Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] [12]:: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Kaarous Aldurald
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
10695
|
Posted - 2014.11.23 03:12:28 -
[331] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Sibyyl wrote: A wardec allows acts of aggression without CONCORD retaliation. This is how it works everywhere outside of hisec (let's not argue about sentry guns here).
Outside of a wardec, CONCORD doesn't stop anyone from attacking you. As you all know, suicide ganking is a thing. People will attack you with or without a wardec.
No matter what you do in EVE, learn how to shoot or learn how to run. Not having one of these two skills does not entitle you to scream and cry about how unfair the game is.
If you can't deal with surviving without CONCORD for a week or two, I'm not sure it was a good idea for you to undock in the first place. Wardec mechanics need a change, but not because it's hard to deal with by folks who can't even survive in hisec as soon as someone gets a free shot at them. EVE is a game of contested resources, most often resolved at gunpoint. Try not to develop the irrational belief that there are gun free zones in EVE.
I've met my quota of 2 posts and I'm back in hiatus. Good luck with this discussion. I'm sure my 0.02 ISK's worth won't change anything.
basically wardeccers wardec people when its convenient for them, but when they need to they can hide behind concord and be protected, yet they moan when wt's jump npc corps when they are just as bad for hiding behind concord when its convenient for them. thats the jist of it all
If that's what you got out of what you quoted... then you either didn't read it, or can't read.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
63
|
Posted - 2014.11.23 08:09:42 -
[332] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Megan DeMonet wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: The only victims here are new players in PvE corps too egotistical to disband, who get hopelessly blown to bit by the deccers. im pretty sure you can not WD an NPC corp...EVER You think? you do realize many new players quickly join highsec PvE corps, right?
since when NPC corp. war decc-able?!
Just Add Water
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
64
|
Posted - 2014.11.23 15:52:41 -
[333] - Quote
Has the term emergent game play been used yet? |
Beth Beashooter
Interstellar Gallente Industrial Group
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 12:34:51 -
[334] - Quote
Oppressors got all possibilities with their tools...defenders got nothing...except the aggressors tools...so THAT i call broken, if industrialist could choose, NOT to sell to a specific corp...THAT would be a defenders tool. The only possibility for industrials to dodge a dec is to sell ammo to his enemys...THAT is broken...declaring WAR in Highsec (lets say Iceland) to a place in Highsec (lets say Vopnafjar+Šarhreppur) and being allowed to kill all red cars on the way to a hub (lets say Reykjav+¡k) IS a broken mechanism...sorry to all "Legal" Gatecampers that take the easyest way to play this game.
BB |
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1597
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 17:58:45 -
[335] - Quote
Whats clear here is that a lot of carebears who don't know how to do a thing, cross the rubicon into full ret@rdation by then asserting said thing is not possible.
(What I am alluding to here is that its actually very easy to survive during wars without getting zapped..)
So instead of following their EvE forebears and putting mind (and google) in motion, each new generation of fail-bears and pansies look for the quick fix to their 'meh effort' dilema, often choosing ever-fabulous forum wailing threads like this to whine for further nerfs to war mechanics.
That is not EvE. One could in fact say, that is the exact opposite of EvE.
Now let's be honest, these selfsame pansies that chip away at our HTFU traditions will not be happy until hisec is a 100% safe Disneyland.
Look at history. Nerfing can-flipping and introducting 'crimewatch' was Step 1. Nerfing wars further (and awoxing) is Step 2. Nerfing ganking further is Step 3..4..5 ad infinitum, until roses are sprouting out of Cannibal Kane's, Psychotic Monk's and loyalanon's arses instead of antimatter...
My friends, this water-torture of nerfs to hisec must simply be stopped, and a bullet put in the head (in game) of any who not only propose them, but who sit on the CSM and idly give nodding approval to CCP as they seek to make hisec wally-world.
And fail-bears, want to not die in hisec?
Do this. Then, understand how war agressors operate. That's it. Done.
There, no more excuses.
tldr; HTFU, or GTFO.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9081
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:08:23 -
[336] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Now let's be honest, these selfsame pansies that chip away at our HTFU traditions will not be happy until hisec is a 100% safe Disneyland.
You are incorrect.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Now let's be honest, these selfsame pansies that chip away at our HTFU traditions will notNEVER be happy until hisec ALL OF EVE is a 100% safe Disneyland, and even then they won't be happy.
Now you are correct! |
Aeryn Maricadie
Periphery Bound Dominatus Atrum Mortis
3
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 23:21:52 -
[337] - Quote
Neurtral logi ought to be done away with, it just does not make sense. Aiding and abetting a suspect ought to make one a suspect. Aiding and abetting a War target ought to make one a valid war target as well. Interfering in a duel should not be allowed (I mean it is a duel).
Now on to the Ganker vs Bear debate that popped up on this thread, virtually all risk is on the Bears side and very little is on the Ganker side. This is because game mechanics allow the ganker to choose targets at will and there is little the Bears can do about it. Basically if a Ganker fails to get an isk efficient kill every time they choose to engage it is only because they screw up but the Bear's skills don't really help.
E.G. If a Ganknado shoots at a T1 indy and fails to lock in time nothing happens to the gate camp and therefore no risk, if the ganknado locks and fires and fails to kill in the alpha it is because they didn't bother to ship scan properly and decide whether to risk the shot or not, and finally if the kill fails to drop isk effiecient loot that is mostly because they failed to cargo scan properly.
The solution is not however to remove risk from the Bears side as well, but to increase the risk to the gankers. I think this can best be done by changing the kill right and bounty system to each other. The ganked get a killright and have the option to go collect themselves or give to a friend for vengeance (as they already can) however since Bears are... well Bears, they also ought to be able to sell the killright (again which already exists) to people who have the ability to collect.
now I know everyone is thinking "what a stupid noob, thats how it works already". I know that, the actual changes I propose are to allow a player to attach a bounty to the killright as it is sold, sell the killright w/bounty to particular individuals/Corps/Alliances (bountyhunters). This adds incentive (a possible 60m payout for the hull of a ganknado) to the current system which was lacking and would force Gankers to really watch their backs whenever they set up a gate camp. I think this will also improve the current bounty system by limiting who can actually collect the bounty (the problem now as I understand is that when your bounty gets sufficiently high one just has a friend collect it, that plus insurance money for the hull makes having bounties on you profitable) |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] [12]:: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |