Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 10:54:00 -
[1]
What's this I hear about the CSM wanting to make wrecks probeable?! I'm very much against that! Because it makes running missions in unprobeable ship meaningless! --
|
Serra Polaris
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 12:04:00 -
[2]
Well personally I don't think unprobeable ships should even be possible to begin with. As for the major benefits though, it makes salvaging an actual profession and probably helps reduce lag or something when all those wrecks are cleared.
|
Mr LaForge
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 12:56:00 -
[3]
Scanning down players is apparently too hard for some people who want the easy kill.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre Shadow Confederation
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 13:46:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Mr LaForge Scanning down players is apparently too hard for some people who want the easy kill.
Bull####!
Its way too damn easy... just go stop by dodoxie some time.
Wrecks do not need to be probable. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 13:56:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Originally by: Mr LaForge Scanning down players is apparently too hard for some people who want the easy kill.
Bull####!
Its way too damn easy... just go stop by dodoxie some time.
Wrecks do not need to be probable.
I believe the issue is not what happens in Dodixie or other hi-sec systems, but missioning and plexing in lo-sec and null.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Mr LaForge
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 14:04:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Originally by: Mr LaForge Scanning down players is apparently too hard for some people who want the easy kill.
Bull####!
Its way too damn easy... just go stop by dodoxie some time.
Wrecks do not need to be probable.
I was being sarcastic. I know its too easy.
|
Suitonia
Gallente Genos Occidere Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 14:49:00 -
[7]
Why not create a special wreck probe that can only be used in highsec then, sort of like the opposite restrictions to an interdiction sphere launcher. doesn't change people running in unprobable ships, allows people to clean up and salvage after other people in highsec fine (where the salvaging profession will primarily be used) ---
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 14:55:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Suitonia Why not create a special wreck probe that can only be used in highsec then, sort of like the opposite restrictions to an interdiction sphere launcher. doesn't change people running in unprobable ships, allows people to clean up and salvage after other people in highsec fine (where the salvaging profession will primarily be used)
Thats actually quite a fantastic idea.
I support this guy's post.
|
Bunyip
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 14:58:00 -
[9]
In a way, I support what the CSM is recommending - under one condition. If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission), then I have no problem with it. Otherwise, it would become WAY too easy to ninja in high-sec, and gank in low/null sec.
In general, though, I support your measure. Also remember to click the support checkbox if you do support it.
======== "The civilized man is rude, as laws protect him from recompense; the savage is not, for his actions can meet a bloody end." - Robert E. Howard |
Goose99
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 17:02:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Bunyip If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission)
^This
|
|
Shaera Taam
Minmatar Death Squad Broken Chains Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 18:48:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Bunyip If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission)
^This
perfect! __________________________________________________ Gravity: It's not just a good idea, it's the law!" --Adam Savage, Mythbusters |
Ranka Mei
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 19:09:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Bunyip If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission)
^This
Not all missions occur in deadspace, though.
Currently missions aren't probeable (except for DED complexes, with known locations). Via probeable wrecks people would get an easy backdoor to find missions (and the people in it), after all.
If wrecks must be made probeable per se, then make it simply so that all your wrecks become probeable only after you turn in the mission. That is more logical anyway, as, immersion wise, it's kinda strange you're able to probe inside a deadspace pocket anyway, from the outside (what with the existence of acc gates and all). --
|
Serra Polaris
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 21:56:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Bunyip If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission)
^This
Not all missions occur in deadspace, though.
Currently missions aren't probeable (except for DED complexes, with known locations). Via probeable wrecks people would get an easy backdoor to find missions (and the people in it), after all.
If wrecks must be made probeable per se, then make it simply so that all your wrecks become probeable only after you turn in the mission. That is more logical anyway, as, immersion wise, it's kinda strange you're able to probe inside a deadspace pocket anyway, from the outside (what with the existence of acc gates and all).
Why should unprobeable ships even exist though? Eve is all about risk vs reward, and there is currently no risk in flying an unprobeable t3 cruiser which can negate bubbles. Being able to probe wrecks brings nothing but benefits, and you can always pop your wrecks anyway and still have your supercloaked mission runner.
|
Seamus Donohue
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 22:31:00 -
[14]
SUPPORTED CONDITIONALLY. The condition is critical.
Originally by: Bunyip In a way, I support what the CSM is recommending - under one condition. If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission), then I have no problem with it. Otherwise, it would become WAY too easy to ninja in high-sec, and gank in low/null sec.
In general, though, I support your measure. Also remember to click the support checkbox if you do support it.
As long as wrecks are not probable in a deadspace or within 1 million kilometers of a mission's warpin point, I will support a wreck-scanning probe.
No "currently active mission" immunity, no support. __________________________________________________ Survivor of Teskanen, fan of John Rourke. |
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 22:45:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Serra Polaris
Why should unprobeable ships even exist though? Eve is all about risk vs reward, and there is currently no risk in flying an unprobeable t3 cruiser which can negate bubbles.
EVE is not just about risk vs. reward. It's also about fitting choices. If someone is willing to gimp his or her ship with 3-4 mods to make it unprobeable, thus not leaving room for other mods in their stead, then I say that's a perfectly valid choice.
Also, in 'attacker' vs. 'defender,' often a lot of people seem to side with the attacker. Which is to say, whenever someone finds a way to defend himself (from ECM, from probing, from being jammed, whatever), there's always folks who immediately look upon said successful defence as some sort of exploit, or dishonest advantage. Why is that? You have tools to scan people down, I have tools to defend myself from that (when fitted accordingly). If I don't fit those mods, you can find me. If I do fit those mods, you can't. I say that's good balance. And making wrecks probeable, while the missioner is still in mission, only introduces a great disturbance in the Force.
Quote:
Being able to probe wrecks brings nothing but benefits, and you can always pop your wrecks anyway and still have your supercloaked mission runner.
Not really. It only takes a fraction of a second to probe down a wreck of mine (if someone just happens to be scanning in that area); and then you're humped.
Also, flying unprobable ships is 'working as intended.' We have Talon implants to increase our gravimetric strength, for instance. They serve no other purpose than to help your ship become unprobeable.
And, like I said, introducing probeable wrecks, to circumvent a valid game mechanic to stay unseen, is un-balanced. After the mission has been turned in, I'm okay with wrecks being FFA, though. --
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 23:07:00 -
[16]
Author does have a point. However, in my opinion, importance of advancing salvager proffesion exceeds the importance of unprobable ships by a large margin
|
Corina Jarr
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 23:16:00 -
[17]
I'm stuck on this. As a salvager, I would love this. But there are many ways it can be abused...
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 00:46:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Also, flying unprobable ships is 'working as intended.' We have Talon implants to increase our gravimetric strength, for instance. They serve no other purpose than to help your ship become unprobeable.
Uhm, I think their actual purpose is to harden your ship against ECM...
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 01:29:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Omara Otawan
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Also, flying unprobable ships is 'working as intended.' We have Talon implants to increase our gravimetric strength, for instance. They serve no other purpose than to help your ship become unprobeable.
Uhm, I think their actual purpose is to harden your ship against ECM...
They're like hull rep, they fail for their intended purpose.
|
Natalia Kovac
Minmatar Vivicide
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 01:31:00 -
[20]
Meh, there's ways around it such as looting and salavaging your wrecks as you go.
|
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 01:37:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Omara Otawan
Uhm, I think their actual purpose is to harden your ship against ECM...
They're like hull rep, they fail for their intended purpose.
Then you are doing something wrong.
Pretty much the best investments I've ever made, got the racial sets on all my characters and it makes those falcon pilots cry bitter tears.
Especially love my falcon killer Vagabond, gets them every single time
|
Serra Polaris
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 02:17:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Serra Polaris on 28/01/2011 02:16:55
Originally by: Ranka Mei
EVE is not just about risk vs. reward. It's also about fitting choices. If someone is willing to gimp his or her ship with 3-4 mods to make it unprobeable, thus not leaving room for other mods in their stead, then I say that's a perfectly valid choice.
It doesn't matter how much you gimp your fitting you can apparently still run missions just fine, and without any risk. I can understand your point, but I think the idea of a ship that can run level 4 missions solo, avoid bubbles, and is unprobeable is OP.
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Also, flying unprobable ships is 'working as intended.' We have Talon implants to increase our gravimetric strength, for instance. They serve no other purpose than to help your ship become unprobeable.
And, like I said, introducing probeable wrecks, to circumvent a valid game mechanic to stay unseen, is un-balanced. After the mission has been turned in, I'm okay with wrecks being FFA, though.
I never even heard of unprobeable ships until t3 was introduced and those implants have been around for a lot longer. And it's not like the idea of probeable wrecks was introduced as a way to find unprobeable ships, I've only seen it mentioned in salvaging threads. It's just a side effect. If you want to be able to run missions in low/null then there needs to be an element of risk involved.
|
Drake Draconis
Shadow Cadre Shadow Confederation
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 02:49:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Bunyip In a way, I support what the CSM is recommending - under one condition. If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission), then I have no problem with it. Otherwise, it would become WAY too easy to ninja in high-sec, and gank in low/null sec.
In general, though, I support your measure. Also remember to click the support checkbox if you do support it.
Agreed... provided it also nerfs the ability to probe out missions or makes it thrice as hard.
Reason being 95% of the probers out there are looking for ninja'ing stuff/ganks and not direct PVP combat.
It's entirely driven to be "steal your lootz and hope you shootz me".
And make the salvage probe very easy at that point... within the boundries of not being able to invade an active mission area.
If the missions done.... have at it.... otherwise... no go. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
lwxsky oli
Minmatar FACTS on EVE OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 02:53:00 -
[24]
Is this a function for noob probers??
I want CCP spend time on more important stuff.
|
CarnegieSteel
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 05:42:00 -
[25]
Ships shouldnt be unprobable anyway.
|
Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 05:48:00 -
[26]
Anything in space should be probable.
~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ |
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 10:26:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Serra Polaris
It doesn't matter how much you gimp your fitting you can apparently still run missions just fine, and without any risk. I can understand your point, but I think the idea of a ship that can run level 4 missions solo, avoid bubbles, and is unprobeable is OP.
And
Originally by: CarnegieSteel Ships shouldnt be unprobable anyway.
I'm glad you guys actually spell it out like this, because I believe the support probeable wrecks is getting has never truly been about salvaging, but about the ulterior (or maybe not so ulterior) motive of having a way to find unprobeable mission runners.
Originally by: Serra Polaris
And it's not like the idea of probeable wrecks was introduced as a way to find unprobeable ships, I've only seen it mentioned in salvaging threads.
Well, of course it's never mentioned like that! :) If people came out and said: "We want probeable wrecks because we want to find those pesky, unprobeable Tengu mission runners, so we can have our extra, easy, and juicy killmail," then people might object.
If it were really about salvaging, people wouldn't object to wrecks only being probeable after the mission has been turned in. I can only hope CCP sees right thru the ploy.
--
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 10:47:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Ranka Mei Not all missions occur in deadspace, though....
Which one doesn't? Even the ungated ones are technically DED space as far as I know, instanced space where special rules can be applied.
Probe-able wrecks in normal space is a phenomenal idea.
|
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 11:21:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Ranka Mei on 28/01/2011 11:21:40
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Ranka Mei Not all missions occur in deadspace, though....
Which one doesn't? Even the ungated ones are technically DED space as far as I know, instanced space where special rules can be applied.
Probe-able wrecks in normal space is a phenomenal idea.
If ungated mission space is deadspace too, then I got no problem with wrecks being probeable everywhere, but in deadspace. :) It would, indeed, give the salvaging profession a boost. --
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 12:36:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Bunyip If the wrecks are not probable in a deadspace area, but only in normal space (such as when turning in a mission)
^This
I would support this proposal.
It's hard enough trying to persaude people that it's possible to PvE outside of hi-sec as it is without making any mission or plex site trivially probeable.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |