|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
41
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 18:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
the only use for a cargo scanner in high-sec is to scan ships to see if what their carrying is worth ganking them for it aka piracy. Its time to put the risk vs reward back into ganking, because the formula for costs for ganking a freighter has long been worked out, removing the ability to use cargo scanners in highsec would then force the jita gankers for example to have to take the RISK that said freighter thats just jumped through the gate might or might not be carrying anything or even enough to cover the costs of the ships and mods used to gank said freighter, which also brings me to the next point.
WHY do faction navys and concord tolerate KNOWN gankers sitting on gates? IRL if the police saw a group of people sat outside a bank in a car and their all known and have records for violent armed robberys of banks they'd take action to remove said bank robbers, so again WHY do faction navys and concord allow known gankers to sit on gates with impunity doing nothing to move them on etc? :)
|

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
41
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 18:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Morganta wrote:I don't see this as a valid solution to your problem
you could try any number of things people do to make it harder on the scanner like not APing around with expensive cargo
while you try and level the risk playing field you actually lessen your risk at the expense of the other player
what problem? I dont fly a freighter so I dont have a problem lol, and changing cargo scanners to NOT be usable in HS means the gankers have to take the risk the freighter they gank might not have anything or enough to cover their losses as apposed to the almost gurrentied payout from using a cargo scanner, locating a freighter carrying not only enough to cover their losses but also make them a profit.
|

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
41
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 18:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote:Blastcaps Madullier wrote: WHY do faction navys and concord tolerate KNOWN gankers sitting on gates? IRL if the police saw a group of people sat outside a bank in a car and their all known and have records for violent armed robberys of banks they'd take action to remove said bank robbers, so again WHY do faction navys and concord allow known gankers to sit on gates with impunity doing nothing to move them on etc? :)
Really? I've never seen police just take down people for sitting somewhere. I mean if that were the case I would never be able to stop my vehicle as I'm a repeat parking ticket offender. But then again maybe you live in Russia or something where they just steal you off the streets. Just how often do the police sit around a bank taking photographs of people in cars, downloading the picture to their computer, and running a scan? Do they do this for other crimes as well? Maybe scope out the old man sitting at a bench in the park because he just may be a child molester rather than somebody who is just enjoying a day in the park. Better watch that person at the gas station who is buying a snickers because he could have made a counterfeit bill there. Whats it like living in Minority Report?
parking tickets are a minor offense, in comparrison to ARMED BANK ROBBERY, who said anything about police taking pics? a group of KNOWN bank robbers sat outside a bank in a car, you think the cops are NOT going to go investigate and move them on? :)
|

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
41
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 18:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kyle Ward wrote:What we need is an unscanable container that takes like 5000m3 and allows you to store 500m3. There, I won freighter balancing.
edit: Or bring back the double wrap!
actualy CCP are going to be re-balancing freighters, they've already said their re-balancing ALL ships in eve which means at some stage their going to get to freighters and jump freighters.
|

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
41
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 18:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote: And even if that were that case, you are still accusing people for a crime they haven't committed yet. What if they go and arrest those men only to find out that they were waiting on a non accused friend who wanted to make a quick withdrawal, before they head off to their 9-5 job in their now reformed lives. Well that just makes the cops look bad doesn't it?
1: who said they were commiting a crime? 2: who said about the police ARRESTING them? 3 I said MOVING THEM ON, which is what they WOULD do seeing a group of KNOWN bank robbers sat in a car outside a bank, one of them would probley poke their head inside the bank just to be sure nothing was happening inside. |

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
42
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 19:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote:I stand corrected, it turns out the OP already posted a link over in OOPE about a guy who is being moved by the cops for just standing around after committing a infraction. Thanks for the prime example OP 
if your refering to the one with the 2 links in thats something else, and well read the post, read the articles linked and go from there, thats off topic though.
|

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
43
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 20:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote:Blastcaps Madullier wrote:THE L0CK wrote:I stand corrected, it turns out the OP already posted a link over in OOPE about a guy who is being moved by the cops for just standing around after committing a infraction. Thanks for the prime example OP  if your refering to the one with the 2 links in thats something else, and well read the post, read the articles linked and go from there, thats off topic though. I did do all that hence why I said thanks for the prime example. It's good to have somebody actually provide proof when asked for it and I applaud you sir, not like the other 2 in the previous pages who couldn't bring their game on.
Hope you signed in the second link and ty if you did :)
reason not saying what that post in the out of pod section of the forums is, is because it's off topic here and secondly would like people to actualy read the article in the first link then goto the second link after they have done :) |

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
44
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 21:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote: Of course I didn't sign it, certainly not after you showed me the error of my ways. You were right, it helps to get these criminals off the streets. I feel sorry for that man, I heard that US inmates love the British accent.
fair enough end of the day that is upto you :)
|

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
51
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 16:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:Notsureiftroll  
troll nope, encouraging debate? yep :)
|

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp.
51
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 16:25:00 -
[10] - Quote
InternetSpaceship wrote:[quote=reamau] Quote:
I have no problem with "hi-sec isn't safe", but I'd like kill rights for a month on every pilot that looted my wreck as well.
You know, that actually does seem reasonable, aside from the looter part. Some day old rookie is just as likely to loot your wreck, and they'd have no idea why you were attacking them. It would make ganking more dangerous with longer lasting consequences. I'd even go so far as to agree that serial gankers should be attackable without provocation or CONCORD recourse in highsec systems.
and it's ideas like these which is WHY i originally posted this subject lol, it encourages debate and discussion and from that comes ideas :) |
|
|
|
|