| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Avon
   |
Posted - 2005.10.03 15:41:00 -
[1]
I suggested a version of this long ago, and it goes like this:
Webs & Scramblers/Disruptors
Should:
Be a hosile act
Summon Concord in 0.5+
Should not:
Draw a response from sentry guns.
Thus:
Use a scram or web in 0.5+ = concordoken.
Use a scram or web anywhere = victim & victims gang can fire upon you with no consequence.
Use a scram or web anywhere = no sec hit.
Use a scram or web anywhere = no sentry gun activation.
This give pirates a chance to stop ships in low-sec space - removing the need to gank. It also makes piracy in smaller ships viable.
If the captured ship fires upon the pirate he may defend himself, otherwise firing upon the victim will bring about the usual response (ie, sentries blows him to bits).
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.03 16:05:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Murdock Jern
Originally by: Malken
remove the sentrys in .4 and below.
If you do that then those sectors may as well be 0.0 space.
0.0 doesn't give sec hits.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.04 08:50:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Narciss Sevar
It would allow alts to web and scram people, then when they blew the alts up to gget away they would get concordokened by sentrys. Also empire wars do go into low sec as well, so the same problem would still exist.
Read it again.
It is a hostile act - you can fire upon anyone webbing or scrambling you without penalty. Quote:
It's just alot easier to take out low sec sentrys or make them weaker the lower the sec gets. That way gate ransoming could go on in 0.2 - 0.1 but in 0.3 - 0.4 it wouldn't be possible. Mabe?
No, I don't agree.
The sentries need to be there to make think people have some protection in low sec space.
What is needed is an alternative to killing people, and I am not sure the removal of sentries will bring that about.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.04 10:45:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Sky Hunter
Someone still forgetting that piracy even as essential part of the game is still a piracy, so i doubt that game should be altered to favour of pirates and to make it harder for regular players. Piracy meant to be hard and not very profitable. Otherwise everyone would pirate.
It isn't about making it easier for the pirate, but rather potentially safer for the victim.
Currently if you want to pirate someone you pretty much have to gank them and take what's left.
That is really what drove me away from piracy, it is pretty mindless really.
I liked locking people down, a bit of parley, the odd Yarr!!™, then watching them to fly away in to the sunset ... unless they didn't pay up of course.
You would pick your target, be selective, take your time, and try and make it a bit fun (well, more fun than being indescriminately blown to bits).
Maybe I am just a sad old git thinking that things used to be better ... but then again I enjoyed being a roaming salty space-dawg - so things must have been better once.
I
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.04 15:14:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Greavus
Originally by: SugarDaddy
Well......like the TOPIC ....it¦s supposed to give ppl a chance to pay near gates, nothing to do with making piracy easier.
I¦m tired of receiving eve-mail of ppl......"why didn¦t you ranson ?" or "gimme a chance to pay next time".
Way easier to gank than tank and ransom.
Youve just completely contradicted yourself? its not about making pirating easier? and then you say, its easier to gank than tank and ransom, dont forget you make isk ransoming, therefore if its easier to ransom, its easier to pirate?
Not trying to cause an argument but im justing quoting what u said... If you have problem with it, pirate in the belts. u can ransom your life away.
So you think that ganking at gates is better for the game than ransoming at gates?
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.04 15:16:00 -
[6]
Originally by: PCP Mcgee
Pirates need to start getting more inventive. There are plenty of ways that are currently allowed to force people to pay a ransom or co-operate. A button to pay a ransom or demand one > ROFL you've got to be kidding.
Regarding insta-jumps: they make sense. If you've previously mapped out an area using a ships high-tech navigation system you should be able to jump to a precise location. Campers had their opportunity the first time you or your friend made the BM's.
It's the same thing really. Don't be lazy and sit at a gate. Show some skills and go after the bigger loot in the belts - people mining.
Bigger loot at belts?
Hauler full of nice techII stuff or a hauler full of rocks...
Jeez, that's a tough one.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.04 17:00:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Avon on 04/10/2005 17:00:59
Originally by: Utopiana
With your idea i can scramble you, web you and go afk, eat dinner, take a nap. And all you could do was petition for the harrasement it would be.
Am I not writting in English?
With my idea you could scramble & web me and go afk .. then I slowly kill you.
Jeez.
Webs & Scrams = hostile act, but do not trigger sentries - is that really so hard to understand?
EDIT: If you were talking to the OP and not me, then sorry. 
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.04 17:21:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Utopiana
Nothing wrong with your english.
but i didn't answer you.
Care to try?
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.05 08:11:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Megadon
Edited by: Megadon on 05/10/2005 07:15:57
Originally by: Einheriar Ulrich
And just a quick question here at the end, how come so few pirate groups, pirate in 0.0 space ?
Its very rare that i see pirates, setting up camp or running through systems in 0.0.. There are some but very few corps.
I remember all the good fights i had with zombies, in b-vip
Pie-rats don't gate camp in 0 space because they would get their ass kicked in short order. Gate camping in 0 space is a corporate enterprise and requires serious teamwork and skill.
So they would rather attack the soft underbellies of the furry empire carebear that cannot retaliate because they're lazy and they're cowards. And they like to boast of their abilities to PVP! hahahaha!  That's not pvp, that's a turkey shoot.
disclaimer:(not all pirates are ebil and not all are gatecampers and some of the nicest ppl you'll ever meet are pirates and many are smart, intelligent and friendly and well dressed and i do business with anyone pirate or not and if i like them enough, they can even date my sister)
No, pirates don't pirate in 0.0 because it isn't where the targets are.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 00:32:00 -
[10]
Valrandir, noobs (well, everyone) are protected by Concord as I originally stated. All I am suggesting is removing the sentries from the equasion. In 0.5+ Concord would still reply to webs & scrams.
If players venture in to low sec in a noob ship they'll have to take their chances, and maybe hope for a helping hand.
Having said that, currently they would be insta-ganked anyway, so they are no worse off.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
| |
|