Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
I own a highsec Archon, and while pondering about the upcoming player owned customs offices (POCOs) in highsec, I started thinking that it would be fun if I could use my Archon to help destroy the initial NPC Interbus customs offices that needs to be destroyed before players can put up their own. I had until now been of the impression that highsec capitals should generally never be involved in PvP, but PvE is okay. I was familiar with the rules listed in the red box at wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Capitals_in_Highsec, and I came to the conclusion that killing the NPC office faster would not really be much of an advantage, since other players could basically just sit and watch, and be ready to put up their own office as soon as the NPC one had been destroyed. Anyone can shoot the NPC office and they will likely be destroyed pretty quickly anyway, but I decided to open a support ticket and ask CCP to be on the safe side.
What followed got me a little surprised and confused. After a little back and forth, I asked for clarification about the first rule, specifically asking if this was refering to attacking NPC entities as well. I would have liked to just paste the reply here, but I think that might be against the rules. I will instead say that the first paragraph of the reply stated categorically that the rule was covering PvE as well. The second paragraph then said that killing belt rats is okay, refering to them as trivial.
It seemed like the reply was contradicting itself, so when even GMs are interpreting the rules confusingly, it might be time to update them.
The existing rules are as follows:
1. Capital ships may under no circumstances be used for aggression. 2. If at war, or with war declaration pending, you may not take your capital ship out of station. 3. You may not use your capital shipGÇÖs attributes to gain any sort of advantage over other players while in high security space. 4. You may not sell or put your capital up for sale while in high security space.
I am now suggesting updating them to something like this:
1. High security capitals may never be actively involved in PvP by doing hostile actions or remote assistance towards any other player owned entity. 2. High security capitals may only be involved in PvE if the activity in question can be done just as easily/good by a sub-capital ship. 3. High security capitals may not be put on the market, or otherwise sold/traded for any kind of gain.
I dropped the rule about wars because it seemed redundant, only covering the act of undocking - if you simply remained in space it would seem like no rules were broken. I also think that the new first rule covers any kind of PvP that the capital could be involved in during a war, and if one is concerned that the simple presence of a capital can affect a war, I would argue that it is really dumb to declare war while flying highsec capitals. It is much more logical to receive wardecs however, my Archon pilot actually received one yesterday, probably just because they wanted to shoot my Archon. Which is a good reason to let them undock, everybody wants to see capitals go boom, right?
These rules would also clearly state that "mock pvp fights with members of your own corp" is not allowed, clearing up any kind of doubt the author of the wiki page seems to have, as mentioned at the bottom of said page. I believe this to be reasonable, since socalled reverse awoxing seems to be common.
I believe these rules will also clearly show what kind of activity would be allowed. As long as an exhumer can mine just as good, you can use your capital for mining. As long as a battleship can kill rats just as easily, you can use your capital for this. But in relation to doing level 4 security misions, it would be obvious that the capital would have an far easier time tanking the rats than any battleship, so this would not be okay. My rattlesnake can tank level 3 security missions all day, so this would be okay again.
Highsec capitals will only become more and more rare as the years go by, which makes them more and more of an attraction. We don't want to lose them to silly confusion about rules.
And now back to the customs offices. Under the suggested rules, it would be okay to attack the NPC office with my Archon if a battleship could do the same just as good. Giving the nature of these offices, the only attribute on a ship that would matter would be the dps, no NPCs or players will be fighting back, so tank does not matter. An Archon with 15 fighters can do 1500 dps, but fighters get no bonus from Drone Damage Amplifier II, so by using 7 of those and 15x Garde II sentries, it can get a dps of 1653 according to EFT. I then tried fitting a Dominix Navy Issue and got myself a surprise. By fitting 6x Neutron Blaster Cannon II, 4x Drone Damage Amplifier II, 3x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II and 5x Garde II, it gets a dps of 1739 with Void ammo. Both fits are with max skills, no implants and no midslots or rig slots used.
So a Dominix Navy Issue can actually get a higher dps than my Archon. If my capital had been a dreadnaught or even a Thanatos, it would have been different. But my capital is an Archon, it will never leave Otela and its fighters have trouble hitting belt rats. We are some people here from different corps wanting to work together to set up POCOs with zero tax, and would love to see some fighters in action as we clear out the Interbus offices. Destroying these offices only happens once, so it could be called an event. Many highsec dwellers have never seen a carrier before, how many have seen one putting its fighters to good use?
I think this would be fair use of an Archon, what do you think?
(PS: My Archon pilot is Astesia and can be seen regularly in the Otela ice belt) |
iskflakes
701
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
No. - |
Betty Bly
State War Academy Caldari State
1241
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:26:00 -
[3] - Quote
No... "The dead know only one thing: It is better to be alive." |
Montevius Williams
The Scope Gallente Federation
642
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
This is the most detailed response I have ever seen in the history of the internet. "The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
1512
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Nope. Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4944
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
skillless structure shooter There are no goons. The goons' 0.0 dream is over.
"Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action." ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Prince Golem
Yodasmaster Corp
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
I don't see a problem with using your capital on interbus customs office since it's a one time deal. Those rules should be updated as well. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3505
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
I would think that shooting POCOs in order to allow yourself or others to set up a POCO would be considered PvP. It affects others by disrupting and changing income streams for better or worse. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Greenmachine Sale
Fyght Club SpaceMonkey's Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:58:00 -
[9] - Quote
lmao you're all jealous hahahahaha fags |
Cuddle Monster
Schwarzschild Casimir Collective STR8NGE BREW
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:00:00 -
[10] - Quote
Let me preface by saying I don't know what the punishment is for breaking the hi sec capital rules as it isn't listed in that link.
If you feel so strongly about making this a historic thing and want to show off for the locals why don't you?
This is on the thought process that the consequences will likely be loss of your capital in hi sec, which is largely useless anyway. So why not let it go out with a great story to tell? |
|
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:05:00 -
[11] - Quote
Cuddle Monster wrote:Let me preface by saying I don't know what the punishment is for breaking the hi sec capital rules as it isn't listed in that link.
5. Breach any of the above and receive 2 weeks ban and off to low sec with your capital. |
Cuddle Monster
Schwarzschild Casimir Collective STR8NGE BREW
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Cuddle Monster wrote:Let me preface by saying I don't know what the punishment is for breaking the hi sec capital rules as it isn't listed in that link. 5. Breach any of the above and receive 2 weeks ban and off to low sec with your capital.
Jeez big red box and I missed it. :) |
Christopher AET
Segmentum Solar Nulli Secunda
565
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
I always thought the main rule was no offensive module may be fitted to a hisec capital. I drain ducks of their moisture for sustenance. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4944
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:19:00 -
[14] - Quote
good thing drones aren't a module.. ? There are no goons. The goons' 0.0 dream is over.
"Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action." ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
537
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:28:00 -
[15] - Quote
Astecus wrote:
what do you think?
I think you should have your archon moved to low sec just for this post. |
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations CODE.
1756
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:29:00 -
[16] - Quote
I suggest the rules be amended so that the punishment is the relocation is to VFK. See Bio for isk doubling rules. -áIf you didn't read bio, chances are you helped fund those who did. |
Cannibal Kane
My Little Ponies of the Apocalypse Cannibal Empire
2591
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 06:16:00 -
[17] - Quote
Erotica 1 wrote:I suggest the rules be amended so that the punishment is the relocation is to VFK.
And then turned into a noob ship so Harry can shoot at it so we can hear more about his 1 vs 5000 people exploits. "I saw him fight by the monument in Jita. -áHe flowed in his Machariel like a Shinto spirit, 800MM shells sprouting in his passing. -áHis hair flowed in the corona of his target's warp core breach. -áIt was truly majestic. -áAnd while everyone stared in awe I stole the loot and ran off.-áBecause I am like that." --áNEONOVUS |
Joffy Aulx-Gao
Stay Frosty.
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 06:57:00 -
[18] - Quote
When you engage an interbus customs office you will get a suspect timer so my question is what would you do if someone engaged and scrammed your Archon? |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15609
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 07:00:00 -
[19] - Quote
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Oxide Ammar
Equilibrium Tech Labs
27
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 07:42:00 -
[20] - Quote
Everyone above farted "No" has never give reasonable counter arguments of why pve activity like this can't go through, as someone said they are jealous much |
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1727
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 08:36:00 -
[21] - Quote
Your argument that the Archon would do less damage than a BS is fair enough, but attacking the NOCO will mean everyone will attack your Archon? I don't think CCP wants a highsec cap to be the focus of a fight |
admiral root
Red Galaxy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
619
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 09:18:00 -
[22] - Quote
If you really want to shoot customs offices with a carrier take it to low / nullsec. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 11:50:00 -
[23] - Quote
Joffy Aulx-Gao wrote:When you engage an interbus customs office you will get a suspect timer so my question is what would you do if someone engaged and scrammed your Archon?
The devblog at community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/player-owned-customs-offices-in-hi-sec does not mention anything at all about turning suspect, and if this was the case, lots of people would just gather around the offices and quickly vanquish anyone trying to shoot it, basically causing it to take potensially forever to remove it. I believe the offices have around 14.5 million HP, which takes a while to take down, even when you are left alone.
If attacking it would indeed flag people as suspects, I would never use my Archon for this, and probably not any battleship either. |
Baali Tekitsu
State Protectorate Caldari State
117
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 11:59:00 -
[24] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Joffy Aulx-Gao wrote:When you engage an interbus customs office you will get a suspect timer so my question is what would you do if someone engaged and scrammed your Archon? The devblog at community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/player-owned-customs-offices-in-hi-sec does not mention anything at all about turning suspect, and if this was the case, lots of people would just gather around the offices and quickly vanquish anyone trying to shoot it, basically causing it to take potensially forever to remove it. I believe the offices have around 14.5 million HP, which takes a while to take down, even when you are left alone. If attacking it would indeed flag people as suspects, I would never use my Archon for this, and probably not any battleship either.
If you attack an Interbus office you get a flag, if you attack a player owned one you need a wardec or get concorded. |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 13:01:00 -
[25] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:If you attack an Interbus office you get a flag
Quote from forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3735448#post3735448:
CCP Paradox wrote:POCOs will flag you as Criminal in High-Sec. I am assuming you mean the InterBus CO (not POCO, thats player-owned.). An attack on these results in no consequence except PvE timer. CONCORD doesn't care about InterBus, neither do the faction navy/police.
You will get a PvE logoff timer, just like you get every time you shoot NPCs or they shoot you. This is not a suspect timer, even though they have similar colors in the top left corner. |
Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 13:11:00 -
[26] - Quote
Astecus wrote:
If attacking it would indeed flag people as suspects, I would never use my Archon for this, and probably not any battleship either.
This is the exact reason it SHOULD flag you as suspect just like low sec ones gave you GCC. Weed out the bads that will just be here crying about the war decs after their poop corp ninjas in a poco.
|
Noddy Comet
Lysdexic Agnostics - Thier is no Dog
101
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 13:43:00 -
[27] - Quote
Astecus wrote: The existing rules are as follows:
1. Capital ships may under no circumstances be used for aggression.
If you can't understand the very FIRST rule listed, perhaps you shouldn't be trusted to have one in hi sec in the first place.
inb4 tedious reality altering arguments of how blowing **** up is not considered aggression... |
Batelle
RisingSuns
242
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 14:00:00 -
[28] - Quote
Hahahahha no. Fighting is Magic |
ElQuirko
Jester Syndicate S0UTHERN C0MF0RT
2245
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 14:07:00 -
[29] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:Everyone above farted "No" has never give reasonable counter arguments of why pve activity like this can't go through, as someone said they are jealous much
*fart*
This can't go through for two reasons:
One - A carrier is capable of more than double the DPS of the next leading droneboat Two - A carrier is capable of tanking far more than the next leading droneboat whilst dealing this DPS Three - It's cheaper than the next leading pimp droneboat.
I very much doubt anybody is jealous of your 1.2bil hull that's stuck in highsec and useless; if you fancy taking a jaunt down to null you'll see things with 100x the value being actively used in combat, or hop into wormhole space and see "leet" ships like yours being used in group PVE, rather than rotting in a station. Save the Domi model! Spacewhales should be preserved. |
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
2304
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 14:16:00 -
[30] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote: if you fancy taking a jaunt down to null you'll see things with 100x the value being actively used in combat and ratting, or hop into wormhole space and see "leet" ships like yours being used in group PVE and PvP, rather than rotting in a station.
Fixed it for you. Ch+½j+ì Katrina Oniseki ~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer ~ [I-RED] Director of Public Relations |
|
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 15:30:00 -
[31] - Quote
Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:This is the exact reason it SHOULD flag you as suspect
Imagine 100 elite pvp'ers from the same corp show up to destroy an office, and they all go suspect. One neutral pilot next to them could then pick any target he wanted, and all the others would not be able to fight back, because they would be concorded if they attacked the neutral ship. Seems you would weed out basically everybody that way.
Noddy Comet wrote:If you can't understand the very FIRST rule listed
The GM didn't "understand" the first rule, perhaps the rules should be updated.
ElQuirko wrote:One - A carrier is capable of more than double the DPS of the next leading droneboat Two - A carrier is capable of tanking far more than the next leading droneboat whilst dealing this DPS Three - It's cheaper than the next leading pimp droneboat.
One - An Archon is not capable of more dps than a Dominix Navy Issue, as outlined. Two - The ability to tank is irrelevant when shooting Interbus offices, just as it is irrelevant when shooting belt rats. Three - Cheaper how? 15 fighters costs about 255-300 mill. Then add 5x Drone Control Unit I which comes at around 320 mill. I believe you can fit a Dominix Navy Issue pretty good for around 500 mill total.
ElQuirko wrote:rather than rotting in a station.
My Archon is usually in space 23/7, the only reason it is docked now, is because of the wardec, and rule number 2 doesn't allow me to undock now. |
destiny2
Perkone Caldari State
206
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 15:52:00 -
[32] - Quote
The new murader changes will do more dps then a single carrier, easily |
Alice Saki
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
95541
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 16:03:00 -
[33] - Quote
What a Waste, get that piece of rubbish into Low/Null
HS Sec Capitals.... Look at my Epeen.... Pretty much
|
Oxide Ammar
Equilibrium Tech Labs
27
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 16:15:00 -
[34] - Quote
destiny2 wrote:The new murader changes will do more dps then a single carrier, easily
/facepalm |
Alice Saki
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
95553
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 17:02:00 -
[35] - Quote
destiny2 wrote:The new murader changes will do more dps then a single carrier, easily
The New Mod has just made the Phoenix viable.
|
Maliandra
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
74
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 06:16:00 -
[36] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:Oxide Ammar wrote:Everyone above farted "No" has never give reasonable counter arguments of why pve activity like this can't go through, as someone said they are jealous much *fart* This can't go through for two reasons: One - A carrier is capable of more than double the DPS of the next leading droneboat Two - A carrier is capable of tanking far more than the next leading droneboat whilst dealing this DPS Three - It's cheaper than the next leading pimp droneboat. I very much doubt anybody is jealous of your 1.2bil hull that's stuck in highsec and useless; if you fancy taking a jaunt down to null you'll see things with 100x the value being actively used in combat, or hop into wormhole space and see "leet" ships like yours being used in group PVE, rather than rotting in a station. Are you serious dude?
He is one of the rare people that still has a capital ship in hi-sec. Why the hell would he go and remove it from hi-sec? That is quite possibly the LAST thing he should do. Even if he didn't want it for some reason, he'd be far better served selling it through someone like Chrissba or whatever (I know that's not his name :P). He'd get huge ISK for it and be able to buy 1 in low/WH with a lot of spare ISK leftover. |
ElQuirko
Jester Syndicate S0UTHERN C0MF0RT
2249
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 10:28:00 -
[37] - Quote
Katrina Oniseki wrote:ElQuirko wrote: if you fancy taking a jaunt down to null you'll see things with 100x the value being actively used in combat and ratting,
Fixed it for you. I challenge you to find me a ratting titan. No, seriously.
Astecus wrote: One - An Archon is not capable of more dps than a Dominix Navy Issue, as outlined. Two - The ability to tank is irrelevant when shooting Interbus offices, just as it is irrelevant when shooting belt rats. Three - Cheaper how? 15 fighters costs about 255-300 mill. Then add 5x Drone Control Unit I which comes at around 320 mill. I believe you can fit a Dominix Navy Issue pretty good for around 500 mill total.
One - Your Dominix Navy Issue will never apply that DPS on anything other than a stationary target. Your blaster tracking, with nothing to help it out and void in the guns, would barely be able to hit the POCO if it was going 1m/s. Two - Let's talk about how shooting POCOs will make you suspect, shall we? You really want to sit in a glasscannon battleship at a POCO perfectly stationary so your blasters can actually apply some of their damage with a suspect timer flashing? And please, belt ratting in a carrier is next-level stupid. Besides the threat from hotdroppers in that you're ridiculously easy to find, you take just under a minute to warp between belts in order to shoot four rats at a time. Ratting carriers are used in anoms if the pilot has any sense. Three - For a start, the DNI is not the "next leading pimp droneboat". Try the rattlesnake - same DPS, better active tank. Perfect for PVE. The average rattler hull is 420-ish mil, and will be fit with bling in order to maximise ticks. It will come out a similar price to a carrier.
EDIT: As an afterword to point one - try sticking Ogre IIs in instead of Garde IIs. The archon now outdamages your sentry dominix even including guns, 1746dps to 1739.
Maliandra wrote:Are you serious dude?
He is one of the rare people that still has a capital ship in hi-sec. Why the hell would he go and remove it from hi-sec? That is quite possibly the LAST thing he should do. Even if he didn't want it for some reason, he'd be far better served selling it through someone like Chrissba or whatever (I know that's not his name :P). He'd get huge ISK for it and be able to buy 1 in low/WH with a lot of spare ISK leftover.
Dunno if you were around for it, but during Burn Jita somebody logged a Nyx in that'd been there since near the start of the game and hadn't been seen since. Highsec carriers are a lot more common than you think. He's not allowed to sell it, either. Save the Domi model! Spacewhales should be preserved. |
Felicity Love
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
928
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 10:40:00 -
[38] - Quote
... or the existing entries could simply be edited to say:
"Capitals in Hi Sec must be used for asteroid mining ONLY. Failure to undock with anything other than Civilian Mining Lasers fitted into all Hi slots will result in immediate CONKORDOKKEN...."
Pretty much puts an end to any concerns or need to debate this ever again.
Proud Beta Tester for "Bumping Uglies for Dummies" |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 12:49:00 -
[39] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:Your Dominix Navy Issue will never apply that DPS on anything other than a stationary target. Customs offices are stationary targets, being able to hit moving targets is irrelevant.
ElQuirko wrote:Let's talk about how shooting POCOs will make you suspect, shall we? Shooting a POCO would make you criminal and get you concorded, unless you wardec first. But I assume you meant shooting highsec interbus offices, which does not make you suspect, I quote again:
CCP Paradox wrote:POCOs will flag you as Criminal in High-Sec. I am assuming you mean the InterBus CO (not POCO, thats player-owned.). An attack on these results in no consequence except PvE timer. CONCORD doesn't care about InterBus, neither do the faction navy/police. The PvE timer mentioned is the NPC logoff timer you get every time you shoot NPCs or they shoot you. It is not the same as a suspect timer, even though they have similar colors in the top left corner.
ElQuirko wrote:You really want to sit in a glasscannon battleship Yes, this is perfectly viable since you will get no suspect timer. I believe many people will be doing exactly that when Rubicon hits.
ElQuirko wrote:try sticking Ogre IIs in instead of Garde IIs Good point, I was wrong in assuming Garde IIs would give the best dps against a stationary target, since Ogres get bonus from more skills. Switching to Ogre IIs, the Archon does indeed get 1746 dps, while the DNI gets 1784 dps, which doesn't change the fact that the DNI can get a better dps.
The rattlesnake does have a better tank, but I seem to be having trouble getting it above 1351 dps with T2 torpedoes, can you show me how? I used the DNI because it has a damage bonus to two different weapon systems. |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 13:36:00 -
[40] - Quote
Astecus wrote:while the DNI gets 1784 dps Scrap that, by switching one Drone Damage Amplifier II for another Magnetic Field Stabilizer II, it actually gets 1789 dps. I must have been sleeping while fitting earlier.
Felicity Love wrote:... or the existing entries could simply be edited to say:
"Capitals in Hi Sec must be used for asteroid mining ONLY. Failure to undock with anything other than Civilian Mining Lasers fitted into all Hi slots will result in immediate CONKORDOKKEN...." This would be a simple rule to understand, if CCP decided to go that way. But since my carrier has no turret slots and can't fit mining lasers, I would prefer to be able to fit Drone Control Unit I in hislots instead, to be able to field up to 15 mining drones. |
|
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
2316
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 13:40:00 -
[41] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:Katrina Oniseki wrote:ElQuirko wrote: if you fancy taking a jaunt down to null you'll see things with 100x the value being actively used in combat and ratting,
Fixed it for you. I challenge you to find me a ratting titan. No, seriously.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbZt7e_jn8w
If I find a still living one, I'll give you a ring though. :P Ch+½j+ì Katrina Oniseki ~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer ~ [I-RED] Director of Public Relations |
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
146
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 18:27:00 -
[42] - Quote
I would think that any well adjusted person would understand the clearly expressed sentiment; they are grudgingly tossing existing holers a bone to basically let the caps stay arround in high sec as novelties vanity items
Its like a vintage tank or model t you would see driven in a local forth of july parade
Don't be a nutcase anal retentive unable to hear the "spirit if the law" that they have clearly expresed to anyone with basic social skills. If you start trying to make it a letter of the law thing they oughta just put aside the the good spirit they're expressing by aallowing you use of the vanity item outside of the rules thst apply to all other caps in the game . |
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
199
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 18:41:00 -
[43] - Quote
i see no good reason why high sec capital sales are forbidden
same with the ban on using caps for aggression
seems like unnecessary rules to me |
Altessa Post
Midnight special super sexy
57
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 18:57:00 -
[44] - Quote
Diomedes Calypso wrote:I would think that any well adjusted person would understand the clearly expressed sentiment; they are grudgingly tossing existing holers a bone to basically let the caps stay arround in high sec as novelties vanity items
Its like a vintage tank or model t you would see driven in a local forth of july parade
Don't be a nutcase anal retentive unable to hear the "spirit if the law" that they have clearly expresed to anyone with basic social skills. If you start trying to make it a letter of the law thing they oughta just put aside the the good spirit they're expressing by aallowing you use of the vanity item outside of the rules thst apply to all other caps in the game
This exactly.
And I agree with previous posters that your cap should be moved to low sec. Obviously, you lack common sense or maturity to stick to the gentlemen agreement CCP once offered.
On the internet, you can be whatever you want to be. It is amazing that so many people chose to be stupid. |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 19:50:00 -
[45] - Quote
My Archon is now dead.
Kill: zkillboard.com/detail/34129040/ Recording: www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfvjTFRcoxs |
Prince Golem
Yodasmaster Corp
5
|
Posted - 2013.10.29 01:11:00 -
[46] - Quote
well I guess that ends this thread |
Shaun Hansen
Corporation Danmark Tactical Narcotics Team
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 12:12:00 -
[47] - Quote
This is a copy of what I've written on www.themittani.com:
Reading this just makes me absolutely furious. He did in no way break any rules and this stinks like a ton of rotten carcasses. You CCP guys just frakkin' give him the ship back. An Archon can be replaced but you can't replace an Archon in highsec. I am so dissappointed of CCP and furious on behalf of Astecus. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1739
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 12:27:00 -
[48] - Quote
Guy gets banned for fitting a drone control unit? That's not even against the rules. And this guy was specifically asking GMs about the rules to make sure he didn't break any. What on earth is wrong with the GMs? |
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 12:35:00 -
[49] - Quote
High sec Capitals are a touchy and grey area and any real discussion on that is dangerous, whether that discussion happens now to talk about allowing POCO attacks or not or after a while when people start to whineabout how this IS a form of pvp (it is) and that these caps should be rowmoed from high sec. Because it may very well, again, turn out that CCP will go "off with their heads!".
So the OP is willing to risk his and every other high sec capital for the chance to do some easy structure grinding. OP is an idiot. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
9317
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 12:46:00 -
[50] - Quote
Maliandra wrote:Even if he didn't want it for some reason, he'd be far better served selling it through someone like Chrissba or whatever (I know that's not his name :P). He'd get huge ISK for it and be able to buy 1 in low/WH with a lot of spare ISK leftover.
That isn't allowed, actually. Twitter: @EVEAndski
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest.-á |
|
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
151
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:14:00 -
[51] - Quote
As for the OP, your ticket is still open you can still exercise your right to have the matter reviewed by a senior member of the GM department if you believe things to be amiss and it will be investigated.
Capital ships in high security space have been a regular discussion topic in the GM department ever since the events which resulted in the current rules for high-sec capitals.
To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming. They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception). High-sec capitals may not be sold, traded, or change hands through any means whatsoever.
We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done. Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
Alt Two
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
50
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:18:00 -
[52] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:As for the OP, your ticket is still open you can still exercise your right to have the matter reviewed by a senior member of the GM department if you believe things to be amiss and it will be investigated.
Capital ships in high security space have been a regular discussion topic in the GM department ever since the events which resulted in the current rules for high-sec capitals.
To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming. They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception). High-sec capitals may not be sold, traded, or change hands through any means whatsoever.
We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done. Does using hardeners or other non-offensive tank modules to tank belt rats while mining count as "defending from belt rats"? |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
357
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:26:00 -
[53] - Quote
I believe you should review caps in high sec.
Let them live short brutal lives, and die in the glorious fireballs they deserve. |
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
151
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:27:00 -
[54] - Quote
Alt Two wrote:GM Spiral wrote:As for the OP, your ticket is still open you can still exercise your right to have the matter reviewed by a senior member of the GM department if you believe things to be amiss and it will be investigated.
Capital ships in high security space have been a regular discussion topic in the GM department ever since the events which resulted in the current rules for high-sec capitals.
To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming. They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception). High-sec capitals may not be sold, traded, or change hands through any means whatsoever.
We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done. Does using hardeners or other non-offensive tank modules to tank belt rats while mining count as "defending from belt rats"?
If he is not aggressing the NPCs, we are not going to consider it a violation. On the flip side, that carrier is not preventing others from killing these NPCs and profiting from it as it would if it killed them. Very minor profit, granted but we have to draw a line somewhere. Besides, we doubt that high sec belt rats could even kill an untanked carrier going from downtime to downtime so it hardly matters.
If someone now goes and loses a high sec carrier to NPCs in a belt based off my previous statement: No, you are not getting it back. :P Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
Alt Two
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
50
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:31:00 -
[55] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Alt Two wrote:GM Spiral wrote:As for the OP, your ticket is still open you can still exercise your right to have the matter reviewed by a senior member of the GM department if you believe things to be amiss and it will be investigated.
Capital ships in high security space have been a regular discussion topic in the GM department ever since the events which resulted in the current rules for high-sec capitals.
To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming. They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception). High-sec capitals may not be sold, traded, or change hands through any means whatsoever.
We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done. Does using hardeners or other non-offensive tank modules to tank belt rats while mining count as "defending from belt rats"? If he is not aggressing the NPCs, we are not going to consider it a violation. On the flip side, that carrier is not preventing others from killing these NPCs and profiting from it as it would if it killed them. Very minor profit, granted but we have to draw a line somewhere. Besides, we doubt that high sec belt rats could even kill an untanked carrier going from downtime to downtime so it hardly matters. If someone now goes and loses a high sec carrier to NPCs in a belt based off my previous statement: No, you are not getting it back. :P Yeah I understand the rule about not killing the rats. I was just wondering if fitting defensive modules was a violation as well :) Thank you for the quick answer. |
Old Phill
Republic University Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:35:00 -
[56] - Quote
not being tradable is a huge finger up to any collector i mean its up there with rare limited edition ships atleast i may get one of those one day probably not but the thing is i can in theory |
Nicen Jehr
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
261
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:40:00 -
[57] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:...To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming. They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception)... can you explicitly state whether OP can shoot Interbus customs offices? (as opposed to player owned customs offices)? if I was in charge, I would let him... but I would also make shooting NOCO grant suspect flag alongside pve :) Little Things to improve GëíGïüGëí-á| My Little Things posts |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2238
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:43:00 -
[58] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:
If he is not aggressing the NPCs, we are not going to consider it a violation. On the flip side, that carrier is not preventing others from killing these NPCs and profiting from it as it would if it killed them. Very minor profit, granted but we have to draw a line somewhere. Besides, we doubt that high sec belt rats could even kill an untanked carrier going from downtime to downtime so it hardly matters.
If someone now goes and loses a high sec carrier to NPCs in a belt based off my previous statement: No, you are not getting it back. :P
Do not underestimate the value of high sec belt rats. I once got a low grade snake omega off one, in a 0.8 system. over 600 million. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
151
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:51:00 -
[59] - Quote
Nicen Jehr wrote:GM Spiral wrote:...To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming. They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception)... can you explicitly state whether OP can shoot Interbus customs offices? (as opposed to player owned customs offices)? if I was in charge, I would let him... but I would also make shooting NOCO grant suspect flag alongside pve :)
"A player may not activate any hostile or assisting module, nor make use of any kind of drone or fighter drone, against any kind of structure (player or NPC owned), ship (player or NPC owned), or other asset (player or NPC owned) in high-security space with a capital ship normally restricted (under normal game mechanics) to 0.4 space or lower. "
Is this clear enough? :)
Whether or not our erstwhile allies in Game Design decide to have it cause some sort of flag within the Crimewatch system or not simply has no bearing on this. Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
Angel-agl Katelo
The Fallen Angels Corp
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 13:53:00 -
[60] - Quote
CCP: you have lost my respect.
I understand not letting a capital shoot people in high sec, I understand not letting capitals be used in high sec wars. But a drone control mod? CCP is crying over a drone control mod?
Its a CARRIER it would be STUPID to not have a drone control mod on a ship that is designed specifically for that!
Congratulations CCP, you just removed another capital from high sec. |
|
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:01:00 -
[61] - Quote
Angel-agl Katelo wrote:CCP: you have lost my respect.
I understand not letting a capital shoot people in high sec, I understand not letting capitals be used in high sec wars. But a drone control mod? CCP is crying over a drone control mod?
Its a CARRIER it would be STUPID to not have a drone control mod on a ship that is designed specifically for that!
Congratulations CCP, you just removed another capital from high sec.
Please be aware that the ship in question is also explicitly designed not to have access to high security space. For historical reasons capitals ships that were produced in high security space are permitted to remain there, but that also means that we needed to construct some rules about how they could and could not be used there.
I will not comment on the OP's specific case here but we will remain in communication with them through the support ticket system should they wish to continue their correspondence with us.
As we have stated we are fully open to suggestions and ideas on how we should handle these exceptions, or even if we should have these exceptions at all. If you feel strongly about this then please lend your opinion to the discussion. Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
Thelonious Blake
87
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:02:00 -
[62] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming.
So once again you are punishing someone because of a nonexistent rule that you plan to make existent sometimes soonGäó. |
Jayne Fillon
Sanctuary of Shadows Axiomatic Dominion
123
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:08:00 -
[63] - Quote
Howdy - I wrote the article on themittani.com regarding Asectus' Archon. I recommend you give it a read if you're not sure about the context of this Archon loss, or the decisions and interactions that occured with the GMs. Sorry I can't provide a direct link to the source because that would violate Rule #9.
The problem here is that Asectus only ASKED about shooting NOCOs, never actually did. Therefore, the relation between this and the GM's order for the Archon to be removed from highsec is nonexistent and completely irrelevant.
A GM stated that the use of a Drone Control Unit on Asectus' Archon was what constituted as a rule violation.
This is what we need explained, not what the GMs would have decided in a theoretical situation. Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI. |
Angel-agl Katelo
The Fallen Angels Corp
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:09:00 -
[64] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:As we have stated we are fully open to suggestions and ideas on how we should handle these exceptions, or even if we should have these exceptions at all. If you feel strongly about this then please lend your opinion to the discussion.
Believe me you do not want to hear my suggestion on this matter. |
Nicen Jehr
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
261
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:11:00 -
[65] - Quote
??? wrote:"A player may not activate any hostile or assisting module, nor make use of any kind of drone or fighter drone, against any kind of structure (player or NPC owned), ship (player or NPC owned), or other asset (player or NPC owned) in high-security space with a capital ship normally restricted (under normal game mechanics) to 0.4 space or lower. " Thank you GM Spiral this is quite clear, my next question is, where is this rule found? I am not a highsec cap pilot but these details are not mentioned in the Evelopedia page: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Capitals_in_Highsec nor in the linked posts from GM Grimmi. Without knowing the details you just posted it is not clear that killing rats with your highsec capital is disallowed. Surely Chribba has killed rats while mining? Little Things to improve GëíGïüGëí-á| My Little Things posts |
Sheave Yens Nor
EvE Warfare Resources Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:20:00 -
[66] - Quote
You know, I used to think that CCP had some kind of grand plan for the EvE universe, and even though we may not be privy to that plan in it's entirety and therefore may not understand bizarre rule changes, it still exists. Now I'm starting to think they're just a bunch of regular dudes who've caught the dragon by the tail and are holding on for dear life; in short, they have no idea what they're doing and making snap decisions without rhyme or reason is their way of trying to convince the player base (and possibly themselves) that they're in control.
At least that's how it looks to me... |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
7
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:22:00 -
[67] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:"A player may not activate any hostile or assisting module, nor make use of any kind of drone or fighter drone, against any kind of structure (player or NPC owned), ship (player or NPC owned), or other asset (player or NPC owned) in high-security space with a capital ship normally restricted (under normal game mechanics) to 0.4 space or lower. "
Is this clear enough? :) This is perfectly clear, tell me - why haven't you updated the rules accordingly? I believe you could express it more concise:
1. High security capitals may never do hostile actions or remote assistance towards any other entity, player or NPC owned. 2. High security capitals may never change hands ever.
One interesting question is if such a pilot would then get banned if he ejected from his capital. |
Sirinda
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
229
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:27:00 -
[68] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:Howdy - I wrote the article on themittani.com regarding Asectus' Archon. I recommend you give it a read if you're not sure about the context of this Archon loss, or the decisions and interactions that occured with the GMs. Sorry I can't provide a direct link to the source because that would violate Rule #9. The problem here is that Asectus only ASKED about shooting NOCOs, never actually did. Therefore, the relation between this and the GM's order for the Archon to be removed from highsec is nonexistent and completely irrelevant. A GM stated that the use of a Drone Control Unit on Asectus' Archon was what constituted as a rule violation.This is what we need explained, not what the GMs would have decided in a theoretical situation.
"No, it's not okay and we're taking your Archon to lowsec just because you asked if it was."
Wait, what?
"Don't ask us if you're allowed to do something, we might decide you're a nuisance and get rid of you in response."
Does the GM team really want to be perceived like this? |
ImYourMom
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:29:00 -
[69] - Quote
How about - Capitals cannot be used in highsec for pvp or pve - full stop |
Treborr MintingtonJr
The Knights of Spamalot The Methodical Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:37:00 -
[70] - Quote
"3. You may not use your capital shipGÇÖs attributes to gain any sort of advantage over other players while in high security space."
I'm still confused how this carrier was used to gain any sort of advantage over other players? |
|
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
396
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:37:00 -
[71] - Quote
I'm confused...where does the drone control unit enter into it?
Since mining is explicitly allowed, is one expected to launch only 5 mining drones so as not to exceed the capabilities of non-capital ships? If so this would all make sense, but it seems a little pedantic, don't you think? What kind of impact could a 5 DCU 15 mining drone archon really have? Why is it so much worse than 10 drones? 5? Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages. |
Baali Tekitsu
B0SSAURA xXPlease Pandemic Citizens Reloaded Alliance.Xx
190
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:38:00 -
[72] - Quote
Treborr MintingtonJr wrote:"3. You may not use your capital shipGÇÖs attributes to gain any sort of advantage over other players while in high security space."
I'm still confused how this carrier was used to gain any sort of advantage over other players?
It had more mining drones than it is possible to have on the subcap with the most drones I guess (Guardian Vexor). |
Treborr MintingtonJr
The Knights of Spamalot The Methodical Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:45:00 -
[73] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:Treborr MintingtonJr wrote:"3. You may not use your capital shipGÇÖs attributes to gain any sort of advantage over other players while in high security space."
I'm still confused how this carrier was used to gain any sort of advantage over other players? It had more mining drones than it is possible to have on the subcap with the most drones I guess (Guardian Vexor).
Can 15 mining drones mine faster than the best mining ship? |
Ravcharas
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
261
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:46:00 -
[74] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote:How about - Capitals cannot be used in highsec for pvp or pve - full stop How about 'Players can only undock or board a capital in high security space if they are in a player corporation' - that way we could maybe get some interesting stories out of these hangar ornaments. (And that's the one rule, by the way. All other rules are defunct. Use them to do whatever you want.)
Also you could make this part of the code and not have to worry about GM roulette in regards to this issue ever again. |
Grumbletwerp Bumball
Throw More Dots Verge of Carebearing
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:49:00 -
[75] - Quote
I don't understand, Why make special rules for high sec capitals. the supply is limited and its not super hard to kill a single capital with a blob of smaller ships(which is easy to field in high sec) wouldn't letting people use them however they wanted just result in the people who use them in pvp loosing them eventually and only people who keep to themselves and dodge conflict being able to keep them?
The entire way this seems to be being handled seems completely unprofessional.
|
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:50:00 -
[76] - Quote
The rules clarification written in this thread were written in response to this thread and are not currently on the Evelopedia. We'll make sure it is clear enough and then update the page. If you have any further feedback on this, it is welcome.
Capitals in high-sec are a legacy issue from way back when for a brief time certain types of capitals could be produced in high security space. Community feedback at the time resulted in the current incarnation of the rules and the permission for those capitals already built in high-sec to remain there. The discussion to change or remove these rules and special permissions has come up a few times in the past decade, but has been inconclusive.
The rules could be interpreted as an incentive for a high-sec capital pilot to contact us and request relocation to a low-sec system on their own accord. Ultimately it is an exception to intended and established game mechanics and will have to be continued being treated in that way.
And always remember: You can always defer a decision to a senior game master for a review. Our game masters are all human and have been known to err occasionally. We are usually more than happy to discuss and amend as required. :) Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
Nicen Jehr
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
261
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:54:00 -
[77] - Quote
edit: wrote before GM spiral's last comment. leaving intact.
Is GM Spiral's clarification a quote of an existing rule, that's just hard to find? If so then I can't argue against CCPs policy of absolute enforcement (even though I do disagree with it and suggest that the rules be made absolutely clear in one easy to find place.)
On the other hand, if GM Spiral just wrote up this detailed language about NPC structures and ships now, it's unjust to apply the ruling to OP, since as best he knew, he was not violating any rules. "You may not use your capital shipGÇÖs attributes to gain any sort of advantage over other players while in high security space." As OP points out, the action he took (killing a handful of belt rats) could have been taken by other players in other setups, thus he gained no advantage . If he brought the cap to a highsec incursion and tried to steal the rewards from other players, THAT would be using his capital ship's attributes to gain an advantage over the other subcap incursion pilots. Little Things to improve GëíGïüGëí-á| My Little Things posts |
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
211
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:55:00 -
[78] - Quote
Sirinda wrote:
"No, it's not okay and we're taking your Archon to lowsec just because you asked if it was."
Wait, what?
"Don't ask us if you're allowed to do something, we might decide you're a nuisance and get rid of you in response."
Does the GM team really want to be perceived like this?
not only that, it seems there was a 2 week ban involved from what i read in the other thread
so, moving his **** and banning him for asking a question?
you guys really must want your customers to stop being customers huh |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
7
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:03:00 -
[79] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:As for the OP, your ticket is still open you can still exercise your right to have the matter reviewed by a senior member of the GM department if you believe things to be amiss and it will be investigated. Thanks for mentioning this, may I ask where I can find more information about how to do this correctly? |
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3374
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:15:00 -
[80] - Quote
Nice article, Jayne.
CCP when someone files a petition, which in this case was not utter crap, it's just bad form to shut the door on their face. And NOW GM spiral says that 'your ticket is still open'. That 2 week ban was a bit of an over-reaction too.
C'mon CCP we aren't your enemies here. Some of us have been with you throughout the whole time Eve has been online. Don't you think we deserve more of your patience?
|
|
Sirinda
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
231
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:16:00 -
[81] - Quote
Money Makin Mitch wrote:a 2 week ban
Wait, what? |
Ace Boogi
Republic University Minmatar Republic
50
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:18:00 -
[82] - Quote
Jake Warbird wrote:
C'mon CCP we aren't your enemies here. Some of us have been with you throughout the whole time Eve has been online. Don't you think we deserve more of your patience?
it's become quite apparent over the last month or so that we are indeed their enemy
unless we sell GTC that is |
Lord LazyGhost
The Bastards The Bastards.
116
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:22:00 -
[83] - Quote
Ace Boogi wrote:Jake Warbird wrote:
C'mon CCP we aren't your enemies here. Some of us have been with you throughout the whole time Eve has been online. Don't you think we deserve more of your patience?
it's become quite apparent over the last month or so that we are indeed their enemy
they ore there on worst enemy....... |
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
3929
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:23:00 -
[84] - Quote
Sheave Yens Nor wrote:You know, I used to think that CCP had some kind of grand plan for the EvE universe, and even though we may not be privy to that plan in it's entirety and therefore may not understand bizarre rule changes, it still exists. Now I'm starting to think they're just a bunch of regular dudes who've caught the dragon by the tail and are holding on for dear life; in short, they have no idea what they're doing and making snap decisions without rhyme or reason is their way of trying to convince the player base (and possibly themselves) that they're in control.
At least that's how it looks to me...
Not empty quoting.
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'Hodor'. |
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
9914
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:27:00 -
[85] - Quote
Nicen Jehr wrote:Surely Chribba has killed rats while mining? Surely I have not because 1) There are no rats in 1.0 and 2) I don't fit offensive modules
|
|
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
219
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 15:49:00 -
[86] - Quote
Read. Between. The. Damn. Lines. People.
The. GMs. Are. Willing. To. Fix. This. Problem. And. Are. Also. Using. It. As. An. Excuse. To. Clarify. The. Rules.
Sheesh, the GM didn't flat out say "escalate the petition and we'll restore your highsec carrier" but he repeatedly said everything but. . . I am not an alt of Chribba. |
March rabbit
True Horde
845
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 16:18:00 -
[87] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote: To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats...
What does this pilot suppose to do in belt should ge get visit of belt rats? It's ok when they attack ship but occasionally they can attack drones. In this case capital pilot has no rights to get drones back or remote rep them (defending) or kill these rats by other drones (attacking)???
|
Daedelus51
Sovereign Systems OuterWorld
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 16:19:00 -
[88] - Quote
First off let me just say, I too am a high sec Cap Pilot. CCP needs to get some compitent people to answer petitions. Why didnt he tell Astecus the " 24 hour " warning he gave WASN'T final, and that he could appeal? Also, according to the " New Rules " ( that no one knew about ) even chribba has violated them, after all mining in an ungankable ship is definatly " Unfair advantage" . Especially in these times. SHAME on you CCP, these ships ARE HERE Legally. The owners are not criminals, treating them as such is bullshit...... now lets see how long till they Ban my chimera, also in Otela, and Astecus IS my friend, a truly nice person. which is VERY Rare in Game.....CCP you seriously screwed the pooch on this one. |
Molenius Morrowinger
M - Intergalactics Inq.
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:22:00 -
[89] - Quote
This story really insta-killed my awe of EvE and GMs competency in particular.
If aggression for capitals in high sec is not allowed, it should be a game mechanic which apply actions as consequence. Like concord will give you 60 second notice to dock your ship, otherwise it would cyno jump your cap in to random location in low sec. Therefore no human factor involved and you will not violate intentionally or not the rules which are defined somewhere is GMs head.
Is EvE sandbox still? |
Solstice Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
4231
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:28:00 -
[90] - Quote
Daedelus51 wrote: First off let me just say, I too am a high sec Cap Pilot. CCP needs to get some compitent people to answer petitions. Why didnt he tell Astecus the " 24 hour " warning he gave WASN'T final, and that he could appeal? Also, according to the " New Rules " ( that no one knew about ) even chribba has violated them, after all mining in an ungankable ship is definatly " Unfair advantage" . Especially in these times. SHAME on you CCP, these ships ARE HERE Legally. The owners are not criminals, treating them as such is bullshit...... now lets see how long till they Ban my chimera, also in Otela, and Astecus IS my friend, a truly nice person. which is VERY Rare in Game.....CCP you seriously screwed the pooch on this one. Hahaha the shitstorm they'd create even just for tempbanning Chribba would be devastating. ^_^ |
|
Jack Mancetti
Rennfeuer Curatores Veritatis Alliance
32
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:35:00 -
[91] - Quote
CCP are miles away from his own game called Eve-Online,there is a human factor which is increasingly displaced. CCP lost the human factor for isk and capital,sad but true |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
9
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:49:00 -
[92] - Quote
Update: A senior GM has now restored my Archon and restored my faith in CCP. He/She has also admitted that mistakes where made, and that CCP will take steps to make the rules more clear. I again thank CCP for doing this.
My reimbursed Archon can now be found 50km off the Otela V station, with no intentions of turning suspect. It has no drones in the drone bay and no highslots fitted. I will likely keep it online 23/7 for people's enjoyment. |
oOReikaOo Michiko
The Scope Gallente Federation
199
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:50:00 -
[93] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Update: A senior GM has now restored my Archon and restored my faith in CCP. He/She has also admitted that mistakes where made, and that CCP will take steps to make the rules more clear. I again thank CCP for doing this.
My reimbursed Archon can now be found 50km off the Otela V station, with no intentions of turning suspect. It has no drones in the drone bay and no highslots fitted. I will likely keep it online 23/7 for people's enjoyment.
FIRST TO LIKE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nlJuwO0GDs |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
2195
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:51:00 -
[94] - Quote
Solstice Project wrote:Hahaha the shitstorm they'd create even just for tempbanning Chribba would be devastating. ^_^ You must be new here. The Veldnought was threatened, which lead to the current rules for capitals in hisec.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=856260
|
Jayne Fillon
Sanctuary of Shadows Axiomatic Dominion
128
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:57:00 -
[95] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Update: A senior GM has now restored my Archon and restored my faith in CCP. He/She has also admitted that mistakes where made, and that CCP will take steps to make the rules more clear. I again thank CCP for doing this.
My reimbursed Archon can now be found 50km off the Otela V station, with no intentions of turning suspect. It has no drones in the drone bay and no highslots fitted. I will likely keep it online 23/7 for people's enjoyment.
Well hot damn. Mission accomplished, faith restored. Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4410
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 17:57:00 -
[96] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Update: A senior GM has now restored my Archon and restored my faith in CCP. He/She has also admitted that mistakes where made, and that CCP will take steps to make the rules more clear. I again thank CCP for doing this.
My reimbursed Archon can now be found 50km off the Otela V station, with no intentions of turning suspect. It has no drones in the drone bay and no highslots fitted. I will likely keep it online 23/7 for people's enjoyment. I know just what to do with that Archon man. Trust me... . |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
16
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 18:15:00 -
[97] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:I know just what to do with that Archon man. Trust me... How many pilots are needed to gank 4 million EHP (not overloaded)? |
oOReikaOo Michiko
The Scope Gallente Federation
199
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 18:34:00 -
[98] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:I know just what to do with that Archon man. Trust me... How many pilots are needed to gank 4 million EHP (not overloaded)?
You must parade it now.... WITH MANY FIREWORKS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nlJuwO0GDs |
Hra Neuvosto
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
158
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 18:52:00 -
[99] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Update: A senior GM has now restored my Archon and restored my faith in CCP. He/She has also admitted that mistakes where made, and that CCP will take steps to make the rules more clear. I again thank CCP for doing this.
My reimbursed Archon can now be found 50km off the Otela V station, with no intentions of turning suspect. It has no drones in the drone bay and no highslots fitted. I will likely keep it online 23/7 for people's enjoyment. Congrats, nice to see something positive on these forums this week |
Sirinda
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
233
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 18:56:00 -
[100] - Quote
One wonders why it always takes bad press and negative player reactions to move CCP into doing things reasonably.
Other than that, I'm glad this worked out for you, OP. |
|
Cierra Royce
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
85
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 19:06:00 -
[101] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:As for the OP, your ticket is still open you can still exercise your right to have the matter reviewed by a senior member of the GM department if you believe things to be amiss and it will be investigated.
Capital ships in high security space have been a regular discussion topic in the GM department ever since the events which resulted in the current rules for high-sec capitals.
To clarify the rules as they currently stand. If you use your high-sec capital for anything but mining or showing off, we will have to act on it. This includes attacking or defending from belt rats, and will also include the new player owned customs offices in high sec that are coming. They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception). High-sec capitals may not be sold, traded, or change hands through any means whatsoever.
We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done.
If I might suggest the following:
High sec capitals should be treated as captials anywhere else, with one proviso, no cynos into high sec, all the other fluff should be removed.
Having a lone carrier in high sec unable to call in similar support is of no meaningful advantage to any entity in eve anymore, and destruction would be a substantial blow to the owners prestige, lone carriers die to all sorts of small gangs these days, lets have it happen in high sec too. |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
65
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 19:10:00 -
[102] - Quote
a drone control module shouldn't be a violation since it would be used (properly mind you) for just deploying additional mining drones. Also when was the no sale allowed rule added? It did not exsist as of my petition regarding the rules on 3-30-2010 (if it was missed GM Syndemic wasn't informed either and the petition has been purposefully retained by me). I personally have been interested in eventually acquiring one regardless of price since lowsec/nullsec has about the same appeal to me as a dentist's appointment on chainsaw day. Don't need it as a combat ship, just something I've always wanted to posess even if it's horribly gimped by location. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
461
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 19:15:00 -
[103] - Quote
This is a case where specifying what you can do with it would be much clearer than trying to corner all the things you can't do with it.
Rule XX: In HiSec capitals may only lock onto asteroids. CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
|
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
396
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 19:24:00 -
[104] - Quote
Astecus wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:I know just what to do with that Archon man. Trust me... How many pilots are needed to gank 4 million EHP (not overloaded)?
No more than 1600 catalysts.
More "math" reveals you would need 444.44444444444444444444444444444444444 tornados to alpha the sucker. Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages. |
Dynotron
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 19:28:00 -
[105] - Quote
My 2 cents
The current rules do not result in a line being drawn. More like a monstrous piecewise function. This is a result of attempting to draw the line too late. There being so much to do in eve this bring the "fight" into a battlefield that is one large grey area. Attempting to dictate how the ship is controlled without proper game mechanics is extremely messy and inevitably leads to conflict as unexplored grey areas are encountered. Another problem with how things are dealt with is the punishment of the player (the ban). High sec capitals should be the issue here, not players in high-sec capitals. It is NO way the players fault as they are NOT violating any game mechanics. Them having a high sec capital is already seen as not a violation of game mechanics.
Allowing players to keep capitals in high sec with the current rules and protocols for dealing with violations of said rules are not in favor of the players or GM's as they have HIGH probability of causing periodic conflict between said parties leading to hurt feelings and damaged relations.
//Example solution// Draw a (complete as possible) line at the undock as rule 2 does.
A potential new set of rules would be
1. Undocking with any modules or drones that can apply DPS is not allowed. 2. If at war, or with war declaration pending, you may not take your capital ship out of station. 3. Violation of any of the above will result in the capital in question being stripped of CPU, powergrid, and shield/hull/structure (values are edited to be 1). 4. Upon second violation a wormhole will be randomly selected and said capital will be sent there with or without the pilot. 5. Any unforeseen questionable behavior may result in 3 and 4. (This is especially necessary as the game's mechanics are not static) *READ THIS*(NOTE: 3 and 4 are not necessarily permanent and perceived improper handling of the situation can be petitioned!)*READ THIS*
(The no sales rule does not fit in here as it's reasoning is pretty grey, legacy capitals are allowed in highsec for the players to enjoy, buying/selling them does not have a negative impact on the player base and would increase the enjoyment that can be had from these high-sec capitals.)
Send out a one time pop-up notification to all players informing them of the new rules.
To enforce these rules in a way that does not lead to conflict, add the following data logging on undock
If (security >= 0.5 && ship.type == captial) { Log(player.name) Log(ship.ID) Log(ship.modules) Log(player.warstatus) }
If a capital is accused of violation of the rules, verifying said breach would be simple and quick. (Rule 3 could potentially be automated) Ideally also have someone write a simple database API that GMs can call somehow.
ShipCripple(string shipID, string GMcredentials) { if (credentials are not verified) return;
RetrieveShip(shipID) { CPU/Powergrid/max shield/max hull/max structure == 1 } }
ShipUncripple(string shipID, string GMcredentials) (As we are all humans) { if (credentials are not verified) return;
RetrieveShip(shipID) { Restore values to normal } } |
Mana Potion
A Different Kind of Gaming Community Vanguard.
14
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 19:41:00 -
[106] - Quote
Just wait a couple expansions. then we can take over High Sec....first POCOs... next NPC stations. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1065
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 20:17:00 -
[107] - Quote
The GM did a good job. The Tears Must Flow |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1065
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 20:18:00 -
[108] - Quote
CCP should just move all of the remaining ships to lowsec. The Tears Must Flow |
Jennifer Maxwell
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 21:21:00 -
[109] - Quote
I don't see the opposition to highsec capitals when they're not negatively impacting the game in any way.
I'd absolutely love to have one. |
TharOkha
0asis Group
635
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 21:33:00 -
[110] - Quote
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:I don't see the opposition to highsec capitals when they're not negatively impacting the game in any way.
I'd absolutely love to have one.
So buy one in lowsec for f sake. I remember the old days when i brought my first carrier and delivered it toi empty lowsec. I was playing with that toy all day long doing that "brrrrrm" sound and i enjoyed it. You could do it too.
GÇ£If reality can destroy the dream, why shouldn't the dream destroy reality?GÇ¥ |
|
Viktor Fel
Junkyard Doggs
39
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 21:43:00 -
[111] - Quote
OP: you need to lose another capital. Some night I hope to make that happen and mine your tears. Pirate turned PVP Director Blitzkrieg. Corporation Insidious Empire-á
|
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:29:00 -
[112] - Quote
Dynotron wrote:My 2 cents
WAY too complex.
Here is the only mechanics change necessary to balance capitals in hisec: do not let players board a capital in hisec space or undock a capital from a hisec station if they are not in a player corporation.
That's it. Force dock up all existing hisec capitals during a DT after making this change, then remove ALL other GM restrictions on capital use in hisec.
Now, everyone in a hisec capital is forced to be in a player corp if they want to be in space. IF someone attempts to use a capital to any significant combat or personal advantage, they will be perma wardec'd to the point that either a) they can never undock their capital anyway or b) they eventually lose their capital. Yay for player-driven content!
CCP, I have removed all GM workload regarding hi-sec capitals. I expect my cheque in the mail.
EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm saying this rule should be baked into the engine and turned into a game mechanic. Not just some nebulous "you will be petitioned for doing it" kind of GM rule. |
Jennifer Maxwell
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:31:00 -
[113] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:Jennifer Maxwell wrote:I don't see the opposition to highsec capitals when they're not negatively impacting the game in any way.
I'd absolutely love to have one. So buy one in lowsec for f sake. I remember the old days when i brought my first carrier and delivered it toi empty lowsec. I was playing with that toy all day long doing that "brrrrrm" sound and i enjoyed it. You could do it too. Going "brrrrrrm" around lowsec isn't the point; going "brrrrrrm" around highsec is. Sure it's a matter of having something other people can't easily get, of course there's a desire to show off my awesome super special ship. But it's more than that. It's also knowing that I could be inspiring some new player. I could be showing them something they probably won't be seeing for quite some time.
Call it what you will, but the first time I saw a capital ship, just a month ago, it was kinda awe inspiring. Sure I looked at them in the ship viewer. But that's not really comparable to flying next to one. You can go on and on about how easy it is to go find one: "just jump into Nullsec, there are shittons there". But the vast majority of new players won't make it to Null for a good while.
I mean, what is there really in highsec that's awe inspiring? You've got stations, those are big. And planets. Moons. POSes, if you're desperate. I guess you could say those industrial ships are "big", but it's an industrial ship; a glorified tanker. It's not really the same as seeing a Carrier or Dreadnaught in highsec. Especially when you know those ships are so rare.
I'd gladly give up offensive modules on it to be able to fly it around highsec. |
Gekkoh
Circle of Steel Inc. Care Factor
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:53:00 -
[114] - Quote
Dynotron wrote:My 2 cents
...
To enforce these rules in a way that does not lead to conflict, add the following data logging on undock
If (security >= 0.5 && ship.type == captial) { Log(player.name) Log(ship.ID) Log(ship.modules) Log(player.warstatus) }
If a capital is accused of violation of the rules, verifying said breach would be simple and quick. (Rule 3 could potentially be automated) Ideally also have someone (Me? ;D) write a simple database API that GMs can call somehow.
ShipCripple(string shipID, string GMcredentials) { if (credentials are not verified) return;
RetrieveShip(shipID) { CPU/Powergrid/max shield/max hull/max structure == 1 } }
ShipUncripple(string shipID, string GMcredentials) (As we are all humans) { if (credentials are not verified) return;
RetrieveShip(shipID) { Restore values to normal } }
Eve runs on stackless python. Why are you including types and braces?
Also, why on earth would you store a GUID as a string?
Finally, I'm going to guess that the engineers know how to write simple functions without help on the forums :-P
On the original topic, I don't see why caps shouldn't be allowed in hisec. "It's not fair!" is hardly one of the design pillars of Eve. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
2778
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:08:00 -
[115] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:CCP should just move all of the remaining ships to lowsec. I wonder if they can, though. I'm not sure they could find them all. I almost bought an Aeon that was docked at a station in lowsec, but just to be safe I asked a GM about it and they said "no way"... apparently if you don't long in for a certain period of time (or something) you and your ship can get docked at the closest NPC station, even in a supercarrier. ...but it can't stay that way, and you can't sell a docked SC. I would think they would force them all out of dock if they could...
|
Kibitt Kallinikov
Arma Purgatorium Templis Dragonaors
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 01:23:00 -
[116] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:The rules clarification written in this thread were written in response to this thread and are not currently on the Evelopedia. We'll make sure it is clear enough and then update the page. If you have any further feedback on this, it is welcome.
Capitals in high-sec are a legacy issue from way back when for a brief time certain types of capitals could be produced in high security space. Community feedback at the time resulted in the current incarnation of the rules and the permission for those capitals already built in high-sec to remain there. The discussion to change or remove these rules and special permissions has come up a few times in the past decade, but has been inconclusive.
The rules could be interpreted as an incentive for a high-sec capital pilot to contact us and request relocation to a low-sec system on their own accord. Ultimately it is an exception to intended and established game mechanics and will have to be continued being treated in that way.
And always remember: You can always defer a decision to a senior game master for a review. Our game masters are all human and have been known to err occasionally. We are usually more than happy to discuss and amend as required. :)
I know this is nit-picking, but war-decs are the common way to engage people in high security space. Are you saying that a Capital ship is not allowed to defend itself from a war-dec enemy? It's a tricky question to tackle because you have to know who struck who first, but that could be solved by making aggressive actions by capital ships in high security space impossible unless you have an engagement timer on you, INCLUDING TRIAGE/SIEGE to make it impossible to get tangled with a capital ship unless a pilot wants to, as you only receive those timers unless an enemy takes an aggressive action against you, whereas suspect status or a capsuleer combat timer could be achieved via remote assistance or the aforementioned Siege/Triage modules (At least, I think that's how the modules work).
In addition, you could make it so that cyno fields can be lit in high sec, but only for the purposes of capital ships [In other words, only a Capital ship can jump through], thus preventing the use of cyno to deploy offensive or defensive forces in high sec. Whether or not you make this extend to Jump Freighters is up to you, because I know that would have a serious impact upon JF capabilities. If you consider this option, please remember that Titans give gang link bonuses, so if you wish to allow Titans to cyno into high sec, there would have to be even more headache work (straight up prevent them from joining a fleet) involved, and the effect of Titans on Jita undock or the like would probably be horrific for traffic. |
Lady Naween
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
233
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 02:44:00 -
[117] - Quote
Kibitt Kallinikov wrote:
I know this is nit-picking, but war-decs are the common way to engage people in high security space. Are you saying that a Capital ship is not allowed to defend itself from a war-dec enemy? It's a tricky question to tackle because you have to know who struck who first, but that could be solved by making aggressive actions by capital ships in high security space impossible unless you have an engagement timer on you, INCLUDING TRIAGE/SIEGE to make it impossible to get tangled with a capital ship unless a pilot wants to, as you only receive those timers unless an enemy takes an aggressive action against you, whereas suspect status or a capsuleer combat timer could be achieved via remote assistance or the aforementioned Siege/Triage modules (At least, I think that's how the modules work).
you may not undock in a highsec capital ship while wardeced. |
Thatt Guy
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 05:13:00 -
[118] - Quote
Remove all high-sec capitals to low-sec. Problem solved. Can't be used, sold, traded or anything else, so what's the point of them being there? |
ZAKURELL0 LINDA
Black Scorpions Inc Circle-Of-Two
15
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 06:14:00 -
[119] - Quote
Thatt Guy wrote:Remove all high-sec capitals to low-sec. Problem solved. Can't be used, sold, traded or anything else, so what's the point of them being there? - for fellow citizens of eve have an idol to worship - for bitter vets to remember da good ol' days - for mining veldspar - for a good firework shows
or just because they can. RIP Iron Lady |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Industrial Corp. Northern Associates.
222
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 10:30:00 -
[120] - Quote
Nice to see you made a event & a video of sestruction og your cap , +1 The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back |
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 13:27:00 -
[121] - Quote
You know we are only talking about carriers and dreads here. These are not supercarriers that can only be destroyed by other supercarriers. Carriers and dreads can both be destroyed by subcapital fleets. Further the hs capitals are limited in their movements because they cannot cyno around hs. Hence, its not likely that you are going to see multiple capitals assisting each other. In view of the above, I say remove the combat restrictions from the few remaining carriers and dreads in hs. Destroying such a ship would clearly be both fun and an achievement. Let those who own such ships take them out to use in whatever system they are docked in if they dare. They will produce content for eve's players and slowly but surely attrition will solve the hs capital "problem." I don't play, I just fourm warrior. |
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
191
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 14:15:00 -
[122] - Quote
The object of the Highsec Capitals rules are to allow those Capital ships which were built in Highsec and which never left and which therefore represent a piece of grandfathered history to persist while ensuring that they have no impact on the game at all other than as tourist attractions.
The first question therefore is whether this Archon is a true highsec capital. If it is then you're running into the issue of aggression; by agressing the Customs Office you're breaking the first rule... so don't. If it isn't a true highsec capital then aggressing the customs office would amount to an exploit and (probable) ban... so don't; just move it back to where you need it and avoid the attentions of the GMs.
In short... No, I would not support a change to the rules on Highsec Capitals.
The only exception I would make would be to have a CCP managed and updated register of highsec capital holders* and to allow the trading again.
*Alternative, give each current and bona fide highsec capital a "certificate" of authenticity; any capital in highsec which does not have a "certificate" in its cargohold will be moved to lowsec...
For "certificate" read "Specialist Exotic Dancer entitled The 'You won EVE dance'". |
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
221
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 15:32:00 -
[123] - Quote
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:Read. Between. The. Damn. Lines. People.
The. GMs. Are. Willing. To. Fix. This. Problem. And. Are. Also. Using. It. As. An. Excuse. To. Clarify. The. Rules.
Sheesh, the GM didn't flat out say "escalate the petition and we'll restore your highsec carrier" but he repeatedly said everything but. . .
Called it. Two hours before it happened.
Because I know how to read. Sometimes these forums just make me sad :( I am not an alt of Chribba. |
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
162
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 15:33:00 -
[124] - Quote
Hello again.
As promised we looked over the existing rules and clarified them as well as we could.
Capitals in Highsec on the Evelopedia
Hopefully what you may and may not do with these ships currently should be very clear.
Of note:
- "Two week ban" for breach against the rules has been removed. The only action will be removing the ship in question to low sec. Exception being if the ship changed ownership then that transaction will be reversed and the original owner warned (multiple/repeat warnings of any kind may result in a ban). The ban was not something we were enforcing and therefore should not belong in the rules any more.
- Addressed changes to the war mechanics not reflected in the old rules.
- Addressed changes in the crimewatch system not properly reflected in the old rules.
- Expanded the history section a bit. Still digging through the old site and might update with proper links and references when we find them.
Comments and suggestions are welcome. We also thank you for all the feedback already given in this thread. We'll continue to keep an eye on the discussion here. :) Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Easily Offended
163
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 16:04:00 -
[125] - Quote
Looks like my old Evelopedia article has finally grown up. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
126
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 16:29:00 -
[126] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Hello again. As promised we looked over the existing rules and clarified them as well as we could. Capitals in Highsec on the Evelopedia Hopefully what you may and may not do with these ships currently should be very clear. Of note:
- "Two week ban" for breach against the rules has been removed. The only action will be removing the ship in question to low sec. Exception being if the ship changed ownership then that transaction will be reversed and the original owner warned (multiple/repeat warnings of any kind may result in a ban). The ban was not something we were enforcing and therefore should not belong in the rules any more.
- Addressed changes to the war mechanics not reflected in the old rules.
- Addressed changes in the crimewatch system not properly reflected in the old rules.
- Expanded the history section a bit. Still digging through the old site and might update with proper links and references when we find them.
Comments and suggestions are welcome. We also thank you for all the feedback already given in this thread. We'll continue to keep an eye on the discussion here. :)
So since a player with a HS capital can never acquire an aggression flag with a cap and they cannot undock one during a war, the rest of us are denied the opportunity of destroying their HS capital ship. In eve destroying rare ships is an achievement - for confirmation just look at the destruction of the rev by "bl." Now we have a class of ships that cant be destroyed because of the "rules." Seems very short sighted, anti-sandbox and very un-eve like to me.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior. |
Quintessen
Messengers of Judah Socius Inter Nos
225
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 16:43:00 -
[127] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:GM Spiral wrote:Hello again. As promised we looked over the existing rules and clarified them as well as we could. Capitals in Highsec on the Evelopedia Hopefully what you may and may not do with these ships currently should be very clear. Of note:
- "Two week ban" for breach against the rules has been removed. The only action will be removing the ship in question to low sec. Exception being if the ship changed ownership then that transaction will be reversed and the original owner warned (multiple/repeat warnings of any kind may result in a ban). The ban was not something we were enforcing and therefore should not belong in the rules any more.
- Addressed changes to the war mechanics not reflected in the old rules.
- Addressed changes in the crimewatch system not properly reflected in the old rules.
- Expanded the history section a bit. Still digging through the old site and might update with proper links and references when we find them.
Comments and suggestions are welcome. We also thank you for all the feedback already given in this thread. We'll continue to keep an eye on the discussion here. :) So since a player with a HS capital can never acquire an aggression flag with a cap and they cannot undock one during a war, the rest of us are denied the opportunity of destroying their HS capital ship. In eve destroying rare ships is an achievement - for confirmation just look at the destruction of the rev by "bl." Now we have a class of ships that cant be destroyed because of the "rules." Seems very short sighted, anti-sandbox and very un-eve like to me.
What about a high-sec gank... It'll just take a lot of work. |
Lucas Kell
JSR1 AND GOLDEN GUARDIAN PRODUCTIONS SpaceMonkey's Alliance
1492
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 16:54:00 -
[128] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Hello again. As promised we looked over the existing rules and clarified them as well as we could. Capitals in Highsec on the Evelopedia Hopefully what you may and may not do with these ships currently should be very clear. Of note:
- "Two week ban" for breach against the rules has been removed. The only action will be removing the ship in question to low sec. Exception being if the ship changed ownership then that transaction will be reversed and the original owner warned (multiple/repeat warnings of any kind may result in a ban). The ban was not something we were enforcing and therefore should not belong in the rules any more.
- Addressed changes to the war mechanics not reflected in the old rules.
- Addressed changes in the crimewatch system not properly reflected in the old rules.
- Expanded the history section a bit. Still digging through the old site and might update with proper links and references when we find them.
Comments and suggestions are welcome. We also thank you for all the feedback already given in this thread. We'll continue to keep an eye on the discussion here. :) I have a question. Since this has all escalated from Astecus having a rage fit over his carrier, and he's now had it restored, it makes me wonder how he got away with receiving it in the first place? Since capitals in high sec can never be traded within the rules, how did he receive the carrier in trade in September? And surely the act of receiving the carrier is in violation of the rules anyway? So why was it reimbursed? The Indecisive Noob - A new EVE Fan Blog for news and stuff. |
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
164
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 16:56:00 -
[129] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:So since a player with a HS capital can never acquire an aggression flag with a cap and they cannot undock one during a war, the rest of us are denied the opportunity of destroying their HS capital ship. In eve destroying rare ships is an achievement - for confirmation just look at the destruction of the rev by "bl." Now we have a class of ships that cant be destroyed because of the "rules." Seems very short sighted, anti-sandbox and very un-eve like to me.
That is a valid point to an extent. That they are permitted to remain in high security space at all given the current game mechanics of capitals ships in EVE, they are already an anomaly. But historical reasons (see the events in 2008 quoted on the Evelopedia site) set the ball rolling in this direction. Ideas to revisit the option of moving them to low sec have been considered since them, but left alone for those same reasons.
These ships are showpieces and are simply not intended to take part in high sec game play in any way, and the current rules are aimed at keeping it that way. But the idea of simply abolishing the rules and letting what may come has been entertained, as have ideas of replacing them with de-militarised versions, or simply relocating them and have this episode closed. A viable solution that satisfies all (or most) parties simply has not been found and these ships are currently causing so little trouble as to negligible.
But rest assured, there will be no drastic changes to the current state of affairs without ample prior discussion with the community. The Veldnought scare of 2008 (as GM Grimmi put it) is still remembered.
Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
164
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 17:32:00 -
[130] - Quote
Quintessen wrote:What about a high-sec gank... It'll just take a lot of work. The rules do not forbid others to attempt a suicide gank. The capital pilot has the onus of not initiating any actions or take any actions to persist flagging.
Lucas Kell wrote:I have a question. Since this has all escalated from Astecus having a rage fit over his carrier, and he's now had it restored, it makes me wonder how he got away with receiving it in the first place? Since capitals in high sec can never be traded within the rules, how did he receive the carrier in trade in September? And surely the act of receiving the carrier is in violation of the rules anyway? So why was it reimbursed?
The original phrasing of the rules as they were on the Evelopedia prior to us editing it (can view edit history to confirm this): "4. You may not sell or put your capital up for sale while in high security space."
Previously the act of selling the ship was a violation, this is now expanded to include all ownership change. The previous phrasing was simply inadequate. Assuming that your statement in regard to his trade is true, we would in all likelihood leave it be unless ISK or other assets were involved in the trade (thus falling under the old phrasing).
If you feel this is cause for concern then we invite you to contact us with a support ticket and the matter will be reviewed, and we will attempt to address your concerns. Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
|
Julius Priscus
168
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 18:19:00 -
[131] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote: They are for showing off or hangar decoration only and should not impact upon the game play of any other player in that system in any way (with mining being the only exception). High-sec capitals may not be sold, traded, or change hands through any means whatsoever.
We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done.
so what you are saying is...if I own a high sec cap ship and I decide to lave to game.. then sell my character on the bazaa.. what does one do with a cap ship you cannot trade owners??? personally I could careless if it is traded in high sec... the no pvp rule would still apply. -»\_(pâä)_/-»-á Sup cracka ! |
Astecus
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
46
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 20:14:00 -
[132] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Previously the act of selling the ship was a violation, this is now expanded to include all ownership change. The previous phrasing was simply inadequate. Assuming that your statement in regard to his trade is true, we would in all likelihood leave it be unless ISK or other assets were involved in the trade (thus falling under the old phrasing). As mentioned in the themittani.com article, the Archon was indeed given to me for free. Since I got it fully fitted, and have since changed the fit, I have refrained from giving the old unused fitting back to the previous owner, solely because of the rule against selling these ships.
Julius Priscus wrote:so what you are saying is...if I own a high sec cap ship and I decide to lave to game.. then sell my character on the bazaa.. what does one do with a cap ship you cannot trade owners??? personally I could careless if it is traded in high sec... the no pvp rule would still apply. This is a good question. To be honest, I don't really see why they could not be traded freely, just like every other unique/limited ship. In what situation would this become a problem? |
Gatran
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 00:55:00 -
[133] - Quote
Quote:I challenge you to find me a ratting titan. No, seriously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdYgD52u2ts
lol |
Sirinda
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
241
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 01:33:00 -
[134] - Quote
Mother of God.jpg
Also, has this abomination been put to rest yet? |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
1603
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 01:47:00 -
[135] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Hello again. As promised we looked over the existing rules and clarified them as well as we could. Capitals in Highsec on the Evelopedia Comments and suggestions are welcome. We also thank you for all the feedback already given in this thread. We'll continue to keep an eye on the discussion here. :) What is the CCP stance towards capitals and supercapitals that have been moved to highsec either due to a GM petition resolution, or after an user was unsubscribed for 6 months? Both of these events semi-regularly result in new highsec caps and supercaps, but neither is mentioned in the Evelopedia article. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
2779
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 01:51:00 -
[136] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:GM Spiral wrote:Hello again. As promised we looked over the existing rules and clarified them as well as we could. Capitals in Highsec on the Evelopedia Comments and suggestions are welcome. We also thank you for all the feedback already given in this thread. We'll continue to keep an eye on the discussion here. :) What is the CCP stance towards capitals and supercapitals that have been moved to highsec either due to a GM petition resolution, or after an user was unsubscribed for 6 months? Both of these events semi-regularly result in new highsec caps and supercaps, but neither is mentioned in the Evelopedia article. Shhh! Stop spitting on my cupcake man!
|
Kirryan
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
12
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 12:51:00 -
[137] - Quote
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:TharOkha wrote:Jennifer Maxwell wrote:I don't see the opposition to highsec capitals when they're not negatively impacting the game in any way.
I'd absolutely love to have one. So buy one in lowsec for f sake. I remember the old days when i brought my first carrier and delivered it toi empty lowsec. I was playing with that toy all day long doing that "brrrrrm" sound and i enjoyed it. You could do it too. Going "brrrrrrm" around lowsec isn't the point; going "brrrrrrm" around highsec is. Sure it's a matter of having something other people can't easily get, of course there's a desire to show off my awesome super special ship. But it's more than that. It's also knowing that I could be inspiring some new player. I could be showing them something they probably won't be seeing for quite some time. Call it what you will, but the first time I saw a capital ship, just a month ago, it was kinda awe inspiring. Sure I looked at them in the ship viewer. But that's not really comparable to flying next to one. You can go on and on about how easy it is to go find one: "just jump into Nullsec, there are shittons there". But the vast majority of new players won't make it to Null for a good while. I mean, what is there really in highsec that's awe inspiring? You've got stations, those are big. And planets. Moons. POSes, if you're desperate. I guess you could say those industrial ships are "big", but it's an industrial ship; a glorified tanker. It's not really the same as seeing a Carrier or Dreadnaught in highsec. Especially when you know those ships are so rare. I'd gladly give up offensive modules on it to be able to fly it around highsec.
You know, you can't 'fly it around highsec' right?
|
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
67
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 15:57:00 -
[138] - Quote
... post ate, re-editing |
BoBoZoBo
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
350
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:37:00 -
[139] - Quote
Yay - more overly complicated solutions to already solved problems. Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite |
Azami Nevinyrall
Carbon Circle
1341
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:45:00 -
[140] - Quote
Since a GM is floating around...
Might I ask, why is there a ban on the buying and selling of such things?
I'd jump at the chance to get one in highsec... Support my (possibly dumb) Ideas!! Worm Rebalance!!! |
|
|
GM Spiral
Game Masters C C P Alliance
168
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:59:00 -
[141] - Quote
Julius Priscus wrote:so what you are saying is...if I own a high sec cap ship and I decide to lave to game.. then sell my character on the bazaa.. what does one do with a cap ship you cannot trade owners??? personally I could careless if it is traded in high sec... the no pvp rule would still apply. If you are leaving the game, why are you selling your character? That scenario aside, if you wanted to sell a character that actually included a high sec capital then we would appreciate if you would contact us beforehand and we'd consider options available.
Abdiel Kavash wrote:What is the CCP stance towards capitals and supercapitals that have been moved to highsec either due to a GM petition resolution, or after an user was unsubscribed for 6 months? Both of these events semi-regularly result in new highsec caps and supercaps, but neither is mentioned in the Evelopedia article. If caught within a reasonable time frame (lovely concept), we will simply apologize to the pilot and move the ship to a legitimate location. If a longer time has lapsed then we will generally leave it be as long as the pilot in question observes the rules already established (most got caught trying to sell them). The original loophole which permitted such ships to enter high sec completely without GM intervention was closed a long time ago and it is currently very rare for such ships to accidentally find their way to high sec nowadays.
BoBoZoBo wrote:Yay - more overly complicated solutions to already solved problems. I know, right?
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Since a GM is floating around...
Might I ask, why is there a ban on the buying and selling of such things?
I'd jump at the chance to get one in highsec... They are not supposed to provide any game play in high sec. We deemed this included possibly profiting from one by selling it. They are just for show, you can not profit or otherwise benefit from them. That is all.
Senior Game Master | CCP Games Customer Support Team
Helping capsuleers since 2004. |
|
Azami Nevinyrall
Carbon Circle
1341
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:38:00 -
[142] - Quote
So, one could be sold for market average price. As it won't cost more then one in lowsec/nullsec. Even if the reason of buying one is to do laps around stations for exercise.
I'd understand if someone was selling a Chimera for 10 Billion being an advantage. But what if someone wanted to sell one for 10-15 Mil cheaper then market price? Nothing would be broken nor any advantage would be given. Support my (possibly dumb) Ideas!! Worm Rebalance!!! |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2239
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:40:00 -
[143] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Julius Priscus wrote:so what you are saying is...if I own a high sec cap ship and I decide to lave to game.. then sell my character on the bazaa.. what does one do with a cap ship you cannot trade owners??? personally I could careless if it is traded in high sec... the no pvp rule would still apply. If you are leaving the game, why are you selling your character? That scenario aside, if you wanted to sell a character that actually included a high sec capital then we would appreciate if you would contact us beforehand and we'd consider options available. An answer could be : " I have a friend who wants to keep playing and likes my character. So I plan on transferring him all my assets, selling him my character for 1 ISK, and leaving". From your reply above I guess such a player should contact the GMs to see if arrangements can be made. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Ginger Barbarella
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1522
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 18:07:00 -
[144] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done.
How about just move them all into low or null, irrespective of what they are used for? Problem solved. "Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Easily Offended
167
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 19:34:00 -
[145] - Quote
Eve is a persistent universe. If things change, artifacts stay behind. Adapting everything to the NWO is the opposite of persistent.
On the other hand, that move could conceivably have happened in 2006 when the manufacturing lines have changed. In 2013/2014? Not so much. |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
1614
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 19:42:00 -
[146] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:GM Spiral wrote:We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done. How about just move them all into low or null, irrespective of what they are used for? Problem solved. Because of Veldnaught. |
Verite Rendition
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
136
|
Posted - 2013.11.02 04:18:00 -
[147] - Quote
I don't mind the new rules against ratting, but coupled with what you guys have done to the Phoenix over the last year it's kind of a downer. As the only real activity we're allowed to engage in, it's rather difficult to go mining in a ship that doesn't have drones and doesn't have a turret hardpoint. |
destiny2
Perkone Caldari State
216
|
Posted - 2013.11.02 04:54:00 -
[148] - Quote
im confused what if a said carrier in hs is mining and suicide gankers come in and try and gank him. can he shoot back or just die horrible. then again that would take alot of tornado's |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
1625
|
Posted - 2013.11.02 21:36:00 -
[149] - Quote
If you are mining in a dreadnaught, does activating a siege mod to prevent being bumped count as an unfair advantage? |
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
221
|
Posted - 2013.11.06 21:19:00 -
[150] - Quote
Astecus wrote:This is a good question. To be honest, I don't really see why they could not be traded freely, just like every other unique/limited ship. In what situation would this become a problem?
Probably because it ensures that only people who know the rules, and know them well, have these highsec capitals.
Just more headaches for GMs if one of these gets traded to someone who doesn't understand the very specific, highly technical, and honestly hard-to-find "rules" that govern their use.
|
|
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
221
|
Posted - 2013.11.06 21:21:00 -
[151] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:GM Spiral wrote:We will be happy to review and reconsider said rules if that is what our community believes is something that needs to be done. How about just move them all into low or null, irrespective of what they are used for? Problem solved.
It's like you didn't read the thread at all! Good job!
|
Cage Man
303
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 19:26:00 -
[152] - Quote
Mining in cap ships in HS gives the users an unfair advantage, they can't be ganked or bumped. They should all be removed or other players should be allowed to have them. Alternatively ganking and bumping should be review. I neither mine or can fly capital ships, but fair is fair. The thick plottens... CCP, When can my crane get its black paint job back?? |
Laserak
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
185
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 19:35:00 -
[153] - Quote
Capitals belong in 0.0, if they want caps in highsec then lets get bubbles and bombs there too |
James Noble
Metal Industries Company
10
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 20:45:00 -
[154] - Quote
Do it. Change is good. |
NUBIARN
Brutal Ballerinas
3
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 22:20:00 -
[155] - Quote
personally don't really see why we couldn't have cynos and capitals in high sec, not supers just regular carriers and dreads, with the following proviso
It could be linked to you sec status with the empire you are in for both lighting a cyno and for jumping such as
1.0 sec - +10 standing with system empire 0.9 sec - +9 standing with system empire 0.8 sec - +8 standing with system empire 0.7 sec - +7 standing with system empire 0.6 sec - +6 standing with system empire 0.5 sec - +5 standing with system empire
that would make it very hard to jump across high sec but would allow pilot who have high enough standings with the relative empire faction to have a carrier or dread in high sec. why not you already proved loyal to the empire faction.
The building of capitals stays as it is, in low / null sec. personally I think this would be great for role playing, additionally link the race of capital to the system as well so only revs and archons could be in amarr high sec for example |
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1381
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 23:30:00 -
[156] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Since a GM is floating around...
Might I ask, why is there a ban on the buying and selling of such things?
I'd jump at the chance to get one in highsec... They are not supposed to provide any game play in high sec. We deemed this included possibly profiting from one by selling it. They are just for show, you can not profit or otherwise benefit from them. That is all.
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:So, one could be sold for market average price. As it won't cost more then one in lowsec/nullsec. Even if the reason of buying one is to do laps around stations for exercise.
I'd understand if someone was selling a Chimera for 10 Billion being an advantage. But what if someone wanted to sell one for 10-15 Mil cheaper then market price? Nothing would be broken nor any advantage would be given. Might I actually get a reply?
GMs?
I know you're in there...! Support my (possibly dumb) Ideas!! Worm Rebalance!!! |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4758
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 23:52:00 -
[157] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote: As we have stated we are fully open to suggestions and ideas on how we should handle these exceptions, or even if we should have these exceptions at all. If you feel strongly about this then please lend your opinion to the discussion.
Could you pretty please explain why it's not allowed to trade / buy those high sec capitals?
Some players have oceans of ISK and would love to collect one of those ships. I don't see anything exploitive into selling an hi sec capital to somebody else. Maybe limit it to 1 sale per year, but not to complete forbid! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1381
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 00:11:00 -
[158] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:GM Spiral wrote: As we have stated we are fully open to suggestions and ideas on how we should handle these exceptions, or even if we should have these exceptions at all. If you feel strongly about this then please lend your opinion to the discussion.
Could you pretty please explain why it's not allowed to trade / buy those high sec capitals? Some players have oceans of ISK and would love to collect one of those ships. I don't see anything exploitive into selling an hi sec capital to somebody else. Maybe limit it to 1 sale per year, but not to complete forbid! Refer to my post, just right above yours... Support my (possibly dumb) Ideas!! Worm Rebalance!!! |
Khanh'rhh
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2383
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 01:16:00 -
[159] - Quote
Owning a highsec capital is the EvE equivalent of dating a girl with small hands. "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930 |
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1382
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 11:02:00 -
[160] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:GM Spiral wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Since a GM is floating around...
Might I ask, why is there a ban on the buying and selling of such things?
I'd jump at the chance to get one in highsec... They are not supposed to provide any game play in high sec. We deemed this included possibly profiting from one by selling it. They are just for show, you can not profit or otherwise benefit from them. That is all. Azami Nevinyrall wrote:So, one could be sold for market average price. As it won't cost more then one in lowsec/nullsec. Even if the reason of buying one is to do laps around stations for exercise.
I'd understand if someone was selling a Chimera for 10 Billion being an advantage. But what if someone wanted to sell one for 10-15 Mil cheaper then market price? Nothing would be broken nor any advantage would be given. Might I actually get a reply? GMs? I know you're in there...! Can I get a reply?
Or do I have to flag my own post? Support my (possibly dumb) Ideas!! Worm Rebalance!!! |
|
Cage Man
308
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 21:36:00 -
[161] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:So since a player with a HS capital can never acquire an aggression flag with a cap and they cannot undock one during a war, the rest of us are denied the opportunity of destroying their HS capital ship. In eve destroying rare ships is an achievement - for confirmation just look at the destruction of the rev by "bl." Now we have a class of ships that cant be destroyed because of the "rules." Seems very short sighted, anti-sandbox and very un-eve like to me.
That is a valid point to an extent. That they are permitted to remain in high security space at all given the current game mechanics of capitals ships in EVE, they are already an anomaly. But historical reasons (see the events in 2008 quoted on the Evelopedia site) set the ball rolling in this direction. Ideas to revisit the option of moving them to low sec have been considered since them, but left alone for those same reasons. These ships are showpieces and are simply not intended to take part in high sec game play in any way, and the current rules are aimed at keeping it that way. But the idea of simply abolishing the rules and letting what may come has been entertained, as have ideas of replacing them with de-militarised versions, or simply relocating them and have this episode closed. A viable solution that satisfies all (or most) parties simply has not been found and these ships are currently causing so little trouble as to negligible. But rest assured, there will be no drastic changes to the current state of affairs without ample prior discussion with the community. The Veldnought scare of 2008 ( as GM Grimmi put it) is still remembered.
Owners of these ships in HS mine in them, that is gameplay ??? they cannot be ganked or bumped away from the belts, that is unfair gameplay.. they can be used by owners to throw tantrums, go GCC and get popped, only to be replaced.. back in HS.. that is gameplay.. if I decide I am not happy with this unfair gameplay and undock my vindi in jita and smartbomb everyone.. will it be replaced like the carrier was ??? I will be most certainly be providing content for the community.... I would also like a "show piece" carrier in hs to mine with..
The thick plottens... CCP, When can my crane get its black paint job back?? |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
2125
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 21:40:00 -
[162] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Can I get a reply?
Or do I have to flag my own post? GMs usually don't read forums unless they are alerted to a particular thread. Some devs do, although rarely. Your best bet is to petition (and link this thread in the petition). Reporting your own post will only bring it to attention of forum mods, who can't do anything about game policies. |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
132
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 22:13:00 -
[163] - Quote
First off your intended use would have the Archon advantageous by not being suicide gankable and by having high dps potential without ammo cost.
The second bit can be possibly done in a navy geddon using pulses and ogres with all damage mods, but said gedfon is then prone for suicide ganks. Archon can go AFK while at it and just rely on buffer to be almost un gankable. This afk ability is an advantage.
That all said, I think highsec caps should have full freedom to do whatever they please apart from station games and other such uncounterable advantages. Tbh I would even give those uncounterable advantages to them to make them interesting.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |