EVE Search - 1 VS 1 Matches

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

1 VS 1 Matches

» 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)
Ayn Randy Dark Falcon Operations 20	Posted - 2012.10.05 15:39:00 - [1] - Quote "We're also working on a replacement for the usage of loot-theft as a way to initiate consensual 1v1s without incurring criminal penalties that we hope to release for Winter." Havent seen a thread about this yet. But how do you guys feel about this kinda change? I personally think it would be a good addition, just because the highsec carebears can try out the PVP aspect of the game and may actually like it. I know this is already possible but the fact that it is a real 1vs1, without the chance of 5 guys and neutral reps coming in would give people that push.
Bagrat Skalski Poseidaon 39	Posted - 2012.10.05 15:54:00 - [2] - Quote Maybe a trick with mutual party flagging for pvp activities, sort of invite/accept pvp. About WIS
Jim Era 4243	Posted - 2012.10.05 15:56:00 - [3] - Quote wat
Lord Ryan True Xero 688	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:00:00 - [4] - Quote IB4UGA Do not assume-áanything above this line-áwas typed by me. Nerf the Truth, it's inconvenient. Nerf it cause I can't fly it. I want to fly a badass Mon Calamari stlye-ácruiser painted to match my Tron clothes.
Azrin Stella Oerndotte The Nommo 5	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:03:00 - [5] - Quote It better not come with a "yes/no" window that lock everything else up, I can just see how that can ruin a fight...
Random McNally Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 61	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:07:00 - [6] - Quote I have no trouble getting 1 v 1's. vOv Edit: cuz speling is hard
Steve Ronuken Fuzzwork Enterprises 689	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:09:00 - [7] - Quote Ideally it'll work on a fleet to fleet basis. Just makes things easier than they are now. (multi can flipping = not fun) Or possibly: 'Everyone in this fleet is now flagged to everyone else in fleet' FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator, invention chance calculator, isk/m3 Ore chart-á and other 'useful' utilities.
Petrus Blackshell Rifterlings Damu'Khonde 1743	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:11:00 - [8] - Quote It makes "sense", but encouraging organized PvP via in-game mechanics should be done very cautiously. Eve is not a game for balanced or "fair" fights. Yes, you should be able to fight 1v1 and the jetcan solution is logically ridiculous. That said, "slippery slope" and all means that a lot of people who would otherwise be roaming and possibly giving good fights would instead say "nah, we'll just go with organized PvP, where there's no chance of suddenly Falcon". That is detrimental for all roaming PvP in Eve, and Eve's sanboxiness. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - low/nullsec operations, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Keno Skir Vectis Covert Solutions 230	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:32:00 - [9] - Quote Petrus Blackshell wrote: It makes "sense", but encouraging organized PvP via in-game mechanics should be done very cautiously. Eve is not a game for balanced or "fair" fights. Yes, you should be able to fight 1v1 and the jetcan solution is logically ridiculous. That said, "slippery slope" and all means that a lot of people who would otherwise be roaming and possibly giving good fights would instead say "nah, we'll just go with organized PvP, where there's no chance of suddenly Falcon". That is detrimental for all roaming PvP in Eve, and Eve's sanboxiness. This ^ Nice one Petrus If you have any further thoughts on something i've posted, or want to ask an unrelated question feel free to contact me by EvE Mail or by private conversation if i'm online. BUDDY TRIALS AVAILABLE - 21days plus big ISK bonus and starting assistance
Karl Hobb Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium 692	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:33:00 - [10] - Quote The fact that people use a can-flipping mechanic to organize 1v1s (with all the ass-hattery that goes along with it) in the first place indicates that people see value in PvP under that format. On the other hand I don't think we're suddenly going to see the death of roaming or non-consensual PvP if a more formalized 1v1 mechanic becomes available because there's a certain stigma surrounding 1v1 station humping and there's no real meaning to it. I also suspect that the new CW2 flags and their restrictions on docking, jumping, ejecting, etc... will deter a lot of the current 1v1 crowd because of the need to truly commit to a fight. The mechanic is obviously needed and it will certainly help with impromptu tournaments, 1v1s, and what-not, but it remains to be seen how much it will affect the game. Nothing Found
highonpop Eve Liberation Force Fatal Ascension 339	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:35:00 - [11] - Quote So now you have to ask someone if you can shoot at them? And if they say no, your guns wont activate on them? What kind of stupid ** is this? Are we really trying to turn EVE into WOW? What the ** is wrong with you people? If you don't want to ever pvp and thus don;t want others to be able to shoot at you... don't play EVE. ITs really that simple. PvP is the basis of EVE. BTW, this would 100% eliminate gankers, as the person could just say "no" in their "pvp invite window" and go on about their business... (not good for EVE, why build stuff if the stuff you previously sold is not been blown up yet? Eventually, you get to where there is no purpose behind the game) http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Very%20best%20of%20Makalu%20Zarya R.I.P Vile Rat http://evemaps.dotlan.net/live/Outpost/Rename/2012-09-12
Karl Hobb Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium 693	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:42:00 - [12] - Quote highonpop wrote: So now you have to ask someone if you can shoot at them? And if they say no, your guns wont activate on them? No, this topic is discussing what will replace the can-flipping 1v1 mechanic that will no longer work under CW2. Ganking and other sorts of PvP are not affected. Nothing Found
Unsuccessful At Everything Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 70	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:47:00 - [13] - Quote How about some new useless duel mechanic that has 10 popup windows that asks if youre "sure you want to proceed with this dangerous act"?
bloodknight2 Talledega Knights 20	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:53:00 - [14] - Quote Why not a new contract option? You send a contract to someone for a 1VS1 in hi sec. If he accepts, both can shoot each other 1min after the contract has been accepted.
MushroomMushroom Consolidated Sprocket 47	Posted - 2012.10.05 16:59:00 - [15] - Quote bloodknight2 wrote: Why not a new contract option? You send a contract to someone for a 1VS1 in hi sec. If he accepts, both can shoot each other 1min after the contract has been accepted. I was going to suggest something similar, but to make it more flexible, allow a player to contract a fixed duration kill right against themselves. Could make it re-trade/contractable for a variety of potentially interesting mechanics in addition to 1v1 duels.
highonpop Eve Liberation Force Fatal Ascension 339	Posted - 2012.10.05 17:00:00 - [16] - Quote Karl Hobb wrote: highonpop wrote: So now you have to ask someone if you can shoot at them? And if they say no, your guns wont activate on them? No, this topic is discussing what will replace the can-flipping 1v1 mechanic that will no longer work under CW2. Ganking and other sorts of PvP are not affected. Can flipping has never been and never will be a way to 1v1. The person who 'takes' from the can always gets dropped on by the other corp. why its called bait-can http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Very%20best%20of%20Makalu%20Zarya R.I.P Vile Rat http://evemaps.dotlan.net/live/Outpost/Rename/2012-09-12
Karl Hobb Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium 693	Posted - 2012.10.05 17:04:00 - [17] - Quote highonpop wrote: Can flipping has never been and never will be a way to 1v1. The person who 'takes' from the can always gets dropped on by the other corp. why its called bait-can vOv It doesn't work anymore under CW2. The devs want to replace it. OP is exploring ways to do that. Ganking isn't going away. Nothing Found
Jim Hazard Scrubfleet 19	Posted - 2012.10.05 17:57:00 - [18] - Quote Karl Hobb wrote: highonpop wrote: Can flipping has never been and never will be a way to 1v1. The person who 'takes' from the can always gets dropped on by the other corp. why its called bait-can vOv It doesn't work anymore under CW2. The devs want to replace it. OP is exploring ways to do that. Ganking isn't going away. You could still ask ppl if anyone is interested in a 1v1... warp to a safe... drop can.... fight it out and someone will actually die since there is no station to dock if the fight does not go in the favor of one involved party. Yes you can never be sure that the person does not drop fleet and warps in other people, but either the pilot honors the 1v1 agreement or he does not, but thats how eve is. I say no to any kind of arenas or PvP flags or similiar crap.
Joneleth Rein Odysseus Co 6	Posted - 2012.10.05 19:43:00 - [19] - Quote highonpop wrote: So now you have to ask someone if you can shoot at them? And if they say no, your guns wont activate on them? What kind of stupid ** is this? Are we really trying to turn EVE into WOW? What the ** is wrong with you people? If you don't want to ever pvp and thus don;t want others to be able to shoot at you... don't play EVE. ITs really that simple. PvP is the basis of EVE. BTW, this would 100% eliminate gankers, as the person could just say "no" in their "pvp invite window" and go on about their business... (not good for EVE, why build stuff if the stuff you previously sold is not been blown up yet? Eventually, you get to where there is no purpose behind the game) That's not what they are saying by the way. Can-flipping will stil be covered with the suspect flag which warrants aggression anyway. You can still shoot them but you'r subject to Concordokken as it is now anyway. No change there.So it's probably some kind of consentual PVP in high-sec. Also I agree with Petrus completely. Damn good catch there. Although it's a good idea it has a bad slippery slope warning. As for the fleet vs fleet idea. Althought it sounds nice it stil feels tricky and open to abuse as well. Essentially a way to do pvp without war decs...A good tool but people might end up organising consentual fights to do PVP instead of war-deccing some damn corp that stands in their way.[Edit]Also allowing npc corp members to do consentual PVP which again I don't like as it's one more valid reason for them not to join a player corp [/Edit]. I'm all for more and better PVP in high-sec (loving the new crimewatch/bounties implications)but this feels like adding a mini-game PVP arena instead of just using the sandbox's rules to create pvp in it. Spider Pig!-áSpider Pig! Does what a Spider Pig does.. Can he swing? From a web.. No he can't. He's a pig.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance 951	Posted - 2012.10.05 21:30:00 - [20] - Quote Petrus Blackshell wrote: It makes "sense", but encouraging organized PvP via in-game mechanics should be done very cautiously. Eve is not a game for balanced or "fair" fights. Yes, you should be able to fight 1v1 and the jetcan solution is logically ridiculous. That said, "slippery slope" and all means that a lot of people who would otherwise be roaming and possibly giving good fights would instead say "nah, we'll just go with organized PvP, where there's no chance of suddenly Falcon". That is detrimental for all roaming PvP in Eve, and Eve's sanboxiness. shakes fist Damn You Blackshell for beating to the punch! I've been saying this in every single arena and "consensual PvP" idea for years. That said... As long as this 1v1 "contract" does not prevent people outside of the 1v1 from "interfering" (providing RR, warfare links, etc) It won't change much of anything. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
Karl Hobb Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium 695	Posted - 2012.10.05 22:08:00 - [21] - Quote ShahFluffers wrote: As long as this 1v1 "contract" does not prevent people outside of the 1v1 from "interfering" (providing RR, warfare links, etc) It won't change much of anything. I imagine it'll be something along the lines of a "mutual limited engagement" where neither has a suspect flag, in which case neutral RR would be flagged as suspect (but not CONCORDed). The problem is that It's a safer mechanic than the old can-flipping method (for the flipper) since the other party's corp can't jump in, and it's also safer than can-flipping under CW2 since the flipper doesn't gain a suspect flag. Although not instanced in the traditional sense, a lot of the risk is "instanced". Alternatively you could have a "mutual suspect engagement" where both parties gain a suspect flag and all the fun that goes along with it, and enter into a limited engagement. This opens up far more options for general lulz and, IMO at least, feels more "EVE". Nothing Found
Nicolo da'Vicenza Air The Unthinkables 1895	Posted - 2012.10.05 22:53:00 - [22] - Quote cool next they can have a special 'test dual mode" that recinds the mutual kill rights and sends CONCORD in if one of the players puts his opponents into structure. Instead a trumpet noise is blared and a system-wide announcement is made that xXm0nK3y$p4nkXx has defeated Eldritch Gondlor and both players keep their ships after the duel, albeit one has likely learned a lesson in humility. it would give space duelists the option of embracing the honoure of the cosmos
Pipa Porto 1147	Posted - 2012.10.06 05:25:00 - [23] - Quote highonpop wrote: Karl Hobb wrote: highonpop wrote: So now you have to ask someone if you can shoot at them? And if they say no, your guns wont activate on them? No, this topic is discussing what will replace the can-flipping 1v1 mechanic that will no longer work under CW2. Ganking and other sorts of PvP are not affected. Can flipping has never been and never will be a way to 1v1. The person who 'takes' from the can always gets dropped on by the other corp. why its called bait-can Now the question is whether CCP's going to retain the possibility of those kinds of tarps when 1v1ing in HS. Somehow I doubt it. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone -RubyPorto
Mars Theran Caldari Provisions Caldari State 333	Posted - 2012.10.06 12:33:00 - [24] - Quote Random McNally wrote: I have no trouble getting 1 v 1's. vOv Edit: cuz speling is hard Neither do I. I just undock in Jita in some classy, expensive ship, and drop a can. If my fit is decent, I have to grab someone elses can, then wait for them to get there buddies to back them up, but still get a fight after all. Usually, in the second case, it doesn't last quite as long, and it's only usually 1v1 for a brief few moments. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Optimo Sebiestor The Society Calyxes 26	Posted - 2012.10.06 17:00:00 - [25] - Quote What about 2v2!!?
Petrus Blackshell Rifterlings Damu'Khonde 1755	Posted - 2012.10.06 17:19:00 - [26] - Quote Optimo Sebiestor wrote: What about 2v2!!? Enabling NvN "fair" fights is about the worst thing CCP could do, for a few reasons: Fights will never be truly fair. Even if neutral RR, offgrid boosts, and other dickery are done with, there are still issues of boosters (drugs), implants, skill differentials, etc. Not to mention the inherent imbalance in ships (Wolf vs Hawk is nearly an impossible win for the Wolf, despite both ships being AFs). Why would you take your small gang out and roam low/null sec if instead you could sit in Jita station and spam "Looking For Fight" all day? The latter involves far less effort, and has less of a chance of "SUDDENLY FALCON". A fight system like this would lead to further deadening of low/null sec small gang PvP. There is nothing in Eve that says "fair". It is not in the spirit of the game: there is always a bigger fish. Turning the ocean into a series of aquariums makes it boring, and no different than other MMOs. We don't need that. L2P, HTFU, etc. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - low/nullsec operations, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Abdiel Kavash Paladin Order Fidelas Constans 877	Posted - 2012.10.06 18:15:00 - [27] - Quote I really don't have a problem with a "mutual Concord non-involment pact" or whatever. But it shouldn't interfere with any established game mechanics. Specifically it should still be possible to suigank or remote assist the participants in highsec, and shoot them in low even if you're not involved in the pact. I don't think that it would be in the "spirit" of EVE to provide any guarantees (e.g. frigate vs frigate) though. Both parties agree to combat, and from that moment until either party dies, anything goes. It should be possible to declare on an individual or fleet-vs-fleet basis.
MeBiatch Republic University Minmatar Republic 605	Posted - 2012.10.06 18:55:00 - [28] - Quote i have been an advocate for pvp concord contracts fro a few years now... have made several threads about it... glad to see CCP is embrasing another great idea Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point? -áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
Mars Theran Caldari Provisions Caldari State 337	Posted - 2012.10.06 19:23:00 - [29] - Quote I'm thinking it will be rather simple. Just an invite that flags a limited engagement between 2 people. flag more people with similar invites if you want them. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Roime Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance 1311	Posted - 2012.10.06 20:01:00 - [30] - Quote Stop this madness. Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman

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.