Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Valkin Mordirc
1617
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 10:00:22 -
[151] - Quote
Oh another thought
The 30sec E-Warp wouldn't help at all.
It would very easy to see where your freighter goes
which warps very slow
which will be out warped by the Mach and Gank fleet
and once you hit the other gate it starts all over,
Unless you warp to a safe,
which it takes less than two seconds to scan and probe down a Freighter.
So the only the thing this idea would do is make EVE just a little bit more tedious. Which honestly it doesn't need,
#DeleteTheWeak
|

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1018
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 10:13:57 -
[152] - Quote
Depends on your point of view.
Some, if not most, would consider it a buff to high sec.
It would certainly make the rules of high sec consistent, which would improve some folks opinion of the game as a whole.
I agree that the 30 second timer is just a bad idea. There are far better ways to implement an emergency warp, if such were to be considered.
For instance, hitting emergency warp attempts to align to whichever warpable object requires the least navigation and then attempts to warp until dead or sucessful. This would be more balanced than the oft requested GTFO button because alignment is still necessary and it gives the aggressor time to land a point, and allows the defender to take his finger off the warp button and concentrate on trying to break the point.
In the case of bumping it would be a help, though it would not be a 30 second guarantee of freedom. |

Valkin Mordirc
1619
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 10:21:17 -
[153] - Quote
No it would be Nerf to Highsec Variants of PVP. And yes Buff to what I guess you can all 'Carebear Variants of EVE"
Not that Carebear is bad. I generally don't like using the term now. But it's the only way I could describe what I'm trying to say.
I don't see how a Bumping nerf would make Highsec more Consistent, and personally I hate consistency it leads to repeated and circles which become stale. EVE in my opinion should be chaotic. It should have a swirling mass of emotions tied to it, that what I love most about the game. I've had my fair share of it. And even though I lost some things, I'm still here enjoying the game.
#DeleteTheWeak
|

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
14963
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 10:26:57 -
[154] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Kaarous, I guess that's it then. You really are ust a troll.
You keep saying that, but it's pure projection. You're the one incessantly spinning strawman arguments and misrepresenting game mechanics.
"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.
|

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1018
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 10:31:28 -
[155] - Quote
More consistent in that unprovoked aggression follows the same rules regardless of how you do it.
The way Highsec is supposed to be is that so long as you don't steal or shoot anyone then Concord will attack anyone that aggresses you. There are exceptions to this, like Wardecs.
Tackling someone in preparation for a gank would get you concorded if you used any of the standard modules, but doing it by repeated bumping is Ok, no matter how long that goes on. That's inconsistent with the intent of what high sec is supposed to be like. The aggressor should need a wardec, or get the freighter to steal, or gain killrights if those are available. If the pilot of the freighter does not do any of those things, then that is high sec working as intended. You can still gank him, you just have to have your gank ready instead of tackling him until your gank force can arrive, and as per normal deal with the consequences imposed by Concord.
But I don't hold finding ways to break the game because ganking is a holy cow in high regard. |

Valkin Mordirc
1620
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 10:51:34 -
[156] - Quote
As said before no one in there right mind, would loot a yellow wreck in a freighter.
Killrights are rare to find on Freighter pilots as Freighter pilots don't go out getting Killrights. Normally you see only the ones that are scamming with them. Sometimes yes you do find some shiny ship with a KR. But normally it's something other than freighter. In all my days in Highsec. Which have been since I started playing. I have never once personally seen a Freighter with a legitimate KR on it.
Ganking is not the holy cow. It quite literally was nerfed last week.
Highsec is not meant to be safe. These consistent whine threads about ganking and bumping is frustrating. So far I've just been popping in and out of the thread basically being a smartass, and that should show how much value I place on them.
It would be clear after the 1000th one that CCP like Ganking as a mechanic and wants to keep it. So arguing about how it doesn't fit the intended the idea of Highsec is a dumb, because CCP obviously intended it to be apart of the Highsec Mechanics. I understand that you want it to be different, but bumping,
Either A, Completely fine in the eyes of CCP
B They don't like it, but due to how it functions trying to fix it would break the game.
It in reality changing the way bump mechanics work, is probably extremely hard to to do, because the nerf would effect a **** ton of other aspects of the game. Even if you or me don't see it I'm sure CCP has look at it as some point and came to A or B conclusion.
#DeleteTheWeak
|

Mag's
the united
20693
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 11:25:21 -
[157] - Quote
OK a few things.
1. Is it a tackle? Well no, because you can still warp. Bumping only alters your vector, it does not disable your warp capability. People can and have warped to friends, when being bumped.
2. Is it broken? Well no, because that would assume there is no way to avoid it. Seeing as one friend can remove almost every chance of being bumped, this really is a none issue.
3. Is CCP OK with it? Now this was a definite yes, but now I'm not so sure. Why? Well take a look at the first new line in the bumping thread.
CCP CiD wrote:**This forum post is now 3 year old and does not represent CCP-¦s current stance on the issue, as such it can be viewed as outdated** 4. If this is nerfed, will it be the one more nerf that will satisfy the whiners? Well no, the phrase "Just one more nerf and it will be balanced." will still be alive and kicking. Until high sec is perfectly safe, that is. Maybe even after that.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
14964
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 11:37:51 -
[158] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:More consistent in that unprovoked aggression follows the same rules regardless of how you do it.
It already does. Bumping is not aggression.
"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.
|

Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
686
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 11:37:54 -
[159] - Quote
Mag's wrote:3. Is CCP OK with it? Now this was a definite yes, but now I'm not so sure. Why? Well take a look at the first new line in the bumping thread.CCP CiD wrote:**This forum post is now 3 year old and does not represent CCP-¦s current stance on the issue, as such it can be viewed as outdated**
Well, well. Something interesting happened in this thread after all...
|

Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two
134
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 12:30:18 -
[160] - Quote
Daret wrote:I realize that CCP has stated that bumping is a game mechanic and is probably never going to be changed. But that doesn't stop someone from bumping a charon for hours on end, so I'm proposing something to help solve the problem and hopefully without unbalancing the game elsewhere.
Implement a new feature, Emergency Warp.
Emergency Warp starts a 30 second timer similar to when logging out in space (possibly with or without modules turned on) where you are then warped a random distance in a random direction (10-99 au?) Any aggressive action that would normally call concord cancels the warp.
You do not need to be aligned for the warp to complete. you simply need to wait the 30 second timer without being attacked in any way, but bumping does not count obviously.
Alternatives or other options to make it more balanced:
-Add a long cooldown timer to prevent repeated abuse (12-24 hours would be pretty fair)
-Warp fatigue after using emergency warp
-Strip shields and even cause armor or hull damage when emergency warp is used (completed, not started)
I'm not a very experienced pilot so It's very likely that I could be overlooking some glaring issues with this proposal, But I'm open to suggestions and tweaks.
*Edit* I'd just like to add that this is not a personal vendetta I have against Bumpers, I have never personally been the victim of a bumper so to all the people who are trying to antagonize me for 'being bad at the game' you should probably think twice
How about travel the route twice to decrease the risk, but na that-¦s too easy. First why should a not aligned ship be able to warp, and why only stopping at the aligning why we didn-¦t let them break warp disruptors and scrambler.
But honestly do you really think your idea causes any good ?
If your system will be introduces i will probe your freighter, bump him and wait for the emergency warp. Probe him with my alt again (i got the id of his ship) shouldn-¦t take that long. And have a freighter with no shield, a reduced armor or hull. Awesome please implement so you make it easier to gank people not harder.
|

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1018
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 12:43:49 -
[161] - Quote
Valkin Mordirc wrote:As said before no one in there right mind, would loot a yellow wreck in a freighter.
Killrights are rare to find on Freighter pilots as Freighter pilots don't go out getting Killrights. Normally you see only the ones that are scamming with them. Sometimes yes you do find some shiny ship with a KR. But normally it's something other than freighter. In all my days in Highsec. Which have been since I started playing. I have never once personally seen a Freighter with a legitimate KR on it.
All of that is high sec working as intended. It does not make it safe, it does mean you will get concorded if you violence that pilot. Or should, anyway.
He did what he is supposed to do to maintain concords protection. |

Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3613
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 20:38:01 -
[162] - Quote
Daret wrote:
Implement a new feature, Emergency Warp.
Emergency Warp starts a 30 second timer similar to when logging out in space (possibly with or without modules turned on) where you are then warped a random distance in a random direction (10-99 au?) Any aggressive action that would normally call concord cancels the warp.
So...this is implemented, and now the gank fleets just aggress with a noob ship to cancel the warp....kind of like what they do to keep a person in space if they logoff.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|

Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 20:52:34 -
[163] - Quote
just for fun, cos I'm still expecting a lock on this thread, heres a few more bumping ideas:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5590409#post5590409
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5560276#post5560276
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5386858#post5386858
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5386838#post5386838
With gems like those people should be happy I'm not writing up real ideas anymore.
You are content to be content. This is not a jedi mind trick, you're just the game
|

Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
311
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 23:06:05 -
[164] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Or you just do what anyone with half a brain does, and web your freighter.
This is the easiest solution. It requires teamwork - another pilot in your corp (if friendly fire is turned off or you are in an NPC or in separate corps: flagging dueling between the webber and the freighter can be done) can use a web to nearly insta-warp the freighter.
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16901
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 23:33:09 -
[165] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Mag's wrote:3. Is CCP OK with it? Now this was a definite yes, but now I'm not so sure. Why? Well take a look at the first new line in the bumping thread.CCP CiD wrote:**This forum post is now 3 year old and does not represent CCP-¦s current stance on the issue, as such it can be viewed as outdated** Well, well. Something interesting happened in this thread after all... 
They won't be changing anything, jita undock forces their hand
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1019
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 05:27:24 -
[166] - Quote
Unless they just let ships ghost through eachother.
|

Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3614
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 05:41:17 -
[167] - Quote
You know what I find amusing about these threads? Three things. The first is that those who do the complaining have not, apparently considered the concept of an evolutionary arms race.
Quote:...an evolutionary arms race is an evolutionary struggle between competing sets of co-evolving genes, traits, or species, that develop adaptations and counter-adaptations against each other, resembling an arms race, which could be, and often are, described as examples of positive feedback.
In this case, we have people whine incessantly to CCP about ganking, and insurance, and how it is all so unfair. CCP nerfs it, and those doing the ganking respond by adapting and getting even better and finding a new method (a large number of ultra cheap high DPS ships along with bumping).
So, the people getting ganked come back and demand that somebody else (CCP) take care of the problem the last nerf was supposed to fix. In short, these people put on a pathetic display of entitlement and self-righteousness while stamping their feet about how they are right and everyone else is wrong...all the while doing, literally, nothing to solve their problems themselves.
We have in one corner the gankers who are:
1. Organized, 2. Well versed in game mechanics, 3. Spending time/effiort setting things up to do ganks.
In the other corner we have the "victims" who:
1. Refuse to organize themselves. 2. Refuse to learn game mechanics. 3. Do not want to spend anything but minimal time/effort to accomplish their goals.
The latter corner also always runs to CCP saying that just one more nerf! Just one more! Give us this one more thing and it will be balanced....until somebody figures out how to gank a ship with the new rule change in which case the crowd of entitled and self-righteous come asking for yet another nerf. For this latter group their standard cant is, the game is not balanced until you implement my preferred nerf...then it will be balanced...until I come asking for yet another nerf...and yet another and another.
And the really amusing thing....these players do not need to be as organized as CODE. and the like. They just need a scout, maybe a webbing alt, and that is about it. If they wanted to be pro-active 10 guys in catalysts would melt your typical bumping machariel. A machariel hull costs about 5x that of 10 catalysts. These players can put billions in a freighter but can't spare a few million for a few catalysts? Really?
You guys deserve everything you get at the hands of players in game.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|

Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3614
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 05:45:31 -
[168] - Quote
Daret wrote:
Your definition of 'playing the game' is clearly not the same as mine. Maybe you have 0 respect for miners and industry but they're a vital part of EVE and so are definitely playing the game.
As for watching local, we're talking highsec here, you try keeping track of the 20+ names that appear and dissapear on the local list every few minutes.
And again.. afk players are not affected by this measure. If someone is truly afk then you don't need to bump them to kill them
I love this....
We are industrialists, we build your ships which we sell to you for a profit so you should be extra nice to us. Talk about a perverse from of special pleading.
Here is a hint for watching local in HS...use your watch list. Set ganking alliances, corporations, etc. red and that way you can see them with greater ease.
You need to bump AFK freighters that are using autopilot.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|

Tyranex Obsoletus
Dark Saints
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 11:54:55 -
[169] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Daret wrote:I realize that CPP has stated that bumping is a game mechanic and is probably never going to be changed. But that doesn't stop someone from bumping a charon for hours on end, so I'm proposing something to help solve the problem and hopefully without unbalancing the game elsewhere.
Implement a new feature, Emergency Warp.
Emergency Warp starts a 30 second timer similar to when logging out in space (possibly with or without modules turned on) where you are then warped a random distance in a random direction (10-99 au?) Any aggressive action that would normally call concord cancels the warp.
You do not need to be aligned for the warp to complete. you simply need to wait the 30 second timer without being attacked in any way, but bumping does not count obviously.
Alernatives or other options to make it more balanced:
-Add a long cooldown timer to prevent repeated abuse (12-24 hours would be pretty fair)
-Warp fatigue after using emergency warp
-Strip shields and even cause armor or hull damage when emergency teleport is used (completed, not started)
I'm not a very experienced pilot so It's very likely that I could be overlooking some glaring issues with this proposal, But I'm open to suggestions and tweaks. so your asking for an mjd for indis.?
Not a bad idea actually.
|

Cidanel Afuran
Static-Noise Upholders
403
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 16:10:05 -
[170] - Quote
Daret wrote:As for watching local, we're talking highsec here, you try keeping track of the 20+ names that appear and dissapear on the local list every few minutes.
Is it really that hard to hit control + a in local, and just watch for unhighlighted names to appear?
If you're in HS, why aren't you copy/pasting into something like pirates little helper constantly anyway? |

Valacus
Streets of Fire
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 20:50:03 -
[171] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:You know what I find amusing about these threads? Three things. The first is that those who do the complaining have not, apparently considered the concept of an evolutionary arms race. Quote:...an evolutionary arms race is an evolutionary struggle between competing sets of co-evolving genes, traits, or species, that develop adaptations and counter-adaptations against each other, resembling an arms race, which could be, and often are, described as examples of positive feedback. In this case, we have people whine incessantly to CCP about ganking, and insurance, and how it is all so unfair. CCP nerfs it, and those doing the ganking respond by adapting and getting even better and finding a new method (a large number of ultra cheap high DPS ships along with bumping). So, the people getting ganked come back and demand that somebody else (CCP) take care of the problem the last nerf was supposed to fix. In short, these people put on a pathetic display of entitlement and self-righteousness while stamping their feet about how they are right and everyone else is wrong...all the while doing, literally, nothing to solve their problems themselves. We have in one corner the gankers who are: 1. Organized, 2. Well versed in game mechanics, 3. Spending time/effiort setting things up to do ganks. In the other corner we have the "victims" who: 1. Refuse to organize themselves. 2. Refuse to learn game mechanics. 3. Do not want to spend anything but minimal time/effort to accomplish their goals. The latter corner also always runs to CCP saying that just one more nerf! Just one more! Give us this one more thing and it will be balanced....until somebody figures out how to gank a ship with the new rule change in which case the crowd of entitled and self-righteous come asking for yet another nerf. For this latter group their standard cant is, the game is not balanced until you implement my preferred nerf...then it will be balanced...until I come asking for yet another nerf...and yet another and another. And the really amusing thing....these players do not need to be as organized as CODE. and the like. They just need a scout, maybe a webbing alt, and that is about it. If they wanted to be pro-active 10 guys in catalysts would melt your typical bumping machariel. A machariel hull costs about 5x that of 10 catalysts. These players can put billions in a freighter but can't spare a few million for a few catalysts? Really? You guys deserve everything you get at the hands of players in game.
Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either. |

Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
304
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 21:05:45 -
[172] - Quote
Valacus wrote:Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Because gankers figured out how to make it easy, they didn't beg anyone to make it easier for them.
Quote: Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. You've confused risk mitigation with risk aversion.
Quote:And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. No points for figuring out who's at fault, there.
Quote:"Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Risk vs. reward. Very low risk, high investment for a considerable, steady stream of income as a reward.
Quote:Gankers don't stand to lose anything. Get to <-5 sec status. Go do something other than ganking in HiSec. Tell me what you learn.
<^.^> I'm a cat lol
|

Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
304
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 21:06:35 -
[173] - Quote
Valacus wrote:I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either. Just one more nerf.
<^.^> I'm a cat lol
|

Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1947
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 21:07:36 -
[174] - Quote
Valacus wrote:Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either. Freighters have never been mechanically more safe in highsec. I thought we were already at peak safety, and then CCP went and stealth patched hyperdunking out of the game just last week making them even safer. Potential EHP was buffed when low slots were added, CONCORD times have been shortened, and yes, insurance for suicide gankers was removed over five years ago.
Freighter pilots can, with just a little effort, make themselves essentially immune from gankers. Red Frog made 99.8%+ of their contracts last year. How much safer do you want to make these capital ships? |

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
14977
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 21:41:43 -
[175] - Quote
Valacus wrote: What do they risk, an insured catalyst?
He doesn't even know that you don't get insurance payouts for ganking.
Here's a tip for all you bears out there. If you don't know the rules of the game you're playing, you don't get to make suggestions of any kind.
"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.
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16903
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 22:26:12 -
[176] - Quote
Tyranex Obsoletus wrote:
Not a bad idea actually.
Deep space transports already have them.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Sabriz Adoudel
Black Hydra Consortium.
5485
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 00:29:50 -
[177] - Quote
Anyone being bumped can be easily rescued by another character via a wide variety of easily carried out means.
Piloting a freighter isn't some god-given right all characters have, it is a calculated risk you are taking. You can vary the level of risk by a variety of means - modules, scouting, web warp assistance, etc. Or you can take the riskier approach to save time.
If you are stupid enough to pilot a freighter unscouted and unescorted through Uedama, you deserve what is coming to you every bit as much as someone that tries to pilot a loaded up Iteron through Tama.
I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Sabriz's Rule: "Any time someone argues for a game change claiming it is a quality of life change, the change is actually a game balance change".
|

Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3621
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 03:57:34 -
[178] - Quote
Valacus wrote:
Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either.
Ahhh another of my other favorite amusing things.
Know nothings tossing the term "risk averse" around as if it were an insult. Here, let me make the top of your head explode, risk aversion is a good thing...even in EVE. But hey, I'll give you bonus points for spelling it right. 
And no...they get no insurance payout. (Obligatory; do you even play the game?)
As for it being mind numbingly easy...how about this then, careful what you Goddamn wish for then. More nerfing of ganking might lead to even more efficient ganking as an adaptation...did you even read the link? Yeah, didn't think so.
I will agree with you that ganking has become more common place....after the nerfs to things like insurance and ganking. Funny that, eh? You and your ilk go whining and crying and moaning and groaning to CCP, they listen and implement nerfs and here you are...moaning, groanking, crying, whinging and complaining that ganking is too easy. Maybe you guys should have STFU last time. And like a bunch of insane people here you are again doing exactly the same thing expecting different results.
You, and everyone like you deserve everything you have gotten at the hands of other players in game. I doubt you'll learn the lesson here. You just are not that smart.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|

Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3621
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 04:11:56 -
[179] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Valacus wrote:Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy. Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts. What do they risk, an insured catalyst? And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started. "Care bears" stand to lose a lot more. Gankers don't stand to lose anything. I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either. Freighters have never been mechanically more safe in highsec. I thought we were already at peak safety, and then CCP went and stealth patched hyperdunking out of the game just last week making them even safer. Potential EHP was buffed when low slots were added, CONCORD times have been shortened, and yes, insurance for suicide gankers was removed over five years ago. Freighter pilots can, with just a little effort, make themselves essentially immune from gankers. Red Frog made 99.8%+ of their contracts last year. How much safer do you want to make these capital ships?
The answer is obvious, 100%.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|

admiral root
Red Galaxy
3531
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 10:35:07 -
[180] - Quote
Valacus wrote:Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy...
...and safely (99.9%) moving a freighter through highsec has always been mind-numbingly easy.
No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |