EVE Search - PIRATEHUNTING NEEDS SOME LOVE! CCP MUST CHECK THIS!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

PIRATEHUNTING NEEDS SOME LOVE! CCP MUST CHECK THIS!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2006.10.16 08:47:00 - [61] As i said in the other thread the insurance change is POS ,sorry but it is ,it is just going to change the balance .There will be no NEWBIE pirates if this change becomes true. Everyone will change to bounty-hunter ,and will have a blast .Bounty-hunters already have the advantage as famine said sentrys?They can shoot us without being agressed by the sentry's?And don't have ss penalties for doing that.
Lifewire Caldari TunDraGon	Posted - 2006.10.16 11:13:00 - [62] I think we can all agree on piracy should be the hardest proffession. At the moment piratehunting is the hardest because they are no good bountys and those are payed on the pod. Somebody said here, everybody will become piratehunter if these changes that i propose would happen. This would not be bad for the game - actually the lack of bountyhunters caused that CCP had to implement sentry guns and Concord (NPC-elements) that fullfill the role of bountyhunters. Lets say we would have 40K bountyhunters in the game - those would replace another NPC element - perfect! Forum:http://www.tundragon.com/forum/ Movies:http://www.tundragon.com/pub/eveclips Killboard:http://www.tundragon.com/
Shinshi Casoyako	Posted - 2006.10.16 12:32:00 - [63] I smell abuse. I fly a BS and have -9 security standing. A friend has the same. We insure our ships and we kill each other every time. We only pay 36 mil for our insurance and blow up ourselves with a BS unfitted. We take 50 mil bounty in the process. So we make 14 mil everytime we blow each other up. back to the drawing board. . Seriously Have I Not Said How I Can Assist Some One You Are Killing Online?
Zarquon Beeblebrox Liberate Vos Ex Inferis	Posted - 2006.10.16 12:42:00 - [64] For everyone hanging them self up in the one thing with sec hits in 0.0 and not able to defent their space.... If you have a POS with suverenity in a system. You sould be able to configure the POS with who are allowed to enter the system with out beeing attacked. So you set all your alliance +10 for the system. You have a friend corp you set them +10 to the system. And all your alts +10 to the system. Then when someoen not having +10 t0 the system enter they get a message like the one -10 pirates get when entering Jita. That message tells them that entering this space is breaking the alliance rule and if entering you will be marked a war target for the time you spend in that system. Now the alliance defending their system can kill you with out taking sec hits. In systems where you dont have suverenity your alliance is not really owning. So if you just shoot anyone you will get a sec hit. Ofcource people you have a registered concord war with you can kill with out sec hit anywheare. I dont see how this could not work for both, nutrals, pirates, and alliances. -- Lady Beeblebrox
Zarquon Beeblebrox Liberate Vos Ex Inferis	Posted - 2006.10.16 12:45:00 - [65] Originally by: Shinshi Casoyako I smell abuse. I fly a BS and have -9 security standing. A friend has the same. We insure our ships and we kill each other every time. We only pay 36 mil for our insurance and blow up ourselves with a BS unfitted. We take 50 mil bounty in the process. So we make 14 mil everytime we blow each other up. back to the drawing board. No, you cant insure your ship. Thats the whole point. When a pirate enter a ship that was insured by corp or someone else the insurence on the ships is deleted and not payed out. -- Lady Beeblebrox
raVn666 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.10.16 13:39:00 - [66] Originally by: Zarquon Beeblebrox For everyone hanging them self up in the one thing with sec hits in 0.0 and not able to defent their space.... If you have a POS with suverenity in a system. You sould be able to configure the POS with who are allowed to enter the system with out beeing attacked. So you set all your alliance +10 for the system. You have a friend corp you set them +10 to the system. And all your alts +10 to the system. Then when someoen not having +10 t0 the system enter they get a message like the one -10 pirates get when entering Jita. That message tells them that entering this space is breaking the alliance rule and if entering you will be marked a war target for the time you spend in that system. Now the alliance defending their system can kill you with out taking sec hits. In systems where you dont have suverenity your alliance is not really owning. So if you just shoot anyone you will get a sec hit. Ofcource people you have a registered concord war with you can kill with out sec hit anywheare. I dont see how this could not work for both, nutrals, pirates, and alliances. I love you ♥ But still disagree with you I think this will give the big alliances just another tool to claim big regions for themself. For attacking groups trying to win space they will suffer under the fact that they cant enter highsec to buy new ships and equipment to contain the pressure on a region. It will make them depend on eatchother doin logistick runs to empire and it will for sure slow them down in a evt siege With all the poswars going , will we make it even harder to attack settled alliances?
Zarquon Beeblebrox Liberate Vos Ex Inferis	Posted - 2006.10.16 13:42:00 - [67] Thank god not even nostradamus was right in most of his predictions. Im pretty sure you aint either. Lets keep to sugesting fixes for the problems we know are around, and let CCP predict about the future shall we :P -- Lady Beeblebrox
raVn666 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.10.16 13:45:00 - [68] Originally by: Zarquon Beeblebrox Thank god not even nostradamus was right in most of his predictions. Im pretty sure you aint either. Lets keep to sugesting fixes for the problems we know are around, and let CCP predict about the future shall we :P pfft nostradamus was just a noob ... but me... well
darth solo Celestial Apocalypse	Posted - 2006.10.16 14:04:00 - [69] i grew tired of all of EVE saying there is no pirates in EVE, while the same ppl would call us pirates in a diff thread. so i think its a lost trade that CCP have no interest in. d solo.
Bailian Moxtain	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:19:00 - [70] Have to sign this. I like the ideas! But podding should give u the bounty ( as it is now ), not shipkill My english realy s***ed in this post, but im very tired

God forbid Amarr Mithril Inc	Posted - 2006.10.16 22:06:00 - [71] Aight.. We got some nice Ideas here thats for sure.. But I think we would get just alittle bit to many bounty hunters if this would get in game, I mean The pirate doesnt get anything if he kills a bounty hunter only the loot.. So I think piracy will be much less money incoming, and if you would take the insurence out for pirates they would get in some money problems who likes that noone, atleast not me.. Quote: "He did not know, Who he was ******* with."
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.16 22:08:00 - [72] Let's see here. There are 4 points in Lifewire's original post, and I agree with 3 of them. Insurance and bounty I really like the concept that CONCORD would also pay bounties for player pirates. The current player bounty system just doesn't work, and will be adequately replaced with the contract system as such - get money for presenting a <insert name> corpse. That Pend Insurance wouldn't deal with such extreme risk contractors as -2.0 players or lower is only natural. Ship bounty I presume that you mean that CONCORD will pay bounty equal to 40% of ship base value, if there is bounty to be payed, divided to all in gang - as per normal NPC pirate payouts? How will pod destruction payouts be handled? 50% of total bounty? All of it? 0.0 and security status hits This is where I disagree. There are two differences between 0.0 and low sec - the pansy sentry guns are gone and there are no security status hits. Oh, and bubbles. The main point of security status is that it is CONCORD standing. In 0.0 CONCORD has no surveillance at all, they are even expressively forbidden from enforcing any laws in 0.0 space. How would an alliance enforce it's territory? Everyone would be "pirates" eventually. You can't declare war on each and every one who trespasses, you don't have the war slots for that, money for it, time for it, nor the empire logistics to handle so many wars. Hell, you may not even operate on NBSI and be really friendly with the other party as long as they stick on the right side of the imaginary line. No, security hits must not be given in 0.0 for practical reasons - especially the reasons Lifewire gave as being negative in the OP are in fact positive as far as 0.0 and the game is concerned. To put it shortly: there aren't many pirates in 0.0. Nowhere near as many as in low sec. And I'm not talking about security status here, I'm talking about how they act. "Material destruction is an ISK sink" Not posted by Lifewire. Material destruction is a material sink in the game. There are two very different things: materials and money. Essentially, when a ship is destroyed it adds money and removes a material. It's not an "isk sink", it's a materials sink. It's actually an "isk well" - it creates isk. Lifewire's suggestion essentially redistributed the isk well from the losing party to the victorious party, as long as the losing party is a low security status player. - What am I listening to?
Lifewire Caldari TunDraGon	Posted - 2006.10.16 22:42:00 - [73] @Ithildin: You forget that it is important for a player driven game to replace NPC rats with player rats. And to replace Concord with player bountyhunters. 0.0 is full of pirates - its just a question of your view. They are there, all that has to be done is to give them a red ship. Combined with the bounry patch i proposed, EVE would mutate to a truely player driven game within 1-2 months. This means we would have 10-20K pirates in 0.0 and have even more piratehunters that try to kill those. There would also be alliances that would not shoot neutrals outside their territory - they would be called alliance navy officers. Those alliances that attack neutrals outside their territory would be called pirate player faction. NPC-chaining would be a lousy job compared to player-pirate-hunting. Since player pirate factions would not be able to enter empire, a market in 0.0 HAS TO EXIST! The demand will be there and so the industrial players will see it. And when industrial players smell ISK... So the pirates in 0.0 will automatically cause that 0.0 or low sec get interesting for industrial players. Don¦t forget: these -10.0 players need the equipment and ships!!! Somehow the stuff has to reach them in 0.0. It does not mather if they use alts or if real industrial players discover this market in 0.0 - the traffic will be the same: tons of goods and ships have to be moved to the 0.0 pirates, piratehunters and navy officers. This is how 0.0 gets settled, this is how EVE gets a player driven game. All the NPC $hit and new shipclasses will not make EVE much better - the real content has to be player driven. Forum:http://www.tundragon.com/forum/ Movies:http://www.tundragon.com/pub/eveclips Killboard:http://www.tundragon.com/
Lifewire Caldari TunDraGon	Posted - 2006.10.17 01:47:00 - [74] Edited by: Lifewire on 17/10/2006 01:47:47 I listed up how i expect my ideas to work: 1.) Sec. hits in 0.0 concord ship-linked-auto-bounty on pirate ship ---> 2.) more red ships more piratehunters new profession navy officer new profession bounty hunter less people that can enter 1.0 but that still need equipment less NPC-chainfarming, more produced items needed ---> 3.) Markets in 0.0 and low sec. (since pirates cannot enter Jita) new profession smuggler/trader Industrial players in 0.0 More traffic to 0.0 ---> 4.) more piracy more sec hits more Concord autobounty ---> 2.) So once done this process will cause a massive change in EVE. If you ask me: it will extremly improve EVE and help a lot to get it a playerdriven game. It is possible that some people dont like it and that they leave, but on long term only a player driven game can keep players fascinated. We all play a role in this game, we need the tools to play it right. Forum:http://www.tundragon.com/forum/ Movies:http://www.tundragon.com/pub/eveclips Killboard:http://www.tundragon.com/
Famine Aligher'ri V i L e	Posted - 2006.10.17 05:11:00 - [75] It's not really player controlled if you're forcing systems on a player by game mechanics :P Vile - Recruiting Pirates
Derelyk	Posted - 2006.10.17 05:46:00 - [76] How about splitting the bounty? 30% ship / 70% pod.. or whatever..
Lifewire Caldari TunDraGon	Posted - 2006.10.17 10:24:00 - [77] Quote: How about splitting the bounty? 30% ship / 70% pod.. or whatever.. If the bounty is on the pod there will allways be people that podkill themselves with an alt. If not to get the money, then to get rid of all the bounty hunters Forum:http://www.tundragon.com/forum/ Movies:http://www.tundragon.com/pub/eveclips Killboard:http://www.tundragon.com/
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2006.10.17 11:25:00 - [78] ok, tbh, i just read the first page... but i like the ideas you got, and just thought, id drop you a post, to keep the thread on top, and show my appreciation. maybe i shouldve done it, when the thread appears from front page ;) but this is prolly not gonna happen anyway. to the sec hit in 0.0/dont allow people to enter thing: 1) total restriction is bad. doesnt fit the general idea of eve imho. 2) i dont have much knowledge about 0.0 space, but how about this: in an area you hold sovereignity you are allowed to shoot neutrals/hostiles without a sec hit. maybe even podkilling without a sec hit? every kill/aggression in an area you dont own yields sec hits.
Tommy Vercetti Minmatar Custodes Valhallae Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2006.10.17 14:34:00 - [79] Originally by: Lifewire Edited by: Lifewire on 17/10/2006 01:47:47 I listed up how i expect my ideas to work: 1.) Sec. hits in 0.0 concord ship-linked-auto-bounty on pirate ship ---> 2.) more red ships more piratehunters new profession navy officer new profession bounty hunter less people that can enter 1.0 but that still need equipment less NPC-chainfarming, more produced items needed ---> 3.) Markets in 0.0 and low sec. (since pirates cannot enter Jita) new profession smuggler/trader Industrial players in 0.0 More traffic to 0.0 ---> 4.) more piracy more sec hits more Concord autobounty ---> 2.) So once done this process will cause a massive change in EVE. If you ask me: it will extremly improve EVE and help a lot to get it a playerdriven game. It is possible that some people dont like it and that they leave, but on long term only a player driven game can keep players fascinated. We all play a role in this game, we need the tools to play it right. Your not really convincing me that those ideas push a player driven game. NPC markets in 0.0, limited or no insurance on pirates ships, sounds like more rules and non player controlled aspects entering the game. Plus I fail to see how it will create more pirates. I can't see how with removing insurances you will increase no. of pirates, especially since they will most likely raise sec status by npc chaining. This gives a good income to counteract lost bs's with no insurance payouts and raises sec status so every tom, ** and harry can't attack them. Originally by:** Pestillence It's a game where we fly around in eggs with tubes up our arses. If I want reality I'll go outside.
Xinda Duban	Posted - 2006.10.17 16:48:00 - [80] /signed The 0.0 idea seems very interesting, and i'm inclined to agree. But really for me the major problem is having to podkill to collect the bountys. Sometimes you have to make setups just to be sure you get the pod (i.e. sensor boosters or large smartbombs) and that compromises your setups for the actual fight. So, changing the bounty system as Lifewire sugests is really urgent.

Virgo I'Platonicus	Posted - 2006.10.17 20:52:00 - [81] /signed. Except for the last part. Dont close the 0.0 space to noobs. If they venture there, they must face the danger. If they get shot by "alliance navies" then the navies must pay the price with standing loss. Technically though, i'd allow the navies to shoot neutrals in their own territory - if we had constellation control /region control. Upon entering that area of space, everyone should be notified, whether the alliance is neutral-friendly or not. That should solve the problem. Anyway good post, keep it up. V.
Virgo I'Platonicus	Posted - 2006.10.17 20:56:00 - [82] Originally by: Lifewire @Ithildin: You forget that it is important for a player driven game to replace NPC rats with player rats. And to replace Concord with player bountyhunters. 0.0 is full of pirates - its just a question of your view. They are there, all that has to be done is to give them a red ship. Combined with the bounry patch i proposed, EVE would mutate to a truely player driven game within 1-2 months. This means we would have 10-20K pirates in 0.0 and have even more piratehunters that try to kill those. There would also be alliances that would not shoot neutrals outside their territory - they would be called alliance navy officers. Those alliances that attack neutrals outside their territory would be called pirate player faction. NPC-chaining would be a lousy job compared to player-pirate-hunting. Since player pirate factions would not be able to enter empire, a market in 0.0 HAS TO EXIST! The demand will be there and so the industrial players will see it. And when industrial players smell ISK... So the pirates in 0.0 will automatically cause that 0.0 or low sec get interesting for industrial players. Don¦t forget: these -10.0 players need the equipment and ships!!! Somehow the stuff has to reach them in 0.0. It does not mather if they use alts or if real industrial players discover this market in 0.0 - the traffic will be the same: tons of goods and ships have to be moved to the 0.0 pirates, piratehunters and navy officers. This is how 0.0 gets settled, this is how EVE gets a player driven game. All the NPC $hit and new shipclasses will not make EVE much better - the real content has to be player driven. awesome idea. Love it. Please, ccp, please? :)
Xoria Krint The Movement	Posted - 2006.10.17 23:14:00 - [83] Edited by: Xoria Krint on 17/10/2006 23:14:36 /Signed, But does the bounty system works pirate vs pirate too? ---- My Movies
JustBlaze	Posted - 2006.10.18 00:12:00 - [84] Originally by: Beringe I'm always amazed to see thread names with "OMG CCP MUST SEE" in them. I wonder if people really think that sort of thing draws their attention any better than a well written argument. i bet you have flown threw rancer a few times ^^
Spei Prodetor	Posted - 2006.10.18 01:47:00 - [85] well i must say that though more ppl posted for this to happen then not to, with both sides posing good arguments, and i did read every page, i must agree with the original poster. The pro's definatly out do the cons in this case and i for one would go red for this to happen it would spice things up a bit. Cus tbh atm everyone in 0.0 is a pirate unless they fly a hauler. =) and i do rather enjoy hunting 0.0 pirates since as long as you arent in a hauler you are a pirate.
Aaron Static Deep Space Consortium Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.18 05:44:00 - [86] as a vigilante I wholeheartedly endorse this thread and/or product /signed
Powdder	Posted - 2006.10.18 06:18:00 - [87] I fully endourse this post, and ccp please impliment this! the only 2 difficulties with this that I see is making the bounty for dieing low enough that it would be more expensive to buy a ship and self kill it v actually getting killed by a bounty hunter. And the noob question, which i dont have an easy answeer for. OUTSTANDING idea
slothe Caldari Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.10.18 13:40:00 - [88] the ability to trade and sell kill rights would also help pirate hunters to kill high sec pirates like me. otherwise with my +4 sec standing im pretty much untouchable as anti-pirates usually dont want to lose sec status.
Himo Amasacia Minmatar Elite United Corp Antigo Dominion	Posted - 2006.10.18 16:32:00 - [89] As I guy who has on and off been chasing (mainly smakctalkingstationhuggingsentryusingidiotic) pirates around for a while now, I have to agree with most of what Lifewire has said. I find it irritating that while there is now sec LOSS in 0.0, there is a sec GAIN from npcing in 0.0. It there is one there should not be the other. I havent read most of the thread (I dont have time right now) and I am far from the best PVP guy in eve, but piracy has a huge advantage in eve and there is bugger all incentive to be the opposite apart from the moral joy of a shrinking bank balance. I have been saying so for the past 6 months and it's good to see Livewire acnowlaging it. Respect. Also, frankly I hate NBSI policies. I understand why they are there, and when I am in a gang I chase neutrals with the gang, but I hate doing it. I ignore neutrals when traveling by myself. But there is no reason NOT to have an NBSI policy in eve. Go on, tell me the downside. Oh the downside is that you DONT have alts running all over your space making safespots checking out your poses and defences and generally following your ships around so that they can be jumped on. Wow. Sign me up for a non NBSI policy, dude. Basicly a minor sec hit in 0.0 for attacking non war targets would be a disincentive. I mean the wispers of ACSN bieng attacked by people now who are not "at war", still attacking, but still have their halos intact about not-supporting-BOB-really, should show that there should be a downside to this. You get sec boosts in 0.0, you should get sec reductions in 0.0. Case closed and thank you.
Mangold Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.10.18 18:38:00 - [90] Some good ideas in this thread. A sec hit for 0.0 would be interesting imho.



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.