Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:20:52 -
[121] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:No. Get a bigger logi support.
-1
So 40 Logis for every freighter in high sec and tidi in every system. Well thought out response.
-1
Pirating in 2005
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16699
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:35:09 -
[122] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote:Tabyll Altol wrote:No. Get a bigger logi support.
-1 So 40 Logis for every freighter in high sec and tidi in every system. Well thought out response. -1
3 will do.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1587
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:35:32 -
[123] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:The only time I have seen a Freighter in nullsec (not a Jump Freighter, but straight Freighter) we killed it.
Actually, I tackled it with my interceptor as I passed it in travel just by chance. About 5 minutes later my fleet arrived (had already stood down from our roam, so quickly reformed) and we began killing it. However we were interrupted by a larger fleet, who also spotted it in travel, and they got the final kill and loot.
Freighters don't travel in null or low generally. The risks are much greater.
There might be situations within an Alliance's sov space where they feel secure enough to get a freighter to and from a jump bridge, but Freighters flying through null/low and using gates just doesn't happen because they are not very defendable. Seriously, any alliance big enough to defend one just uses a jump freighter, which is quicker, so less boring for the support, and much safer. Well done, you tackled a freighter in null sec and let someone else kill it. Like most people, you are missing the point. If jump freighters didn't exist, which they never used to, and you had to take a freighter 10 jumps through your own alliance space. You would still have better defensive options than you would in high sec. You can actively kill hostiles before they get anywhere near your freighter in null sec. You do not have that option in high sec.
so in a nutshell instead of removing ganking lets remove system security, make everything nullsec, i fixed it for you :)
most gankers are -10.0 anyway so they can be engaged anywhere, do you think your freighter in nullsec has any defence against the blops fleet that cynos on you from dscan immune covert cyno ship?
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:38:44 -
[124] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Christopher Multsanti wrote:Tabyll Altol wrote:No. Get a bigger logi support.
-1 So 40 Logis for every freighter in high sec and tidi in every system. Well thought out response. -1 3 will do.
Sorry. -3 then.
Pirating in 2005
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:40:39 -
[125] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Christopher Multsanti wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:The only time I have seen a Freighter in nullsec (not a Jump Freighter, but straight Freighter) we killed it.
Actually, I tackled it with my interceptor as I passed it in travel just by chance. About 5 minutes later my fleet arrived (had already stood down from our roam, so quickly reformed) and we began killing it. However we were interrupted by a larger fleet, who also spotted it in travel, and they got the final kill and loot.
Freighters don't travel in null or low generally. The risks are much greater.
There might be situations within an Alliance's sov space where they feel secure enough to get a freighter to and from a jump bridge, but Freighters flying through null/low and using gates just doesn't happen because they are not very defendable. Seriously, any alliance big enough to defend one just uses a jump freighter, which is quicker, so less boring for the support, and much safer. Well done, you tackled a freighter in null sec and let someone else kill it. Like most people, you are missing the point. If jump freighters didn't exist, which they never used to, and you had to take a freighter 10 jumps through your own alliance space. You would still have better defensive options than you would in high sec. You can actively kill hostiles before they get anywhere near your freighter in null sec. You do not have that option in high sec. so in a nutshell instead of removing ganking lets remove system security, make everything nullsec, i fixed it for you :) most gankers are -10.0 anyway so they can be engaged anywhere, do you think your freighter in nullsec has any defence against the blops fleet that cynos on you from dscan immune covert cyno ship?
No. Hence why a support fleet helps
Pirating in 2005
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1587
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:48:41 -
[126] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote:Lan Wang wrote:Christopher Multsanti wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:The only time I have seen a Freighter in nullsec (not a Jump Freighter, but straight Freighter) we killed it.
Actually, I tackled it with my interceptor as I passed it in travel just by chance. About 5 minutes later my fleet arrived (had already stood down from our roam, so quickly reformed) and we began killing it. However we were interrupted by a larger fleet, who also spotted it in travel, and they got the final kill and loot.
Freighters don't travel in null or low generally. The risks are much greater.
There might be situations within an Alliance's sov space where they feel secure enough to get a freighter to and from a jump bridge, but Freighters flying through null/low and using gates just doesn't happen because they are not very defendable. Seriously, any alliance big enough to defend one just uses a jump freighter, which is quicker, so less boring for the support, and much safer. Well done, you tackled a freighter in null sec and let someone else kill it. Like most people, you are missing the point. If jump freighters didn't exist, which they never used to, and you had to take a freighter 10 jumps through your own alliance space. You would still have better defensive options than you would in high sec. You can actively kill hostiles before they get anywhere near your freighter in null sec. You do not have that option in high sec. so in a nutshell instead of removing ganking lets remove system security, make everything nullsec, i fixed it for you :) most gankers are -10.0 anyway so they can be engaged anywhere, do you think your freighter in nullsec has any defence against the blops fleet that cynos on you from dscan immune covert cyno ship? No. Hence why a support fleet helps
but nobody takes support fleets in highsec because people are greedy and want to play solo and just rake in isk. as said nothing stops highsec freighters having support and gankers are engageable anywhere.
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16701
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:51:58 -
[127] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote:
No. Hence why a support fleet helps
Not much when a super or dive by titan lands on said freighter.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12167
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 08:56:08 -
[128] - Quote
Oh wow this is still going.
Should probably show you this then
Better the Devil you know.
=]|[=
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 09:45:29 -
[129] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Oh wow this is still going. Should probably show you this then
CCP Falcon, Community Manager.
Not a game designer or even senior game designer.
And are you saying because someone from CCP said it once it means it law for all time?
Yeah because CCP never changed their mind on anything. And that whole post is based on bringing guns to protect you hauler, which as we have said, doesn't help. Someone posted that quote on page 2. But thanks for the bump!
Pirating in 2005
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1587
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 09:49:34 -
[130] - Quote
what does a game designer have to do with the direction of the game? flacon works for ccp, that should be enough.
ok remove ganking from highsec, what next? make haulers immune so they cant deliver assets anywhere they want safely, highsec would just become an autopilot botting themepark. not to mention the market would take a hit because people dont lose assets as much
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
|
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance
215
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 09:57:20 -
[131] - Quote
the easiest way to stop a bump fest is to suicide 1 or 2 char's (recommend 2 toons) and scram the mach when he is fathest away from the freighter, giving the freighter time to warp off.
if concord pop the first one, reapply with the second toon, to extend the time.
you can also refit the freighter with inertia stabs using a Nestor to give it a chance of aligning out. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2068
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:01:09 -
[132] - Quote
I think we can all agree on the following:
- Ganking needs to stay.
- The current model is crappy and could stand to be fixed (bumps/webs are dumb and should be revisited)
- Changing the current model will be non trivial and probably not pan out as any of us expect, were it to happen
- OP is resistant to any form of work to ensure his safety
- This thread should have been locked on page 2
- Ganking needs to stay.
Can we close the troll down now, please? |
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:09:30 -
[133] - Quote
afkalt wrote:I think we can all agree on the following:
- Ganking needs to stay.
- The current model is crappy and could stand to be fixed (bumps/webs are dumb and should be revisited)
- Changing the current model will be non trivial and probably not pan out as any of us expect, were it to happen
- OP is resistant to any form of work to ensure his safety
- This thread should have been locked on page 2
- Ganking needs to stay.
Can we close the troll down now, please?
I think we agree on not everything but a lot.
- Ganking can stay as long as you have a way to defend yourself better from it.
- The current model is crappy and could stand to be fixed (bumps/webs are dumb and should be revisited)
- Changing the current model will be non trivial and probably not pan out as any of us expect, were it to happen
- OP uses blockade runners in high sec.
- This thread should be a healthy discussion on replacing current bad mechanics with good ones.
- Ganking can stay as long as you have a way to defend yourself better from it.
I'll even update the title for you, as i was using it to get a reaction. Now we are on page 7, title revision deployed.
Pirating in 2005
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2069
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:11:36 -
[134] - Quote
If you want to talk about the ability to deprive someone of control of their vessel in highsec, without tripping aggression I wish you the best of luck.
The situation is FOOBAR, but you'll never get past the people defending it.
And besides that, if, IF CCP did change it, it wouldn't be to make people safer. |
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1587
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:11:51 -
[135] - Quote
can you explain the positive affects this would have on the game? specifically the market?
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:17:15 -
[136] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:can you explain the positive affects this would have on the game? specifically the market?
You can make people just as vulnerable in high sec we be revamping the war declaration system. If CCP want's everything destoryable then they can make everyone war deccable.
You assumptions on the effects of the market are pure speculation and no one really knows what would happen to market if gankers had to declare war on those juicy freighter targets. Markets evolve and adapt.
Pirating in 2005
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1587
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:20:55 -
[137] - Quote
but what about npc corps? everything should be wardeccable so remove npc corps, good luck just driving people out of the game by having no immunity, corps would just wardec everything they could and gankers would be just simply immune to any sort of criminal activity, that does not provide any sort of solution to your so called problem
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16701
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:25:23 -
[138] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote:Lan Wang wrote:can you explain the positive affects this would have on the game? specifically the market? You can make people just as vulnerable in high sec we be revamping the war declaration system. If CCP want's everything destoryable then they can make everyone war deccable. You assumptions on the effects of the market are pure speculation and no one really knows what would happen to market if gankers had to declare war on those juicy freighter targets. Markets evolve and adapt. The above argument is focused on removing high sec ganking. If we are talking about updating the mechanics of said ganking. then not much will change at all. But again, who knows. Also there will be positive effects on player retention if ganking is made fairer and less one sided. Thats a positive for cpp and the game right?
The only threat haulers, miners and mission runners face in highsec comes from gankers.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:25:44 -
[139] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:but what about npc corps? everything should be wardeccable so remove npc corps, good luck just driving people out of the game by having no immunity, corps would just wardec everything they could and gankers would be just simply immune to any sort of criminal activity, that does not provide any sort of solution to your so called problem
You don't have to remove NPC corps but you eject new players from NPC corps and moving them to their races militia after one month in the game. Either that or they find/start their own corp. Even CCP agree that player retention is improved when new players join a player corp and stop flying solo.
As for players who leave their current corp. they go straight into their races militia.
Pirating in 2005
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:38:39 -
[140] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Christopher Multsanti wrote:Lan Wang wrote:can you explain the positive affects this would have on the game? specifically the market? You can make people just as vulnerable in high sec we be revamping the war declaration system. If CCP want's everything destoryable then they can make everyone war deccable. You assumptions on the effects of the market are pure speculation and no one really knows what would happen to market if gankers had to declare war on those juicy freighter targets. Markets evolve and adapt. The above argument is focused on removing high sec ganking. If we are talking about updating the mechanics of said ganking. then not much will change at all. But again, who knows. Also there will be positive effects on player retention if ganking is made fairer and less one sided. Thats a positive for cpp and the game right? The only threat haulers, miners and mission runners face in highsec comes from gankers.
Eve has wars. So not that's not the only threat. Do you know the figures on how many people in NPC corps? I don't.
Pirating in 2005
|
|
Anthar Thebess
1317
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 11:00:55 -
[141] - Quote
Use fully tanked DST to transport expensive stuff, and don't put expensive stuff in a freighter. Check killboard, use proper channels, don't venture to Uedama or Niarja.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 11:11:06 -
[142] - Quote
Some of the arguments against a change have been:
- Bring 20 plus logis every time you want to move a freighter through high sec
- Don't carry to much stuff in freighters
- Don't go to 0.5 systems
- Web your freighter and hope you don't get bumped before it warps
- The market will collapse if we stop high sec ganking
- The sandbox as we know it will end if you stop high sec ganking
Only one of those is really a decent suggestion and is currently being used but, as the video shows in the OP, Grath (one of the leaders in PL) did this and still got ganked. So really, webbing is just down to RNG. That's great game design right there.
Pirating in 2005
ER Advert for very first Alliance Tournament in 2005
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2070
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 11:24:54 -
[143] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:don't put expensive stuff in a freighter.
That's the worlds biggest myth right now.
You'll be killed for lols/boredom alone.
Use a scout. End of. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12169
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 11:30:40 -
[144] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote: Eve has wars. So not that's not the only threat. Do you know the figures on how many people in NPC corps? I don't.
I can tell you about two-thirds of our targets join npc corps within a day of, if not on the day our wars go live. I know because I watchlist every damn one of them.
Wardecs are almost voluntary for the purpose for this discussion and more like duel requests en-mass.
You can kill ganking if we can have purchasable killrights, insta live wardecs or something else equally broken because believe it or not , ganking in highsec is actually fairly "balanced" I.e. you need to be all kinds of stupid to get ganked more than one.
Better the Devil you know.
=]|[=
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1707
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 11:39:25 -
[145] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote:Some of the arguments against a change have been:
- Bring 20 plus logis every time you want to move a freighter through high sec
- Don't carry to much stuff in freighters
- Don't go to 0.5 systems
- Web your freighter and hope you don't get bumped before it warps
- The market will collapse if we stop high sec ganking
- The sandbox as we know it will end if you stop high sec ganking
- Don't use freighters
Only one of those is really a decent suggestion and is currently being used but, as the video shows in the OP, Grath (one of the leaders in PL) did this and still got ganked. So really, webbing is just down to RNG. That's great game design right there. Most of those aren't actually arguments against a change. They are (mostly) good advice for reducing the risk that someone will successfully gank your freighter. The ones that are really arguments against, are indeed reasons to proceed carefully: there would be significant effects on the market if you removed suicide ganking, and there would be a significant "hole" in the sandbox where players could isolate themselves from other players.
You still don't seem to get it. You are not suppose to have a 100%, foolproof way to move a freighter from A-to-B safely. You are always intended to be at risk. This is how the game was conceived, how it was designed, and how it was implemented. You will never get a way to be 100% safe in your freighter, at least not as long as CCP Seagull is in charge of development.
There is no problem. Eve is working as intended. Freighter ganking is a feature, not a bug.
CCP has (correctly in my view) decided that maintaining the unique sandbox aspect of the game, and the game play that flows from that like the player-driven economy, outweighs any short-term gains making a certain type of player feel safer would have on their product.
You are wasting your time arguing for a change that has no chance of being implemented.
|
Mag's
the united
20327
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 11:56:55 -
[146] - Quote
Christopher Multsanti wrote:Some of the arguments against a change have been:
- 1. Bring 20 plus logis every time you want to move a freighter through high sec
- 2. Don't carry to much stuff in freighters
- 3. Don't go to 0.5 systems
- 4. Web your freighter and hope you don't get bumped before it warps
- 5. The market will collapse if we stop high sec ganking
- 6. The sandbox as we know it will end if you stop high sec ganking
- 7. Don't use freighters
Only one of those is really a decent suggestion and is currently being used but, as the video shows in the OP, Grath (one of the leaders in PL) did this and still got ganked. So really, webbing is just down to RNG. That's great game design right there. 1. It's already been pointed out to you, that you merely have to defer some of the dps. As baltic has also said, 3 is enough for this purpose. 2. You can carry as much as you like. The point is if you make yourself a loot pi+Ķata and decide not to have friends along to protect you, then you have no grounds to complain when you lose it. 3. Avoiding known gank hot spots is merely common sense. But that doesn't mean you cannot use them with assistance from friends. people move freighters through them all the time. 4. Webbing a freighter almost guarantees you avoid being bumped. The time it takes for a mach to interfere with a freighter, is far longer than it takes to web it into warp. The almost is mainly due to errors, because nothing is or should be guaranteed. Although webbing comes pretty close. 5. Not sure who said that, but Eve does depend upon ships exploding. I guess one could interpret in that way, but I have a feeling you're doing your normal exaggeration repost technique. 6. In a way yes. You want ganking stopped in high sec, that you said yourself. That would most definitely end it there, in regards to ganking as we know it. 7. In many cases the use of other ships is preferable, if solo. But if you need to use a freighter, then you need to accept the risk if you fly it solo.
You don't seem to want to accept any suggestion, whatsoever. You've even modified the OP, kept in the original false premise and added yet more. You don't even apologize when you are wrong.
I'm all for talking about current mechanics and working towards a better solution. If one can be attained. But when the person you're talking to is constantly being disingenuous, what is the point? I mean you btw.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 12:22:40 -
[147] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote: there would be a significant "hole" in the sandbox where players could isolate themselves from other players.
There's a hole in my sandbox, dear Liza, dear Liza, There's a hole in my sandbox, dear Liza, a hole.
Black Pedro wrote: You are wasting your time arguing for a change that has no chance of being implemented.
They said that Obama when he was arguing about gun control in America. Do you think he is going to stop arguing for it? Hell No!
That's right, I am the white Obama. he may not agree with my treatment of Minmitar slaves but I can guarantee you he would agree with my stance on ganking in high sec!
Pirating in 2005
ER Advert for very first Alliance Tournament in 2005
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2784
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 12:26:57 -
[148] - Quote
You were more than happy to argue that you could have 40 guys clear a path for you in low sec and null sec but now half that number in hisec is too hard for you?
You attempt to belittle the arguments for keeping ganking but what was your argument?- not that its too hard to haul. Not that its imbalanced. Not that you dont have options. Oh yeah...it was just cause you didnt like it.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
Christopher Multsanti
Bluestar Airlines
12
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 12:35:20 -
[149] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:You were more than happy to argue that you could have 40 guys clear a path for you in low sec and null sec but now half that number in hisec is too hard for you?
You attempt to belittle the arguments for keeping ganking but what was your argument?- not that its too hard to haul. Not that its imbalanced. Not that you dont have options. Oh yeah...it was just cause you didnt like it.
I am not trying to belittle anyone or anything. Just trying to show why I don't think the argument is not valid.
I used that argument just to show that you can make sure a path is safe in null sec before you undock a freighter, but, you don't need to move a freighter through gates in null sec anyway, cos, jump briges/jump freighters.
But it is impractical to take a 40 man gang every time you move a freighter in high sec. For congestion and for your mates saying "erm? i'm not going to help you with that boring ****"
Pirating in 2005
ER Advert for very first Alliance Tournament in 2005
|
Woozlez
Misfits United I N G L O R I O U S
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 13:36:50 -
[150] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:Get rid of bumping.
The idea that these big ass ships can collide and harmlessly bounce off each other is just fail.
Even when you call it emergent game play.
Rather than getting rid of it, let bumping do what it should do: Damage the ship that has an AB or Microwarp drive active relative to the mass, sig radius, and speed of the two ships. Then people can bump, but at their own risk. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |