|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9194
   |
Posted - 2013.05.08 13:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Gunner wrote:And yet another fine example of CCP stearing the game into more ship kills, preferably in high sec to maximize damage done ISK wise.
More ISK destroyed, more time invested in the game destroyed, more time needed to recover the losses, more rl $ for CCP.
Bah.
That... that all sounds pretty good to me.
I'll definitely be encouraging CCP to make more changes to drive the effects you list. In fact we have already started.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9194
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 13:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote:
I agree with this one. If you choose to play the game as a "criminal" then you should be permanently labeled as one and no tag or anything else should allow you to chance that...
In real life, people can pay to become talkshow hosts, congressmen or members of parliament to exculpate their previous crimes. Until EVE allows this option, tags are a workable alternative mechanic.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9212
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 23:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
Gunner wrote:Malcanis wrote:Gunner wrote:And yet another fine example of CCP stearing the game into more ship kills, preferably in high sec to maximize damage done ISK wise.
More ISK destroyed, more time invested in the game destroyed, more time needed to recover the losses, more rl $ for CCP.
Bah. That... that all sounds pretty good to me. I'll definitely be encouraging CCP to make more changes to drive the effects you list. In fact we have already started. You do realize the number of eve players that DIDN'T vote for you, now do you?
Yep. They have the reps they voted for to represent their perspective. Anyone who did put me on one of their voting choices should know exactly what I stand for, and it would be a gross betrayal of their trust to let them down.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9218
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 12:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Malcanis wrote:Gunner wrote:Malcanis wrote:Gunner wrote:And yet another fine example of CCP stearing the game into more ship kills, preferably in high sec to maximize damage done ISK wise.
More ISK destroyed, more time invested in the game destroyed, more time needed to recover the losses, more rl $ for CCP.
Bah. That... that all sounds pretty good to me. I'll definitely be encouraging CCP to make more changes to drive the effects you list. In fact we have already started. You do realize the number of eve players that DIDN'T vote for you, now do you? Yep. They have the reps they voted for to represent their perspective. Anyone who did put me on one of their voting choices should know exactly what I stand for, and it would be a gross betrayal of their trust to let them down. Well, I voted for you which means I obviously missed the campaign speech of you endorsing consequence free high security suicide ganks....
You missed it because I didn't make it. Ganking isn't consequence free now and it won't be after the tags come into effect.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9219
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 12:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
dark heartt wrote:What I don't think people understand is this isn't really going to affect -10 pirates in highsec anyway as they can gank as a -10. This is going to be a good change for the Faction Warfare guys with negative sec status out there.
Chill out people and actually look at it from both sides...
but but but grrr pirates!
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9219
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 12:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Do you also cry that gankers don't have to make their own ships since they can buy them in the market?
Hmmm would it be good or bad for EVE if we were able to filter who was able to access our sell orders?
Should miners and munfacturers be able to decline to sell to people they don't like (or only to people they do like)?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9220
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 13:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote:mynnna wrote:So stepping past the argument for a bit, a few numbers for people who are actually interested in the changes for their own sake. Turn-in processing fees are 3-6m per tag (or I'm assuming it's per tag rather than per batch, I didn't get the opportunity to test that). That's 3m for the tags closer to -10, up to 6m for the tags closer to 0, though. Which makes sense - CONCORD is no doubt fully aware of the phenomena of suicide ganking and that it will place extra demand for tags in the -5 to 0 range, and so naturally as demand is high they can charge more.  As far as the spawn rate goes... that's hard to say. I got five NPCs (all Negotiators) in one past through an 11 belt system, one stop in each belt. I then got one NPC in the next 44 belts I visited over the next four systems. Whether that's an actual reflection of reality rather than being affected by test server quirks (all but the first system I visited were offline before I jumped in, perhaps that affects spawns in some way) is beyond me, so suffice it to say, the data is inconclusive. Getting five identical spawns in a row in the same system is odd, though. Not impossible, but certainly starting to get "up there" on the scale of "improbable"... Sounds like a Goonspiracy to me. First Tech, now sec status tags! There's no end to your sinister cartel ways! I was thinking about dominating the market through inflated buy orders and subsidizing Miniluv's activities by gouging everyone else on the price.
One would think gankers preying on other gankers would make DCM happy....
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9266
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 19:06:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Bexar Ying wrote:My response to that is the same as always. "You and I don't play the same game. We just use the same servers."
Have a nice day. Hate to break it to you, but you play the same game in different ways. There's a big difference between that and different games on the same servers, and if it's ever the latter we here at CCP have a problem that we need to fix.
GÖÑ
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
|
| |
|