EVE Search - CCP it is a reasonable objection

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP it is a reasonable objection

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.09.21 08:46:00 - [1] If you really want to get people out of NPC corps, then reworking the war dec system and even more importantly the bounty system is really important. War decs are a confused mess. The bounty system isn't even a joke any more. Neutral remote reppers make a mockery out of such hi-sec PvP as does occur. Armour/shield rigs increasing tank without a corresponding increase in aggro timers mean that stupid docking games are the norm, not the exception. Empire PvP needs fixing. Urgently
Asuka Smith Gallente Noir.	Posted - 2009.09.21 08:47:00 - [2] Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour.
Lubomir Penev Dark Nexxus	Posted - 2009.09.21 08:56:00 - [3] And more important, we need new way to designate the different timers, having two aggression timers one 15 minutes (that is ok) and one 1 minute (that is not ok anymore) always leads discussions on the subject in a confusing mess... -- 081014 : emoragequit, char transfered to a friend, 090317 : back to original owner blog
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.09.21 09:01:00 - [4] Originally by: Asuka Smith Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour. Never post again. That might be the most ignorant statement and terrible idea I've ever heard. Originally by: CCP Whisper So you're going to have to do some actual thinking with regards to hull components and their capabilities instead of copying some cookie-cutter setup. Cry some more.
Lidirt Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.09.21 09:29:00 - [5] Are you serious? Empire PVP has serious consequences already. CCP isn't trying to get people out of NPC corps, they're trying to make things more fair and/or fixing inflation just like they have done several times in the past. You need fixing, urgently.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.09.21 09:32:00 - [6] Originally by: Lidirt Are you serious? Empire PVP has serious consequences already. . Can you read? If so, try reading what I posted.
Lidirt Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.09.21 09:37:00 - [7] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Lidirt Are you serious? Empire PVP has serious consequences already. . Can you read? If so, try reading what I posted. I read quite carefully what you posted. It makes no sense to me. Docking games occur in high-sec as well as low-sec. They occur even in sovereign space as well. What you're proposing is ludicrous quite frankly. If anything aggro timers should be removed. How realistic are they? If you shot someone IRL you would be able to run your ass off as hard as you were able to, why shouldn't that apply to New Eden?
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.09.21 09:49:00 - [8] Originally by: Lidirt Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Lidirt Are you serious? Empire PVP has serious consequences already. . Can you read? If so, try reading what I posted. I read quite carefully what you posted. It makes no sense to me. Docking games occur in high-sec as well as low-sec. They occur even in sovereign space as well. What you're proposing is ludicrous quite frankly. If anything aggro timers should be removed. How realistic are they? If you shot someone IRL you would be able to run your ass off as hard as you were able to, why shouldn't that apply to New Eden? Which class of space has by far the highest concentration of available stations to dock in? 0.0 lo-sec hi-sec
Lidirt Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:00:00 - [9] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Lidirt Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Lidirt Are you serious? Empire PVP has serious consequences already. . Can you read? If so, try reading what I posted. I read quite carefully what you posted. It makes no sense to me. Docking games occur in high-sec as well as low-sec. They occur even in sovereign space as well. What you're proposing is ludicrous quite frankly. If anything aggro timers should be removed. How realistic are they? If you shot someone IRL you would be able to run your ass off as hard as you were able to, why shouldn't that apply to New Eden? Which class of space has by far the highest concentration of available stations to dock in? 0.0 lo-sec hi-sec What does that possibly have to do with your original "argument"? You want an increased aggression timer for ships that are rigged? How does that possibly make any sense whatsoever? Someone could undock in a ship that would completely own you, when they might have docked up in an Ibis. If I spent more ISK on a ship that would jack you silly, I should/will be the winner. Are you trying to invalidate my argument because I live in 0.0 space? I hope you realize that I haven't always lived in 0.0... I implore you that if you want to sway people to your opinion, you should make a rational argument that makes sense and persuades people. If you do not, you're just flapping your gums and whining. Good day, sir.
Artemis Rose Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:11:00 - [10] Originally by: Vaal Erit Originally by: Asuka Smith Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour. Never post again. That might be the most ignorant statement and terrible idea I've ever heard. I would gladly take sitting for 1 hour in space if I logged with aggression in order to make the jumping/docking countdown 240 seconds. *** Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine, Self Banstick +2 WTB: +666 E-peen killboard stats
Jen Khai Black Hawk Down Syndrome	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:13:00 - [11] next expansion... let em focus on 0.0, caps and the jukebox for dominion kk? :) There's only so much they can cram into one add-on.
Lidirt Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:13:00 - [12] Originally by: Artemis Rose Originally by: Vaal Erit Originally by: Asuka Smith Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour. Never post again. That might be the most ignorant statement and terrible idea I've ever heard. I would gladly take sitting for 1 hour in space if I logged with aggression in order to make the jumping/docking countdown 240 seconds. Logoffski is one thing, what the OP argues for is something completely different.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:19:00 - [13] I dont care where you have lived. The incontestable fact is that tanking ability has hugely increased, while aggro & dock timers have stayed the same. And you, docking timers were the least of the issues raised in my post. Seriously, stop nit-picking about minor things.
Lidirt Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:31:00 - [14] Originally by: Malcanis I dont care where you have lived. The incontestable fact is that tanking ability has hugely increased, while aggro & dock timers have stayed the same. And you, docking timers were the least of the issues raised in my post. Seriously, stop nit-picking about minor things. How has tanking ability increased, precisely? I really don't think I can tank any better than I could 3 years ago. I can tank cheaper with the new smaller sized rigs, but that really doesn't seem to have anything to do with your original "war decs and bounties are broken" argument. I could have put trimark armor pumps on an Ishtar ages ago, how does that make it unfair if I could afford it? Again I implore you to present a plausible argument for a change in game mechanics... I'm not nit-picking about minor things, I'm trying to rationalize your original post and I can't because it does not make any sense whatsoever.
Julian Lynq	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:35:00 - [15] The idea Ccp could get people out of Npc-Corps by taxing them, changing timers, changing the war dec system or whatever else is just idiotic. Theese are not the things that keep people in Npc-Corps. People leave Npc-Corps because of the social interaction in Player-Corps. Changes that boost this aspect are the ONLY ones that have a chance to move more players into Player-Corps. (For Example the planned facebook-like website).
Scouteye Locasta Tactical	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:38:00 - [16] Bring more friends or more powerful ships if you feel people are not dieing quick enough. Timers are fine as they are.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:40:00 - [17] Originally by: Lidirt Originally by: Malcanis I dont care where you have lived. The incontestable fact is that tanking ability has hugely increased, while aggro & dock timers have stayed the same. And you, docking timers were the least of the issues raised in my post. Seriously, stop nit-picking about minor things. How has tanking ability increased, precisely? Are you just trolling or are you really actually that ignorant of the game? Make a battleship fit in EFT or in game. Look at the EHP. Add 3x trimarks or 3x CDFE rigs and look at the EHP again. See the difference? I'll make it easy for you. The second number is much larger than than the first number.
Marko Riva Adamant Inc.	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:44:00 - [18] EHP tanking (plates, shield extenders combined with rigs) needs to be adressed.
Frug Repo Industries	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:50:00 - [19] Originally by: Malcanis War decs are a confused mess. War decs are fine, and if you can't wrap your head around the current system, you should hire someone who can. Just saying. Empire PvP is absolutely fine the way it is. Remote reppers are a pain but can be dealt with. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Whisper/PrismX 4 emperor
Tea McBag	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:51:00 - [20] Originally by: Vaal Erit Originally by: Asuka Smith Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour. Never post again. That might be the most ignorant statement and terrible idea I've ever heard. had to be reiterated
Doomed Predator The Aduro Protocol	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:52:00 - [21] Originally by: Marko Riva EHP tanking (plates, shield extenders combined with rigs) needs to be adressed. If you're suggesting active tanks are made more appealing than passive tanks then sure, but for the love of god don't nerf passive tanking. The 'Fendahlian Collective' strikes again
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:55:00 - [22] Originally by: Frug Originally by: Malcanis War decs are a confused mess. War decs are fine, and if you can't wrap your head around the current system, you should hire someone who can. Just saying. Empire PvP is absolutely fine the way it is. Remote reppers are a pain but can be dealt with. Right so avoiding wardecs by metagaming your way through a merry-go-round of corps is fine is it? The bounty system is absolutely perfect is it?
Infinity111 Amarr The Knights Templar R.A.G.E	Posted - 2009.09.21 10:57:00 - [23] Edited by: Infinity111 on 21/09/2009 11:00:58 i agree with op about docking mechanics and i know many that also thinks same. edited for: about wardecs. i dont care anything about that part. if somebody wants to leave corp that is wardecced let em and go for next target.
HMSBlueprint Gallente default.aspx Evil Kitty Federation	Posted - 2009.09.21 11:10:00 - [24] this is ridiculous, end of
Sanitarium Slave Minmatar Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance	Posted - 2009.09.21 11:17:00 - [25] Originally by: HMSBlueprint this is ridiculous, end of I can see why you mean that, being an member of "Evil Kitty Federation" you sort of need to backup sometimes to an alt in an NPC corporation.
ropnes	Posted - 2009.09.21 11:32:00 - [26] ITT: a guide to terrible reading comprehension
N Ano	Posted - 2009.09.21 11:51:00 - [27] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Lidirt Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Lidirt Are you serious? Empire PVP has serious consequences already. . Can you read? If so, try reading what I posted. I read quite carefully what you posted. It makes no sense to me. Docking games occur in high-sec as well as low-sec. They occur even in sovereign space as well. What you're proposing is ludicrous quite frankly. If anything aggro timers should be removed. How realistic are they? If you shot someone IRL you would be able to run your ass off as hard as you were able to, why shouldn't that apply to New Eden? Which class of space has by far the highest concentration of available stations to dock in? 0.0 lo-sec hi-sec Ok let me ask you this. which station has the most concentrated amount of players in each station in teh same corp/alliance that is at war with another corp/alliance.
Haakelen Gallente Angels.	Posted - 2009.09.21 11:59:00 - [28] The fundamental requirements for the wardec system to work properly require that it be freeform, able to continue forever if resources are committed, and have no restrictions once it's underway. The current system achieves these goals. However, it's too easy to wardec someone, and it's also far too cheap. This leads to blanket decs of potentially easy targets, which is something that can be universally condemned. If you have a legitimate disagreement with someone, for whatever reason, you should be prepared to pay to settle it via ammunition in highsec. A simple answer would be to increase the corporate wardec cost to the 50M that alliances pay. But that's too 1-dimensional. The cost should go up, sure, but that's not enough. Wardeccing someone should have meaningful consequences if you get in over your head. What that could be, I don't know, but there's all kinds of interactions with NPCs in empire, and that could be a starting point. Dock timers, agents, station services, and etc. Neutral logistical support is another. However, arbitrary target choice limitations and pre-defined "goals" are pointless and boring, and have no place in the equation. The goals of a wardec are almost always to destroy the enemy's fun, by definition. There's no way to make it happy and friendly, so time shouldn't be wasted in trying. In return for an increase in price, complexity, and risk, corps should be given unlimited wardec slots, and corphopping exploits should be declared as such. Originally by: Jack Jombardo CCP love pirate, griffer, and other criminal acters!
Super Whopper I can Has Cheeseburger	Posted - 2009.09.21 12:04:00 - [29] I thought carebear tears were sweet until I started reading the tears of the wannabe pirates. Such whining, so many tears, so many cries to change the game so everyone dies with one single shot or bump from their pods. Cry MOAR children, cry moar
KaarBaak Minmatar Squirrel Team	Posted - 2009.09.21 12:04:00 - [30] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Frug Originally by: Malcanis War decs are a confused mess. War decs are fine, and if you can't wrap your head around the current system, you should hire someone who can. Just saying. Empire PvP is absolutely fine the way it is. Remote reppers are a pain but can be dealt with. Right so avoiding wardecs by metagaming your way through a merry-go-round of corps is fine is it? The bounty system is absolutely perfect is it? Are you trying to wardec specific players or corps? My understanding is that the wardec system was for corps/alliances to declare war against corps/alliances. Individual players didn't enter into it. Perhaps you want something new introduced. Something like a 'Vendetta' system. Same mechanics as wardec (costs/24hr clock, etc), except that it is limited to one player vs one player. Your corp doesn't enter into it and neither does his. KB KB Beware the beast Man, for he is the Devil's pawn. Alone among God's primates, he kills for sport or lust or greed. Yea, he will murder his brother to possess his brother's land.
Spurty Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.09.21 12:11:00 - [31] Originally by: Asuka Smith Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour. Try thinking beyond the end of your nose. What about when people DC due to power outages and things outside their control? Happens to me a lot. Why should I suffer twice? Your name shall go on zee list! Originally by: Machine Delta When making a point, anyone taking it should consider the source. pretty deep coming from you
Jhagiti Tyran Mortis Angelus Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.09.21 12:19:00 - [32] Originally by: Artemis Rose make the jumping/docking countdown 240 seconds. Station timers yes but gate timers are fine.
Xiozor Anonymous Alcoholics Wrath.	Posted - 2009.09.21 12:55:00 - [33] Increasing timers would not mean that you would kill more people before they could dock. Increasing the timers means less people will commit to fights. Leave them as they are, it is hard enough getting PvP in empire. Besides, you already have tools available to you that can easily counter the relatively short docking timer, they are called bumper-phoons. ----------------------------------------------- Mr.Kippling just launched a nuclear holocaust at third world countries! ... But he does make exceedingly good cakes.
Angry Poster	Posted - 2009.09.21 13:30:00 - [34] Edited by: Angry Poster on 21/09/2009 13:36:21 Originally by: Asuka Smith Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour. I agree. Should have happened at the same time they quadrupled the EHP of all the ships tbh. I can't stand these ****ed docking games - and they don't only suck in empire. We're currently fighting a well known alliance and they are such pussies that they won't even fight if they're not sitting on an outpost ready to dock up. (The ***-alliance knows who I'm talking about) I don't care so much about the 15 minute timers tbh. They can stay at 15 minutes or be changed to 60 as well for all I care. The real problem are the 1min times (docking/jumping after aggression). They should really be increased to 5, 10 or 15 minutes. Going into battle should be a commitment and not something where you can just say "aww I'm gonna lose so I'll simply jump+log or dock up without any risk or countermeasure". Anyone who doesn't want this is likely exploiting timers - there's no other argument against increasing them tbh. And to the whiners crying about their crappy connections/power supplies: if you aggro something and then get disconnected then you will either: a) be lucky because there's no prober around or b) will be probed and die (no matter if the prober has 15 or 60 minutes time).
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.21 13:37:00 - [35] Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 21/09/2009 13:44:42 Originally by: Malcanis Right so avoiding wardecs by metagaming your way through a merry-go-round of corps is fine is it? ITT 3litE PVPers condemn metagaming... But only metagames that negatively impact them. All other forms are fine . Pro-tip: If you're really concerned about metagaming then I suggest you tackle the biggest issue of all; the use of alts to circumvent virtually all mechanics in game. Examples? Using alts as intel tools makes gatecamps virtually immune to losses. The use of alts negates the consequences of being -10. No serious consequences to scamming No serious consequences to spying List goes on and on... But yeh, this isn't the metagaming you're looking to get fixed now, is it? CCP, nerf carebearz! Buff 3L1TE PVPrs!! \o/
Laruant Wiggins Gallente	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:04:00 - [36] Originally by: KaarBaak Something like a 'Vendetta' system. Same mechanics as wardec (costs/24hr clock, etc), except that it is limited to one player vs one player. Your corp doesn't enter into it and neither does his. KB I like this.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:16:00 - [37] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 21/09/2009 13:44:42 Originally by: Malcanis Right so avoiding wardecs by metagaming your way through a merry-go-round of corps is fine is it? ITT 3litE PVPers condemn metagaming... But only metagames that negatively impact them. All other forms are fine . Pro-tip: If you're really concerned about metagaming then I suggest you tackle the biggest issue of all; the use of alts to circumvent virtually all mechanics in game. Examples? Using alts as intel tools makes gatecamps virtually immune to losses. The use of alts negates the consequences of being -10. No serious consequences to scamming No serious consequences to spying List goes on and on... But yeh, this isn't the metagaming you're looking to get fixed now, is it? CCP, nerf carebearz! Buff 3L1TE PVPrs!! \o/ Gosh, with all those words you're putting in to my mouth, you hardly need me to post at all. How about a wardec system where an empire corp can post a bond with concord. Anyone wanting to dec them has to match this bond, and if they retract the war, then their ISK is forfeit. The dec'd corp is free to hire more mercenaries or exert any other kind of in-game pressure on the deccing corp to drop the wardec. That might dissaude casual, opportunistic griefing?
Super Whopper I can Has Cheeseburger	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:34:00 - [38] Originally by: Laruant Wiggins Originally by: KaarBaak Something like a 'Vendetta' system. Same mechanics as wardec (costs/24hr clock, etc), except that it is limited to one player vs one player. Your corp doesn't enter into it and neither does his. KB I like this. "Hey, look a mission runner and his ship is worth billions! Vendetta time." The reason why these 'proposals' will never be implemented is because CCP would rather you poasters leave the game than the hordes you would try to take advantage off and grief. This, like this entire thread is PHAIL.
Sun Clausewitz	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:34:00 - [39] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 21/09/2009 13:44:42 Originally by: Malcanis Right so avoiding wardecs by metagaming your way through a merry-go-round of corps is fine is it? ITT 3litE PVPers condemn metagaming... But only metagames that negatively impact them. All other forms are fine . Pro-tip: If you're really concerned about metagaming then I suggest you tackle the biggest issue of all; the use of alts to circumvent virtually all mechanics in game. Examples? Using alts as intel tools makes gatecamps virtually immune to losses. The use of alts negates the consequences of being -10. No serious consequences to scamming No serious consequences to spying List goes on and on... But yeh, this isn't the metagaming you're looking to get fixed now, is it? CCP, nerf carebearz! Buff 3L1TE PVPrs!! \o/ Yes, they need to fix alts, and they need to fix corp-hoppers that are avoiding wardecs. But more importantly, they need to recycle corp/alliance names & tickers that are dead. I forsee alot of them being used very soon Pick Three: Caldari/PVP/Solo/Success
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:41:00 - [40] And they also need to fix the war system so it stops being the griefing joke it is today.
Maria Martillo Amarr	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:48:00 - [41] Dunno why people are more concerned about playstyle of others than their own. imho all playstyles fit perfectly in eve, dont see the point. If someone is happy in a NPC corp that dont affect me in any way. The problem is, as said in other post, the difficulty in many cases of find a player corp that fits you. Its not so easy, in many circunstances, to find comfort with others, and (maybe its a failure of eve from certain point of view), being a MMO, EvE its also a good game to play solo (not as fun as in a group, IMO, but can cover too well your needs). Seems that many people forget the objective of a game: FUN Well, if you have only fun with the dissapointment of others, they are other things... That are not yet "games"...
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:49:00 - [42] Originally by: Malcanis Gosh, with all those words you're putting in to my mouth, you hardly need me to post at all. How about a wardec system where an empire corp can post a bond with concord. Anyone wanting to dec them has to match this bond, and if they retract the war, then their ISK is forfeit. The dec'd corp is free to hire more mercenaries or exert any other kind of in-game pressure on the deccing corp to drop the wardec. That might dissaude casual, opportunistic griefing? Oops, didn't see this Yeh, that's actually a sensible idea. Would also love to see trade-able kill rights. Seriously, why hasn't this been implemented yet?
Rumba Purring	Posted - 2009.09.21 14:52:00 - [43] Edited by: Rumba Purring on 21/09/2009 14:53:03 I agree that aggression rules in empire are complicated and intentions behind them seem very inconsistent. However, whether this makes 'good' or 'bad' game play depends on preference. If you want EVE game play to mimic what space combat could be based on reasonable extrapolation of astronautics and war technologies into far future, then these aggression rules are distractions. They introduce what feels like artificial complications that have nothing to do with actual space combat. On the other hand, one could argue that complicated aggression rules represent entangled and unreasonable legal system of the future. The current game play obviously appeal to those who like 'working the system' and winning based on litigious technicalities. (We all know the type.) So it comes down to what kind of game play we prefer, and hopefully CCP will do what's best to satisfy the most customers. I personally dislike current complex aggro rules that take away from empire wars, and wouldn't mind seeing some cleaning up. Edit: grammar fix ------------- Would you be ready if the gravity reversed itself?
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2009.09.21 15:24:00 - [44] Originally by: Malcanis If you really want to get people out of NPC corps, then reworking the war dec system and even more importantly the bounty system is really important. I can see how a rework of war decs might help, but how would changing the agreeably inadequate bounty system help? Originally by: Malcanis Neutral remote reppers make a mockery out of such hi-sec PvP as does occur. Armour/shield rigs increasing tank without a corresponding increase in aggro timers mean that stupid docking games are the norm, not the exception. Yeah Neut remote reps are bad, too easily meta gamed. Docking games - This is a half and half thing. Players do need to be able to redock, get that 30 seconds of invulnerability for a couple of reasons. First because of the black screen of death. That just sucks. And secondly, because we can not see outside of stations before we undock. The docked player needs to be able to take a peek. If the aggro timer is also increased, then the undock invulnerability timer should also be increased. Blind session changes are one of the poor aspects of Eve PVP, and neither side should have an advantage. Another solution to the whole docking game thing would be warp people out of stations to some random distance and angle of around .5 AU. If they want to warp back and fight fine, then increase the timer, if they wanna warp back and dock and never fire a shot, they can do that too. Or let us see outside the station while docked. Either way, the issue needs a better solution than current.
Kezzle	Posted - 2009.09.21 15:57:00 - [45] Originally by: Adunh Slavy I can see how a rework of war decs might help, but how would changing the agreeably inadequate bounty system help? If you could transfer the right to shoot down a target for whom you have kill rights, it is conceivable that more PvP would occur as at least a proportion of the currently 'unexploited' kill rights would be traded to people willing and able to do something about them, rather than being ignored by non-combatant characters/players. Quote: Yeah Neut remote reps are bad, too easily meta gamed. Anyone care to explain how neutral RRs don't just get added to the top of the kill sequence as soon as they start up? Quote: Blind session changes are one of the poor aspects of Eve PVP, and neither side should have an advantage. I agree strongly when considerint station undocks. Even these days you can see what the traffic is like while you're at a motorway service station. But for JGate transfers though, I think having to send a ship through to see what's the other side isn't too fierce a price. Logically, though, the far gate should be able to tell the departure gate what local conditions are like, and this info should be accessible to Capsuleers. Taken to the extent of the in-game logic (i.e there is the tech for instant datacomms across the whole of New Eden), there ought to be a real-time 'space warning' report available that lets you see the agression and security status of all ships in range of any given stargate or station.
Alakith RennTech	Posted - 2009.09.21 16:34:00 - [46] Originally by: Tea McBag Originally by: Vaal Erit Originally by: Asuka Smith Every aggression timer needs to be quadrupled. If you want to log out in space you better not have gotten aggression/aggressed in the past hour. Never post again. That might be the most ignorant statement and terrible idea I've ever heard. had to be reiterated ~Alakith~
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2009.09.21 16:41:00 - [47] If anything, docking timers should be scaled to hull size. Bigger hull = vastly increased redock time.
Tippia Raddick Explorations Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.09.21 16:45:00 - [48] Originally by: Kezzle Anyone care to explain how neutral RRs don't just get added to the top of the kill sequence as soon as they start up? They tend to show up near stations, and while they become legal targets by aiding someone, they incur no aggression and can thus redock at any time. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Varesk Gallente Maelstrom Crew	Posted - 2009.09.21 17:42:00 - [49] Originally by: Lidirt I really don't think I can tank any better than I could 3 years ago. You should train more skills then. ---- Originally by: CCP Abathur No.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:37:00 - [50] Originally by: Angry Poster ...Should have happened at the same time they quadrupled the EHP of all the ships tbh. I can't stand these ****ed docking games - and they don't only suck in empire...The real problem are the 1min times (docking/jumping after aggression). They should really be increased to 5, 10 or 15 minutes. Going into battle should be a commitment and not something where you can just say "aww I'm gonna lose so I'll simply jump+log or dock up without any risk or countermeasure". Yeah I agree with this part, even though the patch only gave +50% to HP and then 3x trimarks added +45% so it is more like 2x HP. I'd like to see the docking timer be based on the size of your ship. BC and below can dock in 60s, BS at 90s-120s and capitals at 5 minutes. Or instead maybe just double the aggression timer on the station, because I can catch people on the other side of a gate but I can't kill people inside a station yet. Originally by:** CCP Whisper So you're going to have to do some actual thinking with regards to hull components and their capabilities instead of copying some cookie-cutter setup. Cry some more.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:50:00 - [51] The agression timer is the problem, EHP of ships is pretty fine imo (yes i know when you solo it is a pita it takes longer to kill people, i know that from experience also. But blowing up ships in 2 volleys when you are with a few friends also isnt fun). While neutral RR are a problem, it would simply be fixed by fixing logistics in general. I fly them also myself, so it is not just that i hate them. But it is just weird that main tactic for logistics in gangs is to hug the gate so you can always jump through. just make them get same agro timer as the one they are repping (or if that is too much database issues just give them 1m for repping). Then to compensate increase their EHP a bit. Quote: Increasing the timers means less people will commit to fights What is your definition of comitting to fights? Because for me committing to a fight means you commit to the fight, not that you know you can always deagress and dock. Wardecs need to go away from the mainly griefing tool it is now, and the ones starting the wardec need to be forced to commit to the wardec.
Takakura Hirohito	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:52:00 - [52] Originally by: Malcanis Empire PvP needs fixing. Urgently Yes, because Empire space is for PvPing. And station games are limited to Empire. Sound logic, young man! Now pass the butterscotch shnapps!
Tippia Raddick Explorations Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:57:00 - [53] Edited by: Tippia on 21/09/2009 20:57:04 Originally by: Takakura Hirohito [Yes, because Empire space is for PvPing. Yes it is. Like all space, in fact. Quote: And station games are limited to Empire. Not limited to, no, but it's certainly far more common arena for them. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Dirty Wizard	Posted - 2009.09.21 21:13:00 - [54] The amount of fail in this thread is staggering.
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.09.21 21:30:00 - [55] Originally by: Soporo If anything, docking timers should be scaled to hull size. Bigger hull = vastly increased redock time. This is actually a pretty interesting idea.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

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.