Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Leonidas Amarri
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 00:47:00 -
[1] - Quote
Make self-destruct timer on caps higher plz.. nothing sucks more (besides being the one about to lose ur cap)then when ur about to kill them and they self-destruct |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
459
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 02:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
A dead capital is one less capital your enemy can use against you in the next battle, which is the whole point of killing them. If all you care about is the KM, you're fighting for the wrong reasons, this isn't CoD where the KDR means a lot.
However, they were talking about giving out KMs for self destructs, which would fix the whole 'issue' presumably.
tl;dr: You're not the first one that complained about such things |
Simi Kusoni
The Synergy Cascade Imminent
108
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 06:11:00 -
[3] - Quote
mxzf wrote:A dead capital is one less capital your enemy can use against you in the next battle, which is the whole point of killing them. If all you care about is the KM, you're fighting for the wrong reasons, this isn't CoD where the KDR means a lot Please stop assuming everyone is fighting "enemies" in this game. Some of us don't give a damn about the people we're killing, or the kill mails, we just want their stuff. It's hard enough scooping up all those fighters as it is, let alone when you have to deal with the mods going poof nine times out of ten. Unless you blob the capital with hundreds of people, and where's the profit in splitting loot that many ways?
Also, INB4: LOL SHUDA BRORT MOAR DEEPS BRO. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
273
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 06:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
HACKING!
- Each successful hacking attempt after self-destruct has been initiated, adds 10s to timer (Only one attempt possible at a time). Add a computer core hardening attribute to some not directly beneficial module to give the capital something to waste a slot on to keep the option of a successful SD open.
If loot is really the reason for wanting the only anti-gank tool in Eve nerfed then the requirement to bring ships fitted for the task and working for it should meet no resistance, right? |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1152
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 07:05:00 -
[5] - Quote
LOL SHUDA BRORT MOAR DEEPS BRO.
|
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
71
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 07:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
Self Destruct in combat is just stupid to begin with, would make sense if there was some means of capturing a ship, but there isn't.
Actually here's an idea... new Self Destruct should jettison your pod after activation, only way to abort the self destruct at this point is a successful Hacking attempt which also hands over ownership to the Hacker. |
Skydell
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
133
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 07:20:00 -
[7] - Quote
I approve the hacking suggestion.
"We have a hostile carrier on scan. Everyone switch out thier mid slots for hacking modules". |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
6037
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 08:30:00 -
[8] - Quote
Xorv wrote:Self Destruct in combat is just stupid to begin with, would make sense if there was some means of capturing a ship, but there isn't.
Actually here's an idea... new Self Destruct should jettison your pod after activation, only way to abort the self destruct at this point is a successful Hacking attempt which also hands over ownership to the Hacker. I don't agree. I think it's a great reverse tactic, of giving the middle finger to whomever is shooting you.
Long may it continue, but chance are you'll end up with a change for the worse imho.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1154
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 08:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Xorv wrote:Self Destruct in combat is just stupid to begin with, would make sense if there was some means of capturing a ship, but there isn't.
Actually here's an idea... new Self Destruct should jettison your pod after activation, only way to abort the self destruct at this point is a successful Hacking attempt which also hands over ownership to the Hacker. I don't agree. I think it's a great reverse tactic, of giving the middle finger to whomever is shooting you. Long may it continue, but chance are you'll end up with a change for the worse imho.
This. |
Akatenshi Xi
Elite Shadow Society ESS Empire
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 09:28:00 -
[10] - Quote
I think you shouldn't get a kill mail for self-destructs. Why? Because you clearly didn't kill it. they self-destructed. Derp derp.
I think self-destructs should be selectable with timers, or they should be instant. Every sci-fi has something about choosing your self-destruct timer for your ship or station or it is instant. Yes, some B Movies are preset timers for suspense or something.
In addition I think self-destruct should have a blast radius that affects ships by damaging them and also making it so they cannot warp for say 10-30 seconds or so. A massive explosion on a capital ship should definitely weight in the ladder on the warp effect with smaller ships being only a few seconds. Of course an explosion in space would mess with things and make it so you couldn't establish a good warp field, enough to actually warp. As for the timers being programmable, make it so only Battleships and higher could do this?
Bringing this idea up into a new ship class! The suicide bomber! How about a lightly to medium tanked ship with no weapons, only eight low slots. You could chose between armor plates which would make you harder to kill on your suicide destination but also slowly and much less agile, or warp core stabalizers, or modules that could affect the radius or damage of your explosion.
Jihad MF'ers! |
|
Herold Oldtimer
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 10:00:00 -
[11] - Quote
This has been discussed over a long peroid of time, and it usually boils down to bring more guns.
But hey, you might not get the kill, but you will get the assisted siucide. |
bartos100
DARK ADAMA
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 12:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
I think sd timers should be longer the bigger the ship is
|
reaver2145
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 14:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
ADAPT OR CRY
Bring more dps and nutes or CRY SOME MOAR |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
455
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 17:08:00 -
[14] - Quote
Leonidas Amarri wrote:butthurt Pro-tip: Assume you have 119 seconds to engage, destroy, and win against a cap ship everytime you dock. If you don't, HTFU and plan better next time. If one dude can plan to gank a hulk in less then 30 seconds then you too should be able to kill a carrier in less then 119 seconds.
Entire point of self destruct....to give a middle finger, **** off someone, and create a new thread about some self created delusion of entitlement from the OP (EVE isn't chess, you don't /duel, you didn't ask if you could take the guy's ship so why should he let you have it or would not do everything in his power to prevent you from getting a KM/wreck ?). Your not entitled to anything, you only earn it when it actually appears in your KM box, a wreck is floating in space, and local spikes full of colorful language about your mother and your sexual orientation from the guy who just lost the ship. Bring a cap ship, bring more friends, or don't even engage if it is beyond your ability. |
Akatenshi Xi
Elite Shadow Society ESS Empire
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 20:43:00 -
[15] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Leonidas Amarri wrote:butthurt Pro-tip: Assume you have 119 seconds to engage, destroy, and win against a cap ship everytime you dock. If you don't, HTFU and plan better next time. If one dude can plan to gank a hulk in less then 30 seconds then you too should be able to kill a carrier in less then 119 seconds. Entire point of self destruct....to give a middle finger, **** off someone, and create a new thread about some self created delusion of entitlement from the OP (EVE isn't chess, you don't /duel, you didn't ask if you could take the guy's ship so why should he let you have it or would not do everything in his power to prevent you from getting a KM/wreck ?). Your not entitled to anything, you only earn it when it actually appears in your KM box, a wreck is floating in space, and local spikes full of colorful language about your mother and your sexual orientation from the guy who just lost the ship. Bring a cap ship, bring more friends, or don't even engage if it is beyond your ability.
This too^ |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
71
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 21:27:00 -
[16] - Quote
Mag's wrote:I don't agree. I think it's a great reverse tactic, of giving the middle finger to whomever is shooting you.
Nah it's lame Mag's. Given there's no means of ship capture there's no in game reason to self destruct. There's no actual real world military or conflict comparisons to this use of Self Destruct in EVE. It's mostly about Killmail and Killboard efficiency avoidance. Players that pulled out their biggest guns and now want to avoid some of the consequences of losing. It's no more tactical than tearing up your fake money and walking away from a losing game of Monopoly.
|
mxzf
Shovel Bros
462
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 21:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
Xorv wrote:Players that pulled out their biggest guns and now want to avoid some of the consequences of losing
Consequences like losing their ship? You should clarify that you mean e-peen consequences, since that's what this thread is entirely about, the e-peen of the involved parties (mostly of the person who wants the KM but lost it due to insufficient force). |
Bearilian
Man Eating Bears
79
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 21:45:00 -
[18] - Quote
I agree that SD timers should be based off of ship class. the bigger it is, the longer triggering self destruct should take. its really just a cowards way out, especially since it does not have area of effect damage. I under stand the whole middle finger point of view, but i beleve Xorv is correct, (and great monopoly comparison by the way).
also sd's should be placed as a km, since its not like they self destructed without cause. someone (or a group of someones) were definately responsible. |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
71
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 22:16:00 -
[19] - Quote
mxzf wrote: Consequences like losing their ship? You should clarify that you mean e-peen consequences, since that's what this thread is entirely about, the e-peen of the involved parties (mostly of the person who wants the KM but lost it due to insufficient force).
Yes I agree it's largely about "epeen" as you put it, but not just for the winning party, also the losers. For quite a few EVE players ISK loss is not a major factor, this is especially true of those that can afford to fly around in pimped out Cap Ships. So Killboards with Corp K/D and Isk efficiency, bragging rights, or "tears" of their enemies/victims becomes the new prize. Same people are terrified of having a multi billion ISK ship loss on their personal and Corp Killboard.... even more so should it be to just a few players in subcaps.. hence the bring more people comment... As if we need any more encouragement to blob it up.
The other sort of player that wants to keep Self destruct as is, would be the player that thinks EVE should should just be consensual PvP. It's there way of saying "nope I'm not playing." If you think that's a good thing, well we have nothing to talk about really.
Either way there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to have Self Destruct as it is in EVE today.
|
mxzf
Shovel Bros
462
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 22:39:00 -
[20] - Quote
Xorv wrote:Either way there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to have Self Destruct as it is in EVE today.
I would also argue that there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to change it either. I'm not saying the current system is right or wrong, I'm just saying that it is and there isn't any good reason to change it.
And, to be clear, I have no real stake in the issue one way or the other, I've never had that happen to me (and wouldn't care) and I would never bother self destructing to save face; I mostly just hate giving people what they want just because they're whining about it. It's a bad parenting technique and it sounds like a bad game design strategy too. Take my opinion as you will *shrug* |
|
Tidurious
The Dirty Rejects Scelus Sceleris.
50
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 22:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
Self Destruct is working as intended. **** like battleclinic/killboards are not valid reasons to change in-game mechanics. It's about ISK loss, module loss, and preventing your enemy from getting the loot. |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
71
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 23:56:00 -
[22] - Quote
mxzf wrote: I would also argue that there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to change it either. I'm not saying the current system is right or wrong, I'm just saying that it is and there isn't any good reason to change it.
How exactly would you argue that point? Merely stating it, is not an argument.
I've already explained why it's bad gameplay, and that there's no game lore or real life examples to counter balance that fact. So unless you can refute my earlier arguments on the matter with reasoned arguments of your own, there is very good reason to change the status quo.
* There's no good game lore reasons for having Self Destruct as it exists in EVE, from a in character point of view it makes no sense that someone would blow up their own ship when there's no means of the enemy capturing it and that blowing it up has no impact on their chances of survival or harm inflicted on enemy ships attacking them.
* While there's real life and fictional accounts of Self Destructing (or it's equivalent) a ship, none that I'm aware of relate to the context it's used in EVE.
* Players are using Self Destruct to mask their losses and deny the victor record of their victory. While this may seem trivial to an outsider, it's done precisely because it does have value to all involved, more so in many cases than the actual value of ISK involved. This is not good gameplay.
* Self Destructing a Cap ship in a losing fight is a player avoiding consequences that everyone else is subject to, and doing so by utilizing some of the most powerful ships in the game. Ships that are in part balanced by their high costs, a consequence of which losing them is a big hit on a corps battle record. So long as KMs and stats are part of EVE this is bad gameplay.
* Denying Loot (equipment) as a reason for Self Destruct..There's some historical and fictional backing for this, but it relates mostly to ship capture which isn't possible in EVE atm. In terms of gameplay it's a way of saying you shouldn't profit from PvP or piracy, which kind of needs it's own topic. However, I would say to victor goes the spoils, and piracy and PvP for profit could use a buff in EVE of epic proportions. So if anything Self Destruct should result in no difference in drops normal destruction.
Now tell me what benefits to good gameplay Self Destruct provides in EVE?
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
6046
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 00:15:00 -
[23] - Quote
Xorv wrote:Mag's wrote:I don't agree. I think it's a great reverse tactic, of giving the middle finger to whomever is shooting you.
Nah it's lame Mag's. Given there's no means of ship capture there's no in game reason to self destruct. There's no actual real world military or conflict comparisons to this use of Self Destruct in EVE. It's mostly about Killmail and Killboard efficiency avoidance. Players that pulled out their biggest guns and now want to avoid some of the consequences of losing. It's no more tactical than tearing up your fake money and walking away from a losing game of Monopoly. A tactic of loot and KM denial is far from lame, it's got Eve written all over it.
Also there are RL comparisons, the Battleship Bismarck for one. But now I see you're starting to head off, in all kinds of weird and wonderful directions, so I'll leave you to it.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Leonidas Amarri
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 02:14:00 -
[24] - Quote
Xorv wrote:mxzf wrote: I would also argue that there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to change it either. I'm not saying the current system is right or wrong, I'm just saying that it is and there isn't any good reason to change it.
How exactly would you argue that point? Merely stating it, is not an argument. I've already explained why it's bad gameplay, and that there's no game lore or real life examples to counter balance that fact. So unless you can refute my earlier arguments on the matter with reasoned arguments of your own, there is very good reason to change the status quo. * There's no good game lore reasons for having Self Destruct as it exists in EVE, from a in character point of view it makes no sense that someone would blow up their own ship when there's no means of the enemy capturing it and that blowing it up has no impact on their chances of survival or harm inflicted on enemy ships attacking them. * While there's real life and fictional accounts of Self Destructing (or it's equivalent) a ship, none that I'm aware of relate to the context it's used in EVE. * Players are using Self Destruct to mask their losses and deny the victor record of their victory. While this may seem trivial to an outsider, it's done precisely because it does have value to all involved, more so in many cases than the actual value of ISK involved. This is not good gameplay. * Self Destructing a Cap ship in a losing fight is a player avoiding consequences that everyone else is subject to, and doing so by utilizing some of the most powerful ships in the game. Ships that are in part balanced by their high costs, a consequence of which losing them is a big hit on a corps battle record. So long as KMs and stats are part of EVE this is bad gameplay. * Denying Loot (equipment) as a reason for Self Destruct..There's some historical and fictional backing for this, but it relates mostly to ship capture which isn't possible in EVE atm. In terms of gameplay it's a way of saying you shouldn't profit from PvP or piracy, which kind of needs it's own topic. However, I would say to victor goes the spoils, and piracy and PvP for profit could use a buff in EVE of epic proportions. So if anything Self Destruct should result in no difference in drops normal destruction. Now tell me what benefits to good gameplay Self Destruct provides in EVE? Couldnt of said it any better |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1155
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 10:12:00 -
[25] - Quote
Eve PvP is based around blowing up other peoples ships for lolz, km jewing and giving them the finger because you can.
Self destruct allows me to blow myself up, thus giving you cap hating, km jewing sub cap blobbers the finger, because I can.
That has eve written all over it. |
Axium Cog
Grand Solar Trinity Surely You're Joking
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 11:15:00 -
[26] - Quote
Popping in here to agree with the OP. I like that it gives someone the option of denying the loot from the wreck, but i dont like that i just spent 15 mins planning an op to kill someone being stupid with their capital and i dont get recognition for it.
Just a couple of days ago we ganked a fleet of 7 dreads in a C5, we pinned down 3 before they could get away, popped two and the third SD'd literally a volley away from popping. I dont mind being denied the loot, thats tactical, but using it to pretend you didnt do something stupid is total bull.
On a similar note, Id like to see everyone involved in a kill get a copy of the mail. We killed some AAACitizens who were (again) being dumb with a carrier. The pilot thought itd be a good idea to jettison an interdiction nullified proteus in hopes of getting away, only he didnt know you cant climb into a locked ship. Naturally we shot it as well, but he stuck a fighter on it, getting the last blow and because he was being a sore loser, refused to post the mail.
As has been stated before, while the fact that the asset has been destroyed is valid, thats more of a factor in Null. Asset destruction isnt as important in W-space when you wont be connected to them in 24 hours. Its much more focused on the fight itself. What did we kill, how, were we outnumbered, how were our risk/reward ratios, victories/losses ratios. Its fast paced, hit hard and fast and gtfo. The killmails are the only record of success as we cant claim their system as a trophy, rat in the belts they used to mine, and drink quafe while tipping the exotic dancers in their stations. The only spoils we can claim is the mail, as usually its such a fast op we have to shoot the wrecks before we go cause theres no time to loot them. |
Rhealee
Darkness Of Absolution Army Of Darkness.
6
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 12:53:00 -
[27] - Quote
You know if it took longer than 2 mins to kill me in a bc i would probably self destruct that too, just because it pisses you off :) |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
128
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 12:56:00 -
[28] - Quote
of course they keep, why should they not?? If you dont have to kill me faster, I would SD too.
stop complaining, its all fine with that. |
Jiska Ensa
Unour Heavy Industries
52
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 13:14:00 -
[29] - Quote
I once self-destructed a Harbinger because it was PvE fit and these two frigates were taking FOREVER to kill me :)
Killing a carrier or dread is not that difficult. But it was never meant to be done by 2 or 3 guys derping around. |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
458
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 22:01:00 -
[30] - Quote
Xorv wrote: * Players are using Self Destruct to mask their losses and deny the victor record of their victory. While this may seem trivial to an outsider, it's done precisely because it does have value to all involved, more so in many cases than the actual value of ISK involved. This is not good gameplay. A ship, destroyed by your hand or the pilot's....this will blow you mind away....
Absolutely zero ******* effect on game play.
Yes, thats right. ZERO effect. Outside of a shift of isk around to replace it, nothing happens to the pilot with a destroyed ship, nothing happens to you, and the real person profiting is the one with a market sell order.
You want to attach some type of personal shame, as if a loss means something. Guess what, you can have no KB at all, blow up a ship....and repeat it just for the the fun of it while loosing a hundred ships for just 1 fight. ZERO ******* EFFECT! There is zero hidden meaning to life a self destruction that you are trying to justify, the guy is willing to lose his shp to **** you off because it doesn't bother him it just bother's you.
Xorv wrote:I've already explained why it's bad gameplay, and that there's no game lore or real life examples to counter balance that fact. Oh, so now your a game developer. Someone inform CCP, we got a guy impersonating a Dev/GM and that is a bannable offense.
Oh wait....see what you said there.
Where exactly does it state "bad gameplay" in the EULA? Bad game play, by your defination is something you don't like. You don't like self destruction. Guess what, EVE being what it is; tl,dr consiting of Scamming, Theft, Ganking when someone isn't interested in a fight, Harrassment (Hulk miners and Hulkaggeddon, in reality it targets a specific individual type not a particular individual , but its a grey area ), ...**** its called Sandbox and what you can do with it. Its bad gameplay to invite someone into your corp then gank their T3 for lulz, its bad gameplay to steal nearly $20 USD in the form of a contract that someone actually paid for expecting a transaction to be legit, its bad gameplay...oh wait see that is everyday "gameplay" that someone might not like but the other guy might enjoy it. Yeah, you have no soap box statement to back yourself up in the statement "Self destruct is bad gameplay" since there is no actual defination outside "Harrassing a particular individual for an extended length of time" and or Bots/Buying isk.
tl,dr Back on topic: 1. KM have nothing to do with actual game play, its ID10T: User Error content that puts too high of a value on a game score that FFS is more important to them that they Win! and then whine when they lose. Pro-tip: Watch a miner whine when they lose a hulk when high-sec is supposed to be "safe" so they should be immune to attack and you will tell them to HTFU since they can avoid it by being knowledgable on how to be safer themselves (not much different then you being knowledgable that you need more DPS in a short time span...<-- derp moment)
2. Plan better, do it faster, don't **** up, don't whine, accept your lumps when you get chumped, and move on. There are no rules of "fair play" in EVE so the best thing you can do is do it fast, hit them hard, and make damn sure you know you can do it. Failure only makes you do better next time and if it happens again...thats EVE where nothing is fair or easy. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |