EVE Search - This is the end of trade in empire as we know it

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

This is the end of trade in empire as we know it

» 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 .. 18 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dolika Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.05.12 19:33:00 - [421] Well; until CCP fixes the freighters im out of T2 business. I didn't sign up to this game to be ganked in highsec empire on a daily basis. Guess im back to hauling trade **** around ;) Loads of isk to be made there so the children wont starve again. Guess yu'll be buying isotopes and similar stuff from me again ;) @ CCP: When will you fix the freighters?
SE1X	Posted - 2007.05.12 20:07:00 - [422] Edited by: SE1X on 12/05/2007 20:06:17 Ouch Pew pew pew Another one bites the dust!
weebls	Posted - 2007.05.12 20:09:00 - [423] I don't believe you can protect yourself in a freighter from a domi/drone gank as the game currently stands, even using an escort. Certainly armor repping and shield transporting are useless because of the high focussed dps and the very short fight. Battleship escort with smartbombs is problematic because you'd have to be right on top of the freighter all the time, which isn't really possible. Also it's very difficult to do anything at all once the fight is engaged due to the extreme lag from ships, drones, and concord. The only thing that seems to work fine through the lag are the drones. The gank squad can warp in without warning and the fight is so quick and the lag so bad that I think the best you could do is maybe make it somewhat more difficult from a timing standpoint on the gank squad. Currently it does not seem feasible to protect yourself if you are in a freighter in hi-sec, even with an escort.
Thrawnfl	Posted - 2007.05.12 20:35:00 - [424] I can bet good money this is fully supported by CCP, just like POS Bowling with titans/ms. Aka its part of the game mechanics.
Blind Man Kemono.	Posted - 2007.05.12 21:11:00 - [425] Originally by: SE1X Edited by: SE1X on 12/05/2007 20:06:17 Ouch Pew pew pew Another one bites the dust! good
Siege Minmatar Siegecraft Bounty Hunting	Posted - 2007.05.12 23:01:00 - [426] Wow, the debate has been raging for three weeks now, and two freighters lost. Yeah, real game breaking problem guys. However, if the rumored concord vs. drones change is what CCP decides on, then I guess I'm ok with that. Then we can get back to the old debate about you hiding in a noob corp, and how to boot you out of that.
Drizit Amarr	Posted - 2007.05.13 03:43:00 - [427] Originally by: Siege Wow, the debate has been raging for three weeks now, and two freighters lost. That we know of. Several pops may have been recorded that don't get on the forums. Not everyone visits the forums, some people actually play the game. --
Le Skunk Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.13 04:48:00 - [428] Edited by: Le Skunk on 13/05/2007 04:46:30 Originally by: Janu Hull Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Avon Edited by: Avon on 09/05/2007 18:26:10 The only problem here is people crying out for CCP to help them when they refuse to help themselves. This is not unbalanced. ....... Can you even start to imagine how NPC corp freighters becomming invunerable in "safe" space would upset the balance of the game? How would you even begin to stop the logistics of your enemies if they could just resupply using a /pvpoff flag? Well i applaud your post. However - Your alliance - and indeed almost all Alliances - Do not declare war on each other - so dont use the tactics you suggest. Its an old school tie - funny handshake style cartel. Going on . SKUNK Power politics at the sovreign level. Welcome to player empires. Did you genuinely think that all 0.0 Alliances would do was gather up forces to go mosh across the stars until they're fully expended and collapse? Most real empires die from invasion only after they begin to collapse from internal decay and disinterest once they rise above the day to day struggle to survive. BoB and some of the big boys in the 0.0 arena are in their Pax Romana days, give time a chance to burn some of their leadership out. All good things come to an end. Just be ready to play Theodoric when the time comes. Well kindof. But not really. As ive said before Any alliance worth its salt would have an offshoot corp wardeccing its big enemys. Even 5 - 10 pilots scooting round empire would create a logistical nightmare for the enemies. One good hauler kill would pay for the wars. Catch a freighter - youve dented the war effort.Catch a few BS - that less BS at the front shooting at you. The 5-10 pilots arnt really needed out in 0.0 anyway with all the capital stuff going on. And if they ever are - they can be set to blue and withdrawn into 0.0. Think it would be great fun for the pilots as well to.Are enough alliance on both sides to priovide a decent amount of targets to shoot at. Some mid skilled pilots (say 20mill sp) who cant be used for caps would be ideal. This isnt dont for some reason. Again - I think its purely down to some old school tie **** going on. This 'war for eve' is a bit 'queensbury rules' for my liking. SKUNK
Erfnam Time Cube Syndicate	Posted - 2007.05.13 06:10:00 - [429] Alternative defense for freighters. Coordinate with other traders, industrial corps, pirates, and bored players. Everyone creates an alt (or uses main). Warp to gate near hub (or along route), shoot random player with or without intention of killing them. CONCORD should respond and are now loitering at the gate, preventing any freighter ganking at that gate. Repeat for all relevant gates. Noob ships are free and the security hit for shooting a person is minor. Sales: Capital Ships \| Covetors Delivered - Bulk/Package/BYOM
Lord Bleu The Xizor Cartel Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.13 09:48:00 - [430] My 'personal' thoughts and not connected in any way to my corp or alliance. As a pvp'er I understand eve is tough and should be tough. I also understand that this here is a game and generally has to apeal to many different people with different appetites. Its all very well for the hard core pvp'ers to rant on about how nowhere should be 100% safe, but I disagree. From what I see, there are plenty mechanisms in the game to allow all out combat for those who want it. Low sec, 0.0 and the good ole war dec'ing system allows players to satisfy their pvp needs. On the other hand there are those who dont play this game for pvp and I'm quite comfortable with that and the idea that these players should be able to get on with the game without being forced in to pvp and possibly having their entire fortune wiped out in one encounter with a gank fleet whilst having absolutely zero defence. I can only imagine how gutting it would be to sit in a 1 billion plus ship that's being attacked knowing there isnt even a module to can click that would help the chances of survivability. Freighter pilots generally make a choice. Stay in hisec = low risk low profit, lowsec = hi risk high profit. Now it seems that the new craze of freighter popping is getting a little silly and I cant help wondering how many people are doing it for profit, and how many are doing it just becuase they can. Having read through this thread, I'm yet to see a valid post that convinces me that freighter ganking in empire should be as easy as it is. The irony of course is CCP called the freighter changes 'Freighter Love' >> The Xizor Cartel << >> Currently Recruiting Mature PVP'ers <<

Ozzie Asrail Exploited	Posted - 2007.05.13 12:32:00 - [431] All the "solutions" in this thread are pretty pathetic to be honest. Would you and 15 of your friends like to spend all your game time escorting a corpm8's frieghter around. All day everyday. It's boring as crap and no-one would want to do it. The game is supposed to be fun. Hopefully the jamming\killing of drones by concord will help even this up alot. -----
Marvel Master Asgard Schiffswerften Ev0ke	Posted - 2007.05.13 13:18:00 - [432] Hello, my personal view as extreme pvpler. Its simple. High Sec Ganking from frighters should not be possible. Marvel
Karsten Caldari LoneWolf Mining	Posted - 2007.05.13 21:28:00 - [433] Edited by: Karsten on 13/05/2007 21:55:44 Edited by: Karsten on 13/05/2007 21:55:15 Originally by: Marvel Master Hello, .... High Sec Ganking from frighters should not be possible. Marvel signed Karsten "All your ISK belong to the Viking Brewery"
Le Skunk Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.13 21:44:00 - [434] Any more so called 'extreme pvpers' who have trade alts they want to protect want to drop out of the woodwork. SKUNK
SiJira	Posted - 2007.05.14 02:37:00 - [435] ganking should not be allowed in high sec ccp should show up with ships right away and blast the offenders instantly instead of 30 seconds later and slowly in 0.5 anyone taking other peoples things should also instantly blow up so they learn their lesson we should have a /pvp option for anywhere 0.6+ so that we dont get attacked when flying alone in freighters for 45 jumps from one end of safe security to the other end war decs should take 2 weeks to initiate into high security (but 24 hours for low so that you dont lose security rating and can confine your victims faster) and they should end within 24 hours of that initiation or 24 hours after the last kill wichever comes first ____ __ ________ _sig below_ the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some
SiJira	Posted - 2007.05.14 03:10:00 - [436] then all the carebears could dance in stations all night and come outside of them all day ____ __ ________ _sig below_ the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some
Lord Bleu The Xizor Cartel Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.14 08:39:00 - [437] Originally by: Le Skunk Any more so called 'extreme pvpers' who have trade alts they want to protect want to drop out of the woodwork. SKUNK Its more about personal views. I've always subscribed to the dangerous / safe zone, pvp vs pve / player choice philosopy in online games, more so when there are ample mechanics in game already to allow everyone to have their cake and eat it. Unless of course a game is made to be 100% pvp but developers realised early on that they need to cater to all corners of the market in order to make a profit. With low sec, 0.0 and the war dec facility I see no valid argument to suicide freighters that aint in any of these categories. That is just my personal oppinion. Would I do it? Ironically, yes. If the orders come down that that is what we're going to do I'll do it becuase right now its valid & legal, but this here is a debate about whether it should be and again, I say no, I dont think it should. >> The Xizor Cartel << >> Currently Recruiting Mature PVP'ers <<
Le Skunk Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.14 08:47:00 - [438] Originally by: Lord Bleu Originally by: Le Skunk Any more so called 'extreme pvpers' who have trade alts they want to protect want to drop out of the woodwork. SKUNK Its more about personal views. I've always subscribed to the dangerous / safe zone, pvp vs pve / player choice philosopy in online games, more so when there are ample mechanics in game already to allow everyone to have their cake and eat it. Unless of course a game is made to be 100% pvp but developers realised early on that they need to cater to all corners of the market in order to make a profit. With low sec, 0.0 and the war dec facility I see no valid argument to suicide freighters that aint in any of these categories. That is just my personal oppinion. Would I do it? Ironically, yes. If the orders come down that that is what we're going to do I'll do it becuase right now its valid & legal, but this here is a debate about whether it should be and again, I say no, I dont think it should. The argument would be that certain people move corps/hide in the so called 'noob corps' to avoid wardecs. If wardecs are designed to make high sec temporarily 'unsafe' - then these people make themselves invunerable. Thus the only recourse to action some people feel they have - is to suicide gank. Ive never done it myself. And have only seen it done once - in seven months of high sec gate camping. But i think taking away the possibilty would be another nail in EvE's coffin. SKUNK
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.05.14 10:03:00 - [439] Edited by: fire 59 on 14/05/2007 10:03:48 Why don't people just use scouts ahead of themselves to see if theres a bajillion domis or whatever waiting to gank someone. Or, gasp, don't carry soooo much fat lootz all in one trip, you know, split it down into a few trips. Will cut into your whatevers but seriously, like hauler ganking, until people start engaging there brains and use the tools available to survive , they deserve to die. Concorde is not there to keep you alive at all times, it is there to kill the attacker and arrives depending on te sec status of the system. Speaking as someone who has moved valuables through empire and never ever been ganked ( attempted but used my brain and survived ), i don't see any problem with ganking in empire. And i don't do it myself before someone makes a smart comment, although tbh, i just may if people are really that dumb in empire to carry so much in one trip and walking blind Edit - Since my 1st corp in eve i have always found empire more dangerous than 0.0, you never know who may be planning what so if you plan on the worst happening instead of trying to just squeeze profits before brains, you are already half way to winning. Same principle really as for planning for battle, its usually decided before folks undock, the rest is left to the players exp andknowledge BoB vs the coalition of family value's
Ares Lightfeather	Posted - 2007.05.14 10:17:00 - [440] Quote: Why don't people just use scouts ahead of themselves to see if theres a bajillion domis or whatever waiting to gank someone. This argument has been countered before, what if the gankers use a scout too ? Quote: Or, gasp, don't carry soooo much fat lootz all in one trip, you know, split it down into a few trips. Will cut into your whatevers but seriously, like hauler ganking, until people start engaging there brains and use the tools available to survive , they deserve to die. Then tell me : what is the point of having a freighter if it's supposed to be empty all the time ? Do you fly around your battleships with 2 out of 8 guns ?

Mekarae Amarr House Mekarae	Posted - 2007.05.14 10:35:00 - [441] Originally by: fire 59 ...until people start engaging their brains and use the tools available to survive , they deserve to die. lol. Using ones brains... that's a radical concept . The people who ganked the OP obviously scanned the contents of the freighter or wouldn't have risked so many BS's. 15 battleships is quite a bit of money to risk. A simple 'alt' in a shuttle would have alerted you to the danger. Eve is very severe on mistakes and you, the OP, made one by not having a simple scout one jump ahead of you (and a corpmate webbing you also helps). High-sec is NOT meant to be 100% safe EVER. -------------------------- "...strength through aristocratic rule."
Kanitsu Hiyaboosa	Posted - 2007.05.14 11:46:00 - [442] Sooo. The big fat ass ships got ganked in empire... lol... love it . I dont see any problems with the game mechs there.
Augeas	Posted - 2007.05.14 12:17:00 - [443] Quote: All the "solutions" in this thread are pretty pathetic to be honest.Would you and 15 of your friends like to spend all your game time escorting a corpm8's frieghter around. All day everyday. It's boring as crap and no-one would want to do it. The game is supposed to be fun. How many times...? Nano-Scorpion with ECM Burst. It won't break all the drones' locks, but it should break enough for the freighter to survive. If you're unsure, use 2 of them. And yes, the Scorps will likely get Concorded as well. So what?
Lord Frost Minmatar The Crystal Method	Posted - 2007.05.14 17:14:00 - [444] Come on people... its good to debate, but there is only one correct answer here... and I think you all know what it is. Freighter ganking should never happen. Whine and cry all you want, but someone carrying 16bil of goods, in an npc corp, in high sec... has the right to not have his hard earned assets ganked away. The frieghter pilot has taken every precaution he has available to make him the safest as he can be. In Eve we HAVE to move things around... we are constantly moving, and in large bulks this the game's desinged way of doing so. Whether or not you feel the right to gank and destroy a players entire life is not the point... the point is HE has the right to move. Concord gives him that right to be safe, and frankly ganking him with 20+ battlships is exploting Concords right to keep him safe. Bottomline, go ahead and attack, but CCP needs to make it clear if your vicitim dies, then everyone held responsible on the gank is deemed exploting what Concord is meant to provide... safety. Everyone who ganks like this needs to be banned. Its pure simple game mechanics and game courtesy. An individual player has the right to move anything and everything in high-sec without the worry of losing it. Plain as the nose on your faces... CCP can't act on these current agressions, cuz they are within game mechanics, however, all they need to say is that if ANYONE hinders the task of Concord to protect a player, then they are all banned. I'd honestly go as far to rid the game of Concord and disable all locks on players in high sec other than wars. That would even help with lag... win win! Sorry if I upset you piewats, but if you want risk, go for risk... if you think this game is risk vs reward, then find your risk, don't gank. You know it, we all know it. We all have the right to move and keep our gaming property.
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.14 18:01:00 - [445] Originally by: Lord Frost Come on people... its good to debate, but there is only one correct answer here... and I think you all know what it is. Freighter ganking should never happen. Whine and cry all you want, but someone carrying 16bil of goods, in an npc corp, in high sec... has the right to not have his hard earned assets ganked away. The frieghter pilot has taken every precaution he has available to make him the safest as he can be. In Eve we HAVE to move things around... we are constantly moving, and in large bulks this the game's desinged way of doing so. Whether or not you feel the right to gank and destroy a players entire life is not the point... the point is HE has the right to move. Concord gives him that right to be safe, and frankly ganking him with 20+ battlships is exploting Concords right to keep him safe. Bottomline, go ahead and attack, but CCP needs to make it clear if your vicitim dies, then everyone held responsible on the gank is deemed exploting what Concord is meant to provide... safety. Everyone who ganks like this needs to be banned. Its pure simple game mechanics and game courtesy. An individual player has the right to move anything and everything in high-sec without the worry of losing it. Plain as the nose on your faces... CCP can't act on these current agressions, cuz they are within game mechanics, however, all they need to say is that if ANYONE hinders the task of Concord to protect a player, then they are all banned. I'd honestly go as far to rid the game of Concord and disable all locks on players in high sec other than wars. That would even help with lag... win win! Sorry if I upset you piewats, but if you want risk, go for risk... if you think this game is risk vs reward, then find your risk, don't gank. You know it, we all know it. We all have the right to move and keep our gaming property. You're joking right? If you aren't, that's the single most misguided post I've read on these forums, with the possible exception on the New Jenny Spitfire's posts. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Drizit Amarr	Posted - 2007.05.14 18:15:00 - [446] Edited by: Drizit on 14/05/2007 18:23:49 Originally by: Mekarae The people who ganked the OP obviously scanned the contents of the freighter or wouldn't have risked so many BS's. 15 battleships is quite a bit of money to risk. A simple 'alt' in a shuttle would have alerted you to the danger. "Risked" so many BS's? What risk? The insurance payout on a Domi is often more than they actually cost. A risk would have been not to be able to collect insurance on Concord ganks. That would have meant that the Freighter had to be full to make a profit on it. ATM ganking an empty Freighter is no risk at all, you still get the isk back for your BS's you lost. It's the Freighter pilot that loses 700 million plus even if they are insured. The Domi pilots should never be paid insurance and cargo scanners should not work on a Freighter. You then stand to lose unless the freighter had a substantial cargo to make it worthwhile. Logistics and spies could tell you if the Freighter is going to be hauling anything worthwhile or not. If you indiscriminately gank, you then take a risk and I thought that was what this game was about. At present, the risk is zero while the reward is extreme and that's why this highsec ganking continues. If you want to hire mercs to do this as the posts here have indicated, you wuld have to re-imburse their losses as well as pay their fees. Therefore, it would have to be a good reason to do it if you only considered the cargo as a bonus. --
Lord Frost Minmatar The Crystal Method	Posted - 2007.05.14 19:16:00 - [447] Originally by: Ki An You're joking right? If you aren't, that's the single most misguided post I've read on these forums, with the possible exception on the New Jenny Spitfire's posts. /Ki LOL... why should someone who is moving his entire assests in a safe npc corp, thru a safe high sec, have to worry about losing everything due to griefers and gankers who exploit Concord's protective safety shield? "Misguided"? ... not quite. Whats the difference in tanking Concord to render them useless, and then outnumbering Concord to render them useless? Its just another tactic to edge around the main objective, which is to simply gank and grief a player for billions. Whether you lose your ganking ship or not, doesn't matter if the outcome is the same for the victim. Isk and richness is so abundant now, losing ships this way is a minimal loss even if you fail to kill your intended victim. Thus... I provided facts and info... unlike your response.
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.14 19:22:00 - [448] Edited by: Ki An on 14/05/2007 19:22:24 Originally by: Lord Frost LOL... why should someone who is moving his entire assests in a safe npc corp, thru a safe high sec, have to worry about losing everything due to griefers and gankers who exploit Concord's protective safety shield? Because NPC corps aren't "safe" and high sec isn't "safe"? The fact that you think they are is why you die. Originally by: Lord Frost "Misguided"? ... not quite. Whats the difference in tanking Concord to render them useless, and then outnumbering Concord to render them useless? Its just another tactic to edge around the main objective, which is to simply gank and grief a player for billions. Whether you lose your ganking ship or not, doesn't matter if the outcome is the same for the victim. Isk and richness is so abundant now, losing ships this way is a minimal loss even if you fail to kill your intended victim. Yes, it's a tactic to kill stuff in high sec. It's a tactic that is allowed by CCP. It's not even a new tactic, and it has been allowed ever since it was first performed. That you don't like the tactic has no bearing on it's validity as a tactic. Originally by: Lord Frost Thus... I provided facts and info... unlike your response. You provided biased assumptions and lies. /Ki /Edit: Spelling Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Lord Frost Minmatar The Crystal Method	Posted - 2007.05.14 19:35:00 - [449] Originally by: Ki An Because NPC corps aren't "safe" and high sec isn't "safe"? The fact that you think they are is why you die. Empire is safe... its the safest place in Eve. Which is why it shouldnt be the grounds where you can lose EVERYTHING to gankers. Once again, it comes down to equal balance to equal tactics. You can't ask Empire traders to run jumps with support ships everyday. But yet its far easy and okay for a group to beat up on 1 player once in a while... just pick and choose who and where. Quote: Yes, it's a tactic to kill stuff in high sec. It's a tactic that is allowed by CCP. It's not even a new tactic, and it has been allowed ever since it was first performed. That you don't like the tactic has no bearing on it's validity as a tactic. You failed to get my point... you missed it quite humorously and attempted to validate yourself. If tactic A has outcome X which is an exploit... and tactic B has outcome X, shouldn't that be an exploit? Saying its been allowed forever, isn't an answer. Many expolits and nerfs have been here a long time, before change was made. You, my friend, need to take time to learn and honor this game as a whole and not for your selfish gains.
Kypud	Posted - 2007.05.14 20:07:00 - [450] Originally by: Lord Frost Which is why it shouldnt be the grounds where you can lose EVERYTHING to gankers. You can lose everything if you put all your eggs in one basket. All your stuff in one ship is pretty damned stupid. Quote: If tactic A has outcome X which is an exploit... and tactic B has outcome X, shouldn't that be an exploit? Tactic A - manipulate the game to duplicate cash. Outcome: more cash. Exploit Tactic B - kill NPC characters. Outcome: more cash. Exploit? Its the how you get somewhere that makes it an exploit, not the outcome.



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