Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Huurtney Gurdsen
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 14:48:00 -
[271]
Ha ! Pirates whining about not being allowed in High Sec space, whoda thunk it. If you choose to behave in a criminal and predatory fashion, the game mechanic has evoloved to keep you away from those who do not.
Two words for you:
HARD LUCK Yea, though I wart through the valet of thy shadowy hut I will feed no norman. |
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:19:00 -
[272]
Edited by: Korizan on 19/11/2008 15:24:30
Originally by: Omarvelous
Get rid of NPC rats in high sec then. Just mine and trade in high sec. Orrrr - allow the rats to stay - and player outlaws as well!
Removing NPC RATS is a very week arguement and pointless.
Removing RATS from High-sec would only hurt the very new players. Which by the way is the whole reason for them being there. Nobody else even considers them a ISK making option.
They are not even remotely a threat and are the aquivelent of a newbie ship. So if you want to have the same rights as the high-sec RATS then....
You can fly a newbie ship / shuttle / maybe a t1 frigate with t1 or highsec faction items. Then you would have the same rights as the RATS in high-sec.
Anything more then that and you basically throw the whole what about high-sec RATS out the window.
Even from a RP this works. YOu might be a outlaw but you are not a threat to shipping there for Concord is not going to spend the effect to go after you. However if you are in a bigger ship you then have the potential of causing problems and this forces Concord to take action.
In other words Concord wil take the lazy route if they can.
|
Tasty Bit
Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:34:00 -
[273]
Just find a high sec system on your map, set your AP, and go afk. You'll get there eventually.
|
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:38:00 -
[274]
OP is trying to disguise his unwillingness to put in effort with 'logic'. (in)actions have consequences, you had the action now deal with the consequences. If you don't like them then the joke's on you for not thinking ahead.
|
Omarvelous
Caldari Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:45:00 -
[275]
Originally by: Korizan Edited by: Korizan on 19/11/2008 15:28:27
Originally by: Omarvelous
Get rid of NPC rats in high sec then. Just mine and trade in high sec. Orrrr - allow the rats to stay - and player outlaws as well!
Removing NPC RATS is a very week arguement and pointless.
Removing RATS from High-sec would only hurt the very new players. Which by the way is the whole reason for them being there. Nobody else even considers them a ISK making option.
They are not even remotely a threat and are the aquivelent of a newbie ship. So if you want to have the same rights as the high-sec RATS then....
You can fly a newbie ship / shuttle / maybe a t1 frigate with t1 or highsec faction items. Then you would have the same rights as the RATS in high-sec.
Anything more then that and you basically throw the whole what about high-sec RATS out the window.
Even from a RP this works. YOu might be a outlaw but you are not a threat to shipping there for Concord is not going to spend the effort to go after you. However if you are in a bigger ship you then have the potential of causing problems and this forces Concord to take action.
In other words Concord will take the lazy route if they can.
I'm not suggesting to remove high sec rats - I realize that would hurt new players. I was just using an analogy. Its ludicrous that a rat in a battleship (high sec level IV's) can exist in high sec without the NPC police chasing them down - yet an outlaw player cannot.
If you argue that they are not a threat - I argue with my suggestion an Outlaw is even LESS of a threat because an outlaw can not fire on you unless YOU agress them! The rats will aggress the hell out of you.
All I'm saying is allow outlaws in high sec without NPC intereference. The players have all the game mechanics at their disposal to effectively police high sec (I'm even offering a beacon on outlaws for anyone in system to warp to).
Now outlaws have more of eve to play in - just some areas are far more dangerous for them to step foot in than others. Just like a carebear can go anywhere - but they are in dangerous territory in low sec and 0.0. * your signature file is too wide. Please note that we allow images no larger than 400x120 at 24,000 kb. - Fallout |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:45:00 -
[276]
Originally by: Tzar'rim OP is trying to disguise his unwillingness to put in effort with 'logic'. (in)actions have consequences, you had the action now deal with the consequences.
He's asking for different kind of consequences?
Current ones dictate you must use a alt. Lighter consequences would maybe entice people to take the consequences instead of avoiding them altogether with a alt ironically Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Omarvelous
Caldari Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:48:00 -
[277]
Originally by: Huurtney Gurdsen Ha ! Pirates whining about not being allowed in High Sec space, whoda thunk it. If you choose to behave in a criminal and predatory fashion, the game mechanic has evoloved to keep you away from those who do not.
Two words for you:
HARD LUCK
The only prey in my suggestion would be outlaws in high sec.
Get your head out of your ass - lets those little neurons in your brain spark for just a fleeting moment, and think this proposal through.
I'm offering you a chance for revenge against outlaws where all the rules are stacked in your favor. * your signature file is too wide. Please note that we allow images no larger than 400x120 at 24,000 kb. - Fallout |
Omarvelous
Caldari Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:51:00 -
[278]
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 19/11/2008 15:48:23
Originally by: Tzar'rim OP is trying to disguise his unwillingness to put in effort with 'logic'. (in)actions have consequences, you had the action now deal with the consequences.
He's asking for different kind of consequences?
Current ones dictate you must use a alt. Lighter consequences would maybe entice people to take the consequences instead of avoiding them altogether with a alt ironically
I could not have possibly worded that any better.
Thank you! * your signature file is too wide. Please note that we allow images no larger than 400x120 at 24,000 kb. - Fallout |
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:58:00 -
[279]
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 19/11/2008 15:48:23
Originally by: Tzar'rim OP is trying to disguise his unwillingness to put in effort with 'logic'. (in)actions have consequences, you had the action now deal with the consequences.
He's asking for different kind of consequences?
Current ones dictate you must use a alt. Lighter consequences would maybe entice people to take the consequences instead of avoiding them altogether with a alt ironically
I guess that comes with the idea of being an outlaw, outlaws launder their money and do business through more legitimate friends to keep their cashflow going.
As I see it it works just fine. An idea would be if the one attacking an outlaw does not in any way get flagged to the outlaw's friends, corp/fleet members and that assisting an outlaw will still result in concord coming over. ie; no one can help the target in any way and he can be attacked by anyone.
What you then get ofcourse is gatehugging -5 folks, hoping for some idiot to attack them and if things seem bleak just jump out. So in essence you increase your working area and target pool, which would benefit the outlaws. Now why would concord agree to that?
|
Malcanis
RuffRyders Eradication Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:02:00 -
[280]
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: Troezar Let's face it CCP of old saw EVE as a niche PVP game, in fact it was the whole reason for EVE. More and more carebears flooded in and now it is seen as a cash cow. PVP especially non concensual threatens the cash flowing in hence PVP is getting harder. I'm betting if removal of PVP would double the income it would disappear tomorrow...the old EVE will never return
Want some cheese with that whine?
Want to provide some data and arguments with that tired, borrowed meme? |
|
Furb Killer
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:08:00 -
[281]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: Troezar Let's face it CCP of old saw EVE as a niche PVP game, in fact it was the whole reason for EVE. More and more carebears flooded in and now it is seen as a cash cow. PVP especially non concensual threatens the cash flowing in hence PVP is getting harder. I'm betting if removal of PVP would double the income it would disappear tomorrow...the old EVE will never return
Want some cheese with that whine?
Want to provide some data and arguments with that tired, borrowed meme?
He is the one with the borrowed meme (eve is dying, eve isnt harsh anymore, bla bla bla), so i guess he may first give me data.
NPC rats may come in high sec because they dont have a very low sec status, they dont pod kill...
Instapopping a hauler with a battleship isnt exactly hard, so the result would be that suicide gankers can just continue with -10 sec status. |
Emperor Salazar
Caldari Insidious Existence RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:11:00 -
[282]
People seem to keep forgetting that this is in no way a boost for the pirate.
Suicide ganking? C'mon. If they really want to suicide gank, they'll do it. It's been happening for years. And again, ideas have been suggested to prevent this (instant CONCORD response time).
I see this idea from the op as the biggest boost to bounty hunting and players policing the Empire that has ever come to eve. We all know there is a bounty system already in place and that it is fail; you have to travel through gate camps and slums of low sec to engage pirates on their terms. This idea would allow you to engage on YOUR terms.
As for the "well pirates could then take advantage of noobs" age old saying. Ever heard of can flipping? Plenty of noobs fall for it yet its still allowed. Live and learn. In fact, you could have a warning displayed similar to the one when you engage any other player in high sec, but instead of it saying CONCORD will destroy you, just have it say that this pilot will be able to engage you freely now.
Honestly, are you people really this afraid of the scary pirate reentering high sec? TBH this consequence would be better than now because now every player would have a chance to gang up and own the pirates ass for even considering entering high sec.
I say it again; EvE is an MMO greatly run by its players. This idea would cater to this ideology so much more by putting in the mechanics to allow for players to take more control of the game. |
Omarvelous
Caldari Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:13:00 -
[283]
Originally by: Tzar'rim
As I see it it works just fine. An idea would be if the one attacking an outlaw does not in any way get flagged to the outlaw's friends, corp/fleet members and that assisting an outlaw will still result in concord coming over. ie; no one can help the target in any way and he can be attacked by anyone.
Your 'idea' is already a game mechanic. Anyone attacking an outlaw anywhere does NOT get flagged to the outlaw's corpmates. Anyone assisting in any way an outlaw gets GCC and concorded.
Thats how a gang of outlaws could be picked off 1 by 1 in high sec. |
NightmareX
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:20:00 -
[284]
Originally by: Emperor Salazar People seem to keep forgetting that this is in no way a boost for the pirate.
Suicide ganking? C'mon. If they really want to suicide gank, they'll do it. It's been happening for years. And again, ideas have been suggested to prevent this (instant CONCORD response time).
I see this idea from the op as the biggest boost to bounty hunting and players policing the Empire that has ever come to eve. We all know there is a bounty system already in place and that it is fail; you have to travel through gate camps and slums of low sec to engage pirates on their terms. This idea would allow you to engage on YOUR terms.
As for the "well pirates could then take advantage of noobs" age old saying. Ever heard of can flipping? Plenty of noobs fall for it yet its still allowed. Live and learn. In fact, you could have a warning displayed similar to the one when you engage any other player in high sec, but instead of it saying CONCORD will destroy you, just have it say that this pilot will be able to engage you freely now.
Honestly, are you people really this afraid of the scary pirate reentering high sec? TBH this consequence would be better than now because now every player would have a chance to gang up and own the pirates ass for even considering entering high sec.
I say it again; EvE is an MMO greatly run by its players. This idea would cater to this ideology so much more by putting in the mechanics to allow for players to take more control of the game.
Bingo, we have a winner.
Check out my new flash web page 'Alpha Strike' |
Omarvelous
Caldari Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:25:00 -
[285]
Originally by: Furb Killer
NPC rats may come in high sec because they dont have a very low sec status, they dont pod kill...
Instapopping a hauler with a battleship isnt exactly hard, so the result would be that suicide gankers can just continue with -10 sec status.
What exactly IS the sec status of an NPC rat? Its an outlaw by definition since they can be freely shot at by ANYONE without consequences (hell you don't even get an aggression timer for doing it - no session change delay).
An outlaw STILL wouldnt be allowed to podkill a non-war target in high sec without concord insta popping them.
Is the hauler WTZ and actively flying? If so then no chance of a suicide gank.
Is the hauler AFK flying? Is it not tanked? Is the AFK hauler pilot stupid enough to place hundreds of millions (ie more than the BS ganker's ship and mods that are lost and not insured) in an untanked hauler?
If so the outlaw won't be the only one trying to suicide kill him.
Why are you so threatened by this proposed change?
Are you AFK flying untanked T1 haulers with billions in loot?
Are you AFK flying expensive things untanked?
If the aswer is no - then you will not be in any way threatened by this change.
Afraid of being war decced by an outlaw corp? Hmm - scream in local and have everyone at your disposal to drive off the aggressors.
Afraid of being chased by pirates when YOU engage them in low sec?
I don't understand yours (and others flaming in this thread) FEAR of this proposal.
There are plenty of penalties and disadvantages to being an outlaw - allowing them into high sec with my proposal WILL NOT allow them to grief in high sec. * your signature file is too wide. Please note that we allow images no larger than 400x120 at 24,000 kb. - Fallout |
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:25:00 -
[286]
Originally by: Omarvelous
I'm not suggesting to remove high sec rats - I realize that would hurt new players. I was just using an analogy. Its ludicrous that a rat in a battleship (high sec level IV's) can exist in high sec without the NPC police chasing them down - yet an outlaw player cannot.
If you argue that they are not a threat - I argue with my suggestion an Outlaw is even LESS of a threat because an outlaw can not fire on you unless YOU agress them! The rats will aggress the hell out of you.
All I'm saying is allow outlaws in high sec without NPC intereference. The players have all the game mechanics at their disposal to effectively police high sec (I'm even offering a beacon on outlaws for anyone in system to warp to).
Now outlaws have more of eve to play in - just some areas are far more dangerous for them to step foot in than others. Just like a carebear can go anywhere - but they are in dangerous territory in low sec and 0.0.
There are some HUGE Differences between a RAT and a player in a Battleship.
But first lets talk about NPC Mission RATs as a RP story line breaker. Mission RATS are spawned as part of a story, they are not openly flying through gates. They are hiding using hidden gates and you get a mission to destroy them (ie Concord takes no action because some corporation stated they will deal with the problem) Mechanic wise PVE battleships are VERY Week. Everyone will openly admit that a PvE fitted ship will Fail in PvP. What you are proposing is putting PvP battleships in High-sec under the control of people who have already proved they are inclined disrupt high-sec traffic. And funny enough that is the whole reason there is concord and a security status. What you basically want is the removal of security status.
|
Emperor Salazar
Caldari Insidious Existence RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:34:00 -
[287]
Edited by: Emperor Salazar on 19/11/2008 16:35:26
Originally by: Korizan
What you basically want is the removal of security status.
Fail. It's not a removal of security status as there is clearly a penalty (being allowed to be shot by the 300+ average amount of people in hubs isn't penalty?).
You and many others seem to be suffering under the delusion that there are no pvpers in high sec; that they are all in either low or null sec. Any experienced player would be able to tell you that this is far from the truth.
As for well tanked battleship on the pirates side; yeah the average noob or mission runner won't be able to take them on. So...they don't engage, and life moves on. But for those pvpers in high sec and those wanting to fashion themselves as "bounty hunters" this would allow them to do so.
This idea has potential; stop shutting it down with ridiculously stupid reasons just so you can maintain the status quo (afraid of change much?).
Edit: Quoted before Korizan edited his post. Sorry .
|
Omarvelous
Caldari Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:37:00 -
[288]
Originally by: Korizan
What you basically want is the removal of security status.
Your fear has narrowed your scope of perspective on this proposal.
Sec status is MORE than just access to areas with certain security.
Outlaws have several handicaps in place for high sec combat (read up on them I've only posted them dozens of times).
I am not saying NPC rats and players are equal threats. I'm saying for RP purposes it makes no sense to allow outlaws of 1 kind (non pod pilots) and not outlaws that are pod pilots.
How come NPC pirates can 'spawn' through hidden gates - yet when I warp to that same hidden area in anything other than my pod - the police can suddenly find me?
How come Concord wont attack these NPC pirates - yet if you accidentally remote rep them (for example) - they instantly find you and destroy you?! Doesn't make any RP sense.
How come Concord allows these outlaw NPCs to shoot innocent players without destroying them?
Mechanics wise the player controlled outlaw is still just as restricted as anyone else in committing a crime in high sec and will have just as harsh a penalty for engaging in it.
What I want is for players not the faction police to police their security status areas.
What I want is for greater roaming possibilities without having to lose my outlaw status.
Your relative safety in high sec will not be endangered unless you choose to aggress the outlaws. * your signature file is too wide. Please note that we allow images no larger than 400x120 at 24,000 kb. - Fallout |
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:39:00 -
[289]
Originally by: Emperor Salazar Edited by: Emperor Salazar on 19/11/2008 16:35:26
Originally by: Korizan
What you basically want is the removal of security status.
Fail. It's not a removal of security status as there is clearly a penalty (being allowed to be shot by the 300+ average amount of people in hubs isn't penalty?).
You and many others seem to be suffering under the delusion that there are no pvpers in high sec; that they are all in either low or null sec. Any experienced player would be able to tell you that this is far from the truth.
As for well tanked battleship on the pirates side; yeah the average noob or mission runner won't be able to take them on. So...they don't engage, and life moves on. But for those pvpers in high sec and those wanting to fashion themselves as "bounty hunters" this would allow them to do so.
This idea has potential; stop shutting it down with ridiculously stupid reasons just so you can maintain the status quo (afraid of change much?).
Edit: Quoted before Korizan edited his post. Sorry .
Yeh cause we were going in circles. Everything can be simplified to one simple question.
Why do you want to go to high-sec ?
|
Emperor Salazar
Caldari Insidious Existence RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:45:00 -
[290]
Originally by: Korizan
Why do you want to go to high-sec ?
IMO, the biggest reason this should be allowed is from a RP view and an advancement in the movement to allow players more control in the game.
I agree with the NPC rat argument as silly as it comes across. Why the hell would the navies/CONCORD allow them in high sec? They are not just outlaws but allied to factions pitted against the Empire and the way of life in high sec.
Mainly though, I really like the concept of the bounty hunter. Eve is lacking greatly in this area; I know many players that entered eve with the ambition to be one until realizing that the mechanics just aren't there for it yet.
Finally, the idea of players having more control. Players should be securing high sec, not having some computer AI do it for them. CCP has already mentioned their ambition to move in this direction in regards to low sec; this idea simply expands it to high sec.
The biggest thing to note is that this change would in no way endanger high sec citizens as is. They could simply ignore the outlaw and move about their business. But it would enable those who wish to take matters in their own hands. Since when has adding a bit of excitement to the game (yeah even high sec) been looked down on?
|
|
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:48:00 -
[291]
Originally by: Emperor Salazar
Originally by: Korizan
Why do you want to go to high-sec ?
IMO, the biggest reason this should be allowed is from a RP view and an advancement in the movement to allow players more control in the game.
I agree with the NPC rat argument as silly as it comes across. Why the hell would the navies/CONCORD allow them in high sec? They are not just outlaws but allied to factions pitted against the Empire and the way of life in high sec.
Mainly though, I really like the concept of the bounty hunter. Eve is lacking greatly in this area; I know many players that entered eve with the ambition to be one until realizing that the mechanics just aren't there for it yet.
Finally, the idea of players having more control. Players should be securing high sec, not having some computer AI do it for them. CCP has already mentioned their ambition to move in this direction in regards to low sec; this idea simply expands it to high sec.
The biggest thing to note is that this change would in no way endanger high sec citizens as is. They could simply ignore the outlaw and move about their business. But it would enable those who wish to take matters in their own hands. Since when has adding a bit of excitement to the game (yeah even high sec) been looked down on?
This does NOT answer my question. You are stating what OTHER people should be doing in game. Why do YOU want to go to high-sec. |
Emperor Salazar
Caldari Insidious Existence RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:55:00 -
[292]
Originally by: Korizan
This does NOT answer my question. You are stating what OTHER people should be doing in game. Why do YOU want to go to high-sec.
I love idiot trolls.
I already do enter high sec; I am not a pirate (I've stated this before, but thanks for the weak assumption). I simply see this as a damn good advancement for the game of eve. You on the other hand simply offer no reasonable argument as to why this shouldn't be implemented.
I also never said this is what players should be doing; it is something I think players would love to see. This is what this is truly about, enabling players to run the player run game (redundancy intentional because you clearly want CCP to spoon feed you).
Also, OP has stated before; he wants this for fights: plain and simple. And this would bring it. You would find many high sec pvpers answering the call and many pirate v. Empire dweller fights. More pvp in a pvp game? I know. So silly.
|
Omarvelous
Caldari Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 16:56:00 -
[293]
Originally by: Korizan
Why do YOU want to go to high-sec.
To get more pvp than what is available in low sec.
I dont want faction warfare blobs.
I dont want 0.0 politics and 0.0 blobs. |
Furb Killer
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:03:00 -
[294]
Originally by: Omarvelous
Originally by: Furb Killer
NPC rats may come in high sec because they dont have a very low sec status, they dont pod kill...
Instapopping a hauler with a battleship isnt exactly hard, so the result would be that suicide gankers can just continue with -10 sec status.
What exactly IS the sec status of an NPC rat? Its an outlaw by definition since they can be freely shot at by ANYONE without consequences (hell you don't even get an aggression timer for doing it - no session change delay).
An outlaw STILL wouldnt be allowed to podkill a non-war target in high sec without concord insta popping them.
Is the hauler WTZ and actively flying? If so then no chance of a suicide gank.
Is the hauler AFK flying? Is it not tanked? Is the AFK hauler pilot stupid enough to place hundreds of millions (ie more than the BS ganker's ship and mods that are lost and not insured) in an untanked hauler?
If so the outlaw won't be the only one trying to suicide kill him.
Why are you so threatened by this proposed change?
Are you AFK flying untanked T1 haulers with billions in loot?
Are you AFK flying expensive things untanked?
If the aswer is no - then you will not be in any way threatened by this change.
Afraid of being war decced by an outlaw corp? Hmm - scream in local and have everyone at your disposal to drive off the aggressors.
Afraid of being chased by pirates when YOU engage them in low sec?
I don't understand yours (and others flaming in this thread) FEAR of this proposal.
There are plenty of penalties and disadvantages to being an outlaw - allowing them into high sec with my proposal WILL NOT allow them to grief in high sec.
I personally would probably enjoy shooting pirates in high sec.
However: 1. it would make sec status less important, and you can keep telling whatever you want, being bbq'ed by the navy is not the same as people might attack you. It would make it far easier to move arround in high sec (some whirates claim that wont be the case because they will be attacked immediatly by 100 players, then why do you want the entire mechanic?)
2. It would open a can filled with loopholes. |
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:04:00 -
[295]
Originally by: Omarvelous
Originally by: Korizan
Why do YOU want to go to high-sec.
To get more pvp than what is available in low sec.
I dont want faction warfare blobs.
I dont want 0.0 politics and 0.0 blobs.
Now we are getting somewhere. And you are hoping somebody will just attack you because you can be fired on and you have a large bounty correct ?
And no Emporer I am NOT trolling. Keep in mind that CCP has a long list of thinking they want to do. And if you want something changed then the quicK fix stuff will most likely come first. So something simple and that doesn't create any holes will come long before anything that changes a entire system.
I am entirely nuatral to the whole pirate thing I have friends from old corporations that could be by there Concord status be considered pirates.
The object is to find something that most everybody agrees to.
|
Troezar
Fatality. United Federation of Capsuleers
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:05:00 -
[296]
Originally by: Furb Killer
Want some cheese with that whine?[/quote
Want to provide some data and arguments with that tired, borrowed meme?
He is the one with the borrowed meme (eve is dying, eve isnt harsh anymore, bla bla bla), so i guess he may first give me data.
NPC rats may come in high sec because they dont have a very low sec status, they dont pod kill...
Instapopping a hauler with a battleship isnt exactly hard, so the result would be that suicide gankers can just continue with -10 sec status.
Putting a label on an opinion doesn't make it less valid nor does your straw man argument. Note I didn't say Eve was dying it is thriving as never before. See what you see not what you want to see PVP however is stale, is predictable and has been eroded over time. I don't have -10 sec nor do I intend to get it however I can see the trend over the last 5 years and like it or not Eve was more fun when it was harsher and back then I was one of the carebears Oh and Eve isn't harsh any more and as you're so fond of labels go back to WoW
PS Yes I've played WoW myself and guess what it became a boring grind with nothing to lose...
|
Cyber Blue
Gallente Cyber Blue Consulting
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:08:00 -
[297]
I've continued to think about this situation. At the moment I've decided no player should be hindered completely from going anywhere within the game due to game design. That just doesn't seem right to me. As long as the proper security measures are in place, I don't have a problem with it.
I understand the fears of many, however, the mother should not smother the child in order to protect it. Relax the restrictions on one part a bit while beefing up the restrictions on another part. Muzzle the bite a bit and allow more free breathing. It could possibly open up some new avenues of gameplay.
End of line... |
Crucifier
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:09:00 -
[298]
Edited by: Crucifier on 19/11/2008 17:09:15 HOW IS THAT ALMOST ALL THE POSTERS IN THIS THREAD ARE TOO ****ING IGNORANT TO READ THE OP.
The stupitidy in this thread is tilting me haaard.
NO, OP'S MATES COULDN'T HELP HIM IF HE GOT ATTACKED. HE WOULD BE A - ****ING - LONE.
|
Troezar
Fatality. United Federation of Capsuleers
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:16:00 -
[299]
Originally by: Crucifier Edited by: Crucifier on 19/11/2008 17:09:15 HOW IS THAT ALMOST ALL THE POSTERS IN THIS THREAD ARE TOO ****ING IGNORANT TO READ THE OP.
The stupitidy in this thread is tilting me haaard.
NO, OP'S MATES COULDN'T HELP HIM IF HE GOT ATTACKED. HE WOULD BE A - ****ING - LONE.
Simple answer carbears like safety as it equals no loss, no fear of loss means no need to worry and therefore think. If you don't have to think why would you know how game mechanics work, you wouldn't have to think about them Fear of loss and lack of understanding stresses them, they don't like stress hence they avoid pvp.
Note they will do anything to protect this safety, except fight! Find a way for pvp to equal more revenue for CCP and the slaughter will begin
On reflection I've remembered why I don't post a lot on internet forums
|
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:25:00 -
[300]
Edited by: Korizan on 19/11/2008 17:35:58 Actually how about a much simpler solution.
Right now the system goes from 0 to -10 IF CCP Increased or adjusted the standings soooo
First half you become attackable in high-sec and the second half concord gets involved. So CCP could then tier the offenses accordingly.
Suicide attacks give a bigger hit then lowsec gate camping etc etc.
That would effectively open up the OPS requests and @ the same time keep the grief or suicide bunch happy as well.
And as a side of this it you could also give more room for people to work in low-sec without totally destroying the rating ?
So You become KOS to Players with the following; * -2.00 for access to 1.0 security level systems * -2.50 for access to 0.9 security level systems * -3.00 for access to 0.8 security level systems * -3.50 for access to 0.7 security level systems * -4.00 for access to 0.6 security level systems * -4.50 for access to 0.5 security level systems And You become CONCORD lunch @ the following; * -5.00 for access to 1.0 security level systems * -5.50 for access to 0.9 security level systems * -6.00 for access to 0.8 security level systems * -6.50 for access to 0.7 security level systems * -7.00 for access to 0.6 security level systems * -7.50 for access to 0.5 security level systems
A little tweaking but doable. Would that work ?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |