Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
Christopher Mabata
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:02:00 -
[3271] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote:Christopher Mabata wrote:
We dont need freighters with the EHP of carriers, there are plenty of fits that can give you a LOT of EHP already available with what we have now im betting we'll see a "Give freighters a DC2" post again soon as well.
Provis and obbys can get almost 600K EHP with the right fit and a booster alt Charons and fenrirs are a bit behind at about 480-520K but still its a LOT of tank You could use jump freighters and avoid the camps entirely
Also if you see 20+ catalysts on D-Scan with your scout its probably a good idea to wait before you jump it in, either until they complete the gank and are forced to dock or until they leave. Its up to YOU to protect your assets NOT CCP.
Web it into warp Escort with logi Escort with antibump ships Escort with combat ships Use a scout GO the other way Etc.
There are already tons of options, so stop complaining that taking shortcuts is costing people freighters, taking shortcuts IRL can have consequences too so why shouldn't they here?
so you want easy kills.... sorry but eve isnt just about you....and i dont think adding one more slot and 3 rigs is going to give anywhere near the EHP of carriers, so dont be silly
Ganking freighters are only easy kills when the freighter pilot decides to undock without maximum tank, easy kills are fun too so why not kill those as well? Its certainly not a matter of principle.
And yes 3 T2 Transverse bulkheads with 4 RF bulkheads or even resist mods and trimarks or extenders your looking at 800K+ EHP with boosts and implants, possibly drugs too. Not too far off from the EHP of a carrier when its unfitted no? Your a flying cargohold in space, be happy with what CCP gave you in the first place, you dont need more it makes no sense why you need more. So once more i say unto you in the words of myself and many before me:
PROTECT YOUR OWN ASSETS DONT LEAVE IT TO CCP.
Because its not their job, its yours!
Is it bad if your friend says "that was a Metaphor" and you say "Meta 4? Get Tech II or faction" ?I love the sound of silent explosions in Space.-á |
Christopher Mabata
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:05:00 -
[3272] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote:Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:ImYourMom wrote:...
so you want easy kills.... sorry but eve isnt just about you....and i dont think adding one more slot and 3 rigs is going to give anywhere near the EHP of carriers, so dont be silly You and your ilk have read THIS and tried to apply brain in gear before wailing on forums for nerfs right, RIIIIIIGHT? (finger hovers over the Kill-It-Forward button...) F my ilk? fyi i dont even fly a freighter, but i do have the common sense to understand when something is not right....unlike you guys who quite simply just gank people at gates....yay way to go...awesome leet pvpers....lol seriously
PVP is PVP it doesnt matter how you see it but how the ones doing it see it, a kill is a kill regardless and ganking offers a lot more profit than typical PVP unless you hunt excessively blingy ships in null sec with great success. So Whether you see it as Elite or Not ( which personally i just do it for fun and money ) its here to stay. Is it bad if your friend says "that was a Metaphor" and you say "Meta 4? Get Tech II or faction" ?I love the sound of silent explosions in Space.-á |
Christopher Mabata
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:06:00 -
[3273] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:ImYourMom wrote:Now of course people are going to put cargo expanders in the low slots its a freighter the want to carry as much as possible. Even if you fitted hardeners etc 3 slots its not going to give you much tank. They should probably add 1 more slot and 3 rig slots. that should at least give the pilots a little more tank to play with and balance things up. Is that really such a bad thing to ask for? or do you just want easy kills? You talk about making the effort but only if it suits you, you want easy kills... The answer is not give more buffs to the haulers. The answer is for the haulers to use half an ounce of common sense in their endeavours and protect themselves. It's so easy a simple google search will tell you how it's done. please read above comment, i have never seen some many gankers whine that they might have to work to get kills... keep whining ..... tears are delicious
Were not the ones who created this forum are we? Nope its the haulers who cry out for change and we tell them why it wont happen or is unlikely to happen in the near future. Once again a simple button click would show you this Is it bad if your friend says "that was a Metaphor" and you say "Meta 4? Get Tech II or faction" ?I love the sound of silent explosions in Space.-á |
Iain Cariaba
237
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:16:00 -
[3274] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:ImYourMom wrote:Now of course people are going to put cargo expanders in the low slots its a freighter the want to carry as much as possible. Even if you fitted hardeners etc 3 slots its not going to give you much tank. They should probably add 1 more slot and 3 rig slots. that should at least give the pilots a little more tank to play with and balance things up. Is that really such a bad thing to ask for? or do you just want easy kills? You talk about making the effort but only if it suits you, you want easy kills... The answer is not give more buffs to the haulers. The answer is for the haulers to use half an ounce of common sense in their endeavours and protect themselves. It's so easy a simple google search will tell you how it's done. please read above comment, i have never seen some many gankers whine that they might have to work to get kills... keep whining ..... tears are delicious Here's where you get ignored for the troll you truly are.
Good riddance. Disclaimer: My opinion does not necessarily reflect that of my corp or alliance. My opinion is my own, and if you don't like, that is your problem. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8808
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:32:00 -
[3275] - Quote
I would like to thank our current NPC corp troll for providing yet more evidence of precisely why NPC corp characters should be banned from GD.
Oh, and as for your "suggestions", it was already fairly clear that you don't fly a freighter. Because if you did, you'd know just how stupid those suggestions are. The last thing freighters need is more slots. What they need is competent pilots who will bother to fit a tank. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1032
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:00:00 -
[3276] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I would like to thank our current NPC corp troll for providing yet more evidence of precisely why NPC corp characters should be banned from GD.
Oh, and as for your "suggestions", it was already fairly clear that you don't fly a freighter. Because if you did, you'd know just how stupid those suggestions are. The last thing freighters need is more slots. What they need is competent pilots who will bother to fit a tank. Your suggestion of banning NPC corps from GD is different from his suggestion for more freighter slots how?
No really. This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
38
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:10:00 -
[3277] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I would like to thank our current NPC corp troll for providing yet more evidence of precisely why NPC corp characters should be banned from GD.
Oh, and as for your "suggestions", it was already fairly clear that you don't fly a freighter. Because if you did, you'd know just how stupid those suggestions are. The last thing freighters need is more slots. What they need is competent pilots who will bother to fit a tank. Your suggestion of banning NPC corps from GD is different from his suggestion for more freighter slots how? No really.
There's no relationship between freighter slots and being able to post in GD.
I'm not in an NPC corp but I'm a forum character, next it would be you need 10 people in a player corp to be able to post. But wait we already have a forum like that...
NPC corp players have just as much right to post in GD as anyone else.
As for more freighter slots, sounds reasonable current amount of slots makes it boring fitting one. |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1032
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:18:00 -
[3278] - Quote
120+ pages and people still want to stick their heads in the sand.
I would like to see EvE grow. EvE has been lucky due to a lack of competition. It is a niche game. At some point someone will invent a user friendly space game and then truly the bitter vets will have EvE to themselves. And then when they realize that there are no newbies to exploit they will slowly leave blaming most likely someone else.
IMHO a problem with EvE is that it follows EvE logic. People say EvE is hard. I disagree. I say Eve is not intuitive because it follows it own logic. This is by choice and IMHO self limiting.
Take for instance miner bumping. Two objects collide and the net result is....nothing? Here would be a simple solution that is both logical and support both sides. Bumping causes damage based upon the force of the collision. Wow, what a concept.
A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
This would allow people to bump, within reason. It would also allow people to shoot anyone anywhere as long as they didn't go past shields.
But the second you cross the easily recognizable, well defined line the consequences should be sudden and without escape in hi sec. This concept is easy to understand and dos not require a whole lot of "if this then" thinking.
People should not have to read a tutorial or watch a YouTube video to understand how to do the simplest things in a GAME.
This is just a taste of logic that EvE could use. Now bring on the bitter vets who say EvE is about adapting, as long as it means everybody but them.
This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8810
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:24:00 -
[3279] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote: Your suggestion of banning NPC corps from GD is different from his suggestion for more freighter slots how?
No really.
They're entirely unrelated. I disagree with his statement, and I also pointed out how him being a very obvious troll alt is an excellent example of how the NPC corp alt makes it too easy to troll without any consequences, as he is the latest incarnation of some jackass trolling GD with his half baked "opinions".
And that, if you ask me, the ability to endlessly troll with NPC alts should be removed. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
38
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:39:00 -
[3280] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote: Take for instance miner bumping. Two objects collide and the net result is....nothing? Here would be a simple solution that is both logical and support both sides. Bumping causes damage based upon the force of the collision. Wow, what a concept.
As you are aware from the second part of yours that I've quoted. CONCORD is the reason for that.
Nexus Day wrote: A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
This would allow people to bump, within reason. It would also allow people to shoot anyone anywhere as long as they didn't go past shields.
But the second you cross the easily recognizable, well defined line the consequences should be sudden and without escape in hi sec. This concept is easy to understand and dos not require a whole lot of "if this then" thinking.
Don't see how miners would get any benefit from that. It would just make them easier to kill than they already are.
With the bumping you seem to want more realism, but then you go against that with this second part I quoted.
If you shot at a person and just made a hole in their jacket but missed their skin, would that be seen as an act of aggression and a criminal offense.
You can't aim for realism yet choose what you want, as with realism there's no choices to be made they're already defined. Eve's not about realism as it's set in another galaxy and far into the future. |
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4169
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 00:59:00 -
[3281] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:This is just a taste of logic that EvE could use. Now bring on the bitter vets who say EvE is about adapting, as long as it means everybody but them.
Except that the vets already adapted. That's why we're vets. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3790
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:56:00 -
[3282] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up). HA HA HA HA HA HA. Yeah, let's make it so that it's possible to take off seventy percent of a well-fit mackinaw/skiff's tank before CONCORD begins its eighteen-second timer. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3790
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:59:00 -
[3283] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Nexus Day wrote:A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up). HA HA HA HA HA HA. Yeah, let's make it so that it's possible to take off seventy percent of a well-fit mackinaw/skiff's tank before CONCORD begins its eighteen-second timer. you just came up with an exceedingly terrible idea to accommodate the 'make bumping do damage' terrible idea |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20140
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 01:59:00 -
[3284] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Nexus Day wrote:A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up). HA HA HA HA HA HA. Yeah, let's make it so that it's possible to take off seventy percent of a well-fit mackinaw/skiff's tank before CONCORD begins its eighteen-second timer. A variation of Malcanis' law at work right there.
Never hold your farts in. They travel up your spine and into the brain, where they ferment. They then migrate to your keyboard via your fingers. That's where shiptoasts come from.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
3640
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 02:26:00 -
[3285] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:Take for instance miner bumping. Two objects collide and the net result is....nothing? Here would be a simple solution that is both logical and support both sides. Bumping causes damage based upon the force of the collision. Wow, what a concept. Damage effects is a suggestion that is regularly made in threads on bumping.
The main problem is it's rare that we really sit down to design a mechanic and think about all of the different ways that it could be used by players.
For example, even if you ignored station games due to invulnerability timers on undocking, no such luxury exists at gates.
Autopiloting in highsec would become suicide because all a ganker would need is to line ships in front of yours and you would bump yourself to death. They don't even have to bump you. You'll be bumping them. You'll be the aggressor.
This would be extremely easy to do because autopilot goes gate to gate in a straight line and ships land 15km from gate. It doesn't even need any guess work to see where ships are going to drop out of warp and what vector they'll be on.
Park ships along the lines and let Freighters kill themselves.
A 'logical' solution to that might be to allow AP to warp to 0 (another common request). But, that won't solve the problem either.
All a ganker has to do is line up on the other side of the gate and then scram you when you spawn on grid. Then you align to next gate but don't warp. While you slow boat, ships park in front of you and you kill yourself.
That is not possible under the current mechanics, but you made it very convenient with the next part of your suggestion.
Quote:A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
Combined with your first suggestion, this is fantastically exploitable. A ganker can now freely activate a scram on you and stop you warping away. That makes it even easier to arrange for you to bump yourself to death.
Quote:But the second you cross the easily recognizable, well defined line the consequences should be sudden and without escape in hi sec. This concept is easy to understand and dos not require a whole lot of "if this then" thinking.
The recognisable, well defined line already exists. Any module activated against another player leads to Concord. Clear and simple and not exploitable (normally).
Quote:This is just a taste of logic that EvE could use. Now bring on the bitter vets who say EvE is about adapting, as long as it means everybody but them. I generally try to be reasonable in considering people's suggestions. For this suggestion though, it would achieve the exact opposite effect that you are looking for.
Gankers would become the victims of aggressive bumping under the game mechanics and Carebears would become the Gankers, being Concorded every time they tried to travel anywhere.
That's not logic I want to taste anymore of. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
. -á<- Argue this, not this ->-á( -í-¦ -£-û -í-¦) |
Samantha Floyd
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 02:37:00 -
[3286] - Quote
Who's arguing that more low slots wouldn't help?
As of right now fitting a max tanked freighter still leaves you as a potential target to be killed. I've seen CODE take down 3 x Bulkhead Obelisks and 3 x A-type resists Providences. Takes them two waves.
They shouldn't add more slots for the exact oppositie reason some of you are arguing: It would make freighters too OP. With 3 x rig slots, it would take at least 3 waves of the usual big gank fleets to get you.
Anyways this thread really should be closed. Considering web warping and Nestors, there is no reason to get ganked. 150 pages of discussion isn't going to change that. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8815
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 02:43:00 -
[3287] - Quote
Samantha Floyd wrote:Who's arguing that more low slots wouldn't help?
I'll go ahead and make that argument right now.
Slots don't come without costs. That's the big lesson in all of the freighter changes, by the way. If they got rigs to boot, it would be even worse.
Quote: As of right now fitting a max tanked freighter still leaves you as a potential target to be killed. I've seen CODE take down 3 x Bulkhead Obelisks and 3 x A-type resists Providences. Takes them two waves.
Should have bought a permit.
Quote: Anyways this thread really should be closed. Considering web warping and Nestors, there is no reason to get ganked. 150 pages of discussion isn't going to change that.
Apparently it is permitted to live to put all the ganking whines in one place, that way we know whom to wardec. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Arkady Romanov
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
487
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 03:38:00 -
[3288] - Quote
Samantha Floyd wrote:As of right now fitting a max tanked freighter still leaves you as a potential target to be killed.
Good. No undocked ship should be 100% safe from death. |
Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
314
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 03:54:00 -
[3289] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:Samantha Floyd wrote:As of right now fitting a max tanked freighter still leaves you as a potential target to be killed. Good. No undocked ship should be 100% safe from death.
This. We are all potential targets to be killed. No matter what we're flying. This how it is. This is how it has been. This is how it should be. Blood makes the grass grow. |
Heinrich Erquilenne
Foundation Cutting-Edge Mordus Angels
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 11:26:00 -
[3290] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:Samantha Floyd wrote:As of right now fitting a max tanked freighter still leaves you as a potential target to be killed. Good. No undocked ship should be 100% safe from death.
That doesn't mean ships should be 100% not safe to fly. Since eve is a pvp game every ship should be able to do something in a competitive pvp environment on its own, instead of the old "rely on others" which always end up in a boring "rely on alts" thing. Med and high slots + rigs for freighters seems to be a legitimate request to me but that's just me. The freighter pilot should be able to fit a MWD or a cloak just like every single other ship in game. I don't see why carrying stuff should always make you the fat loot pinata some people like because they like easy targets which can't fight back. I would even go as far as adding a small drone bay so that freighter pilots can fit ecm drones. |
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
786
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 11:29:00 -
[3291] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
This could be interesting, if the bumper is a shield logi. CCP would have to detemine who actually is the bumper, to sort this out. Remove insurance. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1554
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 11:47:00 -
[3292] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:120+ pages and people still want to stick their heads in the sand.
I would like to see EvE grow. EvE has been lucky due to a lack of competition. It is a niche game. At some point someone will invent a user friendly space game and then truly the bitter vets will have EvE to themselves. And then when they realize that there are no newbies to exploit they will slowly leave blaming most likely someone else.
IMHO a problem with EvE is that it follows EvE logic. People say EvE is hard. I disagree. I say Eve is not intuitive because it follows it own logic. This is by choice and IMHO self limiting.
Take for instance miner bumping. Two objects collide and the net result is....nothing? Here would be a simple solution that is both logical and support both sides. Bumping causes damage based upon the force of the collision. Wow, what a concept.
A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
This would allow people to bump, within reason. It would also allow people to shoot anyone anywhere as long as they didn't go past shields.
But the second you cross the easily recognizable, well defined line the consequences should be sudden and without escape in hi sec. This concept is easy to understand and dos not require a whole lot of "if this then" thinking.
People should not have to read a tutorial or watch a YouTube video to understand how to do the simplest things in a GAME.
This is just a taste of logic that EvE could use. Now bring on the bitter vets who say EvE is about adapting, as long as it means everybody but them.
make bumping do damage and yoou will jsut make a whole new level of ganking.
Make concord respond and I wil park frigates in front of jita perimeter gate so that auto pilot freighters cllide with them and get concorded.
Go back to your drawing board...
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Matius Udan
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 12:02:00 -
[3293] - Quote
It seems ganking is only a problem for the person that got ganked - for everyone else its hours of entertainment as the ganked miss the point of a game where anyone can do anything they want. Ganking happens, it is legitimate in most cases, in others it is just trolling for fun. I myself have not been ganked, although this character is new, i had played EVE a few years ago and the closest I got was someone scanning me down in a mission area and locking on to me (they would have fooled me into shooting them if they had waited for NPC ships to be on the grid and locking me as well - as it was it was just them so I bugged out). Maybe im on at the wrong time? Maybe its because when ever I haul stuff I warp to zero, keep a very close eye on local and do more than one trip so there is never anything of value in my hold (in the vain hope that there are gankers in it for profit still out there)
In WoW (way back in the day) if I saw someone of the opposing faction with an afk tag I would nuke them and /emote teabagging their corpse without hessitation, I dont see why people think it should be different here? |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7676
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 13:32:00 -
[3294] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:120+ pages and people still want to stick their heads in the sand.
I would like to see EvE grow. EvE has been lucky due to a lack of competition. It is a niche game. At some point someone will invent a user friendly space game and then truly the bitter vets will have EvE to themselves. And then when they realize that there are no newbies to exploit they will slowly leave blaming most likely someone else.
IMHO a problem with EvE is that it follows EvE logic. People say EvE is hard. I disagree. I say Eve is not intuitive because it follows it own logic. This is by choice and IMHO self limiting.
Take for instance miner bumping. Two objects collide and the net result is....nothing? Here would be a simple solution that is both logical and support both sides. Bumping causes damage based upon the force of the collision. Wow, what a concept.
A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
This would allow people to bump, within reason. It would also allow people to shoot anyone anywhere as long as they didn't go past shields.
But the second you cross the easily recognizable, well defined line the consequences should be sudden and without escape in hi sec. This concept is easy to understand and dos not require a whole lot of "if this then" thinking.
People should not have to read a tutorial or watch a YouTube video to understand how to do the simplest things in a GAME.
This is just a taste of logic that EvE could use. Now bring on the bitter vets who say EvE is about adapting, as long as it means everybody but them.
No one should be this bitter and hateful.
|
Airto TLA
Puppeteers of Doom
56
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 15:27:00 -
[3295] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Airto TLA wrote: My suggestions, has always been if you reach -9 or lower NPC police will try and kill your pod and only low sec stations will accept your medical clones. Seems like a realistic disadvantage to being a known arsonist.
While we're making self serving suggestions, I have one. If you are killed by someone whose sec status is -5.0 or lower, you don't get any insurance payout. Because reasons.
I am going to pick this one out of the, several. Since the analogy used was the worst.
Why do you gank something, why do you think you should be protected while you do so, why are you not up for a challenge?
Basically you are a wannabe gangster, not able to live the life, but can buy the outfit.
I real dislike care bear PvP tough guys, they really annoy me. They will exploit every corner to get a stupidly unfair fight. Then they whine like three year olds every time some makes them work a little harder.
High Sec has its protections, because unharmed haulers are slow easy targets, just ask any null sec guy why industry is so hard there. It is not the production lines or the lack of materials as much the complete lack of an ability to move them (without Jump freighters and their inherent cheesiness).
|
Iain Cariaba
238
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 16:20:00 -
[3296] - Quote
Heinrich Erquilenne wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:Samantha Floyd wrote:As of right now fitting a max tanked freighter still leaves you as a potential target to be killed. Good. No undocked ship should be 100% safe from death. That doesn't mean ships should be 100% not safe to fly. Since eve is a pvp game every ship should be able to do something in a competitive pvp environment on its own, instead of the old "rely on others" which always end up in a boring "rely on alts" thing. Med and high slots + rigs for freighters seems to be a legitimate request to me but that's just me. The freighter pilot should be able to fit a MWD or a cloak just like every single other ship in game. I don't see why carrying stuff should always make you the fat loot pinata some people like because they like easy targets which can't fight back. I would even go as far as adding a small drone bay so that freighter pilots can fit ecm drones. Freighters, in fact, are able to do something in a competitive PvP environment on its own. It can haul more than any other hull. Its drawback is that it's potentially a giant loot pinata, unless you're smart.
Ohh, let's put a cloak on a freighter.... seriously? Given the align times of a freighter, how hard do you really think it would be to decloak one on a gate? Let's not even get into the fact that the biggest problem with freighters is the freighter pilots themselves who think it's ok to dump several billion isk worth of crap into a slow, fat hull then hit autopilot and go watch a movie. An AFK autopiloting freighter pilot is not able to use a cloak. Unless it's a covops cloak, you still can't warp cloaked, which means you have to decloak and recover the 50% velocity you didn't have cause you were cloaked.
The largest mwd in the game still won't provide enough thrust to give a hull the size of a freighter any significant speed increase. Hop on Sisi and put a 1mn mwd on a battleship and see how much increase you get, that's comparable to putting a 100mn mwd on a freighter. Unless you add a capital sized mwd to the game, there's no point in letting freighters use one, and a capital mwd is it's own can of worms.
ECM drones?. Ok, let's make the ganker fleets add ond more guy to the fleet to compensate for the one guy that might get jammed. How long do you think it'll be before some carebear sees a suspect flag on overview and unleashes his horde of t1 hornets on someone's hurricane? You know it'll happen.
Hauling does not "always make you the fat loot pinata." It's the pilot of the freighter that does that, not the ship itself. Disclaimer: My opinion does not necessarily reflect that of my corp or alliance. My opinion is my own, and if you don't like, that is your problem. |
Iain Cariaba
238
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 16:47:00 -
[3297] - Quote
Airto TLA wrote:I real dislike care bear PvP tough guys, they really annoy me. They will exploit every corner to get a stupidly unfair fight. Then they whine like three year olds every time some makes them work a little harder. As opposed to the carebears who whine incessantly for more and more nerfs, and when CCP delivers, not only ignores everything CCP did for them, they want even more. Search the forums. The same day Kronos was released and they got the ability to tank freighters, there were posts on forums for further nerfs to ganking.
I don't really see how adapting to the changes and regaining the advantage, while arguing against the people who can't accept what they get and continously cry for even more, is whining like a three year old. Generally, it's the three year olds who are always wanting more. Tell you what, next time you're in walmart and there's some kid crying in an isle cause its parent won't buy them a candy bar, go tell the parent to stop whining and give the kid what they want. See how well that goes for you.
Airto TLA wrote:High Sec has its protections, because unharmed haulers are slow easy targets, just ask any null sec guy why industry is so hard there. It is not the production lines or the lack of materials as much the complete lack of an ability to move them (without Jump freighters and their inherent cheesiness). This is incorrect.
Highsec does not have any protections. What it has are consequences. Consequences are not protection against those willing to pay them.
Null industry is not hard, where do you think all those supers are produced? Why is most stuff made in highsec then? Because there's far less risk to build there and jump freighter it out. People in null are entirely capable of moving freighters around, since ihubs and upgrades don't fit in jump freighters. Disclaimer: My opinion does not necessarily reflect that of my corp or alliance. My opinion is my own, and if you don't like, that is your problem. |
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1291
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 19:01:00 -
[3298] - Quote
For the heroes, an inspirational story on the Yoda of ganking.
For the villainous pansies, a guide on avoiding ganking.
For the ladies, free moustache rides.
That is all.
F
Would you like to know more? |
Christopher Mabata
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 19:09:00 -
[3299] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:120+ pages and people still want to stick their heads in the sand.
I would like to see EvE grow. EvE has been lucky due to a lack of competition. It is a niche game. At some point someone will invent a user friendly space game and then truly the bitter vets will have EvE to themselves. And then when they realize that there are no newbies to exploit they will slowly leave blaming most likely someone else.
IMHO a problem with EvE is that it follows EvE logic. People say EvE is hard. I disagree. I say Eve is not intuitive because it follows it own logic. This is by choice and IMHO self limiting.
Take for instance miner bumping. Two objects collide and the net result is....nothing? Here would be a simple solution that is both logical and support both sides. Bumping causes damage based upon the force of the collision. Wow, what a concept.
A second minor change would benefit miners, miner bumpers, gankers and gankees. There are no criminal effects until shields are depleted. In other words until you can show the officer damage he will not show up to write a ticket (or blow you up).
This would allow people to bump, within reason. It would also allow people to shoot anyone anywhere as long as they didn't go past shields.
But the second you cross the easily recognizable, well defined line the consequences should be sudden and without escape in hi sec. This concept is easy to understand and dos not require a whole lot of "if this then" thinking.
People should not have to read a tutorial or watch a YouTube video to understand how to do the simplest things in a GAME.
This is just a taste of logic that EvE could use. Now bring on the bitter vets who say EvE is about adapting, as long as it means everybody but them.
1. Collision mechanics would make the jita undock scrap free for all warfare or CONCORD Splam fest as people triggered illegal aggression undocking their freighters. This could also be exploited very easily if it triggered CONCORD aggro.
2. No the gank begins when the first shot is fired, if i can sit there and peck a way a skiff's shields and then volley out its armor in a 0.5 before CONCORD responds it defeats the purpose of the buff to their tank. and makes shield tanks useless if you fly anything someone would want to gank.
3. This isn't adapting this is just bad Is it bad if your friend says "that was a Metaphor" and you say "Meta 4? Get Tech II or faction" ?I love the sound of silent explosions in Space.-á |
Christopher Mabata
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 19:19:00 -
[3300] - Quote
Heinrich Erquilenne wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:Samantha Floyd wrote:As of right now fitting a max tanked freighter still leaves you as a potential target to be killed. Good. No undocked ship should be 100% safe from death. That doesn't mean ships should be 100% not safe to fly. Since eve is a pvp game every ship should be able to do something in a competitive pvp environment on its own, instead of the old "rely on others" which always end up in a boring "rely on alts" thing. Med and high slots + rigs for freighters seems to be a legitimate request to me but that's just me. The freighter pilot should be able to fit a MWD or a cloak just like every single other ship in game. I don't see why carrying stuff should always make you the fat loot pinata some people like because they like easy targets which can't fight back. I would even go as far as adding a small drone bay so that freighter pilots can fit ecm drones.
I dont have such an issue with mid slot freighters, but you have to be sure they cant fit a damage control because at that point youve crossed the line into way too OP. Hence why i also disagree with the cloak idea
1. your not hard to decloak 2. thats almost enough CPU for a damage control unless it gets a reduction to CPU use which makes it a cloaky 9/10
Now as for a small drone bay i have no issues with that either, but realistically ECM drones will jam 1 dude which usually wont stop the gank since ganking is about overkilling the target, not getting exactly what you need to kill it. And carrying things only makes YOU a loot piniata if YOU put the several billion in loot inside the freighter and then take no precautions to keep any of it safe.
You know fitting an actual tank, implants, web it into warp, anti bump ships, logi escort, combat escort. etc. Is it bad if your friend says "that was a Metaphor" and you say "Meta 4? Get Tech II or faction" ?I love the sound of silent explosions in Space.-á |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 157 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |