Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp. Flatline.
27
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:51:00 -
[121] - Quote
HVAC Repairman wrote:the gankee loses his ship and gains insurance (heh probably not knowing hi-sec), the ganker loses his ship and loses security status
if anything hi-sec ganking should be buffed
losses a ship usualy worth at max 10m with fittings, looses sec status, gets loot drops from miners, transfers isk etc to anotehr alt, gets biomassed, new char made trained in a few hours, rince repeat....
tbt think CCP should put a 1 week delay on chr deletion, you delete it, you have to wait 1 week for it to actualy happen, means you either have to have more accounts or you cant gank as frequently with VERY LITTLE risk vs reward....
|
Julii Hakaari
Hakaari Inc.
46
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:54:00 -
[122] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:You're either not paying attention, ignoring the fact or you just haven't seen the forums of many other games. It's universal. No, it's not, and I'm not only speaking about games. EVE promotes itself as a hard and cold game, which it is, but it doesn't justify the hate on these forums since last I checked these forums aren't in-character. It must take a lot of energy to hate like that. Why would anyone do it voluntarily? I'm asking a serious question. I hate EU-politicians and my own country's politicians, so I stay far, far away from news about how they want to interfere with my life even more. Why, then, would anyone voluntarily keep hating like you do? Unless you start building gas-chambers, people will remain different, and just like I can't do anything at the moment (until I build my own gas-chambers) about those EU-politicians smoking cigars while they rule a continent undemocratically elected, just like that you can't do anything about people disagreeing with you here.
Stop the hate, friend; your life will be the better for it.
Mallak Azaria wrote:The consequences are already there. They're far higher for ganking than they are for being ganked. There is literally no justification for raising the consequences for the ganker further at this point, considering they were raised 6 months ago. That's pretty much why I made the other thread :p No, they're not, and I honestly don't have time to force you out from your delusion. "Completely un-phased? You think I'm totally lacking in any phasing? The idea that I'm anything less than half-phased I actually find offensive. It greatly phases me." |
Adeena Torcfist
Dark Underground Forces
33
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 12:01:00 -
[123] - Quote
kill rights for 30 days, isnt enough in my opinion. Hiding in low/null when they've committed the crime doesnt help matters. Even ive gone after gankers before, but your so outnumbered, its hard to pick them off to gain revenge.
15 mins Global countdown? big whoop. after a minute or two, they can just dock up & wait out the timer anyways in their pods. ISK fines based on their sec status's would hopefully curb some of the aggressors.
If you want to gank, use the war declaration system. Thats what its for. If your out mining or mission running & get ganked, well,then i have no sympathy for you anyway. thats your own fault. |
Thora Ash
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 14:18:00 -
[124] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Julii Hakaari wrote:RubyPorto wrote:So then how would your proposed choice between exile and a bribe be anything other than paying isk if you want to escape sec hits? It wasn't a thought through penalty. Someone asked for an example and I delivered it. Penalties should be much more thought through with consideration to the economy and the affect it would have on the game as a whole. Ok, come up with a harsher penalty that doesn't break the rule on NPCs podding, doesn't impose artificial travel restrictions, and doesn't automagically whisk isk out of the ganker's wallet. Since none of those things happen in game currently, there's no reason to add them. I'll wait.
What about detaining the offending capsuleer for a given time? Concord captures the pod and releases the pilot after questioning or whatever. Maybe factoring in sec standing. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 14:21:00 -
[125] - Quote
HVAC Repairman wrote:the gankee loses his ship and gains insurance (heh probably not knowing hi-sec), the ganker loses his ship and loses security status
if anything hi-sec ganking should be buffed
tl;dr:
Carebear loses 300 mil hulk
Goon loses a Catalyst Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
bongsmoke
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
70
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 14:22:00 -
[126] - Quote
Julii Hakaari wrote:
tl;dr: suicide-ganking is too easy and should have greater penalty; life for suicide gankers should be no easier than life for miners. EVE is a system built on risk/reward - and the reward for suicide-ganking outweighs the risk of doing it.
Thus ends the thoughts of Gaius Julius - oh, no, wait - Julii Hakaari (doesn't sound at all as awesome, now does it?).
What are your thoughts? And, yet again, please, for goodness sake, act as the intelligent EVE-gamers your propose yourselves to be.
Regards, J. H.
Only cause of my hatred of goons do I support this.
Let poop in the sandbox together! |
Fenella
Dangermouse Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 14:31:00 -
[127] - Quote
ISK loss for ganking is inconsequential, Sec penalty is easily circumvented, kill rights are a joke.
What we need is Community Service and tagging.
Force the aggressors to clean grafiti off the side of a station in a pod for 4 hours every time they gank a barge before they can leave the system or dock.
That'll teach em !
/shakes fist |
Adeena Torcfist
Dark Underground Forces
33
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 14:58:00 -
[128] - Quote
Inconsequential or not, the ISK lost from the miner/victim, & the insurance payed should come out of the gankee's wallet. & the full ISK amount, not some chump-ass insurance quote thats broken on T2 ships it is currently.
& if he/she has no ISK in their wallet, well, i fully expect a negative wallet. Then ship replacement programs will be funded outta their own wallets. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 20:49:00 -
[129] - Quote
Valya Niell wrote:Siobhan MacLeary wrote:No, the price is not too low.
The price is that gankers eventually lose enough security status to not be able to go into any hisec system owned by one of the four Empires without attracting a massive fleet of NPCs that chase him through space and time, and can alpha all but the largest and most heavily tanked ships.
To fix this, a ganker must grind missions in low and null until his standing and security status are at a level that he can enter a hisec system without attracting said fleet of uber-ganky NPC police.
What's the one thing a ganker supposedly hates most of all? Grinding. What does he eventually have to do if he wants to continue ganking? Grind.
Seems a fitting punishment to me. no grinding required, merely another alt with a relatively short training time to get back out and do it again. (correct me if i'm wrong) i am curious though as to how many times you can gank people before you can't exist in high sec. (i.e. please tell me)
The penalty for recycling alts to escape Sec Status hits is a ban, and from what I understand, that ban comes pretty quickly and easily. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 20:57:00 -
[130] - Quote
Valya Niell wrote:Degren wrote:Yes, the penalty for suicide-ganking is too low.
If you are suicide ganked, you should be auto-podded. I think this is a fair penalty, as the suicide-ganker has to track you down, plot and scheme and LOSE HIS SHIP for attacking your immortal, guarded self. What do you suicide gank in? how much does it and your gear cost? how hard is it to use said equipment to break the tank on a hulk and how much do you gain from salvage and loot?
A properly tanked Hulk has 30k EHP, all T2 Fit. A gang of 4 (20m Isk) Catalysts can kill that before CONCORD arrives. Put some RR on the field in the Hulks favor and that number jumps to about 15 Catalysts (75m) or 6 Tornados (380m).
A Hulk drops ~10m in loot and ~10m in salvage (average). Tanking your Hulk, with no RR means it takes 4 people to break even on the gank and split a 10m Isk bounty (which isn't something to balance on, cause it's not a game mechanic). With RR, your Hulk cannot be profitably ganked. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 20:57:00 -
[131] - Quote
Blastcaps Madullier wrote:HVAC Repairman wrote:the gankee loses his ship and gains insurance (heh probably not knowing hi-sec), the ganker loses his ship and loses security status
if anything hi-sec ganking should be buffed losses a ship usualy worth at max 10m with fittings, looses sec status, gets loot drops from miners, transfers isk etc to anotehr alt, gets biomassed, new char made trained in a few hours, rince repeat.... tbt think CCP should put a 1 week delay on chr deletion, you delete it, you have to wait 1 week for it to actualy happen, means you either have to have more accounts or you cant gank as frequently with VERY LITTLE risk vs reward....
Biomassing Alts to escape Sec status hits is a bannable offense. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:00:00 -
[132] - Quote
Adeena Torcfist wrote:kill rights for 30 days, isnt enough in my opinion. Hiding in low/null when they've committed the crime doesnt help matters. Even ive gone after gankers before, but your so outnumbered, its hard to pick them off to gain revenge.
15 mins Global countdown? big whoop. after a minute or two, they can just dock up & wait out the timer anyways in their pods. ISK fines based on their sec status's would hopefully curb some of the aggressors.
If you want to gank, use the war declaration system. Thats what its for. If your out mining or mission running & get ganked, well,then i have no sympathy for you anyway. thats your own fault.
If you want the WarDec system to be used like that, then players shouldn't be able to quit a corp as soon as a Dec comes in. They shouldn't be able to quit at all while a Dec is live. Ohh the tears we'd see then.
Right now a Wardec just means players quit corp. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:01:00 -
[133] - Quote
Adeena Torcfist wrote:Inconsequential or not, the ISK lost from the miner/victim, & the insurance payed should come out of the gankee's wallet. & the full ISK amount, not some chump-ass insurance quote thats broken on T2 ships it is currently.
& if he/she has no ISK in their wallet, well, i fully expect a negative wallet. Then ship replacement programs will be funded outta their own wallets.
Cool, so now Suicide ganking would be a funny new Isk faucet. That's a remarkably (though not surprisingly) stupid idea. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Spikeflach
Echo's of Liberty Dominatus Atrum Mortis
61
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:07:00 -
[134] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
A properly tanked Hulk has 30k EHP, all T2 Fit. A gang of 4 (20m Isk) Catalysts can kill that before CONCORD arrives. Put some RR on the field in the Hulks favor and that number jumps to about 15 Catalysts (75m) or 6 Tornados (380m).
A Hulk drops ~10m in loot and ~10m in salvage (average). Tanking your Hulk, with no RR means it takes 4 people to break even on the gank and split a 10m Isk bounty (which isn't something to balance on, cause it's not a game mechanic). With RR, your Hulk cannot be profitably ganked.
If only the killmails showed the fits of the gankers for proof of the fits.
Loss of the gankers ships is a calculated loss and is of benefit to them in whatever way they see it as benefiting them.
Jumping into something expecting to win and invariably losing is what a loss truly is. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:13:00 -
[135] - Quote
Spikeflach wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
A properly tanked Hulk has 30k EHP, all T2 Fit. A gang of 4 (20m Isk) Catalysts can kill that before CONCORD arrives. Put some RR on the field in the Hulks favor and that number jumps to about 15 Catalysts (75m) or 6 Tornados (380m).
A Hulk drops ~10m in loot and ~10m in salvage (average). Tanking your Hulk, with no RR means it takes 4 people to break even on the gank and split a 10m Isk bounty (which isn't something to balance on, cause it's not a game mechanic). With RR, your Hulk cannot be profitably ganked.
If only the killmails showed the fits of the gankers for proof of the fits. Loss of the gankers ships is a calculated loss and is of benefit to them in whatever way they see it as benefiting them. Jumping into something expecting to win and invariably losing is what a loss truly is.
Loss of the Miner's ships is a calculated loss and if it's not of benefit to them in whatever way they see it as benefiting them, they should have calculated better.
What you undock in is the stakes you are willing to lose. Do high rollers complain that people at the penny slots don't lose as much?
Tank your Hulk Mine in Something other than a Hulk Use a short range D-Scan Mine in a mission space Mine in a grav site Mine in a hidden belt (asteroids off grid of a normal belt) Keep some SEBOED AC Tornados with you to kill the gankers as soon as they light up
All of these things you can use to reduce the chances of you losing your ship. Gankers don't get the option of not losing their ship, so they adapted and use cheaper ships; why shouldn't miners have to adapt? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Horace Nancyball
The Whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:19:00 -
[136] - Quote
Fredfredbug4 wrote:The suicide ganker is 100% guaranteed to lose his ship, some modules, and sec status. It is the highest risk activity in EVE. Anyone can acknowledge that.
Agreed. Also doing it more than once or twice will also make life in hi-sec really irritating avoiding the police all the time. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:33:00 -
[137] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:HVAC Repairman wrote:the gankee loses his ship and gains insurance (heh probably not knowing hi-sec), the ganker loses his ship and loses security status
if anything hi-sec ganking should be buffed tl;dr: Carebear loses 300 mil hulk Goon loses a Catalyst
Carebear chooses to not tank a 300mil Hulk
Ganker exploits Carebear's Laziness/Stupidity Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Bill Loney
Hedion University Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:41:00 -
[138] - Quote
Horace Nancyball wrote:Fredfredbug4 wrote:The suicide ganker is 100% guaranteed to lose his ship, some modules, and sec status. It is the highest risk activity in EVE. Anyone can acknowledge that. Agreed. Also doing it more than once or twice will also make life in hi-sec really irritating avoiding the police all the time. Which is why they use alts, we all know that. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:50:00 -
[139] - Quote
Bill Loney wrote:Horace Nancyball wrote:Fredfredbug4 wrote:The suicide ganker is 100% guaranteed to lose his ship, some modules, and sec status. It is the highest risk activity in EVE. Anyone can acknowledge that. Agreed. Also doing it more than once or twice will also make life in hi-sec really irritating avoiding the police all the time. Which is why they use alts, we all know that.
Miners use alts for their convenience too. So long as they're not recycling alts (CCP'll ban them for that), why shouldn't gankers have access to the same tools miners do? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Wacktopia
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
252
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:54:00 -
[140] - Quote
Julii Hakaari wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:there ought to be enough risk in putting me at risk to ensure i am 100% safe while afk mining at all times I'm sitting here asking myself what I should reply. I see this ignorant and stupid post and I see that, of course - you're a goon, and I ask myself if I'm racist against goons or if I'm just a realist for not being surprised that ignorant, stupidity and goons walk hand in hand, but then I realize that I'm better off reading about Einstein's theory on relativity, so I walk away.
You are ignorant to believe that this is a pvp-optional game. It is not. CCP: Fix Inferno war decs.-áAllies should not be free and unlimited. -á-á |
|
Tanae Avalhar
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:54:00 -
[141] - Quote
If ccp increased the sec hit for ganking and only allowed sec gains from ratting in empire space (low and hi) would this not lead to an increase in the population of low? |
Julii Hakaari
Hakaari Inc.
46
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:39:00 -
[142] - Quote
Wacktopia wrote:Julii Hakaari wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:there ought to be enough risk in putting me at risk to ensure i am 100% safe while afk mining at all times I'm sitting here asking myself what I should reply. I see this ignorant and stupid post and I see that, of course - you're a goon, and I ask myself if I'm racist against goons or if I'm just a realist for not being surprised that ignorant, stupidity and goons walk hand in hand, but then I realize that I'm better off reading about Einstein's theory on relativity, so I walk away. You are ignorant to believe that this is a pvp-optional game. It is not. Of course it's not, you brain-damaged idiot, but I have never claimed it to be so.
Any more trolling coming this way? "Completely un-phased? You think I'm totally lacking in any phasing? The idea that I'm anything less than half-phased I actually find offensive. It greatly phases me." |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
196
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:52:00 -
[143] - Quote
I believe it is too low. not because I want to "punish" gankers.. but because when you look at the prices on wardecc bribes to concord... the cost to concord bottom line via wardecc circumvention through ganking is massive ... concord must be pissed off. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Julii Hakaari
Hakaari Inc.
46
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:19:00 -
[144] - Quote
Removed. Navigator. "Completely un-phased? You think I'm totally lacking in any phasing? The idea that I'm anything less than half-phased I actually find offensive. It greatly phases me." |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7619
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:38:00 -
[145] - Quote
Wow, Julii. That has to be among the most hateful, anti-social, and hypocritical things I've ever read on these forums. I'm very impressed.
You really need to take your medication now. You also really need to learn what GÇ£multiplayer sandboxGÇ¥ entails, because it's not what you think it is.
Quote:in a sandbox I am allowed to form my own fate Incorrect. In a multiplayer sandbox, you are allowed to try to form your own fate, but you'll have to do it in competition with everyone else trying to do the same. Their attempts my very well be at odds with yours, and you are in no way guaranteed to come out on top in that clash.
Quote:without this static high sec, I'd be forced to join a corporation with an alliance to gain protection; being forced to do such a thing would in essence remove my freedom of choice of not doing that, since quitting would be my only other alternative. Is that a sandbox? Yes, because you're not actually forced to do anything and because the tools remain the same, and those tools still allow you (and everyone else) to create your own shared world. It's the latter part that is the sandbox, far more than the former. Even if you were forced to do things because of the actions of others, that would still not make it any less of a sandbox because that's just how things will work out in a shared multiplayer sandbox: some will get their wish; as a result, others will not.
Quote:If someone is willing to die "for the lulz", as some of you have argued is enough, well, then, I guess EVE isn't the cold hearted ***** we thought she was. No. It's just that they value the real-life fun higher than some virtual assets. Seems rather healthy, to be honest.
Quote:if you are willing to die "just like that", even for a marginal profit, then death is too little of a consequence. No. If there's a marginal profit in it, it means that they've taking the consequences into account, no matter how large or small they are GÇö whether they die or not is quite irrelevant at that point. 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¥
Be a smarter newbie, don't fall into the trap of lvl V skills. |
Julii Hakaari
Hakaari Inc.
46
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 01:01:00 -
[146] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Wow, Julii. That has to be among the most hateful, anti-social, and hypocritical things I've ever read on these forums. I'm very impressed. You really need to take your medication now You also really need to learn what GÇ£multiplayer sandboxGÇ¥ entails, because it's not what you think it is. Yes, hateful posts are typically the result when hate is of issue. I hate bullies. What is your excuse?
No, you need to learn the definition; I have experience with MMO sandboxes and the definition isn't as narrow minded as you would have it.
Tippia wrote:Incorrect. In a multiplayer sandbox, you are allowed to try to form your own fate, but you'll have to do it in competition with everyone else trying to do the same. Their attempts my very well be at odds with yours, and you are in no way guaranteed to come out on top in that clash. I never argued for anything else. I said removing high sec would hurt the sandbox since my choices would lessen - and they would, thus it is proof of stupidity beyond belief to actually promote such an idea and scream "SAAANBAAAAX".
Tippia wrote:Yes, because you're not actually forced to do anything and because the tools remain the same, and those tools still allow you (and everyone else) to create your own shared world. It's the latter part that is the sandbox, far more than the former. Even if you were forced to do things because of the actions of others, that would still not make it any less of a sandbox because that's just how things will work out in a shared multiplayer sandbox: some will get their wish; as a result, others will not. No, they actually don't remain the same. Let me make it simple to you: I give you a toolbox, but I steal a tool from you. Does the toolbox then remain the same? You are talking about making a big sandbox very tiny to fit a certain play-style; this is not something you can debate yourself out of since it would also be the result. What makes you think you are more entitled to your play-style than anyone else? What if I want to be self-sufficient? How would that be possible in a sandbox that didn't give me the tool (to go through a safer place, i.e. high sec) to do just that?
Tippia wrote:No. It's just that they value the real-life fun higher than some virtual assets. Seems rather healthy, to be honest. Ah, and here you completely ignored what I said, too. I guess you disagree with me wanting death to have consequences in EVE. Go play WoW, you sissy!
Tippia wrote:No. If there's a marginal profit in it, it means that they've taking the consequences into account, no matter how large or small they are GÇö whether they die or not is quite irrelevant at that point. Above you said they "value the real-life fun higher", i.e. you spoke of that as a reason, and that is also the reason unless a ganker gets lucky and hits jack-pot when scanning a cargo. How does death have consequences if real-life fun outweighs the negative effects of death in New Eden? It doesn't. You know it, I know, CCP knows it. It's a matter of fact that death doesn't have consequences in EVE unless you spend a lot of money on implants. "Completely un-phased? You think I'm totally lacking in any phasing? The idea that I'm anything less than half-phased I actually find offensive. It greatly phases me." |
Hammer Crendraven
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 01:01:00 -
[147] - Quote
I was thinking about this for a few days now. Why is it that gankers can scan your ships in high sec but we can not use area of effect jammers in high sec? That makes you a sitting duck. The ganker holds all of the cards. Who to attack when to attack where to attack. They know the cost of the attack, in short they know all of the risk up front except how much of the stuff in/on the ship will drop. But law of averages says they have a fair idea how much will drop. Not much risk at all for this type of attack.
What if it was also illegal to use a cargo scanner in high sec? Now we add the element of risk and the unknown. Do you attack the target blind and hope for the best? Do you have an informant to tell you what is being moved and where and when? Or do you scan anyway and lose a scanner ship for every ship you scan to concord action. Also this concord attack on the scanner ship will give the player(s) a heads up that a gank attack is imminent. Perhaps if the defender also have a protection fleet with them they can get the drop on the ganker fleet. Of course it is suicide (because of concord) but no longer would the ganker fleet attack be a sure thing. Now you have leveled the risk IMHO for high sec.
None of this does much of anything though for hulkageddon. Except for they might not know the Hulks layout before the attack. So do they assume it is tanked and come in with more force than is needed or do they assume it is a max miner design and not use enough and get concorded before they kill the Hulk. It would add some risk a bit more than it has now anyway.
As of right now the Hulk pilot might as well just set up for a max miner setup because they can scan your ship and come in with just the right amount to kill it. No incentive at all to tank the Hulk. A tanked Hulk just cost more to kill it but dead it is unless the gankers are newbies. But if their was an element of unknown involved then we have incentive to tank a Hulk. That unknown element would be making cargo and ship scanners illegal in high sec.
More ideas for CCP as an isk drain, they could have gate customs officials that are on the take. If you are a ganker you can pay a fee to a gate official. He in turn will give you the last 30 minutes gate traffic name of ship and contents. You would probably have to bribe several gates to get a viable target this way. CCP can determine the value of such info if they want to do this. Maybe it needs to be fleshed out a bit more and or randomized a bit as well. Just thinking about ideas.
The frieght hauler or anyone for that matter could also pay off the gate customs official to give out false info about your ship(s) contents. A sliding fee scale. The more you pay the greater the false hood in your favor of info that he will sell to the gankers. The idea here is to add risk and the element of the unknown. Nothing should be a sure thing. Can you trust the info you paid for as a ganker! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7619
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 01:23:00 -
[148] - Quote
Julii Hakaari wrote:Yes, hateful posts are typically the result when hate is of issue. I hate bullies. What is your excuse? Excuse for what?
GǪand no, it's quite clear that Gǣmultiplayer sandboxGǥ is something quite different than you think it is.
Quote:I never argued for anything else. GǪyou mean aside from what you just said, where your rights were asserted as a given rather than contingent on your own ability to enforce your will onto others. Likewise, just because others can enforce their will onto you doesn't mean it's any less of a sandbox (in fact, it rather proves that it's a proper sandbox).
Quote:No, they actually don't remain the same. Yes they do. No tools or options are removed. You do not need a safer place to be self-sufficient. You might prefer one, but the option is still available to you without it, and you have the tools at your disposal to make it happen.
Quote:Ah, and here you completely ignored what I said, too. No. I just explained that the scenario you described didn't necessarily have the meaning you assumed it had. Just because people get themselves blown up doesn't mean there aren't consequences or that the game isn't cold-hearted GÇö it just means that fun can be had when getting blown up and that this may be valued higher than those consequences, because it's just virtual stuff being sacrificed for RL fun.
Quote:How does death have consequences if real-life fun outweighs the negative effects of death in New Eden? By enforcing a loss of assets, and even game time. Just because the negative effects are valued higher, it doesn't mean that there are no consequences. The simple fact of the matter is that death has consequences, and whether or not they can be outweighed by other gains is pretty irrelevant. 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¥
Be a smarter newbie, don't fall into the trap of lvl V skills. |
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
118
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 01:43:00 -
[149] - Quote
Tippia, I tip my hat to you. How you can maintain your cool logic with this relentless assault of logical fallacy, thread after thread, is commendable. A lesser person would have given up long time ago and just resorted to trolling these guys |
Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp. Flatline.
27
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 06:54:00 -
[150] - Quote
Quote:Right now a Wardec just means players quit corp.
or war deccing corps have members outside of corp, find war targets while having an application in, application accepted just before gank on target, ganker quits corp....
CCPs changed it so they cant rejoin for 7 days which is one thing. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |