Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2474
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:16:00 -
[91] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Plausibale doesn't equal practical. Everything in Eve is impractical. It's kinda what separates the wheat from the chaff, so to speak.
Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:17:00 -
[92] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:What are the mechanics that you feel are so drastically threatened? The HTFU mechanic. Quote:And, no they really don't as illustrated in the initial post. I'm pretty sure they're aware they're going to be criminally flagged before they steal the item.
They are never criminal flagged before they steal the item. That's the reason there is little to no risk. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2474
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:19:00 -
[93] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:That's the reason there is little to no risk. Create some, you're allowed to do that. You don't need CCP to do it for you.
Oh god. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4417
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:19:00 -
[94] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Plausibale doesn't equal practical.
So we can basically sum this down to the basis of your entire argument, your decision to be a victim. You just don't want to employ the 20 or so counter-measures that would vastly mitigate the risk of this happening. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:19:00 -
[95] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Plausibale doesn't equal practical. Everything in Eve is impractical. It's kinda what separates the wheat from the chaff, so to speak.
Why not just stay on topic and answer what mechanics you think are so desperately threatened by this idea? |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4417
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:21:00 -
[96] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Plausibale doesn't equal practical. Everything in Eve is impractical. It's kinda what separates the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Why not just stay on topic and answer what mechanics you think are so desperately threatened by this idea?
The sandbox comes to mind. This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:23:00 -
[97] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Hunter Arngrahm wrote:Oh? Do explain, in great detail, how it's done and how it's plausible and financially viable, then. I'm quite curious about this, after all, missioners are such huge iskmakers, it's not like running missions is the next step up from mining in terms of income or anything. I'm sure incursions and Wormholes pale in comparison to the massive, fat wallets of the missioners, who are capable of suicide ganking pirates again and again as a deterrent to make sure they never do such horrible things again. How much does the mission item cost? The other thread linked says 500m. How many Tornadoes can you buy with 500m? I estimate about 6. More than enough to perform a gank. There, financial viability.
The flaw in your logic is finding a buyer for said mission item, and if they're willing to pay that price, and that's assuming you don't have competition that's willing to sell it for cheaper. It's easy to raffle off a number and say what you can do with it, but as anyone that's actually handled business transactions knows, it's far more complicated than that. Even then, if the mission item is worth 500 mil, how does that serve the missioner than needs it, intact, for the mission? How does this provide them with the isk to suicide gank thieves that would attempt to take the item that they need to sell to get isk to get a tornado to gank the thief that would attempt to take the item that they need to sell to get isk to get a tornado to gank the thief that would attempt to take the item that they need? You also have circles floating around in your logic. |
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations CODE.
3288
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:24:00 -
[98] - Quote
The primary problem with missions is that they are repetitive. Pick any mission and there is a guide out there for how to get past exactly what you encounter. The very fact that a missioner can mention a mission name and have every other mission runner know exactly what the mission is- that is a problem for a sandbox game. For those mission runners who want single player, well maybe CCP should make a single player version and get them out of the sandbox. Or just go buy an old classic like Privateer.
Missions need to be (somehow) more varied and feel like you are getting a mission that no one else has done, just like exploring needs to be dynamic, and like actually find new space.
One idea I have proposed in the past is to have CCP create a sort of storyline that engages a large number of the community at once. One of the examples I used is ice. Have all of the ice of a particular variety disappear (maybe some sort of cloak by pirates, whatever). Sure, miners would be upset. But they would have the opportunity to help get it back, along with missioners and anyone else, by completing unique one time missions that require a lot of involvement from many players.
I think a regular series of this sorg of cooperative mission would be healthy for the community as a whole, though my preference would be that other players could help the opposing side. See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2474
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:31:00 -
[99] - Quote
Hunter Arngrahm wrote:The flaw in your logic is finding a buyer for said mission item, and if they're willing to pay that price, and that's assuming you don't have competition that's willing to sell it for cheaper. It's easy to raffle off a number and say what you can do with it, but as anyone that's actually handled business transactions knows, it's far more complicated than that. Even then, if the mission item is worth 500 mil, how does that serve the missioner than needs it, intact, for the mission? How does this provide them with the isk to suicide gank thieves that would attempt to take the item that they need to sell to get isk to get a tornado to gank the thief that would attempt to take the item that they need to sell to get isk to get a tornado to gank the thief that would attempt to take the item that they need? You also have circles floating around in your logic. Do you want to just transfer your character to me and let me play it for you? For clarification, my point is that I resent having to explain things you should be able to figure out on your own. Oh god. |
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:33:00 -
[100] - Quote
Erotica 1 wrote:The primary problem with missions is that they are repetitive. Pick any mission and there is a guide out there for how to get past exactly what you encounter. The very fact that a missioner can mention a mission name and have every other mission runner know exactly what the mission is- that is a problem for a sandbox game. For those mission runners who want single player, well maybe CCP should make a single player version and get them out of the sandbox. Or just go buy an old classic like Privateer.
Missions need to be (somehow) more varied and feel like you are getting a mission that no one else has done, just like exploring needs to be dynamic, and like actually find new space.
One idea I have proposed in the past is to have CCP create a sort of storyline that engages a large number of the community at once. One of the examples I used is ice. Have all of the ice of a particular variety disappear (maybe some sort of cloak by pirates, whatever). Sure, miners would be upset. But they would have the opportunity to help get it back, along with missioners and anyone else, by completing unique one time missions that require a lot of involvement from many players.
I think a regular series of this sorg of cooperative mission would be healthy for the community as a whole, though my preference would be that other players could help the opposing side.
As someone that loathes grinding and only does missions because he needs the isk, I've been screaming for variety to these things. Not just "Oh, they're all predictable!", I want gameplay variety. Give me a Mining mission where I have to bump a NPC Orca out of a belt, or kill mining ships before their backup arrives. Give me a Security mission that requires a cloaking device so I can wait for rats to burn past me to pick off a key target. Give me a mission where I need to fly Logistics to keep a POS or some other thing alive long enough for friendly rat reinforcements to arrive. Give me missions that require me to use ships other than one battleship with different damage types and different hardeners. Hell, reduce the staggering standing loss on mission failure and give me a chance to FAIL missions without the intervention of someone trying to make the boring grind even harder on me by interrupting it. They aren't adding any gameplay, they're just being annoying. |
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4420
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:35:00 -
[101] - Quote
Hunter Arngrahm wrote:Hell, reduce the staggering standing loss on mission failure and give me a chance to FAIL missions without the intervention of someone trying to make the boring grind even harder on me by interrupting it. They aren't adding any gameplay, they're just being annoying.
Player interaction: Annoying.
This user won the forums on 18/09/2013, then lost on 18/12/2013. |
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:37:00 -
[102] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote: For clarification, my point is that I resent having to explain things you should be able to figure out on your own.
And my point was you're just wasting people's time. Which you've proven. If you had any real argument or contribution you'd be providing it, and you aren't. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2475
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:40:00 -
[103] - Quote
I don't need an argument. I'm not the one trying to change game mechanics to accommodate for my stupidity. Oh god. |
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:44:00 -
[104] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Hunter Arngrahm wrote:Hell, reduce the staggering standing loss on mission failure and give me a chance to FAIL missions without the intervention of someone trying to make the boring grind even harder on me by interrupting it. They aren't adding any gameplay, they're just being annoying. Player interaction: Annoying.
You know, this hardly justifies a response, but I've nothing better to do. In what way is this any real player interaction? Attempted suicide gank? That's player interaction. Competition? That's player interaction. Chatting? That's player interaction. Simply watching what I do and salvaging while I do my mission, completely independent of what I do? Hardly counts as player interaction. You can argue semantics all you like, but it's still a really bad argument. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:55:00 -
[105] - Quote
Hunter Arngrahm wrote:Riot Girl wrote: For clarification, my point is that I resent having to explain things you should be able to figure out on your own. And my point was you're just wasting people's time. Which you've proven. If you had any real argument or contribution you'd be providing it, and you aren't.
Yes this was true several pages ago for most objections.
From the start for some.
I'll be content with the fact that I actually witnessed several gankers, griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually argue against a suggestion that would increase interplay and PvP.
This has been a great day.
Take care all o7 |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2476
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:02:00 -
[106] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:I'll be content with the fact that I actually witnessed several gankers, griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually argue against a suggestion that would increase interplay and PvP.
I'm not against ideas that create more PvP and more interaction (although I feel this idea is unlikely to do either). What I am against is carebears whining for mechanics to be changed to suit them because they're unwilling to make an effort when all the tools they need are provided for them. Forcing a criminal flag, as an idea on its own, has merit but it comes with a cost which affects everyone, not just you. There is no problem with the current mechanics. The problem is you.
Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:06:00 -
[107] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:If it is a public space, and is intended as such, anyone at any time should be able to access it. WELL GUESS WHAT? THEY CAN! Do tell how to get to a mission pocket spawned by a missioner when, they say, do not undock and never go to that pocket? Fine, they need the mission runner to be there. That still doesn't explain why the mission runner should be given their own pocket of space in empire. That mechanic was put in place by CCP when they created the missioning system. I will grant you this: it is also intended for people to be able to invade that private space. I am not trying to in any way change that. The only thing that I am advocating is that the criminal flag be triggered when the actual criminal act is started, which in the case of mission item theft/griefing is when the decision is made to warp into and invade the private mission pocket generated for the mission runner. This suggestion takes absolutely nothing away from the ability to trespass or steal a mission item, and it isn't intended to. As I mentioned, it is really only to allow for counter-play from the initiation of the act of the crime not long after the act has been completed.
A highlight for those who missed the real dialogue in this thread. Read back for the real conversation. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2476
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:09:00 -
[108] - Quote
Have you even tried negotiating with them? Is that too scary? Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:10:00 -
[109] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:I'll be content with the fact that I actually witnessed several gankers, griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually argue against a suggestion that would increase interplay and PvP. I'm not against ideas that create more PvP and more interaction (although I feel this idea is unlikely to do either). What I am against is carebears whining for mechanics to be changed to suit them because they're unwilling to make an effort when all the tools they need are provided for them. Forcing a criminal flag, as an idea on its own, has merit but it comes with a cost which affects everyone, not just you. There is no problem with the current mechanics. The problem is you.
We are all ears. Tell what mechanics you are so afraid will be so drastically changed. |
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:11:00 -
[110] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:I'll be content with the fact that I actually witnessed several gankers, griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually argue against a suggestion that would increase interplay and PvP. I'm not against ideas that create more PvP and more interaction (although I feel this idea is unlikely to do either). What I am against is carebears whining for mechanics to be changed to suit them because they're unwilling to make an effort when all the tools they need are provided for them. Forcing a criminal flag, as an idea on its own, has merit but it comes with a cost which affects everyone, not just you. There is no problem with the current mechanics. The problem is you.
To be perfectly fair, he is being kind of whiny, and his idea does punish people who normally might not intend any harm or foul play. It doesn't help that he keeps saying "Criminal flag" when I think he means "Suspect flag", since Criminal would imply everyone would get concorded for setting foot in another person's missioning space, which is kind of the worst idea imaginable. |
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2476
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:16:00 -
[111] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:We are all ears. Tell what mechanics you are so afraid will be so drastically changed. Well there's this one rule in high-sec about when it's okay to shoot someone. It's kind of a big deal.
Oh god. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:18:00 -
[112] - Quote
Hunter Arngrahm wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:I'll be content with the fact that I actually witnessed several gankers, griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually argue against a suggestion that would increase interplay and PvP. I'm not against ideas that create more PvP and more interaction (although I feel this idea is unlikely to do either). What I am against is carebears whining for mechanics to be changed to suit them because they're unwilling to make an effort when all the tools they need are provided for them. Forcing a criminal flag, as an idea on its own, has merit but it comes with a cost which affects everyone, not just you. There is no problem with the current mechanics. The problem is you. To be perfectly fair, he is being kind of whiny, and his idea does punish people who normally might not intend any harm or foul play. It doesn't help that he keeps saying "Criminal flag" when I think he means "Suspect flag", since Criminal would imply everyone would get concorded for setting foot in another person's missioning space, which is kind of the worst idea imaginable.
My ego can handle being corrected it's no problem and thanks. If that term really interferes with the ability to understand what I am proposing, I hope that the readers forgive me.
And, yet, we still are waiting to hear all of the mechanics that are threatened by this proposed change of adding one trigger. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:20:00 -
[113] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:We are all ears. Tell what mechanics you are so afraid will be so drastically changed. Well there's this one rule in high-sec about when it's okay to shoot someone. It's kind of a big deal.
So, you are saying that you don't want to be shot?
I think you are making my case about all the baddies not wanting to play. |
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:24:00 -
[114] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:And, yet, we still are waiting to hear all of the mechanics that are threatened by this proposed change of adding one trigger.
Riot Girl is kind of leading you on.
That said, she does have a point. Your trigger is far too broad and kind of makes it rough on a lot of occupations. Ninja salvagers, for example, while annoying, do wander through and salvage things because salvaging doesn't flag you as a suspect. It's a fairly "safe" way for exploration minded newbies to make isk early on, even if it is at another mission runner's expense. Keep in mind they only salvage, they don't steal loot items. If they went suspect for simply warping in, it would ruin their entire method of operation and offer less incentive to learn these skills.
And on that note, I've had days where I've been bored and scanned down someone's mission and just started salvaging for them, then dropped the can and abandoned it in front of them. Under your idea I've had gone suspect for my assistance and they could have shot me under the assumption I was stealing from them. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2476
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:26:00 -
[115] - Quote
Abdul 'aleem wrote:So, you are saying that you don't want to be shot? Should I? What I'm actually saying is if you want to attack another player for whatever reason, you should suffer the same consequences as everyone else who chooses this playstyle.
Oh god. |
suid0
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
109
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:29:00 -
[116] - Quote
Hunter Arngrahm wrote: To be perfectly fair, he is being kind of whiny, and his idea does punish people who normally might not intend any harm or foul play. It doesn't help that he keeps saying "Criminal flag" when I think he means "Suspect flag", since Criminal would imply everyone would get concorded for setting foot in another person's missioning space, which is kind of the worst idea imaginable.
rofl, to be honest this entire thread is whiny.
On one side you have the missioner trying to protect their mission item and on the other you have what comes across like an alt of the thief desperately trying to protect their extortion racket.
the entire enemy support fleet is dead except for one interdictor a titan could easily finish off with drones -á--áCommander Ted |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
190
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:31:00 -
[117] - Quote
In a Perfect World Missionitems become permanent items which cant be removed until the Mission Timer Runs Out.
Someone stole your item? Track him down and get your item back but of course Station Games and multiple Accounts and Charakters ruins this idea. |
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:33:00 -
[118] - Quote
Hunter Arngrahm wrote:Abdul 'aleem wrote:And, yet, we still are waiting to hear all of the mechanics that are threatened by this proposed change of adding one trigger. Riot Girl is kind of leading you on. That said, she does have a point. Your trigger is far too broad and kind of makes it rough on a lot of occupations. Ninja salvagers, for example, while annoying, do wander through and salvage things because salvaging doesn't flag you as a suspect. It's a fairly "safe" way for exploration minded newbies to make isk early on, even if it is at another mission runner's expense. Keep in mind they only salvage, they don't steal loot items. If they went suspect for simply warping in, it would ruin their entire method of operation and offer less incentive to learn these skills. And on that note, I've had days where I've been bored and scanned down someone's mission and just started salvaging for them, then dropped the can and abandoned it in front of them. Under your idea I've had gone suspect for my assistance and they could have shot me under the assumption I was stealing from them.
The salvager's being flagged was also brought up in the initial Mission & Complex thread.
And it was agreed that this may be the only true and valid consequence of the suggestion.
I personally think that the salvagers can handle it, especially with the warning system that is in place now. The warp in flag would not prevent the salvager from warping to the mission site, but it would open them also up to counter from the pocket owner.
|
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:34:00 -
[119] - Quote
suid0 wrote:rofl, to be honest this entire thread is whiny.
On one side you have the missioner trying to protect their mission item and on the other you have what comes across like an alt of the thief desperately trying to protect their extortion racket.
It certainly seems that way, doesn't it? I've tried to stay pretty fair, keep the whine to a minimum and present actual arguments, but nobody seemed to acknowledge my idea, so ionno. |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2476
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:35:00 -
[120] - Quote
suid0 wrote:trying to protect their extortion racket. The only thing I'm trying to protect is the basic core principal that suicide should be a defining mechanic of suicide ganking. Oh god. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |