EVE Search - Pod Kills

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Pod Kills

» 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)
Kaspersky	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:22:00 - [1] New idea here for podding people and NPC's When a player is podded (pod destroyed) a carcus is all that remains as the player is teleported into a new clone. However what remains of this carcus? Most people I know seem to collect them - sad buggers! But what if you could refine/reprocess the carcus to reclaim the dead persons implants? Now that would make PvP profitable. Or alternatively, instead of the actual implants dropping an implant of suitable value would drop depending upon the dead persons skill points. I.e. more skill points better implant. Would also like to see some carcus' being left behind from NPC's being killed. Lets face it - loot these days surely needs a big boost.
Kaspersky	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:22:00 - [2] New idea here for podding people and NPC's When a player is podded (pod destroyed) a carcus is all that remains as the player is teleported into a new clone. However what remains of this carcus? Most people I know seem to collect them - sad buggers! But what if you could refine/reprocess the carcus to reclaim the dead persons implants? Now that would make PvP profitable. Or alternatively, instead of the actual implants dropping an implant of suitable value would drop depending upon the dead persons skill points. I.e. more skill points better implant. Would also like to see some carcus' being left behind from NPC's being killed. Lets face it - loot these days surely needs a big boost.
Tuwile Naldai	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:36:00 - [3] There's already been talk of this, but I'm not sure if I can see it happening though. It would be a nice reward for killing someone.
Tuwile Naldai	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:36:00 - [4] There's already been talk of this, but I'm not sure if I can see it happening though. It would be a nice reward for killing someone.
Wrangler	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:48:00 - [5] Rewards for killing people? You should all go to jail, without collecting 200.. [Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators]
Wrangler	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:48:00 - [6] Rewards for killing people? You should all go to jail, without collecting 200.. [Read the Rules!] - [Email the Moderators]
Bhaal	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:56:00 - [7] There should be no rewards for pod killing, except for internal alliance & corp "kill boards" etc... In fact, CCP has to find a way to make it more harsh on those who do pod kill, who are not involevd in any wars with the one they murdered... We already know the bounty system is total crap, because it's too exploitable... Sec hits have proven to not be enough... A harsher penalty is required, quite the opposite from what the original poster proposed... ------------------------------------------------ "for piece sakes!"
Bhaal	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:56:00 - [8] There should be no rewards for pod killing, except for internal alliance & corp "kill boards" etc... In fact, CCP has to find a way to make it more harsh on those who do pod kill, who are not involevd in any wars with the one they murdered... We already know the bounty system is total crap, because it's too exploitable... Sec hits have proven to not be enough... A harsher penalty is required, quite the opposite from what the original poster proposed... ------------------------------------------------ "for piece sakes!"
Nom Anor	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:08:00 - [9] /me remembers seeing something about projected tech 3 production being in POS's only, and requiring Biomass as a component for some items.....
Nom Anor	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:08:00 - [10] /me remembers seeing something about projected tech 3 production being in POS's only, and requiring Biomass as a component for some items.....
Kaspersky	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:13:00 - [11] Well Bhaal, to give your argument some meat.... How about if for those players with sec status bad enough cordcord were to despatch a bounty hunter (NPC) which will slowly home in on a players location to kill and pod that person? This scenario would have players being chased around eve with NPCs following them from system to system. And if the player is cunning/clever enough he might just avoid the bounty hunter long enough for his sec status to return to 0.0 again. I.e. by using a cloak a player could avert detection and fly to another system. Would this be harsh enough?
Kaspersky	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:13:00 - [12] Well Bhaal, to give your argument some meat.... How about if for those players with sec status bad enough cordcord were to despatch a bounty hunter (NPC) which will slowly home in on a players location to kill and pod that person? This scenario would have players being chased around eve with NPCs following them from system to system. And if the player is cunning/clever enough he might just avoid the bounty hunter long enough for his sec status to return to 0.0 again. I.e. by using a cloak a player could avert detection and fly to another system. Would this be harsh enough?
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:15:00 - [13] Edited by: Discorporation on 20/12/2004 12:35:08 Originally by: Nom Anor /me remembers seeing something about projected tech 3 production being in POS's only, and requiring Biomass as a component for some items..... That was a joke by Hellmar, in a CSM. I thought it was funny, most people thought it was for real Anyway, Implants aren't supposed to be 'for everyone' (look up papasmurfs' comments on that). Refining 'em from corpses is not a good idea [Heterocephalus glaber]
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:15:00 - [14] Edited by: Discorporation on 20/12/2004 12:35:08 Originally by: Nom Anor /me remembers seeing something about projected tech 3 production being in POS's only, and requiring Biomass as a component for some items..... That was a joke by Hellmar, in a CSM. I thought it was funny, most people thought it was for real Anyway, Implants aren't supposed to be 'for everyone' (look up papasmurfs' comments on that). Refining 'em from corpses is not a good idea [Heterocephalus glaber]
DeerHunter GE	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:16:00 - [15] Arrgh, Wrangle, yes reward for killing them..why not? This would be an reason to kill for, not just for fun ... Don't ask "can i have your stuff" because i'll give it to everybody else than you!
DeerHunter GE	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:16:00 - [16] Arrgh, Wrangle, yes reward for killing them..why not? This would be an reason to kill for, not just for fun ... Don't ask "can i have your stuff" because i'll give it to everybody else than you!
Infinity Ziona	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:23:00 - [17] I don't know about rewards but I would very much like to get a destroyed items tally on implants similiar to what you see with destroyed items on ships. I wouldn't complain though if there was a small % chance that a person implants could survive Infinity Ziona
Infinity Ziona	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:23:00 - [18] I don't know about rewards but I would very much like to get a destroyed items tally on implants similiar to what you see with destroyed items on ships. I wouldn't complain though if there was a small % chance that a person implants could survive Infinity Ziona
Bhaal	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:31:00 - [19] Pod Killers should not get implants from killing, until CCP allows players to insure said implants... ------------------------------------------------ "for piece sakes!"
Bhaal	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:31:00 - [20] Pod Killers should not get implants from killing, until CCP allows players to insure said implants... ------------------------------------------------ "for piece sakes!"
Erai	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:46:00 - [21] Originally by: Bhaal Pod Killers should not get implants from killing, until CCP allows players to insure said implants... Uh oh... I can already smell the exploits if that would be implemented ------------------------------------------ My bio
Erai	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:46:00 - [22] Originally by: Bhaal Pod Killers should not get implants from killing, until CCP allows players to insure said implants... Uh oh... I can already smell the exploits if that would be implemented ------------------------------------------ My bio
Kardose Plathian	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:49:00 - [23] Originally by: Kaspersky Well Bhaal, to give your argument some meat.... How about if for those players with sec status bad enough cordcord were to despatch a bounty hunter (NPC) which will slowly home in on a players location to kill and pod that person? This scenario would have players being chased around eve with NPCs following them from system to system. And if the player is cunning/clever enough he might just avoid the bounty hunter long enough for his sec status to return to 0.0 again. I.e. by using a cloak a player could avert detection and fly to another system. Would this be harsh enough? That's a good idea but in order to prevent too much additional CPU overhead different levels of NCP hunters are sent out every for every 10 million they are worth. Some other things to think about would be the taxes fund the hunters and compensation is sent back to the victims on collection as a small %. Mean while in the real world..
Kardose Plathian	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:49:00 - [24] Originally by: Kaspersky Well Bhaal, to give your argument some meat.... How about if for those players with sec status bad enough cordcord were to despatch a bounty hunter (NPC) which will slowly home in on a players location to kill and pod that person? This scenario would have players being chased around eve with NPCs following them from system to system. And if the player is cunning/clever enough he might just avoid the bounty hunter long enough for his sec status to return to 0.0 again. I.e. by using a cloak a player could avert detection and fly to another system. Would this be harsh enough? That's a good idea but in order to prevent too much additional CPU overhead different levels of NCP hunters are sent out every for every 10 million they are worth. Some other things to think about would be the taxes fund the hunters and compensation is sent back to the victims on collection as a small %. Mean while in the real world..
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:51:00 - [25] Originally by: Erai Uh oh... I can already smell the exploits if that would be implemented Note that all items in eve are insured acording to their mineral value, not market value . Ever tried to refine an implant? They're worthless, in terms of minerals [Heterocephalus glaber]
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.20 12:51:00 - [26] Originally by: Erai Uh oh... I can already smell the exploits if that would be implemented Note that all items in eve are insured acording to their mineral value, not market value . Ever tried to refine an implant? They're worthless, in terms of minerals [Heterocephalus glaber]
Kaspersky	Posted - 2004.12.20 13:02:00 - [27] I think a more general insurance scheme would be worth while. What I mean is that a player should be able to insure any item he/she wants, ships, implants, modules, minerals... If these items are then destroyed then the player is compensated by getting those items back instead of receiving isk. Cant think of any exploit(s) that could come of this atm. It is important to realise that these items are only returned through insurance if the have been destoryed and not acquired by other players.
Kaspersky	Posted - 2004.12.20 13:02:00 - [28] I think a more general insurance scheme would be worth while. What I mean is that a player should be able to insure any item he/she wants, ships, implants, modules, minerals... If these items are then destroyed then the player is compensated by getting those items back instead of receiving isk. Cant think of any exploit(s) that could come of this atm. It is important to realise that these items are only returned through insurance if the have been destoryed and not acquired by other players.
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.20 13:04:00 - [29] Originally by: Kaspersky I think a more general insurance scheme would be worth while. What I mean is that a player should be able to insure any item he/she wants, ships, implants, modules, minerals... If these items are then destroyed then the player is compensated by getting those items back instead of receiving isk. Cant think of any exploit(s) that could come of this atm. It is important to realise that these items are only returned through insurance if the have been destoryed and not acquired by other players. Slightly unfair and more then unbalancing to replace destroyed modules. There's a reason they're destroyed, it's called "penalty of death". I can, to a certain degree, understand replacing the mineral value of destroyed items. Replacing the items themselves is not a good idea [Heterocephalus glaber]
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.20 13:04:00 - [30] Originally by: Kaspersky I think a more general insurance scheme would be worth while. What I mean is that a player should be able to insure any item he/she wants, ships, implants, modules, minerals... If these items are then destroyed then the player is compensated by getting those items back instead of receiving isk. Cant think of any exploit(s) that could come of this atm. It is important to realise that these items are only returned through insurance if the have been destoryed and not acquired by other players. Slightly unfair and more then unbalancing to replace destroyed modules. There's a reason they're destroyed, it's called "penalty of death". I can, to a certain degree, understand replacing the mineral value of destroyed items. Replacing the items themselves is not a good idea [Heterocephalus glaber]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.