Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 72 post(s) |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1348
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:05:00 -
[421] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:No, carebears are usually looking to make a profit. When it comes to their little PvE activities. When it comes to PvP, they're usually happy to just give away the opportunity to attack their aggressors/griefers. Wardecs taught us this last May. Ahh, but in a war dec situation their usual business is being shut down by the war dec. They can't make money while it is ongoing, they can only lose money or leave their own corp (which is disruptive). It's pretty understandable that they would want as many people on their side as possible, to put an end to the war as quickly as possible. This situation is completely and utterly different. They got ganked, it can happen at any time and they know it. Their ISK making activities aren't being shut down, they are at no greater risk than normal. Life has already reverted to it's normal pace. It is by far to their advantage to sell that right at a reasonable price and compensate themselves at their attackers expense. They have absolutely nothing to lose by doing so, and have the potential for anything from a modest to an impressive gain. I guess we'll find out come December/January how it plays out.
If you're right, and kill rights for ISK is the norm, then kill right baiting becomes a viable profession. Baiting people into paying for kill right activation to an alt, then docking up for 15 minutes. Repeat. Caldari Militia |
Megan DeMonet
The RedNeck Posse
1
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:13:00 -
[422] - Quote
this is some good stuff....
I see a lot of gankers crying about "oh no, now i can be killed by a fleet instead of the noob miner that cant fight. this is a bunch of BS, think ill go play WOW." <-- not a direct quote, then again i skipped a few pages so it could be.
then dont be ganking., that just leave more targets for the ones with the jewels to do the job. funny how i always hear "carebear" this and "carebear" that. but when it comes down to the it. the gankers seem to cry the most when its their turn to be taken advantage of.
and oh hell yea, ill still gank me some ppl, steal their crap, pod them in highsec. you know why? do ya, huh?
I'll tell you why.
BECAUSE THAT SHTUFF IS FUN!
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
960
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:17:00 -
[423] - Quote
Megan DeMonet wrote:this is some good stuff....
I see a lot of gankers crying about "oh no, now i can be killed by a fleet instead of the noob miner that cant fight. this is a bunch of BS, think ill go play WOW." <-- not a direct quote, then again i skipped a few pages so it could be. This could already happen, if the noob miner had a fleet defending him.
http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2526
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:20:00 -
[424] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:No, carebears are usually looking to make a profit. When it comes to their little PvE activities. When it comes to PvP, they're usually happy to just give away the opportunity to attack their aggressors/griefers. Wardecs taught us this last May. Ahh, but in a war dec situation their usual business is being shut down by the war dec. They can't make money while it is ongoing, they can only lose money or leave their own corp (which is disruptive). It's pretty understandable that they would want as many people on their side as possible, to put an end to the war as quickly as possible. This situation is completely and utterly different. They got ganked, it can happen at any time and they know it. Their ISK making activities aren't being shut down, they are at no greater risk than normal. Life has already reverted to it's normal pace. It is by far to their advantage to sell that right at a reasonable price and compensate themselves at their attackers expense. They have absolutely nothing to lose by doing so, and have the potential for anything from a modest to an impressive gain. I guess we'll find out come December/January how it plays out. If you're right, and kill rights for ISK is the norm, then kill right baiting becomes a viable profession. Baiting people into paying for kill right activation to an alt, then docking up for 15 minutes. Repeat. Fair enough my friend. It should be interesting if nothing else.
To be honest, one of the reasons why I am taking this stance and not backing you up on this, was my first thought on hearing the new system was one of having missed an opportunity.
A couple of weeks ago my freighter alt was attacked by a group of several Tornado and Talos battle cruisers, in an attempt to gank my several billion ISK cargo. The attempt failed by a narrow margin, due to some wise precautions I had taken that I won't go into.
So upon reading this Dev Blog my very first reactions was "Doh, if this had happened to me after this went live I could have sold all of those kill rights (for the attack) for 10 or 20 million ISK each. After all, these guys were hanging around the gate in modestly expensive ships... and likely would do so again. Each one would have been a fairly tempting target for anybody passing by if they had a kill right for that amount on their heads. At a minimum I would have recouped more than the price of my repair bill, even if they removed the kill rights with an alt.
The least desirable outcome would have been that they kept those characters docked for 30 days, but even that would have provided a fairly rewarding sense of satisfaction.
The possibility of giving the kill right away simply to get revenge never crossed my mind, particularly since it would play directly to their benefit (allowing easy removal by an alt).
If that is MY first reaction, I seriously doubt I would be in the minority on this. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Violet Giraffe
FROZEN HEADS Stainless.
8
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:24:00 -
[425] - Quote
So as far as I understand, anyone can now be griefed through the new bounty system? |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2526
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:27:00 -
[426] - Quote
Violet Giraffe wrote:So as far as I understand, anyone can now be griefed through the new bounty system? A bounty does not remove Concord protection. The payout will likely end up around 20% of the value of the ship (possibly mods and cargo) until the bounty amount is used up. It can make a gank attempt a bit more likely to turn a profit, and raises your chances to be a target, but doesn't leave you without the usual Concord protection. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
94
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:40:00 -
[427] - Quote
This is looking more awesome the more I read about it.
Couple little things:
Quote:Bounty pools are eliminated and a portion returned to those that contributed to the pool if the target has been inactive (unsubscribed) for a long time. I assume a mail will go out to the person who placed the bounty that this has happened.
Quote:WeGÇÖll redo the Most Wanted list to make it cooler and more useful. The characters with the top bounties on them will be ranked, with the rank giving a bonus to the payout percentage for killing them. This means high-rank characters are potentially juicier targets. I assume people who have been unsubscribed will be removed from the most wanted list. (should be automatic since being unsubscribed will remove the bounty pool anyway, but you never know what devs manage to overlook ;))
Quote:Bounties have no effect on who can be attacked legally where. This was a rather big letdown though, but at least it will be possible to gain some isk due to bounty being awarded at ship destruction now instead of podding (which is next to impossible to achieve solo anyway).
I do hope that there are no ship insurance trickeries available that would make it worthwhile to the bounty person to keep destroying his own ships.. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4879
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:41:00 -
[428] - Quote
You should get ALL THE LIKES for this.
Massive thank you to Superfriends for fixing what has been a long-term open sore in the balance of hi-sec MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4879
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:42:00 -
[429] - Quote
Violet Giraffe wrote:So as far as I understand, anyone can now be griefed through the new bounty system?
Read The Damb Dev Blog wrote: Bounties have no effect on who can be attacked legally where.
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9858
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:42:00 -
[430] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:Alts Voiding Kill Rights Undock in a shuttle. An alt activates the kill right. Blows up shuttle. Kill right completed.
CCP will fix this cleverness quickly, since it voids the entire kill right system on zero day. This is already fixed in the system. If you want control over your revenge, don't make the kill public (or do it under controlled circumstances).
Quote:Boiling a FrogAs I wrote previously, this is another step towards sunshine and rainbows in highsec. Kill rights, rather than encouraging PvP in highsec, will effectively reduce it over the long haul. There'll still be those people who don't give a **** about the mechanics, but there'll be more people who will give up their highsec criminality, because being gangbanged at any time and any place is not desirable. This isn't compatible with your concern about voiding kill rights. The danger of your gangbang scenario basically comes down to what kind of warning the prospective victim will get that he is about to have a bad day. Aside from that insecurity factor, it's no different than being -5, and people manage that just fine.
Violet Giraffe wrote:So as far as I understand, anyone can now be griefed through the new bounty system? No more than they can under the current system. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
Kai'rae Saarkus
Ganja Labs Exodus.
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:47:00 -
[431] - Quote
Megan DeMonet wrote:this is some good stuff.... I see a lot of gankers crying about "oh no, now i can be killed by a fleet instead of the noob miner that cant fight. this is a bunch of BS, think ill go play WOW." <-- not a direct quote, then again i skipped a few pages so it could be. then dont be ganking., that just leave more targets for the ones with the jewels to do the job. funny how i always hear "carebear" this and "carebear" that. but when it comes down to the it. the gankers seem to cry the most when its their turn to be taken advantage of. and oh hell yea, ill still gank me some ppl, steal their crap, pod them in highsec. you know why? do ya, huh? I'll tell you why. BECAUSE THAT SHTUFF IS FUN!
Ganking now has consequences. That's awesome.
But balance it. Re-introduce Insurance payouts for CONCORDed ships.
This means it's less expensive to suicide gank (therefore more of them). BUT, you can be counterganked due to kill rights. (It also buffs the Skiff, because a Mack survives against Desties easily, but Tier 3s will need a Skiff).
Result: actions have consequences. But all play styles are supported.
The Gankers point is that CCP's recent changes are making Suicide Ganking almost impossible. It's a play style that is part of EVE and needs to be balanced as part of the whole ecology of EVE. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4880
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:47:00 -
[432] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:How exactly does this encourage players to have killrights generated on themselves?
I only see yet another measure being taken to make highsec even safer than it already is. There's going to be a lot less suicide ganking if people can just buy a killright at any time for cheap (and you know they'll be cheap) and instantly make that player free to be shot at by anyone.
How is this possibly a good mechanic? How is this not removing risk from highsec aside from people who want that risk. You're slowly Trammelizing highsec, and this change is a huge step towards that.
So encouraging non consensual PvP in hi-sec is "Trammelisation"? OK
Or wait, do you only like the kind of non consensual PvP that you agree to? So you shooting a guy that can't shoot back: good PvP. You being the guy that gets ganked: bad PvP? Right?
Let my sum up my rebuttal to this class of argument:
Oohhhh, that's too bad *kiss* *kiss* mommy make it better did the nasty bounty hunter scare you away from a life of crime *soothe* *soothe* MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
960
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:48:00 -
[433] - Quote
Tippia wrote:This is already fixed in the system. If you want control over your revenge, don't make the kill public (or do it under controlled circumstances). Yeah, cause that'll happen. You can bet that a very large number of players will sell their killrights for free or for very cheap just for the possibility of getting revenge on the guy who killed them. This of course leads the system open to being easily exploited.
Tippia wrote:This isn't compatible with your concern about voiding kill rights. The danger of your gangbang scenario basically comes down to what kind of warning the prospective victim will get that he is about to have a bad day. Aside from that insecurity factor, it's no different than being -5, and people manage that just fine Except that to be -5 you have to commit a whole lot more criminal acts and even then you can easily avoid this mechanic by simple ratting. A single criminal act in highsec or a single podkill in lowsec allows the victim to place the killright on sale, at which point anybody can activate your suspect timer. I don't know how you can honestly stand here and say this isn't a huge deterrent to criminal activity in highsec.
Tippia wrote:No more than they can under the current system. I'm not so sure that's the case. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
94
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:48:00 -
[434] - Quote
Singulis Pacifica wrote: And it still leads to grief issues. How exactly is this going to encourage new players to join EvE online? The moment they get out in their pod on their way to their noob ship, they are a potential target to have a bounty placed on their head. Of course. attacking them makes the attacker a criminal. But what if you just have a few alts that you don't care about? You can grief new players with this.
Why would somebody place a bounty on a noob?
Rather pointless to go about crying about things that will never happen. Having a bounty on you doesn't remove concord protection anyway.. so bounty is NOT a griefing mechanic.
I applaud the removal of the restrictions that allowed for basically anybody to avoid having bounty placed on them if they so wanted. Currently you can't for example place a bounty on me, because of my positive secstatus. I'm glad such artificial and pointless restrictions are going away.
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
960
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:51:00 -
[435] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:How exactly does this encourage players to have killrights generated on themselves?
I only see yet another measure being taken to make highsec even safer than it already is. There's going to be a lot less suicide ganking if people can just buy a killright at any time for cheap (and you know they'll be cheap) and instantly make that player free to be shot at by anyone.
How is this possibly a good mechanic? How is this not removing risk from highsec aside from people who want that risk. You're slowly Trammelizing highsec, and this change is a huge step towards that. So encouraging non consensual PvP in hi-sec is "Trammelisation"? OK Or wait, do you only like the kind of non consensual PvP that you agree to? So you shooting a guy that can't shoot back: good PvP. You being the guy that gets ganked: bad PvP? Right? Let my sum up my rebuttal to this class of argument: Oohhhh, that's too bad *kiss* *kiss* mommy make it better did the nasty bounty hunter scare you away from a life of crime *soothe* *soothe*
I realize asking you not to use strawmen is probably asking a bit much, but please try anyway. I'm not against an increase in risk for gankers or criminals. I'm against a decrease in risk for miners, mission runners, incursion runners, freighter alts, and the like. That's what this mechanic accomplishes, albeit indirectly. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Shaera Taam
Minmatar Death Squad Broken Chains Alliance
47
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 06:56:00 -
[436] - Quote
rock ON with the bounty hunting awesomeness!
\../_ .v. _\../
Thus Spake the Frigate Goddess! |
Crash Me
Enterprise Estonia Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:07:00 -
[437] - Quote
The CCP insurance company should also double to the bounty placed by player, to make it more attractive. And make the person who has bounty on him trackable, so if he moves true high sec gates. This way other palyers could see hes last moves in high sec find him more easily. |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3465
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:08:00 -
[438] - Quote
Atomic Option wrote:As someone who's primarily in Wspace and 0.0 I just came here to give Punkturis an explosive brofist.
YES! :brofist: Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9859
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:08:00 -
[439] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yeah, cause that'll happen. Yes, because that's how the system works. It's not something that has to happen GÇö those are the mechanics.
How players choose to employ those mechanics is just the game being played. If player choose to create that GÇ£problemGÇ¥ for themselves, then that's their choice. They can also choose not to. The GÇ£fixGÇ¥ exists if you want it. If you don't want it, then there's nothing to complain about.
Quote: don't know how you can honestly stand here and say this isn't a huge deterrent to criminal activity in highsec. By looking at how easy it is to work around and by looking at the added incentives. Oh, and by the fact that people manage to live under worse circumstances.
Quote:I'm not so sure that's the case. Seeing as how bonties have no effect on the rules (which prohibit GÇ£griefing someone out of the gameGÇ¥) nor on the ability to constantly attack peole (since it doesn't change the aggression rules in an way), it will have the exact same effect on griefing people out of the game as the current bounty system does, simply because the current bounty system does the exact same things in that regard.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4883
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:11:00 -
[440] - Quote
Crash Me wrote:The CCP insurance company should also double to the bounty placed by player, to make it more attractive. And make the person who has bounty on him trackable, so if he moves true high sec gates. This way other palyers could see hes last moves in high sec find him more easily.
Don't be ridiculous. If you want to get someone bounty hunted, put a decent bounty on them, you cheapskate. MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
|
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:13:00 -
[441] - Quote
Most of this sound really good. I've actually been waiting for these changes since I started playing this game. In general is sounds like a huge step in the right direction.
However eliminating all current bounties seems like a very poor decision. People paid those amounts out of their wallets and now you guys are just going to steal that isk from the game? And I don't use the word steal lightly here. You guys sell PLEX for real life money and the isk made from selling that PLEX can be used for anything in game including placing bounties. When isk is removed from the game it reduces the total isk pool and therefore has an upward effect on prices. Meaning more PLEXs have to be purchased to buy the same stuff. So that aspect of this change seems very shady at best and bordering on criminal.
As far as the bounty only paying out 20% of the ship value I'm not sure why you went so low? I mean anything below full payout will prevent players from cashing in on their own bounties with alts. What the 20% does is make it so that no matter how big of a bounty you put on someone it will almost never be cost effective to gank someone for their bounty. In low sec and null sec the people that like to shoot at other people do, up till now the people that don't like to shoot at other people had no way to deal with this. It would seem bounties should be something to balance things.
what I mean is someone running around low or null sec is likely to get shot at by the people that will shoot at them and not by those that won't and a bounty likely won't change that. I doubt a bounty would make someone shoot at a "blue" and not having a bounty will not stop someone from shooting at a "red" or "neut".
To me it would seem that they way bounties can bring some balance is when someone can put a bounty high enough on a player to make them afraid to travel without much caution in high sec. I realize that the transferable kill rights is intended to help with that but what if you want to put a bounty on someone that has never killed another player like a jita scammer for example.
Again aside from stealing the current bounties most of these changes seem like a real good start but I think there is room between what you proposed and ideal. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
962
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:33:00 -
[442] - Quote
Tippia wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yeah, cause that'll happen. Yes, because that's how the system works. It's not something that has to happen GÇö those are the mechanics. Tippia wrote:How players choose to employ those mechanics is just the game being played. If player choose to create that GÇ£problemGÇ¥ for themselves, then that's their choice. They can also choose not to. The GÇ£fixGÇ¥ exists if you want it. If you don't want it, then there's nothing to complain about. I don't think CCP agrees with you there.
Tippia wrote:Quote:don't know how you can honestly stand here and say this isn't a huge deterrent to criminal activity in highsec. By looking at how easy it is to work around and by looking at the added incentives. Oh, and by the fact that people manage to live under worse circumstances. You hint a lot at these added incentives. What are they, exactly? http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Lunaleil Fournier
StarFleet Enterprises Red Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:36:00 -
[443] - Quote
This isn't "bounty hunting" its "kill bonuses."
The whole "Accept Bounty, track down bounty, capture/kill bounty" ala Boba Fett, is missing in this system - which turns into more of a "You're not a 'bounty hunter' but oh he jumped into your random gatecamp and you killed him?" Here's an extra 10 mil.
Disappointed there aren't any skills being introduced so players can really develop their character. Disappointed you can't accept bounties as missions - which would be tied to skills ;)
So for instance skills would allow you to accept up to X number of active bounty missions Bounties only pay out if you have the mission accepted when you kill the mark. Skills increase the % of payout based on isk value destroyed.
That is bounty hunting. Please implement. |
Ponder Yonder
Fleet of the Damned Happy Endings
38
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:37:00 -
[444] - Quote
Great changes!
Just one question tho CCP:When calculating the ISK value of a ship loss, will the platinum insurance value of the ship be subtracted from the total? Please say yes, otherwise I see great scope for insurance abuse.
Actually two questions: will a kill-right be expended when the target is ship-killed or only when pod-killed?
|
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:37:00 -
[445] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: I'm not against an increase in risk for gankers or criminals. I'm against a decrease in risk for miners, mission runners, incursion runners, freighter alts, and the like. That's what this mechanic accomplishes, albeit indirectly.
This bounty and transferable kill rights does absolutely nothing to change risk for anyone. All rules that affect risk remain unchanged. The only risk that you could say is being affected is the risk of an actual consequence. There are no changes here that make it any harder or riskier for gankers or criminals nor easier for missioner or miners. The only thing that changes is that if you are they type of person that likes to shoot at people that typically don't shoot back they now have a way to pay other's to do it for them .
Up until now there has been a very extreme unbalance in the game mechanics. This unbalance is that in high sec criminals and griefers have all the advantages of game mechanics to protect them to hunt freely until such a time as they find a suitable victim and up to this point there is nothing the victimized player could do about it. It was totally onesided. A ganker for example can sit on a gate with 6 of his friends and gank all week long and as long as they only shoot at pilots that can only fly industrial type ships like freighters and barges then there was nothing the industrial toons could do about it.
I understand that you are upset that a mechanic that has given an extremely unbalanced advantage to a playstyle that you like is being brought closer to balance will make things less easy for you. But this is not making life in high sec safer for anyone it's just bringing consequence to actions.
I think this will encourage more actual PvP ( meaning PvP fit ships with guns fighting other PvP fit ships with guns ) to high sec which I think is what everyone wants or at least what most interested parties would like to see.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9859
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:45:00 -
[446] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I don't think CCP agrees with you there. How so?
Quote:You hint a lot at these added incentives. What are they, exactly? Bounties, most notably. Baiting is another one. Killboard scores and ISK are great motivatorsGǪ
I've heard mumblings about a few other ideas people have had, but they'll depend on the exact mechanics so mehGǪ
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 08:17:00 -
[447] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
This is all perfectly, fine, but it will upset carebears, and CCP will respond. Carebears are naturally quite stupid, and CCP has determined it is their job to protect them.
I'm not realy sure how anyone could say this. The first 9 years of this game have been very anti carebear. The HTFU video just put music to a slogan that CCP had going long before then . I agree that this coming expansion sounds like it will be carebear friendly but I think it is much need to bring balance to the game.
I can agree that carbears need to have risk but so do gankers and criminals and currently they don't.
With the current game mechanic criminal types can roam high sec or gate camp high sec freely with all the benefits of concord protection. Since they plan on loosing their ship to concord anyway they will be in cheap ships that they intend to loose and will be a gank magnet to one one. They can chose to engage or not on their own terms full protected by concord and at no risk to themselves. They can do this repeatedly until they get -5 sec status and then have to go to low or null and belt rat a bit until standings improve. All combat occurs on his terms when he chooses and thanks to the protection of concord.
On the flip side carebears have to fly around in expensive ships typically ( and example would be what hulks cost and how easy they were to gank until the recent barge changes ) and have to fly around paranoid like a schizophrenic 23/7 and risk his expensive: barges, freighters, faction or T2 mission boats etc. As things are now one player with no skills can war dec an incursion corp and not even log in all week but still prevent them from running incursions unless they can get a full corp group because no one will want war deced players in fleet.
I agree this game needs and is intended to have risk. But that goes for everyone. Not to mention that if CCP keeps encouraging pirate type game play because it gets lots of press out of game then soon everyone will be a pirate and there will be no carebars left to shoot at. |
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union SONS of BANE
8
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 08:34:00 -
[448] - Quote
Please, please give us that Forum-Button "Place Bounty" directly by the side of the "Like" Button. If i see some of the Flame-Wars here, i'm sure it will be used pretty regularly :D |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
777
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 08:39:00 -
[449] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Mars Theran wrote:Well, nobody said you wanted to discourage PvP in highsec did they? ..oh yeah, that's right, they did. I find this incredibly amusing. I don't want to discourage highsec PVP, no. Which is why I'm against these changes. They go ahead and break the wardec system, so instead of fixing that they move on and break yet another aspect of highsec PVP. You're an idiot if you can't see the trend here.
Wow, I didn't know razor was a hi sec corp. With you being all about hi sec, and spending lots of time up there obviously, think there is any way I could get an app to your alliance?
I spend most of my time in hi sec, and be nice to have fellow hi seccers to hang out with and ***** about how CCP keeps playing with the area we pilots fly around in the most. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan
137
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 08:52:00 -
[450] - Quote
Awesome! Sounds like this change will create a lot of fun and tears. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |