|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Jenshae Chiroptera
107
   |
Posted - 2011.11.06 02:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Yes. There's a difference. Griefers get banned.
How so?
Tippia wrote:People who punish other players for not fitting their ships properly or for being drunk at the wheel should be rewarded. 
How so?
Tippia wrote:It's only one-sided if the victim chooses to make it one-sided by not equipping his ship properly, by not flying it properly, and by not enforcing the consequences on the aggressor.
How so?
How so?
How so?
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 11:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Andski wrote:
I welcome this change, to be quite honest - it will make miners so much more complacent in their supposed "safety" that they will totally neglect taking any measures to protect themselves.
So, not only do you want to shoot at something that can't shoot back, you also want it to not flee either ... hmm ... I guess some people do find punching bags challenging and "fun". 
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Sorry, are you talking about the miners or the gankers here?
Miners aren't shooting and most of them being some what sane are half AFK while doing other things. I am sure that gankers will like you highlighting that they are no better than miners though. 
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:12:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ryllic Sin wrote:... create a much-needed risk in high security..
Umm ...
Encouraging criminal behaviour. Riiight. 
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
117
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Since you were actually quoting me, not Ryllic SinGǪ
Yes?
How so?
Tippia wrote:
Yes? Just because it is GÇ£highGÇ¥ security doesn't mean it should be without risk, nor does it mean that it can't use more risk than it currently has. Over time, GÇ£highGÇ¥ sec has edged closer and closer to complete sec, which has a number of harmful consequences. I would prefer that it was edged back towards being merely high security (relatively speaking, compared to the low security of low sec and the no self-made security of nullsec).
Yes?
How so?
Tippia wrote:
Yes? It has become a bit too rare, moving more towards scam spam and various aggression juggling (can flipping and the like), making it rare to see proper crime in space. Such acts rather seem to need a bit of encouraging in this day and age, to bump up that risk of flying in space a bit and to further stimulate the economic effects of such crime.
Yes?
How so?
Tippia wrote:
That's the funny thing about EVE: the way the game is set up, criminal behaviour is not a bad thing GÇö quite the opposite. Rampant criminality in EVE can have a silly amount of very positive effects.
Yes?
How so?
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
119
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 04:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Ladie Harlot wrote:... All the "tears" that certain posters keep smugging about seem to be imaginary.
Oh go on, pretend to be upset at least. People will like you for some signs of humanity.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
119
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 04:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
K Suri wrote:
Oh go on, pretend to be smart at least. She's a Goon.
"She"? *Arches eyebrow.* "It" you mean?
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
119
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 05:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tippia wrote:quote=Naari TalvanisHighsec was designed as the area's for casual players, industrialists, new players, etc, etc./quote
DebatableGǪ and even if it were, why does that mean that cheap ganks should have come to an end 7 years ago?
Does
Tippia wrote:quoteAt the very least it should not be easy and relatively effortless to destroy what players not as far into the game as yourself, new guys or casual players have worked very long to attain./quote
Why not? Everything should be relatively effortless to destroy, or it will stifle demand.
no one
Tippia wrote:quoteBut just hanging around unchallenged untill you can blow something up..? Kinda cheap way of play, and can hardly be described as PvP./quote
It most certainly is PvP GÇö it's another player that gets blown up after all. It just isn't fair, but that is kind of the whole point of doing it (and very much in line with how the game works in general). Moreover, if you can GÇ£just hang around unchallengedGÇ£, then a fair amount of work has gone into that, so the cheapness isn't really there.
else
Tippia wrote:quoteThink the rewards in highsec are too high and people shouldn't be safe there?
Buff low and 0.0 and give people a reason to go there, like it used to be. /quote
That's a particularly bad solution for an economy that is already out of whack. Nerfs are often a far better solution than buffs, and people need to stop being so afraid of them.
find this
Tippia wrote:quoteI'm really unable to believe that gankers actually believe there is some art to ganking when it's this easy./quote
If it is as easy as that, how come people are so utterly unable to uphold the consequences of ganking, in especially since it's made even easier by not even having to take CONCORD into consideration when doing so?
absurd?
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 05:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Does no one else find this absurd? Do you mean your quoting style or what I said? If it's the former, then yes. If it's the latter, what is it you find absurd about it?
You see a difference between our quoting styles? 
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
126
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 13:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
yumike wrote:...
There's no reason they should take that much risk when i'm virtually risk free (I go into every fight knowing I will die.)
It doesn't make sense.
If your arguement is "they shouldnt be using autopilot" then I do agree, but intelligent people isn't what this topic is about.
I risk giving kill rights to a bear for 30 days (And only ever had one drake pilot actually come hunt me down to try, which I applauded him for)
They risk.. Their ship + whatever isk is in their cargo hold.
As it stands right now on tq, I risk 10/20mil isk usually depending on my module drop/salvage (bc/bs).
When my potential earnings are in the billions (Got a geddon BPO my third week of suicide ganking, I was pretty pumped!) ...
Quoted for highlighting purposes.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
|
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 22:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
Have to give Tipsy some endurance medal or something. I doubt they have slept in days with the fervent replies to this thread.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:18:00 -
[12] - Quote
Tippia wrote:MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:Sure you're not: [GǪ] The very least you could do is keep it honest, Tippia. And where in those quotes do I tell people how to play the game?
Someone is testing Cleverbot on these forums, aren't they?
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:45:00 -
[13] - Quote
500 replies and Tipsy is still frothing at the mouth. How much longer can they go without sleep? Join us later for an update.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
144
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:35:00 -
[14] - Quote
MeestaPenni wrote:Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
What I DO support are tradeable killrights. Or at least a bidding system on the existing unused killrights, perhaps if unused they become available on a system where players can bid on a weeklong extension to the killright for a straight fee or auction. Or just if someone gets one they can auction them off on a system like the bounty office system currently to encourage player retailiation. And to prevent the abuse of low SP alts make the thieves of the loot also available to be killrighted for a shorter time. Youd have to do a time limit on how the server would log the thieves or just anyone that takes anything. All fees either going to the player or Concord as a possible reimbursement of the ganked items to the player or an isk sink to Concord.
I think this would encourage players to go after other players as full fledged "pirate hunters" like in the old days.
I endorse this idea. Fix the bounty system, or as this gentleman (sic) suggests, make kill rights trade-able.
Agreed.
There should be a contract you can put up that:
- Records time of the contract being created.
- Checks for the kill mail when someone tries to redeem the contract and makes sure it happened after the contract was made.
- Holds the ISK in collateral for the bounty hunter.
- You can make it public to be redeemed or private to a particular person
- You can also assign a ship class range, such as battle cruisers, T2+ so that friends don't redeem cheap kills on each other.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
147
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:11:00 -
[15] - Quote
Good work keeping Tipsy occupied guys. Next shift will be with you in 30 minutes.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
147
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:09:00 -
[16] - Quote
Predator and prey populations and how they affect each other.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
147
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:12:00 -
[17] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:...
Highsec should be a noob heaven, and could be, without being an ISK pump. [...]- these are the people who don't tank their haulers).
Nice theory but what about the masses who will always chose the safest option or quit?
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
149
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:...
Highsec should be a noob heaven, and could be, without being an ISK pump. [...]- these are the people who don't tank their haulers). Nice theory but what about the masses who will always chose the safest option or quit? They can stay poor. I don't know a thing about mining so I am reaching into my butt for numbers.
Our Hulk miners make about 20-22M a day. In worm holes, I make 27M an hour. They operate with buffs more frequently than I do.
I think missions do need some changing. L4s seem to pay a bit much and are getting farmed. Low sec needs improvements on that I would like to see NPC pirate factions protecting or assisting members with high standing with them in PVP. (You would get killed a lot in the beginning but things should improve as you progress)
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
149
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:45:00 -
[19] - Quote
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: ... This has absolutely nothing to do with new player retention at all....
The most common newbie ganking I have seen is in missions with those piots that jump into a battle ship very quickly with T1 fits. Minimal skilling it. Quite a few have rage quit, never to return after that.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
149
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:48:00 -
[20] - Quote
Ladie Harlot wrote:
You might want to check the current price of oxygen isotopes before you start making yourself look even dumber.
Yeah, yeah. That is only temporary. At some point your enthusiasm for it will wane, the whole thing will lose momentum; then everything will go back to the way it was.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
|
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
149
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:13:00 -
[21] - Quote
Ladie Harlot wrote:... He was using four accounts to run a single ice harvester and he still managed to lose his Hulk to a couple Goons. It was ...
... highlighting how bad the tanks on mining barges are.
CSM do you think?
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
154
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 23:11:00 -
[22] - Quote
Russell Casey wrote:Ladie Harlot wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:First off, my corp/alliance lives in null sec, and has for as long as I've played EvE. Additionally, we have a strict ROE that prohibits Hi-sec ganking, I will never understand why people join corps and alliances that tell tell them how to play the game. Easier than figuring it out and picking a playstyle for themselves I suppose.
You maintain an image to attract more people to your corp or alliance that you will most probably like.
Ideas & stuff
No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
|
|
| |
|