Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.13 19:34:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Tippia on 13/06/2011 19:34:13
Originally by: Mary Astell i just wanted to see how they were fit since they were tanking better than the other carriers weve netted.
Denial of KM has no reasonable strategic value in game.
Aside from the fact that you just provided an additional good value ù denial of intel ù if denial of a KM has no strategical value, then what is the problem if you occasionally miss out on one?
Quote: Since i didnt talk about assets at all, i think you missed the point.
Your point was to ask "Is [self destructing] there just to deny your enemy cap killmails?" to which the answer is quite obviously no ù there is also a value in denying the enemy assets and intel. So if by missing the point you mean answering your question, then yes, I missed the point. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.06.13 20:14:00 -
[32]
I love when people complain about this! It shows that this is working as it was intended.
Although this ****es me off just like a chicken gang that logs off everytime they see our counter gang show a toe at the gate (and you know who you are), meh.. who cares. Its not like you lost any isk. ____________
Originally by: CCP Guard Nobody gets to ruin EVE but us!
|
The Illustrious Juden
|
Posted - 2011.06.13 20:26:00 -
[33]
Edited by: The Illustrious Juden on 13/06/2011 20:25:56 How could you blow yourself up if it weren't for self-destruct?
|
Fordosan Banzai
|
Posted - 2011.06.13 21:27:00 -
[34]
Originally by: The Illustrious Juden Edited by: The Illustrious Juden on 13/06/2011 20:25:56 How could you blow yourself up if it weren't for self-destruct?
real talk.
|
Pierced Brosmen
Priory Of The Lemon
|
Posted - 2011.06.13 22:09:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Mary Astell Edited by: Mary Astell on 13/06/2011 14:51:35 Is it there just to deny your enemy cap killmails?
Ive had people eject from caps to avoid being on a KM, which is a win win.
Just seems that self-destructing is an overused tactic simply to deny others of a record of your loss. Maybe the cost should be higher if you self-destruct, perhaps the pod is destroyed in the process?
Ready, Steady, Troll me now!
I'd say that a good solution would be to give the KM and "Final blow" to the character that has the last damage dealing shot against the ship before it self destructs, and also that the KM states that the ship was destroyed by method of self-destruct (to bring even more shame on the pilot).
|
Spank Boss
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 00:03:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Mary Astell Edited by: Mary Astell on 13/06/2011 19:02:13 I have no problem with us getting no loot from a self-destruct, i just wanted to see how they were fit since they were tanking better than the other carriers weve netted.
Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 13/06/2011 19:34:13
Originally by: Mary Astell i just wanted to see how they were fit since they were tanking better than the other carriers weve netted.
Denial of KM has no reasonable strategic value in game.
Aside from the fact that you just provided an additional good value ù denial of intel ù if denial of a KM has no strategical value, then what is the problem if you occasionally miss out on one?
Quote: Since i didnt talk about assets at all, i think you missed the point.
Your point was to ask "Is [self destructing] there just to deny your enemy cap killmails?" to which the answer is quite obviously no ù there is also a value in denying the enemy assets and intel. So if by missing the point you mean answering your question, then yes, I missed the point.
I agree with both sides. However since you wanted a KM for intel and the self destruct systems of today (RL) are aimed at denying the enemy intel, I suggest that a KM should be generated with parties involved but should not display any modules fitted or in cargo hold.
You get the KM for your killboard, the other guy gets to leave you guessing at what his fit was/what he was carrying. Win for both sides.
|
Mupdadoodidda Bix Nood
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 02:14:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Mary Astell
I WANT KILLMAIL TO MAKE MY LEET PVP KILLBOARD LOOK PWNZORS!!! BAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWW
|
Xenuria
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 02:48:00 -
[38]
I once had a wet dream about being a GoonSwarm Titan Pilot in the middle of a huge OP. I set my self destruct and then all the goons in mumble started yelling and screaming at me. As they cried and begged and pleaded with me I become more excited until I woke up soaking wet. "Sorry, Your Sov Options are Unavailable due to a PSN Outage."
|
Mintoko
Gallente Taedium In Perpetuam
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 03:11:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Xenuria I once had a wet dream about being a GoonSwarm Titan Pilot in the middle of a huge OP. I set my self destruct and then all the goons in mumble started yelling and screaming at me. As they cried and begged and pleaded with me I become more excited until I woke up soaking wet.
"Soaking wet"? That wasn't a wet dream....you pi$$ed yourself.
|
Braondra
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 03:13:00 -
[40]
What if you were in a WH. And you were pointed by someone. And they kept you pointed... forever. Wouldnt you want a way out?
|
|
Xenuria
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 03:13:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Mintoko
Originally by: Xenuria I once had a wet dream about being a GoonSwarm Titan Pilot in the middle of a huge OP. I set my self destruct and then all the goons in mumble started yelling and screaming at me. As they cried and begged and pleaded with me I become more excited until I woke up soaking wet.
"Soaking wet"? That wasn't a wet dream....you pi$$ed yourself.
Not really.. I am just really well lubricated "Sorry, Your Sov Options are Unavailable due to a PSN Outage."
|
Camron Champagne
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 03:44:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Xenuria
Originally by: Mintoko
Originally by: Xenuria I once had a wet dream about being a GoonSwarm Titan Pilot in the middle of a huge OP. I set my self destruct and then all the goons in mumble started yelling and screaming at me. As they cried and begged and pleaded with me I become more excited until I woke up soaking wet.
"Soaking wet"? That wasn't a wet dream....you pi$$ed yourself.
Not really.. I am just really well lubricated
Fascinating...... Anyways, since the only rational reason outside of the stuck in a wormhole one that someone would self-destruct is if facing certain defeat in combat what difference does it make if they blew up because of you or blew themselves up so long as they are toughly blown? I don't understand this fascination with Kill mails. Sprinkles! we need more Sprinkles!!
|
Admiral Leviathan
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 03:51:00 -
[43]
Like many things, SD would work such much better if it scaled with ship size 'nuff said
|
Ruri Mizushisi
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 05:10:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Ruri Mizushisi on 14/06/2011 05:12:06 Maybe people also want to deny you intel about their fittings.
And maybe you should care less about killmails.
|
Eyup Mi'duck
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 06:39:00 -
[45]
If my ship is obviously going down, for example I'm in a defenceless and scrammed hauler, I always self destruct. This destroys the ship at a time of my choosing, which improves the prospect of getting away without being pod-killed. It's the only initiative you can take when caught in that situation.
KM's have nothing to do with it. And the aggressor still gets the wreck, so no harm is done.
Get over it! Learn from your mistake and move on. |
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 07:57:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Jennifer Starling on 14/06/2011 07:57:47
Afaik there is no illegitimate ejecting from or self-destructing of ships.
And killboards have to go anyway.
|
Mary Astell
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 10:39:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 13/06/2011 19:34:13
Originally by: Mary Astell i just wanted to see how they were fit since they were tanking better than the other carriers weve netted.
Denial of KM has no reasonable strategic value in game.
Aside from the fact that you just provided an additional good value ù denial of intel ù if denial of a KM has no strategical value, then what is the problem if you occasionally miss out on one?
Quote: Since i didnt talk about assets at all, i think you missed the point.
Your point was to ask "Is [self destructing] there just to deny your enemy cap killmails?" to which the answer is quite obviously no ù there is also a value in denying the enemy assets and intel. So if by missing the point you mean answering your question, then yes, I missed the point.
Eveyone else seems to have understood my position, i never mentioned loot and was clearly talking about KM's. Rather than reading between the lines and getting to the point i was making you went all autistic and failed to grasp my actual reason for posting.
As for denial of intel, the way they would have done that would be to not die on field. Imo a KM should be generated.
As for the killboard haters, ive lost plenty of ships, the KB is nothing more than looking at the scores in any other pvp game. I can only imagine that most who 'dont get' killboards, dont have much call to use them?
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 11:29:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Mary Astell Eveyone else seems to have understood my position, i never mentioned loot and was clearly talking about KM's.
No. I did. I did so to answer your initial question: "Is [self destructing] there just to deny your enemy cap killmails?"
The answer to this question is "no". The follow-up and clarification to that answer is "it is also there to deny your enemy loot." You then accidentally contributed another follow-up and clarification to that answer: "it is also there to deny your enemy intel."
I am not reading between the lines. I am answering your original question. If you didn't want that question answered, you shouldn't have asked it.
Quote: As for denial of intel, the way they would have done that would be to not die on field.
àand if you wanted that intel, the way you should have done it is to kill the guy faster. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Mary Astell
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 11:59:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Mary Astell on 14/06/2011 12:00:38
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Mary Astell Eveyone else seems to have understood my position, i never mentioned loot and was clearly talking about KM's.
No. I did. I did so to answer your initial question: "Is [self destructing] there just to deny your enemy cap killmails?"
The answer to this question is "no". The follow-up and clarification to that answer is "it is also there to deny your enemy loot." You then accidentally contributed another follow-up and clarification to that answer: "it is also there to deny your enemy intel."
I am not reading between the lines. I am answering your original question. If you didn't want that question answered, you shouldn't have asked it.
Quote: As for denial of intel, the way they would have done that would be to not die on field.
àand if you wanted that intel, the way you should have done it is to kill the guy faster.
I know you are not reading between the lines, thats what i said. With each post you are ignoring the clarifications that no one else seemed to need and continue addressing issues beyond the simple issue that i was addressing. If you want to only address thread titles and ignore the content then perhaps not posting would be smarter?
Though you do have a point with killing the carriers faster, but imo the wreck is there, the km should be generated.
The issue for me is that at the point where losing the carriers was inevitable all they had to lose was the carriers, so why is there no further penalty to SD'ing?
I suggest that there should be a disincentive, like the pilots pod being destroyed in the SD so that a carrier pilot already losing his craft has something further to lose when SD'ing and denying the people that he hot dropped a record of the event.
In other words, if you want to deny intel, then it'll cost you your slaves. That would turn SD into a choice rather than the only option.
|
Lady Ayeipsia
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:34:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Pierced Brosmen
I'd say that a good solution would be to give the KM and "Final blow" to the character that has the last damage dealing shot against the ship before it self destructs, and also that the KM states that the ship was destroyed by method of self-destruct (to bring even more shame on the pilot).
Um... shame is a relative thing. If I self destruct before you kill my ship, do you honestly think I will feel shame because a killmail confirms this? Wouldn't I just view it as proof that you lack pvp skills because you couldn't kill me fast enough.
People will only feel shame if the view selfdestructing in a negative light, and if that is the case, well... those are the people who wouldn't self destruct in the first place.
|
|
Lady Go Diveher
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 13:35:00 -
[51]
Self destruct, or rather scuttling the ship, has been a legitimate part of combat forever and a day. Removing it just plays into fail-PVPers with blueballs who are only in it for the killmails.
Real life uses: intel denial, asset denial, morale denial, etc.. all applied in eve, too. Stop thinking of PVP as being all about the killmails, and you'll get it.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |