Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 13:59:00 -
[61]
As I was moving on to something else I realized that a half way point also could be attained as well. A similar alternative would be that the insurance level nulled would be anything above default. It's a halfway measure, yes, but it would also keep any bug victims/newbies from being eviscerated while they wait for petition response.
Additionally it would not raise the cost of a suicide gank too far as most suiciders would just simply not buy platinum insurance prior to engaging in criminal activities. This would change current profitability from (Ship+Mods+Plat)-100% Insurance=Offset Gain to (Ship+Mods)-40% Insurance=Offset Gain.
As I was leaving I realized that there should be a "gently, gently" idea to such sweeping changes.
To Shar -verb: 1 - To say what you mean. 2 - To say what it means. 3 - To say something mean. |
bitters much
Nekkid Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:03:00 -
[62]
Lol, they smell so sweet, the carebear tears
Please go on flying around in your T1 haulers with nothing but cargo extenders on and a cargo full of Zydrine like I popped last week in Sivala.
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:08:00 -
[63]
Originally by: CCP Prism X What makes you think the alternative hasn't been looked into. On multiple occasions? I just had this exact conversation with Tux last Thursday. I know it might come as a shock, but I'm actually not talking straight out of my rear here.
While you have a point about protecting noobs, the actual situation demand something to be done.
I have no issue with the guy in a T1 hauler with a 300 millions cargo getting suicide ganked. In fact, I approve it. Even if I lost a hauler like that, once.
However, the current gap between ships's market price and their insurance value means that the suicide attempt no cost practically nothing. With overheating and cheap faction ammos, you can get a lot of dps in a single BS for less than 15 millions isks. That leads to situations where a freighter is at risk for transporting less than half what the ship is worth. Where a single faction module worth more than 100M can put a huge crosshair on you.
Suicide-ganking is clearly too cheap, and fine in every other aspect, and tweaking the insurance is the only realistic way to change it.
And the noob of today isn't the noob of three years ago. Back then losing a cruiser was painfull . Now, even the basic insurance is enough to buy a destroyer, and doing lv1 or ratting or mining with a destroyer will give you back a cruiser with relatively little effort. ------------------------------------------
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:09:00 -
[64]
Originally by: bitters much Please go on flying around in your T1 haulers with nothing but cargo extenders on and a cargo full of Zydrine like I popped last week in Sivala.
Blah, blah, blah, "stroking my ego because mommy won't anymore", blah. If you ever find me so vulnerable please do pop me.
To Shar -verb: 1 - To say what you mean. 2 - To say what it means. 3 - To say something mean. |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:18:00 -
[65]
Originally by: CCP Prism X If someone here manages to bring up an idea we've not covered over coffee breaks, smoke breaks, during lunch, at the bar or on the plethora of different places were we discuss EVE.. then you really should be working here.
I'd suggest giving players an insurability rating, separate from their security status, and using this new measure to restrict access to the higher grades of insurance. Insurance companies care about isk, not fighting crime, so there should only be one way to increase your insurability rating: going for ages without losing a ship.
The best part about this idea is the degree to which it can be balanced. Different actions and losses could have different effects on insurability, with losses of larger ships counting for much more. People could also get the option not to make a claim on their insurance if they preferred not to spoil their rating, or opt to pay an excess in return for smaller penalties when making a claim. My research services Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats |
Arvald
Caldari Xtreme1911 Corp Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:21:00 -
[66]
if it aint broken dont fix it, and suicide runs are working as intended. that is all
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:24:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Arvald if it aint broken dont fix it, and suicide runs are working as intended. that is all
Agreed, leave suicide runs alone. Fix insurance, which is broken.
To Shar -verb: 1 - To say what you mean. 2 - To say what it means. 3 - To say something mean. |
Christari Zuborov
Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:29:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 21/04/2008 14:31:06 The only compromise that could be had is diminishing returns for insurance.
First time you get killed, 100% payout, 2nd time 95%. First time you gank, 100% payout, 2nd time 95%.
both keep reducing to 0%, in 5% increments for each death or gank.
Insurance mechanics on both sides are a problem, so both must be addressed.
After you first billion dollar loss, and it's discovered you hired no security, you'd be thrown in prison in RL.
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:31:00 -
[69]
Originally by: CCP Prism X This would be exactly like it works in the real world, yes. But this is an MMO and things here don't work like the real world. It's not that the people here at CCP believe that insurances should be payed out to criminals. It's more a factor of our newbies.
Just think about how often you accidentally aggro'd CONCORD one way or the other as a newbie. Then think about how you would have felt when you were left with 10k ISK in your wallet and your first cruiser gone. Then you go to the forums and get told that CONCORD doesn't pay insurance out to criminals.
The current system makes high-sec a little less secure due to the proliferation of suiciders. Suiciders don't target newbies but rather people with actual assets who, due to those assets, can recover from the loss. Newbies lose their first cruisers because they Smartbomb an asteroid, get most of their ISK back and note down that asteroids are touchy creatures who will report them to CONCORD if they're exposed to anything other than Mining Lasers.
In the end it comes down to it being the lesser of two evils. It's not perfect. Could most definitely be worked on, but not by ruining the new player experience and allowing even worse grief tactics on players who don't have a complete grasp on game mechanics.
Prism X,
i understand what you are saying. But this all comes down to 1 thing:
Should eve be a harsh, cold world, or not? The stance you are taking right now, does by NO mean remind me of what i signed up for. I signed up for a game with consequences. Judging from your logic, eve shouldn't be.
I'm honestly not sure if removing insurance from suicide ganking is the right way to go. Its arguable if there's an issue in the first place. But i think it's nonsense that suicide gankers gets insurance, either way.
So tell me Prism X, is eve really this cold and harsh world which Wrangler has been quoted for a number of times? I mean, i'm all for helping newbies with decreasing the learning curve. But REALLY, isn't this taking it a bit too far?
How about people get their ship and modules back the first time they lose a ship in pvp? I mean, the effect is more or less the same. It lessens the effect on making mistakes.
I make mistakes on the market once in a while, why doesn't CCP save me?
|
Vincent S
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:32:00 -
[70]
Whine, whine, whine
Get this: A vexor costs 5m +2m for fittings. It can do over 500 dps with heat + t1 fittings. NOBODY will hesitate to drop 7m to suicide a fat hauler/Hulk. The one thing that might be affected is smartbombings of macro miners in hisec, and nobody wants to get rid of that.
|
|
LLeugh
Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:34:00 -
[71]
You fail to grasp how pirates operate. I have many happy memories of hunting pirates. If they are good the pirates will have a guy with a higher sec status so you cannot attack them.
Ironically i managed to get concordokened due to not knowing the game mechanics about concord and agression. The 1st protagosnist was a high sec status pirate.
Refusing to pay out insurance to criminals will just put the pirate hunters at a disadvantage and thus make high sec even more dangerous.
The system is fine as it is. I hope ccp keeps good sense and doesnt listen to people whining cos they lost their ships due to their lack of vigilance and complacency. If you have been targetted by suicide gankers you obviously must have some assets why not hire some mercs to kill them. Thats what eve is all about. If you have a precious cargo train industial ships up to 5 and buy a blockade runner they are one of the hardest ships to catch. transport ships i think they are called ;)
If you are not living life on the edge you are taking up too much room
|
Agent Li
Caldari Galactic Defence Consortium BLACKHAWK FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:36:00 -
[72]
How about...
The miners in high sec form an alliance, and get a fleet together, and go raiding in Goon space....
1. It would be fun, even if it's painful at first 2. It would give you that sense of satisfaction you've been looking for... 3. The Goons would enjoy it, too. 4. Since it would be fun all around, what's not to like? 5. Did I say it would be fun?
------------------
Let me show you around. That's my lab table, and this is my workstool. And over there is my intergalactic spaceship. And here's where I keep assorted lengths of wire. |
Durzel
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:37:00 -
[73]
Originally by: CCP Prism X This would be exactly like it works in the real world, yes. But this is an MMO and things here don't work like the real world. It's not that the people here at CCP believe that insurances should be payed out to criminals. It's more a factor of our newbies.
Just think about how often you accidentally aggro'd CONCORD one way or the other as a newbie. Then think about how you would have felt when you were left with 10k ISK in your wallet and your first cruiser gone. Then you go to the forums and get told that CONCORD doesn't pay insurance out to criminals.
The current system makes high-sec a little less secure due to the proliferation of suiciders. Suiciders don't target newbies but rather people with actual assets who, due to those assets, can recover from the loss. Newbies lose their first cruisers because they Smartbomb an asteroid, get most of their ISK back and note down that asteroids are touchy creatures who will report them to CONCORD if they're exposed to anything other than Mining Lasers.
In the end it comes down to it being the lesser of two evils. It's not perfect. Could most definitely be worked on, but not by ruining the new player experience and allowing even worse grief tactics on players who don't have a complete grasp on game mechanics.
I'm probably being a bit stupid here but why not have a different system of insurance for players that are younger than, say, a month? Remove insurance for Concorded ships after this date, but leave it as is for players younger than that?
|
|
CCP Prism X
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:38:00 -
[74]
Wait a minute here. I have not once said my opinion on this. No one here has any knowledge of where I stand on these coffee break conversations I mentioned. All I'm posting here for is:
a) Let you know it's not a dead issue. b) Give you the other side of the coin which often tends to be ignored.
I've said this a billion times before. I don't imply information. If you think you're reading between the lines it's just you and your wishful thinking. That being said: I will not tell you my opinion on insurance, high-sec ganking & insurance payouts to high-sec gankings. See a) & b) for what I'm telling you.
And yes LaVista, we do care about new subscriber retention as well as cause & consequences. Sometimes they don't mix all so well so we arrive at a compromise. Players quit for all kinds of reasons but we'd rather not want new players to quit before they come to understand the game and it's ever evolving nature just because they were trying out them nifty smart bombs or got fooled into shooting at someone etc.
~ Prism X EvE Database Developer Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006. Relocating your cozy, secure container to the EVE cemetery since 2008. |
|
Durzel
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:39:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Agent Li How about...
The miners in high sec form an alliance, and get a fleet together, and go raiding in Goon space....
1. It would be fun, even if it's painful at first 2. It would give you that sense of satisfaction you've been looking for... 3. The Goons would enjoy it, too. 4. Since it would be fun all around, what's not to like? 5. Did I say it would be fun?
How about:
1. Miners probably have zero interest in proactive PvP.
|
Agent Li
Caldari Galactic Defence Consortium BLACKHAWK FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:41:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Durzel
Originally by: Agent Li How about...
The miners in high sec form an alliance, and get a fleet together, and go raiding in Goon space....
1. It would be fun, even if it's painful at first 2. It would give you that sense of satisfaction you've been looking for... 3. The Goons would enjoy it, too. 4. Since it would be fun all around, what's not to like? 5. Did I say it would be fun?
How about:
1. Miners probably have zero interest in proactive PvP.
Playing the same way all the time has got to be boring. I tend to shift all around over time.
Doing all pvp or all mining all the time has got to be mind-numbingly boring... ------------------
Let me show you around. That's my lab table, and this is my workstool. And over there is my intergalactic spaceship. And here's where I keep assorted lengths of wire. |
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:45:00 -
[77]
Originally by: CCP Prism X All I can tell you is that we've discussed it ad infinitum. If someone here manages to bring up an idea we've not covered over coffee breaks, smoke breaks, during lunch, at the bar or on the plethora of different places were we discuss EVE.. then you really should be working here.
How about insurance payout due to criminal acts only paying the basic insurance amount? ( voiding anything higher ).
The problem is that as bigger ships get cheaper and cheaper, while insurance payout is static, the bar for targets is lowered.
When all it takes for a suicide gank to be profitable, is a few BPC or module drops, it's really getting out of hand.
If each additional BS needed for a gank would mean having to recoup 20M+ per BS used, maybe we can get back to suicide ganking being something that isn't profitable on a large percentage of ships going through any given gate.
|
Durzel
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:46:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Durzel on 21/04/2008 14:47:43 Just to add to LaVista Vistas point above there are a number of things in Eve which new players can and do get caught up in including:
* Contract scams (description doesn't match item, giving money away instead of receiving it, etc)
* Canflip/Lofty scams - in the absense of prior knowledge of how these work you can easily fall into them
* People stealing mission objective loot
* Griefing starter systems (sure it's petitionable, but how many of these 1-day old newbies even bother?)
Newbies fall into the above traps day-after-day and to my knowledge they are all considered within the bounds of the game (ergo: no reimbursement of any kind) or otherwise permitted, i.e. PvP is possible in starter systems.
To legistlate for one (newbies getting Concordokken) whilst leaving the others around seems contradictory to me.
|
Tippia
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:46:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Surgu
Originally by: Keyser Sozie Noobs have it hard enough trying to learn how to play EVE without
Who would suicide gank a noob? Noobs don't carry expensive stuff, the older players do.
Originally by: Keyser Sozie having to contend with lazy "Pirate" who are not man enough to pirate in low sec.
High-sec piracy isn't about manhood, it's about taking from the rich and giving to the poor (themselves)
As one of the aforementioned n00bs, I can safely say that the thread was resolved with this post. Noobs don't have it particularly hard, unless they go out of their way to make it so, nor do they get suicide ganked.
I'd rather guess that the ones mostly affected this are the 1-year-'tweens who are old enough to think they know how to survive, old enough to have amassed enough toys to make them worth-while targets, but still too inexperienced to fully understand the intricacies of what they're doing.
When you're new, you do stupid things – yes – but you don't lose much simply beacause you don't have much to lose. It's when complacency sets in, and you fall into routine behaviour that reality comes and bites you in your rear…. "I bet it's safe to gamble the last six months worth of hard work on this one-shot deal – nothing has happened to me so far" and all that.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:51:00 -
[80]
When I see Devs post and then alts posting things, I often wonder if the Devs immediatly know who the alt belongs to, or if they'd have to search.
What about, rather than no insurance at all, if insurance was reduced by a percentage during a criminal act? It wouldn't hurt as much for smaller ships, so newer players wouldn't get hurt that much. Or perhaps it could still be 100% for frigates, and then start with cruisers and above.
Or if it's possible to change it via the reason CONCORD came, I'm not sure if that's even logged or anything though, and it probably sounds like work. Since Smartbombing an asteroid is not the same as attacking a player.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 14:51:00 -
[81]
Originally by: CCP Prism X Wait a minute here. I have not once said my opinion on this. No one here has any knowledge of where I stand on these coffee break conversations I mentioned. All I'm posting here for is:
a) Let you know it's not a dead issue. b) Give you the other side of the coin which often tends to be ignored.
I've said this a billion times before. I don't imply information. If you think you're reading between the lines it's just you and your wishful thinking. That being said: I will not tell you my opinion on insurance, high-sec ganking & insurance payouts to high-sec gankings. See a) & b) for what I'm telling you.
I'm really sorry to say Prism X. I know you are just adding perspective to the discussion, and i appreciate it very much that you take your time to post on here. But as you realise just as well as I do, perception is everything.
That's why it's so hard to post, and devs in general rarely post on here. When you post, people thinks that you talk on behalf of CCP. It's like people from microsoft blogging on their blogs. People think what they state is Microsoft's view. Of course, the intention isn't it to be so, but people perceive it this way.
|
Cissnei
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:01:00 -
[82]
Originally by: CCP Prism X Wait a minute here. I have not once said my opinion on this. No one here has any knowledge of where I stand on these coffee break conversations I mentioned. All I'm posting here for is:
a) Let you know it's not a dead issue. b) Give you the other side of the coin which often tends to be ignored.
I've said this a billion times before. I don't imply information. If you think you're reading between the lines it's just you and your wishful thinking. That being said: I will not tell you my opinion on insurance, high-sec ganking & insurance payouts to high-sec gankings. See a) & b) for what I'm telling you.
And yes LaVista, we do care about new subscriber retention as well as cause & consequences. Sometimes they don't mix all so well so we arrive at a compromise. Players quit for all kinds of reasons but we'd rather not want new players to quit before they come to understand the game and it's ever evolving nature just because they were trying out them nifty smart bombs or got fooled into shooting at someone etc.
this is pretty bad
firstly, i didnt shoot or use a smartbomb around concord.i read the tutorial. many people read the tutorial
secondly, those that do make the mistake are more likely to make it in the newbie frigate - of which they get a free replacement when they dock in their level-up egg
thirdly, how can you say what you said when we have jerks who plant cans labelled 'free isk' in 0.8 and 1.0 systems, where the m ajority of new players will not only be concentrated but STAY for quite some time? remove the ability to set name on jet cans and have them eject pre-labelled with the game time they were jettisoned. voila! one form of griefing down. will it eliminate the griefing tactic? no, people will still do it because they know humans are curious. but it will be impossible to bait people with a lie and lying to your new players is one big way you prevent that new player from continuing the account past week 2
and as for your comment about the suicide gankers only targeting those with assets - more balogney. corp mate made a new char last night and moved it towards us in the newbie amarr frigate. he was suicide ganked two jumps out in a 0.8 space 'just because' was the reason he was given. insurance pays out on most frigates MORE than the damned things sell for.
no insurance on concord kills will not damage the game as much as you think. we have rookie help. those that get up to cruisers usually have a basic working knowledge of the game since a) most will choose military and b) military options dont start with frigate IV and c) cruisers are 4-6 million isk, which is quite a few missions ground out and again MORE time in game to figure things out
you cant hand-hold all of them. this game is niche, it will stay niche due to it's complexity and prevalent risk-free griefing methods endorsed by the devs.
|
Yakia TovilToba
Halliburton Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:05:00 -
[83]
Originally by: CCP Prism X Wait a minute here. I have not once said my opinion on this. No one here has any knowledge of where I stand on these coffee break conversations I mentioned. All I'm posting here for is:
a) Let you know it's not a dead issue. b) Give you the other side of the coin which often tends to be ignored.
I've said this a billion times before. I don't imply information. If you think you're reading between the lines it's just you and your wishful thinking. That being said: I will not tell you my opinion on insurance, high-sec ganking & insurance payouts to high-sec gankings. See a) & b) for what I'm telling you.
And yes LaVista, we do care about new subscriber retention as well as cause & consequences. Sometimes they don't mix all so well so we arrive at a compromise. Players quit for all kinds of reasons but we'd rather not want new players to quit before they come to understand the game and it's ever evolving nature just because they were trying out them nifty smart bombs or got fooled into shooting at someone etc.
It depends whether you are a dev responsible for this issue or not. If you are, you should get some good reasons for not acting. Better reasons than newb-protection, because as people stated above, it's a) a one-time mistake they make (unlike ganking, which is persistant), b) they don't lose much if they are newbs, nothing that can be recovered by a newb in an hour or two and c) the frustration is not that high, since -unlike ganker victims- they will know they did a mistake and paid a little price, they are still in control, just have to avoid doing the mistake again in order not to pay again.
You need better reasons because the issue is growing bigger and bigger, causing hate and bitterness, and according to some fansite's forums eve already is known as "a game where veterans that can fly big ships, kill newbs for fun and get paid for that by the company." (we all know that haters exaggerate, but this statement has a true core unfortunately). Pve-interested empire inhabitants are not just a tiny fraction of eve playerbase, and if you frustrate it long enough with bad game mechanics and tolerance of inbalanced grief, it just might happen that eve stops to grow or even starts to go down. And guess who will be held responsible for that ? The fingers will be pointing at you. The guy who was in charge, who knew about the problems, but didn't act. I just don't want to be in your shoes in such a situation.
|
Vincent S
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:13:00 -
[84]
[img-doyouknowhowimportantIamintheMMORPGCommunity]
|
Elysa Madou
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:17:00 -
[85]
Quote: 2nd: new players can be advised that smartbombs are dangerous on high sec just as they are warned that they are about to jump to a low sec system
You mean some sort of warning system, that pops up before you activate a smartbomb to tell you that it's dangerous to use in empire because concord will respond if you hit someone, even a cloaked ship?
Hmmm......
|
Tippia
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:28:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Elysa Madou
Quote: 2nd: new players can be advised that smartbombs are dangerous on high sec just as they are warned that they are about to jump to a low sec system
You mean some sort of warning system, that pops up before you activate a smartbomb to tell you that it's dangerous to use in empire because concord will respond if you hit someone, even a cloaked ship?
Hmmm......
Foolishness! That will never work!
…never mind the fact that I say so, mainly because I personally soundly ignored that warning when I first got it. And the second time… The third time, I turned it off, and as it happens, that was also the time I accidentally hit something.
Oh well, at least no-one beat me to salvaging my own poor wreck.
|
The Djego
Minmatar merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:35:00 -
[87]
How about simply seperate Suizide Ganks from random nooby mistakes, simply by some Databasechecks.
1. Ship Killed by Concord? check 2. Last Killmail within 90 Seconds? check 3. Not a War Target? check 3. No Inurance payout. check
I have nothing against high Sec ganking. But it is to cheap atm. You can get 5 Ravens + Fitting for about 100-120 M. Got some Faction Mods on your Ship? Well 300 M worth of Fitting will do, so you become a paying Target. Got a T1 Hauler, well 5-10 M (Cruisers or a BC) will do the kill without many problems. Will increasing costs will stop suiciding? No. But well it will leave far less paying Targets and release the stress of most people that like to use some Faction Mods.
---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Jonny JoJo
425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
|
Red Desire
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:57:00 -
[88]
It's not even suiciding, the POD doesn't get destroyed. So it's just business!! Trading your ship and fittings for a potential jackpot, of course in detriment of the victim.
I would agree to a small tweek in the system, but CCP has to be careful. Maybe and I underline maybe, there are too many suiciding ganks in empire, still I wouldn't want a change were killing haulers/freighters in empire will stop entirely.
Hauling AFK is not a option, in no freaking way.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 16:05:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Red Desire Hauling AFK is not a option, in no freaking way.
I'm all for a system that has rewards & consequences attached to each person's choice. Choose to afk fly, risk getting ganked. Choose to gank, risk losing isk on the deal. Right now only one side has consequences attached to their choice.
To Shar -verb: 1 - To say what you mean. 2 - To say what it means. 3 - To say something mean. |
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 16:09:00 -
[90]
The solution to this problem is already in the game. LEARN how to protect yourself. LEARN how to move expensive items. LEARN how to avoid getting in such griefing situations.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |