Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Cannibal Kane
Brotherhood of KANE
302
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:41:00 -
[181] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Cannibal Kane wrote: How will it promote PVP in highsec? People will refuse to do it if it means going to a negative sec status. Only those that like flying around from gate to gate in shuttles or ceptor might like it since it changes nothing for them.
I'll tell you how it will promote it for me ... I don't have to worry about some guy warping in some neut repper or his silly orca alt - i'll be more inclined to fight, and more inclined to flip a few cans.
I feel like im repeating myself here...
I don't mind the new agression they want to implement. It's the sec status hit for defending yourself.
I'm not a Pirate, I'm a Terrorist. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
401
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:41:00 -
[182] - Quote
Cannibal Kane wrote: The only part of the new agression machanic that bugs me is the sec status hit for defending yourself. that alone will deter people from doing it.
On a plus side, Ship prices will decrease since less people will be willing to take the sec hit.
I agree with you on that part. Perhaps the penalty for going suspect and shooting back should be pretty small, something that shooting a handful of rats will easily cover. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
401
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:42:00 -
[183] - Quote
Cannibal Kane wrote: I feel like im repeating myself here...
Posting fast man, keep up! :) |
Cannibal Kane
Brotherhood of KANE
302
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:43:00 -
[184] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Cannibal Kane wrote: The only part of the new agression machanic that bugs me is the sec status hit for defending yourself. that alone will deter people from doing it.
On a plus side, Ship prices will decrease since less people will be willing to take the sec hit.
I agree with you on that part. Perhaps the penalty for going suspect and shooting back should be pretty small, something that shooting a handful of rats will easily cover.
There should be no hit....
Your already getting shot at by potensially 100 people depending where you are or how many see you. Mob justice should be enough on it own. I'm not a Pirate, I'm a Terrorist. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
401
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:44:00 -
[185] - Quote
Cannibal Kane wrote: There should be no hit....
Your already getting shot at by potensially 100 people depending where you are or how many see you. Mob justice should be enough on it's own.
True true, can agree with ya on that. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
210
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:46:00 -
[186] - Quote
All the carebears hail these proposed changes as things that will "promote pvp" because they know they're being thrown a bone. They know that now they will seldom have to worry about fending for themselves. They simply don't want to admit as such, and are instead trying to make the changes seem like a boon to the types of players who have historically picked on them.
On the surface, these changes seem like they will promote pvp, but the actual effect will be the exact opposite. Most players will avoid performing actions that will expose them to being shot by literally everyone in empire (and on top of that not being allowed to defend themselves without penalties). The few who do will be employing significant amounts of neutral assistance. The only people taking cans will be the ones who are rolling with thirty friends/alts, employing absolute numerical superiority to crush any white knight attempts.
Deep down inside, everyone knows that this will happen. It won't be a difficult task for empire pvpers to band together into much larger groups for mutual safety. Is more blobbing what we want in this game?
Adunh Slavy wrote:Cannibal Kane wrote: How will it promote PVP in highsec? People will refuse to do it if it means going to a negative sec status. Only those that like flying around from gate to gate in shuttles or ceptor might like it since it changes nothing for them.
I'll tell you how it will promote it for me ... I don't have to worry about some guy warping in some neut repper or his silly orca alt - i'll be more inclined to fight, and more inclined to flip a few cans. He's not going to warp in "some neut repper," but he is going to warp in some neut repperS. Significant numerical superiority will be the most efficient counter for these changes. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
401
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:51:00 -
[187] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted
Adunh Slavy wrote:Cannibal Kane wrote: How will it promote PVP in highsec? People will refuse to do it if it means going to a negative sec status. Only those that like flying around from gate to gate in shuttles or ceptor might like it since it changes nothing for them.
I'll tell you how it will promote it for me ... I don't have to worry about some guy warping in some neut repper or his silly orca alt - i'll be more inclined to fight, and more inclined to flip a few cans. He's not going to warp in "some neut repper," but he is going to warp in some neut repper[i wrote:S[/i]. Significant numerical superiority will be the most efficient counter for these changes.
I'll make sure to pick my fights near gates and stations then. Let the chaos begin. |
Garven Dreis
Count With Teddy Mercenaries Stay Calm Don't Panic
13
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:51:00 -
[188] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:All the carebears hail these proposed changes as things that will "promote pvp" because they know they're being thrown a bone. They know that now they will seldom have to worry about fending for themselves. They simply don't want to admit as such, and are instead trying to make the changes seem like a boon to the types of players who have historically picked on them. .
This pretty much sums it up for me.
In Manticore we Trust |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
210
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:56:00 -
[189] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:I'll make sure to pick my fights near gates and stations then. Let the chaos begin. It doesn't matter where you're going to pick your fights, because MeanGriefer has three dozens Guardians, and you don't. Good luck convincing your miner buddies to throw themselves into the fray, because much more often than not, the people with actual guns on their ships will be on my side, and not yours.
"Promote pvp." What a joke. |
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University Minmatar Republic
152
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 02:58:00 -
[190] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:All the carebears hail these proposed changes as things that will "promote pvp" because they know they're being thrown a bone. They know that now they will seldom have to worry about fending for themselves. They simply don't want to admit as such, and are instead trying to make the changes seem like a boon to the types of players who have historically picked on them.
On the surface, these changes seem like they will promote pvp, but the actual effect will be the exact opposite. Most players will avoid performing actions that will expose them to being shot by literally everyone in empire (and on top of that not being allowed to defend themselves without penalties). The few who do will be employing significant amounts of neutral assistance. The only people taking cans will be the ones who are rolling with thirty friends/alts, employing absolute numerical superiority to crush any white knight attempts.
Deep down inside, everyone knows that this will happen. It won't be a difficult task for empire pvpers to band together into much larger groups for mutual safety. Is more blobbing what we want in this game? In other words, you will now face some real consequences and you're QQ'ing about it.
Welcome to Eve. Where there will now be consequences and risk for everyone.
EVERYONE.
If Eve gets too harsh and dark you could always try Hello Kitty Online. |
|
Grumpy Owly
361
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:01:00 -
[191] - Quote
Cannibal Kane wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Am sure there are final tweaks and kinks to resolve and I'd like to see more of the war dec and FW mechanics in detail to have a complete picture of the move of PvP activities in Empire.
However, the proposal by CCP here I welcome as a much needed change to add more fun and promote PvP in Empire whilst also giving some ramifications to criminal activity that at present is sadly missing. With further corrections to the Bounty Hunting system it could potentially give realistic white knighting opportunities a real career chance in Empire.
+1 CCP How will it promote PVP in highsec? People will refuse to do it if it means going to a negative sec status. Only those that like flying around from gate to gate in shuttles or ceptor might like it since it changes nothing for them. The ramification of going criminal is EVERYBODY gets to shoot you... mob justice which is fine. The sec status thing bugs me.
The advent of the "suspect" system should encourage more PvP open opportunities.
I'm not thinking from the point of GCC in HS this wont change anything for suicide ganking as an activity, the end result is still the same.
The aftermath is how they will be treated due to their sec hit changes. And also the potential enrichment of some low sec gameplay should people try to seek out the more fervant criminal element.
In this sense it may encourage more PvP. It has the potential to enliven low sec quite a bit as a result. Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
401
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:03:00 -
[192] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:I'll make sure to pick my fights near gates and stations then. Let the chaos begin. It doesn't matter where you're going to pick your fights, because MeanGriefer has three dozens Guardians, and you don't. Good luck convincing your miner buddies to throw themselves into the fray, because much more often than not, the people with actual guns on their ships will be on my side, and not yours. "Promote pvp." What a joke.
I don't have any miner buddies. I'm a loner that wanders into low sec and null alone. Go bleat to some miners that may fall for your appeal to bravado. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
462
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:05:00 -
[193] - Quote
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:Welcome to Eve. Where there will now be consequences and risk for everyone.
EVERYONE.
If Eve gets too harsh and dark you could always try Hello Kitty Online. Totally. ...and I think when salvaging first cam out everyone kind of expected the highsec mechanics to change... there should be risks to everything.
I just want to make sure highsec ganking is still possible.
|
Mentat Cthulhu
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:06:00 -
[194] - Quote
If this is what CCP is doing with criminal mechanics, just imagine how gay war dec "improvements" will be.
|
Tarsas Phage
Pain Delivery.
52
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:14:00 -
[195] - Quote
I was at the preso and the roundtable afterwards. Here's my overall take on this.
The primary reason behind these huge, proposed changes is that Greyscale wants to programmatically rid the aggression trees of nodes which involve individual players. Basically, having to account for player-player and player-corp aggression is hard from a server logic perspective, so the primary motivation behind these changes are to make the implementation of Crimewatch simpler by making it all person-everyone.
In other words, it's not because these are necessarily "needed" mechanics changes from a gameplay perspective... it's the "easy button" from a coding perspective. This is an utter crock, and it's a cop-out. In addition to this, it's moving player "safeties" from player's own brain into a hand-holding client.
I've always considered Aggression Management a skill, nay, an art form, when it comes to highsec shenanigans, and even now it has always been up to any of the players involved to escalate a confrontation or to not. If I flip your can, you AND/OR your corpmates could aggress me back, easily turning it into a 1-vs-n. Some choose to, some chose not to. So you're in a NPC corp and thus you have no corpmates to come to your aid? Well, that's the tradeoff you have for being in a non-dec'able NPC corp. Want to wish death on the flipper but all your SP are in Industry and can't field a proper ship to fight him with? It's not anyone's fault but your own that is how you chose to spend your skill queue time.
One of the most disturbing moments came when, under the proposed rules, the following scenario was given:
1) Player A flips the can of Player B and gains a Suspect flag, making A shootable by everyone
2) Players C-Z go to town on Player A as a result.
Here's the kicker - going into this preso, CCP Greyscale said that once Player A gets aggressed by Players C-Z, Player A will not be allowed to shoot his aggressors back. Yes, this is basically making anyone with a mere Suspect flag the equivalent of GCC, just without the sec drop and CONCORD spawn. Many people in the audience, including myself, collectively WTF'd and suggested that he's off his rocker... and he seemed a bit surprised at this reaction.
In the end, the proposed Crimewatch 2.0 gameplay changes have big problems. First, for being presented at a fanfest in a embryonic state, and second, the impetus behind them is to make the implementation of aggression mechanics easier (as in lazy-easier.) I don't think this is even close to being a sound basis.
/T
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
211
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:20:00 -
[196] - Quote
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:All the carebears hail these proposed changes as things that will "promote pvp" because they know they're being thrown a bone. They know that now they will seldom have to worry about fending for themselves. They simply don't want to admit as such, and are instead trying to make the changes seem like a boon to the types of players who have historically picked on them.
On the surface, these changes seem like they will promote pvp, but the actual effect will be the exact opposite. Most players will avoid performing actions that will expose them to being shot by literally everyone in empire (and on top of that not being allowed to defend themselves without penalties). The few who do will be employing significant amounts of neutral assistance. The only people taking cans will be the ones who are rolling with thirty friends/alts, employing absolute numerical superiority to crush any white knight attempts.
Deep down inside, everyone knows that this will happen. It won't be a difficult task for empire pvpers to band together into much larger groups for mutual safety. Is more blobbing what we want in this game? In other words, you will now face some real consequences and you're QQ'ing about it. Welcome to Eve. Where there will now be consequences and risk for everyone. EVERYONE. If Eve gets too harsh and dark you could always try Hello Kitty Online. Then would you also agree to providing "consequences" to people who choose to run missions? I'm fine with being flagged to everyone, in principle. I wouldn't even be against being permanently flagged without any specific reason. But if that's the case, then I want every single person who has ever taken a mission from a Caldari or an Amarr agent to be flagged to me as well. You see, I'm Gallente, and we don't really take kindly to people shooting our navies without provocation..
You know, let's take it up a notch. What have those level 2 mission NPC mercenaries in the deadspace pocket done to you, that you have the right to shoot them with impunity? If I get flagged to everyone in the universe by taking from your can, then it's only fair that you're flagged to everyone in the universe by shooting entities that you really have no reason to shoot in the first place. They haven't done anything to you, so what gives you the right to just come in and blow them up without repercussions?
Consequences.
Do you support them? |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
1116
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:21:00 -
[197] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Defending yourself while you're suspect-flagged is an ongoing conversation; we've not decided on anything yet, and we'll devblog when we've got it better nailed down
Are you ******* serious m8? That's the dumbest thing you've ever said - and that's saying a lot.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
401
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:25:00 -
[198] - Quote
Tarsas Phage wrote:Here's the kicker - going into this preso, CCP Greyscale said that once Player A gets aggressed by Players C-Z, Player A will not be allowed to shoot his aggressors back. Yes, this is basically making anyone with a mere Suspect flag the equivalent of GCC, just without the sec drop and CONCORD spawn. Many people in the audience, including myself, collectively WTF'd and suggested that he's off his rocker... and he seemed a bit surprised at this reaction. /T
That part is bad, if someone is shooting at you, you should have every right to shoot them back. |
Grumpy Owly
361
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:28:00 -
[199] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:All the carebears hail these proposed changes as things that will "promote pvp" because they know they're being thrown a bone. They know that now they will seldom have to worry about fending for themselves. They simply don't want to admit as such, and are instead trying to make the changes seem like a boon to the types of players who have historically picked on them.
On the surface, these changes seem like they will promote pvp, but the actual effect will be the exact opposite. Most players will avoid performing actions that will expose them to being shot by literally everyone in empire (and on top of that not being allowed to defend themselves without penalties). The few who do will be employing significant amounts of neutral assistance. The only people taking cans will be the ones who are rolling with thirty friends/alts, employing absolute numerical superiority to crush any white knight attempts.
Deep down inside, everyone knows that this will happen. It won't be a difficult task for empire pvpers to band together into much larger groups for mutual safety. Is more blobbing what we want in this game? In other words, you will now face some real consequences and you're QQ'ing about it. Welcome to Eve. Where there will now be consequences and risk for everyone. EVERYONE. If Eve gets too harsh and dark you could always try Hello Kitty Online. Then would you also agree to providing "consequences" to people who choose to run missions? I'm fine with being flagged to everyone, in principle. I wouldn't even be against being permanently flagged without any specific reason. But if that's the case, then I want every single person who has ever taken a mission from a Caldari or an Amarr agent to be flagged to me as well. You see, I'm Gallente, and we don't really take kindly to people shooting our navies without provocation.. You know, let's take it up a notch. What have those level 2 mission NPC mercenaries in the deadspace pocket done to you, that you have the right to shoot them with impunity? If I get flagged to everyone in the universe by taking from your can, then it's only fair that you're flagged to everyone in the universe by shooting entities that you really have no reason to shoot in the first place. They haven't done anything to you, so what gives you the right to just come in and blow them up without repercussions? Consequences. Do you support them?
Isnt that a faction issue though, for which you take appropriate reputation hits for actions and navies of empire states react accordingly?
Criminal aspects of security status are co-ordinated by the SCC (Concord) which is effectively a neutral commision for ensuring the safety of trade and other regulated interests from criminal activities.
Be interesting though if FW guys could respond to people who have low factional status perhaps?
Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University Minmatar Republic
157
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:37:00 -
[200] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Then would you also agree to providing "consequences" to people who choose to run missions? I'm fine with being flagged to everyone, in principle. I wouldn't even be against being permanently flagged without any specific reason. But if that's the case, then I want every single person who has ever taken a mission from a Caldari or an Amarr agent to be flagged to me as well. You see, I'm Gallente, and we don't really take kindly to people shooting our navies without provocation..
You know, let's take it up a notch. What have those level 2 mission NPC mercenaries in the deadspace pocket done to you, that you have the right to shoot them with impunity? If I get flagged to everyone in the universe by taking from your can, then it's only fair that you're flagged to everyone in the universe by shooting entities that you really have no reason to shoot in the first place. They haven't done anything to you, so what gives you the right to just come in and blow them up without repercussions?
Consequences.
Do you support them?
What? Stop crying and whipe the boogies off your nose for a second because I'm not sure I understand what you ask for. Are you suggesting that someone not committing an aggression against another player and thus not aggroing Concord be flagged to you anyway because if you commit a crime against another player you are flagged?
|
|
Liam Mirren
338
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:45:00 -
[201] - Quote
I'm not entirely sure greyscale really understands the implications of these proposed changes, seems like it'll become a lot be exploitable and silly than it is now. Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.
My guides: http://mirren.freeforums.org |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
211
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:45:00 -
[202] - Quote
The point I tried to make is that when carebears spit drivel like "now everyone will have consequences for their actions, they mean that everyone but themselves will have consequences for their actions. So far, I have yet to see what consequences the missioners and miners have for the choices they make, aside from the varying amounts of money they receive from their choices of what rats to shoot and what rocks to mine.
If I'm going to be penalized for even looking at these people funny, then they should be penalized for the veritable crimes against humanity they commit each time they warp to a deadspace or an asteroid belt.
I don't care how CCP does it. Let players join pirate factions for all I care, as long as they get a free pass on anyone who shoots one of those factions' NPCs. CONCORD doesn't shoot Serpentis rats, so this system would be completely acceptable to all mission runners.
Right?
Right?
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:What? Stop crying and whipe the boogies off your nose for a second because I'm not sure I understand what you ask for. Are you suggesting that someone not committing an aggression against another player and thus not aggroing Concord be flagged to you anyway because if you commit a crime against another player you are flagged? Exactly. I fail to see why performing a non-hostile action against a pod-pilot should be treated with more hostility than a hostile action against a non-pod-pilot NPC entity. Both are part of the EVE universe. For example, why should a pod-pilot who runs missions for the Gallente Navy be flagged to everyone after stealing a can from a pod-pilot who runs missions for the Caldari Navy, but the pod-pilot who runs missions for the Caldari Navy not be flagged to everyone after shooting a non-pod-pilot ship that belongs to the Gallente Navy? |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
401
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:48:00 -
[203] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote: I fail to see why performing a non-hostile action against a pod-pilot should be treated with more hostility than a hostile action against a non-pod-pilot NPC entity.
NPCs don't pay the bills. |
Grumpy Owly
361
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:52:00 -
[204] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:If I'm going to be penalized for even looking at these people funny, then they should be penalized for the veritable crimes against humanity they commit each time they warp to a deadspace or an asteroid belt.
I don't care how CCP does it. Let players join pirate factions for all I care, as long as they get a free pass on anyone who shoots one of those factions' NPCs. CONCORD doesn't shoot Serpentis rats, so this system would be completely acceptable to all mission runners.
Right?
Right?
Wrong.
Wrong.
There's already implications associated with standings and missions.
Suggest also re-reading the topic at hand. This is a topic about crimewatch and the associated aggression mechanics. Not inter-factional relationships.
Since neither of the areas you are dicussing are considered criminal activities, I don't see much relevance to the subject material. I'd love to see your arguments for making mining illegal in a seperate thread however, be fun seeing the responce. Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises
305
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:57:00 -
[205] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: Can-flipping as-is will be impossible once the safeties are added. People should be able to choose to do dumb things, but they should also have the information they need to figure out that the thing they're doing is dumb.
Duelling we're planning to support with an explicit mechanic rather than the current hacky workaround.
They do have that right to do stupid things. And in space, when you do something stupid, it gets you killed. That is how you learn. How about you protect me when i approach a cyno dominix with my webbing loki and cant get away in time? i mean, if i was smart i'd have stayed out of point range, but hey i'm dumb and i need you to hold my hand through it.
Seriously though, carebear gets canflipped and gets a POPUP WARNING EXPLAINING EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN when he steals it back. If he chooses to ignore it the first time, that's his own fault and he receives his lesson. If he refuses to listen to it time and time again, that's his own stupidity getting him killed.
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
211
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 03:57:00 -
[206] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:If I'm going to be penalized for even looking at these people funny, then they should be penalized for the veritable crimes against humanity they commit each time they warp to a deadspace or an asteroid belt.
I don't care how CCP does it. Let players join pirate factions for all I care, as long as they get a free pass on anyone who shoots one of those factions' NPCs. CONCORD doesn't shoot Serpentis rats, so this system would be completely acceptable to all mission runners.
Right?
Right? Wrong. Wrong. There's already implications associated with standings and missions. Suggest also re-reading the topic at hand. This is a topic about crimewatch and the associated aggression mechanics. Not inter-factional relationships. Since neither of the areas you are dicussing are considered criminal activities, I don't see much relevance to the subject material. I'd love to see your arguments for making mining illegal in a seperate thread however, be fun seeing the responce. So why is stealing a can from a random State War Academy bro a criminal action, but shooting a Gallente Navy Admiral (or whatever they're called, I don't run missions) not a criminal action? Let's not be inconsistent for the sake of comfort, shall we?
Adunh Slavy wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote: I fail to see why performing a non-hostile action against a pod-pilot should be treated with more hostility than a hostile action against a non-pod-pilot NPC entity. NPCs don't pay the bills. See, this guy gets it. |
Tarsas Phage
Pain Delivery.
52
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 04:01:00 -
[207] - Quote
Liam Mirren wrote:I'm not entirely sure greyscale really understands the implications of these proposed changes, seems like it'll become a lot be exploitable and silly than it is now.
With all due respect to the Devs, I'm worried that they're a good bit out of touch with things given their position behind the curtain with the limits that puts on their first-hand experience in EVE. Devs aren't allowed to grief on their non-Dev accounts, so that means no can flipping, no ninja looting, no ganking, no nothing that could possibly bring CCP's Internal Affairs to their desk one day. As a Dev, you have to be benign and as we all know, fliipers, looters, gankers and griefers are anything but.
By and large, this means that they have to rely on what they remember from their (perhaps dated) pre-Dev EVE experience and what they hear second-hand when it comes to aggression mechanics. More importantly, this also means that they're largely out of touch with the social dynamic that surrounds these activities, further making any impressions artificial in nature.
We have T20 to thank for this.
/T |
Grumpy Owly
362
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 04:02:00 -
[208] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:If I'm going to be penalized for even looking at these people funny, then they should be penalized for the veritable crimes against humanity they commit each time they warp to a deadspace or an asteroid belt.
I don't care how CCP does it. Let players join pirate factions for all I care, as long as they get a free pass on anyone who shoots one of those factions' NPCs. CONCORD doesn't shoot Serpentis rats, so this system would be completely acceptable to all mission runners.
Right?
Right? Wrong. Wrong. There's already implications associated with standings and missions. Suggest also re-reading the topic at hand. This is a topic about crimewatch and the associated aggression mechanics. Not inter-factional relationships. Since neither of the areas you are dicussing are considered criminal activities, I don't see much relevance to the subject material. I'd love to see your arguments for making mining illegal in a seperate thread however, be fun seeing the responce. So why is stealing a can from a random State War Academy bro a criminal action, but shooting a Gallente Navy Admiral (or whatever they're called, I don't run missions) not a criminal action? Let's not be inconsistent for the sake of comfort, shall we? Adunh Slavy wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote: I fail to see why performing a non-hostile action against a pod-pilot should be treated with more hostility than a hostile action against a non-pod-pilot NPC entity. NPCs don't pay the bills. See, this guy gets it.
When a player pays a war dec Concord looks the other way, don't you think that it's possible factions will take out similar contracts (aka mission elements) in a similar way? Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
211
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 04:07:00 -
[209] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:When a player pays a war dec Concord looks the other way, don't you think that it's possible factions will take out similar contracts (aka mission elements) in a similar way? Okay, well, give me a call when your good Serpentis buds decide to decshield after your second mission. Or better yet, leave their corporation right before you arrive on the mission grid. |
Grumpy Owly
362
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 04:12:00 -
[210] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:When a player pays a war dec Concord looks the other way, don't you think that it's possible factions will take out similar contracts (aka mission elements) in a similar way? Okay, well, give me a call when your good Serpentis buds decide to decshield after your second mission. Or better yet, leave their corporation right before you arrive on the mission grid.
lmao
Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |