EVE Search - Pods

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
ThaDollaGenerale R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out	Posted - 2007.11.12 03:54:00 - [31] It's called not having your ship blow up. The ship is the protection for the pod.
Kittamaru Gallente Ceptacemia Fallout Project	Posted - 2007.11.12 11:37:00 - [32] Actually... I think Pod's should be given protection UNTIL THE FIRST INPUT FROM THE PODDED PLAYER IS RECIEVED. The lag from such a thing (especially in larger gatecamps) can be so horrendous that you simply cannot warp away... that is broken. The rest of it... you lost. Deal with it.
Jallem Sims Minmatar Exploring Blind	Posted - 2007.11.12 16:44:00 - [33] sounds like a lot of people have been podded without updating there clones! or... just don't like been killed to often. If you have a set of snakes or any other faction implants in then you have a massive advantage over those that don't... its only fair you can loose that advantange through bad piloting. You got to be a bit daft or very rich to even concider flying your faction implants into a fleet battle anyway! Or just very skilled to get out of difficult situations. Thats what the eve experiance is about.... taking chances.... if your mining, ratting trading in low or 0.0 then you best know what your doing! if not, stay in empire where you are protected. Its great to open up low sec and 0.0, but then your taking away goals from new pilots, i mean... whats to look forward too?? In low sec your going to get hit badly on your sec rating anyways if you pod! and then you simply can't get back into empire. Think this is really just a whining thread... and really try and think about it from every point of view to have a really great idea. What about salvagable pods? so you can get your implants back? or so your more of a target <--- see from both perspectives!
Poena Loveless	Posted - 2007.11.12 18:39:00 - [34] Originally by: JanSVK /signed I think it is a good idea but no slots on the pod some basic stab number should be enough. I think there must be also a way to sort bounty. If pirate starts to fly in such a pod it will be hard to get the bounty. Maybe if char has a standing of < -8 it can not use the Grade 1 pod and so on this is just a fast idea not to nerf pirate hunting and bounty system. Its not the pod that made the current bounty system broken, its the people in the pods
VB Sarge	Posted - 2007.11.12 19:25:00 - [35] This is a horrible idea. Putting stabs on a pod, putting a buffer on a pod, putting a cloak on a pod... all bad ideas. You lose your ship, THAT is your buffer for your pod, that is what protects your pod. Yes, the current pod goes down very quickly, even against a T1 fitted Frig. That is because it isn't supposed to be the OMG save me! device most of the previous posters think it should be. Bad piloting gets your pod killed, not the lack of pod resources. Yes, I suffer from lag when my ship explodes, and instawarping with my pod doesn't usually work before I'm locked and scrammed. It happens. Don't put yourself in a situation in which you can lose your pod. If you do, then you deserve what you get. A shield buffer just prolongs the inevitable, and is a waste. In order to have any real impact the buffer would have to be outrageous, and lame. Stabs on a pod just don't make sense. It's a small shell to protect your body from the harshness of space, not the harshness of those in space. A cloak on a pod, albeit attractive to many non serious PvPers just doen't make sense. A cloak is a tough thing to fit on most ships to begin with, so how are you going to justify one on your lil ol pod? Besides, I'd say 9/10 times I end up in my pod, it's in a close range engagement, and would be decloaked instantly anyways. Please note, I do not lose ships that often, just offering that up for reference. While I do commend the OP's attempt at an idea, I think it wasn't thought up in the name of any kind of balance. A money sink, yes; practical, no. And yes, current pods are not the reason bounty hunting is broken, the bounty system is the reason bounty hunting is broken.
Kittamaru Gallente Ceptacemia Fallout Project	Posted - 2007.11.12 22:03:00 - [36] Thing is, it takes a few seconds (quite often) for your pod to even load on screen! I've had it happen where I dont' even see my pod, just wind up in station somewhere. It isn't my PC lagging... it can play the newest FPS games at max settings without a hiccup!
Jenjuan Gallente	Posted - 2007.11.13 18:03:00 - [37] Or how about giving them another target to shoot at? If you had a Co-Pilot, the chance of you being targeted is reduced a bit, plus with some extra hands manning some of the controls, maybe you have a better shot at not being blown up to begin with. [url=http://profile.xfire.com/jenjuan][/url]
Quesa Ketahl	Posted - 2007.11.13 21:29:00 - [38] Most of the instances where I was podded was due to the terrible lag that happens when you transition from ship -> pod. If this was cleared up, I would not agree with this idea. Until then. /signed
Plekto Priory Of The Lemon R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.11.14 00:11:00 - [39] Edited by: Plekto on 14/11/2007 00:15:40 I have to vote no on this. EVE as it is is already too much of a gimmie. - Insurance - cheap clones - bounty system that is a joke - warp to 0 The list is extensive. The last thing we need is yet another way to avoid a penalty - in this case, a paltry clone cost of 3-5 million for the average 2-3 year old character. As for the lag - the solution, IMO, is to just not display ANY of the death/explosion scene on the victim's side. You just end up in a pod and the rest of the universe nearby sees the explosion and such. EDIT: Quote: A sufficient safe-guard against Podding would be to let the manual "Eject" command project your pod, cloaked, at 10km/sec from the front of your ship. The cloak would only last a second or two, but by the time you're susceptible to targetting, you're 20km away and just starting to slow down, and you've probably recovered from the lag spike and started to warp anyhow. It would almost guarantee your survival, even if there are small or medium bubbles involved. This is the best idea I've heard in the last six months. If you eject too early, they get a free ship from you if they can turn off their weapons in time. If you do it too late... well, tough luck. (I'd have it so that if you DON'T eject and are in your ship when it goes up, you are auto-podded for your stupidity)
Mayobe	Posted - 2007.12.14 05:07:00 - [40] I'm sorry. I couldn't help myself: "Real men pod tank."
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.12.14 07:21:00 - [41] "Posted - 2003.07.02 21:17:00" Just thought I'd point that out. Still, an interesting topic. -Rash
Arcayan	Posted - 2007.12.14 11:35:00 - [42] Originally by: Rashmika Sky "Posted - 2003.07.02 21:17:00" Just thought I'd point that out. Still, an interesting topic. -Rash lol. I've actually been flamed for "necroing" on this forum before, but I think it's better to see previous arguments for an against an idea, as well as the new stuff. As for the actual idea being proposed, the technicalities of fitting technologies to a pod which generally are difficult to fit on a frigate makes the proposed idea no good. I have often wondered why pods aren't ejected at speed though. Look at a fighter jet. Ejection, not just disconnection. The simple fact is that if the power generator of a large space vessel were destroyed in combat, the resulting explosion would also make short work of something as physically vulnerable as a pod if it were in the blast radius. As such, any "real" design would attempt to get the pod far away as quickly as possible. The other idea I've seen on this forum regarding pods is allowing a ship to have "decoy pods".
Xzar Fyrarr Minmatar State War Academy Glory	Posted - 2007.12.14 13:05:00 - [43] Clones and pods are fine as they are IMHO.
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.12.14 16:11:00 - [44] Well, funny as it may seem - I'm not sure CCP originally planned for everybody to try to kill every pod they could get their target lock on. I think it was probably something they'd expect between actual enemies, players that had it in for one another. I don't think they expected gate camps and bubbles and indiscriminate killing of anyone and everyone, which is something we see a lot of. I say this because there is no real advantage gained by killing a random person's pod. Therefore, the only reason in many cases to do it, is out of spite or cruelty or just plain bloodthirst. Against actual enemies, it's different, as it can move them far from where combat is taking place, and effectively remove them from battle for possibly a long while. It could also cost them a lot of isk in implants. But against some random person you've never met, what is gained by the action? I'm not saying people shouldn't pod without a reason, because Eve is all about making your own choices. However, I don't see what people lose by not podding, except perhaps not ending up with the most podkills on their killboards... I think in many cases, people don't actually think about if they should pod or not, they just do it. Perhaps it's something people should think about, though - "Why do I pod-kill (random) people? Is it a good reason?" -Rash
Rjaiajik Kajvoril Amarr Autonomous Systems	Posted - 2007.12.14 18:16:00 - [45] /signed I like the idea of spending cash on a better pod. After all from a realistic point of view, dying is scary. Even if you have a clone contract, dieing is still scary. This means people will want to avoid dying if at all possible. RickRoll Avoidance Trolling EVE Knowledge
Yukiyo	Posted - 2008.01.26 03:14:00 - [46] Personally i think this is a bad idea. A pod with module slots to escape warp scramble is weak. Do you want a MWD on it too to escape warp bubbles at gates? This is cotton wool EvE. With EM 5, SC 5, pods are fast escape modules as they are. If you lose your ship and get podded and lose implants that's just tough. That's a loss and without that sting losing something starts to mean less and less.
Rane Connor	Posted - 2008.01.29 18:45:00 - [47] The best solution is to give a invulnerabilty to pods until A) the pod pilot makes an action ie. click the mouse on anything, or push any key or B)after 5-10 sec delay. This reduces petitions for lags, and give someone a fighting chance to escape a lagged out battle in a fair way to everyone, and does nothing to change any mechanics to the game. The player can't just sit there, and someone else can't shoot a lagged pilot. Win Win. PS. Why do people have to suggest defeating the purpose of a pod, like adding slots... why don't we just make every pod a black ops ship. Let's all say we played EVE and don't. Crazyiness. But thanks for the opinion anyway.
Doctor Bruce	Posted - 2008.02.16 14:09:00 - [48] I propose an "Auto Warp To Safety" feature. I've personally been podded because of the discreet amount of time it takes to find a stargate or station on your HUD and warp there. I suggest that following the in game mechanics and with possibly very little effort from CCP. We make it just slightly more difficult for a pirate to target a pod and scramble it in the time it takes to align to a safe spot. A dedicated pod killer is then faced with a decision as to whether to fly a ship that can smash anything to bits or fly a ship that can target quicker. Giving at least a slightly higher chance to the gankee of fighting back and winning or being able to run if the pirate blasts his Itty V to bits. Podding has much wider implications than just the sudden rush of adrenalin followed by a period of personal hurt and maybe moving the personal standing slider all the way to the left in a fit of pique. It also affects the markets and not everybody plays Eve for the PvP. It's well known that 80% of pod pilots prefer to remain in empire space. Of late I've seen the markets for empire minerals flatten out with very little profit in say shipping mins between systems. lowsec mins are virtually non existent where I am. The markets are stagnating. I think encouraging the younger pilots to venture out into lowsec might also help to envigourate the markets a little.
Halander Meo	Posted - 2008.02.16 14:40:00 - [49] what about having decoy pods? buy 5 fake pods to have in the cargobay or "pod bay" in ships, so when you blow up, 4 pods will be released on battleships, 3 for BC, 2 for C, and 1 for frigs and destroyers.. like 10 mill pr pod or so..
Lusulpher Raddick Explorations Friend or Enemy	Posted - 2008.05.06 04:41:00 - [50] Originally by: Halander Meo what about having decoy pods? buy 5 fake pods to have in the cargobay or "pod bay" in ships, so when you blow up, 4 pods will be released on battleships, 3 for BC, 2 for C, and 1 for frigs and destroyers.. like 10 mill pr pod or so.. Large Bubble >>> multiple pods. But yes, there needs to be some sort of implant insurance or upgraded pods, it's that simple...A full set of implants is a devastating loss and there is no recompense even with excellent foreplanning. Live and Let Die...All of it...null
Jeckes	Posted - 2008.06.21 17:36:00 - [51] its important to be easily poddable, if you implant a full set of snakes and whatnot so you can nano around invincibly, and someone manages to lock you down and kill you, you deserve to lose that set as much as they deserve the kill imo. this sounds like a stealth whine about nanoship users not liking paying more than the average person for being neigh invincible. No.
Jeckes	Posted - 2008.06.21 17:38:00 - [52] Originally by: Lusulpher Originally by: Halander Meo what about having decoy pods? buy 5 fake pods to have in the cargobay or "pod bay" in ships, so when you blow up, 4 pods will be released on battleships, 3 for BC, 2 for C, and 1 for frigs and destroyers.. like 10 mill pr pod or so.. Large Bubble >>> multiple pods. But yes, there needs to be some sort of implant insurance or upgraded pods, it's that simple...A full set of implants is a devastating loss and there is no recompense even with excellent foreplanning. implant insurance.. better yet, have full insurance for all implants, modules, and ships, that way it really WILL become capitals online, since everyone will always be reimbursed fully. gtfo.
Marcus Gideon	Posted - 2008.06.21 18:30:00 - [53] Back to the matter at hand... Escape Pods are thin for a reason. They are like the inflatable life rafts aboard boats and planes today. And none of those are heavily armed, armored, or geared so well that they'd function as their own ship at sea. Pods are there so you can limp home when you explode in High Sec. And they are a last ditch effort to get out of the line of fire in Low Sec. They shouldn't be an impervious, invincible, indestructible, magical shell around you so you never have to bother with another medical clone again. Don't like getting podded? Don't put yourself in those situations. If you're enlisted in the militia, then suck it up! You asked for it.
Astria Tiphareth	Posted - 2008.06.24 09:49:00 - [54] Originally by: Marcus Gideon Escape Pods are thin for a reason. They are like the inflatable life rafts aboard boats and planes today. And none of those are heavily armed, armored, or geared so well that they'd function as their own ship at sea. Actually this logic is a bit weak. The backstory has pods as heavily armoured goo-filled shells, that survive the ship being destroyed, not ejected. After all, ships exploding tend to do quite a lot of damage, even if somehow they don't in EVE. That said, even armoured pods will be destroyed under weapons fire, so both sides of the coin are strictly irrelevant to the issue of how easily pods should be destroyed. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Marcus Gideon Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.06.24 12:12:00 - [55] Originally by: Astria Tiphareth Originally by: Marcus Gideon Escape Pods are thin for a reason. They are like the inflatable life rafts aboard boats and planes today. And none of those are heavily armed, armored, or geared so well that they'd function as their own ship at sea. Actually this logic is a bit weak. The backstory has pods as heavily armoured goo-filled shells, that survive the ship being destroyed, not ejected. After all, ships exploding tend to do quite a lot of damage, even if somehow they don't in EVE. That said, even armoured pods will be destroyed under weapons fire, so both sides of the coin are strictly irrelevant to the issue of how easily pods should be destroyed. Fine fine... we'll bump up the Shields and Armor on the Pod. Then we'll add damage to exploding ships, but only within 10m or so. Now when you "survive" the destruction of your ship, it'll show by the Large Red Bars on your damage meter. And rather than complain "their first shot took all my hit points" you can say "their first shot finished me off". I'm sure that'll make everyone going on here more happy. I still think the "heavily armored" portion is meant to reflect that the crew can't mutiny and kill the captain while they're laying in the pod. Or the fact that a teeny bubble can survive the rigors of space long enough to travel home again. But that's just me. --- Five Green Dots - One Red Dot = Happy Drones
Astria Tiphareth	Posted - 2008.06.24 12:55:00 - [56] Originally by: Marcus Gideon Now when you "survive" the destruction of your ship, it'll show by the Large Red Bars on your damage meter. And rather than complain "their first shot took all my hit points" you can say "their first shot finished me off". I'm sure that'll make everyone going on here more happy. I still think the "heavily armored" portion is meant to reflect that the crew can't mutiny and kill the captain while they're laying in the pod. Or the fact that a teeny bubble can survive the rigors of space long enough to travel home again. But that's just me. I was actually agreeing with you in general, just pointing out the backstory references. It's all relative. One person's heavy armour is another person's papier mache; depends what gun you point at the armour I rather like the notion of pods coming out damaged in a twisted sort of way, although you can guarantee cries of 'my pod started out damaged, why is this?' and so on. Anyway, back to the topic. Pods and podding are always going to be a contentious issue. One side (the victim) will want them to be invulnerable spheres of doom, the other side (the shooter) will want them to be paper-thin. The balance is ok. However you could bump the hitpoints up and no-one would really notice or care, because a scrambled pod isn't going anywhere, it just takes longer to kill. It would reduce the 'accidental' podding e.g. by smartbombs. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Zirconium Blade Ass Pounding Space Monkeys	Posted - 2008.06.24 13:51:00 - [57] This is a pretty sweet topic from 2003
Jawas	Posted - 2008.06.24 14:04:00 - [58] Originally by: Astria Tiphareth Anyway, back to the topic. Pods and podding are always going to be a contentious issue. One side (the victim) will want them to be invulnerable spheres of doom, the other side (the shooter) will want them to be paper-thin. The balance is ok. However you could bump the hitpoints up and no-one would really notice or care, because a scrambled pod isn't going anywhere, it just takes longer to kill. It would reduce the 'accidental' podding e.g. by smartbombs. I think the pod should be a little tougher. There's a difference between paper thin and one volleyed by a noob frig Whether it's going somewhere or not, players should be able to last long enough for an EW ship to ECM and unlock whoever is scambling you in a fleet fight. Players should be able to do something to defend their corpmates pods as well as thier ships. Half the time, if you've been popped, your pod has gone before your ship has even finished exploding. That's not nearly long enough for anyone to get help from a corpmate. The option for players to buy tougher pods is sound. Even if they introduced a really horrendously expensive pod with 2 points of stab natural. If they were all put on an NPC market, this would be a great isk sink. -- Sig design in training: Remaining time 30 years 20 days, 4 hours, 10 mins, 15 seconds.
BobbyCarter	Posted - 2008.06.24 14:42:00 - [59] Originally by: Washell Olivaw Originally by: Zeph Yrus this would also help as a money sink Losing a set of implants is probably a bigger ISK sink than the price for a better pod. Uhh... Unless these things are seeded by the market, you're both wrong. Neither actually removes ISK from the economy, just moves it around. Player driven economy understanding, FAIL!
Zirconium Blade Ass Pounding Space Monkeys	Posted - 2008.06.24 14:44:00 - [60] Thread was created in '03, pods havent changed since then. Don't think they're going to change anytime soon.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.