Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Tarojan
Tarojan Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2014.03.17 18:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Patch 3.0 Thermopylae
Under continued assault from the sanshas, the empires have been weakened and are fallen back. Concord has withdrawn into "true sec" a grouping of 0.9-1.0 systems surrounding the tutorial hubs and is no longer present elsewhere in highsec as their manpower is stretched beyond breaking point. While faction police forces still patrol the gates of highsec and will enforce the law against criminals capsulers are advised to look to their own defenses. In response to these increased dangers manufactors of civilian shipping are increasing the defenses of the ships they build.
patch notes: Freighters and industrials are now immune to warp disruption. Freighters now have increased defenses and will require a significant number of attackers to bring down. Mining barges have expanded drone bays for self defense purposes and increased ehps.
pve players are urged to group up for their own protection and to encourage this the way missions are accepted, run and turned in has been altered such that it can and should be done in fleets with npcs/rewards being adjusted for the number of fleet members. Erotica 1: "I would create a massive pyramid scheme in Eve to show you what it is, but I'm an honest business person, so you'll just have to find education elsewhere. Start with the wiki link that was linked by a person who didn't even read what he linked." Theres a reason I play eve XD |
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Panhandle Industries
294
|
Posted - 2014.03.17 18:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
While I'm hesitant to have concord pull out of any area, it would be cool to have an area that uses faction police instead of concord. New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |
Christian Lionbate
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
75
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 10:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
Not sure C&P is the right place for this discussion but I think random, hi-sec, wildcat strikes by Concord over, say, pay and conditions would produce some interesting game play not to mention tears. |
Froggy Storm
The Praxis Initiative Gentlemen's Agreement
197
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Maybe instead of a blanket industrials are scram immune, make a player deployable warp accel gate. Once anchored it can be used to greatly speed up that freighters warp time. However it needs to be setup and then guarded to be any use. Thus adding conflict points for both white knights and for pirates to permit or stop freighter travel through a system.
Yes that is a very rough idea and would need a LOT of discussion on how to make it work. |
cpt Varox
Offerings of Blood
21
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 14:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
Awesome reference name for the dream patch! |
Tarojan
Tarojan Corporation
44
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 14:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
Christian Lionbate wrote:Not sure C&P is the right place for this discussion but I think random, hi-sec, wildcat strikes by Concord over, say, pay and conditions would produce some interesting game play not to mention tears.
I posted it here as I wanted you guys involved in the discussion. Removing concord from the majority of high sec while increasing the abilty of pve players to defend themselves/avoid ganks directly affects high sec pvpers/gankers and its your current game play that would be altered the most.
Erotica 1: "I would create a massive pyramid scheme in Eve to show you what it is, but I'm an honest business person, so you'll just have to find education elsewhere. Start with the wiki link that was linked by a person who didn't even read what he linked." Theres a reason I play eve XD |
Real Serious PVPer
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 14:52:00 -
[7] - Quote
The day concord retires is the day I'll have to step in and keep order.
-áSerious about being serious- Putting the "P "into PVP one fight at a time. -áMUFC |
Black Locust
SwEaTy ArMpIT RaIDeRs Mordus Angels
6
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 15:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Why cant people just say "I want more easy targets" and be done with it? |
Tarojan
Tarojan Corporation
44
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 16:29:00 -
[9] - Quote
Black Locust wrote:Why cant people just say "I want more easy targets" and be done with it?
Because thats not what this is about? The current situation (ie concord) is based around ganking miners, haulers, newbies and mission runners.
Newbies and mission runners are often tricked into allowing a pvp ship to engage their pve ship due to poor understanding of the aggression mechanics. That makes them free loot and people cant assist them against the ganker due to concord.
Miners and haulers are being ganked (as well as bling fit mission boats) when a combination of too high value cargo for the tank they have equipped makes the gank profitable. That I have no problem with and nor does any other intelligent player I have spoken to yet. Its simple piracy and easily handled by tanking your ship properly. What has changed though is that a certain part of the high sec pvp community has stopped ganking for profit and has started ganking for giggles, ie no longer piracy but arguably griefing. Using dessies to suicide gank newbies in ventures/rookie ships/shuttles and dropping tornados on empty badgers (tank fit or not) can carry no expectation of profit.
However hilarious it is to read the tears, the naivety of the victims (you cant do this!) and their self entitlement (you cant do this to ME! CCP change the game!!!1), I have to recognise that: a) one day Im going to get 2 tornados dropped on my tanky badger carrying its "4 large crates of polytextiles" and fail my mission b) it will be done purely because someone wants to see me blow up c) theres nothing I can do about it.
I have no problem with A and B, I would like to do something about C. Concord cant defend me. I would like the option of defending myself Erotica 1: "I would create a massive pyramid scheme in Eve to show you what it is, but I'm an honest business person, so you'll just have to find education elsewhere. Start with the wiki link that was linked by a person who didn't even read what he linked." Theres a reason I play eve XD |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
3732
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 17:14:00 -
[10] - Quote
I once had a dream that I solo'd an erebus with a velator.
And I think my dream is much more likely to happen than yours. |
|
Winchester Steele
409
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 19:21:00 -
[11] - Quote
Real Serious PVPer wrote:The day concord retires is the day I'll have to step in and keep order.
We already have a Supreme Protector, sorry. Maybe you should challenge him to a duel for supremacy of Hi-Sec though? Assuming that you can pass the trials three, of course. This game is built around the likes of us. It's not the assholes that are playing the wrong game. - James Amril-Kesh. |
Kiryen O'Bannon
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
92
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 19:44:00 -
[12] - Quote
Black Locust wrote:Why cant people just say "I want more easy targets" and be done with it?
Well, you're being somewhat unfair to the OP, who is not asking for that. The problem is the large attacker community that will be all for this, except for the part about making it easier for defenders to defend themselves, and come up with ideas like the "freighter warp accelerator thingy" to disguise that.
How long does that thing take to online, activate, and how long does it need to be defended? How much does it cost? How does one get it back, or is it just an expended item that possible becomes free loot for attackers? Wouldn't one need a new one for every single jump? How does this affect profits for freighter pilots?
If it takes anywhere near as long to set up and activate as a webbed freighter already does to align, it's totally worthless, both for its intended purpose and as a "conflict driver" which isn't needed anyhow if you're already making it possible to attack people without CONCORD replying. It's a fairly clear example of just saying "make it hard for the defender" and disguising it with memes about driving conflict - very one-sided conflict.
The OP has interesting ideas, but any approach to this would take an almost total re-look at combat in general, and giving the defenders greater self-defense ability to compensate has to be done without causing problems in lowsec and nullsec, not making bigger ships overpowered, and without simultaneously buffing the attackers to the point that slf-defense is pro-forma. |
Froggy Storm
The Praxis Initiative Gentlemen's Agreement
197
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 20:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
I can see the points about being over used cliche "conflict". But I think we can agree that giving freighters and any other industrial warp disruption immunity can be construed as just a means to prevent them being killed.
As stated it would be a complex item to suggest and was off the cuff. But if freighters were moving with a team to web them then they were already operating with support. It is the solo freighter who seems to be the ultimate winner in this case, and that runs counter to what the OP suggests.
Perhaps a better means would be to dramatically boost freighter resists. This would make the time to kill substantially longer allowing for a defence force to save it, while not making freighter bowling the only way to tackle one. |
Dearthair
Black Research Industries
7
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 21:45:00 -
[14] - Quote
One idea for the "accel gate" thing. Make it a new type of mobile structure. Activating it creates an unconditional cloaked warp to a safe location a few AU away (ship lands cloaked, but does not cloak before jumping). Alignment and speed of a ship does not matter, nor does distance from the device as long as you are within activation range when you activate it. Does not work inside bubbles. Potential balancing factors:
- HP of the device. If it is destroyed before the warp occurs, ship does not warp. - Time for device to become active after dropped. - Time for warp to occur after activated. - Activation range (ship could possibly be bumped out of activation range after dropping but before device became active) - Whether an allied pilot could drop the device in advance, or whether only the dropping pilot could activate - Size of the device (should be large enough that PvP pilots won't carry it to escape a bad situation, only industrials and freighters trying to reach safety) - Cost of the device (should be high enough that it wouldn't be used every jump to save time, only in emergencies)
NBLID (Not Blue Let It Die), the new motto for miners, manufacturers, and retailers everywhere. |
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Panhandle Industries
310
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 21:54:00 -
[15] - Quote
EHP buffs really aren't the way to go, at least if you want alpha ships to be at all useful. If EHP is buffed too much then the attacked ship can burn back to the gate and lose its attackers. Even if concord is removed or has higher response times, gate guns will make it extremely difficult for gankers to stay alive long enough for help to arrive for either side. New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |
Mike Adoulin
Adolescent Radioactive Pirate Hamsters
586
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 22:01:00 -
[16] - Quote
This will never happen, but we can all dream.
My dream CCP patch?
Outlaw players (technically -2 secstatus or below, but mostly the fullblown -5 or worse) are allowed to shoot anyone in hisec/losec, anyone at all, since anyone can shoot at them........ie, they don't get CONCORDED/sentry gunned.
I mean, they are supposed to be outlaws.......CONCORD doesn't hunt them until they attack somebody, faction police are the reason they have to move fast.
So since they ARE Outlaws, let them be Outlaws.
I mean, if you are an Outlaw, anybody in empire space can pop you. Might as well be some benefit to it. Everything in EVE is a trap. And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
2287
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 22:31:00 -
[17] - Quote
A CONCORD strike sounds like a great idea.
Perhaps there could be a CONCORD labor dispute over the amount of work they have to do in Jita and the danger of going near smartbombs that could lead to them placing workbans on attending any spaceship violence in that system.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=318489 - Proposal for a new type of tech 2 Destroyer If you want to mine in highsec, read www.minerbumping.com. |
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations CODE.
4403
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 23:18:00 -
[18] - Quote
Let's involve the players and do a live event. Concord chooses their bravest 300 captains, for a final stand. They will all be officer fit (but regular stats) and players will signup to attack them with huge player run fleets. The ships will be full of all sorts of treasures. See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did. |
Kiryen O'Bannon
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
96
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 03:38:00 -
[19] - Quote
Froggy Storm wrote:I can see the points about being over used cliche "conflict". But I think we can agree that giving freighters and any other industrial warp disruption immunity can be construed as just a means to prevent them being killed.
I think it's pretty obvious that was not it's intent. You'd have to kill them in a running battle, but they'd be killable. Freighters are so cumbersome that to keep them useful under such conditions they'd need fairly reliable means of escape.
[QuoteAs stated it would be a complex item to suggest and was off the cuff. But if freighters were moving with a team to web them then they were already operating with support. It is the solo freighter who seems to be the ultimate winner in this case, and that runs counter to what the OP suggests. [/quote] The time issue is nearly insurmountable for this proposal.
Quote:Perhaps a better means would be to dramatically boost freighter resists. This would make the time to kill substantially longer allowing for a defence force to save it, while not making freighter bowling the only way to tackle one. Still ridiculously easy to pin one down and kill it. For OP to work, tackling across the entire game would need serious examination.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3222
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 03:55:00 -
[20] - Quote
Winchester Steele wrote:Real Serious PVPer wrote:The day concord retires is the day I'll have to step in and keep order.
We already have a Supreme Protector, sorry. Maybe you should challenge him to a duel for supremacy of Hi-Sec though? Assuming that you can pass the trials three, of course.
I was out of the loop for a while, has anyone ever passed the trials three? Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
|
Kyperion
114
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 06:06:00 -
[21] - Quote
Tarojan wrote:Patch 3.0 Thermopylae
Under continued assault from the sanshas, the empires have been weakened and are fallen back. Concord has withdrawn into "true sec" a grouping of 0.9-1.0 systems surrounding the tutorial hubs and is no longer present elsewhere in highsec as their manpower is stretched beyond breaking point. While faction police forces still patrol the gates of highsec and will enforce the law against criminals capsulers are advised to look to their own defenses. In response to these increased dangers manufactors of civilian shipping are increasing the defenses of the ships they build.
patch notes: Freighters and industrials are now immune to warp disruption. Freighters now have increased defenses and will require a significant number of attackers to bring down. Mining barges have expanded drone bays for self defense purposes and increased ehps.
pve players are urged to group up for their own protection and to encourage this the way missions are accepted, run and turned in has been altered such that it can and should be done in fleets with npcs/rewards being adjusted for the number of fleet members.
I have a dream, that I meet many a ganker while playing EVE Valkyrie...
cannot wait to REALLY pilot a ship in New Eden. |
Kyperion
114
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 06:08:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Winchester Steele wrote:Real Serious PVPer wrote:The day concord retires is the day I'll have to step in and keep order.
We already have a Supreme Protector, sorry. Maybe you should challenge him to a duel for supremacy of Hi-Sec though? Assuming that you can pass the trials three, of course. I was out of the loop for a while, has anyone ever passed the trials three?
I don't give a **** about riddles or trials, but I'll put out an open challenge to all New Order takers when Valkyrie comes out. (assuming I can get my hands on Morpheus)
Prepare thyselves |
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations CODE.
4418
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 06:33:00 -
[23] - Quote
Wouldn't a new distraction cause highsec miners to be more afk? See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3224
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 06:35:00 -
[24] - Quote
Erotica 1 wrote:Wouldn't a new distraction cause highsec miners to be more afk?
Conversely, depending on how long a match of Valkyrie takes, one could use it to wait out the criminal flag timer in between ganks. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Real Serious PVPer
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 14:24:00 -
[25] - Quote
Kyperion wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Winchester Steele wrote:Real Serious PVPer wrote:The day concord retires is the day I'll have to step in and keep order.
We already have a Supreme Protector, sorry. Maybe you should challenge him to a duel for supremacy of Hi-Sec though? Assuming that you can pass the trials three, of course. I was out of the loop for a while, has anyone ever passed the trials three? I don't give a **** about riddles or trials, but I'll put out an open challenge to all New Order takers when Valkyrie comes out. (assuming I can get my hands on Morpheus) Prepare thyselves
At last, a challenger worth fighting. my long and fruitless solo roams through lo sec and null sec that end in everyone docking up is coming to an end. I shall meet you in the space of New Order where we will engage in mortal combat. If you win, then you too, shall be known as a Real Serious PVPer. A coveted title that is only bestowed to an extremely select number.
-áSerious about being serious- Putting the "P "into PVP one fight at a time. -áMUFC |
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 19:39:00 -
[26] - Quote
Tarojan wrote:Black Locust wrote:Why cant people just say "I want more easy targets" and be done with it? Because thats not what this is about? The current situation (ie concord) is based around ganking miners, haulers, newbies and mission runners. Newbies and mission runners are often tricked into allowing a pvp ship to engage their pve ship due to poor understanding of the aggression mechanics. That makes them free loot and people cant assist them against the ganker due to concord. Miners and haulers are being ganked (as well as bling fit mission boats) when a combination of too high value cargo for the tank they have equipped makes the gank profitable. That I have no problem with and nor does any other intelligent player I have spoken to yet. Its simple piracy and easily handled by tanking your ship properly. What has changed though is that a certain part of the high sec pvp community has stopped ganking for profit and has started ganking for giggles, ie no longer piracy but arguably griefing. Using dessies to suicide gank newbies in ventures/rookie ships/shuttles and dropping tornados on empty badgers (tank fit or not) can carry no expectation of profit. However hilarious it is to read the tears, the naivety of the victims (you cant do this!) and their self entitlement (you cant do this to ME! CCP change the game!!!1), I have to recognise that: a) one day Im going to get 2 tornados dropped on my tanky badger carrying its "4 large crates of polytextiles" and fail my mission b) it will be done purely because someone wants to see me blow up c) theres nothing I can do about it. I have no problem with A and B, I would like to do something about C. Concord cant defend me. I would like the option of defending myself
FFS ... mission flipping does not equal ganking
Psychotic Monk for CSM 9
This game is built around the likes of us. It's not the assholes that are playing the wrong game. - James Amril-Kesh. |
Tarojan
Tarojan Corporation
46
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 07:28:00 -
[27] - Quote
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:Tarojan wrote:Black Locust wrote:Why cant people just say "I want more easy targets" and be done with it? Because thats not what this is about? The current situation (ie concord) is based around ganking miners, haulers, newbies and mission runners. Newbies and mission runners are often tricked into allowing a pvp ship to engage their pve ship due to poor understanding of the aggression mechanics. That makes them free loot and people cant assist them against the ganker due to concord. FFS ... mission flipping does not equal ganking. Mission runners have to choose to engage a suspect in their mission pocket - they are not free loot. That criminal has flagged themselves as a target of opportunity - KEY WORD... OPPORTUNITY - the lost ISK from stolen loot will almost always be negligible compared to the cost of replacing a ship. Mission flippers use a lack of knowledge about game mechanics and social engineering to bait mission runners into aggression.
Thats what I said Jamwara. Can flippers bait and kill mission runners who dont understand the rules. I have no problem with this. What I have a problem with is I cant practically help them short of suicide ganking the can flipper.
Erotica 1: "I would create a massive pyramid scheme in Eve to show you what it is, but I'm an honest business person, so you'll just have to find education elsewhere. Start with the wiki link that was linked by a person who didn't even read what he linked." Theres a reason I play eve XD |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3266
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 07:35:00 -
[28] - Quote
Tarojan wrote:Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:Tarojan wrote:Black Locust wrote:Why cant people just say "I want more easy targets" and be done with it? Because thats not what this is about? The current situation (ie concord) is based around ganking miners, haulers, newbies and mission runners. Newbies and mission runners are often tricked into allowing a pvp ship to engage their pve ship due to poor understanding of the aggression mechanics. That makes them free loot and people cant assist them against the ganker due to concord. FFS ... mission flipping does not equal ganking. Mission runners have to choose to engage a suspect in their mission pocket - they are not free loot. That criminal has flagged themselves as a target of opportunity - KEY WORD... OPPORTUNITY - the lost ISK from stolen loot will almost always be negligible compared to the cost of replacing a ship. Mission flippers use a lack of knowledge about game mechanics and social engineering to bait mission runners into aggression. Thats what I said Jamwara. Can flippers bait and kill mission runners who dont understand the rules. I have no problem with this. What I have a problem with is I cant practically help them short of suicide ganking the can flipper.
Are you kidding? If they actually flipped a can, they're suspect flagged, you can fire freely on them in highsec. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Kiryen O'Bannon
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
96
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:36:00 -
[29] - Quote
Which is why you blue all your wrecks as soon as someone warps in. |
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar E.A.R.T.H. Federation
353
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:50:00 -
[30] - Quote
CONCORD did more to ruin this game than anything else CCP has added before or since. Faction police should be enough, let people fight the police, but have proper escalation to combat ZOMBIES.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |