Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Alexandra VonKarl
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 15:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
Greetings All, As a victim of 'Hi Sec' pirates, and a low sec PvPer, I find myself looking to move to hi sec. However, I thought about the intent of the hi/low sec system and the thought process the CCP must have put behind it. Therefore I submit the following suggestion to you CCP:
- All pods/ships destroyed not as a result of War should not yield loot. - Pirates who destroy a ship (Suicide Gank) should have the losses subtracted from their wallet as well. - In the case of War Dec s and Militia Hi Sec PvP, they should be treated the same as low sec.
I know the Hi Sec pirates will whine ... call names... blah blah... but using the system designed to protect pilots against them is a perversion of the intent the developers put into the game. Lets have a system the carebears can rely on to adequately punish the griefers and force the PvPers to actually shoot something that shoots back. Let this game's PvP be a measure of skill, piloting prowess, or tactical intellect. Lets not make it "who can bend the rules in their direction" , "who's afraid to go to low sec and challenge themselves" , or "who can troll the most carebears". |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
437
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 15:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
no, htfu or leave |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
633
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 15:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
I'm a carebear myself and I think this is a bad idea. High sec is fine, maybe a little too safe even.
Bumping freighters for prolonged times (>30 mins) without them being able to do much against it, even if they field an escort, may need some looking at. But that's about it. Remove insurance. |
Alexandra VonKarl
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 15:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
Too Safe?
Is too safe a 200K ISK frig exploiting smartbomb mechanics and destroying a multi B mission runner?
Is too safe someone with a the same frig and a buddy with a 2M Isk hauler destroying your hauler and looting the 3B+ Isk of stuff you had in it while they have the minimal risk of just their 200K isk ship?
I think not.
However, if said pirate got no loot in the first case and lost 3B in the second case... would the risk be worth the reward?
I think not.
Now, do I condone someone who has Kill Rights or a War Dec going at it and getting their rewards for their efforts?
Absolutely. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2443
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 15:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:Too Safe?
Is too safe a 200K ISK frig exploiting smartbomb mechanics and destroying a multi B mission runner?
Is too safe someone with a the same frig and a buddy with a 2M Isk hauler destroying your hauler and looting the 3B+ Isk of stuff you had in it while they have the minimal risk of just their 200K isk ship?
I think not.
However, if said pirate got no loot in the first case and lost 3B in the second case... would the risk be worth the reward?
I think not.
Now, do I condone someone who has Kill Rights or a War Dec going at it and getting their rewards for their efforts?
Absolutely.
if you're losing anything to T1 exploration frigates, you're doing something very (hilariously) wrong. |
Alexandra VonKarl
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 15:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
L2Read
A.) High Sec pirates tend to use CONCORD to do their dirty work or B.) High Sec pirates use the said frigs to destroy a slow and defenseless hauler
in low sec, sure that would be a very LOL able loss... however ( the VERY thing im trying to highlight) , in high sec, a little frig is all you need to risk |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2443
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:L2Read
A.) High Sec pirates tend to use CONCORD to do their dirty work or B.) High Sec pirates use the said frigs to destroy a slow and defenseless hauler
in low sec, sure that would be a very LOL able loss... however ( the VERY thing im trying to highlight) , in high sec, a little frig is all you need to risk
But an exploration frigate doesn't have the damage output to pop even a completely untanked hauler in highsec...
And if they're using concord to kill you, does that not imply you shot first? |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2458
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:06:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:Is too safe a 200K ISK frig exploiting smartbomb mechanics and destroying a multi B mission runner? turned the safety off eh |
Alexandra VonKarl
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:07:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sure... if you consider exploitation of mechanics that shouldnt be in the game in the first place (im looking at you, Smartbomb safety requirement) HOWEVER, if you are in Hi Sec where its supposed to be relatively safe, what would be the point in tanking a hauler when good old CONCORD and the risk vs reward system should have your back? FURTHERMORE, this doesn't even get into the ganks on frieghters who have no way to defend themselves.. I mean, yes you would have to have a larger ship to kill it but the point remains the same. In addition, the POINT ( which by concentrating on the frigate in the example you hope to draw attention from) is to balance the risk vs reward system, not claim there is one and half-ass the enforcement of it. |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
633
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:09:00 -
[10] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:Too Safe?
Is too safe a 200K ISK frig exploiting smartbomb mechanics and destroying a multi B mission runner?
Is too safe someone with a the same frig and a buddy with a 2M Isk hauler destroying your hauler and looting the 3B+ Isk of stuff you had in it while they have the minimal risk of just their 200K isk ship?
I think not.
However, if said pirate got no loot in the first case and lost 3B in the second case... would the risk be worth the reward?
I think not.
Now, do I condone someone who has Kill Rights or a War Dec going at it and getting their rewards for their efforts?
Absolutely. 1. Turn your safety back on when leaving lowsec.
2. Are you telling us, that you moved >3B worth of stuff in a T1 hauler? Remove insurance. |
|
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2444
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:10:00 -
[11] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:. In addition, the POINT ( which by concentrating on the frigate in the example you hope to draw attention from) is to balance the risk vs reward system, not claim there is one and half-ass the enforcement of it.
Okay, balance risk VS reward.
Remove incursions and level 3-4 missions from highsec, increase nullsec rewards. That suut you?
I can't be bothered to have the suicide gank argument here when it's already ongoing in two or three other active threads RIGHT NOW. Let's cut it short and have you explain exactly why one person should be immune to the actions of ten or more simply because the one spent more on their ship and doesn't want to make an effort. |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
16676
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:16:00 -
[12] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:Greetings All, As a victim of 'Hi Sec' pirates, and a low sec PvPer, I find myself looking to move to hi sec. However, I thought about the intent of the hi/low sec system and the thought process the CCP must have put behind it. Therefore I submit the following suggestion to you CCP:
- All pods/ships destroyed not as a result of War should not yield loot. - Pirates who destroy a ship (Suicide Gank) should have the losses subtracted from their wallet as well. - In the case of War Dec s and Militia Hi Sec PvP, they should be treated the same as low sec.
I know the Hi Sec pirates will whine ... call names... blah blah... but using the system designed to protect pilots against them is a perversion of the intent the developers put into the game. Lets have a system the carebears can rely on to adequately punish the griefers and force the PvPers to actually shoot something that shoots back. Let this game's PvP be a measure of skill, piloting prowess, or tactical intellect. Lets not make it "who can bend the rules in their direction" , "who's afraid to go to low sec and challenge themselves" , or "who can troll the most carebears". NPC and the system is designed to punish, not protect. They do not care about your ship, only if certain crimewatch laws have been broken.
It's already a game of skill and it seems you are losing. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
16677
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:18:00 -
[13] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Let's cut it short and have you explain exactly why one person should be immune to the actions of ten or more simply because the one spent more on their ship and doesn't want to make an effort. My guess is effort and a massive misunderstanding of Eve.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Alexandra VonKarl
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 16:25:00 -
[14] - Quote
Here's an explanation for you @Mag's. Make a non-juvenille claim and debate a strong point from a position that you are familiar with. Don't step into an adult argument with the 'you suck' quit or uninstall. Its not original and simply not needed.
As for the explanation, see any definition on risk versus reward. Furthermore @Danika, that is a great point and a comprimiseable suggestion. Removing the reason most people get expensive ships in high sec would transfer the risk to the mission runner properly and allow for the pirates to have to themselves be at risk to get the most reward. Finally, that is a great use of the Illicit Minor fallicy on my argument and I applaud you for debating it like a civilized person. |
Ines Tegator
Towels R Us
367
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 17:08:00 -
[15] - Quote
"Back" to Highsec?
Have you played EVE before? - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there? |
Alexandra VonKarl
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 17:40:00 -
[16] - Quote
I've made my point. You debate it among yourselves. In closing, I leave this remark: Regardless of what gets implemented, the risk versus reward system in the High Security systems of EVE needs to be balanced, losing a ship is not enough risk for the potential reward. Something needs to change. Lesser minds and younger individuals may suggest that my perspective is the thing that has to change, and I will let them get older and wiser and see things from more civilized point of view on their own. I'm sure Darwin has a great deal in store for them. My main wish is for balance, pure and simple. You risk alot, you get alot, that is a balanced system. Until then, kiddos, make sure your mom teaches you this before you go out thinking you can spend a little bit of effort and come out with billions, because, guess what... barring extraordinary circumstances, it doesn't. |
Karak Bol
Low-Sec Survival Ltd.
167
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 17:53:00 -
[17] - Quote
Setting safety red: You choice. Activating Smartbomb: Your choice. Running Missions in an expensive ship: Your choice. Transporting 3 bil in a T1 Hauler: Your choice. Why should CCP protect you from your own choices? Debating here for more safety instead of thinking what you did wrong, shows an utter lack of common sense.
|
Mag's
the united SCUM.
16679
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 18:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
If you don't think the risk is high enough, then increase it. Stop asking for hand holding mechanics from CCP and deal with protection yourself. NPCs have always punished only, they do not and have not ever protected.
But you as a character, have been bought and sold a couple of times. I wonder if you are a new player, buying plexes and trading them for ISK? Then buying a character thinking you can somehow 'win' Eve, because you now have a 30 million SP loki pilot. Who knows? But if you did, you have Eve all wrong.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Truculentus
Pariah Army Usurper.
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 19:06:00 -
[19] - Quote
*gets popcorn* I just love watching pirates reply to a dead thread to stroke their own epeen! Besides, whats the fun in forum posting if you cant tell someone they're wrong? I mean that makes you a PvP God right? *grabs glass full of pirate tears* Go pirates! Show that apparent nub that EvE is a pirate's playground and her carebear type doesnt belong! |
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
474
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 19:25:00 -
[20] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:Too Safe?
Is too safe a 200K ISK frig exploiting smartbomb mechanics and destroying a multi B mission runner? Don't use smartbombs in hisec. The fact that you have to disable your safety before you can activate them should have hinted that they are 'not safe'.
As for your T1 hauler getting ganked, the recently rebalanced "tanky" T1 haulers can get upwards of 30k EHP so basically...
Danika Princip wrote:if you're losing anything to T1 exploration frigates, you're doing something very (hilariously) wrong.
Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0 |
|
Gigan Amilupar
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
164
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 21:20:00 -
[21] - Quote
Basically, you used a smartbomb in highsec and hit another ship, and as a result got concordokken. It really wouldn't matter if the ship you hit was a frigate or a battleship, you actively hit another ship. It's not an exploit of game mechanics on their part, it's a lack of careful use of your weapons. The fact that you had to disable your safety only further exacerbates this point.
As for getting ganked in a 3b hauler, well, that's also your fault, to be honest. Why would you load that much into a hauler? That's asking to get killed. As someone who claims to PvP in lowsec, I would assume that you understand that most PvP in EvE is non-consensual. So I'm unsure how you thought that being in highsec would change that. Highsec isn't safe by any stretch, and it's not supposed to be. While I would argue that there may be some problems with the way highsec space works (namely the lack of ability to adequately respond to non-criminal aggression in some circumstances), the responsibility for getting ganked while flying something akin to a pinata solely rests on you. Decrease the reward part of the Risk:Reward ratio for making you explode, don't skew it hugely in the reward direction and then argue that there isn't enough risk. |
Alexandra VonKarl
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 21:30:00 -
[22] - Quote
check my kbs before posting trolls lol , hypothetical situations... geez anyway.. this char is going away : see below
You have chosen to transfer the character Alexandra VonKarl to the account named xxxxxxxxxxxx
We are currently processing this transfer. The character you are transferring will remain on your account, but will not be playable until the transfer automatically completes.
If you did not initiate this character transfer, please file a petition to Customer Support.
If you have any questions, you may browse the EVE Knowledgebase or email [email protected] and one of our customer support representatives will be happy to assist you. |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
16679
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 22:09:00 -
[23] - Quote
OP buys the char, makes themselves look foolish, posts with alts and tries to deflect their failure, then sells the char.
You couldn't make this sh*t up.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
182
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 22:19:00 -
[24] - Quote
Quote:check my kbs before posting trolls lol , hypothetical situations... geez anyway.. this char is going away : see below You have chosen to transfer the character Alexandra VonKarl to the account named xxxxxxxxxxxx We are currently processing this transfer. The character you are transferring will remain on your account, but will not be playable until the transfer automatically completes. If you did not initiate this character transfer, please file a petition to Customer Support. If you have any questions, you may browse the EVE Knowledgebase or email [email protected] and one of our customer support representatives will be happy to assist you.
Thats some harcore forum PvP right there.
oh wai
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1052
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 00:23:00 -
[25] - Quote
got tired of trying to explain it, so changed my signature just for peeps like the OP.
funny thread though. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
445
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 13:46:00 -
[26] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:Sure... if you consider exploitation of mechanics that shouldnt be in the game in the first place (im looking at you, Smartbomb safety requirement) HOWEVER, if you are in Hi Sec where its supposed to be relatively safe, what would be the point in tanking a hauler when good old CONCORD and the risk vs reward system should have your back? FURTHERMORE, this doesn't even get into the ganks on frieghters who have no way to defend themselves.. I mean, yes you would have to have a larger ship to kill it but the point remains the same. In addition, the POINT ( which by concentrating on the frigate in the example you hope to draw attention from) is to balance the risk vs reward system, not claim there is one and half-ass the enforcement of it. concord is not here to protect you.
it is here to punish someone who would aggress you when they have no right doing so.
nowhere it is said they'll save your ass
high sec is safer, not safe.
if you are dumb enought to get concorded, that is YOUR problem, for not understanding the game mechanics.
enought of the cry babies who cannot even read, damn CCP even introduced a SAFETY for you, and you want MORE?
you don't want risk => don't undock and go play wow |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
445
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 13:55:00 -
[27] - Quote
Alexandra VonKarl wrote:Here's an explanation for you @Mag's. Make a non-juvenille claim and debate a strong point from a position that you are familiar with. Don't step into an adult argument with the 'you suck' quit or uninstall. Its not original and simply not needed.
As for the explanation, see any definition on risk versus reward. Furthermore @Danika, that is a great point and a comprimiseable suggestion. Removing the reason most people get expensive ships in high sec would transfer the risk to the mission runner properly and allow for the pirates to have to themselves be at risk to get the most reward. Finally, that is a great use of the Illicit Minor fallicy on my argument and I applaud you for debating it like a civilized person. no one is forcing you to fly a gank magnet, any lvl4 mision can be achieved using a T1 BS with a t2 fitting.
you CHOOSE to pimp it, cause you want to run it faster, that is YOUR choice, now face it's consequences.
eve is a game of choices, when i gank someone in low, i accept the consequences, in a form of potential death and SS hit, resulting in my toon unable to go in high unless in a shuttle, i MADE that choice.
same goes for you, you CHOOSE to fly expansive, you then become a potential ganker tgt.
also, i did ran mission in a partly officier fit machariel (worth 2.5+ B at the time) for 2 years, prior to the safety and all crap, i NEVER got ganked, some tried, they failed(one time from a few HP, i ended with 20% struct left :p), but i knew from day one i was exposing myself to loosing this ship to gank, so i took mesures, learned how mechanics worked, to avoid issues.
this is how you eve. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |