| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jim Steele
   |
Posted - 2005.02.20 16:32:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Lorth
Simply put, the reason you were ganked, was because you had stabs on.
The reason most people get ganked is because there are 20 BS's all sat at a gate waiting for someone to jump through, all with multiple sensor boosters on and megapulse apocs. I dont know what kind of fool would fit 7 WCS as that really gimps your ship, unless you are planning on mining veldspar.
Death to the Galante |
fairimear
|
Posted - 2005.02.20 16:54:00 -
[32]
make it so a wcs can't be activated with any gun or missile online at the same time.
simple as its gets them out of pvp but leaves blockade running.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
|
Lorth
|
Posted - 2005.02.20 19:50:00 -
[33]
You know replys like "you just want wcs to be nerfed so you can kill more; really get tierd.
I hate making comments on items such as the WCS simply because hafl of the people are going to read the first sentance, look at my corp, then assume I wrote what I wrote simply to benifit my self and nothing more.
Come on guys look at what I wrote, and read it. Try to understand what was said and why I said it. Theres a lot there and I made an effort to make my point clear. Do I want to kill more? Yes sure I do. Do I also at the same time want to die more? Yes, yes I do.
Its not a case of evil pirate want to kill more. Its more like, eve player wants the game to become a challange again.
|
Hellspawn666
|
Posted - 2005.02.20 21:12:00 -
[34]
wcs are already balanced when fitting them you cant really fight that easily anlesss u nurf ure setup or speed if somone is in a geddon with 8 on then you should just maek sure u carry enough strength to beat that and i do alot of ganking.. chances are ure best way to kill him is to get alot of firepower on him before h can warp and bump his alignment hel drop like a stone
|
Jazz Bo
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 00:28:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Lorth
No you'll see a lot less ganks around, and more people moving in smaller packs then you do now.
Simply put, the reason you were ganked, was because you had stabs on.
Anyone who has done much pvp in 0.0 knows that every BS running around has about 7 stabs in the low slots. While very few of us find ganking people fun, we find getting 6 points of scramble on him and watching him warp even less fun.
So, in order to actually kill someone, you brign enough people to kill him before he warps, regardless of what he has fitted in the lows. Thus the gank squad is born, simply because that the only way you can kill someone who doesn't want to fight.
Remove stabs and you'll see a lot less gank squads and more 3-4 pilots roaming wolf packs, which are much more perferable for the killed and killers.
10 vs. 1 = gank
4 vs. 1 = gank
I really can't see a difference.
You have 8 stabs and 10 people WS and fire at you = you die
You have no stabs and 4 people WS and fire at you = you die
"preferable to the killed"?
You didn't really think it through did you?
Originally by: DB Preacher
Celestial Apocalypse - Brave souls fighting the endless smak.
|
Unleashed
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 02:03:00 -
[36]
Originally by: fairimear
make it so a wcs can't be activated with any gun or missile online at the same time.
simple as its gets them out of pvp but leaves blockade running.
I like this idea.
___
>currently training to level 5: sexual tyrannosaurus / Rank 8 /
|
Gundahar
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 04:17:00 -
[37]
Leave stabs in the game, BUT give them a Stacking Penalty like everything else 
|
ALTNAME
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 04:50:00 -
[38]
oh pi** off, every loser that has been with this bugged game from day one, are bored with everything else so they sit at the 10 or so entrances to 0.0 and wait for someone to warp in. Then they get ****y when a ship 10 times their cost gets away. YOU ARE NOT GUARANTEED A KILL.
Their is a DEFENSE for every OFFENSE
if you fail to see this and believe everyone must succomb to an UNSTOPPABLE offense is simply ridiculous.
|
Kendra Leigh
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 04:53:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Kendra Leigh on 21/02/2005 04:54:43
The game is a challenge when their is something to fight over.
Try planetside for some real pvp, although I hate the genre and the graphics are *special*
|
Lorth
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 07:19:00 -
[40]
Originally by: ALTNAME
oh pi** off, every loser that has been with this bugged game from day one, are bored with everything else so they sit at the 10 or so entrances to 0.0 and wait for someone to warp in. Then they get ****y when a ship 10 times their cost gets away. YOU ARE NOT GUARANTEED A KILL.
Their is a DEFENSE for every OFFENSE
if you fail to see this and believe everyone must succomb to an UNSTOPPABLE offense is simply ridiculous.
Fine, I have no problem with there being a defence to every offence. But have you considered that there is currently no way a single pilot can stop a fully stabed BS?
Ya I'm perfectly fine with having a defence of every offence, but the defence of one pilot shouldn't be insurmountable by the offence of one other pilot. Tell me how fair that is? Perhaps you have some sort of reasoning to explain why you feel its perfectly ok to be immue to any force not 16 times your size?
|
Lorth
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 07:32:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Jazz Bo
10 vs. 1 = gank
4 vs. 1 = gank
I really can't see a difference.
You have 8 stabs and 10 people WS and fire at you = you die
You have no stabs and 4 people WS and fire at you = you die
"preferable to the killed"?
You didn't really think it through did you?
You have a point there I'll give you that.
However, lets suppose that you have no stabs, just for fun.
4 people are certainly a lot more easily avoided to begin with. Simply 4 people can't be everywhere at once meaning you at least have a chance of excaping through a gate, or docking at a station they are not currently covering.
Further, in order to cover all the entrances 4 people are going to have to split up. Meaning if you are scrambled you at least have a chance of killing off the attackie before his friends arive. Not to mention if one or two of those 4 are tackling frigs, you do have a chance of tanking the other BS's and killing the tacklers.
Anyways, the point I was trying to make with that entire post was... I personally belive that many pilots (and I include my self here) felt they could lock down a BS with out bringing overwellming odds you would see less 10vs1's. Fights are a lot more fun then ganks, I think we would see more fights less ganks and overall better game play because of it.
|
Beringe
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 07:56:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Doktor Bowstein
Not necessary with the upcoming EW and propulsion changes
What he said. There are changes being made already...argue about them in the proper threads.
-------------------------------------------
"My main griveance with the Caldari state was that once I had finished my work for them, they wanted me dead."
"No, it's none of your business." |
Typherin laidai
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 07:59:00 -
[43]
To say gimping WCS's will bring about less ganks is just true lies.
And if someone really wants to load their geddons low's with WCS's then let them. Im fairly certain your average camp can toast a battleship before they manage to manouvre their brick for warp anyway. And congrats... theyv'e just gimped their own setup 
Typherin LaiDai Care Negotitations Expert level 5
'Give me a position of power and I'l abuse it in an instant' |
Damien Vox
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 08:14:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Damien Vox on 21/02/2005 08:15:35
Of course WCS are the root of all gate ganking how could I have not seen it. They're aren't lazy, wannabe pirates roaming the universe tired of actually hunting people and instead they just want to sit at a gate and make 'easy' isk. Then again how could I forget WCS are an 'exploit' to most people and a killable offense (what isn't?) even though its a smart and affordable way to get away from 'the gate ganks caused by them'.
Please, come on folks. First it was "Make scanning easier", then it was "safepoints are exploits and need to be found easier", now its "gimp WCS's". What's next "make my targets sit still because its too hard to shoot a moving target"?
Gimmie a break, this whole thread is lame and anyone who can't properly bounty hunt and pirate needs to find a new thing to do in Eve. As someone else said in another thread "Why don't we just put an 'I Win' button in the game".
|
Lorth
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 08:21:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Lorth on 21/02/2005 08:49:16
Originally by: Damien Vox
Edited by: Damien Vox on 21/02/2005 08:15:35
Of course WCS are the root of all gate ganking how could I have not seen it. They're aren't lazy, wannabe pirates roaming the universe tired of actually hunting people and instead they just want to sit at a gate and make 'easy' isk. Then again how could I forget WCS are an 'exploit' to most people and a killable offense (what isn't?) even though its a smart and affordable way to get away from 'the gate ganks caused by them'.
Please, come on folks. First it was "Make scanning easier", then it was "safepoints are exploits and need to be found easier", now its "gimp WCS's". What's next "make my targets sit still because its too hard to shoot a moving target"?
Gimmie a break, this whole thread is lame and anyone who can't properly bounty hunt and pirate needs to find a new thing to do in Eve. As someone else said in another thread "Why don't we just put an 'I Win' button in the game".
I'll take it from that well thought out intelligent reply that you niether read the thread nor have you actually tried to kill someone who did not want to be killed?
Originally by: Typherin laidai
To say gimping WCS's will bring about less ganks is just true lies.
And if someone really wants to load their geddons low's with WCS's then let them. Im fairly certain your average camp can toast a battleship before they manage to manouvre their brick for warp anyway. And congrats... theyv'e just gimped their own setup
Ya, cause every person who pvp's loves camping gates with enough fire power to insta destroy anything that jumps though
I hate camping, and I'll place a bet that the majority of people who call them selves pvp'rs do was well.
Is this the, "Lets not actually read the thread, or provide some sort of counter argument, and flame the guy insteed day?"
|
Typherin laidai
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 08:54:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Lorth
Edited by: Lorth on 21/02/2005 08:49:16
Originally by: Damien Vox
Edited by: Damien Vox on 21/02/2005 08:15:35
Of course WCS are the root of all gate ganking how could I have not seen it. They're aren't lazy, wannabe pirates roaming the universe tired of actually hunting people and instead they just want to sit at a gate and make 'easy' isk. Then again how could I forget WCS are an 'exploit' to most people and a killable offense (what isn't?) even though its a smart and affordable way to get away from 'the gate ganks caused by them'.
Please, come on folks. First it was "Make scanning easier", then it was "safepoints are exploits and need to be found easier", now its "gimp WCS's". What's next "make my targets sit still because its too hard to shoot a moving target"?
Gimmie a break, this whole thread is lame and anyone who can't properly bounty hunt and pirate needs to find a new thing to do in Eve. As someone else said in another thread "Why don't we just put an 'I Win' button in the game".
I'll take it from that well thought out intelligent reply that you niether read the thread nor have you actually tried to kill someone who did not want to be killed?
Originally by: Typherin laidai
To say gimping WCS's will bring about less ganks is just true lies.
And if someone really wants to load their geddons low's with WCS's then let them. Im fairly certain your average camp can toast a battleship before they manage to manouvre their brick for warp anyway. And congrats... theyv'e just gimped their own setup
Ya, cause every person who pvp's loves camping gates with enough fire power to insta destroy anything that jumps though
I hate camping, and I'll place a bet that the majority of people who call them selves pvp'rs do was well.
Is this the, "Lets not actually read the thread, or provide some sort of counter argument, and flame the guy insteed day?"
Is this the "Cant be bothered to actually find someone who 'wants' to fight, Lets just stop ppl running away"
Typherin LaiDai Care Negotitations Expert level 5
'Give me a position of power and I'l abuse it in an instant' |
Jonas Bane
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 09:05:00 -
[47]
You've brought me around on this, Lorth. But only just a little. =)
I can follow your reasoning as to why WCS have lead to gank squads at gates. But I don't really see how removing them or toning them down will somehow make 10 ship gank squads go away. You still need excessive firepower to kill someone who logs before they auto-warp. And after so many months of witnessing the power and ease of killing single ships with overwealming odds, I don't see these squads suddenly breaking up and giving up their numbers advantage.
|
Vicious Vic
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 09:06:00 -
[48]
I was going to say that GANKING is the lowest form of combat but then GANKING isn't really combat is it. The whole point of GANKING is so that cowards can kill without out combat.
I can count the number of times a GANK squad has stood their ground and fought once a somebody comes along LOOKING for a FIGHT.
I have never travelled with 8 [EIGHT] stabs in a geddon WTF [EIGHT] I have never been killed by GANKERS either although I have chased GANKERS......... They are pretty had to WARP SCRAMBLE....... I wonder why that is.
|
The Cosmopolite
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 09:08:00 -
[49]
Those who speak against WCS from a 'self-respecting PVPer' point-of-view may well find ganking and gate-camping boring.
However, the sad, sweet truth is that the practice of camping and ganking is well-established and there are an awful lot of unimaginative, stupid (frankly) players who really do get their kicks out of it.
Gimping WCS overnight will not get rid of the problem of gank squads. It's too far entrenched as a tactic.
Anyway, as has been said, nothing is going to happen on this front until the EW changes go live. (...and from the clear bugginess of the system on the test server, that'll be a while.)
The Cos
The Star Fraction - Executor CEO: Jade Constantine |
Lorth
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 09:41:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Lorth on 21/02/2005 10:17:05
Originally by: Typherin laidai
Is this the "Cant be bothered to actually find someone who 'wants' to fight, Lets just stop ppl running away"
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Entering low security space implies that you are willing to PvP. If you whine when it happens, youre just a complete dumbass.
@The Cosmopolite
Nice post, and you probably have a very good point there. Though the majority of my post(s) were more about the complete lack of risks anywhere in eve provided one actually uses there head.
I find that a smart player, and even the dumb ones who can press f10 can avoid upwards of 90% of pvp regardless. Which takes away a lot of the risk, imersion(sp?) and fun from the game.
I think that done right, adding more risks and less and less ways to completly avoid any pvp situation would drastically improve the gameplay for many. It would be fun to expect combat to happen, and never knowing for sure that it will anytime your in 0.0. And its not like anyone is actually forcing players to enter, and I'm not expecting everyone to go either.
EDIT: I have personally seen more then a few situations where what started as a 1vs1, (maybe a vigil on one side) turned into a gank simply because the pilot had a rediculous amount of stabs on. And I have also seen the commander ask that people stay behind in order to actually have a fight rather then a OMGWTFGANK.
Also I would like to add that a geddon (for instance) can fit out with full stabs in the lows and 7 pulse. As can the mega, domi, apoc, tempest, raven.... Ya it tottaly kills your set up but allows you to kill cruisers while maintaining near invonrability.
|
Rex Martell
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 10:50:00 -
[51]
The point here is That alot of Players myself included will happly stick around for a fight and Gladly challange a gate rat.
But the chances of a good one on one fight or even two on one are rare Gate Campers and Gankers don't count 'cause they will only fight if they have a numeric advantage and being Jammed Scrambled and killed is not my Idea of fun.
If you want PVP it is There and it is a lot of fun. but Gankers and Gate campers are not PVPers. Player V Player suggest a test of skill and an element of honarable combat that Gankers are not capable of.
The pilots complaining in the thread are not anti PVP but anti ganker.
"The object of war is not to die for your corp, but to make the other b@##@#d die for his" |
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 12:26:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Lorth
You accept the risk when entering 0.0 that this is an open zone for combat.
Yes, but that does not mean you are entering 0.0 with the intention of engaging in combat. I'm pretty sure those stab-ed up indys aren't actively looking for a fight! It is a pilot's responsibility to accept the risks of 0.0, but it is their right to be able to plan and fit to minimise those risks.
Originally by: Lorth
I can't tell you the number of times I have wondered around 0.0 solo looking for action only to see BS after BS after cruiser after frig warp off 'scrambled.'
I don't want guaranted kills, and there is never any such thing. I want guaranted fun, and action.
And so do the players you are trying to kill. Not everyone thinks that constant fighting is the be-all and end-all of this game.
Originally by: Lorth
Being in 0.0 should fill you with gutrenching fear for your very existance. Death should be around nearly every corner. It should be hard to keep your wits and only the strong the quick and the smart should survive. Imagine how exciting that would be!
And imagine how many more people would crowd back into empire! Leaving only a tiny minority of hardcore PvP combat players out there. But of course you'll have to come back to empire yourselves eventually, as you'll have driven all the industrial players back ther, so no supplies for you. Not that they would have any megacyte or zydrine to build your stuff with anyway, as you scared all the miners back to empire too.
Originally by: Lorth
Err you could umm, reilize that low sec and 0.0 (much more so) has a high change of combat being forced apon you and equip your ship accordanly. As in to fight back.
Just why is fitting to run away any less valid a tactic than fitting to fight back? Both serve to mitigate the risks when combat is forced upon you.
Originally by: Lorth
You are given every chance to do 'somthing about it' including fighting back and winning. I'd even say that you have a better chance of wining, or at least forcing your opponent to run given that you don't have to fit mods to keep your opponent in place.
ok, so Mr Industrial with WCS should instead mount a fitting to defeat your battleship in combat.
WTB Lorth's industrial
Originally by: Lorth
No, I pay for this game, and thus have an expectation of entertainment. I find PVP and risks are what provides enjoyment for me.
Funnily enough, I pay for this game too, and also have an expectation of entertainment. Being blown up all the time doesn't entertain me. Sure, the risk of being blown up is a rush - but only if mitigated by an ability to avoid it wile going about my normal business - which often requires me not to be mounting my most pimped-up PvP fitting on my most combat-capable ship. Again, I'll go back to how my industrial is supposed to put up a fight against your battlehsip.
Originally by: Lorth
If you unwilling to accept that 0.0 comes with the risk of unconsentual pvp then stick to empire.
If you're unwilling to accept that players have the right to try and avoid combat with you rather than fight on your terms, the stick to fighting NPC's. At the end of the day, it's your responsibility to make me your victim. I'm not going to line up and be shot. If I think I have a better chance at survival by mounting to run, rather than mounting to fight, then I'll choose to run. Chances are, if I made the decision in favour of running, I wouldn't have put up the "fair fight" that you're looking for anyway.
|
Verone
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 12:54:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Damien Vox
What's next "make my targets sit still because its too hard to shoot a moving target"?
that's what webbers are for
COME AND SOCIALISE WITH US NASTY SNIGG BASTARDS AT : WWW.SNIGG.CJB.NET |
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 13:17:00 -
[54]
Under the current rules, 5 midslots beats 8 lowslots in warp-strength.
So there is no need for a 9 mid-slot ship any day soon....
|
Omatje
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 13:45:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Omatje on 21/02/2005 13:46:02
Quote:
Its not my lack of wits thats stops me from killing a 7-8 wcs ships. Its the lack of a ship which has 9 mids slots needed to effectivly tackle a BS equiped as such. You fail to understand that concecpt yet accuse me of having a 'lack of wits.'
If you are hear simply to make ill thought out flames, please refrane from posting. This discussion could do without the trolling.
People gimp their setups using 7-8 wcs.
You are only not willing to gimp your setup to encounter it.
Why dont we all f1f2f3 eachother? |
Rex Martell
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 14:05:00 -
[56]
I don't see the porblem here if a pilot wants to get past Gankers, without being scrambled and is willing to fit eight stabs to do it let'em, there is only one ship can do that anyways, at least for now.
My Personal advice here, And I really HOPE you take it is to fit eight WSC on a scorpion and camp a gate :P
But i deffinately belive that it should not be possible to fit a stab and a WCS.
"The object of war is not to die for your corp, but to make the other b@##@#d die for his" |
Shirei
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 14:05:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Shirei on 21/02/2005 14:07:01
Originally by: Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
Under the current rules, 5 midslots beats 8 lowslots in warp-strength.
Not really. There is no ship with 5 spare mid slots (after equipping a MWD) that could get in range quickly enough to use 7.5k scramblers before someone warps away.
However, I don't see anything wrong with the fact that you need 2 tacklers to stop a ship with all its low slots full of warp stabs. Just like you will need 2 average fitted (i.e. not pure damage-setup) PvP ships to take down a very well-tanked ship quickly.
2 stilettos are all it takes to stop any ship bigger than a destroyer from warping out at a gate. 
|
Masu'di
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 15:03:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Lorth
Thats how I feel. If you don't agree with my points, I would suggest that you stay in empire.
i agree with some of you points, but who are you to decide who can and should go in 0.0 and what the rules are. other people's "imaginations" of 0.0 may be very different to yours, and no less valid.
|
Re'kiru
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 15:08:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Re'kiru on 21/02/2005 15:08:42
Originally by: Verone
Originally by: Damien Vox
What's next "make my targets sit still because its too hard to shoot a moving target"?
that's what webbers are for
They aren't good enough, they require you to get too close. They might scratch the paint on their Amarr BS.
EDIT: Sorry, my alt by accident.
|
Lucian Cole
|
Posted - 2005.02.21 18:28:00 -
[60]
Well, people may have different "imaginings" of what 0.0 space is, but that does not change the fact that it's a dangerous place to be and that you should not hang out there unless you are well acquainted with how your "fight/flight" instinct works. I mean I could imagine that a car traveling at 100km/h will crash right into me and blow up because I'm superman but that does not change the fact that it would actually turn me into bio-paste.
Anyhow, I remember when there were not WCS's in the game... and man did that make a one on one gank easy in a sense. In another sense it was not, because back then scramblers had something rediculous like a 5km (or less even) range, so if you were stupid enough to let some stranger get that close to you in a low sec zone you were pretty much asking for a clone activation.
It strikes me though that balancing of systems like this should probably be based upon a 1v1 type of encounter, i.e. you should not be able to equip enough WCS's to prevent an entire team of people from scrambling you... it just makes things too easy. Warping is one of the flawless methods of escape we have in this game, and with the right skills and equipment (or number of mates) you should be able to take that away, or vice versa.
If you scramble someone and they have a stab they should be able to get away... end of story. Now if you bring a few of your friends along for insurance that's a different story. In other words I think they should be single fitted modules, one per ship for both stabilizers and scrams. Otherwise it changes from a simple point/counterpoint strategy to a "mount so many counterpoints that it just becomes a non issue for you" which is not really right IMO.
What I am saying may promote the whole "gank squad" use but hey, in the real world these are called "platoons" or "units" or plain old "squads". Numbers always give you an advantage and should. You should NOT be able to laugh at a group of 3-4 people trying to lock you down just because you have the magic setup.
--
Lucian Cole |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |