Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
311
|
Posted - 2015.07.29 19:10:33 -
[31] - Quote
Madd Adda wrote:i agree, but people here will argue "concord is retribution force not a police force", "Mega corps don't answer to concord/faction police", "sec status doesn't matter to mega corps" etc.
I do think that there should be a fee or fine based on your sec status/corp standings in high sec, plus additional fees for suspect/criminal flags. If you can't pay, you can't dock. Oh look another isk sink!
THIS! I like
this whining about highsec being perfectly safe - whoever introduced you to EVE did it wrong, EVE is a cold, harsh, unforgiving B***h of a mistress, who doesn't care about your whining or your 'right to be perfectly safe and make stupid isk whilst doing so'
if you want to be perfectly safe, sit in an NPC station, market trade, make lots of isk, if you actually want to taste the EVE universe, don't ask to water it down.
Also, reported for redundancy
For posting an idea into F&I:
come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it.....
If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
|
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
215
|
Posted - 2015.07.29 20:24:34 -
[32] - Quote
sigh..............
Even if a single Isk was not paid for the catalyst and its fittings..... Someone mined the rocks Someone setup up a moon pos Someone did reactions Someone hauled all the **** together Someone researched the Bpo's Someone manufactured it all someone then had to fit the ships and ship them......
time, it cost time.....play time, in that very sense 'not free' even though they were ISK free.
On another note....I kinda like the idea of having to pay docking fees, you could incorporate Corp and Faction Standings into that for price variants then include whether suspect or criminal for extra fees, and then if say -10 very Exorboratn fees to dock up.
Just make these fees apply to every one including the +5 guy to your left and right. |
admiral root
Red Galaxy
2890
|
Posted - 2015.07.29 23:45:35 -
[33] - Quote
Max Deveron wrote:On another note....I kinda like the idea of having to pay docking fees... and then if say -10 very Exorboratn fees to dock up.
Just one more nerf, amirite?
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium. CODE.
13861
|
Posted - 2015.07.29 23:58:33 -
[34] - Quote
admiral root wrote: I don't think he cares either way, he just likes to troll.
He's Basil. He very much cares, he hates the fact that PvP exists in any game.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
716
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 00:43:56 -
[35] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Kenrailae wrote:Oh god we're on this 'free ship' thing again. Definition of insanity anyone? It's all rather funny to read tbh.
Even funnier since I predicted ganking would get worse, not better, long ago when ccp took away insurance.
You saw some no skill did you even bother to try gank attempts in the good old days. Getting insurance, they just didn't care as much. Basically they half assed this crap more often than not. More they half assed it, better your chances to live the gank.
Removed insurance, they started to care a lot more Sort of like low sec'ers. They know at some point gate guns will take them down. When engaging on gates they make sure that target dies to not have those gate gun losses be a waste.
empire gankers just did the same thing after insurance taken away. They really want target to pop now. We imo were probably better off with the idiots relying on insurance to compensate for their stupidity really. It kept them playing stupidly lol. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1431
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 03:20:03 -
[36] - Quote
I don't think it's so much that insurance kept people stupid, it's that ganking has become an optimized play style. Everything in a game will eventually get to this point, unless the developers shake up the etch-a-sketch every so often.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
216
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 03:21:42 -
[37] - Quote
admiral root wrote:Max Deveron wrote:On another note....I kinda like the idea of having to pay docking fees... and then if say -10 very Exorboratn fees to dock up. Just one more nerf, amirite?
Nah, not really.....because seriously, especially with the way organized ganking occurs now.....what would an exorborirant fee look like anyway when some freighters drop billions worth in loot?
I much highly doubt CCP would make a docking fee be a billion ISK let a portion of that....just mentioned in case a carebear was reading, but now you ruined the fun |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
332
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 04:20:10 -
[38] - Quote
ive only played for three years. was there some time in the past that was substaintually different than now?
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise
94
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 06:20:08 -
[39] - Quote
After two years in EVE, I find null to be more secure and safe than high-sec
The major issue I see for high-sec ganking vs null sec is that when is it okay to shoot someone who has been bad. Null = fire at will High = you have the crime watch, but even after two years I am not really sure besides the "red" blinks which is okay to sure.
(Could just be a overview setting I am missing)
But all in all EVE is a PVP game before anything else What probably needs to happen is more information/default settings, that help players who are "law-abiding" citizens to know they can pod that fracker. Locking out gates and stations would be a nice added pick for the bears- but what are the Bears willing to give up for it?
xoxo
Amarisen Gream
|
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
216
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 06:30:30 -
[40] - Quote
Amarisen Gream wrote:After two years in EVE, I find null to be more secure and safe than high-sec
The major issue I see for high-sec ganking vs null sec is that when is it okay to shoot someone who has been bad. Null = fire at will High = you have the crime watch, but even after two years I am not really sure besides the "red" blinks which is okay to sure.
(Could just be a overview setting I am missing)
But all in all EVE is a PVP game before anything else What probably needs to happen is more information/default settings, that help players who are "law-abiding" citizens to know they can pod that fracker. Locking out gates and stations would be a nice added pick for the bears- but what are the Bears willing to give up for it?
well, im not technically a bear....i do other things just not on this character. I wouldnt agree to locking out gates. Stations, maybe.....but then bears wouldnt care anyway about that, only those that might actually try to hunt down a ganker pod that cant dock up....which would be a game in itself. Facpo dont strike pods correct? so probing a pod in deadspace would be really really lucky, let alone actually getting him.
But seriously its my opinion as an indy character here, that if station(and especailly gate) lock outs occurred for highsec against gankers.....a reduction in defensive abilities of the barge/exhumer should take place amongst maybe other buffs to some ships used by bears. On top of maybe making belt rats bigger or at least harder hitting, botters and afkr's would really have it too easy if lockouts happened as a nerf to ganking.
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
1724
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 06:48:14 -
[41] - Quote
Amarisen Gream wrote:After two years in EVE, I find null to be more secure and safe than high-sec
The major issue I see for high-sec ganking vs null sec is that when is it okay to shoot someone who has been bad. Null = fire at will High = you have the crime watch, but even after two years I am not really sure besides the "red" blinks which is okay to sure. Then how about you educate yourself about Crimewatch? Or how about you ask people about that and ask them to help setting up a working and proper overview setting with you (not for you!), or use already setup packs like Sarah's? Surprisingly, the information you seek is already available (does not go without saying for CCP), you just need to look it up or ask.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
admiral root
Red Galaxy
2892
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 11:24:24 -
[42] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:ive only played for three years. was there some time in the past that was substaintually different than now?
Yes. There was a time when, by design, Concord could be tanked and evaded. There was a time when Concord took longer to respond. There was a time when suicide ganking was far more common than it is now. There was a time when highsec carebears understood the nature of the game and as a collective didn't whine anywhere near as much as they do now. There *was* a time when HTFU didn't end at the jump gates leading to highsec.
Now it's all cries of "bullying" and "enhanced interrogation techniques" because you bumped a ship or have the bare-faced audacity to *gasp* speak to a carebear, followed by comparisons to everything from the Thugee, to the Austrian corporal with the Charlie Chaplin moustache, to sickos who fly planes into buildings when you follow up the gank with some (very pretty) explosions in a video game. Then you have the professional victims jump in, their advocate groups, their hangers-on and you end up wanting to shower in bleach and acid, like any normal person who just took a wrong turn and wound up in Jita.
When I started playing in 2008, the Eve forum wasn't a cesspit - you'd get a fair diet of posts in C&P, but you'd be able to click the link to the GD sub-forum without feeling dirty. The decline in the forum has, in my experience, gone hand in hand with the decline of the quality of Eve player in-game. The first time I ganked a guy he *demanded* an explanation, apology and reimbursement, waved his credit card around in the air and then went off to do whatever. He didn't threaten to multiate me so as to make me look like a cow (as some kind Russian gentleman once did), he didn't spew venom all over the forum, he didn't send for that famous space detective whose name escapes me.
I blame society, and I especially blame the parents.
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
405
|
Posted - 2015.07.30 14:12:22 -
[43] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:In the current state of affairs, saying this from the perspective of someone who used to gank in HS everyday, it is sort of hilariously one dimensional and a little loopy. With the gradual erosion of every other type of HS aggression or content generation mechanic, it's basically all suicide ganking now. You cannot really blame the gankers either as HS is where all the big easy kills are - the rest of the game is a relative content desert. I'd try to make the rest of the game more worth while to live in and the content wouldn't be so HS centred, and you'd have addressed the problem a different way, instead of another nerf, which aside from being philosophically wrong, would just result in an overexploitation of whatever is left. I disagree with potions of this.
Low is a waste land because the self styled elite PvP players who prefer to gank or war dec and kill easy targets in high sec rather than face the reality of fighting someone that is willing, prepared and in a ship fit to fight. There is no content that CCP can place into low that will change this behavior, I am afraid the only thing that will is the draconian measure of completely eliminating the ability to shoot other players and their stuff in high sec. Please no hate here I am not suggesting that CCP do this I am merely acknowledging the simple truth of this situation.
Nul on the other hand is a very complex thing and I for one hope that the recent changes revitalize the nul environment for everyone that plays there it would be really good for the game.
Looking at another portion of your post I need to be sure I fully understand your idea here? You are suggesting that the elite group of PvP players known as gankers should actually go into low and nul where they might face(wait for it) SOMEONE THAT WANTS TO FIGHT. God I only wish that CCP would eliminate ganking and war decs forcing these folks into low/nul to find their PvP the tears that would flow would fill oceans.
Other observation. Those who despise ganking are esstially told to shut up, stop whining and move on with the game. At the same time and in those same topics the gankers always end up whining about how the evil CCP has chosen to nerf ganking. No matter which side of this debate you align with all you need to do to fill your tears quota for a day is find one of these and read it.
Closing thought. While it is true CCP has clearly stated that ganking as a mechanic is here to stay, it is also equally true that CCP has in the past placed restrictions on ganking into the game. From this we can draw several conclusion, for whatever reasons CCP decided that there was to much ganking going on, or that it was to easy for player to gank. So in the end we always come back to the same place as players we all need to accept what is and move on.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |