| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
    |
Posted - 2008.05.04 12:05:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 12:11:34
Dear friends,
There's a CSM Candidate with your interests at heart, on May the 5th your vote can make a real difference.
 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah's stance on high sec crime
While space has never been safe, and probably never will be, there are those that believe they have the right to take your well-earned material assets everywhere, and at any time they please. In fact, there are many criminal organisations whose sole purpose it is to find and exploit loopholes in our laws and regulations for their own financial gain and personal enjoyment, at your expense.
Take Care believes that the current laws provide far too little consequences to well-known and repeated offenders which seem to think that our high-security space is their personal playground. Also, Take Care believes that the current regulations, which force insurance companies to provide policies to all capsule-pilots, regardless of their liability, are outdated and should be reviewed as soon as possible.
Lastly, there are many pilots eager to deal with these well known criminals, only to find that CONCORD protects these scoundrels as if they were law-abiding citizens. Take Care believes that changes should be made to the bounty and killright systems, to give pilots more opportunities to defend or avenge themselves, or hire someone to do the job.
Vote for Ankhesentapemkah this May 5th to make high sec safer for all!
Thank you. |
steejans nix
Amarr
Crusader Enterprises Interstellar
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 12:42:00 -
[2]
Wrong forum, should be in the " desperate to be elected forum "
But as i'm only scanning for belts i'll ask you this what in her view should happen to the current system, it's got to be changed is not an answer either !!!
Everyone even the gankers think something should, let have a proper answer and not just the three paragraphs of policial ramblings that you opened with. |
steejans nix
Amarr
Crusader Enterprises Interstellar
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 12:49:00 -
[3]
P.s.
While we about it lets here from the other canidate's that been on claiming to reperesent us, laVista vista springs to mind.
|
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:07:00 -
[4]
Hello steejans nix.
I support Ankhesentapemkah because we share the same values, I can't speak for her as I'm only a supporter not connected with her who thinks she should be CSM. I don't know what you mean about the wrong forum 'troll attempt' but this has been posted here because I think it is an important issue that people here would care about.
Take care friend. |
Leandro Salazar
The Blackguard Wolves
Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:08:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 04/05/2008 13:08:40
She is far from being the only candidate who has putting a stop to the rampant suicide ganking on their agenda. Me any many of the other candidates want to curb it as well.
I gotta wonder though, with that alt scandal she had already, if this is some clever attempt to discredit her further by making a post that looks like an alt post of hers?
Though I assume that pretty movie will guarantee a seat anyway... Hell I would probably vote her if I didn't have someone else to vote for already  |
steejans nix
Amarr
Crusader Enterprises Interstellar
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:17:00 -
[6]
Edited by: steejans nix on 04/05/2008 13:22:57
Well gentle miner when she comes on please point her to this thread and get her to answer my question please,
and it was not a troll attempt quite the opposite as on this forum channel as in the industry one we are getting stuff about the election posted with very little susbtance, no clear polices by people who just want to get voted on, WE NEED to know the canditates actually play the game and looking at histories of some candidate it seems they don't !!!
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 04/05/2008 13:08:40
She is far from being the only candidate who has putting a stop to the rampant suicide ganking on their agenda. Me any many of the other candidates want to curb it as well.
I gotta wonder though, with that alt scandal she had already, if this is some clever attempt to discredit her further by making a post that looks like an alt post of hers?
Right well answer the question then and don't try to score points on other candidates what would YOU do to curb ganking's in high sec ? |
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:19:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
I gotta wonder though, with that alt scandal she had already, if this is some clever attempt to discredit her further by making a post that looks like an alt post of hers?
I have no idea what you mean and why would someone supporting Ank look like an alt trying to discredit her? I think people are just mean and trying to use smear campaigns against the best candidate around. Look at the information on her website She cares about Eve and she cares about the players of Eve. It's funny people assume someone supporting a candidate must be an alt, or maybe they're just trying to breed suspicion and mistrust. |
Riddick Valhalla
Caldari
Centermass Solutions
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:31:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Gentle MinerI have no idea what you mean and why would someone supporting Ank look like an alt trying to discredit her? I think people are just mean and trying to use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smear_campaign"
smear campaigns[/url] against the best candidate around. Look at the information on her website She cares about Eve and she cares about the players of Eve. It's funny people assume someone supporting a candidate must be an alt, or maybe they're just trying to breed suspicion and mistrust.
1: Multiple postings about the same junk = wasted bandwidth needed for flying internet spaceships.
2: If you aren't an alt I'll self destruct a drake in your honor. Limited API, please.
The wardec system operates as intended. Don't like being wardecced? Hire a merc. What bears looking at is security status. Decreasing Concord response time, and introducing Bounty-hunter Agents would serve to introduce more PVP for those who want it, and more protection for those who don't. |
Leandro Salazar
The Blackguard Wolves
Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:39:00 -
[9]
Originally by: steejans nix
Edited by: steejans nix on 04/05/2008 13:30:43
Edited by: steejans nix on 04/05/2008 13:22:57
Well gentle miner when she comes on please point her to this thread and get her to answer my question please,
and it was not a troll attempt quite the opposite as on this forum channel as in the industry one we are getting stuff about the election posted with very little susbtance, no clear polices by people who just want to get voted on, WE NEED to know the canditates actually play the game and looking at histories of some candidate it seems they don't !!!
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 04/05/2008 13:08:40
She is far from being the only candidate who has putting a stop to the rampant suicide ganking on their agenda. Me any many of the other candidates want to curb it as well.
I gotta wonder though, with that alt scandal she had already, if this is some clever attempt to discredit her further by making a post that looks like an alt post of hers?
Right well answer the question then and don't try to score points on other candidates what would YOU do to curb ganking's in high sec ?
And to you below, please don't de-rail this is for the ganking debate and not cheap point scoring and is exactly what i ment about wrong forum !!! .
What I would do can be read about in the proper places (see the link in my sig). No need to repeat what is already in the CSM forum here. And if the OP is really not a troll/alt, he would do well to read the CSM forum too to get all the info about his candidate before putting ads into other forums. |
steejans nix
Amarr
Crusader Enterprises Interstellar
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:54:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 04/05/2008 13:08:40
What I would do can be read about in the proper places (see the link in my sig). No need to repeat what is already in the CSM forum here. And if the OP is really not a troll/alt, he would do well to read the CSM forum too to get all the info about his candidate before putting ads into other forums.
1. Course the op is a alt, a 17 day old with no history and by the way, gentle miner is a "she" , hope you can tell better than that in Rl 
2. Why should i do well to go to the CSM forum's, seems you all are posting in here, even though you don't see the need to answer a relevant and pertinant question just score points.
3. please take the time to answer the Question. What would you about the ganking/insurance situation ?
|
|
Leandro Salazar
The Blackguard Wolves
Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 14:02:00 -
[11]
Originally by: steejans nix
3. please take the time to answer the Question. What would you about the ganking/insurance situation ?
Quoted from my CSM intro:
Now, some specific issues I see with EVE and the solutions I favor:
1. Suicide ganking.
While I agree that highsec should not be safe but safer, the level of 'safer' needs to be adjusted upwards a notch or three. If you cannot run a mission in the nextdoor system without a scout anymore because people will suicide-gank you with 5 T1 Battleships for your meager 500 mil in gear, something is wrong. Suicide ganking should really only be profitable on paper-thin ships carrying loads of valuables, or really pimped combat ships (like the ones I fly Embarassed).
The solution to this is obviously to do away with insurance for ships killed by concord. And that means not even the basic payout but complete voiding. Nada, nothing. Recently someone posted a good optimization for this: You only lose insurance IF the target dies. If your target lives, you get insurance. This provides a nice safety net for both suiciders and those prone to accidents with gang members. Thus it does not even raise the risk level for the suiciders (still very close to 0 if you do your homework), but it steeply raises the value of bigger ships loot to be worth suiciding. Which seems like the perfect solution to me. Not that I would mind complete insurance revoking for any concord kills, but I wouldn't want to drown in 'griefer' tears.
And if this is supposed to turn into a popularity contest on who the best candidate for the mission runners would be, I suggest taking a look at the forum statistics of some candidates as presented here, which might give at least a rough impression on where peoples priorities have been in the past. |
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 14:15:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 14:18:39
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
And if the OP is really not a troll/alt, he would do well to read the CSM forum too to get all the info about his candidate before putting ads into other forums.
I have read the forums, I know all the info and I don't see anything negative or detrimental and still fully support her. She is in my eyes the best choice.
For anyone reading who doesn't know, some mean person tried to extort/blackmail isk from her because she made a post with an alt. No big deal in my eyes, nothing negative and she fully admited it. Click
Some candidates obviously feel threatened by Ank by going to all this trouble trying to make her look bad.
The thread topic here is Ankhesentapemkah and in both here and the Industrial forum I posted to support Ank and the threads have been invaded by other candidates either trying to make Ank look bad or make themself look good. |
Leandro Salazar
The Blackguard Wolves
Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 14:29:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 04/05/2008 14:30:13
Originally by: Gentle Miner
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 14:18:39
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
And if the OP is really not a troll/alt, he would do well to read the CSM forum too to get all the info about his candidate before putting ads into other forums.
I have read the forums, I know all the info and I don't see anything negative or detrimental and still fully support her. She is in my eyes the best choice.
For anyone reading who doesn't know, some mean person tried to extort/blackmail isk from her because she made a post with an alt. No big deal in my eyes, nothing negative and she fully admited it. Click
Some candidates obviously feel threatened by Ank by going to all this trouble trying to make her look bad.
The thread topic here is Ankhesentapemkah and in both here and the Industrial forum I posted to support Ank and the threads have been invaded by other candidates either trying to make Ank look bad or make themself look good.
And what exactly did you expect to happen when you spilled her campaing into inappropriate forums? CCP created the CSM forum for a reason I think, and this thread should probably be moved there.
And despite the alt posting issue which IS a big deal and not undone by just admitting it, I like Ankh, if by some cruel twist of fate I am elected I would much rather see her on the council with me than many of the other candidates. The one making her look bad here is you, spamming the wrong forum and appearing overly naive and desperate for votes. Not to mention your alt character does not make you very credible in the first place. |
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 14:37:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 14:43:44
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
The one making her look bad here is you, spamming the wrong forum and appearing overly naive and desperate for votes. Not to mention your alt character does not make you very credible in the first place.
I'm just trying to raise awareness which I hope I'm doing. People can make up their own mind based on the facts and information provided. I actually didn't even know anything about Ank or pay much attention to the CSM Candidates until I clicked the link in Jenny Spitfire's signature and from that moment I'm a loyal supporter of Ankhesentapemkah.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire's Signature
Go vote!
Put voice for silent majority.
LOVE PVP, HATE grief
|
Rathawk
Sanguine Shipyards
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 14:58:00 -
[15]
I must sadly announce that I cannot support this candidate as I can't even begin to pronounce the candidate's name.
Originally by: Gentle Miner
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 12:11:34
Dear friends,
There's a CSM Candidate with your interests at heart, on May the 5th your vote can make a real difference.
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah's stance on high sec crime
While space has never been safe, and probably never will be, there are those that believe they have the right to take your well-earned material assets everywhere, and at any time they please. In fact, there are many criminal organisations whose sole purpose it is to find and exploit loopholes in our laws and regulations for their own financial gain and personal enjoyment, at your expense.
Take Care believes that the current laws provide far too little consequences to well-known and repeated offenders which seem to think that our high-security space is their personal playground. Also, Take Care believes that the current regulations, which force insurance companies to provide policies to all capsule-pilots, regardless of their liability, are outdated and should be reviewed as soon as possible.
Lastly, there are many pilots eager to deal with these well known criminals, only to find that CONCORD protects these scoundrels as if they were law-abiding citizens. Take Care believes that changes should be made to the bounty and killright systems, to give pilots more opportunities to defend or avenge themselves, or hire someone to do the job.
Vote for Ankhesentapemkah this May 5th to make high sec safer for all!
Thank you.
|
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 15:26:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 15:33:35
Originally by: Rathawk
I must sadly announce that I cannot support this candidate as I can't even begin to pronounce the candidate's name.
Hehe! You could just call her Ank that's much easier. |
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 15:45:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 15:50:00
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
The one making her look bad here is you, spamming the wrong forum and appearing overly naive and desperate for votes. Not to mention your alt character does not make you very credible in the first place.
I said trying to make her look bad, I don't think any person can make another person look bad. I think it's evident from my post I'm not trying to do anything like that but apparently you are by coming to this thread and bringing up the only negative point you can. |
Seetesh
Caldari
Pixels Docks
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 15:50:00 -
[18]
She seems a nice person and has my vote already |
Strak Yogorn
Amarr
Mind Warpers
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 17:28:00 -
[19]
way to troll the wrong forum on purpose, and with an obvious alt .. just go away already, you got a whole forum section for csm crap. |
Gentle Miner
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 17:36:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Gentle Miner on 04/05/2008 17:40:24
Originally by: Seetesh
She seems a nice person and has my vote already
I totally agree with you.
Originally by: Strak Yogorn
way to troll the wrong forum on purpose, and with an obvious alt .. just go away already, you got a whole forum section for csm crap.
I guess this person is George W. Bush's alt going by these alt conspiracy theories logic.
Anyone who thinks I'm an alt needs a tinfoil hat to be honest. |
|
Pwett
Minmatar
QUANT Corp.
QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 17:37:00 -
[21]
Wooohooo Populism! |
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 18:05:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 04/05/2008 18:11:16
Originally by: steejans nix
i'll ask you this what in her view should happen to the current system, it's got to be changed is not an answer either !!!
Everyone even the gankers think something should, let have a proper answer and not just the three paragraphs of policial ramblings that you opened with.
1) Tradable killrights, to allow the victims to get a bountyhunter/vigilante to take known gankers out before they harm anyone else.
2) Changes to the insurance system, so that either the criminal acts are not refunded as much as they are currently, or that the next ships cost more to insure (character is deemed a liability).
3) Optional: Cargo scanning made impossible in highsec? Needs researching.
There definately need to be more consequences to suicide ganking and other high-sec crime. Currently it's frustrating to many players, especially because there is so little they can do to get vengeance. That's why I like systems that allow players to actively deal with these scoundrels. And don't get me started on people that blow up pimped mission running ships, if that is tolerated in any way we might as well take every expensive mod out of the game 
Originally by: Rathawk
I must sadly announce that I cannot support this candidate as I can't even begin to pronounce the candidate's name.
Watch my movie for proper pronounciation. Otherwise you can stick to Ankh or just Eva I guess. |
Belidonna
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 18:39:00 -
[23]
Can the candidates tell us how they would make this system fair? This is like the democratic ticket.
So far it looks like a blanket , increase insurance cost / reduce or eliminate payout. Modify security status.
Would you all be able to elaborate further? How is this going to keep obvious grief killing from happening? It is not always over loot. Some people are simply genuine ass holes. They have loads of isk. How exactly are these measures going to stop this? All it takes to wipe out a "care bear" mining operation is a battle ship loaded with smart bombs. My recent experiences have been with people who simply want to "make a joke" and blow up miners for whatever reasons.
Other than these minimal isk sinks, what real penalties should be put in place to make criminal activity have lasting effects and drawbacks for those who do it?
Just to be clear I spend substantial time in low sec, while I know it is not 0.0, I expect to be attacked. I can preempt strikes against neuts to avoid attacks on myself and my crew as well. In high sec you have no way to strike first or prepare. You must interrupt your operation when known offenders are in the area and move, dock up or log off.
I don't think suicide bombing is used during war for getting lewts. It also carries a pretty serious side effect for the party carrying out the task. How do you balance this in Empire so that grief killings sting the attacker just as much if not more than the target, especially when there is no loot involved? |
Leandro Salazar
The Blackguard Wolves
Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 18:46:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Belidonna
I don't think suicide bombing is used during war for getting lewts. It also carries a pretty serious side effect for the party carrying out the task. How do you balance this in Empire so that grief killings sting the attacker just as much if not more than the target, especially when there is no loot involved?
I think the point of any sensible nerf to suicide ganking is exactly to still make it possible to kill ANYONE even in highsec if you are willing to bite the bullet and take a huge financial hit. That is what EVE is all about after all. Sandbox. Certain 'misguided' playstyles should be hard and painful and not viable for most people, But NOT impossible. |
Joe Elliot
Stabho's
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 19:42:00 -
[25]
Definately not voting for this candidate then. Better luck next time. |
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 19:45:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Belidonna
So far it looks like a blanket , increase insurance cost / reduce or eliminate payout. Modify security status.
(...)
Other than these minimal isk sinks, what real penalties should be put in place to make criminal activity have lasting effects and drawbacks for those who do it?
(...)
How do you balance this in Empire so that grief killings sting the attacker just as much if not more than the target, especially when there is no loot involved?
Errr... As illustrated in the post above you, I do not just want sec hits or insurance cuts.
The idea behind tradable killrights is two fold:
1) Give players that want to PVP on the good side of the law something to do, and reward them appropriately for it (sec bonus and/or concord loyalty points for item shop)
2) Make sure that the criminals will suffer at some later time, when the fight is not on their terms, unlike suicide ganking. Suicide ganking is a controlled enviroment, where the criminal sets the stakes, he is safe and knows what he invests in the gank.
When there are killrights open that demand his head, he'll be looking over his shoulder for the next few weeks for the payback that might be on it's way! |
Belidonna
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 20:21:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Originally by: Belidonna
So far it looks like a blanket , increase insurance cost / reduce or eliminate payout. Modify security status.
(...)
Other than these minimal isk sinks, what real penalties should be put in place to make criminal activity have lasting effects and drawbacks for those who do it?
(...)
How do you balance this in Empire so that grief killings sting the attacker just as much if not more than the target, especially when there is no loot involved?
Errr... As illustrated in the post above you, I do not just want sec hits or insurance cuts.
The idea behind tradable killrights is two fold:
1) Give players that want to PVP on the good side of the law something to do, and reward them appropriately for it (sec bonus and/or concord loyalty points for item shop)
2) Make sure that the criminals will suffer at some later time, when the fight is not on their terms, unlike suicide ganking. Suicide ganking is a controlled enviroment, where the criminal sets the stakes, he is safe and knows what he invests in the gank.
When there are killrights open that demand his head, he'll be looking over his shoulder for the next few weeks for the payback that might be on it's way!
Transferring kill rights assumes that I cant defend myself or exact my own revenge. I can and have. Shooting this guy or girl later , making him look over his shoulder, thats not any kind of real threat that doesn't exist already. I can go suicide grief them right back. Which strangely seems to have no discernible effect on these guys.
The ideas presented so far simply dont convince me that they would help reduce this problem. A raw battle ship and unimplanted clone is but an hour or two of mining and a little ratting to recover in 0.0.
I do like the idea of transferable kill rights though. I believe this is a great addition and may help new players while creating a meta-game / market opportunity for some players. I just dont think this will deter suicide ganking.
|
Meneia
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 20:53:00 -
[28]
Wellà a lot of ôweö û we donÆt want to play EVE PROMENADE à
the suicide gang û is a rare form of 2-5 players to try new ideas and behaviour before they move in other dangerous places. Good for them û they know how to play sometime 2-3 h in a day EVE in high sec - instead of taking a 7 holydays for job just for mining 20h / day and ruin their real live.
Hunt them after ôthe actö with your other FIGHT char, or with your friends if they are in a corporation and you not.
Maybe your friends want to declare war to themà I see very nice battle between alliances of high sec places corps. And they mine in same belt sometime  . And they start the war from other ôminorö problem because in fact is a surviving war game. In fact is a game. In fact do you really see you flying a Titan after 3 years? Cause we tooà so how many Titans? That is a real game problem. And they find the way: the Faction War - they will "half" us all our fortune, and will start again to work and recover the money we lost. And so on... smart game.
|
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 00:11:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Belidonna
Transferring kill rights assumes that I cant defend myself or exact my own revenge. I can and have. Shooting this guy or girl later , making him look over his shoulder, thats not any kind of real threat that doesn't exist already. I can go suicide grief them right back. Which strangely seems to have no discernible effect on these guys.
The ideas presented so far simply dont convince me that they would help reduce this problem. A raw battle ship and unimplanted clone is but an hour or two of mining and a little ratting to recover in 0.0.
I do like the idea of transferable kill rights though. I believe this is a great addition and may help new players while creating a meta-game / market opportunity for some players. I just dont think this will deter suicide ganking.
Thanks for the input, Belidonna.
It is true that a lot of suicide gankers will not be deterred by one method to address them. However, I still think that any changes to the mechanics should be introduced over time, to observe the effects and success. Suicide ganking shouldn't be completely impossible, I just want to see a large reduction in it's frequency, especially against miners and mission runners.
Nothing is going to stop or deter someone that has set his mind on ruining another player's day, unless we completely disallow target locks and smartbombs in hi-sec or something as draconic as that, and I don't think that is what most people want, and even then they'll just use lootstealing or some other baits and loopholes like the lofty scam (which I think needs to be fixed) to get to you. |
TimGascoigne
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 06:11:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 04/05/2008 18:11:16
Originally by: steejans nix
i'll ask you this what in her view should happen to the current system, it's got to be changed is not an answer either !!!
Everyone even the gankers think something should, let have a proper answer and not just the three paragraphs of policial ramblings that you opened with.
1) Tradable killrights, to allow the victims to get a bountyhunter/vigilante to take known gankers out before they harm anyone else.
2) Changes to the insurance system, so that either the criminal acts are not refunded as much as they are currently, or that the next ships cost more to insure (character is deemed a liability).
3) Optional: Cargo scanning made impossible in highsec? Needs researching.
There definately need to be more consequences to suicide ganking and other high-sec crime. Currently it's frustrating to many players, especially because there is so little they can do to get vengeance. That's why I like systems that allow players to actively deal with these scoundrels. And don't get me started on people that blow up pimped mission running ships, if that is tolerated in any way we might as well take every expensive mod out of the game
Originally by: Rathawk
I must sadly announce that I cannot support this candidate as I can't even begin to pronounce the candidate's name.
Watch my movie for proper pronounciation. Otherwise you can stick to Ankh or just Eva I guess.
Do you think you are reducing the sandbox nature of the game? Because as of the moment the only thing wrong is the insurance that is being paid to people who got Concorde to destroy them. If you were to four-incidents disable cargo scanners in Empire then that would make suicide gangs completely impossible because the odds of a cargo being valuable are actually very low. Isn't it simpler for people just to fit warp stabs, have a scout or even use a ship with a tank like a battleship or command ship...or for cheaper a battle cruiser.
As of the moment suiciding clearly isn't a problem because I see afk freighter ships all of the time and those can be definitely worth killing. If suicide gangs were overpowered I would not see these capital ships flying afk.
|
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |