Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Wild Rho
Amarr Sniggerdly
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 10:33:00 -
[31]
ECMs are considered offensive systems like weapons because they have a negative effect on the target ship (in this case preventing it from locking anything).
Simply targeting and scanning a ship is not an offensive action because it has no negative effect on the target ship (you not liking it is not a negative effect on your ship).
It's also pretty obvious that classing an ECM as non offensive in a game mechanic sense creates a significant loophole that would be exploited in Empire wars (i.e. neutrals target jamming you when fighting a war target).
The game mechanics already exist in Eve for moving high value goods around safely, it's up to you (the player) to decide between a balance between convenience and safety and take the appropriate steps.
Besides if the person scanning you does decide to aggress you're now free to use your ECM on them.
|
Doddy
The Executives IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 10:42:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Atticus Fynch If someone targets you, you should be able to use any anti-target measures without having to contend with Concord.
You shouldn't have to wait until you are fired upon.
No, not really, why shouldn't people have the right to target anyone they like? There is most likely a nuke targetted at my flat right now . Scanning and targetting are not the same thing by a long shot.
|
Persephone Asphodel
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 11:08:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Atticus Fynch If someone targets you, you should be able to use any anti-target measures without having to contend with Concord.
You shouldn't have to wait until you are fired upon.
Why should this be?
Theres no should about it mate.
I would like to be able to log in without being detected but I don't say it SHOULD BE that way just because I want it.
|
Some Advisor
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 11:10:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Atticus Fynch I found out the hard way that 0.5 is not really "high-sec."
Takes Concord 20 secs to show up and in the process I was ganked. Lost 175 mill in cargo and collateral.
so i guess that Originally by: Atticus Fynch OK, so Im in 0.5 space and some clown scans my cargo hoping to suicide me.
was succesfully suicide ganking you after all. Now eve is unfair :( ^^
|
Shitz
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 11:23:00 -
[35]
if you have something big and valuable you should use a freighter, if you have something small and valuable use a blockade runner.
if you are carrying anything more valuable than T1 rubbish or veldspar in a indy then you are bound to die.
Although they should take insurance away from people killed by concord. i can't believe the police would destroy your ship for piracy, then a insurance company would compensate you for the loss!
|
Riesia
THE UNKNOWN KNOWN THE-FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 13:25:00 -
[36]
To the OP, then you are saying its OK for me to fly in to your next mission and keep my ECM on you permajamming you so that you cannot fire at the NPCs and you also cannot fire back at me since you want jamming to be no an offensive action?
When you can reply to that, then you may have a clue why its not a good idea. |
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 13:26:00 -
[37]
Another ****ty thread by a ****ty OP. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
Bombuhr
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 13:31:00 -
[38]
Err?!
Are you saying that there's no difference if I look at you and what you are wearing as to running up to a person and tie up his arms and legs?
Perhaps it's a poor comparison, but it's effectively the very same. |
Rashmika Clavain
Gallente Shadows Of The Federation
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 13:47:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Mashie Saldana Don't fly AFK using the autopilot and they won't have time to scan you.
I think the OP needs a sanity check, however in response to teh above they've got loads of time to scan you on the out gate if you're in a T1 industrial. Removed. Please keep your EVE signature related to your EVE persona and not that of a real life politician. Navigator |
Washell Olivaw
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 13:57:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Atticus Fynch OK, so Im in 0.5 space and some clown scans my cargo hoping to suicide me.
I can not stop him from scanning me. I have to wait until he fires upon me before I can turn on my ECM jammers.
Currently, ECM jammers are considered the same as guns...if you turn it one, concord will kick your ass.
This does not seem balanced to me.
After your (between the lines) proposed change:
You'll be targeted and jammed, then cargo scanned. If they decide to attack, you don't even have the option of targeting them back.
Still seem unbalanced?
Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
|
|
Catherine Frasier
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 15:23:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Blane Xero Another ****ty thread by a ****ty OP.
And another content free ad hominem by you, are we keeping count of these things?
|
Drenan
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 15:34:00 -
[42]
Scanning cargo or fit-out should also be regarded as an offensive act.
|
Max Queso
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 15:48:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Drenan
Scanning cargo or fit-out should also be regarded as an offensive act.
It doesn't even sound offensive!
|
Hoo Is
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 16:42:00 -
[44]
High-Sec = your neighborhood. I look at you funny and can see through your semi-clear wal-mart bag... I just targeted and scanned your cargo. Do you have the right to pull out your gun and shoot me? No, but you can, and you can expect the donut inhalers to eventually get around and do something to you
Low-Sec = Wild-West, you can fire at me if you want, but you become a wanted man (Kill Rights)
Neull-Sec = Detroit... the rules are set by the locals... anything goes ---- a reply which adds nothing to a thread or results in a thread being bumped with no new discussion worthy content is considered spam and as such warrants a forum ban |
Jesslyn Daggererux
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 16:59:00 -
[45]
6/10
Originally by: CCP Fallout
Hola, esta forum es ingles solamente.
This forum is English only. Welcome to my lock. Now please, zip your pants. I don't need a show.
|
Cadde
Gallente FireworX
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 17:22:00 -
[46]
If it hasn't been mentioned in this thread before then good... Otherwise, I'll just repeat it as i couldn't be bothered to read.
I can agree to a passive lockbreaker that breaks the locks to YOUR ship only. But that brings a lot of balancing issues with it. What is the impact in PvP? Also, if someone had time to target your ship, they will most likely have time to scan your stuff before you even notice they had.
Further more, good pirates use passive lock systems to scan ships for mods and cargo. You'll never know if they scanned you! The cargo scanner makes a distinct sound. But if you can't see who locked who and scanned what you'll never know for sure. JUST ASSUME, that as soon as you undock with something in cargo worth more than it takes to killing your ship. You are a target of interest!
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
Daleth Prem
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 18:40:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Celeritas 5k
Originally by: Atticus Fynch
If I were in a battlefield and some sniper was eyeballing me...YES, I would pluck his eyes out.
EVE is a battlefield...not a bus ride.
What's all this talk about a sni
dont you seem him? he is near the
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 18:46:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Atticus Fynch OK, so Im in 0.5 space and some clown scans my cargo hoping to suicide me.
I can not stop him from scanning me. I have to wait until he fires upon me before I can turn on my ECM jammers.
Currently, ECM jammers are considered the same as guns...if you turn it one, concord will kick your ass.
This does not seem balanced to me.
I find all ECM to be highly offensive. I get offended every time someone jams me. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Amanda Mor
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 19:36:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Catherine Frasier
Originally by: Blane Xero Another ****ty thread by a ****ty OP.
And another content free ad hominem by you, are we keeping count of these things?
I know "ad hominem" is the current trendy word being used to make you sound smart, but you should at least use it in the right context instead of just throwing it about whenever you don't like someone.
However, it certainly was a content free post (which makes it just like 75% of internet forum posts)...
|
Catherine Frasier
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 19:48:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Amanda Mor I know "ad hominem" is the current trendy word being used to make you sound smart, but you should at least use it in the right context instead of just throwing it about whenever you don't like someone.
Ad hominem refers to making your response against and/or about the individual rather than addressing a response to the individual's argument. You know; like saying "it was another ****ty post by a ****ty poster" without actually saying anything about the content of the post itself or the issue it raised. Another good example would be to suggest that someone used a particular phrase to be "trendy" or in an attempt to "look smart", thereby attacking the individual's (supposed) motives rather that what they actually said, especially so when the phrase in question is both correct and cogent.
|
|
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 19:50:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Catherine Frasier
Originally by: Amanda Mor I know "ad hominem" is the current trendy word being used to make you sound smart, but you should at least use it in the right context instead of just throwing it about whenever you don't like someone.
Ad hominem refers to making your response against and/or about the individual rather than addressing a response to the individual's argument. You know; like saying "it was another ****ty post by a ****ty poster" without actually saying anything about the content of the post itself or the issue it raised. Another good example would be to suggest that someone used a particular phrase to be "trendy" or in an attempt to "look smart", thereby attacking the individual's (supposed) motives rather that what they actually said, especially so when the phrase in question is both correct and cogent.
I like you.
(There that should help balance things out. ) -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 20:06:00 -
[52]
can't wait to see rooks sitting in asteroid belts in high sec griefing miners, as if the nano bouncing of macks/hulks wasn't already funtimes enough
|
Amanda Mor
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 20:37:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Catherine Frasier
Originally by: Amanda Mor I know "ad hominem" is the current trendy word being used to make you sound smart, but you should at least use it in the right context instead of just throwing it about whenever you don't like someone.
Ad hominem refers to making your response against and/or about the individual rather than addressing a response to the individual's argument. You know; like saying "it was another ****ty post by a ****ty poster" without actually saying anything about the content of the post itself or the issue it raised. Another good example would be to suggest that someone used a particular phrase to be "trendy" or in an attempt to "look smart", thereby attacking the individual's (supposed) motives rather that what they actually said, especially so when the phrase in question is both correct and cogent.
You're really stretching here. An actual ad hominem attack would be something like:
"You're idea sucks because you're just a dirty carebear!" ie he's not attacking the idea on it's merits, he's attacking the person who came up with the idea.
What Blane said was the OP was a ****ty poster who made a ****ty post. He didn't say the idea was stupid because the poster is stupid (which would then qualify it as ad hominem). There's a fine line, and maybe I'm splitting hairs, but meh...
Anyway, to add some content (and not be accused of engaging in ad hominem tactics): ECM should remain an aggressive act for the reasons already listed; maybe there should be a counter-module to ship scanning? A cargohold cloak or something? Who cares really, I don't haul expensive **** around...
|
Manu Hermanus
FaDoyToy
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 20:39:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Atticus Fynch I found out the hard way that 0.5 is not really "high-sec."
Takes Concord 20 secs to show up and in the process I was ganked. Lost 175 mill in cargo and collateral.
Tell me again why ECM jammers are bad unless fired upon?
concord showed up, therefor it was highsec.
ps: you got mugged, something that can happen in big cities where it is also "safe" You're posting again!? Has it really been 5 mins?
|
Incredulity
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 20:52:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Incredulity on 09/10/2009 20:52:40
Originally by: Daleth Prem
Originally by: Celeritas 5k
What's all this talk about a sni
dont you seem him? he is near the
He can't get me, I'm wearing a h |
Catherine Frasier
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 21:15:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Amanda Mor I'm splitting hairs
Agreed. |
Zeredek
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 18:40:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Incredulity Edited by: Incredulity on 09/10/2009 20:52:40
Originally by: Daleth Prem
Originally by: Celeritas 5k
What's all this talk about a sni
dont you seem him? he is near the
He can't get me, I'm wearing a h
Why do people stop talking in the middle of their sente
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 18:46:00 -
[58]
Edited by: lollerwaffle on 10/10/2009 18:46:54
Originally by: Zeredek
Originally by: Incredulity Edited by: Incredulity on 09/10/2009 20:52:40
Originally by: Daleth Prem
Originally by: Celeritas 5k
What's all this talk about a sni
dont you seem him? he is near the
He can't get me, I'm wearing a h
Why do people stop talking in the middle of their sente
I don't kn
|
Caelum Mortuos
Gallente Zero G Research and Development
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 18:55:00 -
[59]
Atticus wasn't interested in guns. Atticus said to the pvper, "I'd rather you shot at other pvpers in 0.0, but I know you'll go after carebears. Shoot all the pvpers you want, if you can hit 'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a carebear."
That was the only time I ever hear Atticus say it was a sin to do something, and I asked my mate about it about it. "Atticus' right," she said. "Carebears don't do one thing but make modules for us to enjoy. They don't crap in your wheatos, don't live in your systems, they don't do one thing but build modules and ships for us. That's why it's a sin to kill a carebear."
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 18:58:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Caelum Mortuos Atticus wasn't interested in guns. Atticus said to the pvper, "I'd rather you shot at other pvpers in 0.0, but I know you'll go after carebears. Shoot all the pvpers you want, if you can hit 'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a carebear."
That was the only time I ever hear Atticus say it was a sin to do something, and I asked my mate about it about it. "Atticus' right," she said. "Carebears don't do one thing but make modules for us to enjoy. They don't crap in your wheatos, don't live in your systems, they don't do one thing but build modules and ships for us. That's why it's a sin to kill a carebear."
Erm, that was a bit random. Made me lol th
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |