EVE Search - ILLEGAL Hi-sec podding

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

ILLEGAL Hi-sec podding

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Galrak Malinkorn Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2015.11.30 00:53:37 - [31] - Quote yawn! yawn! yawn! yea heard it all before, blah! blah! blah!..... you all know nothing... you are all irrelevant, deal with it ....
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3976	Posted - 2015.11.30 00:57:31 - [32] - Quote Who's going to be the first to report this thread for trolling?
Galrak Malinkorn Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2015.11.30 00:58:00 - [33] - Quote oh by the way i'm done with this thread now.. so you can all ridicule me all you like ...i wont be readin it.. i real dont care...
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3976	Posted - 2015.11.30 01:01:06 - [34] - Quote Please, keep telling us how little you care!
Netan MalDoran Last Garrison 149	Posted - 2015.11.30 02:18:12 - [35] - Quote HTFU! The onlything that is 'Illegal' is anything that breaks the EULA IB4L "Your security status has been lowered." - Hell yeah it was! Falcon's truth
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2413	Posted - 2015.11.30 02:34:33 - [36] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: Black Pedro wrote: Did you ever stop to consider that suicide ganking exists because the game developers deliberately coded it into the game? Ganking is and CCP has made it clear that they are OK with it at this point so please accept this as I intend it strictly a related topic that is of interest to me. And yet I wonder, did CCP actually code it this way on purpose knowing that suicide ganking would be the result. Or is suicide ganking one those emergent game play things that was not anticipated or expected? If it was this latter it would hardly be the first and it will not be the last time that we they players have taken what we are given and then find uses for it that were never though of by CCP or that were never intended to happen. If it was not intended, they would not of made concord take that much time to respond...
The Ginger Sith Attero Industries 4	Posted - 2015.11.30 02:38:39 - [37] - Quote Khan Wrenth wrote: Good god, you must have depleted an entire ocean's worth of salt for that post. Good news everyone, the Pacific is now freshwater, so drinkable water isn't a problem anymore! Also, had to check to make sure I didn't cause this rant. Checked, not my guy. So what your trying to say is that you loved his post and agree with him? since salt is a good thing enhancing flavor as well as preserving meat products so just so you know your complimenting people when you call them salty :P
Ageanal Olerie Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2015.11.30 04:58:16 - [38] - Quote Joe Risalo wrote: The gankers will take this into consideration when deciding to pod kill another pilot. IE, they're going to be in naked clones. Of course they will, but there is still the inconvenience to consider if CONCORD were to pod the criminal podder. Also why not issue steep fines that only get steeper with each violation. Should the criminal not have the ISK, then they go into deficit and any incoming ISK is immediately used to pay off their fine. Alternatively there's always the incarceration idea. Which has some interesting role play aspects to it as well. But say start at 1 hour and every violation (say in a one month period) increases that up to a maximum 24 hours. And it goes without saying that there's also the possibility of hitting the perpetrator with significantly higher dings to their security status for podding an innocent in Hi-Sec. I wouldn't mind seeing these penalties also issued simply for ganking ships that are unable to fight back (miners, haulers, industrials).
Iain Cariaba 2073	Posted - 2015.11.30 06:06:10 - [39] - Quote Ageanal Olerie wrote: Of course they will, but there is still the inconvenience to consider if CONCORD were to pod the criminal podder. As someone who's actualy tried ganking, I would have enjoyed the quick trip back to base. Would've saved me the hassle of having to fly back in my pod while a legal target to literally everyone in the game. Ageanal Olerie wrote: Also why not issue steep fines that only get steeper with each violation. Should the criminal not have the ISK, then they go into deficit and any incoming ISK is immediately used to pay off their fine. Oh no!!! The totally broke alt I keep trained up, in case one of you carebears manages to whine me back into ganking, that's never had or made any isk, nor ever will, won't be able to hold any of the isk I'm never going to send her?!?!? Oh, however will my Jita alt ever cope with this!!! Ageanal Olerie wrote: Alternatively there's always the incarceration idea. Which has some interesting role play aspects to it as well. But say start at 1 hour and every violation (say in a one month period) increases that up to a maximum 24 hours. Because it's good to punish people for behaving in the spirit of the game by not allowing them to play the game? If you think this is a good idea, you're playing the wrong game. Ageanal Olerie wrote: And it goes without saying that there's also the possibility of hitting the perpetrator with significantly higher dings to their security status for podding an innocent in Hi-Sec. -10.0 is -10.0, regardless of how fast you get there. Besides, the current formula allows a white knight with that coveted 5.0 sec status they're super protective of to pre-emtively gank 24 bumping machariels before they suffer any penalty at all to a negative sec status. Ageanal Olerie wrote: I wouldn't mind seeing these penalties also issued simply for ganking ships that are unable to fight back (miners, haulers, industrials). Here's a bit of a news flash for you. Attentive people actually playing the game don't get ganked. Once again in a thread like this, I have to point to Red Frog's completion ratio of 99.8% successful HS deleveries for last year. Personally, I've had the same freighter for years now, and haven't lost a mining barge to a gank since 2008. Why is it too much to ask that you actually play the game? EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 2050	Posted - 2015.11.30 09:19:17 - [40] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Donnachadh wrote: Black Pedro wrote: Did you ever stop to consider that suicide ganking exists because the game developers deliberately coded it into the game? Ganking is and CCP has made it clear that they are OK with it at this point so please accept this as I intend it strictly a related topic that is of interest to me. And yet I wonder, did CCP actually code it this way on purpose knowing that suicide ganking would be the result. Or is suicide ganking one those emergent game play things that was not anticipated or expected? If it was this latter it would hardly be the first and it will not be the last time that we they players have taken what we are given and then find uses for it that were never though of by CCP or that were never intended to happen. If it was not intended, they would not of made concord take that much time to respond... Exactly. I am sure CCP didn't foresee exactly how suicide ganking would develop, but they obviously wanted it to exist. They could easily have locked out aggression, or set CONCORD response times to 0 (and still could) if they wanted players to be safe from attack in highsec. The varying CONCORD response times is clearly an attempt to make a gradient of safety across highsec which, more-or-less, was successful. If you fly a max-tanked Skiff in a 1.0 system you essentially immune from suicide ganking as the fleet size and cost required to gank that would be more likely used to hunt freighters, while if you fly an anti-tanked Covetor in a 0.5 I can take out 2 or even 3 of them with a single Catalyst before CONCORD arrives. The game for the miner is to balance yield and the quality of ore (system security status) against the risk of being attacked (and defense from that attack) and thus losing their ship. All of this game play is predicated on the ability of players to sacrifice their ship to (attempt to) destroy another player's. There is no other reason to spend all that time coding CONCORD, and designing/implementing the security system to track criminal behaviour unless CCP intended for criminals to operate in highsec. They are the only risk left for NPC corp members who leave their safeties on 'green' so despite what the OP is hoping for, suicide ganking is not going anywhere.

Stalker Ofeveryone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 45	Posted - 2015.11.30 10:30:14 - [41] - Quote Were you the one who asked CCP at Eve Down Under to make CONCORD "smarter"? I spoke to you after and gave you a bunch of tips to avoid ganking, and for new players. Also here's one regarding pod ganking: NEVER use autopilot. You're welcome.
Lan Wang Knights of the Posing Meat FETID 1948	Posted - 2015.11.30 11:56:19 - [42] - Quote Guys i just moved to lowsec and bought this ship to use, it goes like this. Megathron Damage Control II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1600mm Reinforced Nanofiber Plates I 1600mm Reinforced Nanofiber Plates I 1600mm Reinforced Nanofiber Plates I 1600mm Reinforced Nanofiber Plates I 1600mm Reinforced Nanofiber Plates I Empty ECM Burst II Heavy Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I Empty Empty Large YF-12a Smartbomb Large YF-12a Smartbomb Large YF-12a Smartbomb Large YF-12a Smartbomb Large YF-12a Smartbomb Large YF-12a Smartbomb Large YF-12a Smartbomb Large YF-12a Smartbomb Empty Empty Empty See you on the gates scrubs Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic \| Angel Cartel \| Serpentis \|
Lucy Alfrir The Goat Farm Bad Intention 3	Posted - 2015.11.30 12:35:29 - [43] - Quote This is BS. If anything suicide ganking needs to be made easier not harder. I used to be in a highsec pirate corp who could easily make money by ganking haulers, then they changed the insurance mechanics and we had to leave for lowsec. Personally I'd like to see a return to the good old days, where with enough logi you could sit on a gate fighting off the police whilst ganking whoever you chose to, up until some white knights came along and ruined your party. I also object strongly to the police now being able to jam your cloak from the other-side of the system just because you're wanted. If they have that kind of targeted decloak technology why hasn't someone nicked it and solved that other whingers problem; the afk cloaky in local? It's not hard to avoid being ganked/podded, if you're too lazy or stupid to work out how and so precious about your virtual possessions that you rage quit when it happens, then good riddance.
Iain Cariaba 2085	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:05:33 - [44] - Quote Lucy Alfrir wrote: It's not hard to avoid being ganked/podded, if you're too lazy or stupid to work out how and so precious about your virtual possessions that you rage quit when it happens, then good riddance. This. So totally this. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Xe'Cara'eos A Big Enough Lever 372	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:55:57 - [45] - Quote +1 to the idea of concord podding people (perhaps only below -5?) otherwise, just whine. For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Lan Wang Knights of the Posing Meat FETID 1948	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:58:57 - [46] - Quote Xe'Cara'eos wrote: +1 to the idea of concord podding people (perhaps only below -5?) otherwise, just whine. they already instantly point you system wide, we dont need more op police tactics to serve the lazy and ignorant. it doesnt do anything anyway they will just run around in empty clones duh Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic \| Angel Cartel \| Serpentis \|
Mag's the united 20746	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:12:59 - [47] - Quote This thread wins the *"Just one more nerf and it will be balanced."* thread of the month award. Congrats. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 666	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:56:07 - [48] - Quote ShahFluffers wrote: Drifters. Everyone I know that has tangled with Drifters came out on the losing end so I never bothered and none of them have reported a pod loss. Thank you much for the warning I will heed it should I ever decide to tangle with Drifters. Lucy Alfrir wrote: This is BS. If anything suicide ganking needs to be made easier not harder. My joy in this game is to help new players get a start and then send them on their way and I have lost far to many new players to being ganked in their first week or so as it is. I am glad that CCP has decided to leave things as they are and not make ganking easier. Like it or not CCP is in a bad place with all forms of non-consensual PvP including ganking. On the one side they risk losing paying customers if they make it easier, and on the other side they risk losing paying customers if they make it harder. Publicly they support ganking, I wonder what the hidden feelings on it are since no company likes to be in a position where they risk losing customers no matter what they do. Xe'Cara'eos wrote: +1 to the idea of concord podding people (perhaps only below -5?) otherwise, just whine. Podding gankers would have no real affect on limiting what they do since it is most likely that they have no implants, and the clone loss would be an insignificant expense.
Joe Risalo State War Academy Caldari State 1004	Posted - 2015.11.30 16:08:47 - [49] - Quote Here's the ultimate question. HOW IN THE HELL DID YOU GET POD KILLED IN HS???? If you've got more than 1 year in Eve, you should know how to emergency warp your pod by now... Lucy Alfrir wrote: This is BS. If anything suicide ganking needs to be made easier not harder. I used to be in a highsec pirate corp who could easily make money by ganking haulers, then they changed the insurance mechanics and we had to leave for lowsec. Personally I'd like to see a return to the good old days, where with enough logi you could sit on a gate fighting off the police whilst ganking whoever you chose to, up until some white knights came along and ruined your party. I also object strongly to the police now being able to jam your cloak from the other-side of the system just because you're wanted. If they have that kind of targeted decloak technology why hasn't someone nicked it and solved that other whingers problem; the afk cloaky in local? It's not hard to avoid being ganked/podded, if you're too lazy or stupid to work out how and so precious about your virtual possessions that you rage quit when it happens, then good riddance. I get your point, but no... CCP changed the ease of ganking for a reason. It's a necessity to have some level of secure space in order for new players and vet players who've lost everything, in order to establish or re-establish themselves within the game. Apart from that, ganking isn't exactly that difficult. I watched a CODE pilot streaming about a month ago. They failed a gank because they didn't have enough dps. They then came back a second time against the same ship, but failed again. Then came back for a 3rd attempt on yet still the same target. Granted, they failed and the target got away. However, the point here is that they were able to hit the same target 3 times and the only reason they failed was due to bump fails. That was at least 45 minutes of holding a target down... You can't pull that off in low or null sec. The fact that you went to low sec to avoid insurance loss is moot. Besides, I don't see where a payout in 200k isk is such a huge loss...
Ghaustyl Kathix Quantum Singularities Half Massed 63	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:07:40 - [50] - Quote Galrak Malinkorn wrote: HI-SEC illegal podding is possibly a reason for the fall off of new players trying to start in eve Heavily disagree with that, because podding has almost always hit older players harder. What would a newer player lose? A few mil in +2 implants? If the player got a full rack of +4 or +5 learning implants, then he should learn not to fly what he can't afford to lose.

Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3848	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:20:13 - [51] - Quote Galrak Malinkorn wrote: yawn! yawn! yawn! yea heard it all before, blah! blah! blah!..... you all know nothing... you are all irrelevant, deal with it .... So in other words...you are playing stupid...on purpose. Then you come here and whine on the forums when your stupidity bites you in the ass. Got it. I wont say you are stupid, but damn son you are doing a damn fine imitation. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 86	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:26:26 - [52] - Quote First post contains a few very big hints towards better retention. The rest of the thread contains the reason why eve doesn't have any.
Joe Risalo State War Academy Caldari State 1004	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:31:24 - [53] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: First post contains a few very big hints towards better retention. The rest of the thread contains the reason why eve doesn't have any. Personally, wardec mechanics are a larger issue than ganking. Also, if you're losing a pod to HS ganks, you're either too new for it to really matter, or too fail to accomplish an emergency pod warp, which is quite easy in HS considering you don't have to worry about bubbles.
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 86	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:41:28 - [54] - Quote Joe Risalo wrote: Personally, wardec mechanics are a larger issue than ganking. wardec mechanics are non-issue to anyone who knows how they work, they just routinely dodge them. It only hurts newbros, but generally, in current failplementation, they are non-issue. Ganking is a major problem to hisec and received many unneeded buffs in the recent years. Despite their crying about "one more nerf", the activity has seen unprecedented rise due to how overbuffed it was. I have made my own proposal on how to turn ganking from lolcatalysts into actual profession, but since it would require people to actually get good rather than be F1 monkeys on throwaway consequence-nullifier alts, it was met with expected ultra-defensive fearposting. Joe Risalo wrote: Also, if you're losing a pod to HS ganks, you're either too new for it to really matter, or too fail to accomplish an emergency pod warp, which is quite easy in HS considering you don't have to worry about bubbles. I do not say there's any problem with podding. I do not say we should just buy the OP's words at face value either. I'm just saying it contains a hint of what is wrong with eve. And it does indeed. Just like the other hint which is the rest of the first page.
Barrogh Habalu Forever Winter 1085	Posted - 2015.11.30 18:03:14 - [55] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: ...and the clone loss would be an insignificant expense. When did you log in last time? Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3986	Posted - 2015.11.30 18:03:56 - [56] - Quote ...When the hell has ganking been buffed in the past several years?
Eternity Mistseeker Renegades of Eve Aureus Alae 24	Posted - 2015.11.30 18:16:09 - [57] - Quote Concord is not there to protect, but to punish. This is how it has always been, and there are too many effective counters to the issue if you make just a little effort. Retriever fit was poor, t2 rigs inflated the cost with no gain. If gankers around then refit, procurer, insured, shield tank, reinforced builkhead and damage control in lows, orbit the asteroid. You can easily make it much harder for them and much cheaper for you... Failing that, set the gankers to red, and watch local. Although to be honest, and this is serious advice, once you put this level of effort in when mining then believe me you will be a lot better mining in nullsec...
DaReaper Net 7 2671	Posted - 2015.11.30 19:13:36 - [58] - Quote Galrak Malinkorn wrote: oh by the way i'm done with this thread now.. so you can all ridicule me all you like ...i wont be readin it.. i real dont care... so i read this as "well i have a **** idea that got shot down easily. instead of admiting that my idea was **, i'm gonna make it seem that other people are the issue. not you know, that my idea is ****. Cause it is" The devs made it so you cna pod in hs, this is by design. /thread. OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining! Yes i am optimistic about eve.. i'm giving it till dec 31st 2016 before i doom n gloom
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3850	Posted - 2015.11.30 22:13:15 - [59] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: First post contains a few very big hints towards better retention. The rest of the thread contains the reason why eve doesn't have any. That is a load of steaming crap. Podding people in HS has been something that has been in game forever, so the idea that it is suddenly the cause of retention issues is highly dubious and just some convenient post hoc ergo propter hoc bullshit to push an agenda. Go peddle your tripe somewhere else. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 3850	Posted - 2015.11.30 22:19:42 - [60] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: Joe Risalo wrote: Also, if you're losing a pod to HS ganks, you're either too new for it to really matter, or too fail to accomplish an emergency pod warp, which is quite easy in HS considering you don't have to worry about bubbles. I do not say there's any problem with podding. I do not say we should just buy the OP's words at face value either. I'm just saying it contains a hint of what is wrong with eve. And it does indeed. Just like the other hint which is the rest of the first page. The "retention" aspects of the OP were in relation of HS podding and even HS ganking. To then pretend you were referring to something else indicates you are a horrible writer or when called on your nonsense you just move the goal posts which is dishonest. Eve has alwasy been, and hopefully always will be a sandbox MMO that encourages emergent game play for the most part. That is much of the game play may not be either anticipated or intended, and so long as it is not unbalanced should be allowed to stand. So all I can conclude is you are ignorant of the game itself or trolling. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.