| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 11:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ecrir Twy'Lar wrote:
What good are kill rights against criminals? You can already attack them for being a criminal. The problem is that they can dock in a station in a system where they are banned. I say stop letting criminals dock in highsec. Let other players actually have a chance to try and hunt them down. Don't prevent them from ganking though. They are providing us with more content. We need villains around.
All this would do is make it harder for newbies without multiple accounts and armies of alts to get into piracy. More seasoned players like myself will just shrug and circumvent this nuisance easily.
Congratulations, you just made EVE less attractive for noobs, exactly what this game needs.  |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 11:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Contrary to popular belief, not all criminals are -10. TBH, the most dangerous criminals I know have positive sec status.
Any criminal -10 or not can be killed if you are willing to put in the effort.
The biggest anti-pirate/gank whiners are usually completely unwilling to put any effort in at all. They want game mechanics to keep them 100% safe and on top of that they want game mechanics to do their hunting for them as well...
When I got into ganking, I was shocked to find out just how little effort they are willing to put in. I expected ppl to come after me, camp my stations, hire mercs and what not. None of it, most they would do is make the killright available for free or very cheap. Only one guy made any sort of effort at all, he shot at me when we met outside a station while undocking. Unfortunately, he did not know he had to activate his kill right first so he got himself a not so pleasant meeting with the local CONCORD squad.
Having said that, I've failed ganks and/or gotten killed (even podded!) during those. But those where due to coincidental passers by, screw ups on my part or my favorite one: laaaaaaaaaaag.
|

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2014.08.25 15:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: Regardless though, I'd not say that anything should be done to make it tougher to gank individual pilots, just that there should be more longer lasting consequences of choosing to do so and more reason to actively hunt gankers.
Like what? We're already at a point that you usually make dedicated ganking chars cuz doing it on your main is way too risky in hi sec cuz of killrights and below -5 sec status.
Players already have the tools to foil ganks and/or hunt gankers, they just hardly ever do it... Can't say I blame them even, it must be boring as hell as targets will be few and far between and after one encounter you'll be on the ganker's watchlist. It works the other way around too though. The days of belts filled with easily soloable untanked barges are long gone, at least in my area of operations. It's all skiffs, procurers and tanked exhumers.
|

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 13:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Solution.. make NPC corp tax 30% after 6 months old character and 50 % after 1 year. Also Player corps start paying a tax of 20% that is reduced by 1% per member. That would make peopel flock into reasoanbly sided corps... would brign them to the real eve, they woudl make friends, and wardecs woudl be more relevant than suicide ganking.
They'd just avoid wardecs by hopping around several corporations. |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 22:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Time to enter a new corp if you already entered a corp this week ( 7 days). They can still avoid the war, but at MASSIVE costs.
But the best solution would be to make the war FOLLOW anyone that leaves a corp under war for 7 days.
Unless they changed the cost of setting up a player corp when I wasn't looking (could be, haven't set up a player corp in years), there are no 'massive costs' involved.
" War following" corp members that drop corp, that would be interesting if it followed individual corp members. If it means that the entire new corporation of the member that dropped corp is affected, that would open up entire new ways of griefing and piracy.
War decs were nerfed and nerfed again to accomodate high sec carebears to a point that they were almost completely useless, making them meaningful again has my vote but I reckon it will just create more whining as 'miners just want to mine in peace'... |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 14:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
Trixie Lawless wrote:
1st Offense - Gankers market price ship value is given to gankee as compensation. 2nd Offense - compensation plus "jail time" (two hours of logged in time where no skill point increase occurs and the character is stuck in a penal station) 3rd Offense - compensation + 3 hours jail time.
So again, someone is asking for game mechanics to dish out the punishment. Again, the measures will have a more severe effect on newbies since multi-accounting gankers will be much more efficient at circumventing these measures.
The skill point freeze is ridiculous to begin with. First of all: gank alts are mostly specialized chars trained for flying specific fits and after they reach their goals they don't do much training anymore. Second: I'd just switch my training to another char b4 ganking. But you're prolly gonna suggest the skill training stop should be 'account wide' or something like that now...  |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
Trixie Lawless wrote:
I'm not asking for ganking to stop by any means, I would just have more respect for it if the ganker had to actually put some forethought into it.
I'll keep saying this: ganking requires a hell of a lot more effort than mining, missioning or other favorite carebear pass times. You're just like every other whiner about ganking: "No, ganking should be viable! But we just need one more nerf cuz it's really too easy and profitable now! Just ONE more nerf, I swear!".
As for ganking noobs: good, we need more of that, not less, teach them to lose ships and how to avoid losing them while they are young lest they turn in to whiny little bitches  |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
Trixie Lawless wrote:
And I'll keep saying this...pressing the undock button, flying to the asteroid belt, clicking approach and pressing F1 to pop a venture in two cycles and then docking back up after waiting a bit at an unaligned safe spot takes no more effort then mining or running missions.
If that was all there was too it then yes, it would be as simple as mining. That isn't all there is too it though. I'm not saying that ganking a venture is hard mind you, it's just needs about 100 times more effort and knowledge of game mechanics than mining....
Quote: Its like some of you who want to only grief others just don't understand how business works. Star Citizen is not too far off and WoW is getting ready to drop a new expansion (lol @ WoW all you want, I do), and the trend in the gaming industry is for a gentle ease into player vs player combat.... Not getting ganked by more experienced players in the first week of play. Just pay attention to rookie chat sometime and count how many potential customer say "effe it, I'm out" when they have been ganked two days into the game and lost most of their assets. I understand the "it's Eve", but if this game doesn't find a way to better transition toons into actually being able to defend themselves, then new games coming out (especially Star Citizen) is going to take a huge chunk out if its player base.
We've heard that story before, many times... The reality is that EVE is still here and has been for over a decade, it has coexisted with WoW for a long, long time. Many supposedly "EVE-killers" have been released in that decade, most of them were utter crap, I doubt any of them are still relevant at any level. Star Citizen might very well be the next one to fail and isn't scheduled for full release for over 2 years...
Quote: Hate carebears all you want, they make up the large part of the gaming community and pay the bills. And at that I'm done in this thread. No point in trying to talk sense or have a logical discussion on this topic anymore.
We all pay the bills, not just the carebears. Furthermore, I don't hate carebears, they make lovely targets and I still do my fair share of 'bearing' too. I just don't whine when I get shot out of space by other players in a PvP game...
Don't let the door hit you mate ;)
|

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:45:00 -
[9] - Quote
Leto Thule wrote:
Also, LOL @ people who think star citizen is going to be a forgiving environment. It will be the cut throatness of EVE with no CONCORD.
If that turns out to be true, it just might be that "EVE-killer" that has been prophesied for so long!  |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 19:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
As soon as I stop being a lazy arse and I reactivate my ganking accounts I'll be pushing for harder punishment for naive miners and haulers.
Plz mind that it could take a while for me to stop being a lazy arse though, I hope others will be pushing for harder punishment of these miscreants in my absence though!  |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
63
|
Posted - 2014.09.24 12:04:00 -
[11] - Quote
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
You seem to be saying the counter to a ganker is sitting in a Moa all day waiting for ganker to be stupid enough to gank in range of your Moa. Not that I am saying that gankers aren't stupid but to me waiting around all day for a 20sec engagement with a ganker doesn't sound like 'fun'.
Let me tell you this, scouting multiple solar systems, having to covertly scan the potential targets fitting, work out how much dps you need for the target, making bookmarks or having an alt provide a warp in, undocking in your gankalyst and landing on grid just 5 seconds after your target warped off and decided to do something different or was alarmed by your or your alt's presence is not 'fun' either. It is however what you have to deal with being a ganker.
Gankers have to put in time and effort to get their targets, as do most people who are looking for whatever form of PvP. I see no reason why White Knights should be exempt from this.
Ganks are also not foolproof, if you have your DPS/tank numbers off, you could easily fail. Even if you do have them right, you can be warping right into a trap or be caught by someone passing by who is looking for easy kills (the latter happens WAY more often than actual traps). Or my favorite: land on top of your target, go to work just to have a belt rat warp in and jam you when you have him in structure. The ironic part being that that has happened to me more often than being stopped by White Knights. |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
64
|
Posted - 2014.09.24 19:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
Renegade Heart wrote:
This did cross my mind when I ganked the pod of a 9 minute old toon in Perimeter attempting to autopilot into Jita.
Tbh, most newer toons I come across and gank turn out to be alts from older players. Reminds me of that time that I ganked a 800m covetor.
"Very tough of you to gank newbies!" -"Ehm, that 2007 hauler char right next to you is not your alt then?" "Yes it's my alt but this toon is noob!" -*shakes head and closes convo*
Any 9 minute old toon that wants to get into Jita chances are it's a newly created alt going on a shopping trip. |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2014.09.24 19:31:00 -
[13] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Well, I looked through all the responses - most were nonsensical and used strawman arguments. I thought about only responding to the well reasoned posts, but talking to myself isn't so useful. So briefly:
1) No, I don't subscribe to the concept of "isk tanking." What I do think is that there should be tools available to properly tank ships commensurate with their expense level. If my Machariel costs 3x as much as a T1 battleship, it would be reasonable to think that there are some fitting choices available to give me 3x the ehp. Instead, bigger ships tend to not have dps/ehp increases corresponding to their increased price tag. In general I would support a WoT style "penetration" system in Eve, where small destroyer/frig guns would be unable to do any real damage to a well tanked battleship. Why should 50 rookie ships with Civilian guns be able to blow up a well tanked Machariel? The system is weighted towards small ships, and lends itself to glass cannon suicide ganking.
Well, tbh isk tanking does exist and you are doing it. If you use the blingiest model ship with the bingiest tank you WILL have significantly more EHP than a non faction T1 fitted variant of the vessel of your choice.
So in that sense, it pays to invest in more spensive stuff. HOWEVER, EHP does not scale linearly with the price of your toys. The main reason for this is that EVE is a free market and prices are mostly dictated by supply and demand. Supply of the ultimate bling stuff is rather low but since it is the best in the game there are always enough ppl that want it and want to pay the price premium that goes with it. They are willing to pay 100x as much for the module that will give them a 5% advantage on whatever. Why? For bragging rights, cuz they are collectors or simply because they are so filthy rich (ingame or even IRL so they can spend 2000$ on PLEX for a single ship) that they don't care for the price.
In a game where any ship can be destroyed that does come with some risks. Even if you could get your 3x EHP ppl would STILL gank you if you made it profitable for them. Hell, they might even kill you for a loss. Why? Well, for bragging rights, cuz they are collectors of leet killmails or simply because they are so filthy rich that they don't care for the price and just want to blow stuff up (which is the core of this game: blowing stuff up).
Edit: and ppl like you would STILL be whining that ganking was too easy and it should get just ONE last nerf.... |

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 14:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Well in my view, at least, the amount of effort and isk expended to gank a properly tanked ship in highsec should scale with the size of the ship. So it should take more isk and effort to gank a Mach or Vindi than to gank a Maelstrom or Hurricane. I don't think that a gang of cheap Catalysts should be able to get the job done. I would like to see small turrets having minimal impact on large ships - so for example making it virtually impossible for frigs or dessies to gank battleships. Much like you would not see battleships able to kill a titan. It's not about getting rid of suicide ganking, its about making it take a proper amount of isk and effort.
It does scale and it scales very good. That's why properly tanked non-blinged ships rarely get ganked.
Quote: Yes - Concord do react. But losing your 10 mil catalyst - even for a 2% of chance of killing a 5 bil Machariel is worth it....CONCORD is not imposing a sufficient penalty to force you to actually think before ganking. It's basically automatic and consequence free for you CODE folks.
We do think, again: that's why properly tanked non-blinged ships rarely get ganked.
And again: it's not consequence free, if it was I wouldn't have to make dedicated ganking alts now would I? I would just use my mains with their perfect implants, gank something and run a mission, mine or whatever with that same main under the nose of the victim if there were no consequences 2 minutes later.
We don't do that because we think, we think about consequences and adapt our playing to it. A concept that seems to be completely ignored by you. All you do is ask for the game to be changed drasticly instead of changing your own game...
|

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 09:52:00 -
[15] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Steppa Musana wrote:Veers youl ove to focus on the rarest and most expensive ships in the game, while completely ignoring how many T1 ships like the Procurer or the Drake are nearly impossible to gank with positive efficiency when tanked correctly. In your world, a pirate cruiser has like 10x the EHP of a T1 cruiser, because :isk: . Somehow, this is balanced. Let us truly digest your suggestions for a moment. An Astero would be as difficult to kill as some T1 battleships.  I'm not sure what you point is. Yes, Drakes and Procurers can be tanked to make ganking unprofitable and Kb negative. Machariels, Nightmares, and Rattlesnakes, the main L4 runners cannot be tanked in such a fashion (more officer tank mods would be nice, maybe deadspace LSE's, etc...). An Astereo is a unique ship with special bonuses, we would not expect it to be 10 times as tanked as a T1. A Mach is essentially a better Maelstron, ditto for Vindi v. Hyperion, etc... The fact is that while you have lots of faction/deadspace/officer mods to get better gank, your tank options are still limited, and you remain vulnerable to gangs of cheap gank ships.
Then maybe you should not fly them and go run lvl 3 missions in your Drake, I think you can even run lvl 4s in a properly tanked Drake.
You instead choose to run them in a Mach cuz that gives much greater rewards but then start bitching about increased risk...
|
| |
|