EVE Search - EVE Pirates.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

EVE Pirates.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 08:34:00 - [1] Edited by: EvilEric on 28/10/2003 08:34:27 CCP is over agressive with the nerf bat in their responce to the camping in non 0.0, to this I agree with you Tank. However I STILL feel it is unacceptable to ba able to camp 0.4 for as long as you wish (24 hours for example) Beefing the guns is NOT the answer. However introducing some slow starting forces, which at first you would be able to beat, but increasing in resistance overtime may be the way. 0.4-0.1 should have pirates and crime but not daily camping and a graduated responce is my suggestion.... oh and get RID of the guns in these areas too.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 09:16:00 - [2] Edited by: EvilEric on 28/10/2003 09:17:28 Quote: Quote: Edited by: EvilEric on 28/10/2003 08:34:27 CCP is over agressive with the nerf bat in their responce to the camping in non 0.0, to this I agree with you Tank. However I STILL feel it is unacceptable to ba able to camp 0.4 for as long as you wish (24 hours for example) Beefing the guns is NOT the answer. However introducing some slow starting forces, which at first you would be able to beat, but increasing in resistance overtime may be the way. 0.4-0.1 should have pirates and crime but not daily camping and a graduated responce is my suggestion.... oh and get RID of the guns in these areas too. As you say in your opinion sentry guns should not be removed and that their should be a slow force and that pirates shouldnt be able to camp 24/7... I agree with you on the 24/7 part. I don't want you guys trading 24/7 so I set up blockades see =) I stop you guys. Why don't you guys come stop us? We welcome it =) You guys make millions a day, use that weapon in your hanger that has dust on it and come kick us out! Dont ask ccp to do it =) You don't see ccp helping us and stoping you guys from trading Sorry mate you misunderstood. I meant beefing UP the guns. Later in my post I said to get rid of those guns altogether. This coupled with graduated responce should force a more "raid" mentality to pirateing in the 0.4-0.1 areas instead of what you really want which is 24/7 camping in high traffic areas. As for stopping you... bah! I am learning PvP but am no way near you in terms of strength or resoursed. Finally if an Empire claimes an area is under thier control (0.4-0.1) then why should they not use some of the government forces to remove "undesireables". I am saying a SLOW and WEAK initial repsonce, builing up over a number of hours. An Alternative to the "time" idea would be to say the number of ships/pods killed in any given 24 hours to dictate the response... that way some a given level of crime/piracy would be tolerated but if "camped" for a long period of time then the responce gets stronger. I am trying to come up with ideas that help the pirates AND hold back a tide of bad feeling that would erupt if you were able to camp anywhere at anytime for any length of time.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 09:42:00 - [3] Quote: Evil, though its a good idea for you guys, I still have to disagree. Kicking us out is where you guys come in. Why leave it up to a 'special force' why not have some fun and do it yourselves? Answer that question. Ok. Finally we get to the point... You want to be able to come into a 0.4 sec area in strength and only large corps with lots of battleships to be able to dislodge you. You should be able to this. BUT, not as a perminant feature. What is the point of 0.4-0.1? What you want is 1.0 then 0.0 with nothing in between. I am NOT saying you cannot come in and have fun/profit, but what is the point of those "lower" ratings is you can treat them ALL like 0.0? Answer that. You vision of piracy as set out above, maybe the most efficant profit making way to get your kicks but if you get your way then your normal pray, small corp miners and traders, will just be forced to go 0.5+. So give them a REASON to go to the lower space by NOT camping for hours in high traffic areas but "raiding" these areas for a few hours then shifting to different areas to continue. As for safe travel I agree with you and call for a removal of ALL gate guns in 0.4 and below to give you access to a greater number of high traffic areas to "raid." Compromise man. Do expect ALL things. The same goes for lame ass carebears that want all priacy limited to 0.0.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 12:47:00 - [4] Ok then to summerize: Tank, you started off with some valid points and arguments which I tried to come up with a compromise ie, remove the gate guns and add graduated responce... You have not come up with one VALID argument as why this would be unacceptable as you get to gank whoever you want not just for infinate time. As for getting NPC's to do my work, let CCP not claim that that is NPC Empire space but move all 0.4-0.1 to 0.0 and be done with it. Which is it to be? Most space is 0.0 or Empire Contolling NPC to have a graduated response based on security status. As a final note... I was thinking in terms of hours not mins for this responce to happen. As I said right at the start you SHOULD be able to "raid" empire space just not 24/7. Before you ask yes you can camp 24/7 in 0.0 same as I can make money (just not a lot) in 0.5 space. IT IS FAIR.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 14:33:00 - [5] Jade, Jash. I totally agree. A balancing of Concord/Empire response to criminal acts is one of my biggest gripes in this wonderful game. Get rid of the gate guns and introduce a graduated responce to 0.4 and 0.1. Still DEADLY to go there as a n00b but more sensible for the rest of us as camping systems for days on end will be rendered impossible. I WANT pirates to operate in these areas but to be honest we may as well call them 0.0 for all the good we normal non-alliance peeps can do against them. If there was RISK involved for the pirate TOO then this is called BALANCE, somthing I wish Tank would understand.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 15:49:00 - [6] Christ Jash you really are in a killing mood today!
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 17:02:00 - [7] Jash.... Throughout this thread I have been trying to come up with solutions that can help BOTH sides have a chance in "less secure" space. On side you have, PK's who want a steady stream of easy kills. On the other the carebears who want no PvP in this area. Then there's me. I want to see Pvp in this area without the total destruction of supposed empire space by the happy camper brigade. I think I should make this my sig: 1)Remove the guns from 0.4-0.1 Gates 2)Start a gradual responce (albeit weak to start with) from that system's owner.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 21:36:00 - [8] One last time for the hard of understanding... WE CANNOT DRIVE YOU OFF TANK UNLESS YOU WANT TO BE DRIVEN OFF YOU FREAKING LUNATIC. Now.... The Graduated responce idea has been recieved by ALL except you with "good idea" . Is EVERYONE wrong except you?
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 22:12:00 - [9] Edited by: EvilEric on 28/10/2003 22:13:07 Quote: Edited by: Xander Teg on 28/10/2003 21:46:10 Quote: WE CANNOT DRIVE YOU OFF TANK UNLESS YOU WANT TO BE DRIVEN OFF YOU FREAKING LUNATIC. Ok so which is it? Either PKs cannot be driven off, or they run from a fair fight. Sorry for everyone who thinks that both are possible, but you are deluding yourself. It is either 1)PKs run from fair fights and therefore can be driven off by assaulting their position with an equal or superior force or 2)PKs cannot be driven off and non-combat characters have no chance, and therefore need concord to protect them. You cannot have it both ways people. So take a side and stick with it. I say PKs will run from a fair fight and therefore are easy to drive off. Teaser drove off a PK, cleared out the Blockade and is complaining why? beats me. Dear god I now wish I'd never replied to Tank in the first place..... PK run(from fair fight)... dock... wait(or log)... PKK leave...PK log on... undock... Blockade up! I hope that beats ya. A lot of sensible ideas have come up in this thread. NO-ONE has said anything against it expept Tank CEO. Please, I am gonna "let it lie" now as we'll never see these ideas put in place.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 22:34:00 - [10] Quote: Quote: ... A lot of sensible ideas have come up in this thread. NO-ONE has said anything against it expept Tank CEO. Please, I am gonna "let it lie" now as we'll never see these ideas put in place. No EvilEric, that's not true. Now it's time to start fighting fire with fire. People like WhiteDwarf, Athren Soulsteal and Merjan got us in this position through whining the loudest while they were in the minority. It's time for the majority to start speaking up. Tank may not like having to move around a bit instead of establishing a continual blockade in a single solarsystem. But I suspect he'll take that over not being able to pirate anything but empty haulers or people hauling bistot. He's using an old negotiating technique: Demand double of whatever you want. That way when you settle for half, you appear to look reasonable. And hell, if you get double of what you want, party on How can I demand double? I want a balance NOT either one of the extremes. Hmmm I could, like Tank, keep starting threads on the same subject again and again and again. On a side issue, apart from the cough great ideas lab cough what could I do to get these ideas into the game?
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.28 23:00:00 - [11] Quote: You explain to me the logic in sovereign space being besieged by pirates for weeks on end without any of their fleets intervening. What we can do momentarily and what is in the best interest of the game are separate issues. Danton I have tried ALL DAY!!! to get this through to Tank and the rest it is like banging your head on the side of an Apoc....
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.29 08:43:00 - [12] Quote: Quote: One last time for the hard of understanding... WE CANNOT DRIVE YOU OFF TANK UNLESS YOU WANT TO BE DRIVEN OFF YOU FREAKING LUNATIC. Now.... The Graduated responce idea has been recieved by ALL except you with "good idea" . Is EVERYONE wrong except you? You can drive him off if you want to. Declare war and then you can catch him at attempts to dock etc. You can catch him at gates then too. Dont sit there and claim otherwise. Youre next point may be that it is much harder for you to "get him" than it is for him to camp the jump in.... that is true, but I dont know if it is relevant. Isnt this whole discussion worthless because they are going to move to jump in points happening at gates? Othnark... The point I was making was SLIGHTY skewed... As far as fighting the pirates, I will endevour to do that when skills, resoursed allow. But I take your point. Tank... In my 1st reply I agreed with you on some points about gate guns and uber-Concord. However you STILL have not answered my origional question to you... namely: Explain how, in game terms, an empire or concord, can claim a 0.4 security status in a system when there is No responce to 74 pod kills in 24hours. For pity's sake I AM NOT SAYING MOVE UBER-CONCORD into these areas, but a severly weakend slower responce gaining in strength over a number of hours... To answer the point about being dependant on concord/empire fleets. I could not agree more in 0.0 space. I cannot see, so please explain, how this can be, used, in anyway other than to prevent mass ganking if it takes a long time for you to be moved on. Tank, Finally. "Do it yourself" only washes with the majority IF you are in 0.0. CCP have screwed up and you are taking advantage. I am aking for changes to return a BALANCE not to nerf you or protect carebears.
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.29 08:56:00 - [13] Quote: Fine, ill agree to a concord response but as long as they are only in cruisers. But whatas the point, we will just destroy them just like you guys destroy them in 0.0 space. How about.... in 0.4 it starts at low level stuff but slowly moves up to BS after a number of hours? That way you get your ganking time but cannot do it for ever, couple that with the removal of the guns... you win, I win(in that it balances out more). At the lower levels... 0.3 etc the same process happens but even slower and weaker build up?
EvilEric	Posted - 2003.10.29 13:08:00 - [14] 1) PK then docks and logs... so what then for the chasing crew? As soon as they leave the problem is back, remember this is empire space not 0.0 unclaimed space. 2) Not saying dependancy, 0.0 space should have NO repocnce or guns.. please read above for my feelings on 0.4-0.1, EMPIRE SPACE. 3) 3? why not just two??? 1.0 and 0.0??? there ya go... next you'll be asking for a PvP only server!!! Balance.... not pleaseing ANYONE but not being UNFAIR to anyone.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.