret sign which is to uncloack and target anyone you see to show you are friendly  + Show Spoiler + obviously j/k | ||
|
hagon
United Kingdom556 Posts
On July 27 2014 15:02 DefMatrixUltra wrote: a) not playing the game b) having an effect on the game you're not playing c) not playing the game ... z) playing the game No, playing a different part of the game. Your concept of what Eve is unbelievably narrow. | ||
|
BlueLanterna
291 Posts
On July 27 2014 19:08 spinesheath wrote: Turns out one can loot nullsec data sites fairly well without a data analyzer II. On my second trip into null I only had a relic analyzer II, hacking V is still like 9 days away. Still managed to pull about 70 mil from mostly data sites. Which brings me to this question: If I were to find a wormhole into stain, would you (hatchery, I guess) let me scan there or would I have to sneak around you too? Would there be an option of mutual benefit? As someone who has used stain exploration as their main source of income for months and plexed multiple characters from it, even if The Hatchery isn't actively hunting you you'll run across a fair amount of gatecamps and cloaky tengus ready to pounce on you without a good MWD trick and d-scan awareness. If you're comfortable with that you'll be able to get around Stain no problem (unless you randomly jump into a fleet of 15+ on gate) as c0ven and happy cartel love to set up stop/drag bubble camps all the way into the RLDS pocket, other corps around T-8, 4gq will do the same on the main pipe occasionally. Be careful with your wormhole usage too, the good ones will be camped as soon as someone from DUST Expeditionary Team finds them. | ||
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
On July 28 2014 00:09 BlueLanterna wrote: As someone who has used stain exploration as their main source of income for months and plexed multiple characters from it, even if The Hatchery isn't actively hunting you you'll run across a fair amount of gatecamps and cloaky tengus ready to pounce on you without a good MWD trick and d-scan awareness. If you're comfortable with that you'll be able to get around Stain no problem (unless you randomly jump into a fleet of 15+ on gate) as c0ven and happy cartel love to set up stop/drag bubble camps all the way into the RLDS pocket, other corps around T-8, 4gq will do the same on the main pipe occasionally. Be careful with your wormhole usage too, the good ones will be camped as soon as someone from DUST Expeditionary Team finds them. Thanks for the info. Stain does indeed seem to have a bunch of easy to camp chokepoints. | ||
KwarK
United States41973 Posts
| ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On July 27 2014 23:03 hagon wrote: No, playing a different part of the game. Your concept of what Eve is unbelievably narrow. Calling the metagame a literal part of the game is an abuse of terminology. The game is the systems and mechanics that the players interact with through the game client. Us talking about EVE on this forum thread is not the game. Calling stuff you generally do on forums/IRC/voice chat "the game" seems like you're reaching. You even agree with me because your second point was having an affect on the game by swaying developer opinions. Developers can't change the organizational structure of your forum hierarchy. They can't determine the personality of your leadership or their leadership. They can't do anything apart from changing code of literal game systems. "Fixed a bug with null bloc leaders where they would go bipolar on some Tuesdays."? The one part of my post that you quoted and responded to (the rest you just ignored?) was a lighthearted joke. If you're going to commit to null politics, you'll want a thicker skin than that. | ||
|
hagon
United Kingdom556 Posts
When I see people talking about CFC leadership, aims, decisions, the very base level of assumptions they operate on are so risible that there is little point reading or listening, their starting point simply bears no relation to reality. Added to which, in my experience, people are inflexible to moving away from their perceptions, further reducing the profitability of communication. I'll admit, my list was a bit facetious, I actually spend a decent amount of time logged in playing, just not involved in the type of ctrl click broadcast, press F1 fleets because that doesn't push my buttons. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41973 Posts
We're now in the odd position of having essentially built a bridge over a river at an arbitrary point and we're trying to work out if it'd be worth redirecting traffic that way and building a town on the other side or whether to just think "fuck it" and build a new one that actually works with the roads and towns we've got. | ||
|
intana
United Kingdom26 Posts
When I see people talking about CFC leadership, aims, decisions, the very base level of assumptions they operate on are so risible that there is little point reading or listening, their starting point simply bears no relation to reality. Added to which, in my experience, people are inflexible to moving away from their perceptions, further reducing the profitability of communication. This level of argument (so misunderstood yet so difficult to explain unless someone 'gets it') is usually more common in bad apologetics for religion. I don't think nullsec politics is completely devoid of interest, but honestly a good group of Diplomacy players would be more interesting on the level of intrigue. | ||
|
hagon
United Kingdom556 Posts
'A Guy at the top and everything flows down from that guy.' This is far more wrong than it is right. Operations in Delve? Blawrf's decision, he runs it, he is responsible for it. Operations in Vale/Germinate? mainly Razor/Bastion [kippig, carneros], Vee to some extent responsible for GSF stuff. Reset Deklein jump bridge network/industry upgrades? mynnna's plan, executed by GSOL, no one is responsible. Reset Vale jump bridge network/Vale upgrade program? Weaselior's idea, no one cares. The nulsec sov changes GSF is going to start to push for? Group effort/brainstorm from across a range of experienced players, adopted as alliance policy by Endie. If you look at Delve you can see the effect of internal politics. None of GSF's true bloc level FCs, a struggle to get scouting, recon, fleet boosters, logistics guys. It is unpopular with the set of players needed to support a rapid, tightly run, successful campaign. You can see it as an example of how difficult it is when one person tries to be 'i'm the boss, everything flows from me' without the mutual consensus of the group. | ||
|
felisconcolori
United States6168 Posts
On July 28 2014 08:04 hagon wrote: So, as an example: 'A Guy at the top and everything flows down from that guy.' This is far more wrong than it is right. Operations in Delve? Blawrf's decision, he runs it, he is responsible for it. Operations in Vale/Germinate? mainly Razor/Bastion [kippig, carneros], Vee to some extent responsible for GSF stuff. Reset Deklein jump bridge network/industry upgrades? mynnna's plan, executed by GSOL, no one is responsible. Reset Vale jump bridge network/Vale upgrade program? Weaselior's idea, no one cares. The nulsec sov changes GSF is going to start to push for? Group effort/brainstorm from across a range of experienced players, adopted as alliance policy by Endie. If you look at Delve you can see the effect of internal politics. None of GSF's true bloc level FCs, a struggle to get scouting, recon, fleet boosters, logistics guys. It is unpopular with the set of players needed to support a rapid, tightly run, successful campaign. You can see it as an example of how difficult it is when one person tries to be 'i'm the boss, everything flows from me' without the mutual consensus of the group. So you're in effect confirming what he said. The difference is that you're looking at the absolute top of the coalition. From a player perspective in a large alliance, none of that matters. To them, it is "some guy says do this, so I'm going to do this" - even to the extent of so-called alarm clock ops in which you're no longer playing the game as much as you're playing the players. It still extends to being nothing more than actions outside the game to extend the egos of the leadership in large actors. For the average grunt, it's still "a guy" that's running things. You're describing higher level "a group of guys" - still a small fraction of the population attempting to run the entire system for their benefit on the backs of many lower level grunts. Of course, that's still just a fraction of the Eve player base - the majority of whom don't know them, don't care about them, and only hear about strange things happening in Nullsec while they go about there business in HighSec and to some extent LowSec. I made a trip through the south of NullSec last time I was in Eve - there were two gatecamps in LowSec on the way out, about 5 guys in one system, and a great heaping no one in the vast majority of the systems I passed through. Hell, there are people in Heimatar that were there ten years ago - they've never really left. I've bounced around a few times, lived in Null, been a part of the great blob on blob warfare, and can't really see the attractiveness of being part of a large machine who's end goals are never clear and who's only benefit to you is smoke and mirrors. Okay, I guess ratting in my carrier was cool for awhile... | ||
|
Boggler
Canada234 Posts
100b spent? That's nothing. I just bought 14 plex from basically doing nothing. Had I made more ISK, I would have made a huge mistake and bought a high SP account. | ||
|
felisconcolori
United States6168 Posts
| ||
|
hagon
United Kingdom556 Posts
On July 28 2014 10:15 felisconcolori wrote: a small fraction of the population attempting to run the entire system for their benefit on the backs of many lower level grunts. This is a very cynical view, and as I said before, refer to a version of large alliance leadership that I do not recognise in my experience, people are inflexible to moving away from their perceptions, further reducing the profitability of communication. You seem see actions as decisions of a few for the benefit of a themselves, and while there are a few egos flying around, the vast majority of the people I see are working with a mutual consensus for benefit the whole. And it is hardly a closed shop, anyone with the desire and some level of competence (possibly, in some cases competence not evident) can move into positions of responsibility. But it wont be instantaneous, no-one is going to look at you and say omfg you're as amazing as you think you are, here let me make you chief super cap FC Unless you solely play on a very small scale (<5 people maybe?) you're going to, at some point, be following someone else's calls. [..I..] can't really see the attractiveness of being part of a large machine who's end goals are never clear The level of autonomous decision making a player wants is completely up to them. Some players want 'shall I go on this fleet' and 'what ship from this list shall I fly' others want more, luckily the game has many facets and only the number of accounts you have restricts the number of areas you can play in. Being part of a large group isn't for everyone. The issue of fudging objectives is almost universal to groups I see in Eve, everyone wants to win, if you don't say what you were aiming for, at some point you can declare yourself the winner and move on. Also Kwark, unless FA is mysteriously poor you know full well that 100bn isn't here or there, GSF has a similar stack in Vale which it seems unlikely we'll ever be able to install and will just sit there forever, the same as good chunk of all supplies we buy | ||
|
felisconcolori
United States6168 Posts
On July 28 2014 11:55 hagon wrote: This is a very cynical view, and as I said before, refer to a version of large alliance leadership that I do not recognise Cynical, perhaps. But then in every fleet I've been in, if you point to the most expensive, well fit ships... they were never being flown by the rank and file, even the ones that had proven they knew how to fly and were competent pilots and FCs themselves. Face it, the financial profiles of the alliance skew extremely top heavy. It presents, from a purely economical viewpoint, exactly that form of system. The richest moons, best systems, are heavily exploited using the willingness of many to jump into a fleet to defend an objective from which they will see little if any benefit. What does it matter if you spend days and weeks fighting to claim and defend constellations and regions when the leadership will turn around merely to rent those out - in some cases to the people that were fighting you last month? I'm not seeing the grand narrative you're promoting. | ||
|
hagon
United Kingdom556 Posts
Directors just aren't swanning around in DED fit pirate BS looted from the corp wallet* [although I can see this could be a point of view issue, I get PLEX from my corp and from the alliance for stuff I'd do anyway without the PLEX, tbh if I was looking for to paid for my time 6 PLEX a month would be an insult] *I know plenty of directors who are by default using the master wallet for everything, but [nearly] everything they do is on behalf of the alliance **and Mister Vee pays for his fanfest tickets using corp isk, he is CEO of a corp with 10 actual members, I am certain they are all fine with that expenditure. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On July 28 2014 07:12 hagon wrote: Just as you ignored the point that there is no compulsion to 'cog in the machine' and chose to pursue your 'working for the man agenda'. [1] For a variety of reasons some people do choose to be a cog in the machine, and I see no reason to denigrate them for doing so. [2] When I see people talking about CFC leadership, aims, decisions, the very base level of assumptions they operate on are so risible that there is little point reading or listening, their starting point simply bears no relation to reality. Added to which, in my experience, people are inflexible to moving away from their perceptions, further reducing the profitability of communication. [3] I'll admit, my list was a bit facetious, I actually spend a decent amount of time logged in playing, just not involved in the type of ctrl click broadcast, press F1 fleets because that doesn't push my buttons. [4] [1] I don't have an agenda. I'm not trying to sell anyone anything. I have no reason beyond trying to (from my perspective) be helpful to talk to people about what I see as the negatives of the null way of life. I don't play the game anymore (or the metagame, either, just so we're 100% clear on that) so I quite literally have no stake in anything. I don't benefit in any way from someone deciding for or against joining some null bloc. [2] There is a distaste I have at the thought of being a worker-bee-type for what is ultimately the aims of one person. There is an extremely thin line (and perhaps nonexistent) between expressing that distaste I have at imagining myself doing that and denigrating those who chose to do it. I do not feel any hatred or anger or disgust towards people that are really into the teamwork/cooperation/greater purpose/etc. fantasy of the game. That's their thing, and their decisions (even if I was playing the game) have either virtually or literally no effect whatsoever on my enjoyment of the game. [3] It's hard not to read this as a disclaimer essentially saying "there are some people who are so wrong I can't bother correcting them, and those people are generally not interested in discussion anyway so if I stop responding to you...". I don't think that's called for. [4] Your list was a bit overstated, which is why I jokingly responded with that first bit and addressed the ideas/motivations behind them in the serious bit. -------------------------------- On the topic of whether or not nullsec works the way I'm claiming: You said essentially that "the Big Guy at the top doesn't literally micromanage every single person below in the hierarchy". I don't think anyone could possibly disagree with a statement like that. But the impetus of all action and belief flows directly from this individual. If they have an accident on Tuesday that causes their personality to change on Wednesday, they can unilaterally go in and change the whole fundamental structure of their organization to suit their new personality. It's like in a real job in a corporate environment. It's often the case that your boss is breathing down your neck and you're feeling the pressure to perform. That's almost certainly because his boss is breathing down his neck and so on all the way up the chain. The idea that you're working together with others to accomplish something is not wrong. The idea that someone would choose to join a group doing just that is not absurd. However, that doesn't mean there's some kind of democratic interaction. In fact, what I've seen when people "change direction" (holy shit how many times did this happen to FA?), is that members "want" to do it because all the members who don't want to do it are not members anymore (i.e. they decided to go against the downward flow of belief/opinion from the top). Can you have real input on things like how to solve problems? Absolutely. Same goes for other details. But null blocs are not representative in any way. Your goals are accepted, they are not formed. They are passed down the hierarchy and end up on your desk with your signature understood to be implicit. More importantly, and this is the part that is undesirable from the point of view I have, the goals are basically arbitrary. The guy at the top can wake up one day and decide to redo everything. That person is not held to any standard nor are they balanced by any checks nor must they meet any requirements. You could wake up one day and find that your alliance leadership pulled some incredibly douche move. Nobody voted. Nobody was given 2 weeks notice. It's literally just arbitrary tyranny. It might be benevolent, or it might tell you to pray your situation isn't altered any further (I won't even talk about FA here as that's a low blow and would make an incredibly long post). There's nothing inherently wrong with backing a dictator. If the dictator has laid out a vision that appeals to you or has put in place a system for you to contribute to that vision that appeals to you, then no one can really question your reasoning or motivation behind joining up. But don't try to sell the idea that the path you're paving was one you had a hand in mapping out. You're the steamroller, not the operator. | ||
|
Shootemup.
United States1044 Posts
On July 27 2014 00:43 Ramong wrote: I was under the impression that the Hatchery was no more and that most people in this thread are in a variety of different corps. A lot of people are suffering from a severe Dota addiction, which hampers the ability to play EVE. | ||
| ||
