Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Elisa Day
Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 17:25:00 -
[31]
Even though this feature is requested approximately once per month and CCP has still not even commented on it, I'm still going to /sign it. You can even put a (self destructed) next to the victim's name!
Oh and get the mails in everyone's combat log who was on a kill please.
Oh and contents of ship hangars/fitted ships in ship hangars/corp hangars on killmails too please.
Oh and implants and SP loss on pod mails please.
It seems like the entire KM system needs some loving, in fact!
Fat chance of that...
|
Aragorn Angelus
Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 17:28:00 -
[32]
/Signed
|
Veng3ance
Multiversal Enterprise Inc. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 17:28:00 -
[33]
This seems unreasonable!!!
j/k /signed
|
Bob Mc
Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 17:29:00 -
[34]
Signed
|
Wolf Soldier
Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 17:47:00 -
[35]
signed
|
Gut Punch
Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 18:06:00 -
[36]
/signed
|
Lerathe Vespaldia
Caldari The Babylon Project. Dead Mans Hand
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 18:22:00 -
[37]
/signed pew pew! |
Jiro Rans
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 18:28:00 -
[38]
Make it so!
|
EvilSpork
Invicta. Advocated Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 18:34:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Lt Jester Signed, Motherships self destructing to keep people from getting their loot is one thing, but it should still generate a killmail
this
|
Kel Nissa
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 18:47:00 -
[40]
dont forget to add remote repair on killmails ;o)
|
|
Nyphix
Amarr Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 19:10:00 -
[41]
/Signed lol'd |
Halsoy
Gallente Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 20:02:00 -
[42]
/signed
|
Karenzi
No Trademark
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 20:19:00 -
[43]
wake up ccp
/signed
|
The Nova
Gallente Total Mayhem. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 22:00:00 -
[44]
SOLAR Fleet dread gets tackled, we bring in enough to kill him.
21:55:05 Notify Naglfar belonging to KpyTeHb self-destructs.
gg.
|
MitchPT
Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 22:07:00 -
[45]
/signed
|
Brutere
Stone Shadow Syndicate Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 22:07:00 -
[46]
I definately agree
/signed
|
K'orbin Hayato
Minmatar Meridian Dynamics Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 22:14:00 -
[47]
Edited by: K''orbin Hayato on 08/04/2009 22:15:28 /signed
With one addition: a ship that self-destructs should be on it's own killmail with weapon: self-destruct
SD to prevent your attackers from getting your loot is abso-****ing-lutely valid, but SD to prevent a km from being generated is utter bull****. --
If you find yourself in a fair fight, somebody screwed up. |
BELLZYBUB
Minmatar Shade. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 22:15:00 -
[48]
o/ Brut..../signed
" SOUL COUNTER DELUXE" THE DEVILS ADVOCATE |
Brutore
Stone Shadow Syndicate Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.08 22:26:00 -
[49]
I agree... /signed
|
Becq Starforged
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 01:02:00 -
[50]
Frankly, I don't see why killmails are bestowed only upon he who takes the last point of hull. Everyone who is involved in the kill (at least since the last session change) should have equal access. One way to do this might be to send kill details to a seperate server (to limit lag) and allow players to log on to obtain any killmails associated with their character from it.
Regarding the specific issue described above, I'd suggest at the very least changing the system so that killmails are sent to both the last player to score a hit (even if that hit didn't kill the ship) and the player inflicting the most damage. This would not only solve the specific problem brought up by Mistress Suffering, but would also take care of cases where a nearly-dead ship is finished off by a 'friendly' smartbomb, thus robbing the other side of killmails, issues involving NPC involvement, etc.
/support (and this might be best moved to Assembly Hall).
-- Becq Starforged
The Flame of Freedom Burns On! |
|
Tryptic Photon
Gallente Mad Bombers Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 01:59:00 -
[51]
/signed
|
Sobic
Mad Bombers Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 02:20:00 -
[52]
Totally agree!
/signed
|
Thiol
Mad Bombers Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 02:30:00 -
[53]
I agree completely and I would also support no insurance payout for ships that self-destruct.
|
DrJ Zoidberg
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 03:33:00 -
[54]
/signed
|
SilverBolt
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 03:56:00 -
[55]
Edited by: SilverBolt on 09/04/2009 03:56:31 Maybe even the inability to self destruct while engaged in combat? Simply blocking self destructs when aggressed wouldn't really work as most people who self destruct are most likely not aggressed anyway..
Dunno, the way I see it is for an easier fix simply block self destruct when in combat?
Idiot in a capital gets himself off station and gets tackled, is now in combat and is unable to self destruct - idiot in capital gets owned in the face, wishes he had waited on someone to scout the station / assist him.
|
Sapphrine
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 11:01:00 -
[56]
i'd like to see either what mistress suggests or for self destruct to nullify insurance payout. The second option would make the last '**** you' valid but actually at a cost to the person going down.
|
Sapphrine
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 11:03:00 -
[57]
lets not muddy the issue of everyone getting the km with the issue at hand.
|
ninjaholic
Gallente Interstellar Armaments Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 11:13:00 -
[58]
Then what's the point of the self-destruct?
>>> SUPPORT EVE's OWN IN-GAME FIGHT RECORD TOOL! <<<
|
Scilent Enigma
Minmatar Total Mayhem. Penumbra Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 12:24:00 -
[59]
I agree, this is a problem that shouldn't even have to have arisen in the first place. Self-destructing a ship while under attack shouldn't be a mechanic for depriving the attackers of a KM.
|
Navigaytion
|
Posted - 2009.04.09 13:05:00 -
[60]
/signed
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |