Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Randomness888
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:06:00 -
[1]
Simple case, some guy is going around a trading hub (let's say Jita) in a nano fitted shield buffered battleship with plenty of smartbombs in his highslots, getting chased around constantly by concord is not discouraging him in the least.
His ship is fully insured so it costs him peanuts to do this, concord don't pod, and he's only doing it for whatever goes for satisfaction in this line of work.
He has an alt in fleet that he warps to so that he can smartbomb, escape with his pod and the alt loots whatever's left.
My suggestion would be revoking insurance rights to people with -10 standings, I don't get how someone who's an enemy to every legitimate player in the game and (if you want to stay in character) an enemy of concord and "the state" can still receive insurance services.
Let the flaming begin.
|
Roland Deschaines
Minmatar Esquires Of Questionable Intention
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:14:00 -
[2]
Simple, insurance is not about roleplay, it's about making PvP more viable for everybody including -10 pilots.
-- Monsieur Rolly
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:25:00 -
[3]
Edited by: De''Veldrin on 13/10/2009 18:27:58 First, let's clarify what you're actually trying to accomplish:
Do you want to get rid of people smartbombing the exit lane on Jita 4-4? Do you want to revoke insurance for certain players/activities?
Pick a proposal and discuss it. You may not be any more successful, but you might actually get some debate on the topic.
Originally by: Roland Deschaines Simple, insurance is not about roleplay, it's about making PvP more viable for everybody including -10 pilots.
That being the case, why can't I insure the contents of my freighter? I mean that would make PvP more viable to me and other people who are subject to being ganked while flying slow lumbering beasts of burden. At that point I could adopt the same "whatever" attitude that the gankers have, because my actual losses will be as minimal as theirs. --Vel
In the world of emoticons, I was colon capital d. |
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:29:00 -
[4]
Last time suicide ganking was 'balanced' CCP had the choice:
Buff Concord Response times Remove Insurance for Concorded ships.
They chose the former.
Do you think if insurance is removed it will discourage the act? Not likely. Those who gank for profit may have to tighten their belts a bit and go after higher value targets or work together in smaller, cheaper ships. As for those who do it for fun. Well, to purchase and fit enough destroyers to take out a hulk costs around 5.5 mil (if that). That's pocket change even without insurance.
TL;DR If you're carrying anything valuable then tank your ship, don't fly AFK and get used to the fact that it's very cold in space.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:34:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
TL;DR If you're undocking then tank your ship, don't fly AFK and get used to the fact that it's very cold in space.
Why do you keep posting stuff I agree with. It makes it very, very hard to continue to think you're an *******.
I did make one minor correction to your post though. --Vel
In the world of emoticons, I was colon capital d. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:40:00 -
[6]
I am pretty sure smart bombing Jita 4-4 is a bannable offence just as baiting/griefing in beginner systems is. Petition anyone you find doing it.
Penalising -10's is hardly a solution to something that is completely unrelated to piracy.
Something that might be worth adding is removal of insurance if mail has a Concord NPC on it (hs to be NPC, not sentry!).
Highsec suicide squads have zero risk for what can be huge rewards ..
|
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:41:00 -
[7]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
TL;DR If you're undocking then tank your ship, don't fly AFK and get used to the fact that it's very cold in space.
Why do you keep posting stuff I agree with. It makes it very, very hard to continue to think you're an *******.
I did make one minor correction to your post though.
Thanks dear. You're not as much of a tit as I used to think either.
|
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:49:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida I am pretty sure smart bombing Jita 4-4 is a bannable offence just as baiting/griefing in beginner systems is. Petition anyone you find doing it.
Penalising -10's is hardly a solution to something that is completely unrelated to piracy.
Something that might be worth adding is removal of insurance if mail has a Concord NPC on it (hs to be NPC, not sentry!).
Highsec suicide squads have zero risk for what can be huge rewards ..
Protip: Due to the station size you cannot smartbomb at Jita 4-4. I do believe it is possible at the main stations in Amarr, Rens and Dodixie (or at least one or two of those). The myth of it being a bannable offense I believe comes from either Zombie Corp's blockade of Yulai or Miz Cenuij's massacre in Jita icebelts/stargates. Both of whom ceased I believe after a warning from GMs (and only because they were spawning so many concord it was lagging out the nodes).
Hisec 'suicide squads' risk everything. They risk sitting there for hours and not finding a target. They risk their target having a sufficient tank on his vessel. They risk getting a terrible drop (I've had upwards of one bil go up in smoke with only a patheticly small drop). As money making activities go it is probably on a par (on average) with ratting in a GOOD 0.0 system or cruising through level 4s with a tricked out marauder.
Regardless. It is still relatively uncommon. It's only because those that get ganked are hysterical morons who feel that their important internet pixels shouldn't have been taken from them by ebil piwates in 'safer' space. If these things were that important to you then why didn't you protect them better yo.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 18:55:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
TL;DR If you're undocking then tank your ship, don't fly AFK and get used to the fact that it's very cold in space.
Why do you keep posting stuff I agree with. It makes it very, very hard to continue to think you're an *******.
I did make one minor correction to your post though.
Thanks dear. You're not as much of a tit as I used to think either.
What can I say, I was rather irritated with you, and I never learned to bite my tongue. I got over it, I think. --Vel
In the world of emoticons, I was colon capital d. |
Randomness888
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 19:39:00 -
[10]
Originally by: De'Veldrin Edited by: De''Veldrin on 13/10/2009 18:27:58 First, let's clarify what you're actually trying to accomplish:
Do you want to get rid of people smartbombing the exit lane on Jita 4-4? Do you want to revoke insurance for certain players/activities?
Pick a proposal and discuss it. You may not be any more successful, but you might actually get some debate on the topic.
Trying to promote discussion on an issue that CCP is failing to address, that's all.
Mainly bringing up the issue itself rather than a catchall answer to the problem. Regardless, the idea that someone who gets attacked by Concord not receiving their insurance payout is a great idea in my opinion and I'd totally support that.
|
|
Awesome Possum
Imperium Signal Corps
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 20:05:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
TL;DR If you're undocking then tank your ship, don't fly AFK and get used to the fact that it's very cold in space.
Why do you keep posting stuff I agree with. It makes it very, very hard to continue to think you're an *******.
I did make one minor correction to your post though.
Thanks dear. You're not as much of a tit as I used to think either.
Can I come to the wedding?
oh.. not supported! ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 20:23:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Randomness888
Originally by: De'Veldrin Edited by: De''Veldrin on 13/10/2009 18:27:58 First, let's clarify what you're actually trying to accomplish:
Do you want to get rid of people smartbombing the exit lane on Jita 4-4? Do you want to revoke insurance for certain players/activities?
Pick a proposal and discuss it. You may not be any more successful, but you might actually get some debate on the topic.
Trying to promote discussion on an issue that CCP is failing to address, that's all.
Mainly bringing up the issue itself rather than a catchall answer to the problem. Regardless, the idea that someone who gets attacked by Concord not receiving their insurance payout is a great idea in my opinion and I'd totally support that.
They are not failing to address anything. In my time playing Eve Concord have had 3 major buffs. The only issue is that you're not willing to take the steps required to protect your investments.
|
Koragoni SkyKnight
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 21:27:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
They are not failing to address anything. In my time playing Eve Concord have had 3 major buffs. The only issue is that you're not willing to take the steps required to protect your investments.
Ditto to this, if you're that worried about the contents of your freighter, get a corp mate to fly by you in an interceptor with dual webs. That freighter will be in warp before you can blink, and never sit in a gankable position long enough to be a target.
I don't want pirates to have it easy, but I also don't want carebears to think it's ok to just wander the cosmos risk free. Semi-trucks with valuable cargo are hijacked all the time in the real world. Get with it, life isn't safe wear a helmet!
|
Randomness888
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 22:24:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Koragoni SkyKnight
Ditto to this, if you're that worried about the contents of your freighter, get a corp mate to fly by you in an interceptor with dual webs. That freighter will be in warp before you can blink, and never sit in a gankable position long enough to be a target.
I don't want pirates to have it easy, but I also don't want carebears to think it's ok to just wander the cosmos risk free. Semi-trucks with valuable cargo are hijacked all the time in the real world. Get with it, life isn't safe wear a helmet!
It wasn't a freighter that got popped, it was a t2 frigate and a pod. I think we're agreeing on some things and disagreeing with others though. We both agree to some extent that we want other people to experience the game differently.
My position is that I would prefer not to have people who exploit weaknesses in the insurance and clone system to enjoy their game at the expense of others.
Your position is that you would prefer people who don't exploit the game at the expense of griefing others to suffer the exploits of others. I think it's safe to assume that we should agree to disagree on what's probably a years old dispute between people who view success in this game differently.
Comparing a suicide bomber to a carjacker is kinda lame though.
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 23:19:00 -
[15]
Quote: Simple case, some guy is going around a trading hub (let's say Jita) in a nano fitted shield buffered battleship with plenty of smartbombs in his highslots, getting chased around constantly by concord is not discouraging him in the least
I can see how that is some pretty bad griefing. Concord are after him for absolutely no reason and are going to kill him for no profit at all.
Quote: His ship is fully insured so it costs him peanuts to do this, concord don't pod, and he's only doing it for whatever goes for satisfaction in this line of work.
That's a good thing. Those bastard concord are out of control. At least when concord is griefing... they arent doing that much damage.
Quote: He has an alt in fleet that he warps to so that he can smartbomb, escape with his pod and the alt loots whatever's left.
Damn concord always thinking of the easy cheats. They just show up from nowhere and start shooting. It's terrible.
Quote: My suggestion would be revoking insurance rights to people with -10 standings, I don't get how someone who's an enemy to every legitimate player in the game and (if you want to stay in character) an enemy of concord and "the state" can still receive insurance services.
What does that have to do with concord griefing? ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 23:40:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Randomness888
Originally by: Koragoni SkyKnight
Ditto to this, if you're that worried about the contents of your freighter, get a corp mate to fly by you in an interceptor with dual webs. That freighter will be in warp before you can blink, and never sit in a gankable position long enough to be a target.
I don't want pirates to have it easy, but I also don't want carebears to think it's ok to just wander the cosmos risk free. Semi-trucks with valuable cargo are hijacked all the time in the real world. Get with it, life isn't safe wear a helmet!
It wasn't a freighter that got popped, it was a t2 frigate and a pod. I think we're agreeing on some things and disagreeing with others though. We both agree to some extent that we want other people to experience the game differently.
My position is that I would prefer not to have people who exploit weaknesses in the insurance and clone system to enjoy their game at the expense of others.
Your position is that you would prefer people who don't exploit the game at the expense of griefing others to suffer the exploits of others. I think it's safe to assume that we should agree to disagree on what's probably a years old dispute between people who view success in this game differently.
Comparing a suicide bomber to a carjacker is kinda lame though.
If you do not give these people the opportunity to 'exploit the game at the expense of others' then they won't. I'm assuming you were carrying some valuable cargo.
|
Randomness888
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 01:45:00 -
[17]
@Larkonis TrassIer
Cargobay was empty except for some t1 missiles, I'm genuinely not complaining about piracy, just griefing.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre REIGN Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 05:17:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Randomness888 Simple case, some guy is going around a trading hub (let's say Jita) in a nano fitted shield buffered battleship with plenty of smartbombs in his highslots, [bold]getting chased around constantly by concord is not discouraging him in the least[/bold].
His ship is fully insured so it costs him peanuts to do this, concord don't pod, and he's only doing it for whatever goes for satisfaction in this line of work.
He has an alt in fleet that he warps to so that he can smartbomb, escape with his pod and the alt loots whatever's left.
My suggestion would be revoking insurance rights to people with -10 standings, I don't get how someone who's an enemy to every legitimate player in the game and (if you want to stay in character) an enemy of concord and "the state" can still receive insurance services.
Let the flaming begin.
Hope you meant Faction Police... CONCORD don't chase... they "show up and kick yo ass on the spot"
As for the main issue your obviously implying... I think restricting it to -10 people is not enough.
Revoke insurance for all instances of criminal actions in any cases and you may dent it.
But as its been pointed out... this doesn't stop them... just makes it harder. So I can't really support this due to lack of foresight... but yes IT IS a problem none-the-less. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
Jon Engel
Intaki Liberation Front
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 06:47:00 -
[19]
Originally by: De'Veldrin Edited by: De''Veldrin on 13/10/2009 18:27:58 First, let's clarify what you're actually trying to accomplish:
Do you want to get rid of people smartbombing the exit lane on Jita 4-4? Do you want to revoke insurance for certain players/activities?
Pick a proposal and discuss it. You may not be any more successful, but you might actually get some debate on the topic.
Originally by: Roland Deschaines Simple, insurance is not about roleplay, it's about making PvP more viable for everybody including -10 pilots.
That being the case, why can't I insure the contents of my freighter? I mean that would make PvP more viable to me and other people who are subject to being ganked while flying slow lumbering beasts of burden. At that point I could adopt the same "whatever" attitude that the gankers have, because my actual losses will be as minimal as theirs.
Who pvps in a freighter? I thought freighters where meant to have an escort or something. Anyyhow, Get a friend with a logistics ship to rep your shields and move on.
You can not do everything solo in eve and expect to be safe all the time.
|
Rico Minali
Gallente Sons Of 0din Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 10:53:00 -
[20]
I do not supportth eops post as people need to insure their ships to pvp, that includes -10 people.
What I believe SHOULD happen is that if your ship is killed by concord or the police, THEN your insurance is invalidated... Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 12:18:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Jon Engel
Who pvps in a freighter? I thought freighters where meant to have an escort or something. Anyyhow, Get a friend with a logistics ship to rep your shields and move on.
You can not do everything solo in eve and expect to be safe all the time.
You're familiar with the concept of non-consensual PvP, right? I mean no one PvP's in a freighter by choice. And the shield repping idea is great, unless they bring enough alpha to the party to make it useless.
My point is, if the purpose of insurance is to make PvP more viable, then let's make it actually do that. Let me insure my cargos, so that I can care as little about what happens to my ship as you care what happens to yours. --Vel
In the world of emoticons, I was colon capital d. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 13:48:00 -
[22]
Honestly i do not see high-sec suicide gankers as a big problem. I think they are well withing the cage, attacking only the targets that has disproportional amount of isk carried vs there tank. Nothing stops you from putting 2-4 meidum shield extenders on your industrial ship, and warp core stabs. Everyone can do that. If you are carrying a blueprint, use a fast ship or a tanked ship. That will save you from vast majority of suicide gankers. Fix Destroyers |
Efrim Black
Gallente Guardians of Misr
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 01:41:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Jason Edwards
What does that have to do with concord griefing?
Your post actually made me laugh out loud jason. 5 out of 5 stars.
|
Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 11:06:00 -
[24]
I wonder if there is room for a mechanic where pilot sec status vrs system sec status modifies insurance payout. So a lower sec pilot in higher sec system gets less %....
Opens up loopholes surely..... Maybe some math that'd work.....
|
RedSplat
Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 11:10:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Dr BattleSmith I wonder if there is room for a mechanic where pilot sec status vrs system sec status modifies insurance payout. So a lower sec pilot in higher sec system gets less %....
Opens up loopholes surely..... Maybe some math that'd work.....
So a + sec status player that loses a ship anywhere but highsec gets a reduced payout as well?
'cause intentionally putting your ship in risky situations surely necessitates some form of compensation to the insurer given the lack of terms on taking out the insurance right?
Or is this idea of your just a bitter, childish knee jerk response to the idea of 'griefers'?
Dont answer that, I'm teasing
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Snava
|
Posted - 2009.10.27 05:24:00 -
[26]
How about the following:
Create bribery contracts. When applied to a targeted player, security forces will look the other way and not provide any security if the targeted player is attacked. The applied contract will last for 1 hour of play time. The number of bribery contracts created each day is limited to some percentage of total hours played by all players (say 1% or .1%). Contracts could be sold in all major trading hubs. Targeted players will appear red or some other special color to indicate their status. Contracts can stack, making it near impossible to travel without the risk of being shot down... effectively sending them to "jail" of their currently docked station.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2009.10.27 19:56:00 -
[27]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
That being the case, why can't I insure the contents of my freighter? I mean that would make PvP more viable to me and other people who are subject to being ganked while flying slow lumbering beasts of burden. At that point I could adopt the same "whatever" attitude that the gankers have, because my actual losses will be as minimal as theirs.
Well, that is the real life solution, though it would be way too abusable in EVE since the goods (or some percent of them) are still in play, unlike the current insurance system where the destroyed ship has been removed thus you get a net ISK sink. If cargo was going to be insured it would have to be done in a way that on average more ISK leaves the economy from the process then enters it.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.10.27 20:11:00 -
[28]
Edited by: De''Veldrin on 27/10/2009 20:13:07
Originally by: Nekopyat
Originally by: De'Veldrin
That being the case, why can't I insure the contents of my freighter? I mean that would make PvP more viable to me and other people who are subject to being ganked while flying slow lumbering beasts of burden. At that point I could adopt the same "whatever" attitude that the gankers have, because my actual losses will be as minimal as theirs.
Well, that is the real life solution, though it would be way too abusable in EVE since the goods (or some percent of them) are still in play, unlike the current insurance system where the destroyed ship has been removed thus you get a net ISK sink. If cargo was going to be insured it would have to be done in a way that on average more ISK leaves the economy from the process then enters it.
The easier fix is stop paying insurance for acts defiend by the game mechanics as criminal. IOW, if CONCORD shows up and knocks your **** in the dirt, you lose your insurance on the spot. This has nothing to do with making PvP more viable. If you want to PvP you can fly your happy ass out to Lowsec or null sec, or war dec someone and shoot them to hell and back without CONCORD even pausing in their consumption of space doughnuts.
Besides, think of all the whine tears from mission runners duped into CONCORDing themselves - now they've lost their ship - and their ISK. --Vel
In the world of emoticons, I was colon capital d. |
Izo Alabaster
Friendly Neighbourhood Extortion Company
|
Posted - 2009.10.29 05:40:00 -
[29]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
TL;DR If you're undocking then tank your ship, don't fly AFK and get used to the fact that it's very cold in space.
Why do you keep posting stuff I agree with. It makes it very, very hard to continue to think you're an *******.
I did make one minor correction to your post though.
No kidding! All the more tragic that there was that conspiracy against him to get him removed from office!
Reinstate Larkonis!!!
|
Iexo Peoa
|
Posted - 2009.10.29 10:13:00 -
[30]
I think some of you are missing the point. This isn't low-sec or 0.0, it's high-sec, and not just any high-sec, it's Jita. It'd be the equivalent of Somali pirates raiding a ship in the middle of New York Harbor, blowing it up and making off with half the cargo. It shouldn't happen.
Unfortunately, it's becoming increasinly common, as evidenced by the General Freight Containers that can now be seen floating next to 15-25% of high-sec stargates in Eve, 50% in some areas.
I believe this problem could be dented by revoking insurance on Concorded ships, however this wouldn't be much of a dent, as the potential payout still far outweighs the losses pirates could suffer. A delay in smartbombs could be considered that would give Concord a chance to kill the offending parties with less damage being incurred, but this could negatively effect other aspects of gameplay, since, as difficult as it may be to conceive, smartbombs CAN have a legitimate use. Alternatively, Concord could be made to react more quickly and harshly to smartbombs than other weapons, and/or, freighters can be given some low and medium slots, with which they could have the option of strenthening their defenses against attack.
Either way, this is a problem that needs to be addressed. It severely hinders commerce, exploits a loophole in game mechanics, makes little sense to canon, and litters the spacelanes with unsightly general freight containers.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |