Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16069
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 19:49:43 -
[451] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:but having a minute chance of escaping unlimited bumping is hardly a 'get out of jail free card'.
Except you have ways out of that already.
They just involve other people. Why should you get any more? Because you don't use what already exists?
This is not a game mechanics problem. It's an attitude problem.
"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.
|
Mag's
Rabble Inc. Rabble Alliance
21094
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 19:53:09 -
[452] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Mag's wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Mag's wrote:Does it mean I win Eve though? On another note, the Wife has just informed me, that there is a guy out there with two. So now I know what she Googles. Wonder how long she had that little piece of trivia in the holster. Seems she's been chatting with our eldest daughters. Now I'm not sure what to think. Well I suppose I should be used to this stuff, after all these years. So glad my kids are both under 6. As are mine..... Boom boom tish...
Joking aside, you should hear them giggling sometimes. I have 3 girls 22, 18 and 14. I have to say they are all pretty awesome kids. Although I do miss those under 6 years. Treasure them while you can bud, it passes all too quickly.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
bigbud skunkafella
Not The Usual Suspects
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:01:24 -
[453] - Quote
This is not a game mechanics problem. It's an attitude problem.[/quote]
yes, the attitude of entitlement that gankers seem to have regarding the botlike nature of farming freighters with the current broken unlimited bumping mechanic...
my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem?
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16074
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:03:49 -
[454] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote: yes, the attitude of entitlement that gankers seem to have
Ah, and the projection starts.
Like the people who are asking for freighters to be even more disgustingly safe than they already are aren't the entitled ones.
Bring escort webs or get used to the idea of dying, carebear.
"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.
|
Mag's
Rabble Inc. Rabble Alliance
21096
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:04:51 -
[455] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:yes, the attitude of entitlement that gankers seem to have regarding the botlike nature of farming freighters with the current broken unlimited bumping mechanic... my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem? Our suggestion is even simpler. Use the tools and options currently available and be almost guaranteed safe passage. What's the problem?
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4534
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:05:17 -
[456] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:bigbud skunkafella wrote:give an ak freighter pilot some small chance of escape when bumped
Why? Why should they get anything more than they already have? Just use webs, and don't get bumped to begin with. Asking for a get out of jail free card for when you've drastically failed is unacceptable. Why should you be rewarded for failure? i understand your consternation that any adjustment to the current bumping mechanics may have a detrimental effect on your style of gameplay /isk flow, but having a minute chance of escaping unlimited bumping is hardly a 'get out of jail free card'. 9 times out of 10 the most probable negative outcome for the gankers is losing a few ships and having to redock /reship b4 making another attempt .
The problem is you want this "chance" to handed to you on a silver platter via CCP. You have a small chance now...get people to gank the bumping ship. Do that and you can get away.
Problem is, that for you and players like you....you just wont do that.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4536
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:07:21 -
[457] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Mag's wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Mag's wrote:Does it mean I win Eve though? On another note, the Wife has just informed me, that there is a guy out there with two. So now I know what she Googles. Wonder how long she had that little piece of trivia in the holster. Seems she's been chatting with our eldest daughters. Now I'm not sure what to think. Well I suppose I should be used to this stuff, after all these years. So glad my kids are both under 6. As are mine..... Boom boom tish... Joking aside, you should hear them giggling sometimes. I have 3 girls 22, 18 and 14. I have to say they are all pretty awesome kids. Although I do miss those under 6 years. Treasure them while you can bud, it passes all too quickly.
I'd say 4-12 are the best years. Old enough to long past potty training and accidents, but still young and full of wonder.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
44103
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:12:12 -
[458] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem? I'm not a ganker and I also can't see any reason currently to change the mechanics in this way.
Not only because it wouldn't actually work, but because the risk of bumping is extremely small if freighter pilots use what's already available and those that don't, don't deserve more tools to compensate for their choice not to use the current ones.
It still hasn't been established anywhere by anyone that bumping represents a significant problem that requires mechanics changes. The available evidence in this thread suggests the opposite. So why change something that isn't a problem?
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4536
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:20:53 -
[459] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:Quote:This is not a game mechanics problem. It's an attitude problem. yes, the attitude of entitlement that gankers seem to have regarding the botlike nature of farming freighters with the current broken unlimited bumping mechanic... my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem?
Sorry, that is just nonsense. Ganking is clearly an example of emergent game play...which is entirely the point of this game. CCP set up a game with very few rules, some mechanics and sit backs and sees what happens. Sometimes bad stuff, but usually very interesting stuff. For example, that we have people like Chribba who have built of a reputation of extreme honesty to allow players to do things there are no mechanics for...is for me amazing. It supports quite a bit of work on this in game theory and economics: reputation effects.
So to sit there and lump ganking in its current form as botlike is incredibly dishonest. Ganking in it's current form is absolutely an outgrowth of attempts to nerf ganking in the past. Changes to insurance, changes to CONCORD response times, and so forth. Ganking now is much more organized and sophisticated than it was in the past....and ironically more common.
You and players like you whined and whined, CCP responded and it blew up in your face. The gankers became even more organized and effective.
And talk about botlike. Even though events like Burn Jita and Amarr are talked about weeks before hand and there are fixed dates....freighter pilots still come to those systems and die in droves. Talk about being not just unaware of one's surroundings, but almost willfully ignorant of the fact that they are stepping into the bear's den.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3038
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 20:21:56 -
[460] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem?
The problems are:
And do you know what rewards not only haulers at their keyboard, but smarter and more organised haulers as well?
Keeping bumping.
And whats with all these alts saying 'in no way...'
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"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
|
bigbud skunkafella
Not The Usual Suspects
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 21:20:41 -
[461] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:bigbud skunkafella wrote:Quote:This is not a game mechanics problem. It's an attitude problem. yes, the attitude of entitlement that gankers seem to have regarding the botlike nature of farming freighters with the current broken unlimited bumping mechanic... my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem? You and players like you whined and whined, CCP responded and it blew up in your face. The gankers became even more organized and effective. .
the title of this thread is 'balancing bumping and looting mechanics' , anyone who thinks that unlimited bumping with absolutely no consequence for the bumper isn't a broken mechanic is imho a few knives short of a cutlery set.
Eve is supposedly all about consequences for your actions , where's the consequences for a bumper in a npc corp who can just carry on bumping a target indefinitely if it takes his fancy, a target who probably hasn't decided to play Eve on 'easy mode' by kissing uncle jimmy or mittens ring with all the resultant welfare and mollycoddling ?
please link to anything i've posted anywhere where i've 'whined' about any mechanic on these forums to ccp. if you can't then please stop your trolling /ad hominem attacks and stay on topic or kindly shut up .
o7 bb
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16078
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 21:24:25 -
[462] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:the title of this thread is 'balancing bumping and looting mechanics' , anyone who thinks that unlimited bumping with absolutely no consequence for the bumper isn't a broken mechanic is imho a few knives short of a cutlery set.
Of course bumping has no mechanical consequences.
It is not a hostile act. Where your engines happen to be pointed will never be anything that has "consequences", because otherwise you basically break the whole game.
Quote: Eve is supposedly all about consequences for your actions
Yeah, between players.
If you want bumping to have "consequences", then come inflict them yourself, coward. It's what the gankers are doing after all. They decided that they don't want hauling to be completely free of risk, so they are doing something about it and bringing risk to the haulers.
And that's the difference between carebears and real players. Real players get something done themselves, carebears want the game to play itself for them.
Oh, and it gets funnier every time when you people talk about "easy mode" while defending hauling and mining. There is nothing in the MMO industry more lowest common denominator than hauling and mining. But apparently you think they need to be easier.
Get over yourself.
"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.
|
bigbud skunkafella
Not The Usual Suspects
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 21:27:38 -
[463] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:bigbud skunkafella wrote:my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem? ... And whats with all these alts saying 'in no way...'
sheesh, dontcha know there's only one bigbud skunkafella ? |
bigbud skunkafella
Not The Usual Suspects
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 21:42:42 -
[464] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:bigbud skunkafella wrote: yes, the attitude of entitlement that gankers seem to have
Ah, and the projection starts. Like the people who are asking for freighters to be even more disgustingly safe than they already are aren't the entitled ones. Bring escort webs or get used to the idea of dying, carebear.
fyi i've never flown a freighter , can't remember the last time i missioned in hisec or mined. + most of my time on eve has been spent in my own corp . my main income for several years has been from hunting crims in hisec , i either build my own ships or buy em from proceeds of hunting crims , no srp or freebies . if that makes me a carebear in your eyes then fair enuf.
don't suppose you've got a deklein ratting alt or the taste of mittens ring on your lips perchance?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4538
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 23:22:33 -
[465] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:the title of this thread is 'balancing bumping and looting mechanics' , anyone who thinks that unlimited bumping with absolutely no consequence for the bumper isn't a broken mechanic is imho a few knives short of a cutlery set. Eve is supposedly all about consequences for your actions , where's the consequences for a bumper in a npc corp who can just carry on bumping a target indefinitely if it takes his fancy, a target who probably hasn't decided to play Eve on 'easy mode' by kissing uncle jimmy or mittens ring with all the resultant welfare and mollycoddling ? please link to anything i've posted anywhere where i've 'whined' about any mechanic on these forums to ccp. if you can't then please stop your trolling /ad hominem attacks and stay on topic or kindly shut up . o7 bb
You just don't get it. The consequences are not supposed to imposed by CCP. You the player have to impose them. If you decline that is not the problem of the guy doing the bumping....that is your problem. Running to CCP saying, "It's not fair! Fix it!" is antithetical to the very idea you just articulated: that there should be consequences to one's actions in game. If I blind jump to a cyno beacon and get my carrier burnt down...is it my fault? Or should I blame the people who burnt down my carrier and CCP?
To be getting bumped means you have catastrophically failed. You did NOT have a scout. You did NOT have a scout with webs. And you jumped into a system known for ganking...which relies on bumping.
Don't want to be bumped for 4-5 hours? Okay, logoff. Problem solved. Go do something else.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
4367
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 23:46:28 -
[466] - Quote
If a solution relies on a player having to use an alt (i.e. a second account), that's no solution. Players should not have to play the game with a main and an alt to avoid a certain built-in game mechanic. If you need two chars to play the game, then CCP would have to give every new subscriber two simultaneously playable chars.
The other way is the alt doing the (scouting, webbing, whatever) function has to be another player. If that's the case, then safe hauling can only be done by teams of players. Not solo. Which might be OK, game design-wise. But it would make hauling one other thing that a solo player can viably do in EVE.
Neil Young and Crazy Horse - Harsher and tougher than punk
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3038
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 00:09:36 -
[467] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:bigbud skunkafella wrote:my suggested solution is simple, rewards ak piloting , creates a few variables for the gankers, bumpers + target and is no way a nerf to ganking . what's the problem? ... And whats with all these alts saying 'in no way...' sheesh, dontcha know there's only one bigbud skunkafella ?
Its so hard to tell your posts apart from the other people who have no experience on the matter but want to nerf ganking anyways because they just dont like it.
@ khergit
Problem with your post.
- Why do you feel entitled to haul with a capital ship without friends or alts? Other caps are vulnerable to bumping and because of that are best used in teams. Why does the freighter need to be special?
Solo players are not meant to be as powerful as group's of players. You could instead fly a DST (something that is harder to bump and can even use the mwd trick).
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"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16081
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 00:25:20 -
[468] - Quote
Khergit Deserters wrote:If a solution relies on a player having to use an alt (i.e. a second account), that's no solution.
Wrong.
Capital ships are not solo vessels. If the idea of having a second account is so distasteful, nothing prevents you from having a second player do it.
Quote: Players should not have to play the game with a main and an alt to avoid a certain built-in game mechanic.
If you really believe that, then you might as well just quit right now, because that's true of a hell of a lot of things in EVE.
"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.
|
bigbud skunkafella
Not The Usual Suspects
2
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 00:55:20 -
[469] - Quote
[/quote]
You just don't get it. The consequences are not supposed to imposed by CCP. You the player have to impose them. If you decline that is not the problem of the guy doing the bumping....that is your problem. Running to CCP saying, "It's not fair! Fix it!" is antithetical to the very idea you just articulated: that there should be consequences to one's actions in game.[/quote]
thats kinda rich coming from a member of the cfc ....
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
44110
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 01:00:46 -
[470] - Quote
Khergit Deserters wrote:If a solution relies on a player having to use an alt (i.e. a second account), that's no solution. Players should not have to play the game with a main and an alt to avoid a certain built-in game mechanic. If you need two chars to play the game, then CCP would have to give every new subscriber two simultaneously playable chars.
The other way is the alt doing the (scouting, webbing, whatever) function has to be another player. If that's the case, then safe hauling can only be done by teams of players. Not solo. Which might be OK, game design-wise. But it would make hauling one other thing that a solo player can viably do in EVE. You don't need an alt. It's just convenient.
One friend is enough to reduce the risk to an extremely low level.
Even alone, the risk of being bumped and ganked is small, so totally doable solo if you are smart about where you haul.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
|
Brad Neece
The Scope Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 01:50:43 -
[471] - Quote
[/quote]
You just don't get it. The consequences are not supposed to imposed by CCP. You the player have to impose them. If you decline that is not the problem of the guy doing the bumping....that is your problem. Running to CCP saying, "It's not fair! Fix it!" is antithetical to the very idea you just articulated: that there should be consequences to one's actions in game. If I blind jump to a cyno beacon and get my carrier burnt down...is it my fault? Or should I blame the people who burnt down my carrier and CCP?
To be getting bumped means you have catastrophically failed. You did NOT have a scout. You did NOT have a scout with webs. And you jumped into a system known for ganking...which relies on bumping.
Don't want to be bumped for 4-5 hours? Okay, logoff. Problem solved. Go do something else.[/quote]
Wait, just to be clear.....Consequences are not supposed to imposed by CCP? So the whole Criminal Timer is a broken mechanic by that implication, no? Gankers should keep their ships if others players aren't killing them off after ganks. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3038
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 02:04:12 -
[472] - Quote
So what is your point? (to use a similarly exaggerated and non-sensical argument)
That all consequences should be handed out by CCP? If I shoot a POS in low sec I should be banned from the game?
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"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
44112
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 02:31:30 -
[473] - Quote
Brad Neece wrote:Wait, just to be clear.....Consequences are not supposed to imposed by CCP? So the whole Criminal Timer is a broken mechanic by that implication, no? Gankers should keep their ships if others players aren't killing them off after ganks. This thread is supposed to be about bumping and looting.
When it comes to bumping and looting, the aim in asking for consequences is to get the bumping ship and looting ship set to suspect so they can be killed (they are the most common requests in these threads).
So anti-gankers want to inflict consequences on those ships, but not if it means consequences for them; and hence they don't gank the bumping Machs.
From everything in this thread, anti-gankers want consequence free options to kill the Machariel be requesting CCP to inflict consequences on bumpers that the anti-gankers aren't prepared to take on themselves.
At the end of the day. if your desire is to shoot the Machariel or the looting Freighter/DSTs, then do it; but don't request CCP to maintain safety for some at the expense of others.
If you want the bumping Mach to have more risk, go make it more risky to bump.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Brad Neece
The Scope Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 02:32:08 -
[474] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:So what is your point? (to use a similarly exaggerated and non-sensical argument)
That all consequences should be handed out by CCP? If I shoot a POS in low sec I should be banned from the game?
Concord response should not happen against criminals.....if in-game consequences should be imposed by other players. I was taking that to the extreme.
But on a serious note, maybe if CCP fixes the lame bounty system. Ganking bumpers might be a worthwhile EVE activity. But only if there is a way to confirm the bumping lead to a gank. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4540
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 02:37:39 -
[475] - Quote
Khergit Deserters wrote:If a solution relies on a player having to use an alt (i.e. a second account), that's no solution. Players should not have to play the game with a main and an alt to avoid a certain built-in game mechanic. If you need two chars to play the game, then CCP would have to give every new subscriber two simultaneously playable chars.
The other way is the alt doing the (scouting, webbing, whatever) function has to be another player. If that's the case, then safe hauling can only be done by teams of players. Not solo. Which might be OK, game design-wise. But it would make hauling one other thing that a solo player can viably do in EVE.
Get a buddy to provide the scouting/webbing. I do this when I need to jump to a cyno beacon and can't get a scout there quickly. I ask in corp chat, alliance chat, etc. If I need a cyno same thing. Imagine that in a game where there are thousands of other players online you learn to help each other.
And yeah...you are going to fly a big expensive ship...shock!!! You need help doing so. I do not move my carrier alone, nor my JF. In both cases I have the help of people in my corp.
Your complaint here is just simply an issue of the incorrect view of the game and how it works.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4540
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 02:39:17 -
[476] - Quote
bigbud skunkafella wrote:Quote:
You just don't get it. The consequences are not supposed to imposed by CCP. You the player have to impose them. If you decline that is not the problem of the guy doing the bumping....that is your problem. Running to CCP saying, "It's not fair! Fix it!" is antithetical to the very idea you just articulated: that there should be consequences to one's actions in game.
thats kinda rich coming from a member of the cfc ....
What is that supposed to mean? That CCP does my beck and call? That is all you got left is Grrrr Goons.
Guess your out of valid ideas and arguments.
Just the other day while chatting with CCP Fozzie I thought it would be good if he implemented....GMAFB.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3038
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 02:59:25 -
[477] - Quote
Brad Neece wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:So what is your point? (to use a similarly exaggerated and non-sensical argument)
That all consequences should be handed out by CCP? If I shoot a POS in low sec I should be banned from the game? Concord response should not happen against criminals.....if in-game consequences should be imposed by other players. I was taking that to the extreme. But on a serious note, maybe if CCP fixes the lame bounty system. Ganking bumpers might be a worthwhile EVE activity. But only if there is a way to confirm the bumping lead to a gank.
Because there is no perma-death, any bounty system that pays well will be exploited. But at least you get paid for sitting in a Naga and whoring on ganker losses.
The game was indeed designed with the notion that players take responsibility for their own protection and vengeance. Read the oft referenced 'falcon punch' post by CCP falcon. Players exacting revenge is exactly what kill rights are for. CONCORD were not intended to replace player revenge. They are a deterrent.
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"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
405
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 07:16:56 -
[478] - Quote
Rhetorical question-
I know freighters have a lot of room in their holds...but do they have enough space to carry a packaged shuttle in there? I know shuttles take up a lot of room and take months and months to train into flying, plus their expense has skyrocketed in recent years...but if you could get past all that, it occurs to me that even solo freighter pilots could carry a shuttle and periodically land at stations, scout ahead a few jumps, then continue. Especially just before gank hubs.
But, I realize with the time and expense training into a shuttle, that not all freighter pilots would be willing to do this. I was just thinking, maybe some of them could do so in the event they don't have a friend handy. It wouldn't be a perfect solution, and god knows those shuttles might take up so much room in the cargo as to make the trip not worth it, but for some people, the hassle would be worth it to avoid the loss of their billion-isk ship with 3-billion-isk cargo.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4543
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 08:00:23 -
[479] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:Rhetorical question-
I know freighters have a lot of room in their holds...but do they have enough space to carry a packaged shuttle in there? I know shuttles take up a lot of room and take months and months to train into flying, plus their expense has skyrocketed in recent years...but if you could get past all that, it occurs to me that even solo freighter pilots could carry a shuttle and periodically land at stations, scout ahead a few jumps, then continue. Especially just before gank hubs.
But, I realize with the time and expense training into a shuttle, that not all freighter pilots would be willing to do this. I was just thinking, maybe some of them could do so in the event they don't have a friend handy. It wouldn't be a perfect solution, and god knows those shuttles might take up so much room in the cargo as to make the trip not worth it, but for some people, the hassle would be worth it to avoid the loss of their billion-isk ship with 3-billion-isk cargo.
You sir, are a man of subtlety and perspicacious insights. Naturally you are a bad, bad man.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
1139
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 08:23:08 -
[480] - Quote
Before I started multiboxing, back in the stone age, that was very similar how I used to scout gates that looked shifty: Logged in an untrained alt to jump first with my main in the system behind. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |