EVE Search - I've never played a game that cators to grief play as much as this one

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

I've never played a game that cators to grief play as much as this one

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:12:00 - [1] Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. -------------------------------------------
Ikarushka A.O.U. Corp	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:14:00 - [2] sorry for you m8, all I can say don't move ALL of your stuff afk... ----------------------------------------- Your ad could be here :)
sableye principle of motion R i s e	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:16:00 - [3] I do feel bad you lost al your stuff rekindle but you have been around long enough to know its always a risk to carry that much valuable stuff in a hauler sure most of time your safe but I am fairly sure you'd have known risk when you boarded that iteron 5 still sad you lost your stuff though. Join The Fight With Promo Today
Ernest Graefenberg Minmatar Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:17:00 - [4] This is either a trollpost or you are downright insane. Who moves all their stuff in a T1 hauler after having 2 years worth of skillpoints ?
Pestillence Chav-Scum	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:17:00 - [5] I lost about 1.15 billion ISK in t2 stuff I was taking to market the other day in a t2 transport. Luckily the stuff blew up too so it made me fell better Boo hoo, life goes on etc. I'm happy for it, it keeps me on my toes. Please don't change that!
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:19:00 - [6] whos trolling who here? -------------------------------------------
Eilie Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:20:00 - [7] Originally by: Rekindle Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. Ah look, it's the weekly suicide gank thread. This one is extra funny though because you've played for 2 years and you even "understand that this is an accepted method of game play" and you still didn't buy a T2 Indy. _______________________________ It's great not being Amarr, isn't it?
Elycion Gallente Wicked Lester	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:21:00 - [8] There are definitely a lot of griefers in EVE, but I have to say that what you're describing doesn't sound like griefing to me. A griefer would blow you up just to cause you pain. It sounds to me like you got hit by empire pirates who scanned you, saw a target that was well worth the Concordokken, and took their shot at what would end up in the jetcan. There's an old saying about not putting all your eggs in one basket, and it's very good advice for EVE.
Ki An Gallente Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Tre Kroner	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:21:00 - [9] Originally by: Rekindle Sad things I really feel sorry for you, as I can only imagine what this must feel like. However, once you have taken a day or two and thought about it I think you will come to the conclusion that if you had the impression that empire space is safe, or that it was a good idea to haul everything you owned in a T1 hauler, you where the one who was wrong. In the player guide which you can access on this site it specifically states that no space is safe. That, I believe, is the most important thing to remember when playing EVE. You are absolutely right that this game is a 100% PvP game. Not all PvP is about blowing stuff up though. Once again, I feel sorry for you, but take a few days and think about it and then, if you feel like me, that the game actually is worth all hardship it puts you through, come back and play again. I am willing to bet that this will never happen to you again. /Ki
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:22:00 - [10] Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. -------------------------------------------

Exortius Amarrus The Clearwater Society	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:23:00 - [11] I have always been of the opinion that EVE can be a 100% PvP game, and 100% player driven (except the rats i guess). Also, in EVE no sec space is truly "safe space". Empire wars come to mind, as well as the empire ganks you've been a victim of. Still, i understand your complaint. The best response i could offer would be to embrace EVE as a PvP game. Enjoy the notion that even if you're building frigates in Empire, you're PvPing, by engaging on a competitive market. To truly embrace PvP, move to 0.0 space. Remove the underlying belief that you are ever "safe". The only time you're safe is when you're docked. So, get used to not being safe, and enjoy it. There are ways to avoid being ganked that 0.1% of the time, adapt or die. If you don't prepare for that 0.1%, that's when you'll die. Hope this helps. ------------------------
Tancred d'Hauteville Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:24:00 - [12] /me shrugs Virtually every mmorpg is set up for grief play. Some people use games (and mechanics within games) as an outlet for sociopathic tendancies that can't be expressed in real life without nasty consequences. Online games allow normal human relationships to be marginalised - but this is an important part of the fantasist/escapist reward people want from the experience. Accept that some people will act like jerks, understand how they choose to play the game and work out strategies to avoid them.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:26:00 - [13] what would help is to buff haulers just by a bit so they cant be shot in a hit or two instead of catoring to all griefers in this scenario. If you werent in a hauler you wouldnt die in a hit or two, why penalize people for moving their gear around in situations where tehy would other wise be %100 protected. If i were in 0.0 system that would be different. Whats the point of "prefering safer" systems if they're only safe if survive griefers ganking at an empire gate? -------------------------------------------
Eilie Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:30:00 - [14] Originally by: Rekindle Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. Use a T2 Hauler with a good tank and your stuff is 95% safe. Use Instas (which won't even be needed soon) and your stuff is 99% safe. Use a Frieghter and your stuff is 99.999999999999% safe. And don't forget what the player guide says: "Don't expect CONCORD to keep you immune to attacks or ship losses. Like in the real world, law enforcers often arrive too late at the scene of the crime, and even though they able to punish the criminal, they can't always prevent the crime." _______________________________ It's great not being Amarr, isn't it?
Illegal Wolvenholm	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:31:00 - [15] i dont mean to offend, and i appreciate they take time to train to use and are expensive, but transport ships are 'beefed up' indy's, its their role, and if you had used giant secure containers, the gankers wouldnt have known what you were carrying, especially if you fill that little excess in your hold with minerals, so it looks like you're carrying 3 full giant secures of mexallon for example. the gankers arent stupid, but its for that reason they wont always risk that 40mil expense to gain some mex. --
jamesw Omniscient Order	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:32:00 - [16] why not just *GRIEF them back??!!11* -- NEW Vid: Domi For the Win!
Sral TBear letter of marque	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:33:00 - [17] This happend to me once , but i only lost war loot so no biggie but he do have a point.. After more than a year in this game, it have become more a battle on game mechanics than a game of thought and skill... Empire ganking...well they can do it they do it even though i think it shouldnt be alowed Logofski that one is slowly killing any good pvp, the amount of times i have seen this, and they way its starting to grow geeez Lag and node crash the new tool for fleet combat, again stupid alowed game things that ruin the fun.. Well transporting in empire do it in transport ship not tech I hauler Log off thing, well some people got realy realy realy bad connections.. Lag/node buum...well we cant help that all our corp m8`s log on the same time.....we doent dump things to create lag we are just in space trading items..... Eve can still be fun, you can avoid most of this stuff, but i agree, its stupid realy realy stupid....its not about who can use the brain anymore, its more about who can use alowed game mechanics the best...live and learn.. And no im not stopping playing eve so no one can have my stuff ;)
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:34:00 - [18] I guess you walk in downtown Chicago on Friday nights, alone, in a dress, right?
Chronus26 Gallente Dark Blood Contracts	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:35:00 - [19] Why, if you can fly an Iteron V, were you not using an Occator? Sombody once tried to gank mine while i was carying close to a bil in t2 stuff, they lost a raven and i lost most of my sheild... It's a real shame that you lost your stuff, but you seemed to know the threat was there, yet you took no action to prevent it. ----- Move along, nothing to see here...
Gonada Gallente Cross Roads	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:41:00 - [20] yep, just as I thought, another whine-post about getting ganked. P.S. If you really have played the game and read the boards for 2 years, then the fault lies squarely on your shoulders, for moving such expensive stuff in a T1 hauler. -I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.- -nerf Missles-

Too Kind	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:42:00 - [21] Edited by: Too Kind on 07/11/2006 00:46:02 If you had been a bit more forum whoring, you would have know it. Suicide ganking is a well known topic for years and it has become more and more common with each thread like this. It's not the exception any more, it's daily practise. The problem here isn't griefing. Eve just punishes making mistakes like making wrong decisions based on wrong assumptions hard.You should have known that high sec doesn't mean 99.99% safety, but that the risk is really high, if you present a really juicy target. Uninformed, wrong assumption, put all eggs in one basked => EVE decided to strike you hard for this this time. P.S.: Pointless, if I like suicide ganking or not. As long as it's part of the EVE reality, you have to take care to avoid the pain. The good thing is that this simple step even works. -------------------------- Post with your main !!!111
Sral TBear letter of marque	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:42:00 - [22] Originally by: Dee Ellis I guess you walk in downtown Chicago on Friday nights, alone, in a dress, right? i shouldnt do this, but cant help it.. He do that cause its the only way to get in contact with someone like you ;) Geez....soorry......
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:43:00 - [23] Originally by: Dee Ellis I guess you walk in downtown Chicago on Friday nights, alone, in a dress, right? Man whatever you dream up on your own time is entirely up to you. But a .5 system is not downtown Chicago. Learn to make thoughtful comments about things without insulting people. That goes for a lot of you. You can talk about something without making personal attacks. Anyone who sits at a gate camp scanning ships in .5 ++ systems is by definition a ganker - the term "ganker" was first implemented in UO and it was in UO that people would stay just outside the range of the guards to kill people walking by for their stuff. The difference is these gankers are griefers because they take a weak game mechanic and make it their own because they're fighting --in-- the guard range that covers everyone else but the haulers. -------------------------------------------
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:45:00 - [24] Originally by: Too Kind If you had been a bit more forum whoring, you would have know it. Suicide ganking is a well known topic for years and it has become more and more common with each thread like this. It's not the exception any more, it's daily practise. The problem here isn't griefing. Eve just punishes making mistakes like making wrong decisions based on wrong assumptions hard.You should have known that high sec doesn't mean 99.99% safety, but that the risk is really high, if you present a really juicy target. Uninformed, wrong assumption, put all eggs in one basked => EVE decided to strike you hard for this this time. P.S.: Pointless, if I like suicide ganking or not. As long as it's part of the EVE reality, you have to take care to avoid the pain. What your'e saying is high sec is safe for anyone in ships other than an iteron Mark 5.....its safe for thoraxes, its safe for ravens its safe unless you are an industrial char going about their business. -------------------------------------------
Too Kind	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:47:00 - [25] Originally by: Rekindle What your'e saying is high sec is safe for anyone in ships other than an iteron Mark 5.....its safe for thoraxes, its safe for ravens its safe unless you are an industrial char going about their business. I say everyone should know it by now. you are victim 3953 or something like this. Sorry. -------------------------- Post with your main !!!111
Futuri Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:49:00 - [26] Originally by: Rekindle I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. They easily can. Why were you moving all of your possessions after 2 years of playing, in a ship that takes two days to train?
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:50:00 - [27] 1. if you jump trhoguh empire space and 99.99 % of that time is over 1.5 years and you've never had an incident and then you get ganked by a lame game mechanic where is the real problem? 2. if 3000 ppl have this problem where is the real problem? Is it really with the stupid noobs like me who think they can warp through "safe" space or does it rest with a mechanic that allows all by haulers to pass by safely? -------------------------------------------
Futuri Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:51:00 - [28] Originally by: Rekindle What your'e saying is high sec is safe for anyone in ships other than an iteron Mark 5.....its safe for thoraxes, its safe for ravens its safe unless you are an industrial char going about their business. It is safe for those who trained the necessary skills, for example, Transport Ships or Freighters.
Futuri Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:53:00 - [29] Originally by: Rekindle 1. if you jump trhoguh empire space and 99.99 % of that time is over 1.5 years and you've never had an incident and then you get ganked by a lame game mechanic where is the real problem? The real problem is that you decided to move billions worth of stuff in a ship that can be popped by 1 volley.
Too Kind	Posted - 2006.11.07 00:58:00 - [30] Originally by: Rekindle 2. if 3000 ppl have this problem where is the real problem? Is it really with the stupid noobs like me who think they can warp through "safe" space or does it rest with a mechanic that allows all by haulers to pass by safely? Well, I don't know, how many that problem have. But one of my ex-corp mates, also experienced 0.0 pvp player, lost one of his tech-2 bpos right when I tried to get it from his agent. Was not an uber BPO, but anyway. Suicide attacks were one of the standard topics at that time, too, because a new wave of suicide ganking had begun. He filed an exploit petition, but got the answer, that it is no exploit. I was just totally surprised that my mate didn't know about it. 2004, when I joined the game, I've heard already about the first suicide attacks with kestrels. -------------------------- Post with your main !!!111

Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:06:00 - [31] Originally by: Rekindle Man whatever you dream up on your own time is entirely up to you. But a .5 system is not downtown Chicago. Downtown chicago got cops too And they're not even half as fast as Concord. Now about thought out posts, you try to make on and I'll try to follow example, but not until you've actually tried and put som effort into it.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:07:00 - [32] Originally by: Too Kind Originally by: Rekindle 2. if 3000 ppl have this problem where is the real problem? Is it really with the stupid noobs like me who think they can warp through "safe" space or does it rest with a mechanic that allows all by haulers to pass by safely? Well, I don't know, how many that problem have. But one of my ex-corp mates, also experienced 0.0 pvp player, lost one of his tech-2 bpos right when I tried to get it from his agent. Was not an uber BPO, but anyway. Suicide attacks were one of the standard topics at that time, too, because a new wave of suicide ganking had begun. He filed an exploit petition, but got the answer, that it is no exploit. I was just totally surprised that my mate didn't know about it. 2004, when I joined the game, I've heard already about the first suicide attacks with kestrels. If you'd bother to have read my post before jumping at the chance to flame yet anotehr poster you'd see that I understand this is an accepted mechanic of the game. I'm not on here saying what omfg ccp stop the sploiters -- I'm saying this game is condusive to griefers and macro miners and its too bad that there wasn't a little something to help out the players who dont pvp 24 x 7 365 -- im not talking about magic griffons that fly me here and there or im not talking about magic soul stones - just a stop to the cheap ass tactics of sitting at a empire gate waiting for a iteron hauler to come through so you can suicide yourself with the hope of scoring some loot. Regardless of whether its accepted or not can we not agree that its totally a lame tactic that doesnt have to be given credence? -------------------------------------------
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:08:00 - [33] And, ya, mr d-fens, chill down, this kinda of self-righteous "You're all spamming, I'm not" attitude doesn't suit you very well.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:09:00 - [34] Originally by: Dee Ellis Downtown chicago got cops too And they're not even half as fast as Concord. Now about thought out posts, you try to make on and I'll try to follow example, but not until you've actually tried and put som effort into it. This isnt chicago, I'm not in a dress or whatever it is you're messed up mind is going on about. How about you stick to the topic of this conversation which is the subject of empire ganking at .5 gates --not-- my ability to out do you in some weak minded flame fest or otherwise go derail someone elses thread. -------------------------------------------
sesanti Minmatar Universal Exports Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:20:00 - [35] Originally by: Rekindle Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. What they did is well within the game mechanics and it's not griefing. They got a nice fortune out of you, they didn't kill you just out of spite. Besides your point is totally refuted when you read EVE's official guide and it clearly states that NO PLACE is secure (that includes high sec.). So... can i have your stuff??? Oops, don't have any now, right. _______________________________________________ The ShadowMaster - <I am a guy... don't mind the portrait>
Sakura Nihil Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:25:00 - [36] You've played for over two years...and yet you can't look at yourself and say "hmm, gee, maybe there are people who'd go after all my hard-earned isk in highsec too, let's tank up a battleship and insta it through highsec"... Seriously, you are not being griefed - you were just the victim of a mugging. There is a difference between the two, the former occurs when people would swap your ore in order repeatedly to try and get a cheap kill, the later occurs when you lack the foresight to protect your assets properly. Repeat after me: "There is no such thing as 100% safe space, and there never will be".
w0rmy Intensive CareBearz	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:31:00 - [37] Originally by: Rekindle I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. You put 2 years worth of work into a paper ship... Darwinism at work Originally by: Avon Originally by: Dark Shikari What single item is larger than a jetcan? My ego?
Adrian Kerensky Caldari STK Scientific Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:32:00 - [38] Sorry to say so but I laughed when I read your post tbh. You wont be moving everything you own whilst AFK in a crappy paper thin ship again will you? Serves you right for being lazy and not playing the game properly imo.
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:33:00 - [39] Originally by: w0rmy You put 2 years worth of work into a paper ship... Darwinism at work Dresses in Chicago at night (Or, for some SLOW people here: Paper ships in Empire space...)
Admai Sket	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:37:00 - [40] Can I have your stuff? --------- NEED A SIG PLEASE.

Cipher7	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:37:00 - [41] I accepted a long time ago that Eve is Juvi Grieferville. 2 years and you didn't know?
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:37:00 - [42] I would neve take all my valuables around in a single t1 hauler, 'tis madness! Of course everything I own probably only adds up to about 100mill, so it really isn't a huge problem for me -----------------------------------------------
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:39:00 - [43] Originally by: Cipher7 I accepted a long time ago that Eve is Juvi Grieferville. 2 years and you didn't know? Yeah and its reflected quite well on the boards for the most part too. You come on, express an opinion on something and instead of people trying to maturely discuss the topic they insult you instead. There's nothing left for me here. -------------------------------------------
Eternal Fury Shadow Of The Light Vertigo Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:39:00 - [44] Edited by: Eternal Fury on 07/11/2006 01:39:47 I have to ask this.. Why do people risk hauling stuff in empire in a a T1 hauler. Why would you not take the time to train up to get a Deep space transport, and the requisite skills to get the uber tank that is available on them. If you are moveing expensive things around in this game there are a few ways to do it. Battleships. Inty's. Industrials(why, I don't know) T2 Industrials(lots better) Freighters(Quite expensive) and Capital ships(can't be used in empire in most cases. So if you are moveing BPO's around, one of two things. First, they should be in secure cargo containers. This way, even if you are popped, you can retrieve the cargo unless they blow the can's up. 2nd, WTF are you useing a T1 Industrial. If you HAVE to use an indy, at LEAST use a T2 one. They at least have better defences, and a greater chance at getting though. A Blockade runner can take a few hits from Battleships, let alone suicide Kessies. And if you've been playing for 2 years, you should be able to use T2 Indy's no problem. Eternal Fury Shadow Of The Light .SOL.
Kaaln Gallente Soar Angelic Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:39:00 - [45] Originally by: Rekindle What your'e saying is high sec is safe for anyone in ships other than an iteron Mark 5.....its safe for thoraxes, its safe for ravens its safe unless you are an industrial char going about their business. Don't be an idiot. If I scan you and see over 200mil worth of stuff, of course I'm going to have a shot at you. Who cares if you're in an Iteron V or a Velator, you're going to go pop. What you did is pretty stupid to be honest. After playing Eve for 2 years you failed to realise even the most basic of lessons. You are not safe. Anywhere. -----------------------------------------------
Too Kind	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:40:00 - [46] Edited by: Too Kind on 07/11/2006 01:41:57 Originally by: Rekindle If you'd bother to have read my post before jumping at the chance to flame yet anotehr poster you'd see that I understand this is an accepted mechanic of the game. Guess, you've never heard me flaming. Originally by: Rekindle Regardless of whether its accepted or not can we not agree that its totally a lame tactic that doesnt have to be given credence? I have answered that one before. The unforgiving world of EVE stroke you, not a griefer. A newbie usually doesn't move extremely valuable stuff around. But you are experienced, you should have known it and avoided to give those guys the opportunity. So no, I don't agree that it's totally lame. I think it's a valid tactics. Maybe it's not perfectly balanced and restricts using industrials too much, maybe it's fine that way, because we have other more secure ships like transports. That's open for discussion, but I don't think you have been griefed, although you feel so. If you think this was a flame again, sorry. Guess I'm a flamethrower. -------------------------- Post with your main !!!111
mazzilliu Caldari Sniggerdly	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:43:00 - [47] i hate greifers. i sincerely hope that you financially recover enough so that you can once again put that much ISK into a t1 hauler some day. 1000% awesome guide to logging out
Pestillence Chav-Scum	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:45:00 - [48] Originally by: Adrian Kerensky Sorry to say so but I laughed when I read your post tbh. You wont be moving everything you own whilst AFK in a crappy paper thin ship again will you? Serves you right for being lazy and not playing the game properly imo. You laugh at him for not playing the game "properly" It's a shame you cant read. He clearly stated he was not afk. tbh I'd rather play a game badly than fail basic reading
Zulak	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:52:00 - [49] Sorry to hear about your loss, and on the other hand I really don't know if there is a solution for this. Maybe it is time ccp open up empire to be an open pvp zone, this way at least people will travel extremely carefully and have alliances camping the gate rather than the unreliable concord.
Futuri Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:53:00 - [50] Edited by: Futuri on 07/11/2006 01:53:23 Originally by: mazzilliu i sincerely hope that you financially recover enough so that you can once again put that much ISK into a t1 hauler some day. He should just jettison it outside jita4-4, it'll last longer

Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.07 01:56:00 - [51] well tbh he is right. But Eve also caters to other gameplay more then any other game. And tbh, what he descrivbed isnt even griefplay, it jsut caused greif. A wholly different thing, altho understandably people get it mixed up sometimes. Old blog
Eilie Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:07:00 - [52] Originally by: Rekindle Originally by: Cipher7 I accepted a long time ago that Eve is Juvi Grieferville. 2 years and you didn't know? Yeah and its reflected quite well on the boards for the most part too. You come on, express an opinion on something and instead of people trying to maturely discuss the topic they insult you instead. There's nothing left for me here. Good riddance. One less idiot in game. One less troll on the forums... and yes, you are the troll here: People give you good advice but you just ignore them and keep whining and making untrue claims. I'm sure the WoW forums would love another troll. _______________________________ It's great not being Amarr, isn't it?
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:17:00 - [53] Originally by: Eilie Originally by: Rekindle Originally by: Cipher7 I accepted a long time ago that Eve is Juvi Grieferville. 2 years and you didn't know? Yeah and its reflected quite well on the boards for the most part too. You come on, express an opinion on something and instead of people trying to maturely discuss the topic they insult you instead. There's nothing left for me here. Good riddance. One less idiot in game. One less troll on the forums... and yes, you are the troll here: People give you good advice but you just ignore them and keep whining and making untrue claims. I'm sure the WoW forums would love another troll. once again I would question whos trolling who here. I come on here to express an opinion on a mechanic taht is obviously broken and the usual suspects of eve forum posters take the opportunity to pounce on me like im some stupid noob whos never played an MMORPG game. The truth is I've played far too many MMORPG games and anyone who clearly has experience should look at the issue of gate campers in NPC patrolled space with some suspicion and question it. I havent yet disagreed with the notion that it IS a game mechanic-- perhaps it was stupid of me to attempt to work the way I did within that mechanic. that does not, however, take away from my orignal notion that the mechanic is stupid and its broken. No matter how often you narrow minded types flame me, call me a stupid noob idiot who knew better, I will maintain my belief (which I'll add attacks no one, trolls no one) that the mechanic , as it is, is designed to support grief play and we wouldnt be having this conversation it if wasnt condusive to such. -------------------------------------------
Victor Vision Central Intelligence Service	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:20:00 - [54] Edited by: Victor Vision on 07/11/2006 02:20:50 To the OP: Sorry for your loss. What many people do NOT know is that this empire ganking is borderlining an exploit. CCP tolerates this as long as it is NOT done by alts that are recycled when their sec rating goes too low. If this tactic is used by alts that are recycled after sec rating is too low it is concidered an EXPLOIT with all its consequences. So I would recommend to the OP to petition the gankers, so CCP can keep an eye on them.
Flesh Eater	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:24:00 - [55] Why are the mechanics "obviously" broken? In this case they have chosen to be close to reality rather than make a mechanic for convenience...and we all knew that this was the case. Using a cruiser with a mwd for taking BPOs would have been much better. BTW this is not really griefing.....sniping at miners in 0.0, warping to safespots and cloaking for days on end is more like griefing.
Futuri Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:34:00 - [56] Originally by: Victor Vision If this tactic is used by alts that are recycled after sec rating is too low it is concidered an EXPLOIT with all its consequences. I agree with what you say, however, ganking people in high sec is not an exploit and is not bordering an exploit either. Bypassing the in-game security system by recycling alts is.
Commander Thrawn Tarnak inc. Eternal Empire	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:40:00 - [57] Edited by: Commander Thrawn on 07/11/2006 02:40:13 bpo's should be carried in shuttles or ints real expensive stuff in BS's and you should put nano's and stabs on your hauler as well as extenders you just need to make more runs but that means your less of an attractive target and your better equiped to get away you should of know better greifers is just a term for ppl that are mad
Victor Vision Central Intelligence Service	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:42:00 - [58] Edited by: Victor Vision on 07/11/2006 02:52:37 Edited by: Victor Vision on 07/11/2006 02:45:38 Originally by: Futuri Originally by: Victor Vision If this tactic is used by alts that are recycled after sec rating is too low it is concidered an EXPLOIT with all its consequences. I agree with what you say, however, ganking people in high sec is not an exploit and is not bordering an exploit either. Bypassing the in-game security system by recycling alts is. Yes, true. Still makes sense to petition, since in these instances of high sec hauler ganking alt squads are often used, and these are usualy recycled after a while to bypass the ingame sec system. And as you said, recycling alts to bypass the ingame sec system is an exploit. Edit: And the underlined part of my post you quoted is 100% correct
Morfane Privateers	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:43:00 - [59] Use your aggresive feelings, boy. Give in to your anger. Let the hate flow through you. Join the dark side, and get your isk back from some other poor shmuck.
Eilie Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:44:00 - [60] Originally by: Rekindle The truth is I've played far too many MMORPG games and anyone who clearly has experience should look at the issue of gate campers in NPC patrolled space with some suspicion and question it. I havent yet disagreed with the notion that it IS a game mechanic-- perhaps it was stupid of me to attempt to work the way I did within that mechanic. that does not, however, take away from my orignal notion that the mechanic is stupid and its broken. No matter how often you narrow minded types flame me, call me a stupid noob idiot who knew better, I will maintain my belief (which I'll add attacks no one, trolls no one) that the mechanic , as it is, is designed to support grief play and we wouldnt be having this conversation it if wasnt condusive to such. There's your problem. You're comparing EVE with your knowledge of other MMORPGs. But that is something that you can't do because EVE is nothing like other MMORPGs. The mechanics are designed so that it is easy to lose stuff and that's why it's called pirating and not griefing in EVE. Having stuff lost so easily is what keeps the EVE economy running. Games with no loss all have really bad economies (which are usually also controlled by chinese currency sellers.) As I said in an earlier post, removing the ability to sucide gank will ruin the EVE economy due to both less stuff needing to be replaced and invincible macrominers. It would also remove all of the skill and strategy needed to move expensive stuff around; you might as well just let people teleport all their stuff between stations in high sec... So you need to choose: Do you want to play a game controlled by chinese macroers where RMTers are better than the real players? Or do you want to play a game with a strong economy where everyone has an equal chance as long as they use some intelligence? _______________________________ It's great not being Amarr, isn't it?

Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 02:55:00 - [61] Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 03:01:04 Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 02:58:46 Originally by: Eilie Originally by: Rekindle The truth is I've played far too many MMORPG games and anyone who clearly has experience should look at the issue of gate campers in NPC patrolled space with some suspicion and question it. I havent yet disagreed with the notion that it IS a game mechanic-- perhaps it was stupid of me to attempt to work the way I did within that mechanic. that does not, however, take away from my orignal notion that the mechanic is stupid and its broken. No matter how often you narrow minded types flame me, call me a stupid noob idiot who knew better, I will maintain my belief (which I'll add attacks no one, trolls no one) that the mechanic , as it is, is designed to support grief play and we wouldnt be having this conversation it if wasnt condusive to such. There's your problem. You're comparing EVE with your knowledge of other MMORPGs. But that is something that you can't do because EVE is nothing like other MMORPGs. The mechanics are designed so that it is easy to lose stuff and that's why it's called pirating and not griefing in EVE. Having stuff lost so easily is what keeps the EVE economy running. Games with no loss all have really bad economies (which are usually also controlled by chinese currency sellers.) As I said in an earlier post, removing the ability to sucide gank will ruin the EVE economy due to both less stuff needing to be replaced and invincible macrominers. It would also remove all of the skill and strategy needed to move expensive stuff around; you might as well just let people teleport all their stuff between stations in high sec... So you need to choose: Do you want to play a game controlled by chinese macroers where RMTers are better than the real players? Or do you want to play a game with a strong economy where everyone has an equal chance as long as they use some intelligence? That is such terribly flawed logic I don't know where to begin. Are you actually suggestioning that gold farmers will take over the eve economy and mudflation will run rampant if gate gankers are not allowed to continue sitting at gates like Jita and other places? We have players running 15 macro miners at once for weeks on end and you think that allowing me to fly through empire space with the expectation that guards will act as designed designed is going to turn EvE into WoW. This is why I can't take half the flames some of you people dish out seriously. Have you actually listened to yourselves? Some these were the types of arguments taht were put to bed 10 years ago. My god. Ps. your comment about the racial origns of gold farmers is pretty narrow minded don't ya think? Most Gold farmers are actually not from Asia. -------------------------------------------
Ravelin Eb Minmatar Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2006.11.07 03:08:00 - [62] If you were moving valuable BPO's and the like. then you really should wait for just before or just after downtime and travel in a small ship with stabs/mwd etc. after two years you should know what kinda precuations to take to prevent things like that happening.
Kirex Gallente Vale Heavy Industries SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.07 03:11:00 - [63] I believe the ability to loose everything you own in a matter of seconds is a big plus and one of the reasons I still play this game. Click above for my killboard stats.
Eilie Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 03:53:00 - [64] Originally by: Rekindle That is such terribly flawed logic I don't know where to begin. Are you actually suggestioning that gold farmers will take over the eve economy and mudflation will run rampant if gate gankers are not allowed to continue sitting at gates like Jita and other places? We have players running 15 macro miners at once for weeks on end and you think that allowing me to fly through empire space with the expectation that guards will act as designed is going to turn EvE into WoW. See, that is why you're a troll. You insulted me and gave no facts against my claims. First of all, the guards already act as designed. Read the player guide as five people in this thread already told you to. They are just like the real life police. They can't always stop a crime, but they will punish the criminal. You must defend yourself until they arrive and in 0.5 it takes them awhile. It's not hard to do and will be even easier after the next patch gives you 50% more shield/armor and allows you to warp straight into jumping/docking range. Secondly, if my logic is so flawed, than explain to me why EVE's economy is better than any other MMORPG's economy and why our economy isn't controlled by RMT'ers like most of the other games? What's the main difference between EVE and those other games? The fact that we can kill anyone we want to and make them actually lose stuff! Without this ability, macrominers and RMT'ers will take over the game. They have done it to every other game and I see nothing else that will stop them here. CCP won't ban them all just like none of the other game companies do. Sure we already have alot of macrominers, but we have people who get enjoyment from repeatedly suicide ganking them all day. Without the sucide ganking, not only would the current macrominers be making alot more money, but we'd have many many more people running macrominers. I would predict that within one year of removing suicide ganking, there will be at least one group of macrominers in every system in high sec. The market would become flooded with minerals and prices will drop. People would than build T1 ships just to self destruct them and get the insurance as it would be profitable for them. Doing so will add tons of ISK into the economy and cause the prices of T2 ships to raise so high that only RMT'ers could afford them. If that sounds unbelievable to you, than you havn't played as many MMORPGs as you claim. So how about you try and respond with facts this time instead of flaming again? _______________________________ It's great not being Amarr, isn't it?
Kaaii Caldari Equilibrium LLC United Confederation of Corporations	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:01:00 - [65] The way I see it, they did you a favor.... Imagine all the fun you had in the last two years aquireing your little bits. They didn't take that, the fun away. Now you can have more fun getting new stuff..... Trading 101
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:10:00 - [66] Oh we could go on. Like I could say there are legimate gold sinks all over the eve universe- insurance, tax, clone costs, ships lost to legimate pvp and pve encounters but then you would come up with some other reason why you feel its a legit tactic for some group of gankers to sit a empire gate taking concord hits so they can score a bit of loot.....How exactly to the looters sink their the stuff they steal? Its too bad this community can't talk about something legitimately without it turning into personal attacks. Its a tactic that results from something that was not designed - it has to do with the fact the time lapse between then the guards are triggered and when they arrive is greater than the time it takes for a t1 iteron to blow up. Some of you suggest that the solution is to not fly an iteron in high sec space - well if you want to cure a head ache by cutting of the head I guess that works too. See, there is dieing to a legit pvp encounter and there is dieing to cheap ass tactics. Tonight I encountered the latter and I put it in the same cateogory as logging out in combat, BM copying, and other less than prestigious "techniques" this game offers to augment pvp encounters. I'll step out of this thread and agree to disagree with you all. I'm obviously in the minority here which is fine, I guess. -------------------------------------------
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:14:00 - [67] What the holy hell? I've only played EVE for less then a year total (took a 6 month break) and the moment I saw "Iteron V" and "all my stuff" it was not only obvious what had happened but patently obvious that it was always going to happen. You were wearing all your bling through Harlem, it was totally worth clonking you on the head and taking all your stuff. --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:14:00 - [68] Originally by: Kaaii The way I see it, they did you a favor.... Imagine all the fun you had in the last two years aquireing your little bits. They didn't take that, the fun away. Now you can have more fun getting new stuff..... a most optimistic view point on things Kaaii....I appreciate that at this point actually. I can't help but equate the stuff lost to the amount of freakin time I spent acquiring it- its not really the stuff as much as it is time wasted to some ass clown that bothers me so much. I think one of the solutions is i need to stop playing games that caters to griefers under the ruse of legitimate pvp. Thanks for the uplift though :) -------------------------------------------
Lunarmist	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:18:00 - [69] Well, this game is a mmog. Collectivly have more players with anti social behavior than any other online games on the market. This however is the selling point of this game. From what I understand, ccp want their game to be like this from start. Thus, if people who cannot handle it or don't like such player base, they should find another game to play. This is the exact reason I give a warning to everybody I know who wants to try this game. Pretty much all of them left game within 4 months. Why? Because they didn't like the game atmosphere. I think OP should've learned something during the 2 years+ experience in this game. Suicide bombing at gate is so common nowdays, you really should consider it before moving all your stuff in a t1 cargo ship. It is asking for trouble I tell ya. But, OP is right, this game is indeed have more jerks and griefers than another games.
Taedrin Gallente Mercatoris Technologies	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:20:00 - [70] Sorry about your loss, man. Suicide ganking is lame, and I personally believe that we shouldn't have to worry about that stuff. But it's probably not going to go away. There are a few ways to stick it to the suicide gankers: When hauling important BPOs and BPCs, use a heavily tanked BS/BC Just say YES to shrink wrap Use a freighter, or a T2 industrial with a decent tank Don't sell your goods in Jita A note about shrink wrap - in order for shrink wrap to be any good, you need to fake out the suicide gankers a couple times first. As it is now, they will probably presume that if you bothered to shrink wrap it, it must be good. But after they lose their ships for a load of shrinkwrapped Veldspar a couple times.... muwahahahahaha

Brechan Skene	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:39:00 - [71] Edited by: Brechan Skene on 07/11/2006 04:39:58
Kitchie	Posted - 2006.11.07 04:51:00 - [72] Hi Rekindle, I'm a full time hauler and I do feel for you though I have to admit, my sympathy is limited. I've only been playing for a few months but in my early days, I also got ganked and lost my Iteron IV. The gank was purely for my Local Hull Expanded Cargo (x4) but at least all but one of them was destroyed so I felt better about that. Anyway, I decided a transport ship was a must after that and now fly an Occator but even with that, when I'm carrying 750 mill - 1.5 bill worth of stuff, I'm as nervous as a musical cat about to be orchestrated! I almost only ever fly through high sec, secure space, but to be honest, if wasn't for the risk, even if only slight, a) I would never have bothered with t2 transports and b) I would never even bother looking at my screen during hauls. Could you imagine how crowded the gates would get in Jita if everyone could safely AFK haul all their valuables there? There'd be hundreds of haulers just floating there waiting for their lazy pilots to come back to their PCs! My biggest criticism of suicide ganking is that there is no comeback. You can have a friend escorting you but he can do nothing about the ganker's hauler picking up your stuff or he'll be Concorded as well. No pod kill so no kill rights, just a 15 min aggression countdown on the ganker that he will avoid. It is lame to the extent that there is no skill involved and almost no penalty for it but I guess it some people's idea of fun..... a bit like 150km gate sniping.... But we just learn to live with it.
Eilie Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 05:44:00 - [73] Originally by: Rekindle Oh we could go on. Like I could say there are legimate gold sinks all over the eve universe- insurance, tax, clone costs, ships lost to legimate pvp and pve encounters but then you would come up with some other reason why you feel its a legit tactic for some group of gankers to sit a empire gate taking concord hits so they can score a bit of loot.....How exactly to the looters sink their the stuff they steal? Taxes and clones are so cheap that they're almost irrelavant. Every other game also has some minor currency sinks but it hasn't helped them against the RMT'ers. Insurance isn't a sink; it adds more money into the economy than it removes. And losing ships in PvE? Is that a joke? The fact is that suicide ganking is a part of legitimate PvP as this is a game designed around non-consensual PvP and without non-consensual PvP, there would be nothing that seperates EVE from other games and the RMT'ers would take over! Originally by: Rekindle Its too bad this community can't talk about something legitimately without it turning into personal attacks. I agree. It's a shame that you keep posting flames and insulting the EVE community when we try to give you advice. Originally by: Rekindle Its a tactic that results from something that was not designed - it has to do with the fact the time lapse between then the guards are triggered and when they arrive is greater than the time it takes for a t1 iteron to blow up. For the love of god. Now you're really trolling. The time lapse IS by design. That is why it increases as you move from 1.0 to 0.5 space. That is why the player guide on this very website warns you that the police won't always protect you, they just kill the criminal. Originally by: Rekindle Some of you suggest that the solution is to not fly an iteron in high sec space - well if you want to cure a head ache by cutting of the head I guess that works too. More trolling... That's like complaining that you can't bring a Vexor to a 200km fleet battle... Each ship has a specific purpose! A T1 Indy is weak but has a large cargo so it's purpose is to carry cheap stuff. A T2 Indy has less cargo but a really strong tank so it's purpose is to carry expensive stuff. Originally by: Rekindle See, there is dieing to a legit pvp encounter and there is dieing to cheap ass tactics. Tonight I encountered the latter and I put it in the same cateogory as logging out in combat, BM copying, and other less than prestigious "techniques" this game offers to augment pvp encounters. I'll step out of this thread and agree to disagree with you all. I'm obviously in the minority here which is fine, I guess. If you complain about people logging out or using BMs to cause lag, than you will be in the majority, but suicide ganking is by design. For the record, I (and most of the other posters here) have never suicide ganked anyone nor have we ever been killed by any, *but we like the fact that someone may attempt to kill us at any time!* I don't know why I waste so much time responding to people who are clearly trolling... they just ignore everything I write anyway... _______________________________ It's great not being Amarr, isn't it?
Unknown Subject Sound of Silence	Posted - 2006.11.07 06:08:00 - [74] after 2 years of gameplay you should have known what people are like. you should have known not to transport high value BPOs in anything other than a ceptor or covert ops even thru high sec, you should know not to put all your eggs into one basket, especially if those lovely yellow dots show up on your route, and finally if you accept this method of gameplay, you should know not to come whining on the forum and then wonder why people flame you. you deserved it.
Uuve Savisaalo Umbra Congregatio	Posted - 2006.11.07 06:23:00 - [75] As you've undoubtably discovered by now, this game is unforgiving to cardinal human error of the sort you've comitted, if you've infact gone down as described. Indeed, what better way to learn than upon a costly error in judgement.
Benglada Finite Horizon The Red Skull	Posted - 2006.11.07 07:05:00 - [76] Originally by: Dee Ellis I guess you walk in downtown Chicago on Friday nights, alone, in a dress, right? Wearing diamonds. --------------------------- Originally by: Arkanor 0.0 is the Final Frontier. Bring money and friends.
Gariuys Evil Strangers Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.07 07:10:00 - [77] Originally by: Rekindle Originally by: Cipher7 I accepted a long time ago that Eve is Juvi Grieferville. 2 years and you didn't know? Yeah and its reflected quite well on the boards for the most part too. You come on, express an opinion on something and instead of people trying to maturely discuss the topic they insult you instead. There's nothing left for me here. There's nothing to discuss really. it sucks to be you, yes it's allowed, yes it's your own fault. and yes this is topic 4000 on this matter and people never ever learn. WANNA WHINE??? VISIT ME
Shagrath Xarra	Posted - 2006.11.07 07:16:00 - [78] This thread is really none of my business but I stumbled across it reading these boards because I am currently a bit bored and sometimes I just read these boards to gather information since I am still fairly new in the game. I have to say the OP is a very irritating and whinny person. He is also not very smart. He loses all of his stuff because he didn't handle the situation like he was suppose to. Not to mention he has two years into the game so lack of knowledge is not an excuse. He comes to this board and cries about a "game mechanic" which he continues to label an exploit and the persons using it as "griefers." However, instead of acknowledging that he did in fact screw up even after numerous people gave him unlimited suggestions to what he could have done differently, he ignores that and just keeps rambling on about how everyone is flaming him because "they don't want to talk about the topic" in the manner in which he does. Here is the real deal Mr. Rekindle: Nobody cares that you consider this griefing and that it seems unfair to you. The bottom line is it should have never happened in the first place if you did what you were suppose to do to prevent it. Arguing that it is "lame" and doesn't belong in the game will get you nowhere here. I am only 2 months old in this game and I apparently know more about it than you do. "You should have known better" is the only thing relevant to discuss here whether you agree or not.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.11.07 07:17:00 - [79] Heh, it isnt even griefers perse, this game heavily caters to skilless pvper's and literally encourages them to fight noobs and avoid competitive figths. Most anyone who enjoys good pvp left eve long time ago or plays eve to get off thier pve rocks, or just doesnt know what to do so they stay in eve. Eve pvp isone of the worst iterations of pvp i seen in a long time, hence why EVE population stays low, for what is over all a very good game.
Xsag Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2006.11.07 07:39:00 - [80] Originally by: Rekindle Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. NO SPACE IS SAFE....0.5 aint that safe anyway bordering many many 0.4 sectors T1 hauler???? Dude you've been playing 2 years ive been playing a month and even ive learnt that if i wanna haul all my assorted junk through space its better to do it the long way and take a while and stick to 0.7 and above.... ~n00b of all trades~ ~~Airkio~~ ~if im posting on here its cos im in work~

Bonny Cloud	Posted - 2006.11.07 07:47:00 - [81] With Kali and warp to 0 everybody who is losing money cause of suicide ganks in Empire should leave this game immediatly. In your case: you still would be rich if you had been a little bit more careful. Im sorry for you but it probably will never again happen to you .
Azrael Maxim Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.07 07:48:00 - [82] You have 2 clear choices. 1.Quit. 2.Get over it, and continue to have fun in eve.
Xsag Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:02:00 - [83] Quote: once again I would question whos trolling who here. I come on here to express an opinion on a mechanic taht is obviously broken NO IT ISNTand the usual suspects of eve forum posters take the opportunity to pounce on me like im some stupid noob whos never played an MMORPG game.Yes someone who cant read the players guide I have modified the above quote....Read the players guide....and stop moaning! ~n00b of all trades~ ~~Airkio~~ ~if im posting on here its cos im in work~
Tudor Minmatar Revolt	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:09:00 - [84] who cares, your loos is nothing compaired to others, its just isk and isk can be gathered again.. stop whining get ower it, and go kill some gatecampers.. to ccp... there should be ways to intercept the high sec killers.. they shouldent be able to go anywhere safe.. i sugest that those criminal flagged bastids can be seen in the ower view so that we can warp to em at all time.
Electric Cucumber Amarr Extinction Level Event	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:14:00 - [85] It's all your fault
Xsag Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:17:00 - [86] Originally by: Tudor who cares, your loos is nothing compaired to others, its just isk and isk can be gathered again.. stop whining get ower it, and go kill some gatecampers.. to ccp... there should be ways to intercept the high sec killers.. they shouldent be able to go anywhere safe.. i sugest that those criminal flagged bastids can be seen in the ower view so that we can warp to em at all time. I do agree that police should be a little more hard hitting in hi-sec ~n00b of all trades~ ~~Airkio~~ ~if im posting on here its cos im in work~
Rick Dentill Lynx Frontier Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:22:00 - [87] Originally by: Rekindle Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. I think you are confusing grief and griefing. greif = something that causes great unhappiness (etc) griefing = deliberately doing something to discomfort another player. Its the intention behind the action that makes griefing, griefing. That is why it is so hard to pin down. The intention of the high sec pirates there was to steal your stuff and profit from it. The grief caused is an after effect. Did they know you? Did they know that you had everything you "owned in your hauler? I doubt it. The game supports trying to claw your way up to the top with any means necessary. This ultimately will lead to conflict with others but does not mean that people are griefers or that this is greifing. _______
thetwilitehour Omega Enterprises Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:24:00 - [88] Originally by: Rekindle I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/ [Emphasis added] Why were you carrying bpos and bpcs in a t1 hauler? Personally I like that there is no such thing as "safe" space in Eve. There is always a relative degree of risk, which allows the players to make the decisions. You made a decision to carry all your assets in 1 t1 hauler, you made the decision to fly through .5 space without isntas. Do I think its unfortunate? Yes. Do I think with a slight bit of hassle you could've minimized your risks? Yes. Removing ganking like this would have no real impact on eve in general. It wont cause inflation or deflation, but it will change the feel of the game. And ultimately your main point about "a griefers playground" is pretty patently false. These guys werent griefing you (at least according to what you said) they simply made a risk assessment and decided to blow your ass up and lose a ship take a security hit so that they could loot your ship. You made a risk assessment that you could haul everything you own in one ship through a 0.5 system without encountering such a group. Griefing would be constantly suiciding you, which in truth you can do in eve, but its really a lot of work. Honestly you just come across as bitter and lashing out. And I am sorry it happened to you.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:38:00 - [89] Originally by: Eternal Fury First, they should be in secure cargo containers. This way, even if you are popped, you can retrieve the cargo unless they blow the can's up. Actually I just want to correct that misconception. If you pop your cans spill into space. Regardless of password, they're then scoopable unless anchored. So an unfriendly hauler can just scoop and repack the cans. Quote: 2nd, WTF are you useing a T1 Industrial. If you HAVE to use an indy, at LEAST use a T2 one. They at least have better defences, and a greater chance at getting though. A Blockade runner can take a few hits from Battleships, let alone suicide Kessies. And if you've been playing for 2 years, you should be able to use T2 Indy's no problem. Agreed there - T2 haulers aren't _that_ expensive, but they're much superior in terms of protecting your stuff. The same's true of freighters. Oh yes, they can still be suicide ganked, but it takes an awful lot more effort. My only real grumble about the whole practice is it's getting a bit ridiculous. I mean, I know a lot of people who could afford to use suicide ships _all day_ and still not care about the losses. Killrights are a step in the right direction, but I still think insurance shouldn't be paid if concord was on the killmail.
Mallikanth Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:38:00 - [90] Edited by: Mallikanth on 07/11/2006 08:39:26 [Edited for (some) spelling] Fact: I work 200m from a police station. Yesterday a man was murdered and a woman badly injured a further 500m from the Police station in their own (secure?) flat. Correlation to Eve: I live or work in Secure Space. Concord are not far away at any time yet I get my ship, goods and clone destroyed. Difference: Eve is a game and no one ever gets hurt (only emotionally?). I appreciatte the OP's point of view and feeling of hurt as I've been in a similar situation once. Give it a day or so and take stock - move on if you can and tackle the game again with a hard lesson learnt. I won't preach on game mechanics / gameplay etc. Enough to say I love the game. All aspects of it - even the ones that hurt my ISK balance! The difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong, it usually turns out to be impossible

Dred'Pirate Jesus Imperial Academy	Posted - 2006.11.07 08:39:00 - [91] Originally by: Rekindle Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. I'll go ahead again and reply to this thread without reading any of the replys.. You had no wcs fitted.. You had everyting you own in 1 hauler with top end expanders.. You admit to knowing that suicide ganks are an excepted game mechanic.. And last but not least Eve is first and foremost a combat mmo regardles if its pvp pve or market pvp.. We play this game to pwn other players.. The devs love pwning other players.. I love pwning other players.. Hell most everyone I know who plays the game loves the fact that if you get caught with your pants down you take a huge hit.. Eve is cerebral not twitch.. So next time fit a ship with a travelling setup and space your move over several hauls not just one.. Play the game don't let the game play you.. [2:02:08] Dred'Pirate Jesus > I'm Mexican you dolt.. It's pronouced "hey zeus" not "gee zus"
Nicholai Pestot Gallente Havoc Inc	Posted - 2006.11.07 09:05:00 - [92] 0.5 and above is not safe space. It issafer space. As for grief play..i suppose it depends on your definition of grief play. This was an attempt to destroy your ship for profit and as such i would not class it as grief-play...just hi-sec piracy. Given that the only difference between safer space and 0.0 is the repercussions of destroying a ship, would you determine destroying a tech I hauler in 0.0 to be grief play? Oh and Firefox spell checker ftw! ________________ What you do is you store up the rage, let it fester while you gain strength, then use it to gank those weaker than you... and so the circle of life is complete
Eilie Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.07 09:08:00 - [93] Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2 Heh, it isnt even griefers perse, this game heavily caters to skilless pvper's and literally encourages them to fight noobs and avoid competitive figths. Most anyone who enjoys good pvp left eve long time ago or plays eve to get off thier pve rocks, or just doesnt know what to do so they stay in eve. Eve pvp isone of the worst iterations of pvp i seen in a long time, hence why EVE population stays low, for what is over all a very good game. I'm not going to say EVE PvP is perfect... but what games are there that have better PvP? There might be some that are more fun in the short term, but unless there is real loss and something to fight for, it gets boring quickly... _______________________________ It's great not being Amarr, isn't it?
Luke Pubcrawler	Posted - 2006.11.07 09:10:00 - [94] Originally by: St3v3sancho I wouldn't fly ANYWHERE in the game with ALL my stuff in one hauler without an escort...quote] An escort is no use. They cannot fire first to protect you, they won't kill the attackers faster than concord. About all they can do is race the attackers hauler to recover your loot and if it is bulky they wont be able to carry it. There are decent ways to minimise the chance of a suicide gank - escorts arent one of them.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.07 09:18:00 - [95] Your escort could fly a logistics cruiser and boost your armor tank all the way up during the gank. --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Biltic Creen Minmatar Deutsche Minen und Werke	Posted - 2006.11.07 09:19:00 - [96] Originally by: Rekindle 1. if you jump trhoguh empire space and 99.99 % of that time is over 1.5 years and you've never had an incident and then you get ganked by a lame game mechanic where is the real problem? 2. if 3000 ppl have this problem where is the real problem? Is it really with the stupid noobs like me who think they can warp through "safe" space or does it rest with a mechanic that allows all by haulers to pass by safely? Man you are really asking for it Of course it is the "noobs like you" fault to think you are absolutely safe in high-sec. The tutorial tells you that you aren't. The daily "omg they hax0r3d my iteron mark 5 with 5 Local Hull Expanders and 50 T2 BPOs - i'm gonna quit" threads tell you that you aren't. I simply don't get it. Why come and whine about something on the forums when it's already been said 1000 times This post is not my personal opinion. It does represent the standpoint of every single player !
Jurskjeld Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2006.11.07 09:27:00 - [97] I am sorry for your loss, but it's kind of thrilling, innit? The way I see it, this game DOES indeed hand out balls to the bullies and those ready to gank over a low shoe, but that's what makes it so much more thrilling to be an industrialist. You know, to outsmart them, to be real paranoid, and get a rep as someone who dodges danger. Say if I ever was in a T2 hauler, carrying a bil or so, I would rather choose to make five more jumps worth of detour, than to go through a gate which had a seemingly idling T1 ship on one side of it. God knows what'd rest on the other! I once got 134m worth of stuff packed into someone's Iteron. Four jumps, highsec, and it wasn't even my fault if it got blown up. But do you think I was ever comfortable during that ride? In my opinion this game loses a lot of people to its harsh PvPish nature, but I can accept that, though I do wish complete newbs would be more protected against ganking. ;) -- Amarr scum be pushing gas, Caldari dogs are kissing their ***. Gallente and Minmatar together stand forever as the holy band.
Rafein Eye of God Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.11.07 09:34:00 - [98] It's a sandbox game, a game where Devs decide the ground rules, and players are free to do whatever they wish inside. Every now and then, Devs step in and add/change rules, but for the mostpart, it remains a sandbox.
Crumplecorn Gallente Aerial Boundaries Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:09:00 - [99] I see no evidence of griefers. ---------- IBTL \o/
DeckardIRL Gallente Bravehearts Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:19:00 - [100] Hell I was in 0.0 on my way back to empire to cash in, 2 months of named loot in an Iteron MKIV... spotted lots of ppl in local warped to the gate at 100km.. lots of ppl there no-one moved towards me and I was preping to warp to planet.... next thing I was dead... an Eagle 200km out with passive targeter and a couple of volleys of T2 Mediums later I was egging it home. Good kill by him and when I came back in a Helios the guy thanked me for all the nice loot.... thats the way it goes, everyone has a sob story, whether its 0.0 or Empire and it was a good kill by them..... Deck _____________________________________________ Watchin' the Game.... Havin' a Bud.... I shoot better on Bud..... Eve Info- All you need to know

Sendraks	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:34:00 - [101] Originally by: Crumplecorn I see no evidence of griefers. Agreed. I see no evidence of griefing. I see evidence of a player who should have known better. WHo should have known that he could be attacked anywhere at any time by any one. Who should have known exactly what he could do to protect his assets while transporting through empire space. Rekindle was not griefed by anyone but himself and his own poor planning. If he'd thought about it and taken proper precautions, he would not have been the victim here. Instead, he lost his ship and assets to players better prepared than him. There is no faulty mechanic here. Fact. End of story.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express The Guardian Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:35:00 - [102] I think the increase coming to all ships in Kali will help to somewhat address the hi sec suicide pirates. It won't eliminate it though. I'm sorry that you lost all your game possessions. Its easy to say that you should have done things differently and also just as easy to say the game mechanics support this far to easily. I think really speaking that industrials and mining barges are to fragile considering their function in the game. Considering a time of war has perpetually existed for centuries it is hard to believe they'd build such ships so flimsily as the game does. At the same time as many have pointed out we all are somewhat aware of their inadequencies. I don't think I'd ever carry all my game possessions in a single ship even if I was able to. ( I could if I could fly a freighter I guess ). THe game is just to dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket. I am sorry that you lost everything you worked for in game. Chin up and try to rebuild best you can :) learning from this experience :) Galactic Express Recruitment Post
TrulyKosh	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:38:00 - [103] Originally by: Futuri Originally by: Rekindle I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. They easily can. Why were you moving all of your possessions after 2 years of playing, in a ship that takes two days to train? It is safe for those who trained the necessary skills, for example, Transport Ships or Freighters. It is not. It only takes bigger gang of suicide gankers to take down those ships.
Lurtz Caldari Gunrunners and Gamblers	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:49:00 - [104] Originally by: Rekindle Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. I have read. There was a very simple method for you to move everything thru empire even as a non-combat character. In you case it is called an obelisk. If you have iteron 5 already it is not a huge step up. Freighters have more hp than most empire gank squads can go thru quickly, and probably more important, unless you are a war target, gank squads won't touch them no matter what you are carrying. Simple reason for this: they don't drop cans, no profit.
DarkElf Caldari Euphoria Released	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:53:00 - [105] Originally by: Rekindle because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. question, who says it's secure space? DE
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 10:54:00 - [106] Suicide attacks are the problem. They are unrealistic, and only exist because there is no sufficient punishment to counter it. In rl you are toast! There's no greater punishment. But EVE is a game, meant for entertainment, and so you can't put in a system that players would consider too harsh (i.e. permadeath). There are different ways to think on this. 1) Life in EVE sucks. It sucks so bad that every pilot is a depressed/religious fanatic/kamikaze suicidal nutjob. Personally i don't like that one 2) Get friends to escort you whenever you are hauling anything you really don't want to lose. Good idea, but not so great for those who don't have many friends, or who's friends aren't online. 3) Get Concord to escort you. Concord are supposed to be peacekeepers right? Maybe you should be able to hire their services for a time (the bigger the escort the higher the cost) to escort you through Empire space. Of course if you enter non-Empire space then you're on your own. Hmm, i wasn't sure about this idea at first but the more i think of it the more i like it. Why not counter a game mechanic that can't be implemented (harsh punishment) with one that can? Players who stay in Empire can feel safer (if they pay) and it's a moneysink. (Although there's probably something bad about this idea that i haven't thought of yet...other than pk's crying about it.) Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Ethidium Bromide ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:03:00 - [107] you are moving stuff around that is worth billions of ISK in a flimsy hauler and wonder why you get blown up honestly, if someone would drive millions of euros around in an open lory.. ** i'd have some millions more on my RL account. Originally by:** George Petsch Nochricht: Dei schwarer StroinlSser trifftn Karli[Baatzis] und ruiniert erm so richtig de Dosn, 1343.7 schhodn, oida. My sig is blue not pink although i can't argue with the slave part - Xorus wth whats this blue stuff all of a sudden? Did I miss a mail? -eris Bwahahahaha!11 Immy was here
TrulyKosh	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:08:00 - [108] Originally by: Wolfways Suicide attacks are the problem. 2) Get friends to escort you whenever you are hauling anything you really don't want to lose. 3) Get Concord to escort you. Both ideas will not solve the problem. The escort will not prevent the target from being blown to bits. The attackers will be killed anyway as it is now. It's the ability to pick up the loot with a 3rd party account standing by that makes this tactics profitable. And this 3rd party account cannot be attacked by your friends (without being killed by Concord as well), nor will any Concord escort take any action against this account as it did not (officially) participate in the attack. Only way to get rid of suicide gankers is see, is to get rid of alts completely.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:09:00 - [109] Originally by: Ethidium Bromide you are moving stuff around that is worth billions of ISK in a flimsy hauler and wonder why you get blown up honestly, if someone would drive millions of euros around in an open lory.. **** i'd have some millions more on my RL account. No, you'd have the money taken off you and be thrown into jail Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:10:00 - [110] Originally by: Mecinia Lua I'm sorry that you lost all your game possessions. Its easy to say that you should have done things differently and also just as easy to say the game mechanics support this far to easily. If it is far easy both ways, and it is easy both ways, then in game terms it is balanced. It is not hard to move expensive BPOs through empire space or even low sec, if you chose the right ship and plan your route carefully. By comparison, the pirates (or griefers as the more immature might wish to call them) have to either a) be really lucky to be waiting at the spot where you pass through or b) have the necessary intelligence in advance to be able to set up their suicide ambush. If it is every bit as easy to avoid losing everything through proper preparation as it is to take everything someone else has with proper preparation, then it can hardly be considered "far too easy" one way or the other. The game mechanics are fine.

Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:14:00 - [111] Originally by: TrulyKosh Originally by: Wolfways Suicide attacks are the problem. 2) Get friends to escort you whenever you are hauling anything you really don't want to lose. 3) Get Concord to escort you. Both ideas will not solve the problem. The escort will not prevent the target from being blown to bits. The attackers will be killed anyway as it is now. It's the ability to pick up the loot with a 3rd party account standing by that makes this tactics profitable. And this 3rd party account cannot be attacked by your friends (without being killed by Concord as well), nor will any Concord escort take any action against this account as it did not (officially) participate in the attack. Only way to get rid of suicide gankers is see, is to get rid of alts completely. Ah i see. Sorry, still a noob here I'd totally support removal of alts. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Roshan longshot Gallente Ordos Humanitas	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:24:00 - [112] I recently moved ALL 199 BPO's I own, in a Blaster rex. I have been moveing all my stuff in a transport...complete with armor plates hardners and hardners. Falling to the grief tactics in regular hauler is just stupid. Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter *pirate* or mixture of them all. [i]As read from the original box.
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:26:00 - [113] Edited by: Athena Starfire on 07/11/2006 11:28:43 Wanna be safe in HiSec? :) Make sure you have enough shield,armour and hull to take 2 or 3 shots..Concord will toast them in about a max of 10-15 sec, less in .7-1.0 Most 'suiside killers' use only 1 ship. Use ECM so it takes them longer to be able to target you..You don't need to outgun them just make them waste enough time until Concord comes and sticks an unstoppable bone up thier arse. Cheers
Sales Merchant	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:36:00 - [114] Oddly enough I think 0.0 has made you feel too brave in the sense that you thought empire wasn't a dangerous place, when in actual fact it can be just as dangerous as 0.0 if people want your stuff. Bottom line is no where in eve is safe, suicide gankers are not new in eve they've always been about, the only difference is as time goes by they are getting better and more professional at it. Interesting thread.
Victor Vision Central Intelligence Service	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:37:00 - [115] Edited by: Victor Vision on 07/11/2006 11:39:01 Originally by: Eilie And losing ships in PvE? Is that a joke? Just for your information: a lot of ships are lost in PvE. - Look at the amount of pods you see returning to mission hubs. - You can also look into the mission forums and will find quiete a few reports of ships lost in PvE. - Another way to check how many ships are lost in PvE is turning on the 'ships destroyed in last 24 hours' option in the map. Most of the blobs you see in empire are at mission hubs. These are by a high percentage due to ship loss in missions and only to some degree due to empire wars or suicide ganking. Thinking no ships are destroyed in PvE is similary educated as thinking flying a hauler through high sec is safe.
Quani Gallente Extinction Level Event	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:40:00 - [116] Originally by: Rekindle Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. They can, adapt. ------ There is no sin except stupidity.
Tivook	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:41:00 - [117] What can I say Rekindle? You sir are a stupid fool. at least get yourself an occator or something that can survive long enough for concorde to arrive. Heh.. move all your stuff worth billions in an iteron V and then complain about being shot.. you should be shot irl for being so dumb! Tiv
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:46:00 - [118] this is weaksauce if this is considered a troll post. obviously the system isnt broken if those in the group attacking you were attacked and instagibbed by concord. actually id say that being instagibbed by concord is a broken system. Anyone moving their "evelife" savings at once is putting himself at risk of losing it all in one swift move. even the noobs will realize this within a few days.
Perani	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:50:00 - [119] Edited by: Perani on 07/11/2006 11:57:46 Originally by: TrulyKosh Originally by: Wolfways Suicide attacks are the problem. 2) Get friends to escort you whenever you are hauling anything you really don't want to lose. 3) Get Concord to escort you. Both ideas will not solve the problem. The escort will not prevent the target from being blown to bits. The attackers will be killed anyway as it is now. It's the ability to pick up the loot with a 3rd party account standing by that makes this tactics profitable. And this 3rd party account cannot be attacked by your friends (without being killed by Concord as well), nor will any Concord escort take any action against this account as it did not (officially) participate in the attack. Only way to get rid of suicide gankers is see, is to get rid of alts completely. Or get rid of the ability for the 3rd party to take the cans, at least momentarily. How about once concord shows up, it will automatically fire and pop anyone other than you who pick up your cans for 15 minutes, allowing you the time to dock and buy whatever ship you can to come back and get your stuff. Also as a side effect, the criminal will be shot down in empire space for the next 24 hours so long as he is not in egg form. This would prevent the pilot from boarding another ship and resume the tactic. There is not enough punishment, that's why crime pays. It is like allowing armed robbers to go free with a hand slap. Edit: I was thinking about the security system and had a laugh. What's this security BS? "Oh, you just killed another player in a restricted zone, bad boy, -5 points, don't do it again, m'kay?" "What, you killed someone else? Naughty, naughty, no cookies, -5 points" "Hey, stop killing other people" "ok, you have killed enough, we are going to have to let you go now" Concord, you are all bleeping idiots.
franny Phoenix Knights	Posted - 2006.11.07 11:54:00 - [120] Originally by: Rekindle blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] just on this, 1 question why did you never bother to get a viator or occ? my alt **** near never leaves her viator the viator is a great ship and takes a hell of a hit, the occ is a good ship and takes a hell of a hit too(to slow for my prefrences tho) your at most industry 5 and transport ships as the skills away from either(a whole week) also how the hell are you playing 2yrs and can fit all your stuff in a ~27km3 hauler?, i'd be lucky to get 1/3rd my stuff in there(not including ships)

Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:15:00 - [121] I'm starting to think that maybe a lot of the DEV's are suicide gankers, because maybe they suck at real PvP, hence the reasoning this ****ty game mechanic is allowed to stay in the game... They were all PK'ers in UO you know. That's why they made EVE a griefer haven... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:17:00 - [122] Originally by: Bhaal I'm starting to think that maybe a lot of the DEV's are suicide gankers, because maybe they suck at real PvP, hence the reasoning this ****ty game mechanic is allowed to stay in the game... They were all PK'ers in UO you know. That's why they made EVE a griefer haven... Ok, for the last time, if all they want is your stuff then it's not griefing, they just want your stuff and are going to take it. Much like alliances seize space from each other - or is that supposed to be griefing to? --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Stephra Parle Dark Angel Security	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:18:00 - [123] I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet (I couldn't be bothered reading through 4 pages of people warning you about hauling expensive cargo in a T1 Inductrial), but have you tried putting any valuables into a Secure Container (password protected of course), then putting the container into your ship? Even if any Empire pirates decide to take the chance and suicide attack your vessel, the Secure Container survives, gets jettisoned along with the ship's jetcan, but is still protected by the password. You may lose your ship, but nobody can access any of the items in the container. Note: You may need to be quick and anchor the Secure Container after your hauler is popped to prevent it being scooped: I have not been in a position to test this last part.
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:21:00 - [124] I love EVE.. EVE is the proof of Darwins theory.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:26:00 - [125] Originally by: James Duar Originally by: Bhaal I'm starting to think that maybe a lot of the DEV's are suicide gankers, because maybe they suck at real PvP, hence the reasoning this **ty game mechanic is allowed to stay in the game... They were all PK'ers in UO you know. That's why they made EVE a griefer haven... Ok, for the last time, if all they want is your stuff then it's not griefing, they just want your stuff and are going to take it. Much like alliances seize space from each other - or is that supposed to be griefing to? PvP'ing with the intent to lose your ship to Concord, a game mechanic whereby you must lose your ship or face bannage, then to swoop in with a hauler alt to take the loot, where the only one who has the ability to avenge the loot stealer is already sitting in a POD due to the suicide ganker, is utilizing poor game mechanics to *an individual in high sec. If you're such a moron that you can't see that this is blatant abuse of faulty game mechanics, than you're either a child and don't know better, or a griefer yourself, which still classes you as a child anyways. This tactic is a cute little way for players to act like immature children in high sec and get away with it. Similar to what that lofty child does with his expoiting technique, same **... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Twilight Moon Minmatar Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:29:00 - [126] Quote: I've never played a game that cators to grief play as much as this one Yeah.....its great isn't it? ....it's great hi-jacking a meme isn't it?
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:33:00 - [127] Originally by: Twilight Moon Quote: I've never played a game that cators to grief play as much as this one Yeah.....its great isn't it? At least as time goes on, CCP removes more & more of the griefing, which kind of proves that it's it griefing in the first place, unlike what many of you try to argue... CCP just takes way too long to act on this stuff... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Lord WarATron Amarr Out Siders Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:36:00 - [128] Originally by: Stephra Parle I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet (I couldn't be bothered reading through 4 pages of people warning you about hauling expensive cargo in a T1 Inductrial), but have you tried putting any valuables into a Secure Container (password protected of course), then putting the container into your ship? Even if any Empire pirates decide to take the chance and suicide attack your vessel, the Secure Container survives, gets jettisoned along with the ship's jetcan, but is still protected by the password. You may lose your ship, but nobody can access any of the items in the container. Note: You may need to be quick and anchor the Secure Container after your hauler is popped to prevent it being scooped: I have not been in a position to test this last part. Firstly, prevention is better than a cure. Secondly, I do not beleive you can anchor a secure can in a pod, though I should test it out. Thridly, even if you could anchor it, the hauler would have enough time to scoop it, and them repackage/reprocess it to get all the items inside. Passwords do not stop repackage/reprocessing --- Slot 10 Akemons Modified 'Noble'Zet 5000 implant +8% Armour FREE
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:37:00 - [129] Originally by: Bhaal At least as time goes on, CCP removes more & more of the griefing, which kind of proves that it's it griefing in the first place, unlike what many of you try to argue... CCP just takes way too long to act on this stuff... Because obviously we must base change on the presumption that it is made for the sake of our personal view and for no other reason whatsoever.... If CCP states it's griefin, it's griefing, if not, it's not.
Taaketa Frist The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:37:00 - [130] NO where is safe. It was simply foolish of you too fly so much of your stuff in a T1 indy. Like numerous people have said before. Fly it in a transport, or a cruiser of a battleship, something thats not gonna be one vollied by a suicide ganker. Heck even if you had a passive tank on that ship you might've just lived long enough. -------------- Dang nabit

Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:42:00 - [131] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 12:44:12 Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Bhaal At least as time goes on, CCP removes more & more of the griefing, which kind of proves that it's it griefing in the first place, unlike what many of you try to argue... CCP just takes way too long to act on this stuff... Because obviously we must base change on the presumption that it is made for the sake of our personal view and for no other reason whatsoever.... If CCP states it's griefin, it's griefing, if not, it's not. CCP once said JIP camping was NOT an exploit or griefing, yet they removed the ability to use that tactic eventually. Don't be silly, CCP is like the Catholic Church, they take a while to come around to reality... Eventually suicide ganking will probably be trashed, as it is an expoilt whether CCP currently states it is or not... You're all a bunch of foolish children if you believe this is valid gameplay for an MMO. ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Ikvar Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:43:00 - [132] Originally by: Rekindle I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything I own. This is the best post EVER! Originally by: Rekindle I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything I own.
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:45:00 - [133] Originally by: Rod Blaine well tbh he is right. But Eve also caters to other gameplay more then any other game. And tbh, what he descrivbed isnt even griefplay, it jsut caused greif. A wholly different thing, altho understandably people get it mixed up sometimes. Tbh, even though I think he is right - I cant help the feeling that he just didnt take enough care. This is a game where risk vs reward is in the high seat. You take a risk, and harvest the rewards. Some risks are smaller than others. I have have hauled countless millions just like him without an incident. So count luck into the equation as well. But, as griefed as he may feel, the attackers ran a risk as well. The most valuable items could have blown up right there and left only crap to loot. This way they would have lost. But the belive the possibility of a huge reward was worth the risk. Thats whats this game is all about. Be smart, think before you act and learn from your mistakes. Im sorry for your losses. But its only a game. Go get your stuff back :-) Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Gaven Blands	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:46:00 - [134] Why does everybody say Hi Sec is dangerous? If you were as smart and uber as me, you could survive in hi sec too. Hint: Use alt-scouts, have a safe spot ready, only use instas. Bring friends. Watch local like a hawk. Trust no one. Anybody with half a brain can get through a gate camp in any ship, under any circumstances. Reset Irony and Sarcasm to Normal. Put home addresses in loss and killmails. Maybe then the community will find a way to control themselves a bit better.
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:49:00 - [135] Originally by: Bhaal You're all a bunch of foolish children if you believe this is valid gameplay for an MMO. pats Bhaal's head gently Yes, yes of course we are. Here, have some ritalin and go calm down.
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 12:50:00 - [136] Edited by: Dee Ellis on 07/11/2006 12:52:47 I'm sorry Bhaal, but you're saying YOU know what's VALID gameplay in MMOs and CCP doesn't? My bet is that you take the ball from the Lacrosse games and state it's not valid gameplay too? Or take buckets from children in sandboxes as it's not 'valid' for the sandbox? See where I'm getting at? good, hopefully I don't have to explain this one. Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Bhaal You're all a bunch of foolish children if you believe this is valid gameplay for an MMO. pats Bhaal's head gently Yes, yes of course we are. Here, have some ritalin and go calm down. The worst thing about your post is that I'm on Concerta..
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:02:00 - [137] Originally by: Rod Blaine No Bhaal, suicide ganking won't be abolished. ctr+q-ing will however. Whiners like the op should stop whining about features existing and start argumenting about how features should be balanced. at least that could lead to something, this thread isn't even going to make any CCP dev think about it. We'll see... Tell that to the guys in Space Invaders and talk to them about JIP camping, oh wait, both of those don't exist anymore, my bad... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:03:00 - [138] Edited by: Sendraks on 07/11/2006 13:03:36 Originally by: Bhaal I've been playing long enough to see griefers & their tactics come & go... Thats just super, but it doesn't validate your belief that this is "griefing." Its "piracy." I'd assume anyone who'd been playing Eve for so long would know the difference. Originally by: Bhaal These tactics don't affect me in-game anymore, as I'm not an empire dweller. However, there is no reason to stop caring about poor game mechanics, and griefers who utilize them. I agree. Crappy game mechanics must go. This, however, isn't one of them and you've really not demonstrated why this should be considered griefing. Originally by: Bhaal Many like you who criticized me in the past are long gone because the griefing they utilized, and I ***ed about have been abolished, just like suicide ganking will be some day. Because obviously these things were abolished because your opinion is oh so correct and not for any other reason at all. No, they were obviously abolished because CCP have regular "vindicate Bhaal" milestones set into their yearly development plan. Originally by:** Bhaal Enjoy your fun while it lasts I guess... I will. I have no interest in suicide piracy myself, as should be apparent, but I do have an interest in making sure I fit my transport vessels to protect against it. Remove suicide piracy from the game and thats one less thing to worry about and one more thing that will make eve increasingly stale and uninteresting.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:09:00 - [139] Quote: I will. I have no interest in suicide game myself, as should be apparent, but I do have an interest in making sure I fit my transport vessels to protect against it. Remove suicide piracy from the game and thats one less thing to worry about and one more thing that will make eve increasingly stale and uninteresting. EVE could be so much more interesting if ppl didn't spend so much time trying to grief in empire, and they got out into 0.0 & low sec & PvP'ed the way they should... To many spineless players, and CCP allows them to flourish in empire, It's CCP's fault. It's been a griefer heaven since day one, and as time goes on, less and less outright griefing is allowed, which is a good thing IMO. I'd say the game is more interesting now then it was at release, but griefers long gone obviously don't agree, as they quit and went on to some other game where it's easier for them to cheat. EVE will get better with age, and these griefer tactics will always come and go. As long as they continue to go, I'm fine with that... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:11:00 - [140] Edited by: Dee Ellis on 07/11/2006 13:14:53 So it's better that they grief in 0.0, and get away with it, including their ship, then? Atleast Empire Space punish them... Edit: What's with this horrible "You're playing it the wrong way" idea anyways? The act of piracy due to the victim not taking proper acction to prevent it.... I dunno.. A dress, diamonds and downtown Chicago in the middle of the night, comes to mind again.

Crumplecorn Gallente Aerial Boundaries Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:13:00 - [141] Still all this talk of griefing... ffs ---------- IBTL \o/
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:15:00 - [142] Originally by: Dee Ellis So it's better that they grief in 0.0, and get away with it, including their ship, then? Atleast Empire Space punish them... There is no griefing in 0.0, that's the ** point. Which means these chicken griefers are hiding in empire space looking for PvP with vast reward, and only taking a known calculated risk, plus getting ** insurance for their ship! It's the definition of lame if you ask me... At bare minimum, CCP need to take away insurence for death by Concord, and by corp warfare in the NEXT patch. And that's just the start IMO. ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:16:00 - [143] Originally by: Bhaal There is no griefing in 0.0, that's the **** point. So you can't attack lonely ships with no chance to survive in 0.0 then?
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:19:00 - [144] Edited by: Sendraks on 07/11/2006 13:26:17 Edited by: Sendraks on 07/11/2006 13:24:18 Originally by: Bhaal EVE could be so much more interesting if ppl didn't spend so much time trying to grief in empire, and they got out into 0.0 & low sec & PvP'ed the way they should... To many spineless players, and CCP allows them to flourish in empire, It's CCP's fault. Two points. 1) if everyone who did pvp and piracy (please stop calling it "griefing" its very immature) in low sec and 0.0, it would make empire less interesting. Piracy should be able to occur in Eve, anywhere at anytime, the only difference in high sec being that the piracy should be much less common and easier to defend against. Piracy in empire IS much less common and IS easier to defend against. 2) Your statement is based on the fallacy that priacy and pvp should only take place in low sec and 0.0. Originally by: Bhaal It's been a griefer heaven since day one, and as time goes on, less and less outright griefing is allowed, which is a good thing IMO. Where is this mythical griefer heaven that you speak of? The only times I've ever been attacked have been in low sec and 0.0. I have never, not once, seen an incident of suicide ganking in empire. Oh I know it happens, but your statement of "griefer heaven" (its not griefing. Learn what griefing actually is, or just be quiet please) would imply its happening everywhere, all the time. It isn't. Even though I know it is not commonplace and I'm highly unlikely to encounter it, I still fit my haulers to be ready for it. Originally by: Bhaal At bare minimum, CCP need to take away insurence for death by Concord I agree. This would be a good move. Originally by: Bhaal There is no griefing in 0.0, that's the ** point. Piracy in empire is no more griefing than piracy in 0.0. If someone, foolishly, flies a T1 industrial thorugh 0.0 without fitting it properly and planning their route properly and taking all the necessary precautions and they lose the ship and cargo to another player, then thats piracy. The only difference in Empire is that it is less likely to happen. Its still not griefing. Sitting outside a station in empire, repeatedly podding someone as they emerge (replacing your lost ship every time) is griefing. There is a world of difference between the two. Originally by:** Erica chez That's really the best way to make 0.5+ space safe for haulers. Why should empire space be safe for haulers? Empire space should be DIFFICULT to pirate in, not SAFE for anyone.
Erica chez Amarr Black Thorne Corporation	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:19:00 - [145] Originally by: Bhaal At bare minimum, CCP need to take away insurance for death by Concord, and by corp warfare in the NEXT patch. And that's just the start IMO. I'd agree with that, I'd go a step further, if you are the attacker you should be podded by Concord. That's really the best way to make 0.5+ space safe for haulers.
Aodha Khan Minmatar The Necroborg The Sani Sabik	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:22:00 - [146] Why do people when they lose resort to calling people 'Griefers'? OP, stop whining. You lost, deal with it. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:22:00 - [147] Whats really odd here is that people are complaining about the creators of this game. "Its CCP's fault that I lost my xxx" Consider this: The game is exactly the way the creators envisioned it. You can do certain things in this game that you cant do in others. Thats what makes it great. If you wanna blame anyone, go blame the "griefers". They are only acting within mechanics however. If Empire space or "high-sec" was a complete no fire zone... the game would never have evolved into what it is today. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:24:00 - [148] Edited by: Dee Ellis on 07/11/2006 13:27:20 Umm, yeah, I just checked the support... Quote: Summary How do I avoid player pirates? Body Locate yourself in Empire space. Being based in a system with a security status above 0.5 should be relatively safe. Player pirates can not enter these systems because of their negative security status and therefore there are less pirates there, than in the lower security systems. Note, though, that you are never invulnerable to hit-and-run attacks, so if you are transporting valuables, always ensure you are either on a ship that can withstand a short attack, or that you have backup. There, CCP stated it's fine, they didn't NOT state anything, they clearly stated it's fine. Can we end this argument now?
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:25:00 - [149] Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 13:27:57 I have had some sleep and now I understand the difference between my point of view and most that have come here. Piracy to me is something that happens in low sec/ zero sec systems. Empire space in high sec space, outside the paradigm of empire war, is a consentual pvp zone. You can not, normally, fire off on someone in empire without their consent (which gets implied when you gang them/flag off something etc). I'm comparing this to other games that have created consentual and non consentual zones of pvp encounters (well, well, well before WoW). In many games if you attack within the range of "guarded space" you get insta wacked. Eve has a similar system except its not sufficient enough to protect everyone, just people in certain ships. I propose such as system encourages grief play, something I continue to believe regardless of how much advice, flaming or insulting some of you may dish out here. (Learn to attack the idea, not the person - its really quite shallow and immature). The general feed back provided is: You should have known better -Which I agree, give me a cookie for having such a big egg on my face. I accept that my stuff is gone, but that doesn't mean (with my plethora of knowledge of other PvP games) I have to like it. You should have outfitted module X,Y and Z to avoid such ganks. Again, this is like saying you should put on a radiation suit to avoid the nuclear testing in your back yard: Just because its happening doesn't mean you have to automatically accept it. You've been playing the game for 2 years and you dont have 1 bil to fly a friegther? I have been playing the game for x time, that char was an alt . This is an accepted form of play and it helps to keep the economy in check - Perhaps the craziest thing I've ever heard in my 10 years of online gaming. Weak argument founded on a limited experience in MMORPG games. The bottom line is this is a l a m e tactic and no matter how much you folks choose to insult me (which is basically pouring salt on a wound) it remains a lame tactic. I'm not on here ranting about dieing to a bubble or dieing in .4 space or dieing to a fair battle or even dieing to lag. The fact that guards respond to non consentual pvp contact in a "high security" zone is a well known fact. Whats ironic is if I had happened to have a fitted cruiser or something in the area I wouldn't have a chance at getting my stuff back because had I fired on these guys I would have been concorded. So once and for all I have the following conclusions: I dont need your advice on how to protect myself (If i do decide to rebuild i'm quite certain i've learned that lesson). please feel free to flame me though since you all seem to get off on that. Iteron m5 ships are used to transport trit - thats it - if you want the luxury of moving other items spend the 1 bil on a freigther or 100mil on t2 hauler. or ship x y z to avoid a broken game mechanic, because its fine the way it is and it helps the economy. This game caters to griefers by making non pvp targets fodder for people who spend 10-15 hours a day sitting a gate waiting for stuff to come through -- that is the crux of the eve experience. I've heard the suggestion that this game embraces Dwarinistic concepts (Dwarin was an idiot btw) but the reality is the risk vs reward pardigm of this game is so majorly messed up its not funny. For a sand box game it sure does caste people into some pretty tight ruts. -------------------------------------------
eLusi0n Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:25:00 - [150] LOL. What corp was it? I should shoot them an application. Thats funny. I mean... I'm sorry you lost your stuff. But all the same, I agree with everyone else here. You had all of your stuff in a tin can, when you could have had a T2 or a different ship. You were flying through borderline unsecured space. You didn't have any one flying with you to back you up or help in any situation. (ESPECIALLY if you know this 'is a method of gameplay') Why would you ever move everything you own at one time with no support? I don't care if I was flying through 1.0 space the whole time, I still wouldnt haul everything I own in one run, just for the sake of sanity. Did you almost have cardiac arrest when they blew up all of you stuff instead of looting it? I'm sorry, thats a nice touch too. "We didn't want your stuff, we just wanted to see you cry." Did they follow you to the forums and wait for you to post this? Its a game, you gambled away time. Fortunately you have a lot of time left and you won't have to put a lien on your house to keep up your addiction. So, thats positive? Okay, now I feel borderline rude. Sorry man, 'teh sux'. If you quit, can I have your character?

Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:29:00 - [151] Quote: Consider this: The game is exactly the way the creators envisioned it. You can do certain things in this game that you cant do in others. Thats what makes it great. I would argue that the game is NOT exactly what the DEV's envisioned... That's why they have to keep changing major game mechanics that players find a way to exploit... Since day 1 the DEV's have had to deal with this... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:33:00 - [152] Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 13:27:57 This game caters to griefers by making non pvp targets fodder for people who spend 10-15 hours a day sitting a gate waiting for stuff to come through -- that is the crux of the eve experience. They only do this because they can. They are allowed to do it. They can even shoot you if they pay the price. Its not griefplay. They werent out there to particulary hurt YOU! So its not grief. Had they followed you around for weeks doing this its something else. Yes they have a poor sense of entertainment, but I would do exactly the same if isk where in dire need and I needed them very quickly. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:35:00 - [153] Originally by: Bhaal I would argue that the game is NOT exactly what the DEV's envisioned... That's why they have to keep changing major game mechanics that players find a way to exploit... Since day 1 the DEV's have had to deal with this... If they didnt want people to shoot other people in high-sec space they would have jammed all guns by default in theese systems. They have not, and dont intend to as far as I know. as someone said, its high-security... not complete security. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:36:00 - [154] Originally by: Rekindle I Empire space in high sec space, outside the paradigm of empire war, is a consentual pvp zone. Sorry, you're wrong. I realise that this is what you belive and underpins your entire argument, but it is fundamentally wrong. Originally by: Rekindle Eve has a similar system except its not sufficient enough to protect everyone, just people in certain ships. It is sufficient to protect anyone with the presence of mind to fit their ship on the basis that it could be attacked at any time, anywhere. This is not limited to just people in T2 ships or freighters. Originally by: Rekindle I propose such as system encourages grief play, something I continue to believe regardless of how much advice, flaming or insulting some of you may dish out here. In short, you came here not prepared to listen to anyone other than those whose opinions matched your own. Originally by: Rekindle Again, this is like saying you should put on a radiation suit to avoid the nuclear testing in your back yard: Just because its happening doesn't mean you have to automatically accept it. This is quite a ridiculous comparison. It is an accepted fact that this kind of piracy can occur anywhere within Eve. It not accepted that Nuclear testing can occur anywhere on earth. A better comparison would be that you can be robbed, anywhere, at any time. Therefore, it is wise to take the necessary precautions to sa*uard yourself from this within the limits of what the law allows. Originally by:** Rekindle Iteron m5 ships are used to transport trit - thats it - if you want the luxury of moving other items spend the 1 bil on a freigther or 100mil on t2 hauler. or ship x y z to avoid a broken game mechanic, because its fine the way it is and it helps the economy. Because its impossible to fit an Iteron 5 to withstand an attack for any length of time? Originally by: Rekindle This game caters to griefers by making non pvp targets fodder for people who spend 10-15 hours a day sitting a gate waiting for stuff to come through -- that is the crux of the eve experience. If someone is prepared to spend 10-15 hours of their day waiting on the offchance that a single big payout poorly fitted craft might come through a gate near them, then I take my hat off to them for their dedication. Of course, if people fitted their freighters so they were not so susceptable to attack, then these pirates would be waiting a good deal longer to be attacked.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:37:00 - [155] Originally by: Rekindle I propose such as system encourages grief play, something I continue to believe regardless of how much advice, flaming or insulting some of you may dish out here. (Learn to attack the idea, not the person - its really quite shallow and immature). You keep using this term. I do not think you know what it means. --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:37:00 - [156] again our understandings differ: Wikipedia Generally, players are griefers if their in-game conduct violates the norms, either explicit or implied, of in-game society in such a way as to frustrate and anger other players. Actions considered to constitute griefing include but are not limited to: kill stealing, player killing, spamming, team killing, ninja looting, spawn camping, and corpse camping. Using exploits in order to harass other players also constitutes griefing. -------------------------------------------
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:40:00 - [157] Originally by: Rekindle again our understandings differ: Wikipedia Generally, players are griefers if their in-game conduct violates the norms, either explicit or implied, of in-game society in such a way as to frustrate and anger other players. Actions considered to constitute griefing include but are not limited to: kill stealing, player killing, spamming, team killing, ninja looting, spawn camping, and corpse camping. Using exploits in order to harass other players also constitutes griefing. And yes... all is allowed within game rules. Where ever you are in EVE you can do it. Depending on where though, there is a price. Try to understand it, please mate. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:44:00 - [158] Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: Bhaal I would argue that the game is NOT exactly what the DEV's envisioned... That's why they have to keep changing major game mechanics that players find a way to exploit... Since day 1 the DEV's have had to deal with this... If they didnt want people to shoot other people in high-sec space they would have jammed all guns by default in theese systems. They have not, and dont intend to as far as I know. as someone said, its high-security... not complete security. Dude, gimme a break. I'm not against firing a gun on another player in empire. What I'm against is players allowed to kill a hauler, use an alt to get the loot, the only one that can fire at the alt legally is in a pod with no guns, and the original attacker gets a full refund on his ship for getting killed by the police for commiting a crime. There is a very specific procedure involved to get around the Concord game mechanic. it's an obvious exploit. At the very least it's insurance fraud... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:47:00 - [159] Quote: The act of piracy due to the victim not taking proper acction to prevent it.... No, that act of piracy due to the aggressor exploiting game mechanics. Quote: piracy (please stop calling it "griefing" its very immature) please stop calling it piracy, it's lying. Quote: the reality is the risk vs reward pardigm of this game is so majorly messed up its not funny. I have to agree there. The pirates who hang around .5 waiting for an easy kill are lame. The player who is not used to pvp, and who's ship isn't set up for pvp risks losing much...while the pirate risks virtually nothing yet recieves the rewards. I don't understand those who say that suicide killing is just part of the game. Like life, the number one rule should be survive! The penalty for dying should be something that discourages suicide attacks. Or if that isn't possible because it would ruin the fun of the game then create game mechanics which stop suicides happening. I've seen this suicide tactic in other games and find it rediculous and also the most immersion-breaking thing in games. If someone tells me to kill myself for any reward i'll give him a grenade and tell him where to shove it! Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:48:00 - [160] Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: Bhaal I would argue that the game is NOT exactly what the DEV's envisioned... That's why they have to keep changing major game mechanics that players find a way to exploit... Since day 1 the DEV's have had to deal with this... If they didnt want people to shoot other people in high-sec space they would have jammed all guns by default in theese systems. They have not, and dont intend to as far as I know. as someone said, its high-security... not complete security. Dude, gimme a break. I'm not against firing a gun on another player in empire. What I'm against is players allowed to kill a hauler, use an alt to get the loot, the only one that can fire at the alt legally is in a pod with no guns, and the original attacker gets a full refund on his ship for getting killed by the police for commiting a crime. There is a very specific procedure involved to get around the Concord game mechanic. it's an obvious exploit. At the very least it's insurance fraud... Lets have a look at it then. What would you propose we did about it. People are allowed multiple accounts. People are allowed a friend ingame (to grab the loot). People are allowed to shoot at haulers. Should haulers become invincible? (just teasing you there) Dont question the knife, but the hand that leads it. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls

Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:49:00 - [161] Originally by: Rekindle Wikipedia Generally, players are griefers if their in-game conduct violates the norms, either explicit or implied, of in-game society in such a way as to frustrate and anger other players. The act of piracy does not violate the norms of the Eve in game society. While it is not the occupation of the majority, it is not an action which is outside of the "norms" for the game and is, in fact, an accepted part of the game.
Aodha Khan Minmatar The Necroborg The Sani Sabik	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:52:00 - [162] Originally by: Bhaal What I'm against is players allowed to kill a hauler, use an alt to get the loot, the only one that can fire at the alt legally is in a pod with no guns, and the original attacker gets a full refund on his ship for getting killed by the police for commiting a crime. There is a very specific procedure involved to get around the Concord game mechanic. it's an obvious exploit. Nonsense. This is not an exploit if another 'character' picks up the loot. Simple rule, don't travel with all your stuff in a hauler that can be killed within seconds. No need to dumb down Eve to stop people being dumb enough to lose. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:53:00 - [163] Rule #1 of mmorpg games - if you give players the option to grief (as previously defined by me for the naysayers) they will use it. If you want to make a massive multiplayer game work and not get the rep of being a game that is a griefer's play ground you need to close the gaps for grief play - not say its an accepted method. The solution to this is quite simple - the risk to a hauler needs to be balanced a bit more. Maybe if you're in a hauler the security rating of a system should change? Or if some ass clown decides to fire at a ship in empire the penality should be increased to properly measure up against the risk that people take moving their hangars from one part of space to another. -------------------------------------------
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:56:00 - [164] Originally by: Wolfways please stop calling it piracy, it's lying. How is it "lying?" The act of destroying another ship in order to sieze its cargo is piracy. Originally by: Wolfways The player who is not used to pvp, and who's ship isn't set up for pvp risks losing much...while the pirate risks virtually nothing yet recieves the rewards. I consider myself to be a player who is not used to PvP, yet I fit my ship against such predations. I do see where you are coming from, but I really don't see why you think it is such an issue when it is so easy to protect yourself against this kind of behaviour. All I see being suggested is that players should have "risk free" gaming, because they can't be bothered to make the effort to take precautions.
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:56:00 - [165] Edited by: Lorn Yeager on 07/11/2006 13:57:21 Originally by: Rekindle Rule #1 of mmorpg games - if you give players the option to grief (as previously defined by me for the naysayers) they will use it. If you want to make a massive multiplayer game work and not get the rep of being a game that is a griefer's play ground you need to close the gaps for grief play - not say its an accepted method. The solution to this is quite simple - the risk to a hauler needs to be balanced a bit more. Maybe if you're in a hauler the security rating of a system should change? Or if some ass clown decides to fire at a ship in empire the penality should be increased to properly measure up against the risk that people take moving their hangars from one part of space to another. Why should the hauler have higher protection by default than the T1 cruiser flying next to him? Imagine the number of T1 cruisers out there fittet with mining lasers or, even a well fitted combat cruiser with a low experienced player. And, its not grief. Its just you who feels hurt in a very deep way. Im sorry for that. But try to accept that the game you play allow these things by default. Oh, and if you want to move all you have - why do it in ONE hauler. And not three? And why not in a transport ship? They can withstand heavy fire you know. ;-) Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Kasak Black The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.11.07 13:57:00 - [166] Can't stand the heat, get out of the kitched.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:02:00 - [167] Quote: Lets have a look at it then. What would you propose we did about it. Impose more penalties: 1) No insurance for death by Concord. 2) No insurance for corp war death, in empire or anywhere else, you're at war, no insurance company should want to insure a ship being used in warfare, that's for alliances & corps to handle, not an NPC insurance system. 3) Along with the sec hit, impose a system arrest warrant for the attacker, if he shows up in the system where the last crime was committed within 7 days, Concord blows up his ship. Remove the repetitive/farming nature of this tactic. Impose more severe penalties so only the extreme cases/targets are hit with this method, and not allow it to occur as an every day farming technique for haulers in empire space. This is too rampant, and players are flocking to this method of gameplay, when CCP needs to provide them with more pirate/ganking opportunities elsewhere. If you think lvl 4 agent mission farming in empire is a joke, I don't see how you can't similarily call this a joke... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:07:00 - [168] How in god's name can you conclude that high-sec piracy is a 'farming' activity? --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Cell Satimo Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:09:00 - [169] No player in their right mind carries BPOs in an industrial ship, Anywhere, Ever. A freighter, battleship, battlecruiser, Interceptor maybe... There were measures (you yourself) are aware of, and common sense (don't move everything at once) for not getting concorddokened. EvE doesn't support grief play, it supports Darwinian selection. Eve Web-Ring Your guide to all sites In-Game and Out. Works in IGB
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:10:00 - [170] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 14:11:31 Originally by: James Duar How in god's name can you conclude that high-sec piracy is a 'farming' activity? Go to Jita and take a look at all of them hanging at gates, it's absurd. These "pirates" hang out in front of the cops all day out in front of wal-mart picking ppl off and stealing their goods... Can you honestly say that this is what CCP envisioned 1.0 space to be? Really? If so, you're foolish... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus

Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:10:00 - [171] Tarazed Aquilae learn to read someone's thread before you actually insult them. If you can't be bothered to read the thread you really have no business making personal attacks. -------------------------------------------
Ki An Gallente Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Tre Kroner	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:12:00 - [172] Originally by: Bhaal Impose more penalties: 1) No insurance for death by Concord. 2) No insurance for corp war death, in empire or anywhere else, you're at war, no insurance company should want to insure a ship being used in warfare, that's for alliances & corps to handle, not an NPC insurance system. 3) Along with the sec hit, impose a system arrest warrant for the attacker, if he shows up in the system where the last crime was committed within 7 days, Concord blows up his ship. Remove the repetitive/farming nature of this tactic. Impose more severe penalties so only the extreme cases/targets are hit with this method, and not allow it to occur as an every day farming technique for haulers in empire space. This is too rampant, and players are flocking to this method of gameplay, when CCP needs to provide them with more pirate/ganking opportunities elsewhere. If you think lvl 4 agent mission farming in empire is a joke, I don't see how you can't similarily call this a joke... Hmmm... worth thinking about. Makes it more real. If this is instituted though, you'de have to institute a similar response from NPC pirate corps. Say a mission runner gets "Pirate Invasion". He completes it and the next day he gets it again, only this time the pirates in the mission got smart and lay a trap for the mission runner. Would make it more real too, right? /Ki
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:12:00 - [173] Originally by: Bhaal Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 14:11:31 Originally by: James Duar How in god's name can you conclude that high-sec piracy is a 'farming' activity? Go to Jita and take a look at all of them hanging at gates, it's absurd. These "pirates" hang out in front of the cops all day out in front of wal-mart picking ppl off and stealing their goods... Can you honestly say that this is what CCP envisioned 1.0 space to be? Really? If so, you're foolish... Thanks, in less than my 500 paragraphs I've written today you've just summed it up. -------------------------------------------
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:12:00 - [174] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Wolfways please stop calling it piracy, it's lying. How is it "lying?" The act of destroying another ship in order to sieze its cargo is piracy. Originally by: Wolfways The player who is not used to pvp, and who's ship isn't set up for pvp risks losing much...while the pirate risks virtually nothing yet recieves the rewards. I consider myself to be a player who is not used to PvP, yet I fit my ship against such predations. I do see where you are coming from, but I really don't see why you think it is such an issue when it is so easy to protect yourself against this kind of behaviour. All I see being suggested is that players should have "risk free" gaming, because they can't be bothered to make the effort to take precautions. By calling yourself a pirate you admit that you are taking on at least a small amount of the roleplay that is indicated in the games background. To me that is completely different to the player who exploits game mechanics to achieve a kill and/or loot at the expense of another player. I call that player a griefer. I personally don't want a risk free game. What i do want is for EVE to be more realistic in the punishment of criminals, and not punish those who are the victims of the criminals. Obviously i'm not talking about permadeath or anything like that, but something at least. I know of one game where if you are caught commiting a crime you are stripped of all your possessions and sent to jail. In jail you can try to escape by performing missions, actions, and bribing gards, to escape. Sounds good to me Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
eLusi0n Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:14:00 - [175] If you want to know what a griefing playground is, go play Lineage 2. If you want to go to grief-hell, then play on this server. This debate on legitimacy and lack-there-of could go on forever. "Some people grin and bear it, others smile and change it, but the ones who frown and dwindle on it will never progress." Move along.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:16:00 - [176] Quote: Hmmm... worth thinking about. Makes it more real. If this is instituted though, you'de have to institute a similar response from NPC pirate corps. Say a mission runner gets "Pirate Invasion". He completes it and the next day he gets it again, only this time the pirates in the mission got smart and lay a trap for the mission runner. Would make it more real too, right? Anything to make the PvE in this game less monotonous is good I think... I'm not a big time mission runner, just doesn't fit in an MMO too well... Anything to liven up missions would be good, as they are certainly repatative & over farmed, same with plexes... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:20:00 - [177] Originally by: Rekindle See, there is dieing to a legit pvp encounter and there is dieing to cheap ass tactics. Tonight I encountered the latter and I put it in the same cateogory as logging out in combat, BM copying, and other less than prestigious "techniques" this game offers to augment pvp encounters. You are right. Personally I consider all of those as bad game design, all of which could have been fixed if CCP would have decided to do so. Lets consider a few things that could have been done. 1. Destroying a ship in Empire space All involved characters should have their ship confiscated by concord, 33% of their empire equity from account (yes, from all alts) confiscated for the loss compensation, involved character slot locked out for 6 months and a -2 sec hit for each alt per each account involved. 2. Destroying a POD in Empire space All involved parties should have their ship confiscated by concord, 66% of their empire equity from account (yes, from all alts) confiscated for the loss compensation, involved character slot locked out for 18 months and a -5 sec hit for each alt per each account involved. Yes, that would mean that if you had 3 characters, of which one blows a ship up, you'd end up with two characters with 2/3 of their assets and no access to hi-sec. And your friend looting the stuff would be in the same mess. Harsh? No. Kill a guy in RL get a 10 years of government paid food & apartment. --- Sell orders Recruitment

Tirg Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:21:00 - [178] Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 13:27:57 I'm comparing this to other games that have created consentual and non consentual zones of pvp encounters (well, well, well before WoW). In many games if you attack within the range of "guarded space" you get insta wacked. Eve has a similar system except its not sufficient enough to protect everyone, just people in certain ships. However, in Ultima, you could get theived in town. They would go grey, you could call the guards, they'd get instawhacked, but you wouldn't get your item back. He was smart enough to pass that item off to his buddy before dieing, or his buddy looted him and passed it to a 3rd guildmate, before he also got whacked. The person traded to never got whacked:) Sound familiar? Now your sig is mine MUAHAHAHAHAHA - Xorus

Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:24:00 - [179] Originally by: Bhaal Go to Jita and take a look at all of them hanging at gates, it's absurd. So a widespread activity, but only commonplace in certain areas. Solution for players: avoid those areas. If you want to mix with the rest of the livestock in Jita, you should expect periodic culling. The power is entirely in the hands of the players to avoid this sort of piracy, therefore I don't see the "act" in itself as a problem. If players could do nothing about it, then yes, the OP might have a point. As it stands, it is entirely avoidable, hence the OPs lack of point. However, I do agree with some of your suggestions for increasing the penalities on high sec piracy. Originally by: Bhaal Can you honestly say that this is what CCP envisioned 1.0 space to be? Really? Can you honestly say that 500 people in Jita, flying around with billions of ISK worth of cargo with absolutely no risk what-so-ever is what CCP envisioned?
Changaroo State War Academy	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:28:00 - [180] I would actually prefer to hear the opinion of a dev rather than a GM. In the end it is they who are invoking the "hamsters of doom" to change the game and the GM's.

Crumplecorn Gallente Aerial Boundaries Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:29:00 - [181] Originally by: Wolfways To me that is completely different to the player who exploits game mechanics to achieve a kill and/or loot at the expense of another player. I call that player a griefer. (emphasis added) Prime example of someone who just doesn't understand the term. ---------- IBTL \o/
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:29:00 - [182] Quote: Can you honestly say that 500 people in Jita, flying around with billions of ISK worth of cargo with absolutely no risk what-so-ever is what CCP envisioned? Uhm, YES! It's a freaking 1.0 trade hub! What would you expect? If CCP didn't expect trade hubs to develop, and very rich industrial corps/individuals to come to power and trade in those hubs, they are in the wrong business... Piracy & crime is primarily for lower sec, corporate espionage, takeovers & market PvP etc are for higher sec. Since there are no real good mechanics for white collar crimes, everything is shootie shootie... Even where it's not supposed to be... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:32:00 - [183] Quote: However, in Ultima, you could get theived in town. They would go grey, you could call the guards, they'd get instawhacked, but you wouldn't get your item back. He was smart enough to pass that item off to his buddy before dieing, or his buddy looted him and passed it to a 3rd guildmate, before he also got whacked. The person traded to never got whacked:) Sound familiar? Ok, they made a mistake 20years ago. Lets repeat it. --- Sell orders Recruitment
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:33:00 - [184] Originally by: Tirg Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 13:27:57 I'm comparing this to other games that have created consentual and non consentual zones of pvp encounters (well, well, well before WoW). In many games if you attack within the range of "guarded space" you get insta wacked. Eve has a similar system except its not sufficient enough to protect everyone, just people in certain ships. However, in Ultima, you could get theived in town. They would go grey, you could call the guards, they'd get instawhacked, but you wouldn't get your item back. He was smart enough to pass that item off to his buddy before dieing, or his buddy looted him and passed it to a 3rd guildmate, before he also got whacked. The person traded to never got whacked:) Sound familiar? So you're saying this is acceptable? I still call it exploiting game mechanics. I'm amazed at the amount of people in this thread who consider suicide as a normal, acceptable way to make ISK's Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Omuro Takeda	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:36:00 - [185] Originally by: Rekindle Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. 1. You agree that killing people in high sec is accepted game play; 2. You then call it "grief at its very core"; 3. Comparing that to your statement about UO, where you label "killing people FOR THEIR STUFF" griefing aswell (which is actually called PKing), I can't help but see what you are telling us with this: You, sir, are insulting every single, devoted to his cause pirate (PK or thiefe), calling him a low life griefer whose ingame occupation is to kill people for no reward or reason whatsoever - only to make them feel bad. Because griefing is exactly this: Originally by: Elycion A griefer would blow you up just to cause you pain. You are carrying stuff worth billions IN A HAULER? Wasn't there an easier way to label yourself with a "SHOOT HERE!" sign? A person who has played UO would know he couldn't feel safe anywhere when carrying stuff around - there were thieves in town who could have robbed you without you ever noticing in time. It's people like you that pirates are waiting and searching all their time for, and no, they don't give a ** about your time spent ingame to aquire all that stuff - "Take as much as you can, give nothing back!" I think describes it best Then you decide to spit on the game, calling the great, free, AND DANGEROUS PvP system a "lame game mechanic", just because you have been played for being too carebear, flying around in a gold mine, thinking CONCORD insta-owns pirates/PKs like the guards did in UO. Having spent almost two years in the game, you should have known better and never let anthing like this happen to you. Quote:** Rule #1 of mmorpg games - if you give players the option to grief they will use it. If you want to make a massive multiplayer game work and not get the rep of being a game that is a griefer's play ground you need to close the gaps for grief play - not say its an accepted method. Last time I checked, EVE was one of the few MMOs whitout serious gameplay restrictions, and we keep having more and more subscribers (meaning those who start are more than those who quit - figured out why?). People play EVE because the thrill of a dangerous virtual world died with UO pre-AOS. PS: Stop calling piracy griefing, learn to adapt or find an easier MMO for you.
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:36:00 - [186] Originally by: Steven Dynahir Originally by: Rekindle See, there is dieing to a legit pvp encounter and there is dieing to cheap ass tactics. Tonight I encountered the latter and I put it in the same cateogory as logging out in combat, BM copying, and other less than prestigious "techniques" this game offers to augment pvp encounters. You are right. Personally I consider all of those as bad game design, all of which could have been fixed if CCP would have decided to do so. Lets consider a few things that could have been done. 1. Destroying a ship in Empire space All involved characters should have their ship confiscated by concord, 33% of their empire equity from account (yes, from all alts) confiscated for the loss compensation, involved character slot locked out for 6 months and a -2 sec hit for each alt per each account involved. 2. Destroying a POD in Empire space All involved parties should have their ship confiscated by concord, 66% of their empire equity from account (yes, from all alts) confiscated for the loss compensation, involved character slot locked out for 18 months and a -5 sec hit for each alt per each account involved. Yes, that would mean that if you had 3 characters, of which one blows a ship up, you'd end up with two characters with 2/3 of their assets and no access to hi-sec. And your friend looting the stuff would be in the same mess. Harsh? No. Kill a guy in RL get a 10 years of government paid food & apartment. This however is a game. I can play the samaritan or the bad guy. Do not try to compare with real life. If we did that, the whole game it self would fall right through. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:37:00 - [187] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Wolfways To me that is completely different to the player who exploits game mechanics to achieve a kill and/or loot at the expense of another player. I call that player a griefer. (emphasis added) Prime example of someone who just doesn't understand the term. Yeah sorry, i meant exploiter...but as i think neither griefers or exploiters should be allowed (much less encouraged) in games i tend to lump them together. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:38:00 - [188] Originally by: Steven Dynahir Ok, they made a mistake 20years ago. Lets repeat it. Why is it a mistake? Action 1: Steal item Action 2: Pass item to another player before guards arrive. Action 3: Get whacked by guards. Action 4: Recover item at later date.
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:38:00 - [189] Originally by: Wolfways However, in Ultima, you could get theived in town. They would go grey, you could call the guards, they'd get instawhacked, but you wouldn't get your item back. He was smart enough to pass that item off to his buddy before dieing, or his buddy looted him and passed it to a 3rd guildmate, before he also got whacked. The person traded to never got whacked:) Sound familiar? So you're saying this is acceptable? I still call it exploiting game mechanics. I'm amazed at the amount of people in this thread who consider suicide as a normal, acceptable way to make ISK's Its not normal. By far. But it can be done. Im amased at the number of posters who think that CCP is to blame for thier losses. Blame your attacker - its his fault. He did it. Oveur or Hammerhead did not. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:42:00 - [190] Quote: This however is a game. I can play the samaritan or the bad guy. Do not try to compare with real life. If we did that, the whole game it self would fall right through. You got all the 0.0, low-sec and wardec to be a bad guy. --- Sell orders Recruitment

Aodha Khan Minmatar The Necroborg The Sani Sabik	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:43:00 - [191] Edited by: Aodha Khan on 07/11/2006 14:43:35 Originally by: Bhaal Quote: Can you honestly say that 500 people in Jita, flying around with billions of ISK worth of cargo with absolutely no risk what-so-ever is what CCP envisioned? Uhm, YES! It's a freaking 1.0 trade hub! What would you expect? There is no such thing as zero crime. The game was designed in certain way to offer an amount of freedom and creativity. If someone is stupid enough to walk around central station with their wallet sticking out their back pocket they are bound to have it stolen. Why should Eve be any different? Eve is unique and people play this game because of the way it was designed. There are plenty of dumbed down games on the market. Go play one of those if that's what you really want. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:43:00 - [192] Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 14:44:45 Originally by: Tirg Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 13:27:57 I'm comparing this to other games that have created consentual and non consentual zones of pvp encounters (well, well, well before WoW). In many games if you attack within the range of "guarded space" you get insta wacked. Eve has a similar system except its not sufficient enough to protect everyone, just people in certain ships. However, in Ultima, you could get theived in town. They would go grey, you could call the guards, they'd get instawhacked, but you wouldn't get your item back. He was smart enough to pass that item off to his buddy before dieing, or his buddy looted him and passed it to a 3rd guildmate, before he also got whacked. The person traded to never got whacked:) Sound familiar? If you got caught stealing the item it was returned as you got insta wacked. not to mention the fact theives have to grind for months to acquire their skills and that was the theiving skill not the ganking a ship at a .5 gate "skill". -------------------------------------------

Tirg Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:46:00 - [193] My point is the OP was refering to UO as a consentual/non-consentual PvP game, with guards who instawhacked. If it didn't happen in a guard's sight, you had to call out for them. If you died before you called, the Pker got away clean. Thieves however, worked right in the bank square:) Maybe the OP forgot this point? I'm one of the carebears who moved to Trammel btw:) I just wished they had left Fel alone, rather than turn it into terror-town. Now your sig is mine MUAHAHAHAHAHA - Xorus

Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:46:00 - [194] Originally by: Sendraks Why is it a mistake? Action 1: Steal item Action 2: Pass item to another player before guards arrive. Action 3: Get whacked by guards. Action 4: Recover item at later date. If that was an acceptable means of acquiring stuff, then doing it in real life would be ok. (Some do get away it, some do get send away for it) In game terms, the item should just end up as "stolen". See a guard and get a insta-whack. --- Sell orders Recruitment
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:47:00 - [195] Originally by: Aodha Khan Edited by: Aodha Khan on 07/11/2006 14:43:35 Originally by: Bhaal Quote: Can you honestly say that 500 people in Jita, flying around with billions of ISK worth of cargo with absolutely no risk what-so-ever is what CCP envisioned? Uhm, YES! It's a freaking 1.0 trade hub! What would you expect? There is no such thing as zero crime. The game was designed in certain way to offer an amount of freedom and creativity. If someone is stupid enough to walk around central station with their wallet sticking out their back pocket they are bound to have it stolen. Why should Eve be any different? Eve is unique and people play this game because of the way it was designed. There are plenty of dumbed down games on the market. Go play one of those if that's what you really want. Freedom & creativity? That's what you'd call suicide ganking? Now I've heard it all. By the way, more restrictions & penalties on the criminals is not going to eliminate suicide ganking, just make it much less prevalent. Right now it's the flavor of the month piracy, you call that freedom? ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:50:00 - [196] Originally by: Aodha Khan Edited by: Aodha Khan on 07/11/2006 14:43:35 Originally by: Bhaal Quote: Can you honestly say that 500 people in Jita, flying around with billions of ISK worth of cargo with absolutely no risk what-so-ever is what CCP envisioned? Uhm, YES! It's a freaking 1.0 trade hub! What would you expect? There is no such thing as zero crime. The game was designed in certain way to offer an amount of freedom and creativity. If someone is stupid enough to walk around central station with their wallet sticking out their back pocket they are bound to have it stolen. Why should Eve be any different? Eve is unique and people play this game because of the way it was designed. There are plenty of dumbed down games on the market. Go play one of those if that's what you really want. Yes you're right. If someone makes themself an easy target they are bound to be stolen from. But if the thief is caught in the act (say like Concord turning up while the aggressor is killing or looting) he is punished and the victim has his possessions returned. Why should EVE be any different? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:51:00 - [197] Originally by: Bhaal Right now it's the flavor of the month piracy, you call that freedom? Its allways been around you know... But more players = more crime. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:53:00 - [198] Originally by: Tirg My point is the OP was refering to UO as a consentual/non-consentual PvP game, with guards who instawhacked. If it didn't happen in a guard's sight, you had to call out for them. If you died before you called, the Pker got away clean. Thieves however, worked right in the bank square:) Maybe the OP forgot this point? I'm one of the carebears who moved to Trammel btw:) I just wished they had left Fel alone, rather than turn it into terror-town. That was changed so that if you stole anything in a guard zone half a dozen guards instantly teleported to you and whacked you. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Futuri Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:54:00 - [199] Wow, this thead is alive and kickin' Originally by: Rekindle Piracy to me is something that happens in low sec/ zero sec systems. Empire space in high sec space, outside the paradigm of empire war, is a consentual pvp zone. You can not, normally, fire off on someone in empire without their consent (which gets implied when you gang them/flag off something etc). a) Piracy can happen both in high sec and in low sec. In EVE, piracy means killing for profit, it has nothing to do with the security of the system. b) You can fire on anyone in EVE, anywhere, without their consent. Who told you otherwise?? Even the player guide says so, go read it.
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:56:00 - [200] Originally by: Steven Dynahir If that was an acceptable means of acquiring stuff, then doing it in real life would be ok. (Some do get away it, some do get send away for it) Who says it is acceptable? It is just a sensible way of trying to ensure that in that setting, the goods you went to the trouble of stealing did not immediately get returned to their owner. If they did, that would ruin the concept of having "theif" as a profession. Originally by: Steven Dynahir In game terms, the item should just end up as "stolen". See a guard and get a insta-whack. I agree, but then, how do you go about getting the item back. Should the game have a process where the "owner" can pay a nominal sum so that the item can be identity tagged as being their's? How then, would the owner go about recovering said item without ruining the concept of the "theif" as a valid career choice without CCP implementing a load of stuff to enable thieves to combat this. In the "real world" (tm) recovering stolen goods is not easy, not even if they have been tagged in some way by the owner. I would rather this were not the case in the real world and that stolen property could be easily returned. However, in a game as open as Eve, people should be able to opt for the "thief" career path without being "instawhacked" every time they made a theft, providing of course the thefts are appropriately planned. I would hate to have my property stolen by another Eve player, just as I would hate to have my property stolen in real life. Which is why I take precautions to ensure it doesn't happen in either setting. The difference is, in Eve, if someone steals from me after all my precautions, I really don't mind, because as a "Player" in a "Game" they made the effort to "win" that aspect of "the game" in order to steal from me. In real life it would just **** me off.

Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 14:58:00 - [201] Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: Bhaal Right now it's the flavor of the month piracy, you call that freedom? Its allways been around you know... But more players = more crime. It has not always been around, 2 years ago it was virtually unheard of, griefers were too busy using JIP camping & other exploits... As CCP has taken away one griefing method after another, these players move to the next easiest "tactic", the one that requires the least risk for most reward. They simply need to pay more for their crime, there needs to be more deterrents. Calculating a known loss through a game mechanic to steal is not what I'd call free form profession, I'd call it bad game design... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:01:00 - [202] Originally by: James Duar And you reveal your purpose at last. You don't want to play a game with that sort of risk. To which I can add, as many others have, there are plenty of games like that. Go find one. I've already revealed my purpose, but you seem to still look for it. Should it be possibile? Yes Should it have some punitive measures? Yes You take an alt, blow up a hauler and gain free iskies. or You blow up a hauler, gain isk, grind few hours a complex for secloss, rince & repeat. There is no loss for such activity, thus there is no penalty. That is why people do it. For zero penalty free ISK. --- Sell orders Recruitment
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:02:00 - [203] Originally by: Bhaal It has not always been around, Wrong ;-) sorry man, but you are. Originally by: Bhaal 2 years ago it was virtually unheard of, griefers were too busy using JIP camping & other exploits... Indeed, it was unheard off. And yet... I heard of it as I started playing. Allmost 2 years ago. But as the number of players grow - so does this behaviour. As the number of mindless afk hauling alts with billions in cargobays increases - so does this behavior. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:05:00 - [204] Originally by: Steven Dynahir Originally by: James Duar And you reveal your purpose at last. You don't want to play a game with that sort of risk. To which I can add, as many others have, there are plenty of games like that. Go find one. I've already revealed my purpose, but you seem to still look for it. Should it be possibile? Yes Should it have some punitive measures? Yes You take an alt, blow up a hauler and gain free iskies. or You blow up a hauler, gain isk, grind few hours a complex for secloss, rince & repeat. There is no loss for such activity, thus there is no penalty. That is why people do it. For zero penalty free ISK. Yes but by the logic you're applying, you didn't really use anything did you? I mean, you lose your stuff, grind a few hours ratting or in a Lvl 4 or mining, and buy all your stuff again. --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:06:00 - [205] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 15:07:52 Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: Bhaal It has not always been around, Wrong ;-) sorry man, but you are. Originally by: Bhaal 2 years ago it was virtually unheard of, griefers were too busy using JIP camping & other exploits... Indeed, it was unheard off. And yet... I heard of it as I started playing. Allmost 2 years ago. But as the number of players grow - so does this behaviour. As the number of mindless afk hauling alts with billions in cargobays increases - so does this behavior. Yes, the behavior grows because it's a tactic that is out of control, and many wannabe pirates see it as an easier way to make ISK than any other form of "piracy" Broken... If you can't see it's broken, you're blind, just like those who don't see it as griefing... In one form or another, this tactic will be forced to change by CCP, we'll just have to have patience... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:07:00 - [206] Quote: Who says it is acceptable? It is just a sensible way of trying to ensure that in that setting, the goods you went to the trouble of stealing did not immediately get returned to their owner. If they did, that would ruin the concept of having "theif" as a profession. lol, what a weird concept. Ever consider not getting caught? Let's look at reality. You get caught, you don't profit and are punished. The vicctim has most, if not all his possessions returned if possible. You don't get caught, you profit. The victim loses everything. In EVE. You get caught, you profit. The victim loses everything. You don't get caught, you profit. The victim loses everything. Why can't people see this? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Omuro Takeda	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:14:00 - [207] Originally by: Bhaal Freedom & creativity? That's what you'd call suicide ganking? Now I've heard it all. By the way, more restrictions & penalties on the criminals is not going to eliminate suicide ganking, just make it much less prevalent. Right now it's the flavor of the month piracy, you call that freedom? Giving a player the choice to try and blow up somebody else in what seems secure space, with a 100% chance of him loosing his ship - THAT's called freedom, yeah. Figuring out how to profit from it is the creative part.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:16:00 - [208] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 15:18:45 Originally by: Omuro Takeda Originally by: Bhaal Freedom & creativity? That's what you'd call suicide ganking? Now I've heard it all. By the way, more restrictions & penalties on the criminals is not going to eliminate suicide ganking, just make it much less prevalent. Right now it's the flavor of the month piracy, you call that freedom? Giving a player the choice to try and blow up somebody else in what seems secure space, with a 100% chance of him loosing his ship - THAT's called freedom, yeah. Figuring out how to profit from it is the creative part. Using an alt to loot & circumvent the system put in place by CCP is not creative, it's an exploit... If it's so **** creative, why don't you and your buddy go down to the local bank & try it. Make sure the cops see you holding the money bag. Then come back and tell us all how creative that is. ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:17:00 - [209] Originally by: Omuro Takeda Originally by: Bhaal Freedom & creativity? That's what you'd call suicide ganking? Now I've heard it all. By the way, more restrictions & penalties on the criminals is not going to eliminate suicide ganking, just make it much less prevalent. Right now it's the flavor of the month piracy, you call that freedom? Giving a player the choice to try and blow up somebody else in what seems secure space, with a 100% chance of him loosing his ship - THAT's called freedom, yeah. Figuring out how to profit from it is the creative part. Figuring out how to exploit the game mechanics is just being creative eh? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Hellspawn01 Amarr The Phantom Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:25:00 - [210] Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: Bhaal Right now it's the flavor of the month piracy, you call that freedom? Its allways been around you know... But more players = more crime. It has not always been around, 2 years ago it was virtually unheard of, griefers were too busy using JIP camping & other exploits... As CCP has taken away one griefing method after another, these players move to the next easiest "tactic", the one that requires the least risk for most reward. They simply need to pay more for their crime, there needs to be more deterrents. Calculating a known loss through a game mechanic to steal is not what I'd call free form profession, I'd call it bad game design... Agreed. Getting insurance after getting blown away by concord for ganking a hauler in high sec is just wrong. Crime pays #1. Have an alt pick up both cans without consequences is also wrong. Crime pays #2. Ship lovers click here

Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:30:00 - [211] The thought of moving BPOs in anything that doesn't do at least 4000m/s makes me cringe. I wish I'd been the one who scanned you.
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:35:00 - [212] Originally by: James Duar Yes but by the logic you're applying, you didn't really use anything did you? I mean, you lose your stuff, grind a few hours ratting or in a Lvl 4 or mining, and buy all your stuff again. Nope. --- Sell orders Recruitment
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:37:00 - [213] Is completely your own fault for not taking the proper precautions, usin a fat slow t1 hauler isnt exactly high end protection for your valuables is it. And it's nt griefing in any way, shape or form. Learn from it, invest in a better hauler with nanos and maybe a stab or 2, use instas and a scout. Laziness is no excuse not to be careful Let's see who's standing at the end when the dust settle's
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Boryokudan Incorporated	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:40:00 - [214] Originally by: Bhaal Yes, the behavior grows because it's a tactic that is out of control, and many wannabe pirates see it as an easier way to make ISK than any other form of "piracy" Broken... If you can't see it's broken, you're blind, just like those who don't see it as griefing... In one form or another, this tactic will be forced to change by CCP, we'll just have to have patience... Login traps and logout saves are also grief tactics. Login traps - Login out of no where and gank enemies. Counter - Mass logouts. Logout traps - Logout of bubbles to save ships and pods. Killers can not get kills. Counter - Nothing. Empire suicides - Take sec hits, lose ships. Can make some ISKs. Counter - Do not put valuables in crap ships. --------- Faction Warfare Begins Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Aodha Khan Minmatar The Necroborg The Sani Sabik	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:41:00 - [215] Originally by: Wolfways Yes you're right. If someone makes themself an easy target they are bound to be stolen from. But if the thief is caught in the act (say like Concord turning up while the aggressor is killing or looting) he is punished and the victim has his possessions returned. Why should EVE be any different? Because Eve is a much harsher environment (which it should be) and CONCORD doesn't have time to be running around collecting loot cans to return the goods to Joe Bloggs. They are too busy shooting down criminals. In this case, the person making the mistake should be punished. The mistake was to put all his things in a hauler and expect to be 100% safe while travelling. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:42:00 - [216] Originally by: Wolfways Figuring out how to exploit the game mechanics is just being creative eh? Since when is using an alt an exploit? CCP addressed this by taking cruise missiles away from frigs, it requires much more isk and training time to make a suicide alt, the idea was to make it not worth the effort. It's not CCPs fault that stupid people transport BPOs in a T1 hauler thus making suiciding worth the effort. If people were smart and weren't lazy then suicide alting would not occur. But because there are retards who will put a mess of BPOs in a T1 hauler, this tactic is valid. And using an alt to do what any other third party can do- pick up a random can in space- is not an exploit. It's simply paying money to be two separate people in Eve. When I NPC hunt in a Raven picking up cans, even with a tractor beam, can be a pain. Is it an exploit to use an alt in a Vigil to loot my cans since a Raven was never meant to go 2000m/s? No, of course not. And I am paying $15 a month to be able to do it.
Aodha Khan Minmatar The Necroborg The Sani Sabik	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:44:00 - [217] Originally by: Bhaal Using an alt to loot & circumvent the system put in place by CCP is not creative, it's an exploit... So it's ok if you get a friend to do it? Your alt issue is just a smokescreen for the real issue of killing in high sec space. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
Jason Marshall Hammer Of Light Astral Wolves	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:46:00 - [218] Originally by: Rekindle what would help is to buff haulers just by a bit so they cant be shot in a hit or two instead of catoring to all griefers in this scenario. If you werent in a hauler you wouldnt die in a hit or two, why penalize people for moving their gear around in situations where tehy would other wise be %100 protected. If i were in 0.0 system that would be different. Whats the point of "prefering safer" systems if they're only safe if survive griefers ganking at an empire gate? My ishkur got one shotted (well one shot from 4 battleships) the other day, it ruined me. Dont call for a buff when somethine goes bad, but you are right this is a pvp game. Tacky lens flares in sigs 4tw!
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:48:00 - [219] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Figuring out how to exploit the game mechanics is just being creative eh? Since when is using an alt an exploit? CCP addressed this by taking cruise missiles away from frigs, it requires much more isk and training time to make a suicide alt, the idea was to make it not worth the effort. It's not CCPs fault that stupid people transport BPOs in a T1 hauler thus making suiciding worth the effort. If people were smart and weren't lazy then suicide alting would not occur. But because there are retards who will put a mess of BPOs in a T1 hauler, this tactic is valid. And using an alt to do what any other third party can do- pick up a random can in space- is not an exploit. It's simply paying money to be two separate people in Eve. When I NPC hunt in a Raven picking up cans, even with a tractor beam, can be a pain. Is it an exploit to use an alt in a Vigil to loot my cans since a Raven was never meant to go 2000m/s? No, of course not. And I am paying $15 a month to be able to do it. I'm not talking about just using alts. The whole idea of killing yourself for profit is rediculous. You don't see that? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:53:00 - [220] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Bhaal Yes, the behavior grows because it's a tactic that is out of control, and many wannabe pirates see it as an easier way to make ISK than any other form of "piracy" Broken... If you can't see it's broken, you're blind, just like those who don't see it as griefing... In one form or another, this tactic will be forced to change by CCP, we'll just have to have patience... Login traps and logout saves are also grief tactics. Login traps - Login out of no where and gank enemies. Counter - Mass logouts. Logout traps - Logout of bubbles to save ships and pods. Killers can not get kills. Counter - Nothing. Empire suicides - Take sec hits, lose ships. Can make some ISKs. Counter - Do not put valuables in crap ships. All login & logout tactics are chicken ** tactics, doesn't make suicide ganking any less of chicken ** tactic... I want to see a punishment that more fits the crime of all parties involved, the suicider and looter. Using a crap ship in 1.0 space is not a crime, sorry. It may be foolish, in low sec, but it's not a crime. Me taking the convenient store earnings to the bank in broad daylight where many cops patrol is not a crime, nor is it foolish. Me taking the earnings to the bank down a back alley at night is not a crime either, although it may be foolish. Jita is not a dark back alleyà EVE doesn't discriminate in this manner as it should... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus

Crovan Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.07 15:54:00 - [221] Originally by: Bhaal 2) No insurance for corp war death, in empire or anywhere else, you're at war, no insurance company should want to insure a ship being used in warfare, that's for alliances & corps to handle, not an NPC insurance system. The other ideas you brought up seem workable, but this one is not. If anything, this cators (sic) to the population who might approach what a griefer really is. Having spent some time in ISS, I ran into quite a few people who wanted to legitimize their solo traveller and Jita-hauler-ganking with a wardec, so denying insurance in wars would actually help these people out. Not real sure where this one fell of the logic train, but meh. Also...Jita isn't 1.0 iirc. Originally by: Seleene Client - "You smash them." MC - "Ooooh! Good! Like to smash!"
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:02:00 - [222] Originally by: Wolfways Let's look at reality. You get caught, you don't profit and are punished. The vicctim has most, if not all his possessions returned if possible. This is not reality. For posessions to be returne the theif in question must either a) be in possession of the stolen goods or b) be able to tell the police where the goods are. If he doesn't have a) and can't/won't do b), then recovering stolen goods is a time consuming activity with little guarantee of success. Originally by: Wolfways You don't get caught, you profit. The victim loses everything. More or less. The part you didn't account for is insurance in the real world. But insurance in reality only pays out if the victim can demonstrate they properly sa*uarded their belongings/and or property. If you leave your car or house unlocked, the insurance company won't pay out. It would, however, be next to impossible to implement a similar system in eve as there is no credible way of determining what is an "acceptable" level of precaution against theft. However, the eve game mechanics allow a player to go to far greater lengths to sauard valuable possessions than your average home owner in the real world. Originally by:* Wolfways In EVE. You get caught, you profit. The victim loses everything. You don't get caught, you profit. The victim loses everything. This is true only on the basis that the victim has anything worth stealing that outwieghs your losses. If someone is stupid enough to put valuable BPOs in a poorly defended Tier 1 freighter, then you will make a huge profit if you attack them. If people put expensive BPOs in well defended Tier 1 freighters, then you will have to increase your losses (and decrease your profit) margin in order to make a profit. Or if people only transport expensive goods in Tech 2, well defended, freighters, then odds are you're not going to make a profit unless. Its only an exploit if the players CAN'T do anything about it. The game mechanics provide a sizeabe number of counter measures against this form of piracy. If people used them, instead of whining here, these sort of pirates would eventually quit as there would be little or not profit in this activity. As things stand. People would rather assume that they should be able to transport billions of ISK worth of belongings in poorly defended ships at no risk at all and when the inevitable happens, they come here to whine that something should be done, when the power to protect themselves was in their hands all along. I'll say again, its not an exploit, because the players can take measures to guard against it. Its not like spawn camping in an FPS where there is nothing you can do to get rid of the guy killing you each time you spawn.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:08:00 - [223] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 16:09:29 Quote: I'll say again, its not an exploit, because the players can take measures to guard against it. Its not like spawn camping in an FPS where there is nothing you can do to get rid of the guy killing you each time you spawn. Then why was JIP camping removed from EVE? You didn't have to fly through the gate did you? No matter what you say, the tactic is lame, and the calculated loss before the crime is commited system is bogus, no matter how you slice it. How you can justify Concord getting fooled day after day letting the same ppl get away with this as not being a broken game mechanic in some form or another is beyond me... I've never lost anything this way, never will, but I can certainly see something is wrong and needs to be fixed... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:13:00 - [224] Originally by: Bhaal I've never lost anything this way, never will, but I can certainly see something is wrong and needs to be fixed... Already was fixed when Cruise missiles were removed from Kestrels. But the fix assumed people weren't lazy and stupid. How dare CCP assume people wouldn't continue to be lazy and stupid.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:16:00 - [225] Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 16:17:01 A lot of you have lost sight of what pvp is, really you have. PvP is player vs player combat. Its not logging off, its not mass logins/mass log outs, its not book mark copying, and its not sitting in front of the police to suicide gank haulers as they come through other wise secure space in Jita so the defender has no recourse. I'm over the fact I've lost my stuff - I have to be or there is no point for me to post here or even log on tonight. It sucks and I think its lame. I do question how long I will play now because I can't get over how much time its taken to acquire that stuff. Yes it was stupid of me to take that type of risk within the dynamic of the game. That doesn't change the fact its lame. What is more lame is that there is a subset of the community that think this is what pvp is. Give your heads a shake ffs. Do you want a balanced pvp community where you fight other people in the spirit of competition or do you want more options to gank hauler noobs moving through "secure" space? The same type of element existed in UO and there were those that claimed to be elite PvP'rs. If you're looking for ways to suicide gank yourself to kill haulers through empire space IMHO you're not a pvp player and you dont deserve the title. A game doesnt have to be unfair to be hard core pvp, a game doesnt have to be endorse griefers to be non care bear. Let me buy you some tin foil hats. -------------------------------------------
Santa Anna	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:16:00 - [226] Originally by: Rekindle 1. if you jump trhoguh empire space and 99.99 % of that time is over 1.5 years and you've never had an incident and then you get ganked by a lame game mechanic where is the real problem? 2. if 3000 ppl have this problem where is the real problem? Is it really with the stupid noobs like me who think they can warp through "safe" space or does it rest with a mechanic that allows all by haulers to pass by safely? I've been playing ~2 months and I've seen this happen a half-dozen times just passing through systems (Jita 3 or 4 times, and it's "safer" than a 0.5). Either these kind of things have gotten a lot more prevalent recently or you haven't been paying attention. Quote: But a .5 system is not downtown Chicago. No space in EVE is as safe as downtown Chicago. Perhaps if rogue drones followed you around at 3am hassling you for spare change rather than shooting at you the new 0.0 regions would be comparable.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:19:00 - [227] Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 16:17:01 A lot of you have lost sight of what pvp is, really you have. PvP is player vs player combat. Its not logging off, its not mass logins/mass log outs, its not book mark copying, and its not sitting in front of the police to suicide gank haulers as they come through other wise secure space in Jita so the defender has no recourse. I'm over the fact I've lost my stuff - I have to be or there is no point for me to post here or even log on tonight. It sucks and I think its lame. I do question how long I will play now because I can't get over how much time its taken to acquire that stuff. Yes it was stupid of me to take that type of risk within the dynamic of the game. That doesn't change the fact its lame. What is more lame is that there is a subset of the community that think this is what pvp is. Give your heads a shake ffs. Do you want a balanced pvp community where you fight other people in the spirit of competition or do you want more options to gank hauler noobs moving through "secure" space? The same type of element existed in UO and there were those that claimed to be elite PvP'rs. If you're looking for ways to suicide gank yourself to kill haulers through empire space IMHO you're not a pvp player and you dont deserve the title. A game doesnt have to be unfair to be hard core pvp, a game doesnt have to be endorse griefers to be non care bear. Let me buy you some tin foil hats. From the very beginning, most PvP'ers had a very very hard time with a balanced PvP system, they chose grief tactics over PvP, because CCP allowed them to... 3 years later, CCP still allows it in various forms... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:20:00 - [228] Edited by: Alowishus on 07/11/2006 16:24:48 Originally by: Rekindle What is more lame is that there is a subset of the community that think this is what pvp is. Piracy /= PvP. Lame is not realizing that. Attacking the inexperienced and deffenseless (or lazy and stupid in this case) to take their assets is not griefing, it's smart piracy.
Santa Anna	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:24:00 - [229] Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 16:17:01 A lot of you have lost sight of what pvp is, really you have. PvP is player vs player combat. Its not logging off, its not mass logins/mass log outs, its not book mark copying, and its not sitting in front of the police to suicide gank haulers as they come through other wise secure space in Jita so the defender has no recourse. At its core, a PVP game is one where the players create the tactics, the rules, the environment in which the other players play. There's no "right" way to PVP. Clearly there's a style that you or I or anyone else prefers, but that style is slightly different for everyone. I shouldn't not use tactic X just because you don't like it -- my choices make your game environment, just like your choices make mine. I can choose how to use the environment my fellow players have provided, and how to contribute to it, but I can't choose to make my own environment.
Rafein Eye of God Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:26:00 - [230] TBH, they should remove insurance payouts to those who have their ships killed by Concord in Empire. Once that is done, it's fine and balanced. Understand, this has been going on for a long time. If the Devs wanted to remove it, they would have long ago. But Eve is a PvP game, and another stops someone fom ganking a hauler, or killing a macrominer, as long as they are willing to take the penalty. As far as greifing, it is as much a greifing tactic as someone going to a system I wanted to mine in, and mining the ore i wanted to mine. Because that player's actions denied me what I wanted to do, and he profited from it.

Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:28:00 - [231] Originally by: Santa Anna Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 16:17:01 A lot of you have lost sight of what pvp is, really you have. PvP is player vs player combat. Its not logging off, its not mass logins/mass log outs, its not book mark copying, and its not sitting in front of the police to suicide gank haulers as they come through other wise secure space in Jita so the defender has no recourse. At its core, a PVP game is one where the players create the tactics, the rules, the environment in which the other players play. There's no "right" way to PVP. Clearly there's a style that you or I or anyone else prefers, but that style is slightly different for everyone. I shouldn't not use tactic X just because you don't like it -- my choices make your game environment, just like your choices make mine. I can choose how to use the environment my fellow players have provided, and how to contribute to it, but I can't choose to make my own environment. There is also a vision for what the DEV's want PvP to be. Gamers by nature will try to exploit the game by any means possible to not conform to the DEV's vision, but to make their chances of easily obtained rewards more accessible. It's up to the DEV's to modify the game when necessary to keep the game on track, and fulfill their vision... I highly doubt they wanted suicide ganking to be so prevalent, unless they truly are all griefers from UO... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Tekka Caldari Dark Cartel Otherworld Empire Productions	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:35:00 - [232] REPORTED FOR GRIEFT TATICS!!! Also thats how the game always was (was easier back in the day), is, and will be. »»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:35:00 - [233] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Figuring out how to exploit the game mechanics is just being creative eh? Since when is using an alt an exploit? CCP addressed this by taking cruise missiles away from frigs, it requires much more isk and training time to make a suicide alt, the idea was to make it not worth the effort. It's not CCPs fault that stupid people transport BPOs in a T1 hauler thus making suiciding worth the effort. If people were smart and weren't lazy then suicide alting would not occur. But because there are retards who will put a mess of BPOs in a T1 hauler, this tactic is valid. And using an alt to do what any other third party can do- pick up a random can in space- is not an exploit. It's simply paying money to be two separate people in Eve. When I NPC hunt in a Raven picking up cans, even with a tractor beam, can be a pain. Is it an exploit to use an alt in a Vigil to loot my cans since a Raven was never meant to go 2000m/s? No, of course not. And I am paying $15 a month to be able to do it. I'm not talking about just using alts. The whole idea of killing yourself for profit is rediculous. You don't see that? But this isn't the real world. In Eve, two characters are two people. The one who kills himself is not profiting, the one who is picking up the can is. And it costs an extra $15 a month for one person to be able to be two separate people in Eve. No, it's the player who is profiting. You can't tell me that the player never uses the resources from one character to help the other. In fact, just by using one character for the attack he is helping the other character by giving that character free loot. And no it's not the real world, but most games try to stick to realism as much as possible, only giving up on reality when something else proves more fun. But killing yourself so that someone else (if you want to ignore the fact that both characters are owned and used by the same player) can make a profit is the most rediculous, unrealistic thing i've ever heard of. Like i said earlier, if CCP state publically that all pod-pilots are suicidal nutjobs then i'll accept that suicide killing is legitimate. Until then (and even after then) it's just stupid. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Matyson	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:38:00 - [234] I wouldn't call them griefers. They're more like pirates in my opinion. They had a specific purpose to steal some of your cargo. That being said, you made a bad decision by carrying everything you own in one load. Originally by: Rekindle ...loosing literally everything you own...explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing.... Things like bpos and bpcs you can carry in a heavily tanked BS. If you're transporting something of great value, you need to plan more carefully. You knew the risks, why take them? You just made a drastic mistake and paid dearly for it. I can understand you're angry but let's not nerf Eve to make up for you're shortcomings.
Blake O'Reilly	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:44:00 - [235] Edited by: Blake O''Reilly on 07/11/2006 16:44:49 While I have some issues with gankers in empire, I can't say I feel in the least bit sorry for the OP. Only an idiot would move valuable items that way, and quite frankly I love eve for its gaming Darwinism. Gee I have billions in stuff, lets move it in a t1 hauler using expanders so I warp in and out REALLY slow, and hell I most likely don't even have instas. Jebus on a *****er, whats wrong with you people?
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:44:00 - [236] Quote: This is not reality. For posessions to be returne the theif in question must either a) be in possession of the stolen goods or b) be able to tell the police where the goods are. If he doesn't have a) and can't/won't do b), then recovering stolen goods is a time consuming activity with little guarantee of success. Sorry, i should have said the criminal was caught in the act. After all that's how Concord always catches pirates. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 16:49:00 - [237] Originally by: Wolfways (if you want to ignore the fact that both characters are owned and used by the same player) I do. When you pay the extra $15 and can use two PCs at once then you're two people in my opinion. Whatever arrangements and agreements these two people have as far as transfer of ingame assets is between them and being controlled by one out of game person is merely a formality.
Black Scorpio	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:06:00 - [238] Originally by: Rekindle Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. Hey man, I hear you about your loss, but what can I say, just make the extra effort and click to dock your ship somewhere next time, random station, whatever, or at least get out of the game if you're planning to be out for some time, don't leave your ship hanging in there, not with the valuable stuff in there. I can't say how many ships I've lost to falling asleep in inappropriate places, but oh well.. I consider that to be my mistake, to not take that extra 10 sec. before I completely go to ZzZzZZZZzz, and dock or at the least exit the client...
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:09:00 - [239] Edited by: Wolfways on 07/11/2006 17:11:14 lol the reasoning in some of these posts is amazing I was just talking about this thread with my wife and she said something that any old gamer will see. "It sounds just like UO when Tram came out." Let's face it, the different playstyles will never coexist happily together in a game. You make a pvp game, pve players complain. You make a pve game, pvp players complain. You combine pvp and pve (like mutually agreed upon corp wars) both can be fairly happy. But if you make a game with the ability to pk (i.e. attack someone who doesn't want to pvp) then the majority of pve players, and to a lesser extent some pvp players will never be happy. As far as i'm concerned, while playing a pirate might be an interesting profession, unless the game is stated as being totally about pvp with no pve involved, then allowing pirates is a bad idea. If CCP want to keep pirates as they are, with the ability to attack anyone, then they should state clearly on all advertising that EVE does not support pve. Or run two servers. One pvp, one pve Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Shinca	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:11:00 - [240] Originally by: Rekindle Any game system that welcomes tradeskill style characters needs to provide reasonable provisions for them to move through from point a to point b you mean something like some kind of ships you can actualy tank (BS, T2 hauler, T2 cruiser) or ships too big to be poped in secure space (freighters) or some stuff to help move around faster (nanofibres, instas, ...)? yeah, if only something like that was in the game /sarcasm off it does however suck to lose all to suicide gankers, on that I agree oh, just one more thing - PVP is player vs player, period. the 'combat' part might be there in your opinion, but that doesn't make it so... clones are people two Slovenian EVE forum

Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:21:00 - [241] Originally by: Wolfways Sorry, i should have said the criminal was caught in the act. After all that's how Concord always catches pirates. Which is not a mechanism paralleled anywhere in the real world. In Eve, if you attack someone in empire space (assuming they are not a war target) then Concord responds almost instantly. This does not happen in real life. The alternative is a system where people report crimes and concord responds to them. Obviously, its not hard to see how open to abuse such a system would be and how hard it would be make work so actual criminals were caught and punished.
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:21:00 - [242] Edited by: Alowishus on 07/11/2006 17:22:48 Originally by: Wolfways If CCP want to keep pirates as they are, with the ability to attack anyone, then they should state clearly on all advertising that EVE does not support pve. Or run two servers. One pvp, one pve I like both pve and pvp. Here's an idea, since CCP advertises that the game has both, how about it still has both and only people who want both should play? And if you only want one or the other, play a different game... CCP is not forcing anyone to pay for a subscription.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:42:00 - [243] Originally by: Alowishus Edited by: Alowishus on 07/11/2006 17:22:48 Originally by: Wolfways If CCP want to keep pirates as they are, with the ability to attack anyone, then they should state clearly on all advertising that EVE does not support pve. Or run two servers. One pvp, one pve I like both pve and pvp. Here's an idea, since CCP advertises that the game has both, how about it still has both and only people who want both should play? And if you only want one or the other, play a different game... CCP is not forcing anyone to pay for a subscription. Umm..did you read the whole post that you quoted there? Maybe i didn't explain properly. Combining pvp and pve in one game is fine. It's when you add in the ability to pk, thereby forcing pve players into pvp, that problems start to occur. Pk'ing is not pvp. It does involve pvp, but it is mainly about attacking those who don't want to pvp. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Blake O'Reilly	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:42:00 - [244] Just because you don't pvp, doesn't mean you should get a free pass on being stupid. The guy was a fool, most people who get ganked are fools, there really is no way for a prepared player to get ganked in empire. Lets look into the brain of the average ganked player..... Mmmmmm lets see, I'd like to move my amazingly expensive t2 hac bpo, my t2 drone bpo, 100k of zyd, 4 faction frigates, and a ton of dead space items. I have 2 billion isk in my wallet and I've been playing for years. Hey, its a occtor! oh man 85 million is expensive, and I can fit this all in an iteron V anyways. Mmmm well I'll need 5 cargo expanders, so lets put those on, and lets move through Jita on autopilot, I'm going to go lay down a bit.....
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:45:00 - [245] Originally by: Wolfways It does involve pvp, but it is mainly about attacking those who don't want to pvp. If you don't want the possibility of being killed by other players then other games beckon. Period.
Wotar	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:46:00 - [246] Originally by: Wolfways Pk'ing is not pvp. wtf so its only pvp if its consentual? Whose definition is this? Not CCPs, for sure.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 17:59:00 - [247] Edited by: Wolfways on 07/11/2006 18:01:24 Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways It does involve pvp, but it is mainly about attacking those who don't want to pvp. If you don't want the possibility of being killed by other players then other games beckon. Period. I agree, but there are always other players who will play and don't agree. If CCP want to tell those players that they aren't welcome in EVE that's fine by me. But it has to be clearly stated and drilled into people, and some will still play and say "Hey, why can he attack me?" I like both playstyles btw, pvp and pve i mean... i don't consider pking as anything but griefing. Blizzard have done well with their pve servers i think. You can pvp or pvp whenever you wish, and there's no pk's Not realistic? Unfortunately no, but neither is constantly watching for the thousands of pirates in a massive area of space...or suicide attacks for that matter... Until criminals suffer huge consequences for their actions games will never be very realistic. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:01:00 - [248] Edited by: Wolfways on 07/11/2006 18:02:33 Originally by: Wotar Originally by: Wolfways Pk'ing is not pvp. wtf so its only pvp if its consentual? Whose definition is this? Not CCPs, for sure. Read the next line after the bit you quoted. It's a definition that as far as i know has been used as long as pk's have existed. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Vanlade Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:03:00 - [249] Originally by: Rekindle Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. The problem is that you were carrying to much value in a defenceless ship. An industrial fitted for cargo capacity is very easy to destroy. When I move a BPO worth a billion around empire space, I never use a shuttle or an industrial. My options are a very fast interceptor, or a transport ship with boosted resistance for armor hp. Anything that would be hard to kill basically. In addition, do not leave precious items directly in your ship cargo. Instead put them in secure containers so that anyone scanning you won't know for sure if you are a worth target or not. You can panic and quit over your loss, or you can learn from it and play better next time. You are the only one responsible for your own security in space, and not CCP. Fly safe. - Vanlade
Illistar DeathWing	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:10:00 - [250] Well, the guy flew in an iteron V (so we know he can use transport ships), he did not use secure containers to hide his goods from scanners, not did he equip his ship deffencively. This tactic is nothing new, I my self am for it because as much as they try they never get me with it, and they always lose bs,bcs in the process.

Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:11:00 - [251] I am sorry to hear about your loss. I do feel it is an exploit as people directly involved are not all Concord popped. It is a selective Concord pop, and that is flawed imho. Enough people will quit over it, and it will change. It is all about the money. ....and that is all it is about.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:18:00 - [252] The only solution I see is to have looting the can a Concord sanctionable act. You want to suicide gank me, fine, I loose my ship, you do too, your mates come in to collect my loot, they are violating safe space law, concord interveres. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:19:00 - [253] Originally by: Illistar DeathWing Well, the guy flew in an iteron V (so we know he can use transport ships), he did not use secure containers to hide his goods from scanners, not did he equip his ship deffencively. This tactic is nothing new, I my self am for it because as much as they try they never get me with it, and they always lose bs,bcs in the process. Putting the item in a container in hold does not hide it from cargo scanners. I dont mind pirates, they would not be able to blow up my command ship before they got popped by concord The only problem with pirates is that there are far too many now... 0.1 - 0.4 is a wasteland now because there were just too many peeps in gank/ecm fitted ships that can very very easily pop miners/haulers/npcers...
Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:23:00 - [254] Originally by: DrAtomic The only solution I see is to have looting the can a Concord sanctionable act. You want to suicide gank me, fine, I loose my ship, you do too, your mates come in to collect my loot, they are violating safe space law, concord interveres. That is not a half bad idea.... that would ensure that all those directly involved are punished.... only in high-sec of course.
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:27:00 - [255] Originally by: DrAtomic You want to suicide gank me, fine, I loose my ship, you do too, your mates come in to collect my loot, they are violating safe space law, concord interveres. Why can't you have a friend on hand to scoop your loot the moment you pop? Why can't you fly a ship that can withstand the attacks of suicide bombers? Your proposal would completely negate the possibility of this kind of piracy happening, which while I'm sure would appeal greatly to those players who want a free ride and can't be arsed to plan ahead, does nothing for the game. While I agree that CCP should make it so ships destroyed by concord don't get insurance payouts, I fail to see why further changes should be made. The necessary mechanisms are available to players in game to protect themeselves from suicide piracy. If people can't be bothered to protect their assets, then they shouldn't complain when said assets are lost.
Black Scorpio	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:32:00 - [256] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: DrAtomic You want to suicide gank me, fine, I loose my ship, you do too, your mates come in to collect my loot, they are violating safe space law, concord interveres. Why can't you have a friend on hand to scoop your loot the moment you pop? Why can't you fly a ship that can withstand the attacks of suicide bombers? Your proposal would completely negate the possibility of this kind of piracy happening, which while I'm sure would appeal greatly to those players who want a free ride and can't be arsed to plan ahead, does nothing for the game. While I agree that CCP should make it so ships destroyed by concord don't get insurance payouts, I fail to see why further changes should be made. The necessary mechanisms are available to players in game to protect themeselves from suicide piracy. If people can't be bothered to protect their assets, then they shouldn't complain when said assets are lost. /Signed!
Kaylana Syi Minmatar The Nest Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:34:00 - [257] EVE is about risk and reward. Get over it. Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Omuro Takeda	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:39:00 - [258] Edited by: Omuro Takeda on 07/11/2006 18:43:23 Originally by: Rekindle ...It sucks and I think its lame...Yes it was stupid of me to take that type of risk within the dynamic of the game. That doesn't change the fact its lame. Bingo! It is lame! Who do you think cares you think it's lame? Nobody! So, you were sitting there in your hauler, thinking of moving somewhere else with all your priceless achievemnts and stuff. Been playing for two years, gee you ought to have some serious cash amounts, no? Why not hire someone to scout ahead of you, use as insta for gate jumping or whatever? The best part of your story is that if you had lost only an empty hauler you wouldn't have come to the forums at all. You knew people were pirating in high sec, suiciding their ships for the loot from an AFK hauler, and despite knowing it you risked all your belongings in a T1 industrial... I bet if you were moving stuff ten times less valuable in 0.0, you would have called some people to watch your rear, having spent 80% of your time in the lawless space as you claim yourself. The worst part of it is comming here, and in all your anger and frustration proclaiming piracy as griefing and suiciding as exploiting. I didn't know CONCORD guaranteed to retrieve my stuff if I lost it somehow in high sec, neither did the insurance company. You think it's lame - go join Bush on the war on terror. But don't insult CCP, telling them how their game is a playground for "griefers", when you couldn't have been more careless with your two years achievemnts. ------------ Those people who talk about "real" PvP being a fair and clear fight 1vs1 or 10vs10 should stop playing right away and get back to CS or GW. Hey, WOW will have arena team deathmatch in their expand too, a place for you to show off your pr0 PvP skills! But wait! You wouldn't stand a chance against a team of 11 year olds who are playing 14 hours a day and are topped out in epics! Oh, and there's this darn class system, it has balance issues!!1 That's not real PvP, it's not a fair fight!! Piracy isn't griefing (unless you ask for it by being too polite) Originally by: A Funny Guy Enough people will quit over it, and it will change. It is all about the money. ....and that is all it is about. Let me quote Lex Luthor: WROOONG! If it was about the money, CCP would have made something as popular and appealing to kidis as WOW. And taking into consideration, that suiciding has been happening for over two years now and subscriptions continue to rise, I don't think enough people have quit over it to make a difference. Omuro
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:44:00 - [259] Greetings, As an empire hauler I find the plight of the original poster a sad one and you have my simpathy. I also find it another example of how bad the situation with ganking in high security empire has become. Now I am sure that this has been going on for some time. The forums are proof positive of this. My question is why has it been allowed, and in truth condoned for so long? I think it is high time CCP stepped in and adjusted Concord just a bit. The solutions are simple and not implimenting them is just placing a stamp of approval on questionable tactics based on weak mechanics. Who knows, maybe CCP intended things to be like this. Of course one is then forced to wonder ôwhy bother with Concord at all?ö. Remove an insurance payout for death by concord. Fairly straight forward and makes sense. Why should a criminal get a free ride for committing a crime? Have concord confiscate the cans of all parties involved. What kind of security force would stomp the offender into paste only to sit by and chuckle as a random hauler (see alt) comes along and scoops the loot? This also guts the profit to be found in such attacks. You would still have the high sec ganking for revenge etc. You would still have people that don't take precautions loose due to their negligence. What you would also do is remove the incintive to farm haulers in Jita as they pass by with disposable 3 day old characters in Caracals. Other things that relate to this is a need to revise all of the haulers in the game. It wouldn't hurt for them to get a slightly better array of defensive options given the added dangers in the game. An improvement in inherent resists or slightly more armor/shields would not be game breaking. Better options to mask the contents of your cargo hold. Perhaps a low slot module that reduces cargo capacity but shields your cargo from cargo scanners. A launcher slot that allows you to use defender missiles for what they are worth. It would also be nice if an escort could actually provide cover for a hauler. Look at the possibilities for added *TEAM* play if you could have a destroyer shoot down incoming missiles or a battlecruiser move to block line of sight between an attacker and his/her target. --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:51:00 - [260] Originally by: Sendraks Why can't you have a friend on hand to scoop your loot the moment you pop? wtf? I have to have a friend in a hauler with me when transporting stuff?? Originally by: Sendraks Why can't you fly a ship that can withstand the attacks of suicide bombers? Well, it has to be said I think he messed up badly by not having his stuff in a decent ship Originally by: Sendraks Your proposal would completely negate the possibility of this kind of piracy happening, which while I'm sure would appeal greatly to those players who want a free ride and can't be arsed to plan ahead, does nothing for the game. what?? who is getting the free ride here exactly? the idiot with no skills who sits on a gate in a raven popping someone who may drop something expensive (for no appreciable loss it has to be said) or the person who npc'd and mined for fricking ages? Originally by: Sendraks While I agree that CCP should make it so ships destroyed by concord don't get insurance payouts, I fail to see why further changes should be made. Indeed, this on its own would severely restrict this daft mechanic Originally by: Sendraks If people can't be bothered to protect their assets, then they shouldn't complain when said assets are lost. To be honest, I have a friend who never comes to this forum because if it isnt whining its flaming and he couldnt be arsed sifting through all the rubbish. He was unaware that this quasi-suicide crap was going on at the scale it was doing. He had not been caught and will be unlikely to be caught out now as he will be transporting anything in a heavily tanked BS, and no AFKing either

Sammiel Ars Caelestis Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.07 18:56:00 - [261] Originally by: Osia Greetings, As an empire hauler I find the plight of the original poster a sad one and you have my simpathy. I also find it another example of how bad the situation with ganking in high security empire has become. Now I am sure that this has been going on for some time. The forums are proof positive of this. My question is why has it been allowed, and in truth condoned for so long? I think it is high time CCP stepped in and adjusted Concord just a bit. The solutions are simple and not implimenting them is just placing a stamp of approval on questionable tactics based on weak mechanics. Who knows, maybe CCP intended things to be like this. Of course one is then forced to wonder ôwhy bother with Concord at all?ö. Remove an insurance payout for death by concord. Fairly straight forward and makes sense. Why should a criminal get a free ride for committing a crime? Have concord confiscate the cans of all parties involved. What kind of security force would stomp the offender into paste only to sit by and chuckle as a random hauler (see alt) comes along and scoops the loot? This also guts the profit to be found in such attacks. You would still have the high sec ganking for revenge etc. You would still have people that don't take precautions loose due to their negligence. What you would also do is remove the incintive to farm haulers in Jita as they pass by with disposable 3 day old characters in Caracals. Other things that relate to this is a need to revise all of the haulers in the game. It wouldn't hurt for them to get a slightly better array of defensive options given the added dangers in the game. An improvement in inherent resists or slightly more armor/shields would not be game breaking. Better options to mask the contents of your cargo hold. Perhaps a low slot module that reduces cargo capacity but shields your cargo from cargo scanners. A launcher slot that allows you to use defender missiles for what they are worth. It would also be nice if an escort could actually provide cover for a hauler. Look at the possibilities for added *TEAM* play if you could have a destroyer shoot down incoming missiles or a battlecruiser move to block line of sight between an attacker and his/her target. Improved transports are already in the game. People just don't want to be arsed to train and buy them. So 'making more durable transports' is simply a red herring. They exist. Learn to use them if you are transporting a lot of items worth a lot of isk. Removing insurance payout is fine as far as I am concerned. However it wouldn't stop suicide ganking, it would just raise the bar by 100m. Finally, any real life analogies are null and void. Eve is not real life. If I get hit by a missile salvo, I don't just wake up in a clone vat. Things should be balanced around what is good for the game. And I don't see suicide ganking as bad. It punishes people for being careless and removes items from the game, acting as an ISK sink. There are easy ways to avoid it also. Saying 'all you need is enough BSes' is a total red herring. When was the last time you saw 10 BSes grouped together trying to suicide on transport ships? Probably never, because it would be quixotic at best. Also, its not greifing. The intent is not to cause emotional duress in the victim, but simply to profit. Calling it greifing just makes you look foolish. DEATHLEY > why dont u remain silent like prominent alliances like our band of brothers do
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:18:00 - [262] Originally by: Sammiel Improved transports are already in the game. People just don't want to be arsed to train and buy them. So 'making more durable transports' is simply a red herring. They exist. Learn to use them if you are transporting a lot of items worth a lot of isk. You are right in that blockade runners and deep space transports are present and available in the game. However, does anyone else find it odd that ships that seem intended for use in ôdeep spaceö and the more hostile portions of the EVE universe are needed more often in high security portions of that same universe? As I said more defensive options for Tech I industrial ships probably wouldn't hurt. It would also place more options in the hands of newer players that cannot afford to or cannot yet fly a Tech II industial. Originally by: Sammiel Removing insurance payout is fine as far as I am concerned. However it wouldn't stop suicide ganking, it would just raise the bar by 100m. You're definately right that removing insurance is not an end all to the issue. It stands simply as a deterent to the behavior. If combined with my suggestion to have Concord confiscate the cans of all parties involved it again would not be an end all, just a further deterent. Originally by: Sammiel Finally, any real life analogies are null and void. Eve is not real life. If I get hit by a missile salvo, I don't just wake up in a clone vat. Things should be balanced around what is good for the game. And I don't see suicide ganking as bad. It punishes people for being careless and removes items from the game, acting as an ISK sink. There are easy ways to avoid it also. Saying 'all you need is enough BSes' is a total red herring. When was the last time you saw 10 BSes grouped together trying to suicide on transport ships? Probably never, because it would be quixotic at best. Also, its not greifing. The intent is not to cause emotional duress in the victim, but simply to profit. Calling it greifing just makes you look foolish. Suicide ganking is not in itself bad. Having mechanics favor such activities to the point of encouraging is ôquestionableö, and might warrant explination. While I agree real life analogies often break down when used in relation to EVE issues logic still applies. There is no good reasoning I am aware of for Concord to paste a target responsible for agression, then sit and watch as someone scoops the rewards resulting from that aggression. In my mind Concord should at the very least confiscate the loot as any combat pilot might from a recent kill. That way no one wins from the act of agression. Doesn't keep people from suiciding a hauler, it just moves it away from what it is today. --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group
Matrix Aran Legio Immortalis	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:19:00 - [263] In responce to the OP, if you'd have taken the care of reading most of the Dev's comments about Eve over the past three years you would realize that they do consider the game to be a 100% PVP game. ----
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:32:00 - [264] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 19:33:49 Originally by: Matrix Aran In responce to the OP, if you'd have taken the care of reading most of the Dev's comments about Eve over the past three years you would realize that they do consider the game to be a 100% PVP game. The problem is suicide ganking in high sec empire is not really PvP'ing, it's PK'ing... There's a difference. No one develops a game and envisions PK'ing as the main form of PvP. Only 0.0 alliances & some RP and Merc corps in empire utilize the true PvP CCP envisioned, the rest of the players are PK'ing.. They don't deserve to be called PvP'ers IMO. Pirating is PK'ing, and I don't care what anyone says, pirating should not be the main form of PvP in an MMO where corp & alliance warfare was the dream... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:39:00 - [265] Originally by: Bhaal Pirating is PK'ing, and I don't care what anyone says, pirating should not be the main form of PvP in an MMO where corp & alliance warfare was the dream... This actually makes sense and I agree. However, the solution isn't to "nerf piracy" but to change the game so the other forms of PvP become more popular again.
Semkhet The Priory Shroud Of Darkness	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:44:00 - [266] LMAO ! Two years in the game, and you can't fly battleships, T2 industrials or freighters when moving valuables nor use scouts ? Dude, the only grief I see here against you is your own mind, or more precisely, the lack of it... It's a bit like those peeps who discover that their girlfriend has another lover, go mad and look for the guy to punch him. The wise path is first to realize that the guy could'n do anything without your girlfriend consent, and second to realize that this could only happen BECAUSE you don't cover all of your girlfiend needs... As long you look for scapegoats, you're just limiting your awareness and hence will fall again in the same errors over and over.
DefJam101 Gallente Praxiteles Inc. E N I G M A	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:45:00 - [267] Originally by: Rekindle Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. This is a 100% PvP only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere. The key points in there are: A. 1hp hauler: It it's that easy to kill why fly it with important stuff? B. PvP can happen anywhere, its the penalties for it that regulate it. As much as I respect all types of players in this game if you don't PvP and accept it your playing "wrong". Not to say there's anything wrong with that, it just means your opinions are always gonna be flawed. ***
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:46:00 - [268] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Bhaal Pirating is PK'ing, and I don't care what anyone says, pirating should not be the main form of PvP in an MMO where corp & alliance warfare was the dream... This actually makes sense and I agree. However, the solution isn't to "nerf piracy" but to change the game so the other forms of PvP become more popular again. This has been the problem since the beginning. Everyone in EVE who wanted to PvP was a pirate, and really didn't PvP for anything other than to *****easy targets. This mentality set in, and has been with the game ever since. The initial direction CCP gave us for PvP was wrong to begin with. And as time went on, the word spread, and EVE has continually attracted PK'ers, and not enough PvP'ers who fight for a greater cause than just kicking some carebears around... I think it's getting there, but tactics like suicide ganking need to be abolished, and pirating needs to become only for the top cream of the crop, not every shmuck under the sun who can say YARRRRR. EVE needs more PvP'ers & less PK'ers, CCP has to make PK'ing less prevalent so there is more competition and the pool of pirates is thinned down, and the fat is removed. ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:50:00 - [269] Originally by: Radioactive Babe wtf? I have to have a friend in a hauler with me when transporting stuff?? Wtf? Can't be arsed to get help when transporting billions of ISK worth of items?? Originally by: Radioactive Babe what?? who is getting the free ride here exactly? the idiot with no skills who sits on a gate in a raven popping someone who may drop something expensive (for no appreciable loss it has to be said) or the person who npc'd and mined for fricking ages? If people fitted ships sensibly for transporting goods, the only people to lose out would be the pirates. When a pirate lose s100million ISK of ship with no profit, they will think twice before doing it again. As it stands, the general thrust of a lot of comments in this thread is that players think they should just be able to fit ships to haul as much as possible, with no defense, and be able to fly safely through empire. If thats not a free ride, I don't know what is. Originally by: Radioactive Babe Indeed, this on its own would severely restrict this daft mechanic In short, remove the onus of responsibility from the players to protect themselves from harm. And there was me thinking Eve was a game that rewarded those players who made the effort to think. But apparently, not everyone wants it that way. Originally by: Radioactive Babe To be honest, I have a friend who never comes to this forum because if it isnt whining its flaming and he couldnt be arsed sifting through all the rubbish. He was unaware that this quasi-suicide crap was going on at the scale it was doing. He had not been caught and will be unlikely to be caught out now as he will be transporting anything in a heavily tanked BS, and no AFKing either I don't care if there is crap here or not. I sift through the crap here to find out whats what to keep me informed so I can not be a victim of piracy of this sort. That, to me, is a large portion of what Eve is about. You do you research, plan properly, and reap the rewards. Rather than fly round, la de dah, and expect everything to be fine.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 19:56:00 - [270] Quote: As it stands, the general thrust of a lot of comments in this thread is that players think they should just be able to fit ships to haul as much as possible, with no defense, and be able to fly safely through empire. If thats not a free ride, I don't know what is. So why is it that the suicide ganker only has to use a calculator to figure out his profits, then F1, F2, F3... Who should have it easier in a well policed city, the truck driver or the criminal? You guys make no sense, talk about free rides! I sure wish I could steal in front of the cops after my buddy whacked a guy and just walk away, all the while talking about how much of an ass that guy was for driving down the street without a military escort Carebears get ZERO free rides in low sec & 0.0, criminals should get ZERO free rides in empire... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus

Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:02:00 - [271] Originally by: Bhaal Carebears get ZERO free rides in low sec & 0.0, criminals should get ZERO free rides in empire... In WoW, this is fine. In EVE, we don't believe in a game for carebears. K?
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:04:00 - [272] Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Bhaal Carebears get ZERO free rides in low sec & 0.0, criminals should get ZERO free rides in empire... In WoW, this is fine. In EVE, we don't believe in a game for carebears. K? No, it's not K you retard... Hence the whole reason for the thread, idiot. If it was ok, we wouldn't be discussing this... Bottom line is, there is a problem, and PK'ers are afraid if the problem is solved, the game will become harder for them... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:07:00 - [273] Originally by: Bhaal So why is it that the suicide ganker only has to use a calculator to figure out his profits, then F1, F2, F3... Which is still more effort than most of these people hauling make. If the haulers made more effort, this kind of piracy would not be profitable. Originally by: Bhaal You guys make no sense, talk about free rides! Its not hard to understand. People in haulers = take more responsibility = less profitable piracy. Instead of advocating the lazy man's solution to lazy man's pirating which is "wah, wah CCP fix this" encourage people to act maturely, take some responsibilty and fit a ship sensibly instead of expecting the world to molly coddle them. Originally by: Bhaal I sure wish I could steal in front of the cops after my buddy whacked a guy and just walk away, all the while talking about how much of an ass that guy was for driving down the street without a military escort This example only makes sense if the police arrive instantly and blow you and your buddies weapons/car/whatever away. But they don't. Originally by: Bhaal Carebears get ZERO free rides in low sec & 0.0, criminals should get ZERO free rides in empire... If a carebear makes no effort to plan a trip through low sec or 0.0, then yeah, they're gonna die. But if a pirate makes then modicum of effort to go blow some idiots away at the Jita gate, then fair enough. If players make it easy for these people to pirate then they will (and should) continue to do so. Two options. 1) Whine and expect CCP to fix stuff. 2) Stop yer whining, fit ships properly or fly tougher ships and don't make it worth the pirates time. I see what you're saying Bhaal and it makes ALOT of sense, but frankly it goes strongly against the grain of getting people to take some goddam responsibility for themselves. I'm sorry, but we're living in a world where people increasingly whine and expect others to solve their problems for them instead of solving them theirselves. This is a problem players can solve and so they should get on with it.
Tanis Bastar Caldari Interstitial Incorporated	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:07:00 - [274] Originally by: Osia You are right in that blockade runners and deep space transports are present and available in the game. However, does anyone else find it odd that ships that seem intended for use in ôdeep spaceö and the more hostile portions of the EVE universe are needed more often in high security portions of that same universe? er, no, it's not odd at all. On my planet even in the middle of the safest cities they use vehicles called "armored cars" to transport large amounts of the local currency.
PanzerGrenadier Caldari Templars of Space CORE.	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:09:00 - [275] Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg This is either a trollpost or you are downright insane. Who moves all their stuff in a T1 hauler after having 2 years worth of skillpoints ? QFT.
Amphira The Golden Goose	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:17:00 - [276] Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Bhaal Carebears get ZERO free rides in low sec & 0.0, criminals should get ZERO free rides in empire... In WoW, this is fine. In EVE, we don't believe in a game for carebears. K? No, it's not K you retard... Hence the whole reason for the thread, idiot. If it was ok, we wouldn't be discussing this... Bottom line is, there is a problem, and PK'ers are afraid if the problem is solved, the game will become harder for them... Originally by: Forum Rules Personal attacks are prohibited. Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts which are designed to personally berate or insult another. Text of this nature is not beneficial to the community spirit and will not be tolerated. Corporation, faction members and other players are cautioned to avoid allowing an "in character" dispute become an "out of character" personal attack. The game is designed for role playing and/or portraying a role and it is sometimes easy for tempers to flare when the lines between the virtual world and the real world are crossed. Keep in-game disputes in the game and off the forum, please, unless it is clearly a mutual, in character exchange. Cool down, eh?
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:20:00 - [277] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 20:21:21 Quote: I see what you're saying Bhaal and it makes ALOT of sense, but frankly it goes strongly against the grain of getting people to take some goddam responsibility for themselves. I'm sorry, but we're living in a world where people increasingly whine and expect others to solve their problems for them instead of solving them theirselves. This is a problem players can solve and so they should get on with it. It does not change the fact the criminals are getting away with this too easily, and there are game mechanic issues. Carebears not equipping their ship is not a game mechanic flaw, getting insurance for a ship blown up by Concord is. Being able to loot a can in front of Concord, who just blew up the ship that forced the drop of said can, is a game mechanic flaw. Carebears can loose ships all they want like this, but not in high sec empire, not at the current frequency... Make this a once a week or month occurrence by a great group of pirates, not something that happens 10's of times a day... It's too prevalent, PvP in high sec empire should require more effort than this. Pirates in low sec need to put in little effort, while carbears need to put in a lot. The opposite should be true in high sec. That's the point of the **** sec system... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
DefJam101 Gallente Praxiteles Inc. E N I G M A	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:21:00 - [278] Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Bhaal Carebears get ZERO free rides in low sec & 0.0, criminals should get ZERO free rides in empire... In WoW, this is fine. In EVE, we don't believe in a game for carebears. K? No, it's not K you retard... Hence the whole reason for the thread, idiot. If it was ok, we wouldn't be discussing this... Bottom line is, there is a problem, and PK'ers are afraid if the problem is solved, the game will become harder for them... Shut the hell up pirates and PvPers have life a lot harder and more unfair than you just to be able to play the way we want. We can be attacked anywhere. We are ALWAYS getting ganked by an opposing force much greater than our own. The even matched run from us where the overpowered attack. You just fly around and whine where respectful PvPers keep their mouths shut and let you play the way you want. No offense... ***
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:22:00 - [279] Originally by: Bhaal *snip - Such words.. Bottom line is, there is a problem, and PK'ers are afraid if the problem is solved, the game will become harder for them... We ain't got no problem unless CCP says we do And they clearly state we DON'T have a problem, but you skillfully dodged that post didn't you.
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:23:00 - [280] Sendraks, I see your posts and I simply must ask do you, or anyone else for that matter, believe that it is right that Tech II haulers are required to transport goods in empire space? Short of the rather whimsical suggestion of a friend or alt standing by to scoop your cargo in the event of suicide attack that seems to be what you are suggesting. Radioactive Babe has a good point in that a suicide attacker is getting a free ride in the current situation. They get an insurance payout which covers their ship in full. They get whatever loot that dropped from their victim assuming their alt is standing by, and they get to do it all over again in just a few minutes. As it stands I fly transports and blockade runners. To date I have had to tank damage from more cruisers and battleships in high security space than I ever encounter in low security or 0.0 regions. This fact combined with the reality that I don't operate near the major hotbeds for these activities like Jita tells me there might be a problem here. Whats more this activity is so low risk for the reward that ultimately there is no defense. There is a limit to the tanking abilities of even a Tech II industrial ship. There is no limit to the number of battleships that an assailant can bring to bear. Since they will get insurance that covers over 95% of their ship with fittings, I don't have to be carrying much to cover the little loss they might incur and still generate a profit. Adjustments might need to be made to the current set of mechanics. Though I do not share all of Bhaal's opinions on the subject he appears to be on the right track. Something needs to be done to discourage this behavior. I wouldn't advocate prohibiting it, but removing some of its appeal and consequence free nature is warranted and seems reasonable. --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group

Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:26:00 - [281] Originally by: DefJam101 Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Bhaal Carebears get ZERO free rides in low sec & 0.0, criminals should get ZERO free rides in empire... In WoW, this is fine. In EVE, we don't believe in a game for carebears. K? No, it's not K you retard... Hence the whole reason for the thread, idiot. If it was ok, we wouldn't be discussing this... Bottom line is, there is a problem, and PK'ers are afraid if the problem is solved, the game will become harder for them... Shut the hell up pirates and PvPers have life a lot harder and more unfair than you just to be able to play the way we want. We can be attacked anywhere. We are ALWAYS getting ganked by an opposing force much greater than our own. The even matched run from us where the overpowered attack. You just fly around and whine where respectful PvPers keep their mouths shut and let you play the way you want. No offense... What are you on about, I'm attacked anywhere and everywhere I go, but by other alliances & corp war targets, how is that different? At least I don't try to cheat the **** game at every turn and fire at targets who are 100% guranteed to not fire back... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:28:00 - [282] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 20:28:24 Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Bhaal *snip - Such words.. Bottom line is, there is a problem, and PK'ers are afraid if the problem is solved, the game will become harder for them... We ain't got no problem unless CCP says we do And they clearly state we DON'T have a problem, but you skillfully dodged that post didn't you. How long have you played? How many griefing tactics did CCP openly say were an exploit months or years b4 they removed it from the game? A small percentage. You know the deal, they take their sweet old time. This is to a problem, and I'm sure the DEV's at least talk about it, doesn't mean they have to tell us... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Boryokudan Incorporated	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:28:00 - [283] Originally by: Bhaal At least I don't try to cheat the **** game at every turn and fire at targets who are 100% guranteed to not fire back... but but but ... that is the pretty side of EvE, is not it? No rules except you do not force someone to quit the game. --------- Faction Warfare Begins Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:29:00 - [284] I think some of you should quit Eve and play a different game. You don't join a basketball game and complain when it's not football, do you?
Ki An Gallente Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Tre Kroner	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:29:00 - [285] Originally by: Osia Sendraks, I see your posts and I simply must ask do you, or anyone else for that matter, believe that it is right that Tech II haulers are required to transport goods in empire space? Short of the rather whimsical suggestion of a friend or alt standing by to scoop your cargo in the event of suicide attack that seems to be what you are suggesting. Radioactive Babe has a good point in that a suicide attacker is getting a free ride in the current situation. They get an insurance payout which covers their ship in full. They get whatever loot that dropped from their victim assuming their alt is standing by, and they get to do it all over again in just a few minutes. As it stands I fly transports and blockade runners. To date I have had to tank damage from more cruisers and battleships in high security space than I ever encounter in low security or 0.0 regions. This fact combined with the reality that I don't operate near the major hotbeds for these activities like Jita tells me there might be a problem here. Whats more this activity is so low risk for the reward that ultimately there is no defense. There is a limit to the tanking abilities of even a Tech II industrial ship. There is no limit to the number of battleships that an assailant can bring to bear. Since they will get insurance that covers over 95% of their ship with fittings, I don't have to be carrying much to cover the little loss they might incur and still generate a profit. Adjustments might need to be made to the current set of mechanics. Though I do not share all of Bhaal's opinions on the subject he appears to be on the right track. Something needs to be done to discourage this behavior. I wouldn't advocate prohibiting it, but removing some of its appeal and consequence free nature is warranted and seems reasonable. T2 haulers are not "required" per se. However, if you plan to carry so much cargo as to make suiciding you actually worth while (Simple maths really. Just figure the value of the total amount of ships required to one-volley your ship, subtract insurance payout for those ships, multiply by two to take account of stuff blowing up and you have a nice figure to keep under) you are better off by ferrying it in a tough, tanked ship (think armored car). /Ki
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:30:00 - [286] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Bhaal At least I don't try to cheat the **** game at every turn and fire at targets who are 100% guranteed to not fire back... but but but ... that is the pretty side of EvE, is not it? No rules except you do not force someone to quit the game. No rules until CCP decides you're breaking them... You have been around long enough to know CCP changes the rules as time goes on. You'd rather have all this blatant suicide PK'ing going on instead of more PvP'ers in 0.0? I don't think CCP does either... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:32:00 - [287] Originally by: Bhaal Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 20:28:24 Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Bhaal *snip - Such words.. Bottom line is, there is a problem, and PK'ers are afraid if the problem is solved, the game will become harder for them... We ain't got no problem unless CCP says we do And they clearly state we DON'T have a problem, but you skillfully dodged that post didn't you. How long have you played? How many griefing tactics did CCP openly say were an exploit months or years b4 they removed it from the game? A small percentage. You know the deal, they take their sweet old time. This is to a problem, and I'm sure the DEV's at least talk about it, doesn't mean they have to tell us... "The players are shooting at eachother!" "WHAT?! Not in a fair fight between two people I hope?" "Yes! And one of them doesn't want to be killed!" "But isn't Concord doing anything?" "Hmm, let's see... They're killing the attacker!" "We gotta do something! To the nerfmobile!" Yes.. I'm sure they're troubled..
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:34:00 - [288] Originally by: Alowishus I think some of you should quit Eve and play a different game. You don't join a basketball game and complain when it's not football, do you? So are the rules the same today, as when basketball was first invented? Did they add more rules/fouls over the years, to promote better play out of the athletes as opposed to cheating street ball players? ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:35:00 - [289] Quote: "The players are shooting at eachother!" "eachother" You just busted your own argument... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:37:00 - [290] Edited by: Dee Ellis on 07/11/2006 20:38:15 Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Alowishus I think some of you should quit Eve and play a different game. You don't join a basketball game and complain when it's not football, do you? So are the rules the same today, as when basketball was first invented? Did they add more rules/fouls over the years, to promote better play out of the athletes as opposed to cheating street ball players? Streetball players aren't cheating, they're playing inside their rules And, last time I checked the modern basketball was invented in 1891 and hasn't had many changes seen in the fouls part since due to it being a "Gentlemens sport" Tssk Edit: Originally by: Bhaal Quote: "The players are shooting at eachother!" "eachother" You just busted your own argument... It's not my fault the knitwits aren't trying to defend themselves, now is it?

Jenny Spitfire Caldari Boryokudan Incorporated	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:37:00 - [291] Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Bhaal At least I don't try to cheat the **** game at every turn and fire at targets who are 100% guranteed to not fire back... but but but ... that is the pretty side of EvE, is not it? No rules except you do not force someone to quit the game. No rules until CCP decides you're breaking them... You have been around long enough to know CCP changes the rules as time goes on. You'd rather have all this blatant suicide PK'ing going on instead of more PvP'ers in 0.0? I don't think CCP does either... It is the player own responsibility to protect ownself. If you want to wear diamond neckless, diamond chain, prada handbag and flash them around in the city and not expecting to be mugged, you must be kidding. City is safer but not 100% than some sub-urb alleys. If high secs are supposed to be safe, CCP can remove activation of hostile mods in high secs unless you are at war. --------- Faction Warfare Begins Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
IlIlIIlIlIlIlIIllIIllIlI	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:43:00 - [292] Cry more noob? 10 pages and not one person has said it.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:44:00 - [293] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Bhaal At least I don't try to cheat the **** game at every turn and fire at targets who are 100% guranteed to not fire back... but but but ... that is the pretty side of EvE, is not it? No rules except you do not force someone to quit the game. No rules until CCP decides you're breaking them... You have been around long enough to know CCP changes the rules as time goes on. You'd rather have all this blatant suicide PK'ing going on instead of more PvP'ers in 0.0? I don't think CCP does either... It is the player own responsibility to protect ownself. If you want to wear diamond neckless, diamond chain, prada handbag and flash them around in the city and not expecting to be mugged, you must be kidding. City is safer but not 100% than some sub-urb alleys. If high secs are supposed to be safe, CCP can remove activation of hostile mods in high secs unless you are at war. Does not have to be 100%, but cops don't allow criminals to loiter outside the doors of a store in broad daylight mugging ppl like Concord allows at the gates Jita... Maybe in your neighborhood, but certainly not mine... The suicide concept can stay, the rate at which it occurs due to lack of deterrents is not ok. CCP needs to make it a whole lot harder to do, they need to make it as hard as they plan to make invention... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:46:00 - [294] Originally by: Bhaal Originally by: Alowishus I think some of you should quit Eve and play a different game. You don't join a basketball game and complain when it's not football, do you? So are the rules the same today, as when basketball was first invented? Did they add more rules/fouls over the years, to promote better play out of the athletes as opposed to cheating street ball players? So you're playing Eve because you're hoping the rules get changed to match what you believe to be the correct way. Hmmm, ok. I'm playing Eve for different reasons. Before you blither on with anymore of this holier-than-though "PK'er" vs. PvP diatribe you may want to look into the history of some of the prominent corps in your own alliance. You think when Shinra was gatecamping HED-GP 24/7 popping newb haulers and what not all day long they weren't doing it simply because it's fun? What you're trying to do is make your opinion about PK'ers, which I don't agree with, seem as if it were fact. Despite evidence to the contrary, you claim even CCP sees it as you do. I simply don't believe you and you have no actual evidence of this. When CCP changes the game I'll believe you. Until then, you're an idiot.
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:47:00 - [295] Originally by: Tanis Bastar Originally by: Osia You are right in that blockade runners and deep space transports are present and available in the game. However, does anyone else find it odd that ships that seem intended for use in ôdeep spaceö and the more hostile portions of the EVE universe are needed more often in high security portions of that same universe? er, no, it's not odd at all. On my planet even in the middle of the safest cities they use vehicles called "armored cars" to transport large amounts of the local currency. Yes, but tell me on your planet do these armored cars regularly take direct fire from main battle tanks? On your planet do law enforcement officials respond within seconds if someone in a tank takes aggressive action toward and kills one of your armored cars? On your planet once the thief's tank is dead does law enforcement watch idly as the thief's friend loads the contents of the shattered armored car as well as the salvage from the thief's tank into a truck and allow him to drive away with a nod and a smile? On your planet does the thief get to head home to his hangar full of battle tanks to find a pair of notes in the mail? The first note is from law enforcement and reads ôyou've committed an aggressive act, stay at home for 15 minutes or we will destroy what you're driving againö. The second note is from the thief's insurance company and reads ôwe are sorry for your recent vehicle loss to the authorities, please find the attached insurance checkö. You see real world analogies don't often work in respect to EVE. --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:52:00 - [296] Originally by: Bhaal CCP needs to make it a whole lot harder to do, they need to make it as hard as they plan to make invention... I'm sorry but I don't agree that CCP needs to change the game enough to account for the actions of every stupid, lazy moron. There has to be a balance of rules and intelligent play. I think there is a good a balance now. Suicide alting is much less lucritive and more skill intensive than it used to be. You used to only need a Kestrel with cruise missiles. Now it usually takes at least a T3/4 cruiser, which means you really have to run into someone that is pretty stupid to make any money.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:52:00 - [297] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 20:53:36 Quote: When CCP changes the game I'll believe you. Until then, you're an idiot. CCP has changed many things I have *****ed about for the last 3 years. Not saying I had anything to do with it, but yeah, I pay for and play this game, and I'll use the forums however I want. If PK'ers can play however they want, I can certainly use the forums to talk about whatever I want until the MODS ban me for good. If you don't like what I'm saying, too bad for you, deal with it or ignore me... If you don't like to argue, why are you here? I play the game to have fun, and use the forums to lobby for changes that I deem neccessary to make EVE a better game. ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:54:00 - [298] Edited by: Alowishus on 07/11/2006 20:54:51 Originally by: Bhaal If you don't like to argue, why are you here? I love to argue. But I'd prefer it be with people of at least average intelligence.
Moghydin Confederation of Red Moon Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:55:00 - [299] I'd transfer BPO's and BPC's in a battleship. Interesting how big a gang should be to kill that in secure space? You played for 2 years and you still moved everything you had in a paper-thin ship. I don't like high sec ganking, but there's a big portion of your own negligence in what happened.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:55:00 - [300] Originally by: Alowishus Edited by: Alowishus on 07/11/2006 20:54:51 Originally by: Bhaal If you don't like to argue, why are you here? I love to argue. But I'd prefer it be with people of at least average intelligence. So because my opinion is different than yours, I'm of lesser intelligence? Sure, ok ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus

IlIlIIlIlIlIlIIllIIllIlI	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:57:00 - [301] Originally by: Bhaal So because my opinion is different than yours, I'm of lesser intelligence? Sure, ok You don't have an opinion, Bhaal. You have an agenda. Two different things..
Gone'Postal Minmatar LuthorCorp Combat Division	Posted - 2006.11.07 20:59:00 - [302] I'm sorry but I don't agree that CCP needs to change the game enough to account for the actions of every stupid, lazy moron. There has to be a balance of rules and intelligent play. I think there is a good a balance now. Suicide alting is much less lucritive and more skill intensive than it used to be. You used to only need a Kestrel with cruise missiles. Now it usually takes at least a T3/4 cruiser, which means you really have to run into someone that is pretty stupid to make any money. Agreed, The only diffrence between someone who hauled there high end gear and got there, and someone who hauled there high end gear and got owned in <0.5 space, is ... Someone was lucky enough to catch the hauler flyer when he made the mistake of undocking in the hauler with that much Isk in the cargo bay. It's not lame tactic, it's not a Exploit it's a mistake made by the hauler and someone caught him/her out. The man without a face... The company without a clue.
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:01:00 - [303] Originally by: Bhaal So because my opinion is different than yours, I'm of lesser intelligence? No, it's because I can argue against your points with historical facts, evidence and sane analogies. All you can do is say "PK'ers are bad!"
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:05:00 - [304] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Bhaal CCP needs to make it a whole lot harder to do, they need to make it as hard as they plan to make invention... I'm sorry but I don't agree that CCP needs to change the game enough to account for the actions of every stupid, lazy moron. There has to be a balance of rules and intelligent play. I think there is a good a balance now. Suicide alting is much less lucritive and more skill intensive than it used to be. You used to only need a Kestrel with cruise missiles. Now it usually takes at least a T3/4 cruiser, which means you really have to run into someone that is pretty stupid to make any money. One of the keys though is no matter how big the Tech I ship needed to conduct the business of suicide attacks insurance payout will cover 95% of the cost. This is simple fact. As a result of this fact suicide attacks are trivial to execute and incur almost no loss to the attacker. At best the attacker simply must wait 15 minutes before continuing to ply his trade. Thus I ask what was the point of the attacker's ship loss? In fact I would go farther and ask why bother with security rating for systems? The current system suggests anything but balance. --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:08:00 - [305] Edited by: Bhaal on 07/11/2006 21:08:50 Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Bhaal So because my opinion is different than yours, I'm of lesser intelligence? No, it's because I can argue against your points with historical facts, evidence and sane analogies. All you can do is say "PK'ers are bad!" I have viewed many things in EVE as being bad for the game over the years, and I've had countless ppl like you telling me how wrong my viewpoint is/was. However I'm happy with a lot of the changes I have seen CCP make in relation to those "bad things" So I'm going to keep expressing my opinions... IMO PK'ers are bad for an MMO, PvP'ers are not... Suicide gankers are PK'ers. ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Gone'Postal Minmatar LuthorCorp Combat Division	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:09:00 - [306] There playing the game how they see fit, making isk off other players mistakes, no diffrent to Escrow scammers or that Lofty guy. The man without a face... The company without a clue.
Black Scorpio	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:10:00 - [307] Hey guys, The way i see both sides at least so far, is that 1. One side says: Make it very hard if not impossible to suicide gank people in high sec, b/c it's high sec, 2. The other side saying: You n00b, this is your own fault, it's your fault for being incompetent/lazy/unprepared, etc, because you get killed. The truth of the matter is I guess to find a way for people to have the following work together: 1. Keep people from shooting anything with a slightly larger profit margin than their loss, just because you get "some profit" 2. Make people use common sense and reason when transporting something of high value. What the problem is for people making point 1 is that if even the guy was in a T2 barge (in the above situation)he/she would have died anyhow, and that that shouldn't be allowed, not at least in high sec. The problem to people making statement #2, is that if they have been more careful and used the proper caution and all means available in Eve, they could easily escaped that situation. After the above said... IMHO High sec should be secure enough so that people that have taken all precautions, i.e, run scouts, and found nothing suspicious/have a T2 barge to use/used a BS or a Command to transfer the goods, and do not fall asleep while "driving" should not suffer the fate of the OP. The problem I guess is that even if that is the case, i.e. taking all precautions for people to still scan you and arrange a group to take you out. The solutions IMO? There should be deterrents that prevent small to med sized (i.e. 10-50mil) margins yields from such operations. And if a person such as the OP are in a position where they risk "all they have" i.e. i assume worth along the lines of several hundred to a bil ISK, they should take even extra precautions to avoid the fate the OP had. If they do not do that, the suicide gankers should still have their way. Although because of the deterrents and the extra precautinos by players, suicide gankers should have been discouraged to the point where it would be utterly dull to scan ships all day and find either no good loot ships, or good well armored ships in gangs, or with escorts, that prevents them from using their tactic. sorry for the long post
eLusi0n Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:11:00 - [308] Edited by: eLusi0n on 07/11/2006 21:12:36 LOL, owned. /agree Originally by: Alowishus Edited by: Alowishus on 07/11/2006 16:24:48 Originally by: Rekindle What is more lame is that there is a subset of the community that think this is what pvp is. Piracy /= PvP. Lame is not realizing that. Attacking the inexperienced and deffenseless (or lazy and stupid in this case) to take their assets is not griefing, it's smart piracy.
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:12:00 - [309] Originally by: Ki An T2 haulers are not "required" per se. However, if you plan to carry so much cargo as to make suiciding you actually worth while (Simple maths really. Just figure the value of the total amount of ships required to one-volley your ship, subtract insurance payout for those ships, multiply by two to take account of stuff blowing up and you have a nice figure to keep under) you are better off by ferrying it in a tough, tanked ship (think armored car). /Ki Based on my experience in game, and the experience shared in suggestions in this thread alone there seems to be strong evidence that T2 transports are required in today's EVE. Simply put, with insurance for ship losses to Concord I wouldn't need to carry more than 5% of the worth of each of the ships involved in the attack for the attacker to make a profit. When tech I ships are being used for the attack that sum is relatively small. Thus the number of attacks of this fasion is extremely high. --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:23:00 - [310] Originally by: Osia One of the keys though is no matter how big the Tech I ship needed to conduct the business of suicide attacks insurance payout will cover 95% of the cost. I agree with you and don't have a real argument against payouts not being made to people killed by CONCORD. This'll probably hurt as many newbs as it protects, however. I can't tell you how many newbs have accidentally activated a module like a smartbomb or ecm burst in empire simply by mistake and lost their ship. But you see I'm pretty much against rules designed to protect people from being stupid, in life and in Eve, especially when these rules infringe on the joy/comfort of others who are intelligent and responsible.

Ki An Gallente Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Tre Kroner	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:41:00 - [311] Originally by: Osia Based on my experience in game, and the experience shared in suggestions in this thread alone there seems to be strong evidence that T2 transports are required in today's EVE. Simply put, with insurance for ship losses to Concord I wouldn't need to carry more than 5% of the worth of each of the ships involved in the attack for the attacker to make a profit. When tech I ships are being used for the attack that sum is relatively small. Thus the number of attacks of this fasion is extremely high. While this is true to a certain extent, there are a few factors that prevent every hauler in high-sec from falling victim to this kind of attack. 1. The gankers can't be certain that all - or even half - of the cargo survives the attack. Thus, they tend to go for extremely rich loads, more or less guaranteeing a profit. - Solution, carry less per load. 2. Mods used for this kind of attack must be taken into account as well, as not all of them will survive the attack. I did not include them in my little count-up above, but I should have. I don't know the sum-total of the mods required for a suicide attack, but I'm guessing that for a BS they would be in the region of 5 million. 3. A well tanked T1 hauler can withstand attack for some time. A Iteron V with crap skills have over 1000 armor hitpoints, not counting shields or structure. To insta-pop this a massive amount of force is required. Fit a couple of passive hardeners instead of expanders and there is no way for the gankers to guarantee a kill. These three, as I can see it, are the main reasons suicide-ganking is not that common (in which I mean it happens to a fraction of the playerbase, and that fraction is pretty low). If more people would concider these points, suicide ganking would drop dramatically, as the pirates doing this are almost as lazy as their victims, and will not pursue a cause of action that does not guarantee profit. There is also the issue of a sec-drop as penalty for these attacks. It may be argued that these pirates use disposable alt to minimize the effects of sec-drop, but I have yet to see any evidence for this, and if anyone knows of such an occurence, feel free to petition it as it is an exploit to use disposable alts. /Ki
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 21:55:00 - [312] Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 21:58:18 Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 21:56:06 no more " you stupid idiot you flew an iteron in empire space" responses are required - we're beyond that No more " you should have had module x" fitted - we're beyond that too I was not in .4 space, i was not in 0.0 space, I was attacked and I had no recourse once concord killed them. I dont debate that this is a tactic and I should have known better but taht does not digress from teh fact it was UTTERLY LAME and CHEAP and I'm not afriad to stand up agasinst all the pvp wananbes to say it. Real pvp'rs are off pvp'ing anyway. This issue is best put by Bhaal. This tactic allows you to stand by a guard kill someone and loot thier crap right in front of them. If that is not grief play then wth is? To anyone who is afraid this game will turn into WoW if it forces you to play a balanced and fair game let me buy you a tin foil hat. I think half the people that proport to be pvp'rs are just griefers in sheeps clothing anyway. PvP is a dieing art and is being contaminated with grief tactics and grief players who dont have a pair big enough to play on even playing fields....this is why people are left resorting to tactics like sitting on a gate in jita drooling like a dog just waiting at teh chance to abuse a game mechanic for their benefit. I dont expect to make many friends with my opinions, I found that this community is generally made up of very hostile people anyway. When you boil down this issue to the reality of the situation yes i shoudl have known better but thats not really my point anymore. -------------------------------------------
Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:03:00 - [313] I knew something felt wrong abou this whole topic,,, and it took me a little while over lunch to think it thru..... This is NOT suicide bombing at all! Your pod is not destroyed, only your ship. No,,, what we have here are (in the case of a Raven) a 30million isk missle. So, in reality, you are allowed to fire 30 million isk doomsday missles in High-Sec space with ZERO reprocussions!!! Simple as that.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:20:00 - [314] Originally by: Lord Dynastron I knew something felt wrong abou this whole topic,,, and it took me a little while over lunch to think it thru..... This is NOT suicide bombing at all! Your pod is not destroyed, only your ship. No,,, what we have here are (in the case of a Raven) a 30million isk missle. So, in reality, you are allowed to fire 30 million isk doomsday missles in High-Sec space with ZERO reprocussions!!! Simple as that. Exactly and that is why this should be corrected, the fact you can find out in advance by scanning the cargo to know pretty much what you will recover for your 30 mill doomsday missle makes it even worse. It is exploiting game mechanics to do something you really are not supposed to do, otherwise concord wouldnt attack people who agressed in empire to start with.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:20:00 - [315] Originally by: Radioactive Babe Originally by: Sendraks Why can't you fly a ship that can withstand the attacks of suicide bombers? Well, it has to be said I think he messed up badly by not having his stuff in a decent ship I can't believe how people can honestly say that. Haulers are made for empire, transporters are made for low-sec/0.0. (period). We're talking about a heavily abused design flaw, nothing less nothing more. Yes suicide ganking someone is designed, suicide ganking someone with a trial account and picking up the loot with your main/hauler without any risk whatsoever is not. It's not even PvP, it's a griefers PvE dream, yes that's right PvE. Where is the risk for the so-called pirate? There isn't. Where is the versus part in the PvP, there isn't, hence we're talking looting players where they shouldn't be looted. Mind you it's not the ship destruction that's the issue, it's the ability to loot them without consequence that is the issue. May as well remove Concord all together. I bet plenty of people have quit because of this. IMHO the issue lays with the devs actually taking pride in the controversy that this kind of griefing causes, and therefor not seeing this as a priority to fix (if they want to fix it; that is if they even want to fix it). For the record I have never been ganked like that myself. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Ikvar Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:27:00 - [316] In EVE, and in life, there are the greifers, the gankers, those who look out for themselves and further themselves any way possible, then there are the born victims. People like my good self are the former, people like you are the latter and thinking the way you do, you always be a victim. So you got your ** ** up? No one is to blame but you, except you can't bring yourself to place that blame smack bang on your head. One of the main attractions of EVE for most people I've talked to is that the game and the developers don't hold your hand and kiss your arse better when it gets kicked. So you lost everything you've owned after playing? Who cares? Why make a thread about it? Move on or quit the game, if you don't like the way EVE works then simply don't play the game. People like you sometimes make me think you get yourself killed in these ways just so you can get all uppity and self righteous. Quote: You should have outfitted module X,Y and Z to avoid such ganks. Again, this is like saying you should put on a radiation suit to avoid the nuclear testing in your back yard: Just because its happening doesn't mean you have to automatically accept it. You wouldn't HAVE to put on a radiation suit if there was nuclear testing in your back yard, just like you wouldn't HAVE to fit an MWD or Nanos or WCS or a tank or whatever to avoid being ganked. Doesn't change the fact that not doing either still results in you dying though. At the end of the day, people will do whatever they want. Suicide ganking might be changed it might not so you either have to adapt to what other people do or get screwed over by them and no matter how many times you scream that your own straight up refusal to protect yourself is everyone else's fault but your own, you have to (sorry to bring out the old chestnut) ADAPT OR DIE. Oh and also: STOP WHINING Originally by:** Rekindle I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything I own.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:28:00 - [317] Here's something the devs should be able to relate to... People enjoy pvp and pve. People, for the most part, accept that if they die in pvp (or lose a ship) they will lose resources (ISK) and property to the winner. There are people here who say EVE is 100% pvp, then run off to kill npc's to make ISK's. EVE is partly pve. There are a lot more pve players willing to get into pvp than most pvp players think, but what puts them off is not the thought of losing ships or ISK's, it is the random killing by pk's. Devs, why did Fel die off? Because Tram came out. Why is there a Tram? Because players were sick of being randomly killed by pk's. Were they sick of pvp? No, because they created guilds in Tram and fought all the time. It is pk's that drive players away from pvp. Stop pk's and i'll guarantee that low-sec will see more players. ...IMO Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:32:00 - [318] Originally by: Alowishus I think some of you should quit Eve and play a different game. You don't join a basketball game and complain when it's not football, do you? But we would complain if we'd play a basketball game where the other team doesn't have a basket, and that Sir is the issue. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:36:00 - [319] Originally by: Ikvar So you lost everything you've owned after playing? Who cares? Why make a thread about it? Move on or quit the game, if you don't like the way EVE works then simply don't play the game. People like you sometimes make me think you get yourself killed in these ways just so you can get all uppity and self righteous. Whos being sell rigteous here? I'm pointing out an obvious flaw in game mechanics which you rebute by flames and insults. -------------------------------------------
Arii Smith	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:36:00 - [320] Danger is fun. Case closed.

Arii Smith	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:37:00 - [321] Originally by: Rekindle Originally by: Ikvar So you lost everything you've owned after playing? Who cares? Why make a thread about it? Move on or quit the game, if you don't like the way EVE works then simply don't play the game. People like you sometimes make me think you get yourself killed in these ways just so you can get all uppity and self righteous. Whos being sell rigteous here? I'm pointing out an obvious flaw in game mechanics which you rebute by flames and insults. You dolt, it is NOT an obvious flaw in the game mechanics that is what everyone is arguing about. It is obvious to me that it is NOT a flaw, and obvious to you that it IS a flaw. Do you see why people are talking in this thread now?
Gone'Postal Minmatar LuthorCorp Combat Division	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:38:00 - [322] They take a sec hit for doing so. While not much they still take one. The hauler has more options to avoid them, then they do of attacking the hauler. Secure space is not 100% secure, it never should be. The guy who loots the cans after, I think he gets can flagged and you have kill rights on him but i'm not 100% sure on that. It's almost a "I quit Eve" option for players that lose everything to one of these, however even the smallest bit of thinking and planning it's 90-100% easy to avoid. I don't mean any offense by saying that. The man without a face... The company without a clue.
Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:39:00 - [323] Originally by: Arii Smith Danger is fun. Case closed. You would think this would be a very popular epitaph
Xs 142	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:44:00 - [324] I said; leave the frickin' monkey! Originally by: Oveur Eternally yours, The other dumbass
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:46:00 - [325] Originally by: Lord Dynastron Originally by: Arii Smith Danger is fun. Case closed. You would think this would be a very popular epitaph Good one! Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:47:00 - [326] Originally by: Arii Smith You dolt, it is NOT an obvious flaw in the game mechanics that is what everyone is arguing about. It is obvious to me that it is NOT a flaw, and obvious to you that it IS a flaw. Do you see why people are talking in this thread now? Yeah its called an opinion, a perspective, a point of view. one of us is capable of forming a thought without degrading into personal attacks on the other. Anyway, this thread is running its course. Tehre IS an issue and it is a FLAw in the game mechanics that allows this to happen its obvious by the consequences. nn all. -------------------------------------------
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:47:00 - [327] Originally by: Rekindle no more " you stupid idiot you flew an iteron in empire space" responses are required - we're beyond that No more " you should have had module x" fitted - we're beyond that too I was not in .4 space, i was not in 0.0 space, I was attacked and I had no recourse once concord killed them. I dont debate that this is a tactic and I should have known better but taht does not digress from teh fact it was UTTERLY LAME and CHEAP and I'm not afriad to stand up agasinst all the pvp wananbes to say it. Real pvp'rs are off pvp'ing anyway. This issue is best put by Bhaal. This tactic allows you to stand by a guard kill someone and loot thier crap right in front of them. If that is not grief play then wth is? To anyone who is afraid this game will turn into WoW if it forces you to play a balanced and fair game let me buy you a tin foil hat. I think half the people that proport to be pvp'rs are just griefers in sheeps clothing anyway. PvP is a dieing art and is being contaminated with grief tactics and grief players who dont have a pair big enough to play on even playing fields....this is why people are left resorting to tactics like sitting on a gate in jita drooling like a dog just waiting at teh chance to abuse a game mechanic for their benefit. I dont expect to make many friends with my opinions, I found that this community is generally made up of very hostile people anyway. When you boil down this issue to the reality of the situation yes i shoudl have known better but thats not really my point anymore. You're saying piracy is griefing. Maybe piracy does cause you grief but it is an intended part of the game. Griefing as most people know it is something else entirely. Griefing in MMORPGs is something one does only to cause people grief. These people may have caused you grief, but they also stole your stuff. That makes it piracy. If they blew you up for no reason at all and didn't collect your loot, that's griefing. Otherwise it's piracy, and if you don't like piracy then don't play Eve. Additionally only CCP states what is an exploit of game mechanics. Not you. As of now, this is not an exploit. This is using two paid accounts to commit an act of piracy. Just because you disagree with the tactic does not make it wrong or invalid, and it certainly doesn't make it an exploit. And lastly, ffs quit your whining.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:48:00 - [328] Edited by: DrAtomic on 07/11/2006 22:50:10 Originally by: Arii Smith Originally by: Rekindle Originally by: Ikvar So you lost everything you've owned after playing? Who cares? Why make a thread about it? Move on or quit the game, if you don't like the way EVE works then simply don't play the game. People like you sometimes make me think you get yourself killed in these ways just so you can get all uppity and self righteous. Whos being sell rigteous here? I'm pointing out an obvious flaw in game mechanics which you rebute by flames and insults. You dolt, it is NOT an obvious flaw in the game mechanics that is what everyone is arguing about. It is obvious to me that it is NOT a flaw, and obvious to you that it IS a flaw. Do you see why people are talking in this thread now? If it's not an obvious flaw in the game then why is Concord there? Why does Concord whack the offender into oblivion? You are saying it was designed so that Concord whacks the offender giving people living in 0.0 a false sense of security (even being told so in the tutorial) all to reach the designed use of a scoop up alt on a trial account? Next thing you'll be claiming that haulers are made of paper because of the exact same reason. /hands out tin-foil hat. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Gone'Postal Minmatar LuthorCorp Combat Division	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:50:00 - [329] Originally by: Rekindle Originally by: Arii Smith You dolt, it is NOT an obvious flaw in the game mechanics that is what everyone is arguing about. It is obvious to me that it is NOT a flaw, and obvious to you that it IS a flaw. Do you see why people are talking in this thread now? Yeah its called an opinion, a perspective, a point of view. one of us is capable of forming a thought without degrading into personal attacks on the other. Anyway, this thread is running its course. Tehre IS an issue and it is a FLAw in the game mechanics that allows this to happen its obvious by the consequences. nn all. You lost everything because they used an item thats seeded by the game NPC market, looked at your unhidden cargo in your weak ship and went.... Hey we can kill that guy and make us some nice profit for a sec hit.... I'm sorry but how the HELL is that a flaw in the game mechanics ?. The man without a face... The company without a clue.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:51:00 - [330] Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 22:52:24 Originally by: Alowishus [:roll: You're saying piracy is griefing. Maybe piracy does cause you grief but it is an intended part of the game. And lastly, ffs quit your whining. That is exactly what I am Not saying. Thanks for putting words into my mouth but I have had many brushes with pirates and im not against that form of game play whatsoever. We just have differing view on what" piracy" is and what risk vs reward is. Saying this is piracy is saying logging in /out during fleet ops is uber pvp. Give your head a shake man! -------------------------------------------

Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:54:00 - [331] Originally by: Rekindle Tehre IS an issue and it is a FLAw in the game mechanics that allows this to happen its obvious by the consequences. Your opinion, which CCP and the majority of Eve disagrees with. So I guess your best bet is to quit Eve. And possibly make your own MMORPG where whatever you say goes. But here, the reality of it is your opinion is misguided.
Ikvar Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.07 22:57:00 - [332] Originally by: Rekindle Originally by: Ikvar So you lost everything you've owned after playing? Who cares? Why make a thread about it? Move on or quit the game, if you don't like the way EVE works then simply don't play the game. People like you sometimes make me think you get yourself killed in these ways just so you can get all uppity and self righteous. Whos being sell rigteous here? I'm pointing out an obvious flaw in game mechanics which you rebute by flames and insults. You just take what I say as flames and insults because you still think you're right. Originally by: Rekindle I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything I own.
Taaketa Frist The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:00:00 - [333] Edited by: Taaketa Frist on 07/11/2006 23:01:17 Heres a similar situation for you. My buddy is in his suicide ship. I'm in my hauler, cloaked at a gate or just floating about. Hes busy scanning obvious AFK haulers for nice cargo, he spots one with 1.5 billion ISK of stuff NOT in cargo containers (which increases the chance of the stuff being destroyed in swoop since its the container that blows up and not the items in the can) So he thinks "sweet, we got a target time for shooty shooty Concord won't be able to respond fast enough." Then his buddy loots the can and goes and hides again with his good old cloaking device. This situation is no different if it happened to be the suicide pilot's alt. I have no issue with this kind of this play as it COUNTERABLE and PUNISHMENT is served. (And whoever said transports where for deep space only, no they weren't. They were for better protection of hauling simply because this kind of play became popular and a counter needed to be put in place.) Originally by: DrAtomic If CCP would do a poll based on one vote per creditcard (so multiple accounts donot get multiple votes) I'm very sure that 80% would judge this kind of gameplay griefing/pk-ing and an unwanted feature that was designed as empire security system. Good thing I pay with two cards then. I still win. -------------- Dang nabit
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:00:00 - [334] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Rekindle Tehre IS an issue and it is a FLAw in the game mechanics that allows this to happen its obvious by the consequences. Your opinion, which CCP and the majority of Eve disagrees with. So I guess your best bet is to quit Eve. And possibly make your own MMORPG where whatever you say goes. But here, the reality of it is your opinion is misguided. No the reality is that the majority of EvE agrees. However what you'll find on the boards here are the majority of the pirates, pk-ers and pvp-ers. My bet is that the forum posters are 5% carebears (by lack of a better word) and 95% of pirates, pk-ers and pvp-ers. It's called vocal minority versus silent majority. If CCP would do a poll based on one vote per creditcard (so multiple accounts donot get multiple votes) I'm very sure that 80% would judge this kind of gameplay griefing/pk-ing and an unwanted feature that was designed as empire security system. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:01:00 - [335] Originally by: Rekindle We just have differing view on what" piracy" is and what risk vs reward is. Saying this is piracy is saying logging in /out during fleet ops is uber pvp. Again, your opinion. One that is not shared by many. We all have our opinions of what is lame. Mine mostly fall in line with the logical majority of Eve and not the rare whiner who transports BPOs in T1 haulers.
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:02:00 - [336] Originally by: Alowishus No the reality is that the majority of EvE agrees. Prove it.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:02:00 - [337] When i started playing i thought Concord was there to kill criminals in hi-sec. Whether you die from pirate attack or not is not their problem. I can accept that. What i find hard to accept is that CCP intended the pirates to benefit from the attack anyway. Some say it's risk vs. reward. Well...The hauler, no matter how much precautions he takes is risking everything he carries (which could be worth billions). You're never totally safe in EVE remember. His reward for making it to his destination intact? Other than still having what he had in the first place, nothing. The pk? He risks his ship (virtually nothing with how easy it is to make ISK's), a sec hit (Like it really matters...), and maybe being very bored for hours if no easy target comes along. His reward if he manages to destroy another players ship? Depends on the cargo and ship, but is potentially huge. Risk vs reward for pk's is very one-sided. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:04:00 - [338] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Alowishus No the reality is that the majority of EvE agrees. Prove it. Fly to jita, explain the question and ask for a vote. Fly to a pirate infested low-sec system and do the same. Add up the numbers of people playing in low-sec versus people playing in empire and viola. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:05:00 - [339] Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 23:07:30 We're here to prove nothing. we're here to express opinions on game play mechanis. We're not here to express who's pee wee is bigger than someone elses. We're not here to say "no you're wrong Coronel sanders". I'm not attacking you or your play style - im talking about a game tactic which is obviously flawed. Please for the love of god stop trying to turn this int oa me vs you debate. Im not against piracy unless your defintion of piracy is equated with exploitation. Its a debate on teh mechanics of the game, not a petition to turn it into wow. my god I thought these debates were settled 10 years ago in UO. Let me get my crayons out and draw this out for people: There is a difference between pvp, between piracy and between grief cheap ass tactics which are clearly in violation of systems that were intended to thwart such tactics. -------------------------------------------
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:06:00 - [340] Originally by: Wolfways Other than still having what he had in the first place, nothing. Then why do it? There must be some reward. Whether it be moving to a new area to join a new corp with better oppurtunities, get a new agent, find a research slot, there is some reward. If not then he's pretty stupid for doing it. That's like saying, "what's the reward for taking an unfitted BS through a chokepoint with 500 BPOs in the hold." Well the lack of reward should be pretty obvious to all and the question doesn't need to be asked.

Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:08:00 - [341] Edited by: Alowishus on 07/11/2006 23:08:47 Originally by: Rekindle we're here to express opinions on game play mechanis. Yes, you are free to express your misguided and unpopular opinions. But if you're going to assert that your odd opinions are accurate, when reality states otherwise, then the burden of proof is on you.
Sammiel Ars Caelestis Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:10:00 - [342] I want to know where these mythical 5% costs from an insurable ship come from also. Here is a hint, loss = ship cost + insurance cost + module cost - insurance payout. It is going to be more than 5m for a Raven. Also, transports aren't just for 0.0. That is just silly, and using the RP description of a ship to determine its stated purpose is even more silly. They are for transporting high value cargo in more security. Like when you want to avoid a suicide gank. I fail to see what is broken about the mechanics involved in suicide ganking other than some spurious real world examples. It punishes carelessness and acts as an ISK sink. Seems like a win win to me. DEATHLEY > why dont u remain silent like prominent alliances like our band of brothers do
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:11:00 - [343] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Other than still having what he had in the first place, nothing. Then why do it? There must be some reward. Whether it be moving to a new area to join a new corp with better oppurtunities, get a new agent, find a research slot, there is some reward. If not then he's pretty stupid for doing it. That's like saying, "what's the reward for taking an unfitted BS through a chokepoint with 500 BPOs in the hold." Well the lack of reward should be pretty obvious to all and the question doesn't need to be asked. So you think that getting to your destination equals the potential reward for the pk? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:13:00 - [344] Originally by: Rekindle Im not against piracy unless your defintion of piracy is equated with exploitation. There you go again with the exploit talk. CCP tells you what the exploits are in this game. CCP also tells you what griefing is in this game. As of now this tactic is neither. You need to learn what an exploit is. You attack someone in high sec and your ship gets destroyed. It's only an exploit if your ship does not get destroyed. What happens after, as far as the looting of your can, whether it was looted by an alt, a friend or a random third party, no exploit has occured. Call it lame if you want. I call transporting BPOs in T1 haulers lame. To each his own. But on the otherhand I whine a lot less than you.
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:15:00 - [345] Originally by: Wolfways Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Other than still having what he had in the first place, nothing. Then why do it? There must be some reward. Whether it be moving to a new area to join a new corp with better oppurtunities, get a new agent, find a research slot, there is some reward. If not then he's pretty stupid for doing it. That's like saying, "what's the reward for taking an unfitted BS through a chokepoint with 500 BPOs in the hold." Well the lack of reward should be pretty obvious to all and the question doesn't need to be asked. So you think that getting to your destination equals the potential reward for the pk? No, but on the otherhand you can limit your risk so that the reward/risk factor is better for you. When you do things in Eve that have extreme risk, with no reward and you are taken advantage of, that's your fault.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:16:00 - [346] Originally by: Sammiel I want to know where these mythical 5% costs from an insurable ship come from also. Here is a hint, loss = ship cost + insurance cost + module cost - insurance payout. It is going to be more than 5m for a Raven. Also, transports aren't just for 0.0. That is just silly, and using the RP description of a ship to determine its stated purpose is even more silly. They are for transporting high value cargo in more security. Like when you want to avoid a suicide gank. I fail to see what is broken about the mechanics involved in suicide ganking other than some spurious real world examples. It punishes carelessness and acts as an ISK sink. Seems like a win win to me. But do you think that the pk, who risks virtually nothing by using this game mechanic, should reap the benefits? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:17:00 - [347] Quote: There you go again with the exploit talk. CCP tells you what the exploits are in this game. CCP also tells you what griefing is in this game. As of now this tactic is neither. You need to learn what an exploit is. Now who's showing lack of intlligence How long have you played this game? ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero I give this sig 3/10 for creativity and 10/10 for having me in it :) - Xorus
Weps Oner	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:19:00 - [348] Edited by: Weps Oner on 07/11/2006 23:20:14 If it were pvp, you would have two parties saying "gg". That sums it up I guess. <dang alt....>
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:19:00 - [349] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Other than still having what he had in the first place, nothing. Then why do it? There must be some reward. Whether it be moving to a new area to join a new corp with better oppurtunities, get a new agent, find a research slot, there is some reward. If not then he's pretty stupid for doing it. That's like saying, "what's the reward for taking an unfitted BS through a chokepoint with 500 BPOs in the hold." Well the lack of reward should be pretty obvious to all and the question doesn't need to be asked. So you think that getting to your destination equals the potential reward for the pk? No, but on the otherhand you can limit your risk so that the reward/risk factor is better for you. When you do things in Eve that have extreme risk, with no reward and you are taken advantage of, that's your fault. You're avoiding the point of my posts. As i asked above: Quote: But do you think that the pk, who risks virtually nothing by using this game mechanic, should reap the benefits? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:22:00 - [350] Originally by: Bhaal Quote: There you go again with the exploit talk. CCP tells you what the exploits are in this game. CCP also tells you what griefing is in this game. As of now this tactic is neither. You need to learn what an exploit is. Now who's showing lack of intlligence How long have you played this game? Until CCP says it's an exploit, it is not an exploit. There are exploits that people commit that nobody knows is an exploit but when this occurs, historically, CCP makes a statement and begins banning people who continue to use the exploit. Changes to game mechanics are not indicative of an exploit. If that were the case then each time CCP nerfed something it would indicate that anyone who used it prior to the nerf was exploiting game mechanics. Caldari are considered really powerful right now, if missiles are nerfed does that mean using missiles now is an exploit? Please.

Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:25:00 - [351] Originally by: Weps Oner Edited by: Weps Oner on 07/11/2006 23:20:14 If it were pvp, you would have two parties saying "gg". That sums it up I guess. <dang alt....> You might want to check up on meaning of usage of the term you know...
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:27:00 - [352] Originally by: Wolfways But do you think that the pk, who risks virtually nothing by using this game mechanic, should reap the benefits? That's what smart piracy is, my friend. Do you think sitting in a gate camp of fifty people (thus risking virtually nothing) and insta-popping every person that comes through one by one and looting their can is an exploit? When I'd go around ransoming mining barges in an interceptor, was I exploiting? What about when I'd tank the sentry guns in my Arma and pop haulers and grab their loot with an alt? If it was an exploit, don't you think the sentry guns should instapop me? Low risk vs. high reward, regardless of the risk vs. reward of your victim/opponent, does not make anything an exploit, it just makes you smart.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:41:00 - [353] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways But do you think that the pk, who risks virtually nothing by using this game mechanic, should reap the benefits? That's what smart piracy is, my friend. Do you think sitting in a gate camp of fifty people (thus risking virtually nothing) and insta-popping every person that comes through one by one and looting their can is an exploit? When I'd go around ransoming mining barges in an interceptor, was I exploiting? What about when I'd tank the sentry guns in my Arma and pop haulers and grab their loot with an alt? If it was an exploit, don't you think the sentry guns should instapop me? Low risk vs. high reward, regardless of the risk vs. reward of your victim/opponent, does not make anything an exploit, it just makes you smart. Ah thank you. So bigger rewards should not mean a bigger risk. Finally someone from the "other side" who admits that pvp has nothing to do with risk vs reward. In that case hi-sec should have access to everything low-sec has, like better ores, tougher npc's, etc. Or do you mean that risk vs reward matters, unless players can find a loophole in the game mechanics to use? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
pizdec	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:44:00 - [354] Edited by: pizdec on 07/11/2006 23:46:22 Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 23:07:30 Please for the love of god stop trying to turn this int oa me vs you debate. What just occured to me is that Rekindle is actually trying to be hurt, personally, emotionally. Have you noticed that almost in every reply he repeats: you vs. me, stop calling me idiot, I don't need your judgement. And guess what? It works! He gets slammed once again in the next 10 posts. Bring the flames ppl. The man is in pain. And he likes it.
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:46:00 - [355] Stupidity shouldn't equal bigger risk When someone throws money at me instead of knives, I just don't make an effort... When a little T1 frigate charges my BS head first, I don't make an effort either... When someone brings an Oberon and a big ass tanker, I just don't make an effort... However, when someone thinks you can jump around screaming "I'm wearing a platinum rolex and can't fight!!" infront of a gang of thugs, it's just not an efort for them...
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:51:00 - [356] Originally by: pizdec Edited by: pizdec on 07/11/2006 23:46:22 Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 07/11/2006 23:07:30 Please for the love of god stop trying to turn this int oa me vs you debate. What just occured to me is that Rekindle is actually trying to be hurt, personally, emotionally. Have you noticed that almost in every reply he repeats: you vs. me, stop calling me idiot, I don't need your judgement. And guess what? It works! He gets slammed once again in the next 10 posts. Bring the flames ppl. The man is in pain. And he likes it. No he's not, he's trying to have a civil debate about his opinion. When people run out of counter arguments they start bashing him, also known as flaming. He has said over and over that he has accepted his losses. He debates however that a game mechanic is flawed. Some people debate with him or against him others resort to flaming and discrediting through lack of argumental skills or maturity. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:54:00 - [357] Originally by: Dee Ellis Stupidity shouldn't equal bigger risk When someone throws money at me instead of knives, I just don't make an effort... When a little T1 frigate charges my BS head first, I don't make an effort either... When someone brings an Oberon and a big ass tanker, I just don't make an effort... However, when someone thinks you can jump around screaming "I'm wearing a platinum rolex and can't fight!!" infront of a gang of thugs, it's just not an efort for them... We're not talking about the stupidity of the person waving cash around. We're talking about the police officer who turns up and knocks you out, then when you wake up says "Well you managed to kill him before i got to you. You might aswell take his cash." Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.07 23:56:00 - [358] Originally by: Wolfways Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways But do you think that the pk, who risks virtually nothing by using this game mechanic, should reap the benefits? That's what smart piracy is, my friend. Do you think sitting in a gate camp of fifty people (thus risking virtually nothing) and insta-popping every person that comes through one by one and looting their can is an exploit? When I'd go around ransoming mining barges in an interceptor, was I exploiting? What about when I'd tank the sentry guns in my Arma and pop haulers and grab their loot with an alt? If it was an exploit, don't you think the sentry guns should instapop me? Low risk vs. high reward, regardless of the risk vs. reward of your victim/opponent, does not make anything an exploit, it just makes you smart. Ah thank you. So bigger rewards should not mean a bigger risk. Finally someone from the "other side" who admits that pvp has nothing to do with risk vs reward. In that case hi-sec should have access to everything low-sec has, like better ores, tougher npc's, etc. Or do you mean that risk vs reward matters, unless players can find a loophole in the game mechanics to use? Nope, PvP has nothing to do with risk vs. reward. Only PvE does. But CCP gives you all the tools required to navigate high sec space with almost complete safety and avoid losses to PvPers. In high sec space, maybe PvP isn't voluntary, but dying and losing BPOs is. He didn't have to be lazy and stupid, he chose to do it. He may as well have just jettisoned his cargo in the middle of Jita. If he did that and I looted a BPO would I be exploiting because there is no risk? No. The fact is that you guys don't like the tactic. And I can't even say I'm fond of it really, but I understand it's a valid tactic and if it happens to me I have nobody to blame but myself. On the flip side I won't protest too highly if CCP comes up with a good way to change it. But people need to take some personal responsibility and realize that a lack of total safety is part of this game. And if you think this tactic inidicates the risk in 0.0 is no higher than empire, please bring some BPOs in a hauler out to Curse.
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:03:00 - [359] Originally by: Wolfways We're not talking about the stupidity of the person waving cash around. We're talking about the police officer who turns up and knocks you out, then when you wake up says "Well you managed to kill him before i got to you. You might aswell take his cash." Problem is, the guy who got mugged is rushed to the hospital and his stuff thrown into a container by the mugger... A policeman couldn't possibly find all the stuff that belongs. Now, a friend of the mugger comes by and empties the container.. The police aren't looking in that area and won't do anything, besides they can't until the mugged wakes up, he did get blown into tiny bits after all..
pizdec	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:08:00 - [360] Edited by: pizdec on 08/11/2006 00:16:57 Originally by: DrAtomic No he's not, he's trying to have a civil debate about his opinion. When people run out of counter arguments they start bashing him, also known as flaming. He has said over and over that he has accepted his losses. He debates however that a game mechanic is flawed. Some people debate with him or against him others resort to flaming and discrediting through lack of argumental skills or maturity. Yeah, he is. It was obvious 11 pages ago, that his oppinion is in minority. In evry single reply he emphisizes that he is hurt. Personally, I am not going to argue about the subject. Previous 12 pages argued this to death. What caught my attention was his obvious desire to continue grieving his loss. And the loss is huge. No ****.

Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:12:00 - [361] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways But do you think that the pk, who risks virtually nothing by using this game mechanic, should reap the benefits? That's what smart piracy is, my friend. Do you think sitting in a gate camp of fifty people (thus risking virtually nothing) and insta-popping every person that comes through one by one and looting their can is an exploit? When I'd go around ransoming mining barges in an interceptor, was I exploiting? What about when I'd tank the sentry guns in my Arma and pop haulers and grab their loot with an alt? If it was an exploit, don't you think the sentry guns should instapop me? Low risk vs. high reward, regardless of the risk vs. reward of your victim/opponent, does not make anything an exploit, it just makes you smart. Ah thank you. So bigger rewards should not mean a bigger risk. Finally someone from the "other side" who admits that pvp has nothing to do with risk vs reward. In that case hi-sec should have access to everything low-sec has, like better ores, tougher npc's, etc. Or do you mean that risk vs reward matters, unless players can find a loophole in the game mechanics to use? Nope, PvP has nothing to do with risk vs. reward. Only PvE does. But CCP gives you all the tools required to navigate high sec space with almost complete safety and avoid losses to PvPers. In high sec space, maybe PvP isn't voluntary, but dying and losing BPOs is. He didn't have to be lazy and stupid, he chose to do it. He may as well have just jettisoned his cargo in the middle of Jita. If he did that and I looted a BPO would I be exploiting because there is no risk? No. The fact is that you guys don't like the tactic. And I can't even say I'm fond of it really, but I understand it's a valid tactic and if it happens to me I have nobody to blame but myself. On the flip side I won't protest too highly if CCP comes up with a good way to change it. But people need to take some personal responsibility and realize that a lack of total safety is part of this game. And if you think this tactic inidicates the risk in 0.0 is no higher than empire, please bring some BPOs in a hauler out to Curse. I know that low-sec/0.0 has more risk than hi-sec. But i also believe that it is risky for everyone, whereas the game mechanic used in suicide attacks is not risky for the...whatever you want to call him...exploiter (not stated by CCP), pk (if he kills the pilot), whatever. I can't believe you honestly think that entering into pvp is less risky than pve. If that is the case do you believe it is right that CCP should try to entice players into low-sec by offering better ores/npc's, as was done in UO? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:15:00 - [362] Question: is transporting stuff strictly PvE? To me, I see transporting stuff as PvP, especially if you go to risky areas. That's why it's important to take the necessary precautions with valuable items.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:19:00 - [363] Edited by: DrAtomic on 08/11/2006 00:23:28 Originally by: Alowishus Question: is transporting stuff strictly PvE? To me, I see transporting stuff as PvP, especially if you go to risky areas. That's why it's important to take the necessary precautions with valuable items. Answer: No it's not strictly PvE, in 1.0 through .05 it is strictly PvE (or at least the design was intended as such), from 0.4 through 0.0 it's an PvP operation requiring scouts and protection. Question: is transporting an empty unfitted battleship from A -> B within empire PvE or PvP? ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
vanBuskirk Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:20:00 - [364] Ship loss to CONCORD should void insurance. No ifs no buts. ---------------------------------------------- "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." ----------------------------------------------
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:21:00 - [365] Originally by: vanBuskirk Ship loss to CONCORD should void insurance. No ifs no buts. Plus Concord should confiscate the cans and both parties can collect their own can from the CONCORD station. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:22:00 - [366] Originally by: DrAtomic Originally by: Alowishus Question: is transporting stuff strictly PvE? To me, I see transporting stuff as PvP, especially if you go to risky areas. That's why it's important to take the necessary precautions with valuable items. Answer: No it's not strictly PvE, in 1.0 through .05 it is strictly PvE (or at least the design was intended as such), from 0.4 through 0.0 it's an PvP operation requiring scouts and protection. If the design was intended as such how come CONCORD/high sec sentries don't instapop people upon activation of aggressive modules? It seems pretty clear that some risk was intentionally left in the game. Risk of being killed by players indicates the the possibility of PvP in high sec is intentional.
Taaketa Frist The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:23:00 - [367] Originally by: DrAtomic That was me. Read their description, it says it all. Blokkade running in empire? Empire regarded as deep space now? Its a description not a "Fly this ship this way or you lose Eve" Its a bit of background and a bone to the RPers. Deep Space Transports are the ones I am refering to for the better protection. I have a tendancy to use my Mastodon in Empire and the Prowler in 0.0. -------------- Dang nabit
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:31:00 - [368] Edited by: DrAtomic on 08/11/2006 00:32:32 Originally by: Taaketa Frist Originally by: DrAtomic That was me. Read their description, it says it all. Blokkade running in empire? Empire regarded as deep space now? Its a description not a "Fly this ship this way or you lose Eve" Its a bit of background and a bone to the RPers. Deep Space Transports are the ones I am refering to for the better protection. I have a tendancy to use my Mastodon in Empire and the Prowler in 0.0. It's also an indication of it's intended design as most ships have descriptions hinting their intended fittings. But above all it certainly wasn't designed with the pure intent of providing empire players a hauler that was more secure within empire. If that had been the case then they would have buffed haulers instead of introducing specilized (and expansive) transporters. Transporters were designed to give players a transportship that could withstand some of the hostilities in high risk areas such as low-sec and 0.0, one specifically designed to be able to jump through gatecamps the other for deep insecure space travel; thats what their description reads. It doesn't read transport ship specifically designed to withstand the hostilities that a capsuleers encounters in high traffic empire areas. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:45:00 - [369] lol when i lost all my stuff a little puppy died. I find it ironic taht people are acusing me of whining when i've openly admited over and over that I @#$@# up. All im trying to do is address the issue and stay on topic and not have a little ****ing match with various people. I choose to address the issue and thus I get flammed for it. -------------------------------------------
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:50:00 - [370] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways If pilots are that carefree about their lives why bother with guns and missiles? Just make ships that create a huge explosion at the command of the pilot (who obviously doesn't care about the crew either) and have a friend along who'll pick up the pieces. The sec status hit? Maybe the reward is only worth it to the suicider if he only gets a hit for killing one ship. If he is a giant flying bomb in Empire there is the possibility he could go to -10 in one incident. Okay that makes sense. Although tbh i don't quite understand the concept of limiting the travel of a criminal depending on how naughty he's been If you're a criminal you're a criminal. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish

Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:52:00 - [371] Originally by: Wolfways If you're a criminal you're a criminal. Ever wanted to shoot a macro miner or ore thief? Just once? What if you accidentally set off a smartbomb or ECM burst? Do you think doing so should be an automatic ban from high sec?
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:52:00 - [372] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: DrAtomic Originally by: vanBuskirk Ship loss to CONCORD should void insurance. No ifs no buts. Plus Concord should confiscate the cans and both parties can collect their own can from the CONCORD station. I have no argument against this. But what about people popped by NPCs in high sec? Why should only people killed by suicide alts get the preferential treatment of having CONCORD protect their can? More questions: Why do cargo scanners exist? In low sec if I see a target I'm going to attack first and ask questions later. The existance of cargo scanners indicates to me that scenarios where the worth of one ship is less than the cargo at stake are intended. Why doesn't CCP just make it so you can't activate high slot modules on non-war targets in High Sec? How idiot proof do we want CCP to make this game? Where is the line drawn? 1) Strangly enough (design wise/background story wise) CONCORD doesn't sanction NPC pirate hostility (bribing CONCORD pays heh), so no CONCORD interverence = cans left in the open. Besides it's not only the victim his cans that are protected but also the criminal his can; just like the police operated on earth in the year 2006. 2) Cargo scanners exist on request of pirates for ransoming purposes in low-sec/0.0. If it were intended for high sec use there would have been a counter module. 3) I do believe that the possibility for suicide attacking was designed as an ultimate means of getting even (pre wardeck way of getting even), heck back in the days you could even fight and defeat CONCORD but CONCORD was buffed because of 1.0 noob griefing getting out of control damaging the influx of new players. 4) This has nothing to do with idiot proofing the game, it has to do with fair play. It has to do with the mindset of the (ab)users of this design flaw. They think of haulers with expansive cargo as idiots where as the haulers feel safe for flying around in high sec for which they are paying the price by making long detours around low-sec areas. All game material helps them think this way starting with the tutorial. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 00:59:00 - [373] Originally by: Dee Ellis Originally by: Weps Oner Edited by: Weps Oner on 07/11/2006 23:20:14 If it were pvp, you would have two parties saying "gg". That sums it up I guess. <dang alt....> You might want to check up on meaning of usage of the term you know... gg stands for good game and was initially intended as honest respect to your oponent, this got changed by kids using gg sarcasticly when they got whooped bad and couldn't handle it. EvE has it's equivalent in gf which is starting to see it's misuse as well. Some people dont ever think it's a gg or gf when they loose. We refer to those people as sore loosers. But it isn't just sore loosers, there's also people using either term to indicate that their oponent was no match at al for them, we refer to those people as poor winners. In a true PvP game you respect your oponents wether you win or loose. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Taaketa Frist The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:00:00 - [374] Originally by: DrAtomic But above all it certainly wasn't designed with the pure intent of providing empire players a hauler that was more secure within empire. If that had been the case then they would have buffed haulers instead of introducing specilized (and expansive) transporters. Transporters were designed to give players a transportship that could withstand some of the hostilities in high risk areas such as low-sec and 0.0. Why would they boast haulers? I'm sorry? The point is you need to pay for protection thus expensive (better protected) transport ships (see the connection?). For someone to gank you THEY need to PAY as well. Industrialists in this game have got super lazy or super tight lately by the looks of things and have come to expect the ulimate protection in Empire. Empire is SAFER then 0.0 not invinicible territory. Did I say it was specifcally for empire? I said I had a tendancy to use my Mastodon in empire and my Prowler in 0.0. -------------- Dang nabit
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:00:00 - [375] Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: Wolfways If you're a criminal you're a criminal. Ever wanted to shoot a macro miner or ore thief? Just once? What if you accidentally set off a smartbomb or ECM burst? Do you think doing so should be an automatic ban from high sec? That is for the authorities to decide. But if found guilty then yes i would expect to be banned from hi-sec for a length of time determined by my crime. But obviously that might be kinda hard to code into a game Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:01:00 - [376] Originally by: DrAtomic Originally by: Alowishus Originally by: DrAtomic Originally by: vanBuskirk Ship loss to CONCORD should void insurance. No ifs no buts. Plus Concord should confiscate the cans and both parties can collect their own can from the CONCORD station. I have no argument against this. But what about people popped by NPCs in high sec? Why should only people killed by suicide alts get the preferential treatment of having CONCORD protect their can? More questions: Why do cargo scanners exist? In low sec if I see a target I'm going to attack first and ask questions later. The existance of cargo scanners indicates to me that scenarios where the worth of one ship is less than the cargo at stake are intended. Why doesn't CCP just make it so you can't activate high slot modules on non-war targets in High Sec? How idiot proof do we want CCP to make this game? Where is the line drawn? 1) Strangly enough (design wise/background story wise) CONCORD doesn't sanction NPC pirate hostility (bribing CONCORD pays heh), so no CONCORD interverence = cans left in the open. Besides it's not only the victim his cans that are protected but also the criminal his can; just like the police operated on earth in the year 2006. 2) Cargo scanners exist on request of pirates for ransoming purposes in low-sec/0.0. If it were intended for high sec use there would have been a counter module. 3) I do believe that the possibility for suicide attacking was designed as an ultimate means of getting even (pre wardeck way of getting even), heck back in the days you could even fight and defeat CONCORD but CONCORD was buffed because of 1.0 noob griefing getting out of control damaging the influx of new players. 4) This has nothing to do with idiot proofing the game, it has to do with fair play. It has to do with the mindset of the (ab)users of this design flaw. They think of haulers with expansive cargo as idiots where as the haulers feel safe for flying around in high sec for which they are paying the price by making long detours around low-sec areas. All game material helps them think this way starting with the tutorial. I don't disagree entirely with any of that. And I liked your cargo scanner answer, good counter. But the fundamental problem here is in whether one believes that suiciding is an exploit (in CCP terms) of game mechanics or not. An advantage, that's something different. Every fleet that sat and waited, entrenched, with a hundred drones out, forcing the enemy to warp/jump into them had a very distinct advantage that, theoretically is unintended, but is it an exploit when the enemy is the one choosing to put themselves at risk? I guess I think high sec is still a risk, depending on your cargo, and people need to realize it. Whether CCP changes it in the future is up to them. Currently I don't see a problem with it, I don't villainize those who do this, I think they are well within their rights. If anyone is to blame it's CCP for either allowing it if they don't want it -OR- not making it clear that this is possible. All this exploit nonesense is just that, however.
Death Merchant InterGalactic Corp. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:06:00 - [377] I keep seeing the term "safe space". There is no safe space in eve. I will repeat in caps, THERE IS NO SAFE SPACE IN EVE! There is space that is safer than 0.0. but for the third time there is no safe space. I feel bad for people that lose stuff because of this, but it should be universally understood that no where except inside a station is immune to player interaction. "What happens in Deklien stays in Deklien".
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:08:00 - [378] I wish we could get this thread finished with by an answer from a dev. Is suicide attacking an exploit or not? C'mon devs! Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Ki An Gallente Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Tre Kroner	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:12:00 - [379] In a futile attempt to lighten the mood in this debate I bring you this 2 a.m. attempt at humor Piccy /Ki
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:24:00 - [380] Edited by: Rekindle on 08/11/2006 01:26:51 Originally by: Ki An In a futile attempt to lighten the mood in this debate I bring you this 2 a.m. attempt at humor Piccy /Ki bah hahaha that was freakin hilarious--- heheheehehe. Even though it might be perceived that I'm laughing at my own expense i spewed beverage all over my screen - lol tyvm for that. Just one question: where did you get that pic of my hauler blowing up? lol that sums this thread up quite well. -------------------------------------------

Ki An Gallente Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Tre Kroner	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:26:00 - [381] Originally by: Rekindle bah hahaha that was freakin hilarious--- heheheehehe. Even though it might be perceived that I'm laughing at my own expense i spewed beverage all over my screen - lol tyvm for that. Just one question: where did you get that pic of my hauler blowing up? Yer, never really meant to be specific in the characters there And, your hauler? Hehe, grabbed a picture off google. Guess I was lucky /Ki
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:29:00 - [382] im the old guy in whos beein playing MMOs since WWII. nice distraction from the issue at hand to see that m8. I stil have my point of view and stuff on it but that was @#$#@ hilarious. classic. -------------------------------------------
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:29:00 - [383] Edited by: DrAtomic on 08/11/2006 01:30:11 Originally by: Alowishus I don't disagree entirely with any of that. And I liked your cargo scanner answer, good counter. But the fundamental problem here is in whether one believes that suiciding is an exploit (in CCP terms) of game mechanics or not. An advantage, that's something different. Every fleet that sat and waited, entrenched, with a hundred drones out, forcing the enemy to warp/jump into them had a very distinct advantage that, theoretically is unintended, but is it an exploit when the enemy is the one choosing to put themselves at risk? I guess I think high sec is still a risk, depending on your cargo, and people need to realize it. Whether CCP changes it in the future is up to them. Currently I don't see a problem with it, I don't villainize those who do this, I think they are well within their rights. If anyone is to blame it's CCP for either allowing it if they don't want it -OR- not making it clear that this is possible. All this exploit nonesense is just that, however. 1) I believe suiciding isnot an exploit, before the CONCORD buff and pre-wardec this was the only way to retaliate yourself in empire. However usage of multiple accounts were not taken into account thus causing the situation of suicide ganking for a profit. 2) The game educates players that 1.0 -> 0.5 is safe space/policed space. The game also educates players that 0.4 -> 0.0 is deadly and hostile. So people expect to be killed in 0.4 -> 0.0 and expect to be safe in 1.0 -> 0.5 as the game taught them. 3) I don't see it so much as who's to blame or not and I'd even go as far as to say that Rekindle is there with me, it's a matter of debating a game mechanic that doesn't add up with the way people are taught by the game on how it is supposed to work and suggestions on how to prevent new victims being made and players being lost as a result on a daily basis. 4) Empire suicide ganking actually promotes macro-mining/ebaying isk because if a victim that is hit extremly hard to the extent of loosing most he had and decides to continue playing he's gonna need new funds/bpos/whatever he wont restart in his <insert noobship> doing tutorial agent missions all over again rebuilding from 0 isk -> imperium. I'd even say that empire players are more prone to do this then 0.0 inhabitants who know what is at stake and know how to get back on their feet fast. 5) The usage of the term exploit is not nonsense; the definition of an exploit is unintended option within a game mechanic caused either by a design flaw or coding flaw for ones betterment. The sanctionability of the use of an exploit depends entirely on the company operating the game some companies (perma)ban even the unreported use of an exploit merely for not reporting it and others only act after an official statement (CCP). ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 01:34:00 - [384] Originally by: Wolfways I wish we could get this thread finished with by an answer from a dev. Is suicide attacking an exploit or not? C'mon devs! Pffft I can give you an answer to what their reponse would be "suicide ganking as it stands now is not viewed as an exploit but it is something we would like to do something about". Now did that sound enough Oveur-ish? ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
franny Phoenix Knights	Posted - 2006.11.08 08:27:00 - [385] if anything High sec is TO secure it's leading to people being overconfident and not taking percautions NERF High Sec!!!!!
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.08 09:02:00 - [386] Originally by: franny if anything High sec is TO secure it's leading to people being overconfident and not taking percautions NERF High Sec!!!!! Too true Actually, I feel more secure in hostile 0.0 space. Why? Because I know they are after me, and that I alone hold the responsibility of my safety. Current empire high-sec gives a false sense of security to people believing that others will guard their butts. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Ishquar Teh'Sainte Euphoria Released Euphoria Unleashed	Posted - 2006.11.08 09:11:00 - [387] only out of interest (as the topic is allready dying ) to the OP - do you consider yourself as a "griefer"? if yes - then why? if not - why not? ___________________ -Skellibjalla- Life is a garden of perceptions. Pick your fruit.
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.08 10:35:00 - [388] Originally by: Alowishus But the fundamental problem here is in whether one believes that suiciding is an exploit (in CCP terms) of game mechanics or not. I suppose it depends whether you deem the entire process of suicide ganking to exploitive or just a portion of it. I think it would be fair to say that most players consider the part after the hauler is destroyed by the pirate ship, which is subsequently destroyed by concord, and its cargo is floating in space to be scooped by a) friend of pirate or b)alt of pirate, to be the exploit. Anything preceding that point is not, on the grounds that the hauler pilot has measures within the game to defend themselves. Even then the ACTUAL theft of the cargo is not an exploit because stealing a victims cargo is part of piracy, the exploit part is that another party can steal the haulers cargo under the eyes of concord. There is also the small matter of suicide pirates getting insurance payouts on their ships, which could also be considered exploitative. In summary. 1) Attacking as a suicide pirate = not an exploit. The player can defend. 2) Using a 3rd party to steal cargo = exploit. The player cannot defend. The issue is how you fix part 2, without effecting all other players. Should cargo theft = sec hit? Intervention by concord in the form of an attack is probably a little extreme, but I suppose stolen cargo could be flagged as "stolen" for a duration (say 24hrs) in which time customs would treat the cargo at jump gates as it would contraband i.e. cargo confiscated, fine imposed. I don't think stolen cargo should be returned. If it was appropriately protected in the first place, it wouldn't get stolen. Carelessness should not be rewarded or risk free. If you implemented a mechanism like this, it wouldn't do away with suicide piracy (and I see NO reason why this should be done away with) and nor would it do away with theft. It would just make it much more difficult. The thief would have to know which gates/stations, if any, did not have customs patrols currently on them to be able to exit the system or dock.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 11:27:00 - [389] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Alowishus But the fundamental problem here is in whether one believes that suiciding is an exploit (in CCP terms) of game mechanics or not. I suppose it depends whether you deem the entire process of suicide ganking to exploitive or just a portion of it. I think it would be fair to say that most players consider the part after the hauler is destroyed by the pirate ship, which is subsequently destroyed by concord, and its cargo is floating in space to be scooped by a) friend of pirate or b)alt of pirate, to be the exploit. Anything preceding that point is not, on the grounds that the hauler pilot has measures within the game to defend themselves. Even then the ACTUAL theft of the cargo is not an exploit because stealing a victims cargo is part of piracy, the exploit part is that another party can steal the haulers cargo under the eyes of concord. There is also the small matter of suicide pirates getting insurance payouts on their ships, which could also be considered exploitative. In summary. 1) Attacking as a suicide pirate = not an exploit. The player can defend. 2) Using a 3rd party to steal cargo = exploit. The player cannot defend. The issue is how you fix part 2, without effecting all other players. Should cargo theft = sec hit? Intervention by concord in the form of an attack is probably a little extreme, but I suppose stolen cargo could be flagged as "stolen" for a duration (say 24hrs) in which time customs would treat the cargo at jump gates as it would contraband i.e. cargo confiscated, fine imposed. I don't think stolen cargo should be returned. If it was appropriately protected in the first place, it wouldn't get stolen. Carelessness should not be rewarded or risk free. If you implemented a mechanism like this, it wouldn't do away with suicide piracy (and I see NO reason why this should be done away with) and nor would it do away with theft. It would just make it much more difficult. The thief would have to know which gates/stations, if any, did not have customs patrols currently on them to be able to exit the system or dock. Good post, and I fully agree the controversy is not with the ship being destroyed it's witht he cargo being looted. The solution however in my eyes should be that CONCORD confiscates all loot involved which can the be collected at a CONCORD station (all involved parties their own loot). If you steal a car, then get caught the police confiscates the car and all your personal belongings; when you are set free your personal belongings are given back and the car is returned to the original owner. This is the way it should be in EvE as well imho. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.08 11:59:00 - [390] Originally by: DrAtomic Good post, and I fully agree the controversy is not with the ship being destroyed it's witht he cargo being looted. The solution however in my eyes should be that CONCORD confiscates all loot involved which can the be collected at a CONCORD station (all involved parties their own loot). I see your point but I disagree. I do not think that Customs (not Concord) should return stolen loot. If a person with loot flagged as stolen (i.e. contraband) in their cargohold then it should just be confisicated. It should not be returned to the original owner. All that approach encourages is for people hauling expensive items to not take proper precautions and guard against potential attacks in suicide space. If you lose your possessions, thats your lookout, take better care next time. Concord or Customs should not exist to "babysit" hauler pilots. Originally by: DrAtomic If you steal a car, then get caught the police confiscates the car and all your personal belongings; when you are set free your personal belongings are given back and the car is returned to the original owner. This is the way it should be in EvE as well imho. Eve does not = Real Life(TM) and I think we need to draw a line in the sand where we try to mirror Real Life with law enforcement in Eve. We can draw parallels, but because Eve is a GAME and RL is not, you cannot expect them to be the same. Eve is a game. If you made the game the same as RL, it would not be fun to play. In real life, yes you either get your car back with its contents or the insurance company pays out. However, Eve is a game and quite an open one at that. Because it is a "game" the mechanisms in place to make thievery diffcult should not negate it as an option entirely, which is what your approach would do. I realise some players would like to live in some sort of happy utopia in Empire Space, but that would just make it stale and uninteresting. Its a game so you make thieves work for their ill gotten gains, make players work to sa***uard their possession, but you DON'T put in place real world mechanisms that when applied to the game environment would completely nullify empire thievery/piracy as an option. Look at it this way. If your ship = your car, then as the pilot/driver, if you want the insurance company to cough up, you need to keep your car locked. If you don't secure your vehicle in terms of the policy, you will get nothing if it is broken into and both car and contents stolen. In Eve terms, keeping your ship+contents secure = fitting the vessel so it cannot be easily broken into i.e. destroyed. If you have properly secured your vessel against suicide piracy your insurance pays out in the form of your ship not being destroyed and your cargo not being spilled across space. As a player your real insurance against ship loss is your ship and fittings, because if they are good enough, you won't lose your vessel. The role of Concord in Eve is to bring the rapid cessation to none war based hostilities in Empire Space. Thats all. The role of Customs vessels is to try and limit the transport of contraband and I think this should include stolen goods. Once the goods are confisicated, thats it. No one gets them back, they just disappear, probably to the Customs Tea & Biscuits fund.

Ginger Magician Minmatar OctoberSnow Corp	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:11:00 - [391] I'M sorry for your loss Rekindle but u made the mistakes of using a tech 1 hauler,not using bookmarks,not tanking your ship,not using a tech 2 indy and putting all your eggs in one very fragile basket. However I think that it should be made clear to all players whether they read the forums or not that no space in EVE is entirely safe and u can lose any ship anywhere if people are determined enough.
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:22:00 - [392] Edited by: Steven Dynahir on 08/11/2006 12:25:08 I've come to a conclusion that the suggested fixes would be adequate to resolve this issue: 1) No insurance payout if ship is lost due Concord 2) Confiscation of cargo containers if Concord is involved Optional fix for compensation of the loss could be: 3) All confiscated containers go directly to the person who got attacked. IE, if assaillent module survives, it's given to the one being attacked. edit: scrap #3. This would cause people shoot at friend first, and the target second, thus transferring the cans to the initial person involved. Better solution. If concord was not shooting at you, your belongings are beamed to nearest station. If concord was shooting at you, they go poof. --- Sell orders Recruitment
Ikvar Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:23:00 - [393] Originally by: Ginger Magician I'M sorry for your loss Rekindle but u made the mistakes of using a tech 1 hauler,not using bookmarks,not tanking your ship,not using a tech 2 indy and putting all your eggs in one very fragile basket. However I think that it should be made clear to all players whether they read the forums or not that no space in EVE is entirely safe and u can lose any ship anywhere if people are determined enough. Ginger in 'post makes sense' shocker Originally by: Rekindle I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything I own.
Taram Caldar Caldari Acheron Vanguard Armada The Shadow Ascension	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:31:00 - [394] Edited by: Taram Caldar on 08/11/2006 12:35:32 Originally by: Rekindle Read people , read. I perfectly understand this is accepted game play...thats my point. The fact that non combat characters can't move their crap through safe space is grief at its very core. No you don't understand. Empire space, even 1.0 space, isn't "SAFE" it's just "More Safe" than 0.0 and lowsec. There is no "SAFE" space in EVE. Get it through your skull. How can you have played for 2+ years and not know this? Yes, it absolutely sucks that you lost your stuff. Some folks in my alliance lost things to suicide squads recently. But claiming that suicide pirates are 'griefing' is beyond silly. It's accepted tactics by CCP. The players guide specifically states that NO space is safe. In fact even during the Tutorial the game makes it VERY clear that the only time you are "SAFE" is when you are docked. Period. It goes on to state that high security space, patrolled by concord, is Safer but it is not a guarantee of safety. Bottom line if you're hauling valuables haul them in a T2 Indy with a strong shield tank mounted. Preferably with an escort but at the VERY least a T2 indy. Otherwise just accept that you're taking a risk by hauling high value items in a T1 Indy that's fairly easy to pop. Don't claim someone is "Griefing" just because you were foolish enough to load billions of ISK worth of valuables onto a T1 Indy and fly it god knows how many hops through space without even so much as a frigate for escort.
Dee Ellis	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:32:00 - [395] Originally by: Ikvar Originally by: Ginger Magician I'M sorry for your loss Rekindle but u made the mistakes of using a tech 1 hauler,not using bookmarks,not tanking your ship,not using a tech 2 indy and putting all your eggs in one very fragile basket. However I think that it should be made clear to all players whether they read the forums or not that no space in EVE is entirely safe and u can lose any ship anywhere if people are determined enough. Ginger in 'post makes sense' shocker Holy mother of christ, we're doomed! /me fetches the Doomsayer bell and his very small 'Repent' sign
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:37:00 - [396] Originally by: Steven Dynahir . Better solution. If concord was not shooting at you, your belongings are beamed to nearest station. If concord was shooting at you, they go poof. No. Better is for Customs (not Concord) to confisicate contraband/stolen goods and for those goods never to be seen again. The pirates/theives should have a chance to evade customs (if they put time and effort into doing so) rather than have NO CHANCE by having Concord on scene to Deus Ex any potential profit they could make away. If there is a mechanism in game where the authorities return stolen possessions to their owners, then it makes hauling in empire risk free. At which point there is no incentive for pilots to take responsibility for their ships and fit and fly the appropriately. Asking players to take less respomsibility = a bad thing.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:45:00 - [397] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Steven Dynahir . Better solution. If concord was not shooting at you, your belongings are beamed to nearest station. If concord was shooting at you, they go poof. No. Better is for Customs (not Concord) to confisicate contraband/stolen goods and for those goods never to be seen again. The pirates/theives should have a chance to evade customs (if they put time and effort into doing so) rather than have NO CHANCE by having Concord on scene to Deus Ex any potential profit they could make away. If there is a mechanism in game where the authorities return stolen possessions to their owners, then it makes hauling in empire risk free. At which point there is no incentive for pilots to take responsibility for their ships and fit and fly the appropriately. Asking players to take less respomsibility = a bad thing. Anything which removes the profit factor from suicide ganking removes suicide ganking. This should be obvious. --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.08 12:56:00 - [398] Originally by: James Duar Anything which removes the profit factor from suicide ganking removes suicide ganking. This should be obvious. Yes, but apparently people keep missing this or assuming that the removal of suicide piracy is necessary or desirable when in fact it is neither. What needs to be done is for it to be made harder, not remove the possibility entirely. But some folk seem to want to remove that possibility so they can have responsibility free, risk free hauling in empire.
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.08 14:27:00 - [399] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Alowishus But the fundamental problem here is in whether one believes that suiciding is an exploit (in CCP terms) of game mechanics or not. I suppose it depends whether you deem the entire process of suicide ganking to exploitive or just a portion of it. I think it would be fair to say that most players consider the part after the hauler is destroyed by the pirate ship, which is subsequently destroyed by concord, and its cargo is floating in space to be scooped by a) friend of pirate or b)alt of pirate, to be the exploit. Anything preceding that point is not, on the grounds that the hauler pilot has measures within the game to defend themselves. Even then the ACTUAL theft of the cargo is not an exploit because stealing a victims cargo is part of piracy, the exploit part is that another party can steal the haulers cargo under the eyes of concord. There is also the small matter of suicide pirates getting insurance payouts on their ships, which could also be considered exploitative. In summary. 1) Attacking as a suicide pirate = not an exploit. The player can defend. 2) Using a 3rd party to steal cargo = exploit. The player cannot defend. The issue is how you fix part 2, without effecting all other players. Should cargo theft = sec hit? Intervention by concord in the form of an attack is probably a little extreme, but I suppose stolen cargo could be flagged as "stolen" for a duration (say 24hrs) in which time customs would treat the cargo at jump gates as it would contraband i.e. cargo confiscated, fine imposed. I don't think stolen cargo should be returned. If it was appropriately protected in the first place, it wouldn't get stolen. Carelessness should not be rewarded or risk free. If you implemented a mechanism like this, it wouldn't do away with suicide piracy (and I see NO reason why this should be done away with) and nor would it do away with theft. It would just make it much more difficult. The thief would have to know which gates/stations, if any, did not have customs patrols currently on them to be able to exit the system or dock. I completely agree with Sendraks here. The goal is to make this activity more difficult, not prevent it from happening. Once made more difficult the practice will remain, but the prevalence will diminish. In addition to this I would repeat my suggestion for a module to counter the cargo scanner. Just as a module is present to counter most other modules, there needs to be a counter for this one. This goes directly to taking responsibility for the cargo you carry. If you are carrying something important you can mask the contents of your ship. Another thing that seems certain is that issues like suicide ganks may be addressed based on player outcry. One only has to look at CCP's track record to see that trend. Can crimnal flagging, warp core stabilizer changes, T2 ammunition changes, 50% more hit points for longer battles are all examples of issues highlighted by the player base that eventually saw change. Anyone who believes threads like this one are pointless might want to take note of those changes. --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.11.08 14:59:00 - [400] Originally by: Sendraks Yes, but apparently people keep missing this or assuming that the removal of suicide piracy is necessary or desirable when in fact it is neither. That viewpoint is shared by you and the vocal pierat minority of EVE's playerbase ... it must be 5 to 1 majority of pierats to npcers/traders/miners AT LEAST on the forums ...but at the rate that piracy is increasing it will be at that level ingame before too long Quote: What needs to be done is for it to be made harder, not remove the possibility entirely. But some folk seem to want to remove that possibility so they can have responsibility free, risk free hauling in empire. heaven forbid but I dont want all of the anti pierat suggestions mentioned above to be implemented, just that hi-sec aggressors dont get insurance if they were attacked by concord

Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:02:00 - [401] Originally by: Sendraks If there is a mechanism in game where the authorities return stolen possessions to their owners, then it makes hauling in empire risk free. At which point there is no incentive for pilots to take responsibility for their ships and fit and fly the appropriately. You seem to forget that items are constantly being destroyed when ship is lost. By returning whats left is not risk free. If you are hauling a T2 BPO and it blows up, then it's gone. This change would only cause the pirating to move to the low-security space instead of Jita and other hub systems. Current system just caters those "pirates" who do not have the time and will to attack on those people who really are prepared. This would still be a viable way to cause financial loss to the target by blowing up his ship & stuff. But with a cost to the attacker. (Now one gains for doing this) But then again, when we have a wuss like Foiritan as President, we'll propably wont see any change to this. --- Sell orders Recruitment
Tanis Bastar Caldari Interstitial Incorporated	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:07:00 - [402] Originally by: Osia You see real world analogies don't often work in respect to EVE. Just pulling your chain. The basic point I was trying to make is that "high security" never means "perfect security". If you haul valuable goods, wherever you are, expect that some crazy bad man might try to take them from you by force. Actually, I totally agree that suicide gankers should not get insurance payouts, but otherwise I would leave things as they are...
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:10:00 - [403] Originally by: Radioactive Babe That viewpoint is shared by you and the vocal pierat minority of EVE's playerbase ... it must be 5 to 1 majority of pierats to npcers/traders/miners AT LEAST on the forums ...but at the rate that piracy is increasing it will be at that level ingame before too long Interesting that you lump me in with the pirates when it should be obvious that I am not one. I am a trader/miner/NPCer and I am vehemently opposed to anything that would make empire into a risk free, carebear playground. Players should be prepared to think and take responsibility for their possessions no matter what segment of space they are in. Originally by: Steven Dynahir You seem to forget that items are constantly being destroyed when ship is lost. By returning whats left is not risk free. If you are hauling a T2 BPO and it blows up, then it's gone. Yes, but by returning all lost cargo you simply aren't encouraging players to take more responsibility for their actions. I see no value in returning the stolen cargo. Once its confisicated thats it. If people fitted their ships properly, it wouldn't happen. Eve is a game that does, and SHOULD, reward those players who make the most effort to sa*uard themselves against piracy. This measure rewards those players more, which is how it should be. Originally by:** Steven Dynahir This change would only cause the pirating to move to the low-security space instead of Jita and other hub systems. Current system just caters those "pirates" who do not have the time and will to attack on those people who really are prepared. Piracy is all about attacking unprepared, poorly defended targets. That is the pirating ideal. What pirating shouldn't be about is attacking unprepared targets without having made suitable preparations yourself i.e. are there customs vessels about and what route do I take to get my "booty" to safety?
Abaddon Nostros Minmatar Nostros Shipyards	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:10:00 - [404] I only have one thing to say to the original poster, and dont feel like going through 14 pages to see if it was said already. ______________________________ Thank god, we may actually have something unique here, if you dont like it, go play one of the other games that you like so much. Have a nice day. Can I have your stuff?
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:12:00 - [405] Originally by: DrAtomic Originally by: Taaketa Frist (And whoever said transports where for deep space only, no they weren't. They were for better protection of hauling simply because this kind of play became popular and a counter needed to be put in place.) That was me. Read their description, it says it all. Blokkade running in empire? Empire regarded as deep space now? So a battleship should never be used for mining by your logic? This is so dumb it hurt's, there are counter's, they get punished, stop whining ffs, adapt or die. This game is great becasue it is harsh and if you screw up, you get hurt, theres risk everywhere and it's fantastic. None of this safe zone crap. I personally, when flying through empire with fat lootz, use a blockade runner with a nice fat tank and instas, nanos and a scout if its really fat and juicy. Result, never been ganked yet although i was shot at but warped off long before it hurt me. The tools are there, stop expecting ccp to think for you and stop being so fricking lazy. This comes up everytime some idiot can't be assed to be careful and instead packs a t1 hauler with all expanders to cram in as much as possible and then cries when they get popped, i mean come on. It's darwin's law in full effect, it's seriously not that hard. I am stunned by the refusual to adapt Let's see who's standing at the end when the dust settle's
Santa Anna	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:18:00 - [406] Originally by: Radioactive Babe Originally by: Sendraks Yes, but apparently people keep missing this or assuming that the removal of suicide piracy is necessary or desirable when in fact it is neither. That viewpoint is shared by you and the vocal pierat minority of EVE's playerbase ... it must be 5 to 1 majority of pierats to npcers/traders/miners AT LEAST on the forums ...but at the rate that piracy is increasing it will be at that level ingame before too long Quote: What needs to be done is for it to be made harder, not remove the possibility entirely. But some folk seem to want to remove that possibility so they can have responsibility free, risk free hauling in empire. heaven forbid but I dont want all of the anti pierat suggestions mentioned above to be implemented, just that hi-sec aggressors dont get insurance if they were attacked by concord I'm more or less an empire carebear and I don't see anything wrong with suicide ganking. Just because I'm not a pirate doesn't mean I don't think pirates should exist. Frankly, this game would be much more boring for me when I carebear around low sec if there weren't pirates lurking behind every jumpgate. In high sec, I'm much more comfortable and I afk when I'm just moving a ship somewhere, but if there were no risk at all in empire I'd find the game less interesting. I've been targeted more in empire than in low sec or 0.0, not counting passive targeters (which I wouldn't know about). If you don't like suicide gankers go find their camping spots and annoy them until they leave. You could also wait for them to do their thing then instapop their pod or loot their can or instapop their slave and loot the original target's can with your own alt/slave/buddy. Suicide gankers are in it to make money. Deprive them of their payoff 3 or 4 times and they'll go clog up someone else's trade route.
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:18:00 - [407] Quote: Yes, but by returning all lost cargo you simply aren't encouraging players to take more responsibility for their actions. I see no value in returning the stolen cargo. Once its confisicated thats it. If people fitted their ships properly, it wouldn't happen. Eve is a game that does, and SHOULD, reward those players who make the most effort to sa*uard themselves against piracy. This measure rewards those players more, which is how it should be. The people taking all the sa*uards and making the effort would not be blown up in the first place (unless multiple attackers who really want him dead), thus the more rewards for effort concept would be still intact. --- Sell orders Recruitment
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:27:00 - [408] Originally by: Steven Dynahir The people taking all the sa***uards and making the effort would not be blown up in the first place (unless multiple attackers who really want him dead), thus the more rewards for effort concept would be still intact. I think the words we;re looking for are "profound" and "less significant." In short, if careless players get their cargo back after being pirated, then the rewards for players who are careful are not as "profound." By making the rewards for being careful "less significant" you diminish the value of being careful. When there isn't much distinction between two things, people will take the easier option as the reward is not perceived as being worth it and probably wouldn't be in this case, By maintaining the penalties for being careless (stolen cargo = gone), you keep the significance of the reward for being careful intact. Thus those who make the effort feel that they have achieved something over those who couldn't be bothered. Which in the environment of a game, is pretty ideal.
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:40:00 - [409] Originally by: Sendraks I think the words we;re looking for are "profound" and "less significant." Dunno, I'm not an English speaking person But basically we are now engaged in the discussion of the value for being prepared, and while we both agree on the confiscation of the loot, we are just getting on a semantic sidetrack. One hauler can easily contain 200m of stuff and should that cargo be destroyed by half it would mean the loss of 100m. By being prepared one would be 100m richer. In every case the value of being prepared would be bigger than the value of not being prepared, and the value would always be proportional to the cargo being transported. Thus I see no need for additional loss for being unprepared. --- Sell orders Recruitment
Santa Anna	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:48:00 - [410] Being able to insure cargo for a limited time (1 hr?) would give haulers another way to limit exposure to suicide gankers when they pack up their EVE Life in a can and cart it across space. You'd make it really expensive of course, but that'd be the price of not using best practices. Being able to insure a ship but not its contents doesn't really make sense anyway. Perhaps a player corp could put something together, actually.

Bill Shankly	Posted - 2006.11.08 15:53:00 - [411] Greifplay lol my advice for the OP is uninstall.
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.08 16:00:00 - [412] Edited by: Sendraks on 08/11/2006 15:59:52 Originally by: Steven Dynahir Dunno, I'm not an English speaking person I dunno, you seem entirely conversant with the language to me. It might not be your first tongue, but you certainly seem able to speak it. Originally by: Steven Dynahir One hauler can easily contain 200m of stuff and should that cargo be destroyed by half it would mean the loss of 100m. By being prepared one would be 100m richer. In every case the value of being prepared would be bigger than the value of not being prepared, and the value would always be proportional to the cargo being transported. Thus I see no need for additional loss for being unprepared. Very true. The loss becomes more significant the great value of your cargo. If you're transporting 200million ISK worth of cargo that equates to "everything you own" then I imagine a lot of players would balk at the outlay of an expensive ship or an organised security escort if all they stood to lose was 100million ISK. Whereas someone with 2 billion ISK would obviously try harder. The lower the value of cargo you get, the less significant the loss becomes. Lose 20million ISK of cargo but get 10million ISK back? Scarcely worth the bother of going to the extra effort for the majority of people, sod the additional outlay and rest safe in the knowledge that you'll get at least half your cargo back. Maybe more. The value of being prepared doesn't necessarily scale with the value of the cargo. I'd go along with what you were suggesting if there was someway for the game to calculate this.
Osia Gallente Astrum Contract Services Group	Posted - 2006.11.08 16:09:00 - [413] Originally by: fire 59 So a battleship should never be used for mining by your logic? This is so dumb it hurt's, there are counter's, they get punished, stop whining ffs, adapt or die. This game is great becasue it is harsh and if you screw up, you get hurt, theres risk everywhere and it's fantastic. None of this safe zone crap. I personally, when flying through empire with fat lootz, use a blockade runner with a nice fat tank and instas, nanos and a scout if its really fat and juicy. Result, never been ganked yet although i was shot at but warped off long before it hurt me. The tools are there, stop expecting ccp to think for you and stop being so fricking lazy. This comes up everytime some idiot can't be assed to be careful and instead packs a t1 hauler with all expanders to cram in as much as possible and then cries when they get popped, i mean come on. It's darwin's law in full effect, it's seriously not that hard. I am stunned by the refusual to adapt What I think you're missing here is while those who choose to use this tactic are punished, it is perceived as inadequate. The security hit a person gets is trivial at best. Between alt recycling and methods of security status repair. The insurance payout for the ship used in the attack means this activity has almost no monetary loss for potential huge gains. In truth this is simply an effort to have the attacker's free ride taken away, not an attempt to cover the defender's laziness. The suggestion was have customs officials on the gate confiscate the loot after a short time. Don't give the suicide's alt a free ride, make them have to think and adapt as well to profit from their misdeeds. Like you I fly transports and blockade runners when carrying precious cargo. Like you I use a scout when the situation demands it. In my experience I have taken fire from far more high security attacks in various places in the EVE universe than low security and 0.0 attacks, and I frequent several low security areas. To date I have not lost a cargo. The point is however why is high security space MORE dangerous than low security and 0.0 areas? --- Logistics XO, Astrum Contract Services Group
Taram Caldar Caldari Acheron Vanguard Armada The Shadow Ascension	Posted - 2006.11.08 16:41:00 - [414] Edited by: Taram Caldar on 08/11/2006 16:44:19 Edited by: Taram Caldar on 08/11/2006 16:42:20 It absolutely floors me that this discussion has gone on this long. 1) CCP has stated in documentation AND in the tutorial that you are NOT safe in eve EXCEPT when you are docked. Period. There is no such thing as SAFE space. PER the guide AND the tutorial. Where you people get this idea is beyond me. Empire space is 'safer' but if you go hauling millions of ISK around in a ship that can be quickly popped by a cruiser or 3 you are just begging for anyone with a cargo scanner to blow you to shreds (you do know that's SPECIFICALLY why cargo scanners are in the game, right?). 2) The OP admittedly loaded millions, probably hundreds of millions of ISK worth of goods into a Tech 1 Industrial and carted it uncountable hops through space and got popped. While I feel bad for him for his losses it's just flat out his own darn fault. The rules of the game, the tutorial for the game and the GUIDE for the game, not to mention the devs themselves, have stated on numerous occasions that THERE IS NO PLACE OTHER THAN DOCKED THAT YOU ARE SAFE. Ipso Facto: You can, and will, get popped ANYWHERE if someone decides they want to kill you. Period. Furthermore they have specifically provided Tier 2 Haulers so that people can cart their cargo much more safely. Merely training for a few more days before making this journey and buying a slightly more expensive hauler would have prevented this entire episode because a Tech 2 Hauler can't be popped by suicide squads before concord wipes them out. 3) Piracy is NOT griefing. Popping a hauler to steal the cargo is NOT griefing. Popping a player every time they undock and preventing them from playing is griefing. Stealing cargo, for the sake of stealing cargo, is ok. Killing a player repeatedly for the sake of killing that player: Is griefing This discussion is silly. I don't even pirate, I've had corp members popped by suicide squads... I've even had friends popped by them. But as much as I may not like it when they do this it is NOT illegal and it is NOT griefing.
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.08 17:27:00 - [415] I think theres still some confusion over the initial intent of this post. I don't think piracy is bad for the game. But anyone whos lost the ability to discren between the concept of suicide ganking in empire and sitting at a low sec/0 sec gate committing acts of piracy (or otherwise working within the confinds of normal game mechanics) is clouding the issue. this isnt a whine post about nerfing piracy or begging for a 1 up on the "bad guys". It makes me sick that everytime people bring up an issue its an automatic challege to the rights of the poor disenfranchised "pvp" members of the community. It also makes me sick that by pointing out some obvious flaw - that is a difference between what was intended, and what is actually happening, that i am some how unworthy or I dont understand the game mechanics or that this is how it is and you should live with it. This is a message forum to discuss things. I think you need to ask who is actually whining when you examine the issue. Some of us have raised a point that suicide ganking is inordinate when compared to the rest of the "protections" offered by teh "automatic" systems of this game.....others suggest that any discussion around such inconsistiencies is a direct threat to their playstyle. If your playstyle is based on a game flaw which causes an inordinate amount of risk to other players and results in your gain then you are, by definition a griefer. Grab a cookie and play some game on cheat mode. Maybe the lines between true pvp and game mechanics have been allowed to blur for too long and your judgement is completely lost. -------------------------------------------
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.08 17:37:00 - [416] Hmm, had a talk about this with a friend who was one of those pk scumbag types in UO and i think i may be changing my stance on this... I'd like a question answered though. Does anyone know the Concord response times in the various security levels? But as of now this is the way i see things. On the cargo hauler side...Theres nothing wrong. You take better precautions and you lower the risk of losing stuff. On the pirate side...Suicide killing does give the pirate a cheap, and maybe highly profitable kill...but that's what pirates are really. The easier the fight the better. The only problems i have with suicide killing are seen from a rp point of view i think. How willing should a pilot be to kill himself for profit? We get cloned yes, but even so i think the thought of throwing yourself into certain death isn't something most people could easily do. But even in rl we have religious fanatics and kamikaze pilots who do exactly that, although obviously their motivation is more important to them than money. I guess unless CCP tell us we are supposed to think a certain way about pilot death (unlikely) then it's up to each of us individually. If you want to play a nutjob, play a nutjob. The actual attack? Well this is similar to above. If the reason for attacking someone in hi-sec is to kill them (for whatever reason) then i can see the validity of hi-sec suicide attacks..."He killed my wife. I may die now, but so will he!" Only CCP can say why Concord just sit and watch the haulers loot being...looted. But i do believe that while the game mechanics are realistic as they are (i.e. anyone could come along and steal the loot) letting the pirate loot after the kill (yes i know it's a different character, but it all comes down to the player getting the benefit, not some random passerby) seems like it's just giving the pirate free loot that he otherwise has little chance of obtaining after he clones, gets a ship, and returns to the scene to loot. So in the end (yeah finally ) i think the reward for the pirate should be lowered. No insurance for Concord-killed ships sounds fair. From a rp point of view maybe the pirate should not get the loot. Maybe Concord should confiscate the lot...not sure how i stand on this yet. Good discussion so far though, apart from the insults Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.11.08 18:01:00 - [417] Originally by: Wolfways On the pirate side...Suicide killing does give the pirate a cheap, and maybe highly profitable kill...but that's what pirates are really. The easier the fight the better. Thats the nub of the issue, its very very easy and has almost no consequences for the pierat (sec status hit? kill 0.0 npc's for a week and you'll be +5 again) if they stood a chance of losing out on it (attacking a hauler that may not drop enough items to cover the cost of a new ship) then the whole thing balances out .. but they only lose 40mil isk at present (plat insurance + fittings), this makes hitting a ship with 100mil worth of mins/bpo's/mods a viable proposition ...... which is daft
Antdung	Posted - 2006.11.08 18:30:00 - [418] Edited by: Antdung on 08/11/2006 18:32:18 Sympathies on the loss, but it goes to prove you should still place some sort of defence (Plates/extenders etc) for those who are willing to sacrafice & feel the wrath of the law for their gain, The game mechanics will deal with crime in 0.5 above very swiftly. swift enough for a hauler with some defence to escape, but not someone with expanders etc
Jalia Kovac Placid Reborn Placid Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.08 18:38:00 - [419] Originally by: Radioactive Babe but they only lose 40mil isk at present (plat insurance + fittings), this makes hitting a ship with 100mil worth of mins/bpo's/mods a viable proposition ...... which is daft Really? I think it's great. It gives empire space a bit of gritty realism that it sorely needs. ► Intaki Canonical Resouces ◄
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.08 19:06:00 - [420] To be honest a lot of the 'pirate' responses in this thread support the statement that started this post and makes me wonder how many pirates even understand the meaning of true pvp. In a true pvp fight two sides engage each other, be it consentual or not where odds are determined by tactics and skill. Ganking/PK-ing is the player killing without him having any chance whatsoever. Ganking/PK-ing defenseless characters is considered griefing in all if not most other MMORPGs. The suicide practise that goes on is just that; griefing. Sadly a lot of people here classify ganking/pk-ing as pvp, something it is most defenitly not. It makes me wonder how those people would stand in true pvp matches, odds are that they'll get creamed hard and fast. I have respect for the true pirates, however I'd never pay them. I'd rather loose my stuff then to grant them their wishes. A lot of people do that and that is most likely why the real pirating has turned into empire ganking/pk-ing defenseless haulers. It doesn't make it a good and acceptable practice though, unless CCP has really intended it to be a griefers paradise. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery

Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.08 19:25:00 - [421] Originally by: Sendraks 1) Attacking as a suicide pirate = not an exploit. The player can defend. 2) Using a 3rd party to steal cargo = exploit. The player cannot defend. A contrast: 1) Following someone around waiting for NPCs to kill them = not an exploit. 2) Looting their can after the NPC kills them = exploit? Players cannot deffend against their can being looted by anyone, ever. So how does the method of destruction of their ship, or the relationship of the looter to the destroyer make any difference?
Taram Caldar Caldari Acheron Vanguard Armada The Shadow Ascension	Posted - 2006.11.08 19:28:00 - [422] Edited by: Taram Caldar on 08/11/2006 19:30:22 Originally by: Rekindle It also makes me sick that by pointing out some obvious flaw - that is a difference between what was intended, and what is actually happening, that i am some how unworthy or I dont understand the game mechanics or that this is how it is and you should live with it. No, you're still missing the point. The DEVS, the DOCS and the Tutorial all state that it is not SAFE anywhere except IN DOCK!... They specifically state that you can be attacked anytime, anywhere, except docked in a station. This isn't an unintended aspect of the game. It is the game. Period. If someone feels it's worth losing a ship to kill you for whatever reason (revenge, loot, whatever) they can. Period. This is not a FLAW. The only flaw is when alts are used to do it, the assets transferred to another character and the alt biomassed. That is a bannable offense. But suicide ganking within the rules is not a flaw or an exploit. That's what you're not getting. It's perfectly within the rules and working as the devs intended or they'd have told players to stop. I understand that you can't grasp that but it is what it is. Suicide killing has been in EVE since BETA. If it was unintended 3yrs into the game (4yrs since beta) you'd think it would have been removed by now or they'd have told people not to do it. I don't do it. I don't like it. I have had friends be on the receiving end of it. But it's PART of the game. I don't run around trying to get the rules altered. I modify my gameplay to compensate for the rules, not try to get the rules altered to compensate for my gameplay. Just because you don't LIKE that it's allowed doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed. It's an aspect of the game that everyone deals with. Fly a tech 2 hauler if carrying valuable cargo or fly with escorts (or both) or be willing to accept that you risk getting blasted. It's just that simple. There is only 1 thing I think needs to be done in this entire situation: Remove insurance payouts for ships killed by concord. That's it... end of story.
Taram Caldar Caldari Acheron Vanguard Armada The Shadow Ascension	Posted - 2006.11.08 19:34:00 - [423] Originally by: Radioactive Babe Originally by: Wolfways On the pirate side...Suicide killing does give the pirate a cheap, and maybe highly profitable kill...but that's what pirates are really. The easier the fight the better. Thats the nub of the issue, its very very easy and has almost no consequences for the pierat (sec status hit? kill 0.0 npc's for a week and you'll be +5 again) if they stood a chance of losing out on it (attacking a hauler that may not drop enough items to cover the cost of a new ship) then the whole thing balances out .. but they only lose 40mil isk at present (plat insurance + fittings), this makes hitting a ship with 100mil worth of mins/bpo's/mods a viable proposition ...... which is daft Pretty sure you need more than 1 ship to do the whole pop a hauler thing... I can't immagine any one ship popping a hauler before concord shows up if the hauler has even basic resist gear or shields in his mids. Every time I've read about it it's several folks hitting the ship and a unganged hauler carting off the loot.
Shagrath Xarra	Posted - 2006.11.08 19:38:00 - [424] What strikes me as being hypocritical is this OP probably never brought this discussion or any similar subjects like it up on the forums prior to him getting ganked and losing all of his stuff. Now all of a sudden it is a "weak game mechanic" which needs to be discussed and addressed pronto.
Alowishus Shadow Company Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.08 19:51:00 - [425] Originally by: Taram Caldar Edited by: Taram Caldar on 08/11/2006 19:30:22 Originally by: Rekindle It also makes me sick that by pointing out some obvious flaw - that is a difference between what was intended, and what is actually happening, that i am some how unworthy or I dont understand the game mechanics or that this is how it is and you should live with it. No, you're still missing the point. The DEVS, the DOCS and the Tutorial all state that it is not SAFE anywhere except IN DOCK!... They specifically state that you can be attacked anytime, anywhere, except docked in a station. This isn't an unintended aspect of the game. It is the game. Period. If someone feels it's worth losing a ship to kill you for whatever reason (revenge, loot, whatever) they can. Period. This is not a FLAW. The only flaw is when alts are used to do it, the assets transferred to another character and the alt biomassed. That is a bannable offense. But suicide ganking within the rules is not a flaw or an exploit. That's what you're not getting. It's perfectly within the rules and working as the devs intended or they'd have told players to stop. I understand that you can't grasp that but it is what it is. Suicide killing has been in EVE since BETA. If it was unintended 3yrs into the game (4yrs since beta) you'd think it would have been removed by now or they'd have told people not to do it. I don't do it. I don't like it. I have had friends be on the receiving end of it. But it's PART of the game. I don't run around trying to get the rules altered. I modify my gameplay to compensate for the rules, not try to get the rules altered to compensate for my gameplay. Just because you don't LIKE that it's allowed doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed. It's an aspect of the game that everyone deals with. Fly a tech 2 hauler if carrying valuable cargo or fly with escorts (or both) or be willing to accept that you risk getting blasted. It's just that simple. There is only 1 thing I think needs to be done in this entire situation: Remove insurance payouts for ships killed by concord. That's it... end of story. Most objective, valid and accurate post in the thread.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.11.08 20:03:00 - [426] "This isn't an unintended aspect of the game. It is the game. Period. If someone feels it's worth losing a ship to kill you for whatever reason (revenge, loot, whatever) they can. Period. This is not a FLAW. The only flaw is when alts are used to do it, the assets transferred to another character and the alt biomassed. That is a bannable offense. But suicide ganking within the rules is not a flaw or an exploit. That's what you're not getting. It's perfectly within the rules and working as the devs intended or they'd have told players to stop. I understand that you can't grasp that but it is what it is. Suicide killing has been in EVE since BETA. If it was unintended 3yrs into the game (4yrs since beta) you'd think it would have been removed by now or they'd have told people not to do it." Everyone understands this but your wrong when you suggest it isnt a flaw. It is a 100% flaw. Like you said alts are used to do it, but they do not have to be biomassed, and to be honest even if they do get biomassed it is impossible to enforce it and be banned lets get real. The flaw occurs in the fact that the looting game mechanic is exploited. Hopefully one day CCP will make loot cans from players falgged in a similar way they made jet cans flagged, with the difference that if you loot a players can who was not yourself dying, or the agressor of that can you get concorded and then a 15 min timer on it. same could be said for logging by the way that has been around for the entire spawn of EVE i guess logging to avoid death MUST BE INTENDED! Wrong... So please do not confuse the fact that something going unfixed for a long period of time is the same as being intended.... It seems obvious to me the reason it is said in the tutorial that empire isnt 100% safe, isnt because of suicide gankers, but possibly the fact there are things like WAR dec's, and now jet cans are flagged for pvp... and who knows what else...
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.11.08 20:15:00 - [427] Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2 same could be said for logging by the way that has been around for the entire spawn of EVE i guess logging to avoid death MUST BE INTENDED! Wrong... So please do not confuse the fact that something going unfixed for a long period of time is the same as being intended.... Indeed, we all know that CCP will not call something an bug/exploit if its difficult to stop or hard to fix in the code ... (macro miners/logoffski/pos targeting etc etc) .. if it was easy to fix (like using wasps after one patch because they were seriously overpowered) then they will call using that an exploit and fix asap Quote: It seems obvious to me the reason it is said in the tutorial that empire isnt 100% safe, isnt because of suicide gankers, but possibly the fact there are things like WAR dec's, and now jet cans are flagged for pvp... and who knows what else... that was also my understanding as well, but the pierats twisted that round to make what they are doing seem to be what CCP intended
000Hunter000 Gallente Leviathan Corperation LTD	Posted - 2006.11.08 20:30:00 - [428] Ok, i've read the first post and i usually keep an open mind to posts like these cuz after playing all this time i do know this game can be kinda rough... But your whining cuz a suicide ganksquad blew up all your stuff? what??? u played almost 2 years and your suprised this happens? if u still can't fly a T2 hauler after 2 years and don't even bother taking any precautions whatsoever i (and prolly most of the community) can hardly sympathise. My advice, go get a blockade runner and get some instas. Transporting your most valuable possesions in a flimsy hauler... sigh... some people will never learn.
murder one Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.08 20:40:00 - [429] Originally by: Rekindle Granted my view point is a little messed up right now. Having played game for a while now ( 2 years in feb ) and loosing literally everything you own on a retarded game mechanic will have that effect on people. But let me explain: I spend 80% of my time in 0.0 and %20 of my time in empire. I was on a empire run when a well practiced group blew up my iteron 5 hauler [with high end expanders] in a .5 system. I was not at war with them, I wasn't afk, I was in an empire system when they used their grief tactics to explode everything (and I mean everything) I own in the form of Bpos/Bpcs/mods etc into nothing. Let me save the naysayers the effort: And explain outright that I understand that this is an accepted method of game play (to shoot and take the Concord hit) and then have your mates loot. But its specifically because its accepted that I come to the conclusion this game is a griefer playground. I have invested as much time and energy in this game as griefers, yet because I chose to move my stuff through what was suposed to be secure space, I am being penalized and the "material" representation of time is now gone. If you don't want players to partake in care bearing empire runs then dont bait them with what is 99.99999999% of the time secure space and write off being ganked with a "you should have known better" attitude. Just call this a %100 pvp only game where combat can happen against your 1hp hauler any time anywhere and remove policing altogther or otherwise repair this pathetic game mechanic. lol? Because I said so...
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.11.08 20:41:00 - [430] Originally by: 000Hunter000 ....didnt bother arse even looking at the last page to get an idea of the threads direction.... ya ya ya ... move along to find another thread to flame OR read at least a few of the last pages and join the lively discussion

Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.11.08 20:42:00 - [431] Originally by: murder one ... same as the other bloke above, needless flamage because he didnt read the thread ... RTFT
Ranger 1 Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.11.08 20:45:00 - [432] Edited by: Ranger 1 on 08/11/2006 20:45:40 You knew the risks. This entire game focus's on PVP to one extent or another, you are either engaging in it, or trying to avoid it. In some area's the cards are stacked in your favor, in other area's the opposite is true. But in no area are you completely free to blunder around with not a care in the world as to protecting yourself. That is the design of the game you are playing, like it or not.
Taram Caldar Caldari Acheron Vanguard Armada The Shadow Ascension	Posted - 2006.11.08 21:12:00 - [433] Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2 Everyone understands this but your wrong when you suggest it isnt a flaw. It is a 100% flaw. Like you said alts are used to do it, but they do not have to be biomassed, and to be honest even if they do get biomassed it is impossible to enforce it and be banned lets get real. The flaw occurs in the fact that the looting game mechanic is exploited. No it is NOT a flaw. Being blasted to shreds in high sec is not a flaw. It is perfectly legitimate gameplay. Once your dead your cans are out there for anyone to loot. And no, it's not necessarily an alt doing it. This isn't WoW. It's not EQ it is EVE. And in EVE no place is safe. Get it into your skull. You are not "SAFE" anywhere in EVE except docked in your station. Heck, you aren't even 100% safe in a POS. You are only safe in the station. The tutorial teaches you this within 10 minutes of starting the game (30 if you're slow). Someone who loots your can is attackable by you or anyone else in your gang. Thus the looting of your gear is not an exploit either. Anyone can loot it. Some noob in a frig can fly up and snatch up all the BPO's that dropped and there's not a thing wrong with it. He'll get an agression timer to you (and anyone in your gang) but that's it. Those are the rules, the mechanics and how EVE works. It's a rough universe. Learn to adapt or don't. It's entirely up to you. But the bottom line is: Noplace is safe. Fly accordingly.
Snarls McGee	Posted - 2006.11.08 21:37:00 - [434] Originally by: Kitchie My biggest criticism of suicide ganking is that there is no comeback. You can have a friend escorting you but he can do nothing about the ganker's hauler picking up your stuff or he'll be Concorded as well. No pod kill so no kill rights, just a 15 min aggression countdown on the ganker that he will avoid. It is lame to the extent that there is no skill involved and almost no penalty for it but I guess it some people's idea of fun..... QFT. Fifteen minute aggression timers are way too short and way too easily bypassed. For that matter, the whole Concord thing is out of whack. The police will shoot the mugger(s) but they won't shoot the mugger's friends that pick over the corpse. Going one further they'll shoot ME if I try to defend my corp mate's belongings?
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.11.09 01:02:00 - [435] "No it is NOT a flaw. Being blasted to shreds in high sec is not a flaw. It is perfectly legitimate gameplay. Once your dead your cans are out there for anyone to loot. And no, it's not necessarily an alt doing it. This isn't WoW. It's not EQ it is EVE. And in EVE no place is safe. Get it into your skull. You are not "SAFE" anywhere in EVE except docked in your station. Heck, you aren't even 100% safe in a POS. You are only safe in the station. The tutorial teaches you this within 10 minutes of starting the game (30 if you're slow). Someone who loots your can is attackable by you or anyone else in your gang. Thus the looting of your gear is not an exploit either. Anyone can loot it. Some noob in a frig can fly up and snatch up all the BPO's that dropped and there's not a thing wrong with it. He'll get an agression timer to you (and anyone in your gang) but that's it. Those are the rules, the mechanics and how EVE works. It's a rough universe. Learn to adapt or don't. It's entirely up to you. But the bottom line is: Noplace is safe. Fly accordingly." Oh please stop with the i am raw, and hardcore and bill bad-arse chitchat. It is a flaw, and here is more ammo for you to ingore as you blindly try to beleive it isnt. It is also a major flaw because YOU CANNOT DEFEND YOURSELF, until agressed, nor can these suiciders be killed without concord killing you also. I mean these guys are obvious, fly a farking hauler around some day ( empty cargo ), you will load in, there will be a raven, and a hauler sitting at the gate, you will get targeted and scanned.... you have no cargo so you do not get suicided..... great now i know a suicide ganker is there, but he gets to sit safely in his raven and there is no way to put the hurt on him...... Good luck trying to arse around that to justify that empire suicide ganking isnt a flaw or broken or needing fixing, or intended.... What next you gonna argue it should be okay to bomb people from the safety of a station? muhahahahah
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.09 01:16:00 - [436] I honestly dont believe that it's intended game play. But then again maybe my vision is a bit blurred coming from DAOC where the exact same mechanism is used; kingdom is safe, handfull of dungeons is dangerous where you run the risk to be ganked and then there is the frontier which is deadly. However the safe areas there are safe (except for NPCs). Ow and can we please stop using WoW as an example for PvP... WoW's PvP was an afterthought and just plainly **** poor. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Jason Kildaro Minmatar Synergy Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.09 01:17:00 - [437] You can argue that Eve favors the agressors...maybe too much so, but to say it is a flaw is presumptious. Suicide ganking has been around so long it's hard for me to believe that the Devs do not realize it exists. You have been given tools to lessen the chance of being ganked but you did not use them. Why are you not using a T2 hauler? Why? After 2 years you cannot sya that it was not within your reach. You did not bother to invest in protecting your investments. The Devs cannot be blamed for that. I think the envisioned the universe to be a greddy, dark, and seedy one. Look at the backstory. There are very few peaches and cream stories there. Look a the tutorials, look at the Dev posts! There is nothing to indicate that it is not a griefer's game! It is obviously so! I can understand being mad. I can understand not wnating to play this game. I do not blame ytou if you quit and move on to something else. But to come into Eve and then complain about it's mechanics is like saying "I bought Quake but all people do is steal flags and shoot each other"
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.09 01:19:00 - [438] Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2 Oh please stop with the i am raw, and hardcore and bill bad-arse chitchat. It is a flaw, and here is more ammo for you to ingore as you blindly try to beleive it isnt. It is also a major flaw because YOU CANNOT DEFEND YOURSELF, until agressed, nor can these suiciders be killed without concord killing you also. I mean these guys are obvious, fly a farking hauler around some day ( empty cargo ), you will load in, there will be a raven, and a hauler sitting at the gate, you will get targeted and scanned.... you have no cargo so you do not get suicided..... great now i know a suicide ganker is there, but he gets to sit safely in his raven and there is no way to put the hurt on him...... Good luck trying to arse around that to justify that empire suicide ganking isnt a flaw or broken or needing fixing, or intended.... What next you gonna argue it should be okay to bomb people from the safety of a station? muhahahahah And that says it all, either make this a 100% pvp game or fix the so called safe space mechanics. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.09 02:10:00 - [439] Okay here's something to think about. Every game mechanic that has been changed in every MMO has changed because although it could be done it shouldn't be done. So should something that allows griefing be allowed to stay? For example: I have tons of ISK's. I decide to be a dork and mess with people so i sit outside a station waiting for a transport. People in the very hi-sec areas usually can't afford, or have the skills for the best transport ships so destroying one should be easy. I blow one up, loot with an alt, and get another ship to go do it again, and again, etc. When my security drops i can go do the same thing in a lower hi-sec area or stop and do missions to increase my sec status again. New players, whether they came to EVE for pvp or pve are not going to like that one bit and it could make them quit then and there if they get blown to bits within 5 minutes of leaving the station. Even players who have been in the game for over a month won't have the skills to fight back or protect themselves in any way. Nothing makes a player leave a game faster than getting killed as soon as they start playing, especially if there's nothing they could have done about it. So, should it be allowed? Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Rekindle	Posted - 2006.11.09 03:33:00 - [440] Edited by: Rekindle on 09/11/2006 03:36:25 Edited by: Rekindle on 09/11/2006 03:35:28 methinks that this has been in the game so long people have concluded its a freakin feature. Maybe CCP should put a log-to-alt button right on the right click menu so people can use that feature in PvP as well. Some day someone is gonna come on the forums and say its lame that people log off in combat and others are gonna scream at them for whining and being a carebear and complain that its a feature of the game and the should live with it. Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks along similar lines on this particular issue. My flame suit was actaully starting to get a bit toasty. -------------------------------------------

Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.09 09:17:00 - [441] Edited by: Lorn Yeager on 09/11/2006 09:25:58 A quicky: Would you like to have places in eve where nobody can open fire at you? (aside from when you are docked?) A naive but honest question in all of this... Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Steven Dynahir Gallente Avaruuslaivanrakentajat Oyj	Posted - 2006.11.09 09:41:00 - [442] Originally by: Lorn Yeager A quicky: Would you like to have places in eve where nobody can open fire at you? (aside from when you are docked?) No. A quicky 2: Would you like to have places in EVE where shooting at you would cause negative concequences to the shooter? --- Sell orders Recruitment
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.09 11:00:00 - [443] Originally by: Lorn Yeager Edited by: Lorn Yeager on 09/11/2006 09:25:58 A quicky: Would you like to have places in eve where nobody can open fire at you? (aside from when you are docked?) A naive but honest question in all of this... No Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.09 11:01:00 - [444] Originally by: Steven Dynahir Originally by: Lorn Yeager A quicky: Would you like to have places in eve where nobody can open fire at you? (aside from when you are docked?) No. A quicky 2: Would you like to have places in EVE where shooting at you would cause negative concequences to the shooter? I thought that's what Empire space was supposed to be... You can be attacked but the attacker gets blown up by Concord, but that doesn't matter if the attacker can make a big profit from it anyway Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.09 11:06:00 - [445] Edited by: DrAtomic on 09/11/2006 11:13:41 Originally by: Rekindle Edited by: Rekindle on 09/11/2006 03:36:25 Edited by: Rekindle on 09/11/2006 03:35:28 methinks that this has been in the game so long people have concluded its a freakin feature. Maybe CCP should put a log-to-alt button right on the right click menu so people can use that feature in PvP as well. Some day someone is gonna come on the forums and say its lame that people log off in combat and others are gonna scream at them for whining and being a carebear and complain that its a feature of the game and the should live with it. Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks along similar lines on this particular issue. My flame suit was actaully starting to get a bit toasty. I'm afraid though that the only way we'll see this fixed is by making a griefers inc corp with trial accounts and start camping starter systems and blowing up noobs over and over again... As in gank every hauler, cargo or no cargo... Should be easily do-able with frigs... ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Elvarien Caldari The Night's Watch THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY	Posted - 2006.11.09 11:12:00 - [446] reading the op I just think one thing. one does not use a cargotugger to move blueprints. . . actualy one does not move the vasluable mods atall one sells em and re-buys em lower priced in the new location. >----
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2006.11.09 11:14:00 - [447] Originally by: Elvarien reading the op I just think one thing. one does not use a cargotugger to move blueprints. . . actualy one does not move the vasluable mods atall one sells em and re-buys em lower priced in the new location. Sure, and then spend another 2 years re-researching them all... ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
Acama	Posted - 2006.11.09 11:30:00 - [448] Where do these suiciders sit? Surely it's worth making a courier mission out of a civvie shield booster, putting it in a badger, waiting for it to get popped then scooping their loot? I mean, if they use ravens to do it, even the basic mods must be worth a bit.
Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2006.11.09 19:05:00 - [449] Originally by: Death Merchant I keep seeing the term "safe space". There is no safe space in eve. I will repeat in caps, THERE IS NO SAFE SPACE IN EVE! There is space that is safer than 0.0. but for the third time there is no safe space. I feel bad for people that lose stuff because of this, but it should be universally understood that no where except inside a station is immune to player interaction. I dunno,, with one shot suicide missles out there, 0.0 and 1.0 you are about equally likely to end up dead if you are in an Iteron V loaded with a billion isk in cargo and anybody knows about it. So, 1.0 equals a death sentance and 0.0 equals a death sentance.... seems like we are comparing apples to apples. 1.0 is NOT safer then 0.0 in this case.
Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2006.11.09 19:08:00 - [450] Here is another kicker to this whole scenario. This whole suicide attack methodology is VERY EFFECTIVE and the more people know about it, the more popular it will become. Seriously, it is almost a no loose scenario,,, you scan the cargo and if it is worth more then your ship, nuke it! No muss, no fuss. Simple math. Easy math. (risk? Where is the risk again?) Very soon Iteron V's will be virtually uselss in Jita... at least if they are hauling anything worth a flip. Mark my words,, this is gonna get really out of hand.

Detavi Kade	Posted - 2006.11.09 19:33:00 - [451] Wow, I had to check the post date to make sure this wasn't another necro job... Anyways..sorry Rekindle, I feel for you. However, what they did wasn't griefing. It was profiteering. They didn't just hit you to make you feel bad, they did it for profit. And last time I checked, most of the things I did in-game was for profit. Let see... Mining? Check, profit. Missioning? Check, profit and standings Ratting? Check, profit and security Trading? Check, profit. There's a handful of stuff that I do that doesn't involve profit, and those usually include making my own ammo and stuff. And some folks do THAT for profit as well. Even as a carebear, I have to say I appreciate this form(hisec ganking) of gameplay. It keeps people on their toes, or at least, it should.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: [one 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.