Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jackson F Kenrick
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 19:06:05 -
[1] - Quote
A ganker should receive a penalty more then just the loss of their ship. A punitive punishment of a fine I think should be imposed for "criminal" activity. I feel that this fine should be adversely proportionate to the size of ship ganked. In other words the smaller the ship ganked the higher the fine.
Imagine if you will someone drives down Main St in your city and shoots and kills a random person and the only penalty they receive is that the cops impound their car so that they have to go out and buy a new one? If Concord isn't going to blow up their capsule (not suggesting they do) then something MORE needs to be the penalty for ganking someone. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1327
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 19:12:04 -
[2] - Quote
I disagree with the premise to your idea and think it is unnecessary. I am sure someone else will link you the "Eve is a harsh, dark universe" speech. One could also reference the lex talionis - an eye for an eye - they destroyed your ship, so Concord destroyed their ship.
Idle curiosity prompts me to ask, "If someone gets fined by Concord, can it give them a negative wallet?"
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1197
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 19:16:52 -
[3] - Quote
Jackson F Kenrick wrote:A ganker should receive a penalty more then just the loss of their ship. A punitive punishment of a fine I think should be imposed for "criminal" activity. I feel that this fine should be adversely proportionate to the size of ship ganked. In other words the smaller the ship ganked the higher the fine.
Imagine if you will someone drives down Main St in your city and shoots and kills a random person and the only penalty they receive is that the cops impound their car so that they have to go out and buy a new one? If Concord isn't going to blow up their capsule (not suggesting they do) then something MORE needs to be the penalty for ganking someone. What? There are plenty of addition penalties for ganking but since the whine for additional "consequences" has been gone over a zillion times before in this sub forum, I will just focus on the only novel bit of your post. Why should smaller ships be additionally protected? Because you fly them? Usually people come here arguing that big expensive ships should be additionally protected from gankers for some reason, probably because they lost a freighter or the like.
Smaller ships are the most naturally protected from gankers because they are so nimble. If you get ganked, it can only be because you were AFK or were auto-piloting. Seems like you have all the tools you need be safe, why do we need more NPC enforced "consequences"? |
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 20:12:05 -
[4] - Quote
-10 shouldn't be able to dock anywhere in high space |
Paranoid Loyd
6307
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 20:21:56 -
[5] - Quote
Yarr!
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!!!
|
Iain Cariaba
1663
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 20:24:19 -
[6] - Quote
Rah McGee wrote:-10 shouldn't be able to dock anywhere in high space Why? The mega corporations who own those stations don't answer to Concord, so why should they give two ****s what you do to other immortal capsuleers? I could understand being denied docking based on your standing with the owning corporation, but not based on sec status.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Will troll for a t-shirt.
|
Amonios Zula
Aeon Ascendant
50
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 20:52:01 -
[7] - Quote
If anything Ganking should be made a little less punishing. People are getting way too comfortable & entitled in Hisec. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
277
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 21:11:29 -
[8] - Quote
Jackson F Kenrick wrote:A ganker should receive a penalty more then just the loss of their ship. A punitive punishment of a fine I think should be imposed for "criminal" activity. I feel that this fine should be adversely proportionate to the size of ship ganked. In other words the smaller the ship ganked the higher the fine.
Imagine if you will someone drives down Main St in your city and shoots and kills a random person and the only penalty they receive is that the cops impound their car so that they have to go out and buy a new one? If Concord isn't going to blow up their capsule (not suggesting they do) then something MORE needs to be the penalty for ganking someone.
You are playing the wrong game sir.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Madd Adda
99
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 21:41:25 -
[9] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Rah McGee wrote:-10 shouldn't be able to dock anywhere in high space Why? The mega corporations who own those stations don't answer to Concord, so why should they give two ****s what you do to other immortal capsuleers? I could understand being denied docking based on your standing with the owning corporation, but not based on sec status.
why? mega corps even in the future would have reputation to consider. Haboring criminals would a good to destroy one's own reputation.
Carebear extraordinaire
|
Iain Cariaba
1664
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 22:16:46 -
[10] - Quote
Madd Adda wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:Rah McGee wrote:-10 shouldn't be able to dock anywhere in high space Why? The mega corporations who own those stations don't answer to Concord, so why should they give two ****s what you do to other immortal capsuleers? I could understand being denied docking based on your standing with the owning corporation, but not based on sec status. why? mega corps even in the future would have reputation to consider. Haboring criminals would a good to destroy one's own reputation.
Oh, that's funny. Even today large corporations are harborers of criminals. Google HSBC's relationship with the mexican drug cartels, or the Koch brothers shutting down a refinery because that'll let them avoid paying a couple million dollars to clean up the polution. What makes you think corporations even larger would care about what you think of them?
Edit: if you want, I can provide you dozens of other examples of corporations conducting criminal activity with little to no legam ramifications. If I expand the list to those outside the US, that list grows to hundreds.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Will troll for a t-shirt.
|
|
Galphii
Oberon Incorporated Get Off My Lawn
316
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 22:41:16 -
[11] - Quote
Rah McGee wrote:-10 shouldn't be able to dock anywhere in high space
I'd tweak this to: If your sec status is low enough that the cops chase you in a given system, you can't dock in that system (aiding and abetting).
"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
|
Madd Adda
99
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 23:08:15 -
[12] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Madd Adda wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:Rah McGee wrote:-10 shouldn't be able to dock anywhere in high space Why? The mega corporations who own those stations don't answer to Concord, so why should they give two ****s what you do to other immortal capsuleers? I could understand being denied docking based on your standing with the owning corporation, but not based on sec status. why? mega corps even in the future would have reputation to consider. Haboring criminals would a good to destroy one's own reputation. Oh, that's funny. Even today large corporations are harborers of criminals. Google HSBC's relationship with the mexican drug cartels, or the Koch brothers shutting down a refinery because that'll let them avoid paying a couple million dollars to clean up the polution. What makes you think corporations even larger would care about what you think of them? Edit: if you want, I can provide you dozens of other examples of corporations conducting criminal activity with little to no legam ramifications. If I expand the list to those outside the US, that list grows to hundreds.
in that case, low sec status should incur a fine from them. After all, the corps are shielding them, they should get something out of it. lower the status is, the more money needed to pay. you can't pay, you can't dock.
Carebear extraordinaire
|
Naga Elohim
Aeras Krekan Syndicate
23
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 23:46:17 -
[13] - Quote
Simple solution...
Remove the ability to fit ships if your sec status is below a certain level.(According to existing sec-status rules) Just the same way gate/station guns will engage criminals when they undock/decloak, the station should deny them services.
It could keep with Eve lore and all that. To Concord, anyone assisting them is really harboring a criminal so naturally law-abiding authorities (Caldari Navy) would deny the fitting service.
|
Iain Cariaba
1664
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 23:57:30 -
[14] - Quote
Naga Elohim wrote:Simple solution...
Remove the ability to fit ships if your sec status is below a certain level.(According to existing sec-status rules) Just the same way gate/station guns will engage criminals when they undock/decloak, the station should deny them services.
It could keep with Eve lore and all that. To Concord, anyone assisting them is really harboring a criminal so naturally law-abiding authorities (Caldari Navy) would deny the fitting service.
Simpler solution...
Read the guides put out by the gankers themselves on how to avoid getting ganked, follow the guides, and never get ganked again.
There doesn't need to be some New mechanic or new punishment. You just need to fly smarter than you currently do. Apparently this is way too hard for some people, who insist that "just one more nerf" will fix where all the previous nerfs failed.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Will troll for a t-shirt.
|
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 00:22:07 -
[15] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:There doesn't need to be some New mechanic or new punishment. You just need to fly smarter than you currently do. Apparently this is way too hard for some people, who insist that "just one more nerf" will fix where all the previous nerfs failed.
I don't care, I just don't want to se red flashing sc.. docked at the same station. |
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 00:24:07 -
[16] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:There doesn't need to be some New mechanic or new punishment. You just need to fly smarter than you currently do. Apparently this is way too hard for some people, who insist that "just one more nerf" will fix where all the previous nerfs failed.
I don't care, I just don't want to see red flashing sc.. docked at the same station. |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
435
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 00:28:58 -
[17] - Quote
Amonios Zula wrote:If anything Ganking should be made a little less punishing. People are getting way too comfortable & entitled in Hisec.
Concord could disband.... faction police only. Though I do like the idea of a pod scanner to read implants.
The Law is a point of View
|
Paranoid Loyd
6307
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 01:43:21 -
[18] - Quote
Rah McGee wrote:I don't care, I just don't want to see red flashing sc.. docked at the same station. And I don't want to hear whining about something that is easily avoidable by using that small pea pinging around in your skull. Guess neither of us gets what we want.
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!!!
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1198
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 05:06:25 -
[19] - Quote
Rah McGee wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:There doesn't need to be some New mechanic or new punishment. You just need to fly smarter than you currently do. Apparently this is way too hard for some people, who insist that "just one more nerf" will fix where all the previous nerfs failed. I don't care, I just don't want to see red flashing sc.. docked at the same station. If it bothers you so much just don't dock there or undock and move to another station. Seems a simpler solution than a draconian change that will dramatically affect a number of players other than gankers (like lowsec pirates), just because a flashing symbol bothers you.
This game isn't a solo game specially crafted so you can feel like you win all the time. It is a multiplayer sandbox where there is suppose to be a criminal element in highsec. I am afraid you will be more successful dealing with that using in-game methods rather than trying to metagame CCP into changing the rules to your favour on the forums. |
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 07:36:50 -
[20] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Rah McGee wrote:I don't care, I just don't want to see red flashing sc.. docked at the same station. And I don't want to hear whining about something that is easily avoidable by using that small pea pinging around in your skull. Guess neither of us gets what we want.
Again, It is illogical that criminals can dock at stations in high or even low, period. I don't care if something is 'easily' avoidable or not. Not ganking is easy too. Who is so stupid enough to do this shouldn't be able to dock anywhere. Period. |
|
Angelica Dreamstar
Miner's House of ill repute
1040
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 07:39:40 -
[21] - Quote
Unless you can provide a month's worth of killmails from ganking, you have no experience or clue what you are talking about.
"People need to realise that saying "someone else will do it" also mean that other someone else might be thinking the exact same thing..."
-- Frostys Virpio, very attentive person, thoughtful, smart responses. Understands self responsibility.
|
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 07:45:38 -
[22] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote: This game isn't a solo game specially crafted so you can feel like you win all the time. It is a multiplayer sandbox where there is suppose to be a criminal element in highsec. I am afraid you will be more successful dealing with that using in-game methods rather than trying to metagame CCP into changing the rules to your favour on the forums.
How does not allowing criminals to dock changes the rules? I am still gankable, am I. So the only reason gankers whine about this proposal its endanger of their easy life in high sec. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1199
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 08:03:34 -
[23] - Quote
Rah McGee wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Rah McGee wrote:I don't care, I just don't want to see red flashing sc.. docked at the same station. And I don't want to hear whining about something that is easily avoidable by using that small pea pinging around in your skull. Guess neither of us gets what we want. Again, It is illogical that criminals can dock at stations in high or even low, period. I don't care if something is 'easily' avoidable or not. Not ganking is easy too. Who is so stupid enough to do this shouldn't be able to dock anywhere. Period. How would criminals operate efficiently in this game if they couldn't dock? |
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 08:09:40 -
[24] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:[quote=Rah McGee] How would criminals operate efficiently in this game if they couldn't dock?
How do people opperate efficiently in wh space without the possibility to dock? |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1201
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 08:23:10 -
[25] - Quote
Rah McGee wrote:Black Pedro wrote:[quote=Rah McGee] How would criminals operate efficiently in this game if they couldn't dock? How do people opperate efficiently in wh space without the possibility to dock? They don't really. They are forced to lug in POSes and fuel so that they can farm the lucrative PvE sites in wormholes which makes the effort worth it.
If you are suggesting that criminals should have to set up a POS, they cannot as the faction police will destroy them while they are trying to deploy the tower. Nor under your plan would they be able to dock in a station to buy a POS or the fuel in the first place. |
Hauler Monkey
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 08:46:28 -
[26] - Quote
Jackson F Kenrick wrote:A ganker should receive a penalty more then just the loss of their ship. A punitive punishment of a fine I think should be imposed for "criminal" activity. I feel that this fine should be adversely proportionate to the size of ship ganked. In other words the smaller the ship ganked the higher the fine.
Imagine if you will someone drives down Main St in your city and shoots and kills a random person and the only penalty they receive is that the cops impound their car so that they have to go out and buy a new one? If Concord isn't going to blow up their capsule (not suggesting they do) then something MORE needs to be the penalty for ganking someone.
Oh look it's this whine-thread again.
Did da widdle newbie autopilot his cute widdle fweighter through a 0.5? |
Mag's
the united
19805
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 09:08:09 -
[27] - Quote
"Just one more nerf and it will be balanced."
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 10:10:27 -
[28] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Rah McGee wrote:Black Pedro wrote:[quote=Rah McGee] How would criminals operate efficiently in this game if they couldn't dock? How do people opperate efficiently in wh space without the possibility to dock? They don't really. They are forced to lug in POSes and fuel so that they can farm the lucrative PvE sites in wormholes which makes the effort worth it. If you are suggesting that criminals should have to set up a POS, they cannot as the faction police will destroy them while they are trying to deploy the tower. Nor under your plan would they be able to dock in a station to buy a POS or the fuel in the first place.
They still can have their POS in Null or even dock there. They can buy their stuff there. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1202
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 10:34:38 -
[29] - Quote
Rah McGee wrote:Black Pedro wrote:Rah McGee wrote:Black Pedro wrote:[quote=Rah McGee] How would criminals operate efficiently in this game if they couldn't dock? How do people opperate efficiently in wh space without the possibility to dock? They don't really. They are forced to lug in POSes and fuel so that they can farm the lucrative PvE sites in wormholes which makes the effort worth it. If you are suggesting that criminals should have to set up a POS, they cannot as the faction police will destroy them while they are trying to deploy the tower. Nor under your plan would they be able to dock in a station to buy a POS or the fuel in the first place. They still can have their POS in Null or even dock there. They can buy their stuff there. So you want a new player who decides to play the game as a criminal to fly to nullsec, spend a couple hundred million on some POS that they can't even deploy in highsec.
Yeah, that's balanced. I can't see that having any affect on the number of criminals operating in the game. |
Rah McGee
Lords and Ladies of event horizon H.O.M.E. Coalition
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 12:22:01 -
[30] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote: So you want a new player who decides to play the game as a criminal to fly to nullsec, spend a couple hundred million on some POS that they can't even deploy in highsec.
Yeah, that's balanced. I can't see that having any affect on the number of criminals operating in the game.
Stop bs pls. A new player can't gank by himself. And yes, if he decides to be a criminal he shouldn't be able to dock. If I decide to go WH as a new player I can't start whining that I can't dock there and it is too hard etc. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |