| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |

Selinate
87
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 03:39:00 -
[151] - Quote
Tippia wrote:MeestaPenni wrote:Seriously? You need me to go Google up a definition of 'obtuse' for you? No, but you can stop illustrating it by pretending to not understand what the GÇ£whyGÇ¥ in question was in relation to.
And you can stop pretending that he didn't answer your "why?" in his response. |

Hamster Too
No Name Corporation
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 03:43:00 -
[152] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aidan Brooder wrote:They should fix corp wars then, as in: You can't just jump corp. But suicide ganking en masse is lame. Anyone can do it with an alt. That's the problem: they just did the opposite. The rendered corp wars completely obsolete since you don't even need to jump corp any more to get rid of them. This leaves ganking as the only available means of attacking people, for whatever reason, and if this change is intentional, they're breaking the balance of that tactic as well.  Oh wellGǪ with a bit of luck, it's just a bug (and with a bit more luck, they'll reverse that policy change once it gets abused enough).
If the corp keeps shedding the wardecs send them a note that they will be suicide ganked until further notice. Open a petition with a copy of the note and ask for a definition of griefing so you don't cross the line. 
The way I see it the latest wardec changes are a good counterbalance to the plague of neutral reps, neutral boosters... neutral Orca pilots. Did I miss anything?  |

Covert Kitty
SRS Industries SRS.
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 03:47:00 -
[153] - Quote
bah insurance payouts for concorded ships was always, heck insurance payouts as a whole, are a silly feature anyway. It's probably an improvement overall.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1216
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:01:00 -
[154] - Quote
Selinate wrote:And you can stop pretending that he didn't answer your "why?" in his response. I have to start before I can stop.
So, let's do that one again: why does GÇ£[my] trying to get them to volunteer the underlying assumptions and intentions behind the claims they make, and offer some kind of reasoning behind their assertions and wishesGÇ¥ make him think of the word GÇ£obtuseGÇ¥, especially considering the explicit caveat that GÇ£the answers may seem obvious, but I still prefer that hey actually give those answers than to presume to know their reasoning, because I don't.GÇ¥
Or, put another way: why should I assume things rather than to strive for certainty? GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |

Lairne Tekitsu
Ordo Mercuia
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:01:00 -
[155] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:Skorpynekomimi wrote:
I hope they go the whole way, and remove insurance completely.
+1 on a side note,: Tippia just got successfully trolled with one of the oldest troll attempts on the interwebs, which is repeatedly just posting 'troll'.
No, he's only been trolled if gets angry, which he hasn't.
There's a difference between trying to troll someone and succeeding. |

Jhagiti Tyran
Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:03:00 -
[156] - Quote
Lack of insurance payout wouldnt have saved this Orca.
|

Aubepine Finfleur
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:05:00 -
[157] - Quote
This and Dec Shielding. EvE does not condone griefplay anymore... what's happening ? it's truly the end of the world. The sad truth about morality in EvE : eve-search.com/search/author/EpicFailTroll |

MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:07:00 -
[158] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Or, put another way: why should I assume things rather than to strive for certainty?
It's obvious you will cheerfully ignore that which is certainty.
You can't even wrap your head around the comical illogic of insurance payouts for what the mechanics of the game deem to be illegal acts.
"How so?" you say.....and normal posters slowly shake their heads and silently mouth..."what the fu.....?"
|

MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:13:00 -
[159] - Quote
I've seen very few people come right out and say "stop the ganking." A couple, not many. Point is....go ahead and keep the gank in the game. There is absolutely a valid place in the game for the practice. If I had the chance to gank a hauler with uber loots....pew pew pew.
There is no sane way to validate the practice of subsidizing that type of play though. And that is what insurance is....a subsidy to ease the loss of a ship. Missioners have no mechanism to subsidize the ammunition lost, or the drones damaged.....and the ganker considers the ship to be no more important than ammo. It is a piece of ammo. |

Selinate
88
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:14:00 -
[160] - Quote
Aubepine Finfleur wrote:This and Dec Shielding. EvE does not condone griefplay anymore... what's happening ? it's truly the end of the world.
How does eve not condone grief play any more? Go scam someone with the market mechanics. Or better yet, go flip some poor miner's can, let him shoot you, then warp in with a bigger ship.
Or even better yet, go suicide gank a hauler with 3 bil worth of faction stuff on his indy, since the profit will just be slightly smaller, but negligibly smaller. |

Krios Ahzek
Juvenis Iratus
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:18:00 -
[161] - Quote
Now wait a second...
Does anyone really think that the big organized suicide ganking alliances care about a few million ISK work of Brutix? They're doing it for the tears and taking out 200m exumers. Taking away some pocket change reimbursal won't change anything. |

Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
60
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:19:00 -
[162] - Quote
Villandra Chassind wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:[ BEST tears!  -Can we call them Tt's from now on? Why not go the whole hog and refer to it as "Tippia in Tears". Everyone loves T i Ts right?
I approve. T i T s!
While we remove the insurance payout can we please take out this annoying filter? |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1216
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:19:00 -
[163] - Quote
MeestaPenni wrote:It's obvious you will cheerfully ignore that which is certainty. No. It is just that I cheerfully don't assume that something is a certainty.
Quote:You can't even wrap your head around the comical illogic of insurance payouts for what the mechanics of the game deem to be illegal acts. Of course I can. It's just that I can also see the logic of having mechanics in place that makes no real-world sense if they benefit gameplay. CONCORD is another such example: it is utterly illogical, just like insurance, but it serves a purpose in the game and thus has its place.
Quote:"How so?" you say.....and normal posters slowly shake their heads and silently mouth..."what the fu.....?" Yes, GÇ£how so?GÇ¥, I say, and thus probe for knowledge, in whomever made the claim, about what the purpose of insurance is in EVE. If all they can think of as an answer is some real-life comparison, they are overlooking what the insurance is actually doing, and thus their assumed lack of logic is in fact a lack of perspective. They are arguing game mechanics without considering the game mechanic.
Selinate wrote:How does eve not condone grief play any more? EVE has never condoned grief play. Grief play is against the EULA and will get you banned. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |

Selinate
88
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:20:00 -
[164] - Quote
Tippia wrote:MeestaPenni wrote:It's obvious you will cheerfully ignore that which is certainty. No. It is just that I cheerfully don't assume that something is a certainty. Quote:You can't even wrap your head around the comical illogic of insurance payouts for what the mechanics of the game deem to be illegal acts. Of course I can. It's just that I can also see the logic of having mechanics in place that makes no real-world sense if they benefit gameplay. CONCORD is another such example: it is utterly illogical, just like insurance, but it serves a purpose in the game and thus has its place. Quote:"How so?" you say.....and normal posters slowly shake their heads and silently mouth..."what the fu.....?" Yes, GÇ£how so?GÇ¥, I say, and thus probe for knowledge, in whomever made the claim, about what the purpose of insurance is in EVE. If all they can think of as an answer is some real-life comparison, they are overlooking what the insurance is actually doing, and thus their assumed lack of logic is in fact a lack of perspective. They are arguing game mechanics without considering the game mechanic.
Still trolling. |

MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:24:00 -
[165] - Quote
Tippia wrote:CONCORD is another such example: it is utterly illogical, just like insurance, but it serves a purpose in the game and thus has its place.
If it's "utterly illogical".....how can it "have its place" and "serve a purpose?"
Please....explain why CONCORD is "utterly illogical."
|

Naari Talvanis
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:25:00 -
[166] - Quote
At last.. now let's all sit back and watch the griefer tears..  Doubt we'll see many of the strategic or smart gankers crying in here though.. It's still possible to gank.. but it shouldn't be easy..
And for the people moaning that we're moving to pvp being consentual, move to low or 0.0, or moan for them to improve the wardec mechanic, which would actually be usefull.
Seeing people claim ganking has anything to do with pvp or smart fitting makes me enjoy the tears that will surely come even more..  |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1216
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 05:26:00 -
[167] - Quote
Selinate wrote:Still trolling. How so?
MeestaPenni wrote:If it's "utterly illogical".....how can it "have its place" and "serve a purpose?" The same way I can be a Top Hat in monopoly GÇö utterly illogical, but still with a purpose.
On the surface, it's because logic is not strictly required in order to have a purpose. More fundamentally, though, it's because we are talking about two completely separate systems of logic.
Suicide-insurance is illogical GÇö or, more accurately, unrealistic GÇö because no real-world insurance company would pay out if the customer willingly and with intent put himself in a situation where he'd with utmost certainty be destroyedGǪ even less so if the situation was one where he was committing a crimeGǪ and even less so if he kept doing it over and over again. It is illogical because the common logic of a business is that it is there to make money and to keep everyone from going to jail for aiding and abetting criminals (although some might argue this latter pointGǪ).
Suicide-insurance is logical because it is not a simulation of a real-world insurance company, but rather a game mechanic that is intended to incentivise the destruction of ships. This is a good thing because such destruction generates demand for goods and keeps the economy flowing. It is particularly logical if certain ships are particularly likely to be ganked and if, without these ganks, those ships would be in very low demand. The real-world-illogic is utterly irrelevant because the mechanic does not serve the same purpose as the real-world business. So being utterly illogical and still serving a purpose is not in any way contradictory.
Quote:Please....explain why CONCORD is "utterly illogical." It is utterly illogical in the same way as suicide-insurance is illogical GÇö or, more accurately, unrealistic. No real-world police force teleports to the scene of the crime without being called; it does not instantly know who the culprits are, and it does not instantly kill (almost) everyone involved. In particular, no real-world police force has what can only be described as the hand of God backing them up, condemning anyone who somehow manages to avoid them to eternal damnation. It is illogical because the common logic of a police force is to apprehend and investigate suspected criminal acts so the suspects can be handed off to the criminal justice system.
CONCORD is logical because it is not a simulation of a real-world police force, but rather a game mechanic that is intended to define highsec: it is there to ensure that aggression in certain parts of space comes at a cost. This is a good thing because it creates an area where people can hedge their resources against the hope that the general miserliness of other players will keep them from attacking people all willy-nilly. It also ensures that certain acts of aggression are pretty much impossible due to hardware limitations, and thus opens up a market for the other way of paying that defining aggression cost. In order to maintain this defining characteristic, any tactic that circumvents it is considered an exploit and will be answered with actions taken against your account. The real-world-illogic is utterly irrelevant because the mechanic does not serve the same purpose as the real-world police force (in fact, a different mechanic is in place to simulate that part far more closely). Once again, being completely illogical and at the same time serving a purpose is not in any way contradictory.
Naari Talvanis wrote:At last.. now let's all sit back and watch the griefer tears..  They have to find this thread first, which would explain the lack of tears so farGǪ GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |

Krios Ahzek
Juvenis Iratus
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 05:30:00 -
[168] - Quote
The real tears will be from the miners when they find out that gankers actually do not give a crap about insurance. |

SilentSkills
Estrale Frontiers
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 05:31:00 -
[169] - Quote
Crap. my bucket is full..
/gets new tear bucket
Can't have enough ganker tears! |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
572
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:12:00 -
[170] - Quote
Krios Ahzek wrote:The real tears will be from the miners when they find out that gankers actually do not give a crap about insurance.
not empty quoting |

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:14:00 -
[171] - Quote
I am tired of posting on the topic so I'll just say this.
Inb4 victims cry because gankers are exploiting every loophole in the book and still getting insurance.
Inb4 Victims cry because ganking escalates cause you ****** with the wrong crowd. |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
572
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:15:00 -
[172] - Quote
SilentSkills wrote:Crap. my bucket is full..
/gets new tear bucket
Can't have enough ganker tears!
Gankers, unlike most of their victims, are able to adjust their tactics when game mechanics are changed against their favor.
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. |

Poetic Stanziel
Arrakis Technology
226
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:16:00 -
[173] - Quote
ShipToaster wrote:Wait, you mean Poetic Stanzeil was right? Score one for the tinfoil hatters. Hilmar said he wanted to make CONCORD smarter ... I suppose those smarts was invalidating insurance claims. :)
This won't put an end to ganking. It won't put an end to ganking for profit. Nor should it. Ganking is a valuable part of this game. But gankers will have to use a couple braincells in their target selection. They might even have to create a spreadsheet. ;)
Blow Me Up Good Contest --áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29295&find=unread |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
573
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:18:00 -
[174] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:ShipToaster wrote:Wait, you mean Poetic Stanzeil was right? Score one for the tinfoil hatters. Hilmar said he wanted to make CONCORD smarter ... I suppose those smarts was invalidating insurance claims. :) This won't put an end to ganking. It won't put an end to ganking for profit. Nor should it. Ganking is a valuable part of this game. But gankers will have to use a couple braincells in their target selection. They might even have to create a spreadsheet. ;)
By the time any ganker worth his salt is redboxing you, he already knows exactly how you're fit.
On our end, we might have to increase our bounty payouts and throw in a slight cushion for flubbed ganks, but this will not put a dent in our campaign in the /slightest./ |

Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
278
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:23:00 -
[175] - Quote
Krios Ahzek wrote:The real tears will be from the miners when they find out that gankers actually do not give a crap about insurance.
Yes, this change will be more of a boon to the bigger haulers like Orcas, Freighters and Jump Freighters. It really won't affect (much) the ganking of mining barges and exhumers.
(The only real solution there is to give the barges/exhumers more CPU/PG so that they truly have the option to fit a tanky setup, rather then the choice right now of "one piece of tin foil" or "two pieces of tin foil" on the Mackinaw. You can fit a better tank on a T1 industrial then you can get onto the more expensive T2 exhumers.) |

Poetic Stanziel
Arrakis Technology
226
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:25:00 -
[176] - Quote
Andski wrote:On our end, we might have to increase our bounty payouts and throw in a slight cushion for flubbed ganks, but this will not put a dent in our campaign in the /slightest./ Hopefully the screaming doesn't force CCP to take highsec protection a step further.
EVE Online: Incarna - New Coke EVE Online: Winter Expansion - Coke Classic |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
573
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:27:00 -
[177] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:(The only real solution there is to give the barges/exhumers more CPU/PG so that they truly have the option to fit a tanky setup, rather then the choice right now of "one piece of tin foil" or "two pieces of tin foil" on the Mackinaw. You can fit a better tank on a T1 industrial then you can get onto the more expensive T2 exhumers.)
Bombers are more fragile than, say, Punishers. Nobody complains about that. |

Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
239
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:31:00 -
[178] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Tippia wrote:No, that's basically the only sensible and non-magical part of CONCORD.
I am gonna go a head and doubt that letting every Killer have free reign in the space they killed is the most sensible thing about them. Sensible would be coordinating off the wreck setting the perp to -5 and sending him on his way out the door. I am sure Suicide Ganking would go down quite a bit. Which is exactly what the Police would want. But that would be a lot less fun then smoking some dudes Barge in a Rax. I'd say a realistic police would throw you into prison for a few months or years. Perhaps they won't catch you as fast as concord does but if they catch you you'd be dragged out of your pod and won't be able to fly spaceships for a long time. |

Bloody Wench
124
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:35:00 -
[179] - Quote
This won't stop hisec suiciders at all, and it's not meant to.
If you think it will lead to a sudden blossoming of T1 haulers carrying billions worth of loot you're out of your mind.
It will make target selection a bit more 'selective'. It's a little more of a gamble in drops vs costs.
It simply removes a rediculous mechanic where you get reimbursed for your crime. Where you get bailed out regardless if you get a crap roll on loot drops.
If you think this will put even the slightest dent in the shannigans of entities like GSF you're sadly mistaken.
25 mill for fully fit gank Brutix. Do you really think that 25 mill is worth any consideration at all?
It's a broken mechanic, and it deserves to go away. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:46:00 -
[180] - Quote
This will help a bit but I doubt it will even cause a 10 percent drop in the ganks.
Why? Because in the old days the ganking was done in teams for direct and risk free epic profit. However, Today it is far less direct but gain as far as market prices.
The big nullsec alliances are greatly benefiting from higher mineral prices that their bots produce. And yes I accuse many of knowingly using bots. Or turning a blind eye because they are "blue"
However the ganking is mostly scaring the active players away from the belts. The bots don't give a rats butt because they can easily replace lost ships and they don't have to worry about playtime. Therefore the next time some alliance alt tells you they are just trying to "clean up the bots" please keep that in mind.
So we need alot more to end this crap. Namely giving mining craft slow to no regen buffers that can outlast an alpha strike to give current concord time to respond.
I propose that all mining craft be given a massive boost to structure hit points. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |