EVE Search - We the undersigned protest suicide ganking and request changes.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

We the undersigned protest suicide ganking and request changes.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 10:53:00 - [331] Edited by: Zachstar on 21/09/2007 10:55:43 Originally by: Red Desire Do not compare it to real life. You don't have ships and the police has nothing to do with CONCORD!! Now for a RP point of view is perfect, you die you get a clone. You die get in a new clone and make some money = PROFIT!! So stfu, ganking freighters doesn't happen everywere I see hundreds of freighters that are not ganked. Ganking a freighter takes some skill, especially some organising skills, if not we would see it done all over! Thats not a very good post. #1 Concord is there to keep the peace just like real police do. What they don't seem to do yet is have "cases" where the alts and fools that do gank get recognized and attacked by Concord and soon as they leave station again. I shall compare it to real police cause that is exactly what concord is. #2 That clone stuff aint making much since. #3 No you arent seeing it ALL over yet. but what you mention is getting into play alot faster than you think. And ganking these ships isnt that hard at all I found out today. It will get much worse pretty soon here if not stopped. #4 STFU is so childish talk man.
Sendraks Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.21 11:45:00 - [332] Originally by: Zachstar #1 Concord is there to keep the peace just like real police do. What they don't seem to do yet is have "cases" where the alts and fools that do gank get recognized and attacked by Concord and soon as they leave station again. I shall compare it to real police cause that is exactly what concord is. How on earth is Concord supposed to keep track of alts? Thats crazy. Originally by: Zachstar ##2 That clone stuff aint making much since. Makes as much sense as any analogy in this thread comparing Eve to real life. Originally by: Zachstar ###3 No you arent seeing it ALL over yet. but what you mention is getting into play alot faster than you think. And ganking these ships isnt that hard at all I found out today. Ganking tech 1 ships is not hard. Simple solution...don't move expensive stuff in tech 1 ships. Originally by: Zachstar ###It will get much worse pretty soon here if not stopped. You talk as if this is new. It's not.
Cornucopian Gallente Orias Fringe Enterprises United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.21 11:47:00 - [333] I, the undersigned, think the frieghter community should stop moaning and start investing in some escort. furthermore, GTFOOJ, thats where it happens the most. What do people do zhen the criminals start to take over their stuff? gangs running the streets? MANIFEST DESTINY, HEAD OUTWARDS AND UPWARDS! you should too. signed: Cornu. ----------------------------------------------- "post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer." Originally by: Royaldo complete win by Cornucopian!
Dragon Lord Caldari InQuest Ascension R i s e	Posted - 2007.09.21 12:21:00 - [334] The only thing id change is if your killed by concord your insurance is invalidated and if your alts loot the left over wreak they are flagged to the ganked pilot and this gang. Other than that high sec has never been safe and dont think just because you are allowed to shoot back, you shoud, as i found out in my noob days shotting a flagging player can get you killed very easily. If you realy want to ensure that you are very hard to kill in high sec, fly your frieghter with a gang of logistic ships, concord dont kill you for repping a gang mates armour and shields as far as i know anyway. I thik this does flag you to the attacking gang, but concord will be on its way to kill them so i dont thik they will have time to kill your logistics support.
William Alex Viscosity	Posted - 2007.09.21 12:29:00 - [335] Agreed on the insurance thing.
Pheonix Kanan Caldari Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.09.21 12:36:00 - [336] You can't remove insurance from CONCORD for the simple fact of human error. Let's say you mis-click and lock a station during wartime and get CONCORDed? Should he get his insurance money? Say he mis-clicked during a lag spike? There are just too many other factors that come into play when you consider all of the facts. Not to mention, if you wanted to allow the game to separate mistake from intention would require an EXTREME amount of coding that I wouldn't want to put the devs through (or they could put a big, fat, hairy guy in your room to watch you while you play ). Originally by: Curzon Dax shrugs Play the game the way you want to, and respect other peoples' ability to do the same.
Tenerhaddi Trinity Corporate Services	Posted - 2007.09.21 12:48:00 - [337] Originally by: Pheonix Kanan You can't remove insurance from CONCORD for the simple fact of human error. Let's say you mis-click and lock a station during wartime and get CONCORDed? Should he get his insurance money? Say he mis-clicked during a lag spike? There are just too many other factors that come into play when you consider all of the facts. Not to mention, if you wanted to allow the game to separate mistake from intention would require an EXTREME amount of coding that I wouldn't want to put the devs through (or they could put a big, fat, hairy guy in your room to watch you while you play ). Easy ways to avoid this not have them showing up in over view! If they click it and fire before confirming there target then tuff! Play smarter than a noob then. simple Locking check wrong target relock right target fire!! simple. Only time i***ed up when i was **ed up! ---------------- http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 13:44:00 - [338] Originally by: Cornucopian I, the undersigned, think the frieghter community should stop moaning and start investing in some escort. furthermore, GTFOOJ, thats where it happens the most. What do people do zhen the criminals start to take over their stuff? gangs running the streets? MANIFEST DESTINY, HEAD OUTWARDS AND UPWARDS! you should too. signed: Cornu. Ok..um like wrong Thats like saying the armored cars that transport gold from banks ought to have tanks alongside as they go from place to place. Seems the armored car is to filled to hold any kind of defense against the roving gangs. Please stop and think about how the EVE economy works and how ganking works before you respond.
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 13:53:00 - [339] How on earth is Concord supposed to keep track of alts? Thats crazy. Nah, No need to write that much code and lag stuff. Keep it simple and simply have concord destroy the loot with what? Like 2 shots? BTW this is only for if a Concord ship is within range (Or a station turret) A super well planned gank could still get some loot in before it gets blasted I guess. Seriously! Once CCP takes such an action you are going to be surprised how quickly everything returns to normal again. Ganks will continue! but they will be for LoL wtfpwned! and not a cheap unbalanced source of bank.
Sendraks Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:01:00 - [340] Edited by: Sendraks on 21/09/2007 14:01:46 Originally by: Zachstar Nah, No need to write that much code and lag stuff. Keep it simple and simply have concord destroy the loot with what? Like 2 shots? BTW this is only for if a Concord ship is within range (Or a station turret) A super well planned gank could still get some loot in before it gets blasted I guess. Why? Why do this. It makes not sense. Why would concord destroy cargo? Basically all you're doing is directly punishing those players who can be bothered to plan hi-sec piracy and indirectly punishing those players who have put in the time and effort to avoid being the victims of such behaviour. There is no good reason for what you're proposing. You're pandering to lazy malcontents who don't want to make any effort and be able to afk round hi-sec in a ship that has all the protection of tissue paper with millions of ISK in the hold. Originally by: Zachstar [Seriously! Once CCP takes such an action you are going to be surprised how quickly everything returns to normal again. Ganks will continue! but they will be for LoL wtfpwned! and not a cheap unbalanced source of bank. Seriously! Once players pull their heads out their asses, stop whining and stop flying poorly protected ships with hugely valuable cargo inside them, you are going to be surprised how quickly everything will return to normal. Ganks will continue! but they will be for LoL wtfpwned! and not a cheap unbalanced source of bank.

Khamal Jolstien Caldari Lucky Hydra Corp SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:07:00 - [341] Threads like this are pretty disappointing. Why is it that people would rather change the game for everyone, rather than play it the way it was intended. It's HIGH-security, not PERFECT-security. Just because you have been unable to adapt, either through ignorance (only a valid excuse the first time), or through pure laziness (not fitting defensive modules), does not mean everyone else should suddenly mold to your version of the game. If you weren't such an inviting target, you would not get attacked. Either that, or you pay the Darwin tax.
Nicho Void Gallente Hyper-Nova	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:12:00 - [342] Twelve pages? We feel that this dribble has to go on for twelve pages? Here, I'll summarize it for all of you: Argument 1: In the real world, cops wouldn't just let you get killed like that! Argument 2: Cops don't provide safety! You ******* noob! Rebuttal 1: At the very least, they wouldn't let your friends loot the body! Rebuttal 2: Bodies get robbed right after a kill all the time! Stupid Fix 1: Make high sec safe! Stupid Fix 2: Get rid of high sec all together! etc, etc, etc. Honestly, everything you have to say, has already been said on page 3, or in an earlier thread. Let it die. ---------------
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:31:00 - [343] Why? Why do this. It makes not sense. Why would concord destroy cargo? To save CCP from having to code mountains of code for them to do otherwise to deny almost wide open loot to the exploiting alts. Plain and simple. No need to make it any more advanced. Basically all you're doing is directly punishing those players who can be bothered to plan hi-sec piracy and indirectly punishing those players who have put in the time and effort to avoid being the victims of such behaviour. Punishing? Bothered? What bother is it when you do a little work to get a boatload of cash you diddn't earn and used an exploit to get? And then exploited to get away from the wardec afterwards? Whoever got prepared for this (You cant basicly) somehow will simply rollback it or hold onto the protection from ego pushing ganks that cant steal their cargo in hisec. There is no good reason for what you're proposing. You're pandering to lazy malcontents who don't want to make any effort and be able to afk round hi-sec in a ship that has all the protection of tissue paper with millions of ISK in the hold. There are tons of good reasons mentioned and explained in tons of posts here. Try laying off the insults and think for a few and maybe you can understand some. It matters little if you are AFK or not. The gankers still have PLENTY of time on the other side of the gate to take you down. You will just be there to witness their payday yourself. There is little to nothing you can do to stop them in hisec. Seriously! Once players pull their heads out their asses, stop whining and stop flying poorly protected ships with hugely valuable cargo inside them, Ass, whine, moan, b****, etc.. yall just keep the insults flying and the malinfo flowing and you will hold onto your precious ganking. Is that yall's mindset? Hopefully others wont be bothered by such filth.
WhatAmI	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:34:00 - [344] Originally by: Zachstar Edited by: Zachstar on 21/09/2007 10:48:28 Originally by: Strife Phoenix Totally unsigned. Only way to wreak havoc amongst the macroers.. So kill the dog to get rid of the cancer? I should have thought of this before...
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:41:00 - [345] Threads like this are pretty disappointing. Why is it that people would rather change the game for everyone, rather than play it the way it was intended. Are you kidding? When the insults and desperation arent being thrown around.. Threads like this are PERFECT examples of the community taking back the game from problems and discussing viable solutions. Giving CCP GRAND insight into the community thoughts on issues! The gankers found the exploit and changed the game. It was them who started this junk. Not us... It's HIGH-security, not PERFECT-security. Just because you have been unable to adapt, either through ignorance (only a valid excuse the first time), or through pure laziness (not fitting defensive modules), does not mean everyone else should suddenly mold to your version of the game. This shows your rather lack of understanding of the situation. You are one of those that seems to be in the conservative camp who worries about what trickle down effects a nerf will cause. What I am asking for isn't some super change thats going to cause the gate to open back or something... It's simply a call to return the game to a state where we don't have such an exploit able to be used to change and ruin the game. It't not a mold to anything except a rollback. If you weren't such an inviting target, you would not get attacked. That is EXACTLY what I've been proposing to do! Have Concord blast the loot so that the only invite they will get is from ego pushing gankers wanting to add billions in damage to their killboards. The LoL factor and fun returns! Either that, or you pay the Darwin tax. Well for now its the "gank-for-bank" tax as I call it.
Sendraks Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:51:00 - [346] Originally by: Zachstar To save CCP from having to code mountains of code for them to do otherwise to deny almost wide open loot to the exploiting alts. Plain and simple. No need to make it any more advanced. But there is no need for any code or changes in the first place. This has been explained innumerable times already. Originally by: Zachstar Punishing? Bothered? What bother is it when you do a little work to get a boatload of cash you diddn't earn and used an exploit to get? Why can't you be bothered to protect what you earned? if you can't be bothered to protect it, why should CCP have to do it for you? Originally by: Zachstar Whoever got prepared for this (You cant basicly) somehow will simply rollback it or hold onto the protection from ego pushing ganks that cant steal their cargo in hisec. Of course you can prepare for this, it has already been stated how. Originally by: Zachstar There are tons of good reasons mentioned and explained in tons of posts here. Try laying off the insults and think for a few and maybe you can understand some. There are no good reasons. Everything that players can do to stop being the victims of hi-sec gate ganks is the game already. You are stuidously ignoring this point. Originally by: Zachstar It matters little if you are AFK or not. It matters a huge amount actually. Originally by: Zachstar The gankers still have PLENTY of time on the other side of the gate to take you down. If you are flying the right ship with the right fitting, they won't. Originally by: Zachstar You will just be there to witness their payday yourself. There is little to nothing you can do to stop them in hisec. Are you in denial here or something? Are you not reading what people are writing here. The means to prevent yourself becoming a victim of a hi-sec gate gank are in the game already. If you don't want to take the precautions, then it is your own fault. Originally by: Zachstar Ass, whine, moan, b****, etc.. yall just keep the insults flying and the malinfo flowing and you will hold onto your precious ganking. Is that yall's mindset? Hopefully others wont be bothered by such filth. You are not listening. This is a fix/chnage. that does not need to be made. The solutions are in game already.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.21 14:51:00 - [347] The number of alts in here is startling. Suicide attacks are not an exploit. Evading Concord to destroy a ship in high sec is, and there are examples of this recently where CCP have plugged this hole, yet no change has been made to the ability to sacrifice one's ships for the opportunity of a greater prize. There is no such thing as safe space. If you don't like that, I'll happily have what's left of your stuff. As for "time" on the other side of the gate, this can be negated with the use of a webber ship. So allow me to repeat myself: Suicide attacks are not an exploit, so adapt or die. Hardpoint Rigs
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 15:11:00 - [348] But there is no need for any code or changes in the first place. This has been explained innumerable times already. Um no they haven't There is a great need to fix this issue and the change is simple. Need + Simplicity = Fix (Well hopefully) Why can't you be bothered to protect what you earned? if you can't be bothered to protect it, why should CCP have to do it for you? Cause you can't protect it properly as of yet! And what you are asking is that every transport have some uber screen around it that will make eve look like some military parade every time someone is ready to sell. Its not cool at all! Stop it. Of course you can prepare for this, it has already been stated how. No it hasn't You can't defend against a average gank run period. What do you propose? Have an empty ship in your screen that runs in and grabs the loot first? but then what about another ship to grab that ships loot? And so on and SO ON. There are no good reasons. Everything that players can do to stop being the victims of hi-sec gate ganks is the game already. You are stuidously ignoring this point. No I am not. Any ideas about how to defend against a reasonable gank attack are shabby and depend on them making mistakes at best. And stop with this thought that these transfers need screens to protect them in hisec! Its not right period! Only the president and high office members have screens of armed people covering them as they ride on the streets of cities. Its unreasonable to expect transports to be convoys in secure space just to prevent a ganker from getting rich. *(Afk/NonAFK)* It matters a huge amount actually. Click Click Click Scramble/Web/Gank What are you going to do? Scream? Throw your moniter at the wall? Just in case you are about to say W20 do not forget that these transports take time to align after they appear on the OTHER side. Enough for click click click with a reasonable attack. If you are flying the right ship with the right fitting, they won't. Ok lets get the economy running on shuttles and frigs for transport then. Are you in denial here or something? Are you not reading what people are writing here. The means to prevent yourself becoming a victim of a hi-sec gate gank are in the game already. If you don't want to take the precautions, then it is your own fault. There is no effective solution I am tired of having to say this over and over again. The way things are now. On top of that why must the transports suddenly have to be ninjas in hisec space? Why must they sweat and spare every second to avoid roving gangs of gankers that have a much better chance to gank you than not? Talk about changing the game for others! You talk of a sizeable chunk having to radicly change their methods in secure space. These are methods they ought to be taking in 0.4 and lower! You are not listening.** Sorry but I have to listen to such bull so I don't get accused of not reading posts correctly. So when yall post such filth I have to read it. Things suck sometimes This is a fix/chnage. that does not need to be made. The solutions are in game already. Sure that solution is in the game already. The death of the economy as more and more go into VERY VERY profitable low training gank and less into manufacture and mine. Like I said there was a 3rd solution that nobody ought to want.
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 15:20:00 - [349] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos The number of alts in here is startling. Suicide attacks are not an exploit. Evading Concord to destroy a ship in high sec is, and there are examples of this recently where CCP have plugged this hole, yet no change has been made to the ability to sacrifice one's ships for the opportunity of a greater prize. There is no such thing as safe space. If you don't like that, I'll happily have what's left of your stuff. As for "time" on the other side of the gate, this can be negated with the use of a webber ship. So allow me to repeat myself: Suicide attacks are not an exploit, so adapt or die. No they are not an exploit. The fact that they can use an alt to get the loot extremely easily and alt corp away when they get wardeced is 100 percent grade A exploit. To continue allowing such will only encourage other exploits to be blown wide open like this one which will slowly start to degrade EVE. I will not just stand by and adapt while such an exploit leads to ruin of the EVE economy. However if it isn't fixed you can well expect me to join on in to get in on the last of the fun before it all dies. The fix is simple! To get assistance from concord your wreck (not pod) and loot will be fired upon and blown to dust to discourage others from profiting on activity that is in violation of the law.
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 15:25:00 - [350] To anyone still thinking I am trying to shutdown hisec ganking. I am not. All I want is the ability to make astounding amounts of money and avoid the consequences be shut down... Afterwards if someone has a good or funny/ego reason to blow millions or billions worth of ship you got to take the other guys millions/billions and convert them into floating dust has my approval and request to post the video on youtube with quality Teamspeak mixed on in! When a gank happens everything must be turned to dust. (Except pod) Not survive to grow a problem.

Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.21 15:33:00 - [351] Quote: No they are not an exploit. The fact that they can use an alt to get the loot extremely easily and alt corp away when they get wardeced is 100 percent grade A exploit. It's only an exploit if they evade wardecs repeatedly. Considering that a wardec is pocket change even towards an alliance, you simply wardec their second corporation and if they duck out of that, petition. You have them bang to rights. Quote: To continue allowing such will only encourage other exploits to be blown wide open like this one which will slowly start to degrade EVE. Finding holes seems to be somewhat human nature, for want of better terminology. Do you not think it as bad that a pirate can use an alt character to buy everything they like in space from which they are prohibited? Evidently CCP don't, as they've never stopped that either - and that's been going on as long as suicide attacks have, if not longer. The only difference is the degree of profit involved. Quote: I will not just stand by and adapt while such an exploit leads to ruin of the EVE economy. There you go referring to this as an exploit again... Quote: However if it isn't fixed you can well expect me to join on in to get in on the last of the fun before it all dies. Then join in the fun! If this was a problem CCP felt needed fixing, they would have never allowed freighters to deposit their load in space in the first place. As I said, suicide attacks have been around as long as the game itself and are a viable tactic. Quote: The fix is simple! To get assistance from concord your wreck (not pod) and loot will be fired upon and blown to dust to discourage others from profiting on activity that is in violation of the law. This idea is frankly preposterous. Profit is the sole motivator in this game, and you seek to annihilate a playstyle presumably for your own end - trying to pretend you "don't mind" whether people suicide themselves for profit or not is utterly disingenuous. Hardpoint Rigs
Sendraks Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.21 15:37:00 - [352] Originally by: Zachstar Um no they haven't Yes it has. Do not move expensive stuff around in tech 1 ships by yourself. Tech 2 transports + escorts and/or scouts are the answer. Originally by: Zachstar There is a great need to fix this issue and the change is simple. See above, the solutions are already in game. Are you now going to tell me that these don't work? Do you have any idea how durable and/or manouverable these vessels are? Originally by: Zachstar Cause you can't protect it properly as of yet! Yes you can. Originally by: Zachstar And what you are asking is that every transport have some uber screen around it that will make eve look like some military parade every time someone is ready to sell. Its not cool at all! Stop it. So basically, the entire thrust of your argument is that you think that players should be able to move round billions of isk in crappy tech 1 ships at no risk at all? That isn't how Eve works. Originally by: Zachstar No it hasn't You can't defend against a average gank run period. The average gank is not going to take down a tech 2 transport. The average gank is not going to take down a tech 2 transport with a scout that spots the gank on the other side of the gate. The average gank is not going to take down someone moving t2 BPOs in a properly fitted BS. Originally by: Zachstar No I am not. Any ideas about how to defend against a reasonable gank attack are shabby and depend on them making mistakes at best. Do you actually have any understanding of tech 2 transports or how to fit them? Originally by: Zachstar And stop with this thought that these transfers need screens to protect them in hisec! Its not right period! Of course it is right. This is a multiplayer game. You have something really valuable to move, you make sure it is protected. Originally by: Zachstar Click Click Click Scramble/Web/Gankquote] When I've been caught in low sec by a gate camp in a tech 1 hauler, I didn't survive by just randomly clicking warp to go to my next gate. Any player worth their salt knows what measures to undertake to avoid getting nabbed at a gate. They ain't foolproof, but they give you a fighting chance. If they give you a fighting chance in low sec/0.0, they do even more in hi-sec. Originally by: Zachstar Just in case you are about to say W20 do not forget that these transports take time to align after they appear on the OTHER side. Enough for click click click with a reasonable attack. Two things. 1) your fitting counts for a lot here. A tech 2 transport well fitted can either evade fire completely or survive long enough with a decent tank for concord to turn up. 2) You align to the nearest warpable object the requires the least alignment. Plus a hauler fitted properly can align surprisingly quickly. Originally by: Zachstar On top of that why must the transports suddenly have to be ninjas in hisec space? Why must they sweat and spare every second to avoid roving gangs of gankers that have a much better chance to gank you than not? Why? if you have hundreds of millions of ISK in your cargo hold then you are a prime target. Of course you should be sweating it. Originally by: Zachstar You talk of a sizeable chunk having to radicly change their methods in secure space. I really don't think this applies to a sizeable chunk of the playerbase at all, just the few who put cargo that costs too much in the hold of a tech 1 ship. Originally by: Zachstar Sure that solution is in the game already. The death of the economy as more and more go into VERY VERY profitable low training gank and less into manufacture and mine. Like I said there was a 3rd solution that nobody ought to want. Hi-sec ganking has been going on for a long time now. The economy doesn't seem to be dying and people happily move millions through hi-sec all the time. The people who do it happily are those who don't leave themselves vulnerable to hi-sec gate ganks.
Zachstar	Posted - 2007.09.21 15:58:00 - [353] Wooboy Can I fit everything into one post on this load of something? We must find out! It's only an exploit if they evade wardecs repeatedly. Considering that a wardec is pocket change even towards an alliance, you simply wardec their second corporation and if they duck out of that, petition. You have them bang to rights. quite hard to detect swaps you know when an alt stays behind as the CEO of a corp that is never active during the dec. All the alt has to say is his members jumped ship after wardec. Nothing less that lack of profit is gonna fix this issue. Finding holes seems to be somewhat human nature, for want of better terminology. Do you not think it as bad that a pirate can use an alt character to buy everything they like in space from which they are prohibited? Evidently CCP don't, as they've never stopped that either - and that's been going on as long as suicide attacks have, if not longer. The only difference is the degree of profit involved. It is just as bad but I can see how difficult it can be to prevent alts from buying stuff in hisec as you say. It is much more simple to fix this alt building issue by not giving them reason to constantly build alts to grab mega millions in profit. Let concord blast the loot! Problem solved. There you go referring to this as an exploit again... Then join in the fun! If this was a problem CCP felt needed fixing, they would have never allowed freighters to deposit their load in space in the first place. As I said, suicide attacks have been around as long as the game itself and are a viable tactic. I will not participate in the exploit! Not while there is a good chance that CCP will fix this and allow everything to get back to normal. Tho now that you mention it I had this kind of dumbed down version idea. What if you could buy a simple module that has only the single job of turning your wreck and loot into dust in the event you get blasted? Then you give the transports just one slot that they can use to drop that in with. (With uber low requirements of course! 1cpu and 1power and uses 1 cap) This isnt a very good solution if you ask me. I say concord ought to do the job for ya and keep the ganking to ego build/bust This idea is frankly preposterous. Profit is the sole motivator in this game, and you seek to annihilate a playstyle presumably for your own end - trying to pretend you "don't mind" whether people suicide themselves for profit or not is utterly disingenuous. It is not disigenuous to propose such! What is, is this constant defense that states that these transports must accept that they are screwed and they must adapt to being robbed silly by alts after the show is over. What is the point of even having hisec when you cant even go after these guys without getting concorded? Atleast in lowsec you could go after the pirates after argo if you accepted the status drop. GAH too many posts so little time. Any other reasonable people want to continue where I left off? Let concord blast the loot! Remove insurance for concord kills! Let the gankings continue!
OneSock Crown Industries	Posted - 2007.09.21 15:59:00 - [354] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Ilya Murametz So to sum it all up, the only sensible thing to do would be to remove insurance pay out for the ship lost due to acts of crime in high sec at least or ships lost to Concord. With that said, i'm not a programmer so I do not know how hard that would be to implement or if it's even possible. Suicide gate attacks are not a big problem and this solution would affect far more players than those bothered by suicide attacks in hi-sec. I imagine the effects on CCPs petition queue would be substantial. I don't see why. Simple code: If player A shoot on player B and Sec >=0.5 then player A insurance payout = void. Simple. Don't see how that would affect any other queue.
Ozmodan Minmatar Knights Covenant	Posted - 2007.09.21 16:10:00 - [355] Well I have to agree it is definitely broken, but then again most pvp in empire is broken from my point of view. Take for example someone steals ore from you while you are in a gang, the thief only flags to you instead of your entire gang or corp, how ridiculous. As to a solution, much care should be taken, to prevent making it too safe. I completely support the no insurance if you anger concord, can't believe CCP has ignored the most obvious change needed. Learners permit still current
John Blackthorn Foundation R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.09.21 16:32:00 - [356] I realy agree with the orginal poster that the suicide gank has got to be stooped. I'm really tried of sending haulers, cruisers, and even transport ships through empire in high security and having them popped by non-war targets. 0.0 to .4 systems sure.. if you go auto pilot or send a hauler through there thats the chance you take. But .5 to 1.0 systems you should be safe from all but war targets. Futhermore anytime concord pops a ship there should be no insurance payout. -John
Sendraks Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.21 16:34:00 - [357] Originally by: John Blackthorn But .5 to 1.0 systems you should be safe from all but war targets. Why?
John Blackthorn Foundation R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.09.21 16:38:00 - [358] Escort haulers and freighters all the time? Have you ever wanted to to get together a gang and drive alongside a freighter in empire? in .4 to 0.0 sure.. but in empire? Heck, my transport ship was popped in a .6 by a geddon the other day. It happened so fast no amount of repair could have saved the transport and I had plate + extender + resists and he got me on warp out.
Leipoi Gallente Joint Espionage and Defence Industries	Posted - 2007.09.21 16:44:00 - [359] Edited by: Leipoi on 21/09/2007 16:44:26 Iv never been ganked in High-sec,but i do plan on getting a freighter in the next little while to help support my industrialist career and to help out my corp in logistics also.It seems to me that most of the people who argue in favor of being able to suicide-gank are being rather hypocritical of the whole thing."high-sec" doesnt mean safe-sec...blah blah blah....of course the suicide gankers rely on the idea of high-sec being safe...or they wouldnt be able to plan the attack,nor ly in wait to pik out their next target.With the added benefit of planning on losing whatever ships they bring.The defender has zero advantage at all. Sure i understand the concept of "dont use what you cant afford to lose"...a trader cant afford to lose anything....thats kinda the point of what ppl are saying here i think.No matter what is done,the suicide-gankers "force" loss onto the industrialist/trader style of player.Either throu RL time by using a ship that obviously is inferior to what is actually req'd.Time lost in training skills to use a ship the suicide-gankers deem for them to be the ship they should be using...why would someone who has no intention of running in low sec train up transport ship skills.Obviously to gain the most benefit they would need to train to lvl5. It would seem that if you intend to be a industrialist or trader in any serious manner,your decisions of ship,cargo and routes have been planned out for you by the suicide-gankers....check all of the posts on this manner,to summarize..."if you want to be safe in high-sec...this is what you will HAVE to do.." Has anyone actually ever tried to succesfully defend a freighter,even if in a simulated excercise to see what would be neccesary to defend against various amounts of BS's.From what iv been reading,it basically wouldnt be possible,is this true?If not what would it take?...and for the suicide-gankers,another question..why do you reserve the right to dictate the manner of transport to be used by small corps,individual players. When a group of players can dictate to another type of player,that would seem to fall within a form of grieving,blackmail at the very least.You decide..this is from the EUlA. 12.1 What is an exploit? The common definition of an exploit is ôto use the game mechanics in such a way as they were not intended for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage over other players.ö Due to the ever-changing dynamics involved with maintaining a virtual, persistent world, it can sometimes be difficult or confusing to determine what might be considered an exploit. Though every effort is made to avoid glitches that enable exploits to be used, they are occasionally discovered. Players have the responsibility of understanding how the game works and keeping themselves informed about changes to the game in order to comprehend what is deemed as an exploit. Those who are charged with employing the use of exploits will be reprimanded, which may include temporary suspension or a permanent ban of the account. Professing ignorance that you didnÆt know you were using an exploit will not prevent the enforcement of this rule. 12.11 What is grief play? A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersÆ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. This should not be confused with standard conflict that might arise between two players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.21 17:10:00 - [360] As per the definition above me, suicide attacks are not an exploit. They have been around as long as there has been valuable cargo and concord, and considering I have never heard of a single ban and that this has not been changed in any way I think that settles what CCP currently think on this. Please though, step in at any time and correct me if you're "in the know". If you're not, please stop declaring that this is an exploit. It makes about as much sense as me declaring it an exploit that all those juicy freighters don't spend more time in lowsec where I can kill them! Quote: What if you could buy a simple module that has only the single job of turning your wreck and loot into dust in the event you get blasted? It's called the self-destruct button: Nothing survives. If there's one change I would support, it's the ability to self destruct your own ship in a reasonable length of time. As it stands, only heavily tanked battleships/battlecruisers and capitals can ever make use of this feature. Reduce the timer to 5 seconds, and much of this issue would go away without any significant changes being required. Hardpoint Rigs



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: 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.