| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aeon Noblemagus
Minmatar
Sto-vo-kor
The Council.
   |
Posted - 2009.05.25 14:53:00 -
[1]
how about anyone with a +10 sec stat difference can attack a pirate.
for example a +.5 and freely attack a -0.5. without losing status? maybe then the get as sec stat rise? LP for a special store or a .5% damage increase in positive faction ammo/ships/what ever, but the catch is a pirate can freely attack them on 0.7 and under only.
While the pirates also get a damage bonus to pirate faction ships/ammo/what ever?
Only the anti pirates get the bounty on pirates plus they get a say 2M for a -2 or 50M for a -10 per kill?
Something ive been chewing on for a couple of days
|
FarosWarrior
Amarr
Sonnema
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 14:56:00 -
[2]
if you mean 10 full points, its already possible since the current max sec status one can have is 5, and below -5 you are KOS for everyone, and faction ships as well |
Valandril
Caldari
Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 15:49:00 -
[3]
First make piracy real job, then we can talk about resonable antipies.
Signature graphics that may only contain your character name, corporation logo, corporation or personal slogan or other text that is directly related to your in-game persona, or content directly related to Eve Online. All content must be in good taste.Applebabe |
Rajere
No Trademark
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 16:58:00 -
[4]
Pirates cannot go into 0.7, they can only go into 0.4 and below, where they can freely attack you anyway.
Anti-piracy is a real job, if no one steps up to fight the pirates they overrun the region and prevent any kind of carebear corps/alliances from living there and using the space. See Solitude region for the past ~3-4 years for an example of what a region looks like when pirates have free reign. Look at the ~3 month window last fall (aug-Oct) when our corp left syndicate and went to go play in Curse, for what that region would be like if pirates were actually kept in check (tranquil, productive, populated. miners in every belt, overall population of +5000 total players inhabiting the region) |
Jade Mitch
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 19:23:00 -
[5]
I've been chewing on this for years. Here's my suggestion:
First, concord and faction navies need to not attack players who have positive security status when they attack players who have negative security status. That's just basic etiquette.
Second, bounty payouts needs to be qualified. Characters in the same alliance or corporation should be disqualified from collecting bounties on their allies and corp mates. Alts on the same account and alts on separate accounts that share any of the same personal info should be disqualified. Characters who have given more than a million ISK within the previous twelve months to a character who has a bounty should also be disqualified.
Third, bounties need to be improved. Any qualifying player with neutral or positive security status should earn bounty and gain status for killing players with negative status and for destroying their ships. Players with neutral or positive status who commit crimes should only loose status. Players with negative status who commit crimes should loosing status and get bountied by Concord. |
General Jung
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 11:15:00 -
[6]
Hello Forum,
generally this is a good idea, but firstly we to talk about a reform of the sec status to make it more stable and connected to the really activities. And furthermore there must be a part of Empire, where it is really difficult dip into even for a big pirate fleet like so pirates shouldnŠt complain that they canŠt get coformtable in 0.7+.
|
Izo Alabaster
Friendly Neighbourhood Extortion Company
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 17:57:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Aeon Noblemagus
Only the anti pirates get the bounty on pirates plus they get a say 2M for a -2 or 50M for a -10 per kill?
You don't see a problem with my +4.5 sec status main sitting outside of my alt's station and podding his -10 self every 30 seconds?
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Are BS useless in solo combat?
The larger ship still has many benefits:
* Can fit smaller weapons to fend off smaller targets
* More slots allow EW counter measures
|
Izo Alabaster
Friendly Neighbourhood Extortion Company
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 18:08:00 -
[8]
These ideas are all well and dandy (well, honestly, some aren't) but you guys need to realize the definition of a "pirate" is a very blurry one. CVA, for instance, will arbitrarily label anyone they don't like as a "pirate" and will blow up their ships and even pod them without warning. Doesn't that make CVA a large pirate alliance, protecting its own interests with brute force and propoganda?
What about Goonswarm?
Are you saying that the status of "pirate" should rest solely on one's security status? How do you account for individuals like myself, who happen to have a sec status of 4.5, yet... Well look at my corp name. We're not exactly extortin' from 'roids!
It seems like the changes the OP posed are difficult to implement and very easily abused. I would love to pod a disposable, -10 alt for 50 million per kill. I could give up this life of piracy and retire to the Chribba's Veldspar Heaven.
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Are BS useless in solo combat?
The larger ship still has many benefits:
* Can fit smaller weapons to fend off smaller targets
* More slots allow EW counter measures
|
Hardin
Amarr
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 09:13:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Izo Alabaster
These ideas are all well and dandy (well, honestly, some aren't) but you guys need to realize the definition of a "pirate" is a very blurry one. CVA, for instance, will arbitrarily label anyone they don't like as a "pirate" and will blow up their ships and even pod them without warning. Doesn't that make CVA a large pirate alliance, protecting its own interests with brute force and propoganda?
From our perspective the definition of piracy is not blurry at all.
Basically if you belong to an organisation which will engage either CVA, our allies or neutrals in low-sec Amarrian space or Providence - then you are a pirate.
We do not 'arbitrarily' label anyone as a pirate.
Everyone who gets added to our red list has either pirated in our or Amarrian space or has belonged to an organisation that has done so at some point in the past. Our rules for flying in the Deliverance area are quite clear and can be found here: http://www.cva-eve.org/
-----
Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services
http://internetspacewars.blogspot.com/ |
Wang Jing
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 10:59:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Wang Jing on 27/05/2009 11:01:05
A complete revamp of the bounty system is needed. A way of doing it that is thrown around a lot is to link payouts to the cost of a ship loss, in a way that prevents it being profitable to claim your own bounty. This would have to take into account insurance.
So, lets say a pirate has a fully insured cruiser, for which the insurance payout is 6 million. Assuming the ship cost is also 6 million, and the insurance fee is 2 million, the pirate stands to make a miniumum 2 million isk loss when the ship goes pop. Of course if you add on a full t2 fit the loss will be much more, but noone will self destruct a fully fitted ship. Please note these numbers are rough estimates for use as an example.
So all you do is make the bounty payout in this case be less than 2 mil isk, and it will not be possible to profit from your own bounty. If the pirate has a 10 mil isk bounty, then the person who blows them up gets < 2 mil isk from it, and the rest stays on the pirates head for the next bounty hunter to come and take a crack at.
This gets interesting for T2 ships as the insurance payouts are way below the actual ship cost. An Assault Frigate costs minimum 15 million isk but with a 3 mil insurance payout. Perhaps the bounty for t2 ships could be equal to double or triple the premium insurance payout; enough to make it a lot better than killing a t1 hull, but still enough for the pirate to make a loss.
The hard part is keeping tabs on the minimum price for each ship; I guess this can be done in the same way the insurance payouts are balanced.
|
Wang Jing
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 11:14:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Wang Jing on 27/05/2009 11:15:07
As for security status gains, I'm all for this. My suggestion would be that it is again linked to ships, on the basis of size, with rookie ships excluded of course.
First of all, and most important, this means we again have a way to balance the cost, and so try to prevent abuse by podding alts etc. Secondly, it is extremely easy to avoid being podded in lowsec. Unless you're in a laggy fleet fight, you simply need to have the right overview tab up and at the right time stop worrying about the fight and start thinking about your pod. So unless the podding method of claiming is abandoned, it doesnt matter how good the new features put in place are, they will very rarely get used.
So the question is how to balance it. The system I propose still makes it possible to blow up a corpmate to raise your sec. However you have to be prepared to lose isk to do it. All that needs to be done is try to get a decent balance between isk loss and actual worthwhile sec status gains.
Another very cool bounty related idea I saw that I'll repost here is to add something to a characters info page when they become an outlaw. For example, when people place a bounty they could be asked to select an option for the type of crime commited. Or perhaps a tally of all the crimes they have commited could be added to their info page.
Wanted Dead or Alive for the podding of Chribba in Rancer, 1 Billion Isk Reward
OR Perhaps:
Wanted for Acts of Piracy; 327 Counts of Unlawful Destruction of Ships, 53 Counts Unlawful of Destruction of Pods
It would add a bit more flavour to the game. Pirates tend to give away their intent in their bio anyway, so it wouldnt be doing any harm, and would give even more incentive to add a bounty.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |