EVE Search - ffs ccp, lock griefers out of missions.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

ffs ccp, lock griefers out of missions.

» 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 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Shameless Avenger	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:20:00 - [691] Originally by: Bellum Eternus PVP is the only activity in the game with risk, yet it has the least amount of reward per time spent. What if player wrecks spawned enough salvage to produce 10 rigs? What would that do to the carebear/PVP landscape? I wonder why you are mentioning PvP so often? Invading a mission, agroing the rats, screwing the mission-runner... where is the PvP part? Im still waiting. There is NO PVP on this. The grieffers/cowards are not firing a single shot at the mission runners.
Bill Shankly	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:22:00 - [692] Originally by: Shameless Avenger I wonder why you are mentioning PvP so often? Invading a mission, agroing the rats, screwing the mission-runner... where is the PvP part? Im still waiting. There is NO PVP on this. The grieffers/cowards are not firing a single shot at the mission runners. pvp doesnt just involve shooting
Shameless Avenger	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:23:00 - [693] Originally by: DropZone 187 It has been long overdue for mission runners to have to play by the rules the rest of the playerbase does. The rest of the playerbase does? ehm cough<>t2 producers<>cough
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:25:00 - [694] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Unless you are claiming there is zero chance of ship loss on lvl4 missions, then lvl4s have an element of "risk". Sorry, it might mean different things in AvonSpeak but we're limited to the good ol' English language here. You list a bunch of definitions, but don't even realise they support my position and not yours. Read through it. Take special attention to words like "chance" and "probability". Then think. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
DarkFenix Caldari Pilots From Honour	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:25:00 - [695] Edited by: DarkFenix on 07/12/2006 11:31:43 Risk? In missions? That's a joke. Mission runners know exactly what ships will spawn in each mission. They know exactly what to aggro. They know exactly what setups to use. There is no risk. It's like people say, the only way you'll lose ships is through incompetence or lag. About time the fluffy carebears got a taste of reality I think. Edit: Oh and I just thought I should say, Alex, it is the human factor that makes pvp a risk. You don't know what you're going up against usually, you don't know what setups they have (you can guess with reasonable accuracy but that's it), not to mention there's a human at the controls who is to an extent unpredictable. But similarly, your analogy between rock climbing and mission running was a load of b*****ks, real life is not defined by a series of rigid algorithms, that do the same thing every time. Eve is. The simplistic AI of rats on eve is only ever going to do one thing.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:27:00 - [696] Originally by: DropZone 187 Well CCP did say they were introducing new professions - looks like they created a new piwat type profession. It has been long overdue for mission runners to have to play by the rules the rest of the playerbase does. Let the culling begin! Won't really work. We have two cases here: a) People griefing highsec missions. These give the griefers zero profit (they are pure griefplay) and it's forbidden by EULA, so the lack of isk incentive plus the risk of getting banned should slowly drop these cases down. Besides, these have nothing to do with "piracy", it's just griefers. b) People ganking lowsec mission runners. Well, this is so easy to do right now and makes missions have such bad risk/reward, that unless things are changed very soon all mission runners will have quit lowsec. So it's work for a few weeks, then dry up. So nothing new to the game, and the probability of lots of cancelled accounts + lots of new players quitting in disgust. I don't see the good, here, in the long run. Whichever way it goes, I don't see lowsec pirates getting appricably more targets -- anyone with half a brain will quit lowsec mission running. Lowsec will just become even more empty than now. That's good how?
Blacklight Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:28:00 - [697] Avon, seriously after three or four years why do you continue to play with the noobies? They almost all wake up after time and those that don't are as extremist as any other loony you can't win an arguement against. The increase in people from other MMO's is tainting this forum horrendously at the moment but I trust CCP to hold true to thier vision (in the main) so it's just not worth the bandwidth to continue playing with these guys, they all get proved wrong in time. Blog
VeNT Minmatar Freelancer Union Unaffiliated	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:29:00 - [698] and since when has it been possible to screw someone's 3 hour mining session by taking out one NPC? missions should be key coded, so you get a key to enter the deadspace area. simple. people are STILL vulnerable entering/exiting the deadspace area (bubbles anyone?) but are not at the mercy of people who feel like screwing things up for them. -------------------- Selena 001 > has VeNT left system? its gone really quiet!
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:30:00 - [699] Originally by: Alex Harumichi So let's see, "exposure to the chance of injury or loss". Unless you are claiming there is zero chance of ship loss on lvl4 missions, then lvl4s have an element of "risk". Sorry, it might mean different things in AvonSpeak but we're limited to the good ol' English language here. So how about you just drop your addled argument and start claiming that lvl4 missions have "very little risk", or something else that doesn't make you sound quite as silly. You know the enemy, his damagetype, his weak risists. Only few will warp-scramble you, and in most cases you can "activate" them yourself by aggroing certain groups, and the rest just sit there while you eat their friends. If you think you are in any danger, try a raid squad in 0.0. There you dont know the enemy, or his ship of choise or how he fits it. Yes, there are some acknowleged "standard" setups but few use them anyway (personalisation ftw). You dont even know how many they are gonna be. What tactics they will use. They cant be googled. So if you want to define risk as in "getting blown up" the risk in missions are very very low (you can warp away) If you define risk as running into something unplanned for, missions are risk free. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Selena 001	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:31:00 - [700] Petition? If they are constantly doing it for no gain to themselves its classed as harassment. You dont worry about what classes as harassment either, thats the job of the GM so all you have to do is sitback and wait for a decision. Might be an idea to collect some proof though... screenshots, chat convo's etc. If your not happy with said decision even after providing a bag of proof, you politely ask that it be escilated. If that dont work then your screwed... Thats EVE ___________ NATIONAL SARCASM DAY!!
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:31:00 - [701] Originally by: Avon If you know exactly what weapons the terrorists are using, how often they fire, which ones will shoot at you, which ones are likely to try and pin you to the floor whilst the rest shoot, how fast they can move, and you can calculate how much damage they can do, and how much you are able to absorb, and all of these things never change - then there is no risk, you can plan for every factor. However, I think that is kinda unlikely in the senario you describe, non? True. But I'd argue that an exact calculation like that is pretty hard for NPC missions, also. There is some unpredictability in their actions, your own flight paths and hit rates are semi-random, there are randon lag spikes, etc etc. Sure, the terrorist analogy has a lot more unknowns, and a lot more risk. I'm just saying that claiming "zero risk" is false. "Low risk" I could agree with, just like 0.0 ratting is "low risk" as long as you're in friendly or relatively empty space. Suddenly adding the significantly high risk factor of pirates to the lvl4 equation without significantly increasing the rewards makes them senseless to run, risk/reward -wise. Talking about lowsec lvl4s here, mainly. I'd claim that there was a balance of sorts before this, and that it's gone now.
Varis Jericho Fraction	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:32:00 - [702] Originally by: Shameless Avenger I wonder why you are mentioning PvP so often? Invading a mission, agroing the rats, screwing the mission-runner... where is the PvP part? Im still waiting. There is NO PVP on this. The grieffers/cowards are not firing a single shot at the mission runners. The player is competing against you. You are trying to finish the mission, he is trying to stop you. In theory its fine - problem is that its a little too easy to get into the deadspace (auto warp to accel gate is silly) and that taking the mission critical loot and no repercussions. Make taking the mission loot just like can-flagging. Make warping to a ship in deadspace take you to the non-deadspace in line (ie, an empty grid that is between pirate and missioner, and not in the deadspace (so has to use afterburner to fly through the deadspace to get to you... or actually find the acceleration gate)
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:33:00 - [703] Originally by: Avon Take special attention to words like "chance" and "probability". Ok, so you are claiming that there is zero chance of loss on lvl4 missions. I'll just stop right here, then. Have fun in fantasyland.
Diablo Venator	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:35:00 - [704] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Originally by: DropZone 187 Well CCP did say they were introducing new professions - looks like they created a new piwat type profession. It has been long overdue for mission runners to have to play by the rules the rest of the playerbase does. Let the culling begin! So nothing new to the game, and the probability of lots of cancelled accounts + lots of new players quitting in disgust. I don't see the good, here, in the long run. Whichever way it goes, I don't see lowsec pirates getting appricably more targets -- anyone with half a brain will quit lowsec mission running. Lowsec will just become even more empty than now. That's good how? I agree, we have many 'noobs' in the corp and since the patch they have moved further into empire space to avoid low sec mission running where as they did the odd low-sec mission before. I still feel that my suggestion is a good solution, it stikes a balance and lets people play the game how they want to play the game, rather than getting greif which is not what this game is about..
Lord XSiV Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:35:00 - [705] Avon and Blacklight are correct. Especially BL's last post. Need to defend from the transient mmo carebears. If CCP sticks to plan, it will maintain a good game environment as it was originally advertised to be. TO the carebears whining - we heard all your crud before back to the mud days when you constantly complained about PK...... It didn't work then and is most certainly not going to work now. You threaten with your subscription removal and we will threaten with ours. Balances out since we have more subs. So quit now and go back to WoW wacking worms and tadpoles.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:35:00 - [706] Originally by: Blacklight Avon, seriously after three or four years why do you continue to play with the noobies? They almost all wake up after time and those that don't are as extremist as any other loony you can't win an arguement against. The increase in people from other MMO's is tainting this forum horrendously at the moment but I trust CCP to hold true to thier vision (in the main) so it's just not worth the bandwidth to continue playing with these guys, they all get proved wrong in time. I never learn, do I? The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:36:00 - [707] Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: James Duar Make the flag like the ore flag where they can't fire until fired upon (missioners discretion as to their intentions) and you'll eliminate simply griefing in frigates since it'll be completely possible to lock them, get your drones around them and then web -> boom. If someone wants to try entering in a battleship, well, power to them I suppose but they'll be stuffed if the missioner packs a warp disrupter and prevents them warping when some of the rats aggro... This would just end i missionrunners getting killed by players. Atleast as missions and rats are right now. The specific case I was thinking of was people grabbing aggro and then warping out. In this case they grab aggro, you scram them and they die. A PVP tank won't survive combined rat fire plus player fire. This could be made even better if we had a drone option that gave us "orbit at optimal" as a non-hostile action. Basically, let an on-the-ball missioner kill the foolish interferer in hilarious and equally unfair ways.
Oen jei	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:36:00 - [708] Edited by: Oen jei on 07/12/2006 11:37:53 As a mission runner over the past few years ive seen : Loot going from good - decent - sparce - Crap Mission rewards / bonus good straight to crap we dont even get item bonus anymore eg skillbooks Missions getting more difficult bounties get less most mission runners plan in advance, this includes skill training too, we get shafted there / salvage is a perfect example The drop rate for salvagable components is poor Now we have to contend with grief play too. Now Lowsec & 0.0 Commander loot, Good quality named loot and chained bs spawns Depending what area you are in you know what BS/ rats your fighting too significantly better salvagable parts Now just for the hell of it you want to intercept a completely different aspect of the game for nothing more than self gratification, cheap kills and ZERO risk I run in a 20+ player system on average that is a 0.5 and its beginning to happen here to. I think that new players running missions 1.0 to 0.8 (lvl 1 and 2 agents) should be locked no access to anyone not associated with the main mission holder. 0.7 to 0.5 keep them open to the grief players if so desired, but as soon as they enter theyre not protected by whats nothing more than a legal loophole by concord. They themselves are target by the mission faction and mission runners PVP is a fine part of this game and has its place Piracy is needed and another excellent part of the game but so are mission runners
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:36:00 - [709] Originally by: DarkFenix Risk? In missions? That's a joke. Mission runners know exactly what ships will spawn in each mission. They know exactly what to aggro. They know exactly what setups to use. There is no risk. It's like people say, the only way you'll lose ships is through incompetence or lag. Ok, so I assume you've both a) done a significant number of modern-day lvl4 missions and b) never lost ships to them Right? Because otherwise you don't know what you're talking about.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:41:00 - [710] Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 07/12/2006 11:43:12 Originally by: Lorn Yeager If you think you are in any danger, try a raid squad in 0.0. Been there, done that. Why do you imagine I know nothing of pvp, or don't do it? Sure, pvp has a lot more risk. Lots and lots more. I don't think anyone is claiming not. Only thing I'm countering is Avon's (and some others') ridiculous "zero risk" stance. The risk is very low, yes, as is the risk in 0.0 ratting if you're smart (you can interrupt and safespot from ratting trivially, not so for missions). "very low" != "zero". That's all I'm saying. And (imho) the current mission rewards reflect that "very low risk" status -- they aren't all that hot vs time needed. Added: as someone above noted, mission rewards have been continually degraded. It you're remembering lvl4 missions from 1.5 years back, the current ones are pretty crap in comparison. Maybe that's one cause of contention here, some people imagine lvl4s to be much better than they currently are, in reality. Try them.
Fink Angel Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:44:00 - [711] I've lost probably 5 battleships and one Cerebus to LvL4 missions. Once was a Tempest, then a Raven back to back when I went to collect my non destroyed items from the Tempest. That disaster was in the drone mission where you end up on the big structure on the second stage. I got caught in the structure and the whole stage aggro'd me. The other losses were all in the Zazzamataz mission with the mad initial DPS, and the fact it warps ganged ships about 80km from each other on warpin, so you can't even help out. I have never petitioned a ship loss for lag or anything else. I have never CTRL-Q'd or pulled the network lead or any other out of game methods to avoid death. That's fair game, but I will not have my game ruined by someone who is just out to wind me up. I have enough of that in RL thanks, without paying for it in my leisure time.
HankMurphy Pelennor Swarm Eternal Rangers of Terror	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:44:00 - [712] Originally by: Darkenral Heh I almost never agree w/Hank you'll say otherwise when everyone is worshiping me just you wait
Shameless Avenger	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:48:00 - [713] Originally by: Lord XSiV Avon and Blacklight are correct. Especially BL's last post. Need to defend from the transient mmo carebears. If CCP sticks to plan, it will maintain a good game environment as it was originally advertised to be. TO the carebears whining - we heard all your crud before back to the mud days when you constantly complained about PK...... It didn't work then and is most certainly not going to work now. You threaten with your subscription removal and we will threaten with ours. Balances out since we have more subs. So quit now and go back to WoW wacking worms and tadpoles. About the carebearing thing, many of us have asked for the right to shoot the griefers, we are not afraid of fighting them. In general, I see you just want to nerf the mission running profesion. There is no gain for you in this. You just wan't EVE to be a PVP ONLY game. It's description changed to "you can't be a miner, trader. missioner, <insert all profesions here>, you can ONLY DO PVP". I just hope TomB's nerfbat hit this whole thing so hard.
checkmarquet	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:50:00 - [714] Originally by: Ishan Shade I know allot of people start "griefing" because of attitudes just like yours. So all in all you have yourself to thank for it. no, just because cant do anything else but annoying people trying to compensate their lifes.=)
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:52:00 - [715] Originally by: Lorn Yeager Then Please fill me in. What am I missing? What, you missed all the posts about how 0.0 belt ratters and miners face less risk than mission runners do at the mometn? Its pretty well known and accepted by anyone with experience of these things. Originally by: Lorn Yeager You are the one who misunderstands this. Apparently not. Originally by: Lorn Yeager Im not saying that its not "wrong" that people can bust others missions. But why should there not be badguys in eve? Why should it all be so green and comfortable. Why should they not be able to. Its what happens WHEN they are in there thats the problem. Its not outlawed to shoot rats, and no-one "own" a rat wich in RP-wise is fighters from another faction. See, you still don't understand.I don't have a problem with someone being the "bad guy" providing I can do something about it. Right now I can't. Hence there is a problem. I keep stating this fundamental fact (it is not an opinion, it is a fact) and for some reason you keep ignoring it. Originally by: Lorn Yeager By adapt I mean go to 0.0 belts if you think they are safer than your missions. The rats are easier, to some extent (lower numbers), but the players out there dont ransom, dont tease you. They kill you - and your pod. Thats a fundamental change in playstyle for a lot of players that simply does not fit with how they can currently play the game in time constraints. I'm sure you realise that not all Eve players are 24/7 leet kiddies with all the time in the world to play, but instead have focused session where they want to go online, have fun and achieve something in short timespell. I'm not saying that this isn't possible in 0.0, I know its possible for me, but it won't be for a lot of players and it won't be enjoyable for a lot fo players. Why should they be exiled from a game they enjoy, just for the sake of pandering to the egos of others who suffer NOTHING by the presence of such players in the game. Originally by: Lorn Yeager Again, the rules and the posibilities are the same for everyone. If they fix level 4 missions so this kind of griefing can be combated in some way, then yes I would agree with you. Originally by: Lorn Yeager Still, you can google you rats resists and dmg types. Its even on theese forums. That will still only tell you so much, as I have already stated. Until you have physically DONE the missions a few times, you simply can't know what to expect with any degree of certainty. Originally by: Lorn Yeager Its a MMORPG you are playing. Be what you wanna be. Dont think the mechanics makes it easier being a PvP'er than it is to be a missionrunner. Yes, I know its a MMORPG, just you and many others in this thread don't seem to realise it. I don't care if its easier to be a "combat PvPer" or not. I know from experience that it is more challenging and fun. Some people like to do it alot, some like me like to do it a little, some don't ant to do combat PvP at all. A good MMORPG caters to all these player types. A simple fix to missions would mean Eve is a free universe that presents choice for all. Moving all missions to low sec or not fixing them as they currently stand, is a restriction of choice in MMORPGs, which is generally considered to be a bad thing. DAoC managed to be an excellent game that blended both PvP and PvE in a way that worked for everyone and there were none of these childish "carebear" accusations that went round (and they are childish, who but a child would come up with such an insult?), because people had choice. No one was harmed by the PvE only players, so there was no need to insult them or take away their game choices. Admittedly DAoC RvR/PvP didn't offer as harsh a penalties as EvE, but the point is that games where PvE and PvP operate seperately are perfectly viable and everyone gets their fun. Choices are what make MMORPGs great. Taking them away is bad.
James Snowscoran Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.07 11:56:00 - [716] This thread delivers. Flame on to page 50 please. -----
Tachy	Posted - 2006.12.07 12:00:00 - [717] Don't try to argue with Avon. He's one of the EVE gods in a religious sense, not as in chatting in blue text. He's always right and he can't be wrong. --==*-- The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing. by Sharkbait \| 2006.09.20
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2006.12.07 12:02:00 - [718] Thank you people for keeping me entertained during lunch. I especially like the P(error\|missions)=0 argument. And that it is being argued that human skill is not contributing to the probability of error when it is general knowledge that human behavior is the biggest contributer to errors in pretty much any statistics. I predict CCP will solve all this by removing all mission critical items in the near future. ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.07 12:04:00 - [719] The PvE players (carebears) should stop thinking of this game as a PvE game. It is not. It's a PvP game that happens to have some PvE in it. The PvP players are not getting some PvP in your PvE, you're getting some PvE in their PvP. PvE needs to exist to teach new players about the world and to get them started. Other than that there isn't any point to it. It just harms the game. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Takanohana Deep Space Explorers	Posted - 2006.12.07 12:04:00 - [720] This is obviously a thing that needs rebalancing. Nobody should be safe in Eve, but at the moment the balance is messed up: There are very clear principles that guides this: * The closer you get to 0.0 -> More risk and more reward. * Remove grief-style use of game mechanics by changing the game mechanics. * Allow different play styles, creating a much more diverse game universe. 1. In Hi-sec it should take such a long time to scan down a mission runner in deadspace that it won't be worth the griefers time, but worth it to a war-enemy. Mission critical drops should be removed from missions or made exclusively accessible to the mission runner, again removing griefplay. Time for scanning of safespots should stay the same. 2. In Lo-sec is should take a shorter time than Hi-sec to scan a mission runner, creating more risk, but not as short as it is now. This enables dedicated pirates and war-enemies to hunt down the mission runners, but also allows the mission runner to call in reinforcements. To avoid mass exodus of mission runners from low sec to Hi-sec rewards needs to be balanced to make it worthwile to take that risk. 3. In 0.0, no change from as it is. Again, rewards might need rebalancing. Just my 5 cents. ///Taka

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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