Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
DSpite Culhach
272
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 02:50:00 -
[541] - Quote
I'm asking an actual question, not taking sides, just FYI.
If 10 players in noob ships sit outside a trade hub and bump everything that comes out to interfere with them aligning, I take it that would not be actionable? As long as you are not targeting a specific person, but randomly, even if you could (people would just dock up really) bump someone off station and hold him for an hour, it would be well within the current rules, would it not?
Isn't that what happens at Jita? Potential victims are bumped immediately in order to give scanning ships time to take a peek, so if they are carrying anything juicy, they can be shot at? I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
227
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 03:51:00 -
[542] - Quote
DSpite Culhach wrote:I'm asking an actual question, not taking sides, just FYI.
If 10 players in noob ships sit outside a trade hub and bump everything that comes out to interfere with them aligning, I take it that would not be actionable? As long as you are not targeting a specific person, but randomly, even if you could (people would just dock up really) bump someone off station and hold him for an hour, it would be well within the current rules, would it not?
Isn't that what happens at Jita? Potential victims are bumped immediately in order to give scanning ships time to take a peek, so if they are carrying anything juicy, they can be shot at?
It's just one method used yes, and would be well within acceptable parameters.
Most scanners in Jita, to my knowledge as I don't really play around Jita(-10 :P), are frigates with sebo's, cargo scanners, and passive targeting systems who just can you as you align to warp out. I COULD be wrong about this. The Law is a point of View |
DSpite Culhach
272
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 04:20:00 -
[543] - Quote
Starting with a base assumption that bumping freighters to stop aligning and killing them is all good - and CCP currently say it is - when this happens when exiting a station,is it actually impossible for a freighter to get away if it has to turn more then a certain amount?
What are optimal conditions, is it having an instawarp bookmark + a web? Is there any other ways other then those to bring down a jump when done after leaving a station?
Personally, when asked by a mate how to deal with taking a freighter into a possibly dangreous station, I told him I would park somewhere else in system and take smaller (cheap) chunks in to station using a high tank ship.
If someone gave me a T2 BPO and I really HAD to move it, unless I had a combo of scouts, timezone tricks, DT timing tricks and a T3 superbricked ship landing on grid with overheated everything assisted by a boosting ship, I'd leave the damn thing in the original station until the entire US gets an internet crash and there's only 1000 people online at once I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
Arthur Aihaken
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
2895
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 04:26:00 -
[544] - Quote
Bumping is fine, but I think the degree of momentum transferred in collisions is disproportionate. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
DSpite Culhach
272
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 04:47:00 -
[545] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Bumping is fine, but I think the degree of momentum transferred in collisions is disproportionate.
I do agree, but you would never get anyone from the extreme camps to agree on a decent middle ground.
One could argue that because of shields and other energy effects, two ships bumping each other would have such effects dampened or negated, but freighters just have straight hulls, and ramming ships usually have nothing running on them other then a MWD - which could be switched off just prior to impact ... or this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXq3dytL6ZA I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
Arthur Aihaken
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
2895
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 04:49:00 -
[546] - Quote
DSpite Culhach wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:Bumping is fine, but I think the degree of momentum transferred in collisions is disproportionate. I do agree, but you would never get anyone from the extreme camps to agree on a decent middle ground. There were several discussions on this (not sure where they ended up) along the lines of incurring collision damage, ramming-specific modules, etc. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
229
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 05:39:00 -
[547] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Bumping is fine, but I think the degree of momentum transferred in collisions is disproportionate.
This is actually about the truth of the entire issue. The Law is a point of View |
Amarisen Gream
Galactic Skyfleet Research Group Galactic Skyfleet Empire
13
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 06:43:00 -
[548] - Quote
They just need to add a physics / real mass to the game. This would change a lot of things > bumbling of smaller ships to bigger ships would not work, thanks to mass. Collision of weapon fire against things in space. Real physics in EVE would be final answer to this > but with real physics/mass in game, CCP would need to look at ways to change game play to balance it. i.e. Smarter missiles/rockets which could move around items in space. i.e. nearly everything in space would need to be distractible by weapon fire. (we can keep NPC stations immune to player fire) plus > the fact that collision damage shouldn't trigger timers on containers and other things in space. xoxo Amarisen Gream
|
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
230
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 13:33:00 -
[549] - Quote
Amarisen Gream wrote:They just need to add a physics / real mass to the game. This would change a lot of things > bumbling of smaller ships to bigger ships would not work, thanks to mass. Collision of weapon fire against things in space. Real physics in EVE would be final answer to this > but with real physics/mass in game, CCP would need to look at ways to change game play to balance it. i.e. Smarter missiles/rockets which could move around items in space. i.e. nearly everything in space would need to be distractible by weapon fire. (we can keep NPC stations immune to player fire) plus > the fact that collision damage shouldn't trigger timers on containers and other things in space.
Unfortunately that's not really a viable solution either, Collision damage. As stated Earlier, I'd love for those little frigates that smash into my vindiciator thinking to bump me to go splat, but there are to many places that system could be taken advantage of as well, on a purely day be day accidental bumping basis alone. Think about the only thing CCP could do at the moment is re-jig velocity transfer and reduce its extreme ends a bit. The Law is a point of View |
Zepheros Naeonis
TinklePee
3
|
Posted - 2014.02.15 16:09:00 -
[550] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:mass wise frigates and smaller ships should just "fly on the windowscreen" on capital size ships and since freighters are capital size they should be bump immune to anything but other caps and perhaps battleships which would hold the nessesary mass x speed to make some form of differance
I've always wondered why this was never taken into account. A frig with a MWD slamming into a shp weighing X amount more (such as a freighter) than itself shouldn't do anything. Hell, if anything the frig should go boom.
DSpite Culhach wrote:If someone gave me a T2 BPO and I really HAD to move it, unless I had a combo of scouts, timezone tricks, DT timing tricks and a T3 superbricked ship landing on grid with overheated everything assisted by a boosting ship, I'd leave the damn thing in the original station until the entire US gets an internet crash and there's only 1000 people online at once
You were probably just using this as an example, but... Blockade Runner ftw. (Just don't move it with the character who was originally given the BPO.) |
|
firepup82
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 14:48:00 -
[551] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Seranova Farreach wrote:mass wise frigates and smaller ships should just "fly on the windowscreen" on capital size ships and since freighters are capital size they should be bump immune to anything but other caps and perhaps battleships which would hold the nessesary mass x speed to make some form of differance frigates are stil heavier than a 747 jet. Throw a 747 jet in an aricraft carrier and they will not squat at the windshield.
your logic here is just flat dumb aprox 750,000lbs take off weightfor a 747 weight of an aircraft carrier 440 924 524
since no were does it show the weight you go by mass mass of an ibis 1.1million mass of a freighter 940 million this is not including whats in the cargo |
firepup82
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 14:51:00 -
[552] - Quote
Cassie Helio wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
Its exactly how works in real life. Police cannot prevent you from being hit by a guy with a baseball bat in the street. But the fact that the guy will be arrested if he does so is what makes unlikely that he will do it.
Why works better in real life? Because the punishment is MUCH more severe and is not forgotten 15 minutes later.
It's funny you said this because I was thinking about it earlier. Actually in real life if you were shoving someone around but not actually causing them harm, you would be suspicious. Police would not be able to stop anyone from hitting you with a baseball bat (the gank squad) but if someone was shoving you around for 30 minutes first (the bumper) police would pay attention to that.
lol you on what planet do you live on and PLEASEEEEE come push me in real life the first shove i will fall out like soccer players do when they get touched and be on my way to the hospital sue you for pain and suffering and live out my days on a beach somewhere.
and since you obviously don't live in the real world a shove is a threatening act the SECOND you put your hands on someone its assault even if you don't cause harm. so please ill give you my address come push me in a public place i actually want you to |
firepup82
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 14:57:00 -
[553] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Mazzara wrote:Gankers are so funny, they use any means necessary to justify them using what is pretty clearly an exploit, but the second someone makes a post about how to fix it suddenly the poster is breaking the game.
if a ganker wants to keep someone from flying away they should have to use the modules that everyone else has to and risk getting concorded like everyone else. I find it pretty funny that people still claim it's an exploit, when CCP have already stated it is not. Therefore the OP is looking to break the game. If you want to stop people bumping you, then use the tools already provided like everyone else.
like everyone pro gank you ignore the fact that the second someone bumps you the web trick doesnt work. point 2 if you had a counter gank squad it still will not work the freighter will still die unless well you have the ability to lock the gank squad faster than they can lock the capital sized freighter with max sebos in the mids .. which will not happen. then you have to have a ship that is capable of insta popping the gankers 100% of the time.. THENNN everyone in the counter gank squad has to instantly target a different person before they get a volley off.
all the ideas suggested are idiotic and will not effectively work in the eve world |
firepup82
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 15:00:00 -
[554] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Bumping is fine, but I think the degree of momentum transferred in collisions is disproportionate.
you completely counter yourself here 1. bumping is fine. 2. momentum transferred is disproportionate if it was proportionate you could not bump a freighter in anything less that a heavy plated battleship traveling at a high speed |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
941
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 15:41:00 -
[555] - Quote
Bumping in RL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDybTIxrJc
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
16747
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 17:32:00 -
[556] - Quote
firepup82 wrote:Mag's wrote:Mazzara wrote:Gankers are so funny, they use any means necessary to justify them using what is pretty clearly an exploit, but the second someone makes a post about how to fix it suddenly the poster is breaking the game.
if a ganker wants to keep someone from flying away they should have to use the modules that everyone else has to and risk getting concorded like everyone else. I find it pretty funny that people still claim it's an exploit, when CCP have already stated it is not. Therefore the OP is looking to break the game. If you want to stop people bumping you, then use the tools already provided like everyone else. like everyone pro gank you ignore the fact that the second someone bumps you the web trick doesnt work. point 2 if you had a counter gank squad it still will not work the freighter will still die unless well you have the ability to lock the gank squad faster than they can lock the capital sized freighter with max sebos in the mids .. which will not happen. then you have to have a ship that is capable of insta popping the gankers 100% of the time.. THENNN everyone in the counter gank squad has to instantly target a different person before they get a volley off. all the ideas suggested are idiotic and will not effectively work in the eve world I'm pro sandbox and pro using the tools provided.
If you do not wish to use the options available, then don't. Your failure to use them matters not and does not in any way mean they are not usable, or successful.
But like every other person incapable of using the tools provided, I find it ironic you complain about a game that does not hide the fact you are not safe anywhere. Unlike those of us the accept the game and play it as it was intended. This includes ganking and a normal game mechanic called bumping.
You seem to also ignore the ruling. Your bias also ignores the fact I'm the first to tell the pro gank side the same, when I see them complaining about things. These include the MWD cloak trick and the changes that were made to rat AI as well as others.
The only idiotic thing I've seen, is the unwillingness of some to learn the game, it's nuances and play within it's rules. I'll leave a quote that fits the thread at this point.
CCP Soundwave wrote:The sandbox isn't for everyone vOv Post 44.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
SKINE DMZ
Stay Frosty.
316
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 20:28:00 -
[557] - Quote
All the sandbox arguments are boring and you should know better. If one single ship, can keep another single ship stuck indefinitely that is bad game design. Telling him to bring friends, or have an alt character ready to "blap" him in highsec, is not a solution. I disagree |
SKINE DMZ
Stay Frosty.
316
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 20:31:00 -
[558] - Quote
firepup82 wrote: come push me in real life the first shove i will fall out like soccer players do when they get touched and be on my way to the hospital sue you for pain and suffering and live out my days on a beach somewhere.
Also srs ***** right here, I'd love to see that **** happen, you going to roll on the floor and cry out of pain when someone pushed you, and then try to sue him? Haha, man you are sad, lazy and pathetic all at once. I disagree |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1095
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 21:05:00 -
[559] - Quote
firepup82 wrote: like everyone pro gank you ignore the fact that the second someone bumps you the web trick doesnt work. point 2 if you had a counter gank squad it still will not work the freighter will still die unless well you have the ability to lock the gank squad faster than they can lock the capital sized freighter with max sebos in the mids .. which will not happen. then you have to have a ship that is capable of insta popping the gankers 100% of the time.. THENNN everyone in the counter gank squad has to instantly target a different person before they get a volley off.
all the ideas suggested are idiotic and will not effectively work in the eve world
there are things u can do to avoid being bumped in the first place. the critical moment s before being bumped. its like saying there should be some way for a shuttle to escape despite being webbed and scrammed by a daredevil. the critical moment was before being tackled.
no, the gank is not instant like u think. it happens over 20 seconds. jams and reps have time to lock and work. i've succesfully prevented ganks against barges using ECM drones, i did so by jamming only one ship, and i didnt insta lock him or have him pre-locked. ganks take time and can be foiled by removing only a few of the gank ships from the equation. remember, u only have to survive by 1hp.
SKINE DMZ wrote:All the sandbox arguments are boring and you should know better. If one single ship, can keep another single ship stuck indefinitely that is bad game design. Telling him to bring friends, or have an alt character ready to "blap" him in highsec, is not a solution.
the sand box arguments are boring? dnt play in a game thats a sandbox then. blapping a bumper is a solution, its just one ur not willing to use. and thats fair enough, no work, no reward. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Jill Chastot
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
221
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 21:31:00 -
[560] - Quote
Mag's wrote:
...Fat load of quotes and stuff...
You may not like certain options, but hey, welcome to Eve.
I think the question here is less that are there things to do, but are they feasible to actually acomplish in a realistic situation.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unreadOATHS wants you. Come to the WH |
|
Jill Chastot
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
223
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 21:36:00 -
[561] - Quote
Amarisen Gream wrote:They just need to add a physics / real mass to the game. This would change a lot of things > bumbling of smaller ships to bigger ships would not work, thanks to mass. Collision of weapon fire against things in space. Real physics in EVE would be final answer to this > but with real physics/mass in game, CCP would need to look at ways to change game play to balance it. i.e. Smarter missiles/rockets which could move around items in space. i.e. nearly everything in space would need to be distractible by weapon fire. (we can keep NPC stations immune to player fire) plus > the fact that collision damage shouldn't trigger timers on containers and other things in space.
I forsee nodes being limited to 100 players again.... https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unread OATHS wants you. Come to the WH "Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter. Once you accept this you will truely enjoy this game."
|
SKINE DMZ
Stay Frosty.
317
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 22:13:00 -
[562] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote: the sand box arguments are boring? dnt play in a game thats a sandbox then. blapping a bumper is a solution, its just one ur not willing to use. and thats fair enough, no work, no reward.
You have the worst logic, if one SINGLE player, can keep another SINGLE player stuck, and he needs a SECOND player to be able to get unstuck, that is bad game design. You should not need another player simply because you are stuck. Please read better next time. I disagree |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1097
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 23:05:00 -
[563] - Quote
Jill Chastot wrote:Mag's wrote:
...Fat load of quotes and stuff...
You may not like certain options, but hey, welcome to Eve.
I think the question here is less that are there things to do, but are they feasible to actually acomplish in a realistic situation.
yes
SKINE DMZ wrote:You have the worst logic, if one SINGLE player, can keep another SINGLE player stuck, and he needs a SECOND player to be able to get unstuck, that is bad game design. You should not need another player simply because you are stuck. Please read better next time.
THEN it SHould bE JUSt FiNE if a SINgle plaYER can gANK A freiGHteR tHen. BECaUse itS so UnFAir thaT A single PLAyer NEEds a SeCOND plaYER to BE abLE tO GANk A freIGHTER. THats greAT lOGic HurR HUrr.
reading is fine, my logic is undeniable and thats not bad game design. especially when the first guy could have taken measures to not get bumped in the first place. he screwed up, now he needs a friend to help him out of his own incompetence. its a situation not unheard of in both eve and real life.
its a pretty straightforward rock paper scissors situation.
running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts. solo freighter>escorted freighter
bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter gankers>solo freighters
escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps escorted freighter>gankers
show me where the game design has failed here?
lol, in before ISD Izual... EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
231
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 23:20:00 -
[564] - Quote
Gah...... this thread just...... gah my head. Please lock already. The Law is a point of View |
DSpite Culhach
278
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 03:18:00 -
[565] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Jill Chastot wrote:Mag's wrote:
...Fat load of quotes and stuff...
You may not like certain options, but hey, welcome to Eve.
I think the question here is less that are there things to do, but are they feasible to actually acomplish in a realistic situation. yes SKINE DMZ wrote:You have the worst logic, if one SINGLE player, can keep another SINGLE player stuck, and he needs a SECOND player to be able to get unstuck, that is bad game design. You should not need another player simply because you are stuck. Please read better next time. THEN it SHould bE JUSt FiNE if a SINgle plaYER can gANK A freiGHteR tHen. BECaUse itS so UnFAir thaT A single PLAyer NEEds a SeCOND plaYER to BE abLE tO GANk A freIGHTER. THats greAT lOGic HurR HUrr. reading is fine, my logic is undeniable and thats not bad game design. especially when the first guy could have taken measures to not get bumped in the first place. he screwed up, now he needs a friend to help him out of his own incompetence. its a situation not unheard of in both eve and real life. its a pretty straightforward rock paper scissors situation. running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts. solo freighter>escorted freighter bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter gankers>solo freighters escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps escorted freighter>gankers show me where the game design has failed here? lol, in before ISD Izual...
I think you will find that ONE player can already kill a freighter. You can get a frigate, scram one, orbit it, and go make some coffee. It has no modules and will eventually die.
What is being discussed here is whether the ability to carry out what is in fact the equivalent of a scram via the action of "bumping", without actually setting off any aggressions flags has proper merits.
Also, I think you fill find that in Rock-Paper-Scissor, both sides go at the same time. With a Freighter, you already know I'm going to play Rock and you always show up and counter with paper. Give freighter modules and we can discuss this point again.
You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.
I'm not here to advocate for either one side or the other, I'm trying to point out that because CCP needed to make hisec "safe", they have created this nightmare side effects, and people just "abuse" them just a hair short of making CCP intervene. Login traps, bumping, can baiting, shooting players Personal Depots, the list goes on. Some are "fixed" some are "working as intended", it's still silly mechanics though.
I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2200
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 03:32:00 -
[566] - Quote
DSpite Culhach wrote:You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.
I can almost assure you, if you took 4~6 destroyers with your freighter you would not be subject to bumping. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
941
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 03:33:00 -
[567] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:
running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts. solo freighter>escorted freighter
bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter gankers>solo freighters
escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps escorted freighter>gankers
show me where the game design has failed here?
lol, in before ISD Izual...
Complete and utter Tripe, I was escorting an Orca, equipped with w/MWD, Support included two Machs and two Scimi's before either Mach could web the Orca (Bad luck spawning at 35km) and before the MWD cycle completed the Orca was bumped, efforts to counter bump against the 3 aggressor Machs were useless, 10 minutes later the gank force (12 Talos, 2 Nados) arrived and the scimitars were all but useless in keeping the Orca alive. In the end it only took 10 Talos and 1 Nado to kill a reinforced Bulkhead, Buffer Invul'ed Orca in 15 seconds. After 10 minutes of Bumping a loss of 2/3 of cargo destroyed and only 100 mil recovered, this is failed, unbalanced, exploitive game play.
Things that keep me up at night;-á Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state,-áOnce you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another. |
DSpite Culhach
278
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 03:55:00 -
[568] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:DSpite Culhach wrote:You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.
I can almost assure you, if you took 4~6 destroyers with your freighter you would not be subject to bumping.
Really? Because as far as I know, the gankers would just need to use 2-3 bumping frigs instead of one. Is your idea to "counter-gank" the bumping ships? I'm pretty sure everyone here could fit a 100MN MWD Tengu to actually have more EHP then the freighter it's bumping. Good like killing that with "4-6" destroyers. I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2201
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 04:10:00 -
[569] - Quote
DSpite Culhach wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:DSpite Culhach wrote:You know what happened in RL when the Somali pirates started to become annoying? They started patrolling the waters in Navy ships, however, unlike in EVE, the Navy ships don't have to wait until the pirates are ON the ship and have ALREADY started shooting people before intervening. In Hisec, by the time an escort is able to activate any aggressive modules the ship they are defending is already dead from the alpha volley.
I can almost assure you, if you took 4~6 destroyers with your freighter you would not be subject to bumping. Really? Because as far as I know, the gankers would just need to use 2-3 bumping frigs instead of one. Is your idea to "counter-gank" the bumping ships? I'm pretty sure everyone here could fit a 100MN MWD Tengu to actually have more EHP then the freighter it's bumping. Good like killing that with "4-6" destroyers. Sure its possible, but the tengu takes some time to make it to speed and you have 6 destroyers that can bump the tengu. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
DSpite Culhach
278
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 04:13:00 -
[570] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:
running ur freighter solo is cheaper and easier than running it with escorts. solo freighter>escorted freighter
bumpers and gankers terrorise solo freighter gankers>solo freighters
escorted freighters help avoid, or counter ganks and bumps escorted freighter>gankers
show me where the game design has failed here?
lol, in before ISD Izual...
Complete and utter Tripe, I was escorting an Orca, equipped with w/MWD, Support included two Machs and two Scimi's before either Mach could web the Orca (Bad luck spawning at 35km) and before the MWD cycle completed the Orca was bumped, efforts to counter bump against the 3 aggressor Machs were useless, 10 minutes later the gank force (12 Talos, 2 Nados) arrived and the scimitars were all but useless in keeping the Orca alive. In the end it only took 10 Talos and 1 Nado to kill a reinforced Bulkhead, Buffer Invul'ed Orca in 15 seconds. After 10 minutes of Bumping a loss of 2/3 of cargo destroyed and only 100 mil recovered, this is failed, unbalanced, exploitive game play.
I would not personally say that it's an exploit as such. The problem exists mostly because the space being hisec, you are unable to open fire first on what is obviously an aggressive attack on your fleet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_engagement
Ability to do that would be nice, unfortunately I probably imagine it would be a coding nightmare, open to new exploit from clever players, and ultimately cause more problems.
On a side note: Why don't toons that destroy ships in hisec - at least more then once - just get flagged as hostile permanently? It's because CCP wants them to have this "ganker" playstyle, and I just don't think that CCP knows where exactly they should draw the line in the sand, so they just stand back and only intervene when they have a strong majority on one side, like say 75%. When we get this here at not even 50-50, they just sit back and say "they'll get over it".
I can't really blame them.
I suddenly woke up thinking I had a nightmare, then remembered I can't even fly Amarr Battleships. I add bits to this when I'm bored https://www.dropbox.com/s/foijsawsqolarom/EVE_Online.html |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |