Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dom Arkaral
The Conference Elite CODE.
948
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:01:10 -
[121] - Quote
tl;dr op hates ganking op wants ganking to dissapear by havong concord preventing ganks XD
CONCORD is there to punish, not to prevent That's how it always was, that's how it'll stay
Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.
Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER
Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome
CCL Loyalist
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:02:02 -
[122] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:NightmareX wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk. Is lame excuses all you can give? You don't even give any reasonable arguments or reasons why there shouldn't be a system in EVE like i mentioned. So why should we listen to you? You said this is EVE yadda yadda yadda. Yes we know it's EVE, but EVE still has to be balanced both towards normal players AND the gankers. I keep repeating it hoping you'll understand the point. The freighter pilot creates the ganking opportunity by overloading his freighter. You keep calling it lame because you can't logically refute the point. And the cash-transport car also creates the ambush / stealing oppoturnity for peoples who want to do crimes / steal money. But that alone doesn't mean the criminals can just keep going and steal the money everytime they see a cash-transport car with no consequences for continueing to do that.
Your excuses doesn't work.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5779
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:02:33 -
[123] - Quote
Just have CONCORD pod the suckers...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Circo Maximo
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:02:37 -
[124] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:CCP should not be balancing player's actions. If a player takes on too much risk it is not CCP's problem, it is the players problem. You can't patch out stupid. Yet here we have the OP trying to patch out stupid. Who are you to say what CCP should be doing. CCP is a business and whatever makes gameplay more enjoyable for all is aloud to be changed. There are regular content / features patches for a reason. Its called reactive development.
Players are punished in highsec by being killed and lowered security status where they aren't free to fly anywhere without being chased and killed. What is your issue? No one is entitled to being invincible while outnumbered. Make your ship economically unfeasible to be killed and profited from, the end. If people can form fleets to kill you, you should have to put in the same effort to stay alive as well. Get organized and get good instead of putting all your effort into crying for CCP to save you from your own ineptitude. |
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:04:11 -
[125] - Quote
Janeos wrote:I haven't seen a vein of salt this rich in YEARS. This has nothing to do with salt. It has all to do with balancing the game out for what criminals are allowed to keep doing days in and days out without risks or consequences.
You know pretty well you have a nice luxury doing this and doesn't want to have a harder time doing this the more crimes you do.
Dom Arkaral wrote:tl;dr op hates ganking op wants ganking to dissapear by havong concord preventing ganks XD CONCORD is there to punish, not to prevent That's how it always was, that's how it'll stay Yeah, Concord (like the police) is there to punish you harder and harder the more crimes you do. Isn't that kinda logic?
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5992
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:19:30 -
[126] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk. You obviously dont know that goons sit in jita ganking whatever they can 24 hours a day. They are able to sit in 0.9 and 1.0 system stations with -10.0 security status. When they undock they dont even have to worry about faction police. They jump whereever they want and gank whatever they want without any negating gameplay effects whatsoever. All it takes is a mach bumper on each gate and they can stop any freighter that they desire and hold them as long as they desire. Bumpers do not go suspect and can even target the freighter so that it cant log out for 15min. Its a complete joke.
And yet all of this can be avoided by:
1. Not over stuffing your freighter. 2. Using a scout. 3. Having your scout use webs.
There are options for prudent play but the OP prefers to reward stupidity.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5992
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:26:03 -
[127] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:NightmareX wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk. Is lame excuses all you can give? You don't even give any reasonable arguments or reasons why there shouldn't be a system in EVE like i mentioned. So why should we listen to you? You said this is EVE yadda yadda yadda. Yes we know it's EVE, but EVE still has to be balanced both towards normal players AND the gankers. I keep repeating it hoping you'll understand the point. The freighter pilot creates the ganking opportunity by overloading his freighter. You keep calling it lame because you can't logically refute the point. And the cash-transport car also creates the ambush / stealing oppoturnity for peoples who want to do crimes / steal money. But that alone doesn't mean the criminals can just keep going and steal the money everytime they see a cash-transport car with no consequences for continueing to do that. Your excuses doesn't work.
Let me see, they use an armored car and the guards have weapons...and they work in a society where people are not even contemplating trying to rob it. Oh yeah...and there are no clones for us to wake up in RL if we get killed.
Yeah, that is a totally valid comparison.[/sarcasm]
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:27:51 -
[128] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Erich Einstein wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk. You obviously dont know that goons sit in jita ganking whatever they can 24 hours a day. They are able to sit in 0.9 and 1.0 system stations with -10.0 security status. When they undock they dont even have to worry about faction police. They jump whereever they want and gank whatever they want without any negating gameplay effects whatsoever. All it takes is a mach bumper on each gate and they can stop any freighter that they desire and hold them as long as they desire. Bumpers do not go suspect and can even target the freighter so that it cant log out for 15min. Its a complete joke. And yet all of this can be avoided by: 1. Not over stuffing your freighter. 2. Using a scout. 3. Having your scout use webs. There are options for prudent play but the OP prefers to reward stupidity. 1. So that means i can't take money with me or my smartphone in my jacket when i'm out walking, just because there can be thieves that can just rob me time after times?
Ofc not. You will take those things with you because the police are there to catch those thieves and punish them if they rob me. And if they later are robbing others again, then ofc the police will punish them even harder for comitting the same crimes over again. Or what do you think, they should get a clap on the shoulder being told not to do those nasty things everytime?
2. Yeah, let's just call my friend that has to hold my hand everytime i go to the grocery store so he can look around for some baddies or naughty peoples so i don't gets scared by them.
Not only that, but you don't see a freaking police car in front of a moneytransporter car everytime they are going to deliver money or whatever.
3. You shouldn't have to use an alt to be able to fly a freighter in a normal way in empire. Yes, you can use an alt for some extra benefits that way. But you shouldn't have to use one with the freighter pilot to be able to use the damn things in empire.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5992
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:28:19 -
[129] - Quote
Circo Maximo wrote:Erich Einstein wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:CCP should not be balancing player's actions. If a player takes on too much risk it is not CCP's problem, it is the players problem. You can't patch out stupid. Yet here we have the OP trying to patch out stupid. Who are you to say what CCP should be doing. CCP is a business and whatever makes gameplay more enjoyable for all is aloud to be changed. There are regular content / features patches for a reason. Its called reactive development. Players are punished in highsec by being killed and lowered security status where they aren't free to fly anywhere without being chased and killed. What is your issue? No one is entitled to being invincible while outnumbered. Make your ship economically unfeasible to be killed and profited from, the end. If people can form fleets to kill you, you should have to put in the same effort to stay alive as well. Get organized and get good instead of putting all your effort into crying for CCP to save you from your own ineptitude.
Also, "don't put all your eggs in one basket".
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Circo Maximo
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:42:36 -
[130] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Erich Einstein wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk. You obviously dont know that goons sit in jita ganking whatever they can 24 hours a day. They are able to sit in 0.9 and 1.0 system stations with -10.0 security status. When they undock they dont even have to worry about faction police. They jump whereever they want and gank whatever they want without any negating gameplay effects whatsoever. All it takes is a mach bumper on each gate and they can stop any freighter that they desire and hold them as long as they desire. Bumpers do not go suspect and can even target the freighter so that it cant log out for 15min. Its a complete joke. And yet all of this can be avoided by: 1. Not over stuffing your freighter. 2. Using a scout. 3. Having your scout use webs. There are options for prudent play but the OP prefers to reward stupidity. 1. So that means i can't take money with me or my smartphone in my jacket when i'm out walking, just because there can be thieves that can just rob me time after times? Ofc not. You will take those things with you because the police are there to catch those thieves and punish them if they rob me. And if they later are robbing others again, then ofc the police will punish them even harder for comitting the same crimes over again. Or what do you think, they should get a clap on the shoulder being told not to do those nasty things everytime? 2. Yeah, let's just call my friend that has to hold my hand everytime i go to the grocery store so he can look around for some baddies or naughty peoples so i don't gets scared by them. Not only that, but you don't see a freaking police car in front of a moneytransporter car everytime they are going to deliver money or whatever. 3. You shouldn't have to use an alt to be able to fly a freighter in a normal way in empire. Yes, you can use an alt for some extra benefits that way. But you shouldn't have to use one with the freighter pilot to be able to use the damn things in empire.
Where did you get the idea that you should be able to be invincible in highsec? CCP has never told you this. You should need to be organized to protect yourself in an MMO. There are single player games available if you don't want to play with others. |
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:45:01 -
[131] - Quote
Circo Maximo wrote:Where did you get the idea that you should be able to be invincible in highsec? CCP has never told you this. You should need to be organized to protect yourself in an MMO. There are single player games available if you don't want to play with others. I have nowhere in my statements said high sec should be invincible. Do you read what i'm saying bro?
All i have said that the gankers should get harder and harder times against Concord the more they gank each day.
What's bad about that?
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27799
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:47:57 -
[132] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Circo Maximo wrote:Where did you get the idea that you should be able to be invincible in highsec? CCP has never told you this. You should need to be organized to protect yourself in an MMO. There are single player games available if you don't want to play with others. I have nowhere in my statements said high sec should be invincible. Do you read what i'm saying bro? All i have said that the gankers should get harder and harder times against Concord the more they gank each day. What's bad about that? If you want ganking to be harder or not as profitable, you pay attention to what you're doing and don't present them with easy targets.
It's that fecking simple.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:50:02 -
[133] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:NightmareX wrote:Circo Maximo wrote:Where did you get the idea that you should be able to be invincible in highsec? CCP has never told you this. You should need to be organized to protect yourself in an MMO. There are single player games available if you don't want to play with others. I have nowhere in my statements said high sec should be invincible. Do you read what i'm saying bro? All i have said that the gankers should get harder and harder times against Concord the more they gank each day. What's bad about that? If you want ganking to be harder or not as profitable, you pay attention to what you're doing and don't present them with easy or juicy targets. It's that fecking simple. Still doesn't makes the idea of getting the Concord to be harder against the gankers the more they gank bad in any ways. There should be some kind of a trade off for doing that more and more.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5993
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:52:49 -
[134] - Quote
NightmareX wrote: 1. So that means i can't take money with me or my smartphone in my jacket when i'm out walking, just because there can be thieves that can just rob me time after times?
Ofc not. You will take those things with you because the police are there to catch those thieves and punish them. And if they later are robbing others again, then ofc the police will punish them even harder for comitting the same crimes over again. Or what do you think, they should get a clap on the shoulder being told not to do those nasty things everytime?
You don't live in New Eden. Different set or norms and laws/rules. So right off you are looking silly. Second, a smart phone and even a couple hundred in cash is not like stuffing half your life's savings into your wallet. Even in RL, if you took half your wealth, stuck in your pocket and went walking down the street most people would consider that imprudent. After all, if you need to move half your wealth from A to B you could just go over to B open an account and write a check against your account in A. You could have A transfer it. You have options for far, far safer modes of moving large amounts of wealth.
NightmareX wrote:2. Yeah, let's just call my friend that has to hold my hand everytime i go to the grocery store so he can look around for some baddies or naughty peoples so i don't gets scared by them.
Not only that, but you don't see a freaking police car in front of a moneytransporter car everytime they are going to deliver money or whatever.
You are the one wanting hand holding by not just a friend, but by all powerful NPCs. The ironic is so rich here.
NightmareX wrote:3. You shouldn't have to use an alt to be able to fly a freighter in a normal way in empire. Yes, you can use an alt for some extra benefits that way. But you shouldn't have to use one with the freighter pilot to be able to use the damn things in empire.
Who said alt. Ask a friend. You do have friends in game, right? I've had a friend scout for me. I've scouted for friends.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
commander aze
306
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:53:16 -
[135] - Quote
https://imgflip.com/i/1kcry4 <--- Had to be said
Also not crazy about making massive changes in code to allow npc stations to point people...
I know the red setting on alphas was a thing a while back and ccp said they didnt anticipate abuse ot this and they would review it at a later time.
Commander Aze For CSM XII
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400
Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5993
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:53:36 -
[136] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:NightmareX wrote:Circo Maximo wrote:Where did you get the idea that you should be able to be invincible in highsec? CCP has never told you this. You should need to be organized to protect yourself in an MMO. There are single player games available if you don't want to play with others. I have nowhere in my statements said high sec should be invincible. Do you read what i'm saying bro? All i have said that the gankers should get harder and harder times against Concord the more they gank each day. What's bad about that? If you want ganking to be harder or not as profitable, you pay attention to what you're doing and don't present them with easy or juicy targets. It's that fecking simple.
For some not simple enough.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5993
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:56:07 -
[137] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:NightmareX wrote:Circo Maximo wrote:Where did you get the idea that you should be able to be invincible in highsec? CCP has never told you this. You should need to be organized to protect yourself in an MMO. There are single player games available if you don't want to play with others. I have nowhere in my statements said high sec should be invincible. Do you read what i'm saying bro? All i have said that the gankers should get harder and harder times against Concord the more they gank each day. What's bad about that? If you want ganking to be harder or not as profitable, you pay attention to what you're doing and don't present them with easy or juicy targets. It's that fecking simple. Still doesn't makes the idea of getting the Concord to be harder against the gankers the more they gank bad in any ways. There should be some kind of a trade off for doing that more and more.
Why? Why shouldn't players be able to punish others for their imprudence?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27801
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:01:07 -
[138] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:If you want ganking to be harder or not as profitable, you pay attention to what you're doing and don't present them with easy or juicy targets.
It's that fecking simple. Still doesn't makes the idea of getting the Concord to be harder against the gankers the more they gank bad in any ways. There should be some kind of a trade off for doing that more and more. Why are you expecting NPC's to make it harder for gankers? You already have the tools to do it yourself.
Gankers will adapt to any changes that happen with regards to Concord response, just as they have in the past. People will still continue to do stupid stuff like put eleventy billion isk in an untanked freighter and AP it through a chokepoint, they will explode and this thread will start all over again.
For example, some of the changes people suggest and the gankers obvious response Faster response times : Bring more DPS Longer timers: They switch between gank characters. Scaling response times on ganking history : CCP's database admin ganks you for making his life hell.
It's a constant cycle of one more nerf will fix ganking, and it never does because ganking isn't the problem, stupidity is.
CCP can't patch stupid.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:02:21 -
[139] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:You don't live in New Eden. Different set or norms and laws/rules. So right off you are looking silly. Second, a smart phone and even a couple hundred in cash is not like stuffing half your life's savings into your wallet. Even in RL, if you took half your wealth, stuck in your pocket and went walking down the street most people would consider that imprudent. After all, if you need to move half your wealth from A to B you could just go over to B open an account and write a check against your account in A. You could have A transfer it. You have options for far, far safer modes of moving large amounts of wealth. Who said anything about how much money i'm traveling with?
For all you know i can travel with ALOT of money.
And you can buy rather expensive smartphones out there. Just look at the Vertu's out there.
Teckos Pech wrote:You are the one wanting hand holding by not just a friend, but by all powerful NPCs. The ironic is so rich here. No, i want criminals to get a harder time against the Police / Concord the more crimes they do within one day. That's all i want. I'm not against ganking at all if you eally think i'am doing that.
Teckos Pech wrote:Who said alt. Ask a friend. You do have friends in game, right? I've had a friend scout for me. I've scouted for friends. Still the same. You shouldn't be in need of others to just move ships around as long as you aren't in a war with someone. If they are at war, then it's for another topic and a totally different thing.
Not only that, but scouting for gankers in Destroyers is very hard. Because one second a gate can be clear and tells the Freighter to jump in. But because the freighter is so slow at entering warp, you can basicly sit 2 jumps out with some Destroyers and just head towards the freighter and gank it before it had entered warp. Not only that. Should every Freighter polits just stop doing what they are doing, just because they see a potential bumping Machariel at gates to?
Once a freighter is getting bumped by some Machariel or whatever, the chance of getting out is very low. So some simple bumps is all that is needed to ruins someones days.
So it shouldn't be that easy to gank others.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:10:50 -
[140] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:NightmareX wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:If you want ganking to be harder or not as profitable, you pay attention to what you're doing and don't present them with easy or juicy targets.
It's that fecking simple. Still doesn't makes the idea of getting the Concord to be harder against the gankers the more they gank bad in any ways. There should be some kind of a trade off for doing that more and more. Why are you expecting NPC's to make it harder for gankers? You already have the tools to do it yourself. Gankers will adapt to any changes that happen with regards to Concord response, just as they have in the past. People will still continue to do stupid stuff like put eleventy billion isk in an untanked freighter and AP it through a chokepoint, they will explode and this thread will start all over again. For example, some of the changes people suggest and the gankers obvious response Faster response times : Bring more DPS Longer timers: They switch between gank characters. Scaling response times on ganking history : CCP's database admin ganks you for making his life hell. It's a constant cycle of one more nerf will fix ganking, and it never does because ganking isn't the problem, stupidity is. CCP can't patch stupid. Again. Do you think it's fine that you get the exact same treatment from the police / Concord everytime you do a crime over and over again over being punished harder and harder the more crimes you do (which is logical by human nature by the way)?
And why do you think it's fair that i get the same treatment from Concord for suiciding on a Rifter as you get for suiciding a massive freighter?
If i steal a small pack og bubblegum and if i steal a car, do you think i will get punished the same for stealing the pack of bubblegum as i get for stealing the car?
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
|
Jakara Dakara
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
4
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:12:21 -
[141] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Jakara Dakara wrote:Erich Einstein wrote:Disclaimer: I understand that ganking is a part of the game and I am completely ok with that. I actually like that people in highsec are not completely protected.
Given that, CONCORD and the security status are completely useless against repeat offenders (mainly -5.0 and lower) who fleet gank every 15min - 24hours a day. Yeah, im talking about those staged up in Jita V - Moon 17 station. Ganking as a profession and source of income should come with the requirement of having to manage and repair your security status based on the system that you are ganking in.
To implement this i propose two changes:
First: CONCORD should respond differently if a pilot's security status falls low enough in a particular highsec system. This second phase of aggression would consist of stations and jump gates instantly webbing and warp-disrupting while CONCORD moves in. This prevents serial criminals from freely moving through highsec and also prevent gank fleets from staging in highsec systems unless they control their security status correctly. Customs officials already behave this way on gates so it makes complete sense to expand this behavior to CONCORD's abilities. CONCORD should not be made to look like fools who can be manipulated.
Here is an example of when this second phase would kick in:
1.0 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-4.0 and lower) 0.9 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-5.0 and lower) 0.8 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-6.0 and lower) 0.7 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-7.0 and lower) 0.6 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-8.0 and lower) 0.5 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-9.0 and lower) 0.4 system and lower - not applicable
Second: To prevent alpha clones from continually being rolled and used as disposable gank toons, I propose that only omega pilots be allowed to set their safety to red, while alpha clones can only set their safety to yellow at most.
I feel that this will balance out the security and safety of highsec without damaging the ability to gank. This change will require gank fleets to put in an effort if they want to treat highsec like a free meal.
This would also bring more meaning to tags, where they can be used to repair status so that mission running is not the only option. Gankers would have to weigh tags cost against target profit to be effective.
CCPlease implement this or something similar so that repeat gank fleets can not freely stage and travel in highsec. If career criminals want to take advantage of major markets like jita and amarr, then they can use an alt or carrier service to get goods. No need for career criminals to even be allowed in highsec. That is what a security status is meant to control. OK 1) You should try searching the forum, this post has been made, ad nauseam, again and again and again. 2) Concord is designed to react to a crime not prevent, CCP has not mentioned wanting to change this. 3) Concord gets regularly made a fool out of in the lore, why can't we have fun with the police too? 4) Having alpha safety locks has been mentioned in other threads as well, they don't want to take emergent game play away from them 5) Everything you mentioned would still severely damage the ability for dudes to gank, even worse than it has been already. 6) You've mentioned you steal the loot from a gank and profit off of it (making it less worthwhile for the gankers I might add), why would you want to remove that emergent gameplay/profit source from yourself? because its bad gameplay for a highsec system and I can make isk in any security status. I dont rely on ganks for income.
so what about points 1 - 5?
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27802
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:29:01 -
[142] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Why are you expecting NPC's to make it harder for gankers? You already have the tools to do it yourself.
Gankers will adapt to any changes that happen with regards to Concord response, just as they have in the past. People will still continue to do stupid stuff like put eleventy billion isk in an untanked freighter and AP it through a chokepoint, they will explode and this thread will start all over again.
For example, some of the changes people suggest and the gankers obvious response Faster response times : Bring more DPS Longer timers: They switch between gank characters. Scaling response times on ganking history : CCP's database admin ganks you for making his life hell.
It's a constant cycle of one more nerf will fix ganking, and it never does because ganking isn't the problem, stupidity is.
CCP can't patch stupid. Again. Do you think it's fine that you get the exact same treatment from the police / Concord everytime you do a crime over and over again over being punished harder and harder the more crimes you do (which is logical by human nature by the way)? Concord don't care how often you kill, they only care that you kill without sanction. What you're suggesting is that Concord have access to someones kill history and scales their response accordingly, which raises questions. How do they distinguish between legal and illegal kills for scaling purposes? How much work would be required to implement your suggestion? Would the time spent implementing this be better spent elsewhere? Would it actually fix anything?
Quote:And why do you think it's fair that i get the same treatment from Concord for suiciding on a Rifter as you get for suiciding a massive freighter? Your crime is that you shot something without the appropriate flags. What you shoot is completely irrelevant.
Quote:If i steal a small pack og bubblegum and if i steal a car, do you think i will get punished the same for stealing the pack of bubblegum as i get for stealing the car? Your analogy is flawed, this is not about value, this is about the actual act of crime. The crime being shooting at another player without sanction.
Using the example of cars, if you steal a car, whether it be a Bentley or a Kia, the Police and the courts wouldn't care what car you stole, they would only care that you stole a car; your punishment is for the crime of stealing a car, not stealing a Kia or a Bentley.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:34:51 -
[143] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:NightmareX wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Why are you expecting NPC's to make it harder for gankers? You already have the tools to do it yourself.
Gankers will adapt to any changes that happen with regards to Concord response, just as they have in the past. People will still continue to do stupid stuff like put eleventy billion isk in an untanked freighter and AP it through a chokepoint, they will explode and this thread will start all over again.
For example, some of the changes people suggest and the gankers obvious response Faster response times : Bring more DPS Longer timers: They switch between gank characters. Scaling response times on ganking history : CCP's database admin ganks you for making his life hell.
It's a constant cycle of one more nerf will fix ganking, and it never does because ganking isn't the problem, stupidity is.
CCP can't patch stupid. Again. Do you think it's fine that you get the exact same treatment from the police / Concord everytime you do a crime over and over again over being punished harder and harder the more crimes you do (which is logical by human nature by the way)? Concord don't care how often you kill, they only care that you kill without sanction. What you're suggesting is that Concord have access to someones kill history and scales their response accordingly, which raises questions. How do they distinguish between legal and illegal kills for scaling purposes? How much work would be required to implement your suggestion? Would the time spent implementing this be better spent elsewhere? Would it actually fix anything? Quote:And why do you think it's fair that i get the same treatment from Concord for suiciding on a Rifter as you get for suiciding a massive freighter? Your crime is that you shot something without the appropriate flags. What you shoot is completely irrelevant. Quote:If i steal a small pack og bubblegum and if i steal a car, do you think i will get punished the same for stealing the pack of bubblegum as i get for stealing the car? Your analogy is flawed, this is not about value, this is about the actual act of crime. Using you example of cars, if you steal a car, be it a Bentley or a Kia, the Police and the courts wouldn't care what car you stole, they only care that you stole a car; your punishment is for the crime of stealing a car, not stealing a Kia or a Bentley. You still haven't explained why Concord shouldn't take into consideration on how much you have ganked each day?
Yeah, Concord should punish you harder and harder within the Concord timer ONCE they take you for doing a new crime.
Yeah, Concord doesn't looks after that now, but that doesn't mean they can't do it in the future. Because it's normal that when you commit a crime, it should be harder and harder for you to avoid Concord within the Concord timer the more crimes you do.
If you do not agree with this, then please give reasonable reasons why this wouldn't work?
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
Kill-Chan
The Conference Elite CODE.
0
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:55:48 -
[144] - Quote
Praise James no one in their right minds would listen to your terrible ideas. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27803
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:56:08 -
[145] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:You still haven't explained why Concord shouldn't take into consideration on how much you have ganked each day? You still haven't explained why they should, nor have you taken into consideration what would need to be done on the back-end for Concord to work in this way.
The fact of the matter is that they don't. You commit your crime, your ship dies and you get to wait out a 15 minute timer. Once that timer is up your record is wiped as far as Concord is concerned. If someone ganks multiple ships each day they have a low security status and are likely free to be engaged, shoot them in the face when they undock, shoot them in the face at the gates before they start shooting other people in the face. The Faction Police will be shooting at them too, when they catch up.
The tools to inflict retribution over and above that provided by the game are already in your hands, that's what they're there for. Stop being lazy and expecting CCP to further punish ganking via mechanics changes; use the tools at your disposal to do it yourself.
The means are also there to make gankers go and pick another target, many are common sense precautions, some require knowledge of game mechanics. What people forget is that Eve is above all a full loot PvP game; you don't AFK, you don't carry all your shiny stuff, you don't fit your ship with nothing but cargo mods, this is some of that common sense.
Quote:Yeah, Concord should punish you harder and harder within the Concord timer ONCE they take you for doing a new crime. How? You lose your ship in seconds, you can't warp, you cant undock in anything but a pod. The only thing left is podding, gankers won't care, they'll just use implant free clones for ganking and wake up in a med clone at the same station, because they're not daft and set the station that they're working out of up with a med clone.
Quote:Yeah, Concord doesn't looks after that now, but that doesn't mean they can't do it in the future. Because it's normal that when you commit a crime, it should be harder and harder for you to avoid Concord within the Concord timer the more crimes you do. Which part of you can't avoid Concord did you fail to understand? It's mechanically impossible and if you do find a way it's a ban.
Quote:If you do not agree with this, then please give reasonable reasons why this wouldn't work? See all of the above, you're another one that has no idea how Concord and Crimewatch actually work.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Tuggin Coggs
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
0
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 04:59:16 -
[146] - Quote
give all transports drones and i think we are on to something
|
Imya Wormhole
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 05:00:48 -
[147] - Quote
I love how he is using the goons WWB background while complaining about goons ganking him. |
Budsin Adar
Blue Angel's The Republic.
12
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 05:09:14 -
[148] - Quote
Erich Einstein wrote:Disclaimer: I understand that ganking is a part of the game and I am completely ok with that. I actually like that people in highsec are not completely protected.
Given that, CONCORD and the security status are completely useless against repeat offenders (mainly -5.0 and lower) who fleet gank every 15min - 24hours a day. Yeah, im talking about those staged up in Jita V - Moon 17 station. Ganking as a profession and source of income should come with the requirement of having to manage and repair your security status based on the system that you are ganking in.
To implement this i propose two changes:
First: CONCORD should respond differently if a pilot's security status falls low enough in a particular highsec system. This second phase of aggression would consist of stations and jump gates instantly webbing and warp-disrupting while CONCORD moves in. This prevents serial criminals from freely moving through highsec and also prevent gank fleets from staging in highsec systems unless they control their security status correctly. Customs officials already behave this way on gates so it makes complete sense to expand this behavior to CONCORD's abilities. CONCORD should not be made to look like fools who can be manipulated.
Here is an example of when this second phase would kick in:
1.0 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-4.0 and lower) 0.9 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-5.0 and lower) 0.8 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-6.0 and lower) 0.7 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-7.0 and lower) 0.6 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-8.0 and lower) 0.5 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-9.0 and lower) 0.4 system and lower - not applicable
Second: To prevent alpha clones from continually being rolled and used as disposable gank toons, I propose that only omega pilots be allowed to set their safety to red, while alpha clones can only set their safety to yellow at most.
I feel that this will balance out the security and safety of highsec without damaging the ability to gank. This change will require gank fleets to put in an effort if they want to treat highsec like a free meal.
This would also bring more meaning to tags, where they can be used to repair status so that mission running is not the only option. Gankers would have to weigh tags cost against target profit to be effective.
CCP Please implement this or something similar so that repeat gank fleets can not freely stage and travel in highsec. If career criminals want to take advantage of major markets like jita and amarr, then they can use an alt or carrier service to get goods. No need for career criminals to even be allowed in highsec. That is what a security status is meant to control. I totally agree. Now those offenders like CODE example with -10.0 boot them from highsec but can only travel in pods no different than faction war stats like most of us have where we cannot go to amarr Jita Rens and Dodixie, also how can we have tags as well to get to fly back into their systems without mission running as much like with stats showing as of -9.0 or what have you thanks. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27803
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 05:09:39 -
[149] - Quote
Imya Wormhole wrote:I love how he is using the goons WWB background while complaining about goons ganking him. I love how both the OP and NightmareX appear to be wholly ignorant of the mechanic that they're trying to "fix".
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
NightmareX
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
717
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 05:17:16 -
[150] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:You still haven't explained why they should, nor have you taken into consideration what would need to be done on the back-end for Concord to work in this way. I have explained why. I have explained it's the police's work to keep track of your crimes. And the more crimes you do, the more they will punish you. Doesn't that sounds right to you?
And most things is possible to do in EVE today, so making Concord harder against you the more you do crimes should be no problem to fix.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:The fact of the matter is that they don't. You commit your crime, your ship dies and you get to wait out a 15 minute timer. Once that timer is up your record is wiped as far as Concord is concerned. If someone ganks multiple ships each day they have a low security status and are likely free to be engaged, shoot them in the face when they undock, shoot them in the face at the gates before they start shooting other people in the face.
Yeah wow, the whole 15 minutes until you can do the same crime over and over and over in the infinite without having anything to worry about. Yeah, that's professional police / Concord work right there that allows that to happen over and over again without giving you more penalities.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:The tools to inflict retribution over and above that provided by the game are already in your hands, that's what they're there for. Stop being lazy and expecting CCP to further punish ganking via mechanics changes; use the tools at your disposal to do it yourself. So all freighter pilots have to use this and that to be able to function as normal in high sec while you gankers doesn't have to be dependent on anything else for a bumping ship to be able to do what you are supposed to do?
Again, i'm not saying you shouldn't be able to gank. I'm just saying the penalties should raise the more crimes you do, which is normal in our human nature to do against criminals. SO why shouldn't it be the same in EVE when EVE is all about humans in space to begin with?
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:The means are also there to make gankers go and pick another target, many are common sense precautions, some require knowledge of game mechanics. What people forget is that Eve is above all a full loot PvP game; you don't AFK, you don't carry all your shiny stuff, you don't fit your ship with nothing but cargo mods, this is some of that common sense. Like i have said, you are free to go and gank more stuffs. But the challenge will be harder as the police / Concord will be hunting you and will try to kill you more actively and faster the more you do crimes.
This is a normal police tactic. So i don't see why it can't be like that in EVE.
--------> Continues on next post.
Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:
1: Asteroid Madness
2: Clash of the Empires
3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |