Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
maarud
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:36:00 -
[91]
I suppose just fixing the game so that insurance didn't pay out if concord was involved was too much work, so you've opted to make a pirate in low sec's life a living hell now.
Nice work.
Maarud.
|
Chruker
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:48:00 -
[92]
hehe, now we just need CONCORD to transfer ISK from the agressor(s)' to the victim's wallet to cover the victims insurrance payout. ----- http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online ----- Top wishes: - No daily downtime - Faster training on sisi - Speedup IGB table rendering |
Boma Airaken
Yurai-Tenshin Zaibatsu Celestial Imperative
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:52:00 -
[93]
Tread lightly in lowsec until you make all lowsec lowsec. The fact that we cant do jack shit with 0.4 needs to go.
|
Korinn
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:57:00 -
[94]
In many cases, unsuspecting victims have no chance to escape , nor any help from CONCORD.
Easily the best part.
If you're flying around in a ship thats worth someone suicide ganking, maybe you should USE A ****ING SCOUT.
I used to think CCP had a backbone but this and the speed nerf and all the other terrible game design decisions lately pretty much prove that you've got about as much spine as a rubber chicken
|
Gustav Seriya
Corp 1 Allstars The Requiem
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:09:00 -
[95]
Originally by: BritishInvader People seem to have issues with people making profit suicide ganking, when in reality it's pretty hard to suicide gank anyone with anything that will give you any form of profit.
If you spent time on a trade route or hub gate with a ship scanner instead of in asteroid belts looking for hulks you'd have a better chance of profitability. The only problem with this is that there's too much competition about killing the good targets; the reason for which is that suiganks are too easy.
However, I agree highsec/lowsec rewards are way out of whack, the trouble is that lowsec needs to be several times more profitable than highsec because lowsec has an abundance of bored pirates and a great shortage of targets, PVE Raven's lowsec life expectancy is very short indeed.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:14:00 -
[96]
EVE looking less and less unique and interesting every dev blog these days. Vote against the nano nerf! |
Fuddlesticks
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:18:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Fuddlesticks on 06/08/2008 10:18:26
Originally by: BritishInvader
*Goons announce Suicide Ganking Jihad on EVE* *Forums explode* *Suicide Ganking gets nerfed to all hell*
You assume that the nerf is due you/your alliance, but I'm sorry you didn't exactly invent suicide ganking, and I'm fairly certain there are plenty of people out there who aren't goons who suicide gank, who had just as much, if not more influence on this coming change.
Originally by: BritishInvader
The thought process behind this is hilarious.
This thought process being? Please,elaborate..are you saying you have inside information?
Originally by: BritishInvader
People seem to have issues with people making profit suicide ganking, when in reality it's pretty hard to suicide gank anyone with anything that will give you any form of profit. 99% of the time even if you plan out your attack and the target drops the mods you wanted to make your profit, it won't cover the loss of your ship even counting insurance.
No by all means, make profit in doing suicide ganking, I for one endorse it..as long as the system isn't being abused, which it is..cause battleships are being built and fitted specifically to more or less pay for themselves through insurance - It's not a complex equation here, you just want it to be.
Originally by: BritishInvader
Also, insurance not being paid out in CONCORD events is going to lead to a huge amount of crippled newbies who accidentally shot someone in highsec with their shiny ship, got CONCORDED, and lost all their money.
That's what newbie ships are for..If beyond that you that you get those accidents and end up with zero money, and for some reason don't have any friends or corp to help you back on your feet, then I'm sorry..you deserve it..even the most vile of personalities, have people who'll lend them a hand if things get rough.
Originally by: BritishInvader
Economically, this will make everything cheaper, move everyone the hell out of lowsec (Why would you go there when the risk:reward ratio is better in Highsec?)....
For some number examples, you can kill an untanked Hulk with a full suicide fit faction ammo Rupture...
People don't suicide gank for profit, they do it for tears. We've run the numbers and decided that the days spent grinding sec status are well worth the chat**** you get on EVE-O and ingame, for every 6 hours of sec grinding, I get 6 minutes of angry pubbie chat....
So you start out by saying how suicide ganking will no longer be feasible pure economically, and somehow this means people won't be in lowsec (as opposed to now where theres plenty of people in lowsec..oh wait), yet you provide no solid basis for this argument..what? Your hulk suicide example? What??? Finally you end your bleeding heart speech(and yes, I do think it was a good speech) by saying economics don't matter, all that matter is, as they say "the lulz" or rather as you say "the tears" or chat**** - I'm sorry what???
Here you are making a dash for an economical argument about these changes, to then habhazardly do a swirly and take a nosedive into a pile of dung..Dude???? I'm sorry but at that point if your final word is you just want tears, then I don't even sympathize, or see how anything has changed for you, as I'm pretty sure plenty of people will always cry when you shoot them..it's the way of the gank.
Originally by: BritishInvader
Off I go to gank the hell out of everyone before this nerf pops through.
That's right! Don't let "The Man" keep you down! REVOLT! Be a rebel! I'm sure the implied hints towards your proverbial disapproval is so vast and numerous in that one liner that it's beyond my comprehension..
|
Shinigami
Gallente Shinra
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:25:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Esmenet EVE looking less and less unique and interesting every dev blog these days.
It's only a matter of time before they introduce "podbound" items/ships, and make it possible to opt-out of pvp.
|
Fuddlesticks
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:28:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Shinigami Edited by: Shinigami on 06/08/2008 10:27:02
Originally by: Esmenet EVE looking less and less unique and interesting every dev blog these days.
It's only a matter of time before they introduce "podbound" items/ships, and make it possible to opt-out of pvp. Did these new devs get recruited at blizzcon?
CCP Fear? More like CCP FuzzyBunny.
Heres your sign..and tinfoil
|
Haradgrim
Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:31:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Shinigami Edited by: Shinigami on 06/08/2008 06:12:16 CCP will be introducing trammel pretty soon. STAY TUNED!
Too late, this is it. GJ CCP, this will kill low-sec. --
Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
|
Fuddlesticks
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:34:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Haradgrim
Originally by: Shinigami Edited by: Shinigami on 06/08/2008 06:12:16 CCP will be introducing trammel pretty soon. STAY TUNED!
Too late, this is it. GJ CCP, this will kill low-sec.
Whats your proof? Or basis for saying that? What's that? You don't have any?..Heres your sign
|
Miklas Laces
A.N.A.R.C.H.I.C.A
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:34:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Miklas Laces on 06/08/2008 10:34:21 I agree on removing insurance for suicide-gank, it was long due. But again CCP can't do the simple and right thing. Nooo, we have these new super-cool game designer that want to re-invent the game to prove they're so great, so instead of a simple straightforward fix we get all that crap about more standing loss and fastest concord and additonal penalty here and there and blah blah blah.
Ass-holes |
Pesadel0
Minmatar Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:39:00 -
[103]
LOl is CCP overrun by carebears now? ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Karentaki
Gallente Maximum Yarrage
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:40:00 -
[104]
I'm sorry, but this change just doesn't work on a purely risk-vs-reward basis. You say you want to move more combat to lowsec, but at the moment only stupid people and pirates even go to lowsec. Lowsec has virtually no profits compared to highsec, but even now, about 100 times the risk.
With the changes you're proposing it won't be worth doing ANYTHING other than running level 4 missions in highsec.Ganking a faction ship will become IMPOSSIBLE (except with prohibitively large numbers of torp ravens) due to the concord response time. This will mean that basically, all those people who sit in NPC corps, running missions in an officer fitted CNR will be INVINCIBLE in game. They will never lose their ship, and they will only work to damage the profitability of the market for newer players.
The only time I would EVER support this change would be if you removed, or at least made less profitable, L4 agents in highsec. Move them all to lowsec, and it will be a huge boost to Piracy. Highsec will have low profits but almost complete safety, while lowsec will be profitable but also risky. However, now you are just reading my signature... Or are you...
========= Sporks FTW |
Fuddlesticks
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:40:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Miklas Laces Edited by: Miklas Laces on 06/08/2008 10:34:21 I agree on removing insurance for suicide-gank, it was long due. But again CCP can't do the simple and right thing. Nooo, we have these new super-cool game designer that want to re-invent the game to prove they're so great, so instead of a simple straightforward fix we get all that crap about more standing loss and fastest concord and additonal penalty here and there and blah blah blah.
Ass-holes
So..whats the simple straight forward fix?
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:41:00 -
[106]
If you are serious about this stupidity it needs to be accompanied by a severe nerf to high sec missions. Vote against the nano nerf! |
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:42:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Fuddlesticks
So..whats the simple straight forward fix?
God, you're dumb.
Implement one of the other millions solutions dreamed up over the years? Tradeable killrights? Removal of insurance (completely)? Boost to low sec? Convoy system? Ability to mask cargo?
Or why not just simply STOP ****ING FLYING AFK???
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Pesadel0
Minmatar Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:44:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Fuddlesticks
So..whats the simple straight forward fix?
God, you're dumb.
Implement one of the other millions solutions dreamed up over the years? Tradeable killrights? Removal of insurance (completely)? Boost to low sec? Convoy system? Ability to mask cargo?
Or why not just simply STOP ****ING FLYING AFK???
Word ,stop being stupid is a start to fix high sec ganking. ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Hiro Nagamura
Amarr eXceed Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:49:00 -
[109]
I hear that CCP has a professional, honest-to-god academic economist on staff.
I'd like to hear his take on this, because I think care-bears really screw with the economy a lot.
|
Fuddlesticks
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:51:00 -
[110]
Edited by: Fuddlesticks on 06/08/2008 10:55:12
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Fuddlesticks
So..whats the simple straight forward fix?
God, you're dumb.
Implement one of the other millions solutions dreamed up over the years? Tradeable killrights? Removal of insurance (completely)? Boost to low sec? Convoy system? Ability to mask cargo?
So I ask again..What's the simple straight forward fix?
Or why not just simply STOP ****ING FLYING AFK???
So whats the simple straight forward fix? None of that sounds simple, or straight forward...No, seriously, they don't..tradeable killrights? Think about that for awhile, it's far from simple, or straight forward.
Removal of insurance?
Originally by: CCP Fear
In addition, the highly requested feature of removal of insurance in CONCORD related events will be implemented in the near future.
Boost to low sec? That's the most ambiguous "fix" I have ever set eyes on..In other words, it's completely useless.
Convoy system? Now I'm assuming you got that off a much more elaborate idea somewhere, fine..but it's not simple, I guarentee it, nor is it straight forward..thing like that would need balancing, tweaking and most of all, implementation with existing systems.
Cargo masking..what's the counter for that? There has to be, remember? No counter, well there goes suicide ganking completely. Okay so we make a counter for it..what's that? We're back where we started? Well whadda ya know.
|
|
Miklas Laces
A.N.A.R.C.H.I.C.A
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:51:00 -
[111]
Edited by: Miklas Laces on 06/08/2008 10:53:44
Originally by: Fuddlesticks
Originally by: Miklas Laces Edited by: Miklas Laces on 06/08/2008 10:34:21 I agree on removing insurance for suicide-gank, it was long due. But again CCP can't do the simple and right thing. Nooo, we have these new super-cool game designer that want to re-invent the game to prove they're so great, so instead of a simple straightforward fix we get all that crap about more standing loss and fastest concord and additonal penalty here and there and blah blah blah.
Ass-holes
So..whats the simple straight forward fix?
Remove insurance when concord is involved, period. No need for all that pile of crap in the dev blog, it's over-complicated, unnecessary, a fix to things that aint broken, go away
|
|
CCP Fear
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:54:00 -
[112]
Some answers to your questions;
These changes are on the test-server right now. So SISI is your way to go for testing this out.
Low security (0,3-0,1) is basically getting a reduction in security penalty from it's current values. So in essence, the lowest of security, just got harsher.
When we first started with this process, by brainstorming. We decided that it should not completely close off suicide ganking, but to raise the bar, make it so that it can be done, but will require some planning, thought and effort.
This is mainly focused on the no-risk no-thought ganking, that has killed thousands in the last few months.
I am in awe of those who spend weeks in planning, infiltrating, scheming and plotting against another player, just to be able to pop his freighter full of dysprosium. THAT is something i find amazing and i do not want to stop. And the reason for that, is the amount of work that went into the planning. That is cool IMO.
And that is still possible. But we want to discourage people to gank for giggles. It's just not sporting.
EVE is still harsh, and it punishes you for being careless and AFK. And this change, doesn't change that.
|
|
NeoTheo
Dark Materials
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:55:00 -
[113]
totally ******ed, this will just mean that less people go to lowsec, and there is STILL no reason to. now there is even less reason to.
not only that you could have fixed this by just removing insurace where concorden was involved.
way to go ccp, ******ed change. Neotheo Dark Materials
Linkage
|
Reikku
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 10:59:00 -
[114]
Edited by: Reikku on 06/08/2008 11:05:25
Originally by: CCP Fear
EVE is still harsh, and it punishes you for being careless and AFK. And this change, doesn't change that.
How, exactly, is afk/macro-mining in 0.5 punished after this patch? Where is the risk, exactly?
List of things afk-miners had to fear up until now:
1) suicide-gankers
List of things afk-miners will have to fear after this patch:
-
|
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:00:00 -
[115]
Originally by: CCP Fear Some answers to your questions;
These changes are on the test-server right now. So SISI is your way to go for testing this out.
Low security (0,3-0,1) is basically getting a reduction in security penalty from it's current values. So in essence, the lowest of security, just got harsher.
When we first started with this process, by brainstorming. We decided that it should not completely close off suicide ganking, but to raise the bar, make it so that it can be done, but will require some planning, thought and effort.
This is mainly focused on the no-risk no-thought ganking, that has killed thousands in the last few months.
I am in awe of those who spend weeks in planning, infiltrating, scheming and plotting against another player, just to be able to pop his freighter full of dysprosium. THAT is something i find amazing and i do not want to stop. And the reason for that, is the amount of work that went into the planning. That is cool IMO.
And that is still possible. But we want to discourage people to gank for giggles. It's just not sporting.
EVE is still harsh, and it punishes you for being careless and AFK. And this change, doesn't change that.
Are you a new employee? I seriously can't believe you actually believe what you just wrote.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Dr Sheepbringer
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:04:00 -
[116]
This:
"no-risk no-thought ganking"
Might get obsolete with this...but only when sober. Enough beer and say hello to no-risk no-thought ganking!
Flawed. Yes, there are people who like to mess RP-players just for kicks when they are feeling merry
|
Pesadel0
Minmatar Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:04:00 -
[117]
Originally by: CCP Fear Some answers to your questions;
These changes are on the test-server right now. So SISI is your way to go for testing this out.
Low security (0,3-0,1) is basically getting a reduction in security penalty from it's current values. So in essence, the lowest of security, just got harsher.
When we first started with this process, by brainstorming. We decided that it should not completely close off suicide ganking, but to raise the bar, make it so that it can be done, but will require some planning, thought and effort.
This is mainly focused on the no-risk no-thought ganking, that has killed thousands in the last few months.
I am in awe of those who spend weeks in planning, infiltrating, scheming and plotting against another player, just to be able to pop his freighter full of dysprosium. THAT is something i find amazing and i do not want to stop. And the reason for that, is the amount of work that went into the planning. That is cool IMO.
And that is still possible. But we want to discourage people to gank for giggles. It's just not sporting.
EVE is still harsh, and it punishes you for being careless and AFK. And this change, doesn't change that.
Why should we test something that in e sense is going true ,unchanged?So what is next are you going to nerf my ability to kill Noobs in low sec and tell me that it isn't a sport and that they didnŠt deserved that?I find it absolutely astonishing that you as in CCP is catering to the massive whines in the forums ,in essence give us tools donŠt take them away. ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Fuddlesticks
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:04:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Reikku
Originally by: CCP Fear
EVE is still harsh, and it punishes you for being careless and AFK. And this change, doesn't change that.
How, exactly, is afk/macro-mining in 0.5 punished after this patch? Where is the risk, exactly?
If you carry an ungodly amount of really really expensive stuff through 0.5, AFK..given enough people who know about this, that ship will go kaboom, and loot will be had..that's how.
|
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:07:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Fuddlesticks
Originally by: Reikku
Originally by: CCP Fear
EVE is still harsh, and it punishes you for being careless and AFK. And this change, doesn't change that.
How, exactly, is afk/macro-mining in 0.5 punished after this patch? Where is the risk, exactly?
If you carry an ungodly amount of really really expensive stuff through 0.5, AFK..given enough people who know about this, that ship will go kaboom, and loot will be had..that's how.
Since you obviously can't read, I've bolded and italisized the important part for you. Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Sopha Serpentia
Core Dynamics
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:08:00 -
[120]
What a bunch of geniuses at CCP eh? I love how it take five years for them to come up with this stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |