EVE Search - Delay CONCORD response time by factor 3x

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Delay CONCORD response time by factor 3x

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 49	Posted - 2012.04.30 14:41:00 - [1] - Quote TWHC Assistant wrote: Delay CONCORD response time by a factor of 3, leaving gankers more time to deal damage, but let CONCORD confiscate/destroy the wreck of the victim as well as that of the ganker's ship. No loot for anyone. Learn to gank proper. Take your ship loss with proud, instead of whining about your punishment. You know you will loose it like we carebears know, that we are not 100% save even in high sec. Destroying the victims ship not just denies the loot to the ganker, it also denies the return of the remaining property to the victim, which might maybe get luckily faster back than you. Greetings from a proud carebear
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 49	Posted - 2012.04.30 17:15:00 - [2] - Quote TWHC Assistant wrote: What gankers need to learn is no one's business but the gankers'. Do not make CONCORD the teachers of gankers. Nor want the carebears being teached by the gankers, how to play the game. EVE is not only 100% PvP. Ganking is not desired in HighSec, but somehow "allowed" with the payment of loosing your ship. And it's working pretty fine the way it is implemented now - according to "Jita burning", isn't it? HighSec = Empire space unter strong control of empire state forces. A state would not get you away with murder and or damage to foreign property. You are free to gank with less serverside party involvement in LowSec and no involvement in NullSec ( no empire, no state forces ). That's your area of operation, if you do not want to take the risk of losing your ship to CONCORD. That's not fun enough, because the "nullsec carebears" are more well-fortified than the highsec carebears? Oh ... surprise ...
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 49	Posted - 2012.04.30 18:00:00 - [3] - Quote TWHC Assistant wrote: Gerald Taric wrote: TWHC Assistant wrote: What gankers need to learn is no one's business but the gankers'. Do not make CONCORD the teachers of gankers. Nor want the carebears being teached by the gankers, how to play the game.... It is irrelevant. It is not the business of CONCORD to care for any of the parties beyond establishing peace and to eliminate the cause (=> loot). It is relevant. It's the setting we are playing in. Otherwise the game would only constist of Null-Space and no empire at all. Some of us are obiously pissed because of some restrictions in their freedom. But i claim, that they conveniently ignore the freedom of the other-minded. There's a area in the game especially designed for the hardcore PvPers needs: unrestricted PvP in NullSpace. There's also a area designed for the ones called "carebears", where they enjoy the game with less, but at least some risk - the HighSec. I personally dislike this batant tries to conquer the others areas - both hardcore-PvPers and carebears. - - - - - - In the past i also played another MMORPG. There was a high demand for a PvP-only server with no secure areas. The game developer at least introduced such a server. At the beginning there was a high peek in the player activity, but it very fast dropped to nearly zero ... for - in my opinion - obvious reasons. The server had been abandoned some time later.
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 49	Posted - 2012.04.30 18:11:00 - [4] - Quote Super Chair wrote: Where's the ignore bad poster button? I shouldn't have to see their threads when they start one. hm .. you might click on the posters name on the left, where you should get an "hide posts" option. But i don't know, if this also hides threads startet by the ignored person. Usually i do not ignore persons because of having other opinions than mine.
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 49	Posted - 2012.05.01 00:24:00 - [5] - Quote TWHC Assistant wrote: Gerald Taric wrote: It is relevant. No, it is not. Why should CONCORD care for either side? They care for no side. They care, because the agressor broke the rule of not doing illegal agression. Illegal is defined as "not in war with victim" and "having no killrights" and "did not stealed from you" in HighSec empire space. CONCORD holds up this rule, like a police in empire. Removing limiting rules named "CONCORD interterence" will end up in an unlimited ganking massacre. Sound also "not professional" - and fatal for the game. I wrote it already: I was able to watch such a situatuion already in another game. It failed horribly.
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 49	Posted - 2012.05.01 09:06:00 - [6] - Quote TWHC Assistant wrote: Gerald Taric wrote: They care for no side. They care, ... They do not care, but they care? ... Come back when you know how to make sense. They care neither for victims side nor for the side of the ganker, they care for the rule being uphold. What a bummer you completely ignore the other arguments, especially that important one, that removing (or weakening to meaninglessness) limitation rules was ruinous in an other game, which i wrote down now for a third time here. You're trolling very good. Have fun furthermore.
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 49	Posted - 2012.05.01 11:32:00 - [7] - Quote TWHC Assistant wrote: Why would anyone care for your experience with another game? Unless you want to make EVE like other games ... double-facepalm ...
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 50	Posted - 2012.05.02 09:39:00 - [8] - Quote Velicitia wrote: Gerald Taric wrote: EVE is not only 100% PvP. Wrong, sorry. Mining, trading, researching, refining, ratting, sleeper-ing,collecting, building,scanning, hacking, ... many actions, which might be related to PvP, but are NOT pure PvP. We could also claim "EVE is 100% economy" because destroying ships let the market florish. In order to pinpoint it: A player can be actively busy in EVE for weeks without getting involved in any PvP action. Saying "EVE is 100% PvP" then would mean, this player isn't playing EVE. And stating this in an indirect way leads immediatelly to the lovely question "who defines how to play EVE right?". Velicitia wrote: Gerald Taric wrote: Ganking is not desired in HighSec Wrong again We are technically allowed to do so, we are allowed to do so by game rules, but CONCORD shooting at Ganker shows, that - seen from "storyline view" - it is not desired (((by CONCORD))). Concerning the other two statements, i have no noteworthy veto.
Gerald Taric Adamantium Industry 50	Posted - 2012.05.02 15:44:00 - [9] - Quote Sobaan Tali wrote: Civilized? Eve civilized? Woaw, woaw, woaw, hold the phone. Where in Eve do you live? In HighSec sorry could not resist ;-)

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.