Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
196
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 20:07:05 -
[91] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:admiral root wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Docking in highsec for criminals and enemy fw players is a joke. A joke that Rise supported. I guess I can see the reason why they have made this stance but it does break the internal consistency of the game. It would be like being a nightelf and sitting inside orgrimmar and being left alone because its a city and apparently the home defence only functions outside the walls of the city.
There's a lot more to it than that. Actually, there's a lot less to it than that. The stations are owned by for-profit corporations who really don't give a damn who you are, they just want your isk. Nor are they concerned about what passes for morality among obscenely wealthy demigods.
These last 2 responses are right up there with ships in Eve that are made of nerf material and bounce off of each other with no damage. |

admiral root
Red Galaxy
3375
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 20:20:53 -
[92] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:These last 2 responses are right up there with ships in Eve that are made of nerf material and bounce off of each other with no damage.
I don't understand, are you saying there's a lore reason for ship bumping? I'm fairly confident you're wrong about that.
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|

Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
196
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 23:07:23 -
[93] - Quote
admiral root wrote:Syn Shi wrote:These last 2 responses are right up there with ships in Eve that are made of nerf material and bounce off of each other with no damage. I don't understand, are you saying there's a lore reason for ship bumping? I'm fairly confident you're wrong about that.
Alice in Wonderland game mechanics because its too hard for CCP to actually fix.
AKA - Emergent gameplay. |

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
14546
|
Posted - 2015.09.28 23:37:31 -
[94] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:admiral root wrote:Syn Shi wrote:These last 2 responses are right up there with ships in Eve that are made of nerf material and bounce off of each other with no damage. I don't understand, are you saying there's a lore reason for ship bumping? I'm fairly confident you're wrong about that. Alice in Wonderland game mechanics because its too hard for CCP to actually fix. AKA - Emergent gameplay.
It's easily explained by the fluidic physics model, even if it weren't 100% approved emergent gameplay.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 09:00:15 -
[95] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Its called outlaw status. They get this if they are really successful at thier job. You get warning signs before blinky red. it be pay attention yellow.
Except that it completeley misses my point, since you can easily buy yourself out of it.
You need to get to -5 or lower to be attackable, you can do a lot of kills before reaching that point, and its not really expensive to get out of it again. And not difficult to farm out of it.
They still are super safe in highsec, and protected much better by concord than their victims.
What would be wrong with them being "perma" blinky after enough kills? Its not like they couldnt do their job anymore, as I said, only players should allowed to attack them,not NPC. Only difference is that they can be attacked too, so they get more pvp. Great, isnt this exactly what they want? Or could it be that they dont want to have actual pvp, but prefer perfect safety until they make their guaranteed kill with zero risk for themselfs? Well here we are again at "everyone is a carebear" and "nothing should be safe". I can understand that they want the safety for themselfs, I just dont see any reason why they should have it.
Zhaceera Armerarram wrote:You cant earn even 0,1% of what null offer in hisec. The risk however, due to CCP regulations and "make bad pvpers happy" policy, is very close to the null risk.
That is not correct. You can make about the same money in highsec as in nullsec and are much safer while doing it. Some player who live in nullsec are actually doing it, because its easier, safer and still offers a great payout. Of course you have to do it right, afk mining in a non tanked mining ship is not the way to do it. But with incursions and mission blitzing you get about the same as in nullsec. But with much lower risk. Thats why I do not want to nerf the ability to gank in highsec, just put the gankers to some risk themself. |

Mag's
the united
20302
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 10:08:18 -
[96] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:Alice in Wonderland game mechanics because its too hard for CCP to actually fix.
AKA - Emergent gameplay. Amongst the many errors in your posts, I'll point out two.
1. You assume because of how you feel about the mechanics of the game, CCP somehow have made a mistake in that regard. You are wrong in your assumption, how you feel has no bearing on how the game should work. Seeing as Eve has always been a space game based on water physics, your feelings are irrelevant.
2. You also assume there is something to fix and CCP is unable to fix it. CCP have quite often made changes to how ships interact when bumped, they do, have and can make changes in that regard. But seeing how they looked into this situation over many months and decided to allow what they deemed emergent gameplay with intended mechanics, to continue. Your assertion of the need of a fix, holds no water.
As usual in these cases, you and your ilk rely upon 'feelings' as proof of something wrong. Whereas those of us who love the game and it's core, rely upon facts. Come back when you have the latter.
Marranar Amatin wrote:Zan Shiro wrote:Its called outlaw status. They get this if they are really successful at thier job. You get warning signs before blinky red. it be pay attention yellow. Except that it completeley misses my point, since you can easily buy yourself out of it. You need to get to -5 or lower to be attackable, you can do a lot of kills before reaching that point, and its not really expensive to get out of it again. And not difficult to farm out of it. They still are super safe in highsec, and protected much better by concord than their victims. What would be wrong with them being "perma" blinky after enough kills? Its not like they couldnt do their job anymore, as I said, only players should allowed to attack them,not NPC. Only difference is that they can be attacked too, so they get more pvp. Great, isnt this exactly what they want? Or could it be that they dont want to have actual pvp, but prefer perfect safety until they make their guaranteed kill with zero risk for themselfs? Well here we are again at "everyone is a carebear" and "nothing should be safe". I can understand that they want the safety for themselfs, I just dont see any reason why they should have it. So what about a player like myself? I lived in low sec for years, never killed in highsec whilst I lived there and gained my much loved -10 status all in low. When a friend in game asked for my assistance in high sec, I travelled to the relevant station and paid with tags and ISK to revert my sec status to 0. I must admit I didn't like it, but he asked and it was done.
Are you now suggesting that my time in low, should be permanently punished with -10 sec status? That even though I play the game as defined, haven't broken any EULA rules. That I should be forever frozen in the game, to one particular game style?
Should we then suggest that because I and others dislike mining immensely, that anyone who has ever partaken that style of play, should be forever warped to belts and held there to mine roids?
How is it you can define, what is and what isn't 'actual' PvP? Are you privy to some knowledge in this, that the rest of us somehow missed in the term player versus player?
Or is it: "Just one more nerf and it will be balanced." Is that what you really mean?
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1693
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 11:15:49 -
[97] - Quote
I didn't see my idea as 'One more nerf' but rather a case that:
If a player corp wants the benefits of a POS in hisec they should be expected to defend it (citadels will hopefully fix this).
If a pirate wants the benefit of operating in hisec without CONCORD interference they should be expected to use a POS and thus be just as at risk of wardecs as the player corps with a POS.
This would depend upon how the citadels shake out though I think.
An XL defended citadel named Tortuga for pirates could be a fun place though :D
|

afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2047
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 11:19:32 -
[98] - Quote
admiral root wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Docking in highsec for criminals and enemy fw players is a joke. A joke that Rise supported. I guess I can see the reason why they have made this stance but it does break the internal consistency of the game. It would be like being a nightelf and sitting inside orgrimmar and being left alone because its a city and apparently the home defence only functions outside the walls of the city.
There's a lot more to it than that. Actually, there's a lot less to it than that. The stations are owned by for-profit corporations who really don't give a damn who you are, they just want your isk.
The FW one is foobar though. They don't allow it in lowsec, but the space faeries make them allow it in high?
It's weird. |

admiral root
Red Galaxy
3377
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 12:20:43 -
[99] - Quote
afkalt wrote:admiral root wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Docking in highsec for criminals and enemy fw players is a joke. A joke that Rise supported. I guess I can see the reason why they have made this stance but it does break the internal consistency of the game. It would be like being a nightelf and sitting inside orgrimmar and being left alone because its a city and apparently the home defence only functions outside the walls of the city.
There's a lot more to it than that. Actually, there's a lot less to it than that. The stations are owned by for-profit corporations who really don't give a damn who you are, they just want your isk. The FW one is foobar though. They don't allow it in lowsec, but the space faeries make them allow it in high? It's weird.
I guess that's a case of things are probably different at the Coke factory in Mogadishu (assuming it's still operational) being in a warzone than they are in one in the US. I don't do faction warfare so I can't really comment.
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|

admiral root
Red Galaxy
3377
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 12:32:08 -
[100] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:If a pirate wants the benefit of operating in hisec without CONCORD interference they should be expected to use a POS and thus be just as at risk of wardecs as the player corps with a POS.
Risk comes from players, not mechanics, and as long as the vast majority of those in highsec are going to sit on their butts and scream impotently for Someone to do something(TM) I don't see why CCP should waste any more time on you whinebears. CODE. have had POSes up multiple times over the years and no-one has had the fortitude to come at us (even the people who had declared war on us at the time), so what makes you think this would magically change if we were driven out of stations in your crusade to nerf highsec into the ground?
This all sounds a lot like "if highsec was much safer, players would have time to accumulate enough isk to progress to PvP in lowsec and nullsec". Followed by "if carebears had this" and "if carebears had that". You have more than enough tools to deliver risk directly and indirectly to our pods - use them.
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|
|

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1693
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 13:04:36 -
[101] - Quote
admiral root wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:If a pirate wants the benefit of operating in hisec without CONCORD interference they should be expected to use a POS and thus be just as at risk of wardecs as the player corps with a POS. Risk comes from players, not mechanics, and as long as the vast majority of those in highsec are going to sit on their butts and scream impotently for Someone to do something(TM) I don't see why CCP should waste any more time on you whinebears. CODE. have had POSes up multiple times over the years and no-one has had the fortitude to come at us (even the people who had declared war on us at the time), so what makes you think this would magically change if we were driven out of stations in your crusade to nerf highsec into the ground? This all sounds a lot like "if highsec was much safer, players would have time to accumulate enough isk to progress to PvP in lowsec and nullsec". Followed by "if carebears had this" and "if carebears had that". You have more than enough tools to deliver risk directly and indirectly to our pods - use them.
Actually it is none of those things but rather a proposal to level the playing field between the haulers and gankers in such a way that allows the hauler/indy chars to retaliate somewhere. |

admiral root
Red Galaxy
3378
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 14:08:59 -
[102] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Actually it is none of those things but rather a proposal to level the playing field between the haulers and gankers in such a way that allows the hauler/indy chars to retaliate somewhere.
Guns are a thing and everyone can get, or hire, them.
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|

afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2049
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 14:43:41 -
[103] - Quote
admiral root wrote:afkalt wrote:admiral root wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Docking in highsec for criminals and enemy fw players is a joke. A joke that Rise supported. I guess I can see the reason why they have made this stance but it does break the internal consistency of the game. It would be like being a nightelf and sitting inside orgrimmar and being left alone because its a city and apparently the home defence only functions outside the walls of the city.
There's a lot more to it than that. Actually, there's a lot less to it than that. The stations are owned by for-profit corporations who really don't give a damn who you are, they just want your isk. The FW one is foobar though. They don't allow it in lowsec, but the space faeries make them allow it in high? It's weird. I guess that's a case of things are probably different at the Coke factory in Mogadishu (assuming it's still operational) being in a warzone than they are in one in the US. I don't do faction warfare so I can't really comment.
LOL I may steal that  |

Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1687
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 19:32:51 -
[104] - Quote
admiral root wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:If a pirate wants the benefit of operating in hisec without CONCORD interference they should be expected to use a POS and thus be just as at risk of wardecs as the player corps with a POS. Risk comes from players, not mechanics, and as long as the vast majority of those in highsec are going to sit on their butts and scream impotently for Someone to do something(TM) I don't see why CCP should waste any more time on you whinebears. CODE. have had POSes up multiple times over the years and no-one has had the fortitude to come at us (even the people who had declared war on us at the time), so what makes you think this would magically change if we were driven out of stations in your crusade to nerf highsec into the ground? This all sounds a lot like "if highsec was much safer, players would have time to accumulate enough isk to progress to PvP in lowsec and nullsec". Followed by "if carebears had this" and "if carebears had that". You have more than enough tools to deliver risk directly and indirectly to our pods - use them. Yes, this is why I am not worried for organized criminal organizations like CODE. if docking restrictions were put in place. The mechanics are already extremely punitive for criminals in highsec - you just need to prevent a free-to-shoot -10 from warping and they will explode in a less than a minute - yet there have been only a handful of times anyone has tried an organized effort to stop me (outside of the usual freighter ganking vultures who themselves seem there more for killmail whoring than actual fights) from doing the Saviour's work. Organized criminals will be just fine, especially if they have an ecosystem of player-built citadels to use as bases. Highsec bears will in general not lift a finger to fight back: the vast majority of them are just there to endlessly grind resources and have no fortitude to actually shoot back, especially when it lowers their ISK/h. And if they do it is still a win, as it is just more content.
But such a system would hurt new players and lowsec pirates much more and is why CCP has not, and is not likely to ever make this change. It would be extremely harsh to lock a new player who doesn't fully understand the Crimewatch mechanics and pods a few people out from highsec. As the mechanics are they can join up with FW to get some pew-pew experience, and a few days later find themselves unable to get back to their stuff in highsec . Similarly, new player who decides to take up ganking would be unable to do so alone anymore. They would need to join an established criminal organization which will reduce the number of players choosing that career.
The bottom line is that suicide ganking is an intended mechanic. Criminals are suppose to exist, even in highsec. There are already enough NPC-enforced mechanics to jump through for outlaws, CCP is not going to add any more without a very compelling reason. In fact, from CCP Seagull's vision of a more player-driven universe, I expect we will start to see the pendulum finally start to swing back a bit and crime mechanics that stifle player-driven content, like the faction police (the Empires are losing control!), go away/get nerfed. |

admiral root
Red Galaxy
3382
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 19:42:41 -
[105] - Quote
So the whinebears get this latest nerf to highsec and the good guys fight back by tricking lots and lots of newbies into blowing their sec status. Suddenly, lowsec gets a whole load of fresh meat and maybe we prevent the next generation of highsec carebears.
Not that they ever make suggestions that blow up in their faces or anything.
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
14550
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 19:49:56 -
[106] - Quote
admiral root wrote: Not that they ever make suggestions that blow up in their faces or anything.
"Make bumping deal damage!" is my favorite one.
Sure, carebears, we can turn each and every Stabber in the game into a one shot super torpedo. That won't go badly for you at all.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2285
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 20:02:55 -
[107] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:admiral root wrote: Not that they ever make suggestions that blow up in their faces or anything.
"Make bumping deal damage!" is my favorite one. Sure, carebears, we can turn each and every Stabber in the game into a one shot super torpedo. That won't go badly for you at all.
They obviously only want the bumper to take damage because ... well... it hmmm... you see...
It's not like differentiating the aggressor between 2 ships colliding is gonna be hard right? RIGHT?? |

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
14551
|
Posted - 2015.09.29 20:09:11 -
[108] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:admiral root wrote: Not that they ever make suggestions that blow up in their faces or anything.
"Make bumping deal damage!" is my favorite one. Sure, carebears, we can turn each and every Stabber in the game into a one shot super torpedo. That won't go badly for you at all. They obviously only want the bumper to take damage because ... well... it hmmm... you see... It's not like differentiating the aggressor between 2 ships colliding is gonna be hard right? RIGHT??
"Realism only when it favors me."
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |