Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Aurelius Harrison
Aperture Harmonics K162
16
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 21:46:00 -
[211] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:And if someone comes and ganks you halfway through, all the better.
Adds flavor.
Colonel Xaven wrote:Aurelius Harrison wrote: They aren't proposing a safe style of combat beyond anything other than two people being able to fight in high sec without drawing the ire of concord. The word arena doesn't show up in the blog at all.
So you can guarantee 100% that there won't come a 10vs10 "duel" in any future because it hasn't been mentioned yet. Brilliant. Thank you.
I don't see how that's a problem. They do talk about being able to have more people involved, it's at the very end of the blog. Think of it as a short legal wardec with few of the downsides that come with the wardec system.
Just because 2, 5, 15, or even 100 people are able to engage in a massive knockdown-dragout for a few minutes in highsec without Concord interference doesn't mean it's automatically bad. It also doesn't mean other players won't try their damnedest to spoil it.
The only way i'm going to get upset with this is if they take it outside the bounds of the normal game play into an instance. |
Syri Taneka
Dopehead Industries Republic Alliance
54
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 21:48:00 -
[212] - Quote
This *should* have dropped with the initial Retribution launch.
That said, better late than never.
On a sub-features track, would it be possible to set a flag to ignore/block all duel requests, *without* also ignoring/blocking all conversation invites? |
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
240
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 21:54:00 -
[213] - Quote
Aurelius Harrison wrote: Just because 2, 5, 15, or even 100 people are able to engage in a massive knockdown-dragout for a few minutes in highsec without Concord interference doesn't mean it's automatically bad. It also doesn't mean other players won't try their damnedest to spoil it.
The only way i'm going to get upset with this is if they take it outside the bounds of the normal game play into an instance.
Being in an instance is not really a difference at all.
www.facebook.com/RazorAlliance |
Tarpedo
Incursionista
7
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 21:59:00 -
[214] - Quote
Nice.
Also add this functionality for fleets, please (fleet vs fleet). |
Ave Kathrina
My Ass Is On Fire
23
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 21:59:00 -
[215] - Quote
Hand Bags at 30 paces!
I've done some really stupid **** in this game. |
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
62
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:01:00 -
[216] - Quote
Bleh, this topic sure has some Chicken Little crap in it. The update will legitimize an activity that has been done for years that could have been considered mechanics abuse. Furthermore it allows for sustaining some current subcultures in EVE and possibly even growing more. On top of that it provides a "safe(r)" method of letting some otherwise PvE-only types to engage in PvP than the old jet can duels.
Frankly, while this sort of thing isn't a high priority issue that could have waited until after other things were handled it's not an inherently bad design change. If anything it just adds more realism to the game which sorely needs it after enough years playing it. You can only watch your ship turn around in space like an epileptic fat chick in a greased up bath tub at a rave so many times before all the little "If EVE were real I'd be able to do this" things gang up on you.
As for generic ideas: Auto-decline options: Seconded. Auto-decline options make Jesus weep tears of joy. Betting options: Seconded as well. If you tax it it can also help take some of the isk out of the economy to help reduce the rate of inflation. Duel tagging in KMs: Seconded again. Dueling is different enough from "real" PvP to warrant this.
Chribba wrote:I prefer mining lasers! No surprise huh?
That's not all you prefer... http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff8/Marikhen/ChribbasBalls.jpg
Gheyna wrote:When are we getting raids?
Don't we already have them? L4 missions, 10/10 complexes, Incursions, and all that sort of thing?
Colonel Xaven wrote:CCP, I really hope you are aware of the danger to develop this into a sort of arena pvp, which would be plain wrong imho.
Low-sec low-level complexes have, apparently, already created an arena-like atmosphere. This just legitimizes limited forms of it in high-sec while removing the need for players to go through a (relatively) convoluted process to do something that should be more than possible were EVE "real."
Othran wrote:Given high-sec protects people then why should you circumvent that? I'd like more people in PvP but this nonsense isn't the way to do it
High-sec is there to provide consequences for "unwarranted" PvP, not to protect people. The simple fact that you can prosecute kill rights in high-sec should prove that much. All this does is eliminate the stupidity of having to use secondary criminal mechanics in order to initiate "legitimate" "limited PvP."
Gent BF wrote:I don't get it.. why you call it a DUEL if others can still Interfere ?
Dueling is the act of two or more individuals engaging in formalized combat, and it has never been and never will be free of the possibility of outside interference. There should be as little in "EVE life" stopping someone in a naga at 225km from dropping several rounds of Spike into one of the participants as there is in "real life" stopping someone from putting a .50 caliber round through someone's shoulders with a Barrett rifle. That's to say nothing at all except the "honor" of the individuals in the duel. |
Call Rollard
Grim Determination Academy Nulli Tertius
19
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:04:00 -
[217] - Quote
Makes me think how griefers will take advantage of this.
1) Griefer goes into system full of newbies.
2) He keeps inviting newbies into duel fights.
3) Newbies keep accepting them.
4) Lots of newbies die.
Hopefully newbies will take note what this means
lol |
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
240
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:08:00 -
[218] - Quote
Shereza wrote: Low-sec low-level complexes have, apparently, already created an arena-like atmosphere. This just legitimizes limited forms of it in high-sec while removing the need for players to go through a (relatively) convoluted process to do something that should be more than possible were EVE "real."
Oh I see, going into the evil lowsec for pvp is inconvenient.
www.facebook.com/RazorAlliance |
Markus Reese
Incertae Sedis Pandorum Invictus
321
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:13:00 -
[219] - Quote
I accept your challenge.
Chainsaws in a dark gymnasium. |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
255
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:16:00 -
[220] - Quote
Malrock wrote:All fine for fun, but please, put under game client generic options a checkmark for auto declining all duel requests.
Thank You. This so very much. I really don't need those WoW times back, when you had this bullshit popping up nonstop every time you had to pass one of those special places . Remove insurance. |
|
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
552
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:18:00 -
[221] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Low-sec low-level complexes have, apparently, already created an arena-like atmosphere.
I'm sorry, you mean those plexes that were removed from lowsec due to "metrics showing farming in hisec"? Plexes which disappeared because of change that was smuggled into Retribution without any warning and annihilated huge chunk of lowsec pvp. Those plexes?
I am not my skills but... http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schmata_Bastanold |
Alec Freeman
The Dark Space Initiative
226
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:29:00 -
[222] - Quote
April 1st is still 3 'n a bit months away CCP -.- |
Legion Reaver
Crimson Collective The Obsidian Cartel
8
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:30:00 -
[223] - Quote
Didn't read any of the replies beyond page one so if its been mentioned sorry but is it possible to play bets on a dueling party? Maybe a option to add a 1-2 min count down where parties who are on grid can bid on who they think will win and payouts are done based on isk wagered with the winning party reaping a % of the total amount? |
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
404
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:32:00 -
[224] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:Shereza wrote:Low-sec low-level complexes have, apparently, already created an arena-like atmosphere. I'm sorry, you mean those plexes that were removed from lowsec due to "metrics showing farming in hisec"? Plexes which disappeared because of change that was smuggled into Retribution without any warning and annihilated huge chunk of lowsec pvp. Those plexes?
I bet that duel mode will boost lowsec pvp to a new level.
_______________________________________ Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime. |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
725
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:33:00 -
[225] - Quote
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:I bet that duel mode will boost lowsec pvp to a new level.
no the arena combat that is FW plexing has done that At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
552
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:33:00 -
[226] - Quote
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:Schmata Bastanold wrote:Shereza wrote:Low-sec low-level complexes have, apparently, already created an arena-like atmosphere. I'm sorry, you mean those plexes that were removed from lowsec due to "metrics showing farming in hisec"? Plexes which disappeared because of change that was smuggled into Retribution without any warning and annihilated huge chunk of lowsec pvp. Those plexes? I bet that duel mode will boost lowsec pvp to a new level.
We will be dueling over belt rats dropping Tags4Secs. I am not my skills but... http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schmata_Bastanold |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
129
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:35:00 -
[227] - Quote
I hate the term duel, I would really just prefer them referred to as limited engagements.
There should be an auto reject tick box, this should default to on for new players.
You should not be able to request a limited engagement while in fleet.
If you fleet afterwards you and the fleet mate should get the global suspect flag.
How does setting up a 3 v 3 work, do you need to request one against each player and them against each player is that 9 requests total, will this result in different limited engagement timer lengths?
I would prefer a multiple player engagement UI interface with two sides were you can drag pilot names into the two sides. The interface could do a fleet check on each member to ensure each team is only in fleet with each other. You could also have the facility to add multiple sides for even more mayhem. |
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
404
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:43:00 -
[228] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:
I would prefer a multiple player engagement UI interface with two sides were you can drag pilot names into the two sides. The interface could do a fleet check on each member to ensure each team is only in fleet with each other. You could also have the facility to add multiple sides for even more mayhem.
You're talking about an arena? _______________________________________ Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime. |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
725
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:47:00 -
[229] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:I hate the term duel,
i coined it as concord sanction pvp contracts...
or cspc
cuss it sounds more eveish... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
129
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 22:56:00 -
[230] - Quote
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:Alticus C Bear wrote:
I would prefer a multiple player engagement UI interface with two sides were you can drag pilot names into the two sides. The interface could do a fleet check on each member to ensure each team is only in fleet with each other. You could also have the facility to add multiple sides for even more mayhem.
You're talking about an arena?
I am in two minds about the whole thing to be honest really feel it may harm the game more than benefit it.
However it sounds like the mechanics will pretty much be there and this is the route CCP is going down. In that case the interface should be as good as possible. |
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
193
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 23:01:00 -
[231] - Quote
can I do a 1v1v...v1? or a 2v1? and if someone reps someone else but everyone is also a target will they still go suspect?
I miss being able to do light shows with out of corp alts :( |
Souxie Alduin
Anarchy in the Eve
48
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 23:04:00 -
[232] - Quote
Chribba wrote:I prefer mining lasers! No surprise huh?
"Chribba vs. Veldspar... FIGHT!"
PS. My personal weapon of choice would be the Spork. |
Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
44
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 23:12:00 -
[233] - Quote
YES PLEASE!!!
Thank you!
P.s. Why did this simple concept take sooo long to bring to reality? eëÆWhomever said, "You only get one shot to make a good impression," was utterly wrong. I've made plenty of great impressions with my AutocannonseëÆ eÉà |
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
404
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 23:39:00 -
[234] - Quote
Cordo Draken wrote:YES PLEASE!!!
Thank you!
P.s. Why did this simple concept take sooo long to bring to reality?
Because it weakens
- the purpose of wardecs, - the meaning of hisec vs. low /null and - the sandbox approach at all. _______________________________________ Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
882
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 23:50:00 -
[235] - Quote
I think the idea of blocking duel requests while in fleets is neccessary. I have a hard enough time getting my gang to do what I want at the best of times, I don't neccessarily want people becoming involved in escalating neutral-RRing OGBing duelling shennanigans while part of a fleet which may drag the whole fleet in.
I think and duel request directed at a fleeted member should go to the fleet boss for approval. That way the person responsible for, eg, 20 ships, doesn't get his guys being derpfarts and spreading escalations in stupid ways. Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed. http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Arduemont
Rotten Legion Ops THE ROYAL NAVY
1131
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 00:04:00 -
[236] - Quote
Although I do not object to this mechanic, this man's words ring pretty true right now. "In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
582
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 00:14:00 -
[237] - Quote
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:Cordo Draken wrote:YES PLEASE!!!
Thank you!
P.s. Why did this simple concept take sooo long to bring to reality? Because it weakens - the purpose of wardecs, - the meaning of hisec vs. low /null and - the sandbox approach at all. Ok, must ask. Please explain how a consensual 1v1 mechanic which ends after 5 min of inactivity weakens: - A mechanic which non-consensually gives one group the ability to engage another and the other group the ability to retaliate for an entire week (what situation would you ever use one in place of the other?) - The meaning of highsec and Concord which already can be turned off at will via the suspect flag but can now be done more selectively (same as pre crimewatch 2.0) - A sandbox by actually providing MORE options on how to fight someone |
Montevius Williams
Eclipse Industrial Inc
353
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 00:20:00 -
[238] - Quote
Qaidan Alenko wrote:I don't know why... But I have a bad feeling about this...
Why? WOuld you prefer the current can flipping mechanic? "The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
725
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 00:29:00 -
[239] - Quote
Rordan D'Kherr wrote:Cordo Draken wrote:YES PLEASE!!!
Thank you!
P.s. Why did this simple concept take sooo long to bring to reality? Because it weakens - the purpose of wardecs, - the meaning of hisec vs. low /null and - the sandbox approach at all.
you can wardec a npc corp now?
you used to be able to can flip to duel now you can again
how does this affect the sandbox? if anything it adds to the sandbox... you can still cheat lie and steal still have regular non consentual pvp against anyone... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1516
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 00:30:00 -
[240] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:I hate the term duel, I would really just prefer them referred to as limited engagements.
There should be an auto reject tick box, this should default to on for new players.
You should not be able to request a limited engagement while in fleet.
If you fleet afterwards you and the fleet mate should get the global suspect flag.
How does setting up a 3 v 3 work, do you need to request one against each player and them against each player is that 9 requests total, will this result in different limited engagement timer lengths?
I would prefer a multiple player engagement UI interface with two sides were you can drag pilot names into the two sides. The interface could do a fleet check on each member to ensure each team is only in fleet with each other. You could also have the facility to add multiple sides for even more mayhem. Yes 9 requests total, 3 from each player on one side, all aimed at the players on the other side. It will be a bit annoying as the players receiving the requests have to accept before they can get another, which means those issuing the requests will get alot of "blocked" messages.
After that you can fight. Note that if you do not shoot an opponent for 5 minutes (less them time it took to get all the requests set up), he drops off your list as a valid target. In situations much bigger than 3 v 3 or so this will become an issue. The last person gets called primary, and you cannot shoot him because its taken more than 5 minutes to take care of the setup and killing everyone else. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |