|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 22 post(s) |
Arcosian
EntroPrelatial Industria
EntroPraetorian Aegis
24
   |
Posted - 2012.10.26 01:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP GingerDude wrote:
* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?
I can already see drool dripping from every suicide ganker's mouth.
This change would mean Orcas could now be massive loot pinatas. I say "could" because making the fleet hangar scannable and drop loot would only mean indy/traders would find new safer means to transport goods be that fitting a bigger tank on the orca(it's pretty easy to get well over 250k ehp), using Red Frog to transport things or just transporting smaller loads with an "un-gankable" value. Nevertheless, I can see the gankers' argument for this change since "Those evil highsec carebears get a 100% risk free 40km3 cargohold to transport billions of goods. And they must all be killed with fire because they ruin nullsec and lowsec and the economy. blah blah blah. "Eve is hard noob, get used to it." blah blah blah" 
Personally, I'm against this change since the orca takes months to train for so having an unscannable and undroppable cargohold isn't something a 2 week old noob would have access to. Suicide ganking is already a nuisance as it has become very easy with the introduction of the talos and tornado allowing a 10 man fleet to pop freighters with virtually no consequences. And gankers already have plenty of stupid people transporting billions in untanked T1 indy ships.
Now, I'm not against ganking since it's good for business and keeps people from messing with my markets more than they would otherwise but with no way to counter it other than being lucky with gate camps it seems like if this change goes through then there should also be a re-balance to ganking/criminal actions entailing greater consequences or buffing the EHP of all indy ships.
tldr: If this change goes through it will enrage EVERY highsec industrialist/orca pilot. Suicide ganking is a nuisance and already got buffed with the Tornado and Talos. |
Arcosian
EntroPrelatial Industria
EntroPraetorian Aegis
26
|
Posted - 2012.11.01 13:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so here's our current complete plan:
- Fleet hangars will now behave like normal cargo hold when it comes to ship scanners and loot drops (ie, will be scannable, and loot will drop from them)
We're hoping this will be the final set of adjustments, but obviously we're reading the feedback here :) -Greyscale
*curses* gankers will like that
|
Arcosian
EntroPrelatial Industria
EntroPraetorian Aegis
26
|
Posted - 2012.11.01 16:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
o.O nerfing double wrap couriers too it seems |
Arcosian
EntroPrelatial Industria
EntroPraetorian Aegis
34
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 04:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
rodyas wrote:Maybe they felt this was safe to do, due to the incoming bounty system.
As in more people are gonna be able to gank orca for phat lootz, but people can place a bounty on them, or the fact if you steal from that container the whole system can shoot you for it.
So in a theoretical way it is fair for this to happen, but I wonder how it will play out.
I don't think that will matter. With the new agro system it won't stop gankers from popping the ships then abandoning the wreck and scooping the loot with a neutral alt(s). It's what they already do now and anyone would be stupid to put a bounty on a "throwaway" suicide ganker.
|
Arcosian
EntroPrelatial Industria
EntroPraetorian Aegis
34
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 05:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
rodyas wrote:^ But I mean its easy to pop the alt that scoops that wreck with the new crimewatch.
I suppose if someone is fast enough, its easy to get the cargo then escape easily.
So you can gank more targets, but people can easily gank the gankers, if they aren't fast enough.
Or does the wreck from a player's ship belong to the ganker?
If the gankers abandon the wreck then its free game. If you shot the alt that scoops it you would be concorded. Crimewatch only means criminals like can flippers and ninja salvagers can be killed by anyone now not just the person/corp they steal from. |
Arcosian
EntroPrelatial Industria
EntroPraetorian Aegis
36
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 20:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote:CCP is kinda fond of ffffrustrating people with this coming expansion.
"Divisions are gone, as is any other reliance on corp roles
Fleet hangars will now behave like normal cargo hold when it comes to ship scanners and loot drops (ie, will be scannable, and loot will drop from them) "
How are we, WH dwellers, expected to move billions on sleeper loot out to trade? Remember we don't have bounties and have to haul blue books, yea? Last time I moved corp sellary out it was like 30+bil in one cargo. Do you want us to move that in what? Even Viators get poped by your precious high-sec suicide gankers!
Usual tactics now is haul to highsec, wait for orca, put it into closed section (so that noone steals it on the way) and haul that like that. These changes make it impossible. You expect people to like the game for a hard stress of moving big summs with taking heart medicines on every successfully passed system?
You get to make 100 trips now ... yay for a hauling buff. But seriously as someone who builds large orders of T2 stuff and T3 subs this will make it a pain to transport both mats and subs seeing as how 1 T3 BPC of offensive subs is worth almost 800mil and only takes up 400m3. Not to mention it's easy to queue up 10 T2 jobs worth few bil at a time on 1 char. So yes hauling will suck big time. I expect Red Frog to get a ton of business after the change and probably fall really behind on completing contracts on time. And we may even see more regionalization between gallente and amarr space if the gankers pop enough people.
But using a heavy tanked orca you could probably haul 2-2.5bil at a time pretty safely long as you scout the route and make sure there isn't a gate camp. That still makes a lot of trips required to move 30+bil of mats and products unless you just want to risk it.
|
|
|
| |
|