| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Moghydin
   |
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:25:00 -
[1]
Looks like the guys who keep talking about risk vs. reward in the low sec prefer the "reward" part for themselves, while leaving the "risk" part for everyone else. Here are my thoughts on how to make the risk vs. reward to work in both ways.
1. PvP should be impossible for NPC corp members. Want to PvP, go and find a proper corp.
2. Collecting loot using alts looks like an exploit. Time penalty beteween logging with an alt char from the same account will solve the problem. Lets say you can't log with a different char from the same account in less than 3 hours after logging off with your other char (enough time for the cans to pop).
3. Number of sentries near 0.4-0.2 gates should be a little increased (0.1 is too close to a lawless 0.0). The sentries should target not only the ship that attackes, but all members of the attackers gang or corp within say 50 km radius, starting with the weakest member.
4. Attackers gang or corp members within 50 km radius are marked as outlawes for 15 mins and can be shot by anyone without sentries intervention or security hit.
These measures if implemented, will still allow the campers to take the loot and destroy the victim, but if the victim is smart, he can tank the dmg for long enough for sentries to kill the campers, or even help the sentries to fight.
Now it would be the real risk vs. reward. You want this guy's 50 mil loot, take your chance. But it's not a 100% reward for you and 100% loss for the victim.
|
Viceroy
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:32:00 -
[2]
*yawn*
Pointless suggestions for stuff that isn't even needed, or is already ingame in one form or another.
__________________________
Finite Horizon
Your end is our beginning.
|
Andrue
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:34:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Moghydin
1. PvP should be impossible for NPC corp members. Want to PvP, go and find a proper corp.
Agreed.
Quote:
2. Collecting loot using alts looks like an exploit. Time penalty beteween logging with an alt char from the same account will solve the problem. Lets say you can't log with a different char from the same account in less than 3 hours after logging off with your other char (enough time for the cans to pop).
No way. A lot of people have alts as backup up characters for game play. Having to wait three hours because you logged on and found your main char camped in a station or a system would suck royally. In addition under the current skill training system you would lose three hours training time when switching to training an alt.
Quote:
3. Number of sentries near 0.4-0.2 gates should be a little increased (0.1 is too close to a lawless 0.0). The sentries should target not only the ship that attackes, but all members of the attackers gang or corp within say 50 km radius, starting with the weakest member.
No way. If you can't take the ganks, keep out of the gank zones.
Quote:
4. Attackers gang or corp members within 50 km radius are marked as outlawes for 15 mins and can be shot by anyone without sentries intervention or security hit.
If you scarp the distance limitation and can assure me that the devs could implement this easily I'd agree.
--
(Battle hardened miner)
[Brackley, UK]
WARNING:This post may contain large doses of reality. |
Drilla
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:34:00 -
[4]
NPC corp members shouls not be allowed outside 0.5-1.0.
Noob scouts 4TL.
EVE System Security |
Rodge
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:34:00 -
[5]
ROFL
I don't even know where to start with those ridiculous suggestions 
[ 2005.04.17 00:34:30 ] Nagilam > u better leave Rodge, u will not gank any1 else 2nite......
|
Moridin
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:37:00 -
[6]
1. No
2. NO
3. NO
4. NO
this suggestions are for low sec empire i see. if you cant handle low sec. move to 0.0 where no rules apply |
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:44:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Moghydin
3. Number of sentries near 0.4-0.2 gates should be a little increased (0.1 is too close to a lawless 0.0). The sentries should target not only the ship that attackes, but all members of the attackers gang or corp within say 50 km radius, starting with the weakest member.
4. Attackers gang or corp members within 50 km radius are marked as outlawes for 15 mins and can be shot by anyone without sentries intervention or security hit.
3. A long time ago there were no sentry guns in lowsec. People got ransomed and squealed. CCP listened to them and added sentry guns. This made ransoming unviable. Pirates adapted.
4. What does this achieve? Said corp or gang member sits at a planet and warps in. ---->Cue revision to crap idea to cunningly prevent this happening.
Stay out of lowsec if you are too weak.
|
Miri Tirzan
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:45:00 -
[8]
1. Good idea.
2. Good idea, bad implimentation. Something does need to be done IMHO. One way would be to have all the alts in an account share the flag once a criminal act is committed until it runs out.
3. No
4. Good idea.
svetlana - "whining gets you stuff. that is why humans got to the top of the food chain and all the other animals got nerfed."
|
Kerby Lane
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 12:48:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Kerby Lane on 14/07/2005 12:48:34
1. I agree. People who wish to PvP should be war declarable.
2. No. If it looks as an exploit you are free to write a petition in "exploit" section and ask GM. If GM will say it is exploit - then proceed.
3. No way. Sentries are powerfull enough now and we dont need to change it.
Agro on gang members or\and corp members will lead to exploiting.
( Gang to do 6\10 complex, fire to neutral at gate in 0.4 then come with alt and collect loot).
4. Dont need it.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:00:00 -
[10]
1) Unfortunately, making PVP impossible for NPC corps is probably never going to happen for two reasons. Firstly, it makes them immune to pirating since that's PVP they can't "get involved" in. Secondly, it means there's an artificial restriction in the game. Would you really be happy if you got yourself a trial account, considering playing Evem and ot a message saying "You can't fire because you are in a starter corp"?
2) This could be bypassed by using alt accounts rather than alt characters. There is no way to reliably distinguish between someone's alt account and their normal account using current game mechanics. Even if it's linked to IP, people would get through. And it does stop legitimate business people have such as logging into two accounts at once if you attmept to put a delay between accounts. Essentially, the exploit would be limited to people with two accounts, not removed, and this is a non-solution to the problem.
3) The sentries already cycle gangmembers and two is enough to get rid of most pirates. You're left with only the best ones who deserve to be called pirates. Maybe you should try tanking two sentries before you decide how to change them.
4) A lot of corps have no idea what is going on with their corp members. Say they're on a mining op and another corp member comes along and shoots at another miner in the field in a 0.8 sec system. What then? This unconnected fellow gets his ship blown up by concord with the current system. With your system, the entire mining group would be destroyed because of unsanctioned actions by one corpmate.
There's a difference between griefing yourself by getting your own ship blown up and griefing an entire corp by forcing a criminal flag on them without their permission.
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:02:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Kerby Lane
3. No way. Sentries are powerfull enough now and we dont need to change it.
They clearly aren't, because they don't stop people getting ganked at the gates. Either people should be able to be ganked (get rid of the sentry guns altogether), or they shouldn't (put more of them in, increase their range).
The current position is half-baked.
_______
"Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age." |
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:10:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr
Originally by: Kerby Lane
3. No way. Sentries are powerfull enough now and we dont need to change it.
They clearly aren't, because they don't stop people getting ganked at the gates. Either people should be able to be ganked (get rid of the sentry guns altogether), or they shouldn't (put more of them in, increase their range).
The current position is half-baked.
You, sir are clueless.
The current situation adds uncertainty. Uncertainty adds variety. Variety is the spice of life.
Don't change this game into If x<>y then....
|
Golden Ratio
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:12:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Golden Ratio on 14/07/2005 13:12:25
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr
Originally by: Kerby Lane
3. No way. Sentries are powerfull enough now and we dont need to change it.
They clearly aren't, because they don't stop people getting ganked at the gates.
They don't? Can you imagine how many people would get ganked at .1 - .4 gates if NO sentry guns existed? You, sir, have some silly ideas...
----------------------------
The Golden Ratio has spoken. |
Moghydin
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:12:00 -
[14]
Sentries are not too powerfull. I tanked 2 and even 3 sentries on missions (may be missions have other sentries, but I doubt it) and at the same time I was able to destroy several cruisers. In ganking, your target is most of the times much weaker and rarely shoots back, so you need to deal a burst of damage and disappear, letting gang members to collect the loot.
I specifically stated that the flagging should take place in a certain radius from the gate. No one mines near the gate.
Alt problem will be partially solved by the way I propose. You can't really stop guys with 2 or more accounts from doing this, but these chars are not striktly alts. If someone has money to spare on 2 accounts, it's his choice what to do with them.
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:13:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Deja Thoris
You, sir are clueless.
The current situation adds uncertainty.
Hunh? What?
If there's a gank group hovering just outside sentry gun range, I'm going to die. If there isn't, I'm not.
What's uncertain?
_______
"Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age." |
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:21:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Moghydin
Sentries are not too powerfull. I tanked 2 and even 3 sentries on missions (may be missions have other sentries, but I doubt it) and at the same time I was able to destroy several cruisers. In ganking, your target is most of the times much weaker and rarely shoots back, so you need to deal a burst of damage and disappear, letting gang members to collect the loot.
I specifically stated that the flagging should take place in a certain radius from the gate. No one mines near the gate.
Alt problem will be partially solved by the way I propose. You can't really stop guys with 2 or more accounts from doing this, but these chars are not striktly alts. If someone has money to spare on 2 accounts, it's his choice what to do with them.
Gate sentries hit a lot harder than mission sentries.
I dislike people suggesting changes to the game when you dont have a clue about how it works now...
|
kwoodward
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:23:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Golden Ratio
Edited by: Golden Ratio on 14/07/2005 13:12:25
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr
Originally by: Kerby Lane
3. No way. Sentries are powerfull enough now and we dont need to change it.
They clearly aren't, because they don't stop people getting ganked at the gates.
They don't? Can you imagine how many people would get ganked at .1 - .4 gates if NO sentry guns existed? You, sir, have some silly ideas...
the ones who didnt pay up?
Meow! |
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:25:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Nyphur on 14/07/2005 13:25:26
Originally by: Deja Thoris
Gate sentries hit a lot harder than mission sentries.
I dislike people suggesting changes to the game when you dont have a clue about how it works now...
Indeed. They hit a LOT larder. I can tank about 5-12 mission sentries without a problem, depending on the level of the mission (actually, i do ones in tough complexes which hit harder), but I can only barely tank two empire sentries. I can tank two empire sentries forever but if someone fires at me whle I'm tanking them, there goes my expensive Deimos. ;)
Seems perfectly balanced to me.
|
Moghydin
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:26:00 -
[19]
I didn't know that mission sentries are harder. But on certain missions they call them caldari sentry I, II, III. The same goes near the gates. So it's strange that at mission caldari sentry II deals less dmg than the very same sentry near the gate.
One thing remaines a proven fact. If there's a gank squad near the gate you can't pass, so sentries are not doing their job of keeping the gates safe.
|
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:39:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Deja Thoris on 14/07/2005 13:39:41
Originally by: Moghydin
I didn't know that mission sentries are harder. But on certain missions they call them caldari sentry I, II, III. The same goes near the gates. So it's strange that at mission caldari sentry II deals less dmg than the very same sentry near the gate.
One thing remaines a proven fact. If there's a gank squad near the gate you can't pass, so sentries are not doing their job of keeping the gates safe.
You know what?
I can't be bothered debating this anymore. It's lowsec. You arent meant to be safe. It's an almost lawless area with token gestures of protection thrown in.
If you dont like it then stay the hell away and stop trying to turn this game into a risk free no loss no brainer. Theres more than 1500 (one thousand five hundred!!!11!!1!) high sec systems where you can suck scord or cuddle your agent. Use them.
|
Moghydin
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:46:00 -
[21]
Sending me to cuddle the agent? heh. You can as well go and have lots of fun killing another hauler or Ibis. End of discussion I think.
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:48:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Moghydin
I didn't know that mission sentries are harder. But on certain missions they call them caldari sentry I, II, III. The same goes near the gates. So it's strange that at mission caldari sentry II deals less dmg than the very same sentry near the gate.
One thing remaines a proven fact. If there's a gank squad near the gate you can't pass, so sentries are not doing their job of keeping the gates safe.
Their job is not to make low security space stargates safe for travel.
Their job is to provide some risk to uinorganised and unprepared pirates.
They do.
I agree they need some tweaks to make sniping less effective yet make ransoming effective again (yet difficult), but other then that they perform the function they were intended to.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 13:58:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Moghydin
Sending me to cuddle the agent? heh. You can as well go and have lots of fun killing another hauler or Ibis. End of discussion I think.
Never killed a noob ship. Killed a hauler yesterday though. Why? Because their corp killed one of my alts ones previously. I will now kill them in lowsec every opportunity I get. Even if it destroys my sec status.
See, you look at my character and make presumptions about my occupation, thats where you make errors in judgement. I'm pro balance - not anti you.
I've put in my support for better tools for miners because it makes sense.
I've said that I feel a couple of missions are too difficult based on CCP's current stance that they should be soloable (for players with adequate skills)
I speak in areas where I feel I can make an informed opinion.
So I'd enourage you to stop and learn the game mechanices and then come back with suggestions that can be defended from more than one angle.
Also stop jumping to the conclusion that I am against your ideas because I am a ganker. I am against your ideas because they are crap. I am pretty sure they are your knee jerk reaction to being on the wrong end of a gank.
|
Raging Alcoholic
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 20:52:00 -
[24]
I think that when purchasing eve, CCP should give you a gratuaty pink carebear so you can hug it when you travel through low sec. You obviously dont undestand the meaning of risk vs reward. If you dont want to tae the risk of losing your ship, stay in empire its not hard to make a ton of isk there.
Get a scout for you indy if you have to go through low sec space, but dont whine like a ***** when you get killed by a pirate because your a idiot. These whining threads of risk vs reward are getting old and even more retarded. If you cant handle low sec without crying, this game isnt for you.
|
Fester Addams
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 20:55:00 -
[25]
Risk vs reward looks great on paper and it fits all types.
The problem is that there is a group of people who interpret it litterary, choose ither risk or reward.
In short, we take the risk thay take the reward :)
|
Gamer4liff
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:00:00 -
[26]
the true game equasion should be and usualy is:
risk=reward-(the only exeption being when)-effort=reward.
what i mean is risk vs reward is not the final commandment, the overiding equasion has to be effort vs reward, because not everybody wants to take risks with their gameplay.
therefore ultimatly:
reward has to be a direct result of:
effort
or
risk
and ultimatly it has to result in:
fun.
this is why lvl 4's shouldnt have been nerfed if the raven was going out the window too, it didnt have to be that way.
|
Rasitiln
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:38:00 -
[27]
The reason it says sentry guns where put in place in the game was to protect stargates and billboards(FT polecats) so if you wanted to get serisous perhaps they should only shoot you when you attack a stargate or billboard, dont whine about sentry guns being under powerd etc, its unsecure space their for your safty is not always going to be a sure thing.
Ive gotten ganked in insecure space, learn to avoid that place or learn the time pirates hang out there, travel smart and you will rarely get ganked.
|
Alpha799
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:52:00 -
[28]
Originally by: kwoodward
Edited by: kwoodward on 14/07/2005 13:25:53
Edited by: kwoodward on 14/07/2005 13:24:12
Quote:
They don't? Can you imagine how many people would get ganked at .1 - .4 gates if NO sentry guns existed? You, sir, have some silly ideas...
the ones who didnt pay up?
Pay up? The lames don't even ask for ISK anymore.
|
Carter Burke
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:52:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Moghydin
1. PvP should be impossible for NPC corp members. Want to PvP, go and find a proper corp.
Agreed.
+1
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Moghydin
2. Collecting loot using alts looks like an exploit. Time penalty beteween logging with an alt char from the same account will solve the problem. Lets say you can't log with a different char from the same account in less than 3 hours after logging off with your other char (enough time for the cans to pop).
No way. A lot of people have alts as backup up characters for game play. Having to wait three hours because you logged on and found your main char camped in a station or a system would suck royally. In addition under the current skill training system you would lose three hours training time when switching to training an alt.
+1
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Moghydin
3. Number of sentries near 0.4-0.2 gates should be a little increased (0.1 is too close to a lawless 0.0). The sentries should target not only the ship that attackes, but all members of the attackers gang or corp within say 50 km radius, starting with the weakest member.
No way. If you can't take the ganks, keep out of the gank zones.
That one I don't necessarily agree with. Gate-ganking unfairly preys on noobs, who need a bit of mercy when they start up, and the griefers who do the gate-ganking aren't familiar with the term. If there were a method by which to give new players a chance to avoid PvP if they weren't into it, for, say, a max of one month after the account started up, I'd be a lot more open to this idea.
As it is, yes, players can nail each other at gates, but I wish there was a way to let noobs off the hook.
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Moghydin
4. Attackers gang or corp members within 50 km radius are marked as outlawes for 15 mins and can be shot by anyone without sentries intervention or security hit.
If you scarp the distance limitation and can assure me that the devs could implement this easily I'd agree.
+1.
I'm also inclined towards seeing alt-pickup as being an exploit. Problem is, often those alts are on a second account. What do we do then?
Oh, and hey, Andrue ). Did you ever get an answer to that NNTP question you had?
CB / T
|
Pompeius
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:53:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Moghydin
Looks like the guys who keep talking about risk vs. reward in the low sec prefer the "reward" part for themselves, while leaving the "risk" part for everyone else. Here are my thoughts on how to make the risk vs. reward to work in both ways.
1. PvP should be impossible for NPC corp members. Want to PvP, go and find a proper corp.
2. Collecting loot using alts looks like an exploit. Time penalty beteween logging with an alt char from the same account will solve the problem. Lets say you can't log with a different char from the same account in less than 3 hours after logging off with your other char (enough time for the cans to pop).
3. Number of sentries near 0.4-0.2 gates should be a little increased (0.1 is too close to a lawless 0.0). The sentries should target not only the ship that attackes, but all members of the attackers gang or corp within say 50 km radius, starting with the weakest member.
4. Attackers gang or corp members within 50 km radius are marked as outlawes for 15 mins and can be shot by anyone without sentries intervention or security hit.
These measures if implemented, will still allow the campers to take the loot and destroy the victim, but if the victim is smart, he can tank the dmg for long enough for sentries to kill the campers, or even help the sentries to fight.
Now it would be the real risk vs. reward. You want this guy's 50 mil loot, take your chance. But it's not a 100% reward for you and 100% loss for the victim.
If i see you in low sec, I am going to pod kill you Harmony Bear.....
20m for this guy's corpse. Thx.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |