Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
trexinatux
Bipedal Carnivore Club
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:28:00 -
[31] - Quote
Goons say this. CCP says that. Trolls call trolls. Still my POS has NO FUEL! It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. |
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:29:00 -
[32] - Quote
CCP is considering upping the current Mickey Mouse consequences on hi sec suicide gankers?
Brace yourselves! Massive tear flood incoming! |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
93
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:32:00 -
[33] - Quote
"deal with it!" .. Noooooooooo .. that is the leet high-sec PvP'ers line .. not fair using it against them!!!!11111 |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:34:00 -
[34] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:- Mittani was informed about CCP blabla, and saw the opportunity to anticipate and make it look like he was the one forcing CCP to change game mechanics. Ego stroking on a massive scale.
- Mittani blabla, and saw an opportunity to get even richer, speculating on oxytopes and creating this "protection fee" scheme.
I'd choose these two tbh.
|
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:38:00 -
[35] - Quote
Feilamya wrote:Mining barges are weak, untankable ships. So what can we do to protect them? Bring a strong force of PVP ships, camp the gates, guard the hulks and macks and shoot everything that even remotely looks like a goon.
You seem to be assuming that every player is (or wants to be) a member of a hardcore alliance potentially capable of fielding a large number of coordinated pilots dedicated to security duty 23/7. That isn't the case though. For many veteran players being in an alliance like that is unappealing and for most less experienced players it isn't really even an option. |
Marcus Janus
82nd Assault Fleet
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:38:00 -
[36] - Quote
Feilamya wrote:Comy 1 wrote:If they change anything I would assume that it is a way to either:
1) Make it alot harder for outlaws to keep ganking.
2) Prevent people from pulling Concord away from a spot with a noob alt/ship
This will not stop people from alpha killing a ship though, nor is there a way to stop a player with sufficient security status from suiciding unless they completely break the game. It will only make alt-recycling more common. Yes I know this is a punishable exploit, but we already know that CCP don't have the resources to police wardec mechanics, so why would they be policing alt-recycling? Gankers will always find a way. Carebears on the other hand will always cry for CCP to adapt the game for them. In the end, this becomes a game of gankers vs. CCP. Is this what you think a sandbox should be like? If gankers can adapt, so can carebears. Give them a chance! Give carebears the tools to adapt to the situation! Remove highsec! Put balancing in the hands of the players!
TLDR version
PEOPLE DONT PLAY LIKE I DO WAAAAAAAAAAAH
|
Tobias Sjodin
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:41:00 -
[37] - Quote
Personally I think that players should have to call the police themselves.
|
Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:45:00 -
[38] - Quote
"We need to look at it"
I can totally see how such a statement means the game is going down the toilet, that the devs are horrible people, that you actually needed to create yet another whine thread on a forum that is already full of them from people crying over NOTHING.
People are seriously pathetic. |
Lil' Miss Sunshine
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:53:00 -
[39] - Quote
What is this game coming to when you cannot grief high sec players in peace anymore :( |
Feilamya
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:57:00 -
[40] - Quote
Marcus Janus wrote:PEOPLE DONT PLAY LIKE I DO WAAAAAAAAAAAH
On the contrary: People DO play the way I do: They hide behind the safety of highsec when they need to. The only difference between me and John Q. Carebear is that I know better than to fully rely on CONCORD to provide safety, so I take the necessary precautions. This, however, is nothing I need to be griefing about. If carebears are incompetent, it is their problem, not mine.
With the changes I proposed, people would have the opportunity NOT to play like I do. They would be able to take their safety into their own hands, rather than rely on CONCORD. It would open up for different styles of gameplay which are not possible at this time.
Embrace the sandbox! Remove highsec! Remove CONCORD! |
|
Pytria Le'Danness
Placid Reborn
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:57:00 -
[41] - Quote
Feilamya wrote:Mining barges are weak, untankable ships. So what can we do to protect them? Bring a strong force of PVP ships, camp the gates, guard the hulks and macks and shoot everything that even remotely looks like a goon.
Teamosil wrote:You seem to be assuming that every player is (or wants to be) a member of a hardcore alliance potentially capable of fielding a large number of coordinated pilots dedicated to security duty 23/7.
Yeah, I agree. EVE as it is makes it impossible to properly guard ships. You might be able to use remote repair modules on ships that are already strong, but with their cycle time protecting a weak barge or more than one is a game of chance and dice. Defending a system is not really possible either since you cannot aggress people without a sec hit or CONCORD action if you are in high sec. We tried that for a while in low sec and all we got was flooded by cheap alts forcing us to approach outlaw status.
Besides, mining already is one of the most boring activities in the game. Defending miners is that and more - by the time an aggressor shows up your brain cells have already left the building.
I'm not really up to current events with ganks and all. I think it is good that they are possible, but they should have some consequences besides "Oh, I need to roll up a new alt". Especiallly since it's a very one-sided affair - the miner has no choice except not to undock. That makes the choices for the miner very unattractive: either don't play at all, or play and risk losing a lot of money without proper chance of retaliation. Being ganked over and over might be hurting the EVE subscribers more than the Day of the Monocle. Look at it from a miner's perspective: he makes some pittance with a mind-numbing activity, and suddenly his ship is blown up in ten seconds or less. And don't tell me "tank your ship", I have an alt in a wormhole who flies barges, and those things lack everything to mount a decent defence. Even with a command ship booster there's always something that can easily kill it.
Alternatively give miners something to work with. I have no idea what though. I think just boosting CONCORD or increasing sec level loss is boring and would not help much. If the miner could do anything - and if it's only a popup "XYZ is trying to gank you. Allow it? Yes/No" things might be a bit better. I don't feel bad if my light tank gets blown up in WoT because I always have some options, and if it's only to locate enemy tanks. If I only were fodder I'd quit fast. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:05:00 -
[42] - Quote
How about this? Make it so you can't biomass an alt with a negative security status and you can't shoot anybody in high sec on a trial account. Would that be a change everybody could live with? |
Lil' Miss Sunshine
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:08:00 -
[43] - Quote
Feilamya wrote:Marcus Janus wrote:PEOPLE DONT PLAY LIKE I DO WAAAAAAAAAAAH
On the contrary: People DO play the way I do: They hide behind the safety of highsec when they need to. The only difference between me and John Q. Carebear is that I know better than to fully rely on CONCORD to provide safety, so I take the necessary precautions. This, however, is nothing I need to be griefing about. If carebears are incompetent, it is their problem, not mine. With the changes I proposed, people would have the opportunity NOT to play like I do. They would be able to take their safety into their own hands, rather than rely on CONCORD. It would open up for different styles of gameplay which are not possible at this time. Embrace the sandbox! Remove highsec! Remove CONCORD!
What this would do is force people to join big alliances for protection, become pets and drones and pretty much do what the almighty emperor desires you to do. If I wanted to play this playstyle I would have already been in null sec. |
Houseki Shoujo
Catocalypse Meow ZOMBIE KITTY FORCE
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:13:00 -
[44] - Quote
What if there was a distress call? one that if someone was in the system they could click the button and be warped in to help out. Just an idea to throw out. |
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:15:00 -
[45] - Quote
Im rather amazed and scared that he would think that poetic stanza's comments are apparently the voice of the community with that "So I should think this is not wanted" thing O.o They hired actual clothing designers for WiS clothes "no wonder the monocle cost $80, they had to pay royalties" Screw "FiS" its called EVE CCP |
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:21:00 -
[46] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:But best to assume they are acting upon that conversation unless they confirm otherwise.
I like this part best. "best to panic now and if the dont do it we can be relieved later"
They hired actual clothing designers for WiS clothes "no wonder the monocle cost $80, they had to pay royalties" Screw "FiS" its called EVE CCP |
Comy 1
Ore Mongers Indecisive Certainty
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:24:00 -
[47] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:How about this? Make it so you can't biomass an alt with a negative security status and you can't shoot anybody in high sec on a trial account. Would that be a change everybody could live with?
This might help a bit, but in the end I think it will only end up as limitations in the game since there will still be alot of people using other ways to exploit. I'm not gonna describe exactly how they do it, but haven't you seen all of the 3 weeks or so old amarr characters in noob corps sitting in apocs suicide ganking?
These rules will not stop them. |
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:25:00 -
[48] - Quote
Chancellor November wrote:God knows, this game needs smarter NPC's... if (finally) getting around to doing that means that Concord gets cleverer, then what the hell's the problem? It's Eve... you adapt, or you don't... big deal. In other threads we have (and have had - for years) people whining about how much Isk 'carebears' make from level 4's... do I think Level 4's pay out too much? No, not at all... I think they pay out a good amount -- I just think they're far too bloody easy. Far too predictable --- like Concord. Bring in something new to the mix. Why not?
cant you read? The gankers want the MINERS to adapt. Not the gankers to have to adapt
lol They hired actual clothing designers for WiS clothes "no wonder the monocle cost $80, they had to pay royalties" Screw "FiS" its called EVE CCP |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
251
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:27:00 -
[49] - Quote
For the record i don't care either way.. but serioulsy bro?! You give with one hand (Tier 3 bc's) and take with another (apparently).
Come to think off souds fair,.. but meh. GÇ£Status quo, you know, is Latin for 'the mess we're in.GÇ¥
~ Ronald Reagan |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:34:00 -
[50] - Quote
Comy 1 wrote:Teamosil wrote:How about this? Make it so you can't biomass an alt with a negative security status and you can't shoot anybody in high sec on a trial account. Would that be a change everybody could live with? This might help a bit, but in the end I think it will only end up as limitations in the game since there will still be alot of people using other ways to exploit. I'm not gonna describe exactly how they do it, but haven't you seen all of the 3 weeks or so old amarr characters in noob corps sitting in apocs suicide ganking? These rules will not stop them.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I would think that would be exactly what it would stop. I'm assuming that they just use those characters for however long they can before their security status drops too low, biomass, and roll new ones. Is that not true?
But, IMO the goal with that kind of approach wouldn't be to prevent suicide ganking. Just to make the people doing it face the consequences. They'd either have to grind their security status back up periodically or do the orca trick. Either way, that seems more like a fair fight to me. If they're grinding security status up, they're certainly putting in the effort and deserve the reward. If they're using an orca then the person getting ganked gets a lot of warning and it limits their options pretty dramatically since that approach doesn't really work for gate and station camping. Plus it means they have a little skin in the game since people could actually set them back a bit by suicide ganking their orca. |
|
Desert Ice78
Gryphon River Industries Bloodbound.
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:36:00 -
[51] - Quote
I don't see the problem with updating CONCORD.
First: Gankers cried for years about unprobable ships until CCP relented and let them have their way. Second: Risk and reward people. Remember. Gankers have no risk. Zero. That is NOT Eve.
Stronger exumers tanks, remove insurance payouts for ganker ships, and have all gankers immediently teleported to some remote corner of nul-sec (or WH) with each gank.
Solved.
DI |
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:37:00 -
[52] - Quote
we should get poetic stanza to tell Hilmar to remove concord and high sec. He'll think its the whole playerbase talking and do it They hired actual clothing designers for WiS clothes "no wonder the monocle cost $80, they had to pay royalties" Screw "FiS" its called EVE CCP |
Poetic Stanziel
Arrakis Technology
175
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:37:00 -
[53] - Quote
Richard Hammond II wrote:we should get poetic stanza to tell Hilmar to remove concord and high sec. I don't want that.
EVE Online: Incarna = New Coke. EVE Online: Winter Expansion = Coke Classic. |
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:40:00 -
[54] - Quote
Houseki Shoujo wrote:What if there was a distress call? one that if someone was in the system they could click the button and be warped in to help out. Just an idea to throw out.
except that by the time they warp to you you are dead lol They hired actual clothing designers for WiS clothes "no wonder the monocle cost $80, they had to pay royalties" Screw "FiS" its called EVE CCP |
Lykouleon
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
241
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:41:00 -
[55] - Quote
CCP Trollmar hits conspiracy theorists for wrecking damage! Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER SO I CAN HIT THEM WITH MY SWORD |
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:43:00 -
[56] - Quote
Lykouleon wrote:CCP Trollmar hits conspiracy theorists for wrecking damage!
what took you guys so long O.o They hired actual clothing designers for WiS clothes "no wonder the monocle cost $80, they had to pay royalties" Screw "FiS" its called EVE CCP |
Houseki Shoujo
Catocalypse Meow ZOMBIE KITTY FORCE
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:47:00 -
[57] - Quote
Richard Hammond II wrote:Houseki Shoujo wrote:What if there was a distress call? one that if someone was in the system they could click the button and be warped in to help out. Just an idea to throw out. except that by the time they warp to you you are dead lol
guess that would be true. All well. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:48:00 -
[58] - Quote
Richard Hammond II wrote:Houseki Shoujo wrote:What if there was a distress call? one that if someone was in the system they could click the button and be warped in to help out. Just an idea to throw out. except that by the time they warp to you you are dead lol
Yeah, that's true, but I do like the premise. If there is a way for players to solve the issue that doesn't require like setting up a huge corporation and organizing everything in advance that certainly would be appealing. Like maybe they set it up so that if you get shot first in hi sec you can hit a distress button. It immobilizes you, cancels CONCORDE, prevents you from doing anything at all, but makes you invulnerable for 90 seconds and sends out a distress call to local that people can click on to warp to you.
I haven't thought that through, but you get my drift I think. Something where the players could protect one another would be cool. |
Richard Hammond II
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:59:00 -
[59] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:Richard Hammond II wrote:Houseki Shoujo wrote:What if there was a distress call? one that if someone was in the system they could click the button and be warped in to help out. Just an idea to throw out. except that by the time they warp to you you are dead lol Yeah, that's true, but I do like the premise. If there is a way for players to solve the issue that doesn't require like setting up a huge corporation and organizing everything in advance that certainly would be appealing. Like maybe they set it up so that if you get shot first in hi sec you can hit a distress button. It immobilizes you, cancels CONCORDE, prevents you from doing anything at all, but makes you invulnerable for 90 seconds and sends out a distress call to local that people can click on to warp to you. I haven't thought that through, but you get my drift I think. Something where the players could protect one another would be cool.
Yeah I dont think making the miners invulnerable goes along with the whole "no safety in space" thing They hired actual clothing designers for WiS clothes "no wonder the monocle cost $80, they had to pay royalties" Screw "FiS" its called EVE CCP |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 19:11:00 -
[60] - Quote
Richard Hammond II wrote:Yeah I dont think making the miners invulnerable goes along with the whole "no safety in space" thing
It isn't so much "making the miners invulnerable" as it is giving the miner the option of having 90 seconds to try to pull together their own defense instead of relying on CONCORDE.
It's a pretty even tradeoff I think. Keep in mind that I said it would cancel the call to CONCORDE. WIthout CONCORDE coming to your rescue you're relying on whatever pilots are in space in combat ships that are willing to come help you out putting their own ships at risk in the process. Could be some times you hit the button nobody comes, other times 10 people come. Since you cancelled CONCORDE, if the ganker survives those 90 seconds they can pop you without losing their own ship, so they're something more in it for them too. Probably a lot of times, only one ship would show up to rescue you and the gankers could just blow them up easily too and double their kills. And it would be converting PvHelplessMiner into PvP, which seems a lot more fun to me... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |