Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Skippidipp
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 16:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
First off I would like to ad why I want today's self destruct mechanism to change. It's just an unfair option to use in PVP. When you have a capital ship tackled and are about to kill it, it just self destructs. If you don't manage to kill it off in 2 min, you don't get anything. No modules drop(only drones) and you don't get any kill mail. I guess this is mostly a problem in WH, where you can't or may have problems getting inn other caps to kill it, with the WH limitations. Since I joined Norcorp I think we have lost 20+ capital kills to this mechanism.
Seeing that CCP is fixing the log off mechanism in this winters expansion, I would like them to take a look at the self destruct option as well.
My idea to fix this, is not allowing a ship to self destruct when it has aggression timer.
Everyone that has experienced this, make your word heard. Than CCP might actually see this and do something about it.
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
107
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 17:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
While I somewhat mirror your sentiments I must still point out that denial of loot and a killmail is the entire point of of self-destructing. Otherwise, what's the point in having it at all?
What I'd like to see is that during self-destruct mode all your module heat up in the same manner they do when being overloaded (minus the positive effects... and if someone actually overloads while in self-destruct mode the heat damage is doubled). After about a minute all the modules should be nice and crispy, making the ship more vulnerable to a last ditch effort to kill it. "Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 18:00:00 -
[3] - Quote
Shahfluffers sounds idea sounds good and I think heat crankups would be based on ship's size larger the ship the longer it takes it to cook off. |
Resperra Coldony
katakaio Designs
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 18:28:00 -
[4] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:While I somewhat mirror your sentiments I must still point out that denial of loot and a killmail is the entire point of of self-destructing. Otherwise, what's the point in having it at all?
The self destruct was invented back in a time when there were no capitals let alone super-capitals. At least to my knowledge this feature/function is about as old as eve itself. It has never gone through an update either.
The long and short if it: it was not intended to be used with a ship for which it takes so much longer to destroy compared to how long the self destruct timer is. Attackers should have the option of destroying the ship before the timer runs out with a reasonable chance of success. The timer just needs to be much longer for (super-)capitals... |
Skippidipp
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 19:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Resperra Coldony wrote:ShahFluffers wrote:While I somewhat mirror your sentiments I must still point out that denial of loot and a killmail is the entire point of of self-destructing. Otherwise, what's the point in having it at all? The self destruct was invented back in a time when there were no capitals let alone super-capitals. At least to my knowledge this feature/function is about as old as eve itself. It has never gone through an update either. The long and short if it: it was not intended to be used with a ship for which it takes so much longer to destroy compared to how long the self destruct timer is. Attackers should have the option of destroying the ship before the timer runs out with a reasonable chance of success. The timer just needs to be much longer for (super-)capitals...
Nowadays you can say that the destruct option is needed in WH space, in case you get stuck somewhere, and need to take the pod express. But the hole 2 min timer, no matter what, is just a stupid. Unless you have huge amount of DPS you don't stand a chance killing any capital in that time. And I don't think the mechanism was designed for the purpose of being used in PVP. |
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
256
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 19:21:00 -
[6] - Quote
Skippidipp wrote:Since I joined Norcorp I think we have lost 20+ capital kills to this mechanism.
No, you haven't. Those capitals are all dead, right?
Working as intended, there's no issue here. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
107
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 19:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
5 or 6 gank-fit battleships don't have an issue chewing through a ["normal"] capital ship once it has capped out. The idea I tossed out above has somewhat of the same effect... once the modules have burnt out they can not longer be used and so said ship cannot put up any resistance against incoming DPS. "Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
256
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 20:24:00 -
[8] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:5 or 6 gank-fit battleships don't have an issue chewing through a ["normal"] capital ship once it has capped out. The idea I tossed out above has somewhat of the same effect... once the modules have burnt out they can not longer be used and so said ship cannot put up any resistance against incoming DPS.
Honestly, I REALLY like your idea.
Even to the effect that imo the self destruct mechanics are fine, this would add to the experience. |
AureoLion
Etoilles Mortant Ltd. Solyaris Chtonium
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 20:28:00 -
[9] - Quote
Mainly, it's a goddamn damage blowing itself up in a glorious, firey explosion. LET IT DO SOME DAMAGE, DAMMIT! |
Lex69v
Royal Skiff Blades DarkSide.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:40:00 -
[10] - Quote
People use self destruct to:
1) escape from WH 2) move their pod fast to the distant system 3) get insurance
This feature is very useful for players.
But why it can be used in PVP situation? Why can my enemy after i caught and overpowered him steal my killmail and loot?
For me its not enought that my enemy lose his ship. Even carriers arent that expensive as they were 2 years before. I want satisfaction for my efforts. And its not an empty wreck.
And im pretty sure this often happens, when a capital is catched. He log off or self destruct. People dont like being ditched and start avoiding this situalion (blob or just do something else). Anyway it does not add fun to EVE.
These are the ways to solve the problem:
1) If a player is aggressed by another player they cannot self destruct.
2) Ships cannot activate self destruct and self-destruct ceases when they are warp scrambled.
3) Your modules enter a state similar to offline when you self destruct. They give no ship bonuses and can't be activated. Modules return to normal when self-destruct is cancelled. |
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
494
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
They should make self-destruct near-instantaneous (10 seconds). This would save ammo. If aggressed, create a killmail showing the ship self-destructed but crediting the pilots involved in the kill with the kill.
Then we can laugh at people accidentally self-destructing themselves and not turning it off in time. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Ynot Eyob
Nisroc Angels The Obsidian Front
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:24:00 -
[12] - Quote
AureoLion wrote:Mainly, it's a goddamn damage blowing itself up in a glorious, firey explosion. LET IT DO SOME DAMAGE, DAMMIT!
I agree on that part, if self destruct it should work as a bomb.
In the army if getting over run, you destruct any gear you dont want you enemy to have before they rush in.
I find selfstruct just fine, if you cant manage to kill a ship in that time, you are to few for the task and the target should be in best interest to selfdestruct and deny the enemy access to loot. The KM how ever i think should work as when you get on a CONCORD mail, and as stated show the involved parties. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:54:00 -
[13] - Quote
there is nothing to fix, SD works as intended. If I want to SD my ship I should be able to. There is no reason why you should get a guaranteed KM, why?? |
Nephilius
Pillage and Plunder Salvage Co.
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:23:00 -
[14] - Quote
PvP tears, interesting. I find it rather ironic that the word 'unfair' even enters a thread like this. If the tables were turned, not one person would be complaining about it. Personally, if they removed KMs from the game, then I'd support the removal of the SD function. But since they won't, then there has to be a way for the victims to deny their assailants satisfaction and maybe get a few tears of their own.
Stop crying, pull up your panties, and come up with a legitimate reason to remove self-destruct from the game. There's no such thing as Space Pirates, only Space Bears with eyepatches and speech impediments. |
Skippidipp
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:06:00 -
[15] - Quote
Nephilius wrote:PvP tears, interesting. I find it rather ironic that the word 'unfair' even enters a thread like this. If the tables were turned, not one person would be complaining about it. Personally, if they removed KMs from the game, then I'd support the removal of the SD function. But since they won't, then there has to be a way for the victims to deny their assailants satisfaction and maybe get a few tears of their own.
Stop crying, pull up your panties, and come up with a legitimate reason to remove self-destruct from the game.
How would the tables bee turned? You mean if I self destructed a ship while someone was trying to kill me, than I would suddenly like the mechanism? I think not! What is interesting is that people that has never experienced a helpless victim self destruct before them, or even been the victim, comment on this tread. I thank you for that. Keeps the thread bump, and more people interested.
|
Goose99
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:56:00 -
[16] - Quote
U mad bro? |
Elindreal
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 05:24:00 -
[17] - Quote
If anything I could support a scaled timer based upon ship class. From the RP perspective it takes a larger ship a bit more time to overload it's core and explode or whatnot. But no changes to self-destructing while aggressed, it is a perfectly viable strategy to avoid being on a killmail.
I do like ShahFluffers idea tho, self-destructing should overload your modules making you defenseless. |
Lex69v
Royal Skiff Blades DarkSide.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 08:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
Elindreal wrote:If anything I could support a scaled timer based upon ship class.
Either way you will need a decent amount of DPS.
I can tell you a story about small gangs. I was flying passive tanked sleipnir. Ruprure thrasher and falcon managed to catch me. When i had smth like 60% shields i initiated self destruct ("because i can"). In 20% hull SD was done. I realise that its not fair but this is the machanics we have in EVE and as i human i will use every possibility to harm my enemy. But its no good for game.
Nephilius wrote:PvP tears, interesting. I find it rather ironic that the word 'unfair' even enters a thread like this. If the tables were turned, not one person would be complaining about it. Personally, if they removed KMs from the game, then I'd support the removal of the SD function. But since they won't, then there has to be a way for the victims to deny their assailants satisfaction and maybe get a few tears of their own.
Stop crying, pull up your panties, and come up with a legitimate reason to remove self-destruct from the game.
If someone want to be safe, he should live in high sec. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:26:00 -
[19] - Quote
Lex69v wrote: If someone want to be safe, he should live in high sec.
and if someone wants a KM, he should bring enough DPS. |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:29:00 -
[20] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Lex69v wrote: If someone want to be safe, he should live in high sec.
and if someone wants a KM, he should bring enough DPS.
Rather if someone wants to avoid being the kill on a killmail, try avoiding the situation to begin with. The persons responsible for causing you to opt for self destruction deserve the kill.
Why should anyone have the option to chicken out of a killmail like that? What have they done to desrve it? Whereas the would be killer doesn't need any more proof than the self destruction that they left the other player no other choice. |
|
Rina Asanari
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:44:00 -
[21] - Quote
If you don't do enough damage, you dont deserve the killmail. Its easy as that.
I'd rather suggest the other way round, meaning that a self destruct guarantees that there's nothing usable left behind. That would mirror the motivation of using self destruction or other similar means in today's engagements - denying the enemy your resources.
To take it even further, I'd favour to have the means to do a "scorched earth" approach when facing the loss of a POS or the souvereignty in a system. Be it with additional modules/upgrades or not, something like a system-wide self-destruct (and maybe taking an enemy blob with it) has some ring to it...
|
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:02:00 -
[22] - Quote
Rina Asanari wrote:If you don't do enough damage, you dont deserve the killmail. Its easy as that.
At the same time, if you don't do enough damage to kill, the target has no reason to self destruct in the first place. Sure, either party has the chance to get backup during the fight, but at the same time by self destructing you're pretty much making the statement that you've lost already. Thus, the agressor deserves the killmail.
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:05:00 -
[23] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Thus, the agressor deserves the killmail.
no. nobody "deserves" any killmail, as nobody forces you to go out for a hunt and tackle stuff you cant kill in time anyways. |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:06:00 -
[24] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Borlag Crendraven wrote:Thus, the agressor deserves the killmail.
no. nobody "deserves" any killmail, as nobody forces you to go out for a hunt and tackle stuff you cant kill in time anyways.
Read the above answer, if you can't kill it then why does it self destruct in the first place? Chickening out shouldn't be rewarded at all, at most it should be a compromise where you get the killmail but lose the loot. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:55:00 -
[25] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:Borlag Crendraven wrote:Thus, the agressor deserves the killmail.
no. nobody "deserves" any killmail, as nobody forces you to go out for a hunt and tackle stuff you cant kill in time anyways. Read the above answer, if you can't kill it then why does it self destruct in the first place? Chickening out shouldn't be rewarded at all, at most it should be a compromise where you get the killmail but lose the loot.
kill "in time" before it SD.
What is "chickening out"?? Loss of ship isnt chickening out IMO, you just dont get KM and loot. Thats fine. If you cant kill it quickly, SD is an option to deny you the KM and the loot. |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:59:00 -
[26] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:kill "in time" before it SD.
What is "chickening out"?? Loss of ship isnt chickening out IMO, you just dont get KM and loot. Thats fine. If you cant kill it quickly, SD is an option to deny you the KM and the loot.
I understand why you want it that way, I just fail to see why a compromise of killmail without loot wouldn't be better alternative. Right now it's so that there's absolutely no drawbacks to self destructing a ship you're about to lose anyway and only something to gain. In otherwords, there's no consequences at all, which to me is pretty much against everything in the game. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 12:08:00 -
[27] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote: I understand why you want it that way, I just fail to see why a compromise of killmail without loot wouldn't be better alternative. Right now it's so that there's absolutely no drawbacks to self destructing a ship you're about to lose anyway and only something to gain.
compromise?? Why does it need one? The guy SDing his ship does not get anything from that. But if you are talking about compromises, I have one for you: not getting a KM for a kill is a fine one of not having enough ppl to gank big stuff in time.
Borlag Crendraven wrote:In otherwords, there's no consequences at all, which to me is pretty much against everything in the game. "no consequences".. so what? Not everything requires a consequence, even less if someone destructs his own stuff... |
Lex69v
Royal Skiff Blades DarkSide.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:41:00 -
[28] - Quote
Rina Asanari wrote:If you don't do enough damage, you dont deserve the killmail. Its easy as that.
In EVE there are lots of ships and lots of possibilities and ways to win.
Rifter can kill Abaddon. Few Abaddons can kill Phoenix.
Why having a large amount of EHP should give a guy a advantage and possibility to "not lose". Because if the winner doesnt get a KM and loot wtf is that?
Why we all SHOULD blob. Its not about what game is.
|
Skippidipp
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:17:00 -
[29] - Quote
Lex69v wrote:Rina Asanari wrote:If you don't do enough damage, you dont deserve the killmail. Its easy as that. In EVE there are lots of ships and lots of possibilities and ways to win. Rifter can kill Abaddon. Few Abaddons can kill Phoenix. Why having a large amount of EHP should give a guy a advantage and possibility to "not lose". Because if the winner doesnt get a KM and loot wtf is that? Why we all SHOULD blob. Its not about what game is.
Yea, Robert Caldera dosn't seam to get this. Self destruct was never intended to be used in a PVP situation. But with ships that has huge amounts of HP, it has become a reality. And now everyone uses the exploit/deny loot and KM option in WH. Except a few of the more elite WH entities. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:26:00 -
[30] - Quote
I dont get WHAT exactly??
In my opinion nothing is broken with the SD, thats all, there is nothing to "get".
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |