| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
   |
Posted - 2007.05.13 07:41:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Frug on 13/05/2007 07:39:07
I felt the need to start this as a simple counter to that 9 page thread that might make it look like 9 pages of people agreeing with stopping suicide ganking in general (it's not but many in there say that). If I post there, I'll be undersigned, and I'm certainly not.
First of all, to people who keep asking CCP to make high-sec 100% safe: HAHAHA. Right. What game have you been playing?
More reasonably, people seem to generally agree on removing insurance payouts when you get concordokkened. Sounds fine to me. No arguments here.
The point is being able to suicide gank people is FUN and often hilarious and this whole "It will scare noobs out of eve" mentality is all wrong. The only people it'll scare is people who aren't ready for Eve Online.
I introduced 4 people to eve at about the same time. One of them was suicided for NO REASON on his FIRST F-ING DAY. You know what happened? Did he quit eve? No. He laughed, we laughed (one of his buds was there) and now it makes a great story to tell.
None of us saw it coming, none of us has any idea why it happened, but all of us agree it *****s us up. And that's the point. It's gotta happen, and you've gotta learn to laugh about it, because it really is pretty f-ing funny.
And if anyone ever takes the possibility for that fun away, I'll quit eve and take all my 231498751 accounts with me and sue you all for mental anguish.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - -
If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO
BOOO!! - Ductoris
Neat look what I found - Kreul
Hey, my marbles |
Ryas Nia
Minmatar
Stormriders
Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 07:45:00 -
[2]
risk and loss are what make the game worth playing... yes they suck some times.
Remove the risk and you remove the game.
Recruiting Terrorists |
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 07:49:00 -
[3]
Hey ryas. I'm talkin about Varraka too. Happened on his first day. Poor bastard.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - -
If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO
BOOO!! - Ductoris
Neat look what I found - Kreul
Hey, my marbles |
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 07:50:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 13/05/2007 07:48:24
Suicide ganking must remain in the game. If ccp changes the insurance to make it cost more, I guess I can live with that, but empire should never be free from sporadic attacks by other players. Like I said in another thread... making empire totally safe will remove unprepared pvp from the game because people in low sec and 0.0 are always prepared for it.
So do we want to keep surprise attacks in the game? I definently think so. I hope its still part of the devs vision for the game.
Eve should continue to keep people on their toes like it always has, not adapt to the rest of the grinding games out there.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune |
Ryas Nia
Minmatar
Stormriders
Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 07:57:00 -
[5]
hehe always fun to get ganked in high sec..
Jim you got it man, its sad that the general population of eve went from trying adapting to changes, to whining till CCP fix it for them. So far 99% of all the grifing and exploit threads i see these days are from people who clearly are either to lazy or unwilling to change their play style.
For anyone who feels like they are not safe in empire, be it freighter or miner i have to concepts for you, Gang support and Logistics.
A freighter with 2-5 logistics ships will tank a swarm of BS's so long that concord will pop them unless they bring 30 to the fight... all of a sudden the cost ratio of the gank goes up...
The same is true of mining, bring along a logistics ship and a few BC's. Fact of the mater is most of these people refuse to realize that the game is played in groups (gangs and corps) and that corp specialization while good means your an easy target. Fly nothing but barges and you cant defend your self. If you need protection frigging pay for it.... sorry but its not cheap so maybe you should move somewhere where the reward justifies the risk unlike high sec empire where the reward is crap and there is just as much risk as low sec.
Recruiting Terrorists |
EaglesFire
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 08:06:00 -
[6]
Heck I'm all for ganking in High Sec. If someone wants to give me a low-risk / high reward in high sec, I'll take it to the bank.
Heck, a freighter with billions of ISK in it, with no escort is the same as an armored car in RL running around with no guards and the back door open!!!
"Knowledge is power, and the uninformed SHALL be punished!"
|
Callthetruth
Caldari
Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 08:34:00 -
[7]
a simple nerf is removing insurance payout on suicide ganks in empire stil keeps the risk-reward open
|
Willow Whisp
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 08:46:00 -
[8]
/signed. CCP finally Fixed the Freighter so it works as intended, and people that have been abusing a bug that caused the freighter to basically give them invulnerability in highsec are whining. Thank you, CCP, for finally fixing the bug.
Re: Loss of insurance to Concord. I fully Agree. I don't see why a pilot that took a t2 piħata through highsec unescorted basically inviting aggression should get any kind of insurance. That kind of piloting is irresponsible.
Oh, you meant the attacker? 
I'm the alt of the main that the forums picked, and i can't be arsed to go through the "settings" page to change it back, k? |
Swirled
Amarr
The JORG Corporation
FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 09:43:00 -
[9]
/Signed.
High security, Not total security.
If a change is needed, id have to agree with the insurance payout removal. Maybe even remove payment on any ship which CONCORD has destroyed.
---
Just My Opinion Of Course...
--- |
Selya
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:02:00 -
[10]
/signed !
|
ToxicFire
Phoenix Knights
Dark Nebula Galactic Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:08:00 -
[11]
/signed only if people in high sec attacking others without wardec invalidate their insurance, someone further up used the analogy of freighters been armor cars with no guards, well to turn that kinda real world thinking back at ya, what insurance company would pay out if you deliberately rammed the armored car with your car to rob it.
Sig removed as it lacks EVE-related content. Mail [email protected] if you have questions. -Hango
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:14:00 -
[12]
 Originally by: ToxicFire
/signed only if people in high sec attacking others without wardec invalidate their insurance, someone further up used the analogy of freighters been armor cars with no guards, well to turn that kinda real world thinking back at ya, what insurance company would pay out if you deliberately rammed the armored car with your car to rob it.
And what police would magically appear in seconds and wipe their car off the face of the planet?
The best would be if players could do hit and run attacks and get away from concord, but that wont happen I guess.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune |
Ha'Uler
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:20:00 -
[13]
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:20:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
A step in the wrong direction imo.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune |
Janu Hull
Caldari
Order of Z Industries
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:30:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Callthetruth
a simple nerf is removing insurance payout on suicide ganks in empire stil keeps the risk-reward open
win
This is my sig, there are many others just like it. With me, my sig is worthless. Without (or with even) my sig, I am worthless... |
Selena 001
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:32:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
All its doing is making it cost you slightly more to suicide stuff. Not dealing with the actual problem.
PvP in empire was intended to be reserved for wars (not the pointless war-mongering the Privateers were taking advantage of either btw) otherwise, whats the point in allowing wars and creating concord? 
___________
NATIONAL SARCASM DAY!! |
Von Druid
Black Omega Security
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 10:48:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Von Druid on 13/05/2007 10:46:05
Originally by: Selena 001
All its doing is making it cost you slightly more to suicide stuff. Not dealing with the actual problem.
No really, it's impossible now. CONCORD jams and Nos's everyone to hell and they only get one or two volleys off. Drones used to be the major damage dealer, but now they're being targeted by CONCORD as well. Unless you can assemble a 300 man blob to instapop a freighter, you're not going to kill one in highsec.
|
Ryas Nia
Minmatar
Stormriders
Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 11:09:00 -
[18]
CCP nerfs empire again :( sad... All this will do is continue the trend of using NPC corps for large alliances to safely move goods around empire.
CCP give us a chance to attack their logistics at least.
Recruiting Terrorists |
000Hunter000
Gallente
Magners Marauders
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 11:16:00 -
[19]
keep concord as they are (uber concord in hi sec is no fun), remove insurance on beeing concordized (it's silly u should get a payout from ur insurance company for using your car on a robbery and it gets trashed by the cops on the concurrent persuit, i'm sure there is something in their policy which means they won't have to pay u for abusing your car)
I'm not a big ship to ship pvp fan but hi sec beeing hi sec not fully sec is the reason i enjoy eve so much.
CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!!
|
Callthetruth
Caldari
Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 11:18:00 -
[20]
how to make substantial ISK by getting other peeps to suicide gank u in empire
Take a covert ops ship, add a recon probe launcher some spook and snoops find a high sec mission running system ( or any system with more than 10 in local) and level 3 and 4 agents
Scan out mission sites begin salvage ( take a corp mate to get teh wrecks faster)
Before u all go off going thro empire there are very very very few people doing this - it takes persistance as the pay off both in ships lost , equipment lost when aggressed ( yeah ive got balls so generally take a lot of risks) and generally the fact that a lot of missioners now have a buddy or alt to salvage their wrecks as they go ( carebears learning)
But the key is to find multiple targets only take a few bits of wreckage or loot ( dont get aggroed just ninja salvage) and eventually those juicy mission runners ( or the ISK farmers from ***** who have now moved into running missions to fund thei9r illegal activities) will occasionally think they can kill u and blow themselves up with a bit of help from concord ( hint use a warp stab) smarll armour rep and or a couple of 50mm extenders ( be prepared to loose the odd cov ops ship tho) having the buddy there can scoop up the centus loot and the t2 and factional gear that the mission runners leave b ehind from their encounters with concord.
Now u can go days with nothing happening, collect lots of t1 drones and ISK returns near nothing but the good stuff pays off. Have some fun doing it, feeling nice help other ppl out take in a BS and help them shoot their rats as well
Its all open and multiplayer CCP have been good not to further protect noobs with secure dungeons but their nerf of scan probes has made the time to scan peeps out a bit tough on the old mind but the risk v reward balance is there. Ie not finding mission runners to quickly (its hard to get a sig result sometimes) but not too long that u never get any reward
|
Cipher7
Keepers of the Holy Bagel
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 11:19:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
Carebearism run amok.
Nobody should be able to haul billions of isk worth of stuff without risk.
|
Whacky Backy
Under The Edge
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 11:40:00 -
[22]
Risk / Reward is the phrase most often used in Eve as a justification for most aspects of the game.
High Risk in 0.0 can give high rewards but it may cost you a ship or two along the way. Same applies to low sec, complex work and missions.
Suicide ganking using a domi or other BS in empire could give a nice loot at the expense of a sec hit and a few million (after insurance) for the loss of the ship. No doubt the use of scanner alts to select the target and some mates in a hauler/salvager to get the loot.
My main lost a small ship to someone called Ruxandra. My loss was maybe 200mil, most it destroyed so maybe 20-40 mil for Ruxandra and friends. More than enough to cover losses. Sure I had kill rights but my skills not a match and my agents found the character fixing sec status in bob space, now theres a suprise. But a lesson learned for me. I now use bigger stronger ships to move stuff around.
IMHO its abuse of the system. Concord should not pay out when you deliberatly lose your your ship. You want to suicide your ship then fine but the risk should be total loss and no insurance payout for your acts. I am sure your mates can get your "can" and the loot for you.
I would also like to see kill rights than can be assigned to others. Sure I could not take Ruxandra down but I know many that could  , maybe kill righs could be sold, now that would be fun.
So sure lets have risk and reward.
|
Taikun
Gallente
Serenity Prime
Praesidium Libertatis
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 11:42:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Cipher7
Nobody should be able to haul billions of isk worth of stuff without risk.
The way it is now, nobody can run with more than 750 million in a freighter without risk.
Do the math. A freighter with as little as 750M million in stuff is the "breakeven point" for an economically viable target for a 15 Domi gank squad.
Heck.. take away insurance payments for concorded kills and that number will rise to as little as 2.8 billion for cost/benefit.
Now it seems crazy to me to spend a billion on a freighter but not be able to use it to carry at least a few times it worth safely in the safest space of this game.
I am not against killing freighters in high sec but it is clear to me the decision point for engaging is VERY skewed towards the pirate/privateer.
Taikun
|
Ryas Nia
Minmatar
Stormriders
Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 11:56:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Taikun
Originally by: Cipher7
Nobody should be able to haul billions of isk worth of stuff without risk.
The way it is now, nobody can run with more than 750 million in a freighter without risk.
Do the math. A freighter with as little as 750M million in stuff is the "breakeven point" for an economically viable target for a 15 Domi gank squad.
Heck.. take away insurance payments for concorded kills and that number will rise to as little as 2.8 billion for cost/benefit.
Now it seems crazy to me to spend a billion on a freighter but not be able to use it to carry at least a few times it worth safely in the safest space of this game.
I am not against killing freighters in high sec but it is clear to me the decision point for engaging is VERY skewed towards the pirate/privateer.
Taikun
You can use it even with all the ganking going on... just bring some friends in ships that can escort and assist. All the capital ships in the game are very very vulnerable when they lack any sport ships. Just ask a few of the solo dread or carrier pilots that lose ships in belts to 4-6 battleships...
Recruiting Terrorists |
Laboratus
Gallente
BGG
League of Abnormal Gentlemen
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:05:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
A step in the wrong direction imo.
Very true...
___
P.S.
Post with your main.
Mind control and tin hats |
Taikun
Gallente
Serenity Prime
Praesidium Libertatis
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:12:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Ryas Nia
You can use it even with all the ganking going on... just bring some friends in ships that can escort and assist. All the capital ships in the game are very very vulnerable when they lack any sport ships. Just ask a few of the solo dread or carrier pilots that lose ships in belts to 4-6 battleships...
Ducking skill at V? My point completely missed you.
How did using scouts work for you when Priavteers were in full effect? Get real. Friends to constantly monitor freighter movements in empire to protect a load worth 750m?
As Paris Hilton would say... WHAT-EVE-RRRR...
As it stands... freighters are basically useless in EvE. Need mins in 0.0? Use a carrier to cyno jump it down. Want to run stuff in empire? Better not be worth more than a billion or you are going to get popped in a freighter.
Freighters by DESIGN are for hauling ****loads of **** from A to B. The way the game mechanics are right now... putting more than a 750m worth of stuff in a ship with that capacity is terchnically a BAD thing to do. It would be safer to use a tweeked out battleship to haul compressed minerals and otehr stuff.
Just a matter of time for the Privateer CounterStrike fan bois to figure this new ISK making gankfest out and freighters will be popping like crazy soon. What am I saying... it has already started.
Do we count you as one of their number Ryas Nia?
Taikun
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:14:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 13/05/2007 12:16:57
Originally by: Taikun
Just a matter of time for the Privateer CounterStrike fan bois to figure this new ISK making gankfest out and freighters will be popping like crazy soon. What am I saying... it has already started.
At least its better than The Sims fan bois.
Personally I think that people who go on and on about how unfair the fighting is dont really want to play a pvp game in the first place. They want to duel people, preferably with some dancing afterwards to make it all right.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune |
Stakhanov
Shih Yang Tong
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:18:00 -
[28]
I don't like the idea of voiding insurance , people will no longer afford to suicide macros / farmer (and the recently ganked fenrir was one) and concord accidents will be that much costlier. If it is ever implemented , I'm making a covops alt to grief smartbomb mission ravens
While drone jamming is a logical step , it's a poor move to increase damage and add cap drain. Smartbombs can't be reliably used in large gangs , so they won't affect freighter ganking.
|
Ling Xiao
Prism Project Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:22:00 -
[29]
I find suicide ganking to be perfectly valid, and a welcome part of Eve game mechanics. Non consensual pvp is the backbone of the game.
However I think full insurance payouts for CONCORD deaths make the cost vs reward a little too lucrative for the attacker.
__________
If you think the game is rigged, why are you still playing? |
Cipher7
Keepers of the Holy Bagel
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:26:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Taikun
Do the math. A freighter with as little as 750M million in stuff is the "breakeven point" for an economically viable target for a 15 Domi gank squad.
Lemme put it to you this way.
How many thousands of freighters fly around Empire?
If we count that 1 freighter gets ganked daily, what is the individual risk for each pilot?
So you're saying that a %.01 chance of getting ganked in your freighter is unacceptable?
Where exactly is your risk then?
Every profession should have some kind of loss, it should not be %100 profit.
Mining should not be %100 profit
Trade should not be %100 profit
Piracy should not be %100 profit
This is why I support freighter ganking, not because I'm a nasty ***** that wants to see people hurting.
I want people to accept risk as part of Eve.
People who object to Freighter ganking are saying that in highsec you should be %100 safe, because the % that actually do get ganked is very very small.
People who say insurance payouts should be nerfed are like saying that even a %.001 chance of getting ganked is too much.
Listen, if a freighter doesn't pay itself off in a few runs, you prolly shouldn't be flying one.
I hope you're not using a 750 mil ship to make 5 mil an hour.
|
Ryas Nia
Minmatar
Stormriders
Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:26:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Taikun
Originally by: Ryas Nia
You can use it even with all the ganking going on... just bring some friends in ships that can escort and assist. All the capital ships in the game are very very vulnerable when they lack any sport ships. Just ask a few of the solo dread or carrier pilots that lose ships in belts to 4-6 battleships...
Ducking skill at V? My point completely missed you.
How did using scouts work for you when Priavteers were in full effect? Get real. Friends to constantly monitor freighter movements in empire to protect a load worth 750m?
As Paris Hilton would say... WHAT-EVE-RRRR...
As it stands... freighters are basically useless in EvE. Need mins in 0.0? Use a carrier to cyno jump it down. Want to run stuff in empire? Better not be worth more than a billion or you are going to get popped in a freighter.
Freighters by DESIGN are for hauling ****loads of **** from A to B. The way the game mechanics are right now... putting more than a 750m worth of stuff in a ship with that capacity is terchnically a BAD thing to do. It would be safer to use a tweeked out battleship to haul compressed minerals and otehr stuff.
Just a matter of time for the Privateer CounterStrike fan bois to figure this new ISK making gankfest out and freighters will be popping like crazy soon. What am I saying... it has already started.
Do we count you as one of their number Ryas Nia?
Taikun
Scouts are only part of the solution, i don't know how it gets missed in this game but LOGISTICS LOGISTICS LOGISTICS, some of these things can rep 1k HP ever few seconds get just a few into gang and just watch.... they take a little time to train yes, and the skill is 30m fine, thats why you join a corp or an alliance that has sufficient members to defend and support your freighter.
Also you can make all the personal attacks you want but i have never been in privateers though i did like what they were doing and think CCP's nerf will hurt empire pvp, i have played CS once found it rather lame and did not like the community around it. Also i have never ganked anything in high sec and don't ever plan on it.
But then i do think it needs to be part of the game, otherwise people think they can just fly around without ever getting into a corp/alliance and be totally safe. Personally i don't think anyone should bealbe to fly anything larger than a BC in an NPC corp, this is an MMO people need to play it like that, if they want single player this is the wrong game.
Recruiting Terrorists |
Methodius
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:35:00 -
[32]
Quote:
One of them was suicided for NO REASON on his FIRST F-ING DAY. You know what happened? Did he quit eve? No. He laughed
Really?!  On his FIRST day?! Wow!
It takes a whole another kind of man not to quit after such a huge financial loss! My hat's off to your buddy.
Sheesh! One helluva guy! 
|
Big Al
The League of Legitimate Nigerian Businessmen
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:47:00 -
[33]
Dev alt freighter got ganked eh?
|
Li Jhakarra
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 12:47:00 -
[34]
if you have that many accounts you must be a macro miner.
|
Grendelsbane
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 14:27:00 -
[35]
I think that the ability of drones to offset, a bit, Concord action should be addressed. I also think that it seems a bit silly to have insurance payouts for ships that get Concorded.
However, I also think hi-sec suicide ganking can be very amusing and is sometimes your only recourse. Hell, I considered doing it yesterday for a personal slight, but decided I had better things to do.
On the other hand... I also think people with below a certain sec rating (i.e., pirates) shouldn't get bounty payouts for killing rats. 
|
Xeron Silverblade
Esthar Industries
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 14:53:00 -
[36]
/signed
and /signed as well for the no-insurance-payout-if-killed-by-concord
|
J'Mkarr Soban
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 15:26:00 -
[37]
Edited by: J''Mkarr Soban on 13/05/2007 15:25:33
*******s. The risk in high-sec is wardeccing, that's what it's there for.
Suicid ganking is just...hell words escape me it's that pitiful. I've never been suicide ganked, and I hope it never happens to me, and yeah, I won't run away crying if it happens. At least, not how that I have enough resources to rebuild anything I'd lose. And that's where the problem is - if it happens to a newb, big effing deal! They've only got what, 1,000 ISK and a watermelon? But when it happens to someone who is trying to get on in the game, and have fun doing what they like to do, it's really frustrating. It's not even about risk versus reward, a freighter full of frozen seeds has realised the risk versus reward thing, which is why they are in high-sec shipping around frozen seeds instead of in 0.0 or low sec shipping parts and ships around. The risk versus reward line is getting so old. Simply put, you want killmails without effort, no? Oh, it's not about that then? Then go to 0.0 where things are challenging. Risk versus reward, right? You're exploiting the fact that you can risk little for high reward in high-sec. What's 100mil in suicide ships when you can loot 2bil from a freighter? Mmm, risky.
Children, the lot of you. Why don't you play Eve.
I'd like to see some degradation in your clones if you use them too quickly after they'd been setup. 1mil SP per day it saves from when you load it. Then we'll see where suicide gets you.
-J
---------------------------------
"He who 'hah hahs' last, 'hah hahs' best." - Nelson
Balanced != Nerfed |
Vana Gank
Gallente
Kebabtossers
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 15:29:00 -
[38]
My name should explain why.
My race should explain how.
I rest my case.
|
weebls
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 15:43:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Ryas Nia
Scouts are only part of the solution, i don't know how it gets missed in this game but LOGISTICS LOGISTICS LOGISTICS, some of these things can rep 1k HP ever few seconds get just a few into gang and just watch.... they take a little time to train yes, and the skill is 30m fine, thats why you join a corp or an alliance that has sufficient members to defend and support your freighter.
Logistics seems like it would help in theory, but in reality it's useless. Each Domi you bring to the fight does 10,000 dmg in the first 15 seconds. With the lag, targetting delays, and the rep cycle time of 8-10 seconds the freighter will likely be dead before any repair can be done at all. It's not a workable solution. |
J'Mkarr Soban
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 15:58:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Ryas Nia
CCP nerfs empire again :( sad... All this will do is continue the trend of using NPC corps for large alliances to safely move goods around empire.
CCP give us a chance to attack their logistics at least.
This is meta gaming, and completely outwith your control. If you are using this as the basis for suicide ganking, then I'm sorely disappointed. You'll always have people with multiple accounts. Using an in game way to get at those accounts is pretty crap. Although I agree that using those accounts in the first place to move stuff around is bad. No way round it, unfortunately.
-J
---------------------------------
"He who 'hah hahs' last, 'hah hahs' best." - Nelson
Balanced != Nerfed |
Le Skunk
Privateers
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 15:58:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 13/05/2007 15:57:21
Originally by: Selena 001
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
All its doing is making it cost you slightly more to suicide stuff. Not dealing with the actual problem.
PvP in empire was intended to be reserved for wars (not the pointless war-mongering the Privateers were taking advantage of either btw) otherwise, whats the point in allowing wars and creating concord?
The 'pointless war mongering' never existed. Every war had a point be it resource hoggins/ space denial/ smack talk/ ore thiefing/ loot thiefing/ defence of a smaller corp/ economic 'black ops'.
Any'pointless war mongering' is now continued by myriad smaller corps - who pick on the smallest and most helpless - instead of the Largest and most powerful like we did.
SKUNK
Oh and signed to the OP. You are however - doomed. The anti freighter gankers are following my "9 points to nerfdoom" and are well on the way to success.
|
Stakhanov
Shih Yang Tong
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:02:00 -
[42]
I'm not sure - how exactly does lag prevent remote rep ? Can't the logistics just lock the freighter and activate armor reps *before* the bunch of BS appearing on overview open fire ? Logistic drones and remote reps have different durations also...
|
Aphotic Raven
Gallente
E X O D U S
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:24:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Willow Whisp
/signed. CCP finally Fixed the Freighter so it works as intended, and people that have been abusing a bug that caused the freighter to basically give them invulnerability in highsec are whining. Thank you, CCP, for finally fixing the bug.
Re: Loss of insurance to Concord. I fully Agree. I don't see why a pilot that took a t2 piħata through highsec unescorted basically inviting aggression should get any kind of insurance. That kind of piloting is irresponsible.
Oh, you meant the attacker?
Agreed... Insurance shouldnt cover suicide attacks... its not in the contract... lets see the carebears ***** and moan then.
Originally by: Dr Cupid
Let me tell you all that I'm really enjoying eve-beta, and can't wait for the real game to come out!
|
Le Skunk
Privateers
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:28:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 13/05/2007 16:26:37
Originally by: Aphotic Raven
Originally by: Willow Whisp
/signed. CCP finally Fixed the Freighter so it works as intended, and people that have been abusing a bug that caused the freighter to basically give them invulnerability in highsec are whining. Thank you, CCP, for finally fixing the bug.
Re: Loss of insurance to Concord. I fully Agree. I don't see why a pilot that took a t2 piħata through highsec unescorted basically inviting aggression should get any kind of insurance. That kind of piloting is irresponsible.
Oh, you meant the attacker?
Agreed... Insurance shouldnt cover suicide attacks... its not in the contract... lets see the carebears ***** and moan then.
I think this would be a BAD idea. People oft quote REAL LIFE insurance companys not paying you if you ramraid your car into a supermarket.
Well this is true. But if you want to do that
1) No insurance for self destructs
2) No insurance for gross negligence in a mission
3) If you live in lowsec - massive premiums
4) If you die in 0.0 - no insurance offered
5) The more ships you lose - the more they charge you.
6) Noobs uninsurable
7) No insurance for "act of CCP" (lag)
SKUNK
|
bigfatbird
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:31:00 -
[45]
/signed
|
Phocas Lebournes
Minmatar
New Justice
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:33:00 -
[46]
/signed
Suiciding must remain in the game!
|
umop 3pisdn
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:34:00 -
[47]
Edited by: umop 3pisdn on 13/05/2007 16:34:04
Originally by: J'Mkarr Soban
Edited by: J''Mkarr Soban on 13/05/2007 15:25:33
*******s. The risk in high-sec is wardeccing, that's what it's there for.
Suicid ganking is just...hell words escape me it's that pitiful. I've never been suicide ganked, and I hope it never happens to me, and yeah, I won't run away crying if it happens. At least, not how that I have enough resources to rebuild anything I'd lose. And that's where the problem is - if it happens to a newb, big effing deal! They've only got what, 1,000 ISK and a watermelon? But when it happens to someone who is trying to get on in the game, and have fun doing what they like to do, it's really frustrating. It's not even about risk versus reward, a freighter full of frozen seeds has realised the risk versus reward thing, which is why they are in high-sec shipping around frozen seeds instead of in 0.0 or low sec shipping parts and ships around. The risk versus reward line is getting so old. Simply put, you want killmails without effort, no? Oh, it's not about that then? Then go to 0.0 where things are challenging. Risk versus reward, right? You're exploiting the fact that you can risk little for high reward in high-sec. What's 100mil in suicide ships when you can loot 2bil from a freighter? Mmm, risky.
Children, the lot of you. Why don't you play Eve.
I'd like to see some degradation in your clones if you use them too quickly after they'd been setup. 1mil SP per day it saves from when you load it. Then we'll see where suicide gets you.
You sir take it far too seriously. Suicide ganking is Hilarious and fun for the 30 guys doing the shooting.. its certain death so its exciting too... and btw, concord dont shoot pods... neither do carebears getting suicide ganked...
The risk is that A) the freighter escapes B) the good loot doesnt drop C) someone else scoops the loot D) someone sucides the wreck (can be done with 2-3 t1 cruisers and POP bye bye loot)
No one will have to worry about any of this since CCP is apparently giving into the whining carebears and nerfind drones vs. concord.
Carebears and rich pvp'ers alts want high gain from NO risk in empire carting billions around.. heres a news flash... most people play eve for around 6 months... most people never see 2 bil in their wallet.
Risk vs. Reward... make 5 runs across empire or take your trillions in one run of laziness... its not the campers fault that you're offering them money... they are not lazy.. it takes a lot of effort to kill a freighter in empire before concord kills you.
Carebears win again.
Lame.
Edit: also... let people wardec the noob corps to get at the freighter alts... and then the real noobs and those who really dont wanna pvp will suffer and quit in huge numbers... dont allow noob corpers to fly t2 haulers or freighters maybe? they arent noobs after all are they... im sure they'd need at least some kind of corporation to purchase such behemoths right?
|
Psyllus Ktenas
Amarr
BlackHole Entertainment
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:35:00 -
[48]
Dont give in even more to the carebears CCP.
|
weebls
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 16:48:00 -
[49]
Lag affects pilot response times, their ability to find, select, and target rapidly, launch drones, activate modules and then there is a delay of 8-10 seconds before any armor is repaired. In and of itself it doesn't affect remote repping, but it has a major effect on how soon that remote repping can actually come into play. If a freighter took at least 30-40 seconds to kill, then remote repping would start to become useful. When you can kill a Freighter in under 20 seconds however, it's pretty much taken out of the equation.
Logistics also just don't repair fast enough. A guardian with 6 remote reps does about 1800 hp of repair in 8 seconds, or 3600 hp in 16 seconds. A single Dominix does 10,000 dmg in the first 15 seconds. |
thesulei
Applied Eugenics
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 21:50:00 -
[50]
Zombiecorp-incidents are cool ; for those among you who have been around here long enough to remember that.
(although I do kind of understand the changes that sometimes happen in the aftermath)
|
Mirirar
Solstice Systems Development Concourse
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 21:51:00 -
[51]
Insurance should be changed so it does not pay out if Concord is involved.
It should also up your "rates". :)
|
Le Skunk
Privateers
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 21:58:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 13/05/2007 21:56:34
Originally by: Mirirar
Insurance should be changed so it does not pay out if Concord is involved.
It should also up your "rates". :)
I would agree as long as any ships destroyed in 0.0 did not recieve an insurance payout.
After all - following the real life analogy used to justify no insurance to suicide gankers - no insurance company would ever pay out if you deliberatly drove your car in a war torn country and got shot at.
If your gonna nerf empire - you REALLY gotta make 0.0 harsher.
Never happen though.
SKUNK
|
Gealbhan
Caldari
The SAS
The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 22:11:00 -
[53]
I don't see a reason to remove it. It is part of the game.
You start watering it down and you'll kill the game.
Leave it as is.
"Concentrate all your fire on one target, when it is destroyed, move on to the next. That is how you secure victory". - Tactica Imperium. |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 00:00:00 -
[54]
/signed
and since there are sensible people here please sign this thread
Please do NOT nerf cloaking in anyway including scan probes
____ __ ________
_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 |
Awox
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 00:38:00 -
[55]
Don't you get it? CCP are removing non-consented pvp. If you want pvp you go to 0.0 and take part in large fleet battles, anything will continue to be nerfed while the large fleet battles get all the "boosts".
-
BOOST OUTLAWS (-10.0 and proud of it) |
Taikun
Gallente
Serenity Prime
Praesidium Libertatis
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 00:40:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Taikun on 14/05/2007 00:42:48
Originally by: Frug
Originally by: Taikun
As it stands... freighters are basically useless in EvE. Need mins in 0.0? Use a carrier to cyno jump it down. Want to run stuff in empire? Better not be worth more than a billion or you are going to get popped in a freighter.
Freighters by DESIGN are for hauling ****loads of **** from A to B. The way the game mechanics are right now... putting more than a 750m worth of stuff in a ship with that capacity is terchnically a BAD thing to do. It would be safer to use a tweeked out battleship to haul compressed minerals and otehr stuff.
"As it stands... freighters are useless in Eve" my ass. I see freighters all over the place and I'm sorry, but I don't believe you. Not even remotely. That is called uber whining and extreme exaggeration.
Just because there are freighters everywhere doesn't mean my assessment isn't valid. I have done the numbers and they are what they are. ( http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=518173 )You are welcome to sharpen your pencil and put on your thinking cap and work it out for yourself. But until you do, you are the one spouting hot air with nothing to back you up. To put it another way, you are uber whining about something you have extreme lack of knowledge about.
Just like Privateers who's war decing policy lead to a change in its operation, high sec freighter ganking will lead to a change in how Concord responds.
Wardec policy was changed because it was being abused to the point where it was not "working as devlopers intended".
Now if a dev would come on and tell me that a freighter was intended to only haul 750m worth of stuff or risk getting poppped to make some pirates cash I'd say fine. However given that there are plenty of other ships that fit that role I beleive freighters were implemented to haul 'massive' amounts of goods rather than just a token piddly amount.
Simply put, freighters usefullness given the new environment of freighter ganking has passed.
Does this mean people will stop flying freighters? Of course not. It just means they are using the wrong tool for the job most of the time.
The actual role of the freighter is now so limited as to make my opinion of them to be 'useless'.
Now, if you want pull your head out of the sand and explain in detail what a freighter is now good for taking into consideration the following.
1. High sec gankers
2. The 'role' of freighters given their CCP description.
3. Other ships capability to do a freighters job more effectivly.
THEN you would have added something constructive to this dialouge beyond "I don't believe you".
Taikun
|
Lavinrac Krad
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 01:10:00 -
[57]
I agree with this message and regularly fly an Industrial/Barge. Suicide ganking makes Jita, Tash-Murkin Prime, and Hek a hell of a lot more interesting.
Keep on flying my little suicidal pirate-like friends Also, as was told to me by the tutorial and others, who could be macros of some sort I guess, "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose."
BTW- The safer empire becomes, the less point there is to play Eve. Plenty of other MMORPGs have no PvP zones and they were designed around that. Eve is designed around rather free PvP and to switch the design plan 4 years after release, well... That may make sense to John Smedley but it sure and hell don't makes sense to me
|
Kylar Renpurs
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 01:15:00 -
[58]
/signed :)
Improve Market Competition! |
Chad Nova
Celestial Fire
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 22:38:00 -
[59]
/signed
The harsh enviroment of EVE is one of the reasons I decided to start plaing this game.
|
slothe
Caldari
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.05.14 22:42:00 -
[60]
in r/l you can still go into a police station and shotgun an officer. sure you will regret it. but you can do it.
shouldnt eve be the same?
|
Nerogk Shorn
Caldari
Royal Hiigaran Navy
The Sani Sabik
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 07:19:00 -
[61]
/signed
I <3 kessies
D-F-A-A-B-A-A-S |
insidion
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 08:34:00 -
[62]
/signed.
Until there are other ways to handle things like alts in noob corps, high sec ganking *needs* to be part of the game, plain and simple. Currently, a freighter can be ganked in high sec at a relatively fair risk to the gankers. I'm all for the 'no insurance for j00' concept to increase the risk to the gankers, imho that just makes sense.
The proposed changes completely remove all risk for freighters in empire, and that's just insane. And no, war decs aren't a factor because 99.9% of freighter pilots are whiney carebear cowards that hide in npc corps to begin with. =P
Risk is part of the game, and balancing game mechanics is tricky business.
|
Bimjo
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 09:09:00 -
[63]
/signed , just make ganker's insurance policy null and void
|
Roy Batty68
Caldari
Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 09:10:00 -
[64]
Originally by: insidion
/signed.
Until there are other ways to handle things like alts in noob corps, high sec ganking *needs* to be part of the game, plain and simple. Currently, a freighter can be ganked in high sec at a relatively fair risk to the gankers. I'm all for the 'no insurance for j00' concept to increase the risk to the gankers, imho that just makes sense.
The proposed changes completely remove all risk for freighters in empire, and that's just insane. And no, war decs aren't a factor because 99.9% of freighter pilots are whiney carebear cowards that hide in npc corps to begin with. =P
Risk is part of the game, and balancing game mechanics is tricky business.
Exactly my feelings on the topic.
Nerf NPC corps.
OR
Leave suicide ganking as is.
-------------------
Say What? |
DarkFenix
Caldari
Pilots Of Honour
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 09:11:00 -
[65]
/signed. Suicide ganking 4tw.
|
Karanth
Gallente
Freehold Industries
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 09:52:00 -
[66]
/Signed. If I didn't have all those whine threads to read, what would I do while AFK mining?
Free beer for those who mod my sig!
There is only one sig hijack that matters, the orginal and only member of the hijack squad. me. -Eris. ps Black russians are better then beer.
I'll see your beer, and raise you a goat kebab -Tirg
I'll take that pint and raise you two -Timmeh
I bet 2 goats, 1 pint and a bag of slugs -Lordharold
I grab it all, cook it/eat and drink it all and say thank you. -Pirlouit
I'll call your bluff, and go all in on 3 locks of Hutch's hair. -Incognus
|
Gabba
The Three Hundred
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 10:29:00 -
[67]
Just make sure freighters cant be scanned, or stuff inside cans cant be scanned. That way its a gamble if there is anything in there.
Its not risk vs reward if you know exactly how much is in that freighter and can just do the math.
|
Kehmor
Caldari
The Movement
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 11:25:00 -
[68]
frug aren't you the one who cried for about a week becase told you to come to a planet and you were dumb enough to do it and get ganked.
|
hydraSlav
Synergy Evolved
Sparta Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 17:04:00 -
[69]
Risk vs Reward.
No AFK money printing.
No place in EvE is safe, just safer.
That about sums it up.
However, insurance payout from getting a ship blown by Concord should be removed (once again, Risk vs Reward here)
==
Above comments are my personal views
Oveur >Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 17:10:00 -
[70]
Without freighter ganking, nothing unexpected will ever happen in empire space.
Its only natural in a space game that players attack convoys for the fun of it and the profit opportunities. Its FUN to bring down a huge freighter and earn lots of money on it.
Keep it in the game. Tweak it, adjust it, but keep it as a real option for players to do.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune |
Igus
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 17:14:00 -
[71]
I'm not sure if the change on test is a good one or not, yeah domi's were exploiting how concord responded by using drones. But I think more of the issue to suicide gankers in general would to be if your agro concord you will invalidate your insurance. Also if you self destruct your ship you shouldn't get any insurance either, thats like setting your house on fire to collect the insurance money.
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 17:16:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 15/05/2007 17:14:15
Originally by: Igus
I'm not sure if the change on test is a good one or not, yeah domi's were exploiting how concord responded by using drones. But I think more of the issue to suicide gankers in general would to be if your agro concord you will invalidate your insurance. Also if you self destruct your ship you shouldn't get any insurance either, thats like setting your house on fire to collect the insurance money.
Like ive said before... with all these real life analogies, shouldnt the police also take a lot longer to show up if we want to keep things realistic?
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune |
Lord Frost
Minmatar
The Crystal Method
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 17:31:00 -
[73]
Suicide ganking is okay to have, but if we could all fly frigs into a battleship and kill it... where would this game go? Ofcourse if you suicide and kill you want to gain more than your death... but that defeats the purpose of pure combat then. And keep in mind, this is a GAME people. CCP is making the right call... it shouldn't be profitable to suicide gank. That of course all falls into what your victims have fitted and are hauling.
If you want to suicide gank and kill someone, I'll applaud CCP for making it for more costly and difficult to do. Oh... and stop trying to compare a game to reality.
|
Last Cause
Green Gecko Inc.
Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 18:47:00 -
[74]
I don't usually post on threads with more than 1 page of replies already however this is a good topic. I think that if you actually consider if EVE was real, wouldn't people exploit thier clones like this? It's simple math, I lost a 75k clone and a 150k ship to end up a couple systems away with a headache and 25 million ISK. Seems logical to me.
-Sig-
Green Gecko Inc. A corp, A family.
Hiring ALL types of players! 0.0 based!
Recruitment Poster |
Hamfast
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 19:36:00 -
[75]
To start, I am a Carebear (Classic Sense) in that I don't like the Pew Pew part of PvP... I try to avoid it if I can... if you like it feel free but please leave me out.
My opinion is Suicide Ganking is part of the game, and needs to be left in the game... but in the case of Freighters, the Risk/Reward is out of whack...
First we must define success... for the Gankers, Freighter goes Pop = Success, freighter survives = Failure... for the Freighter driver it's the oppisite (simple enough)
As it is now, the Gank Squad fails, the insurance pay off almost no cost and perhaps some small profit... Success means they add the parts of the cargo they can grab... more profit... no down side... no real risk...
From the Freighter point of view, Gank Squad fails, they get to keep the cargo, but it still costs them to repair the ship (It's not long to Hull on a freighter and there are no remote Hull Repair Modules)... if the Gank squad succeeds, the Freighter driver may have lost billions... but they lose millions even if they survive...
If there was no insurance payout for those killed by Condord, it would start to work toward a balance... the Gankers would have to succeed to have any payoff... failure is totally loss...
Second is Freighters, they need to have less hull and more Armor and Shields... totals need to be a bit higher then now... 20% to 30%... make it so that if the Gankers have enough firepower to do the damage needed, they succeed and get to loot the freighter wreck... they fail, and the Freighter can be remotly repaired (or at least most of it)...
Concord should also be able to handle all "Hostiles" in a timely manner once it arrives...the Higher the sec the faster the response... so the Suicide Gank squad has a longer lifespan in .5 space then .9... so less ships are needed to gank... but with enough ships, even in 1.0 sec space, the Freighter should still pop... how many is yet to be determined... but the Freighter will have to be carring a good load to make it worth the cost.
Noob in training...
|
RossP Zoyka
|
Posted - 2007.05.15 20:48:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Whacky Backy
Risk / Reward is the phrase most often used in Eve as a justification for most aspects of the game.
High Risk in 0.0 can give high rewards but it may cost you a ship or two along the way. Same applies to low sec, complex work and missions.
Suicide ganking using a domi or other BS in empire could give a nice loot at the expense of a sec hit and a few million (after insurance) for the loss of the ship. No doubt the use of scanner alts to select the target and some mates in a hauler/salvager to get the loot.
My main lost a small ship to someone called Ruxandra. My loss was maybe 200mil, most it destroyed so maybe 20-40 mil for Ruxandra and friends. More than enough to cover losses. Sure I had kill rights but my skills not a match and my agents found the character fixing sec status in bob space, now theres a suprise. But a lesson learned for me. I now use bigger stronger ships to move stuff around.
IMHO its abuse of the system. Concord should not pay out when you deliberatly lose your your ship. You want to suicide your ship then fine but the risk should be total loss and no insurance payout for your acts. I am sure your mates can get your "can" and the loot for you.
I would also like to see kill rights than can be assigned to others. Sure I could not take Ruxandra down but I know many that could , maybe kill righs could be sold, now that would be fun.
So sure lets have risk and reward.
Selling kill rights has to be the coolest idea ever. Like a bounty but better because it lets you kill them in high sec and prevents some dude's corp mates from just collecting.
|
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 17:56:00 -
[77]
Originally by: J'Mkarr Soban
Originally by: Ryas Nia
CCP nerfs empire again :( sad... All this will do is continue the trend of using NPC corps for large alliances to safely move goods around empire.
CCP give us a chance to attack their logistics at least.
This is meta gaming, and completely outwith your control. If you are using this as the basis for suicide ganking, then I'm sorely disappointed. You'll always have people with multiple accounts. Using an in game way to get at those accounts is pretty crap. Although I agree that using those accounts in the first place to move stuff around is bad. No way round it, unfortunately.
Maybe use a way to prevent multiple account from the same IP address?
|
Ryas Nia
Minmatar
Stormriders
Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 17:59:00 -
[78]
Originally by: frihetskjemper
Maybe use a way to prevent multiple account from the same IP address?
We have 3 people playing on one IP in my house... so no thanks.
Recruiting Terrorists |
Nicho Void
Gallente
Hyper-Nova
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 18:04:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Ryas Nia
risk and loss are what make the game worth playing... yes they suck some times.
Remove the risk and you remove the game.
I'm too lazy to read all the posts, so if this has been addressed, I apologized.
The problem as I see it is this, how many people suicide gank with their main? I'm never suicide ganked, so I wouldn't know. If people are really ganking with their mains, fine, I'm all for it.
If, however, these are suicide ganking ALTS, the attacker has lost all level of risk....it's only reward. This is unacceptable.
In short: one character per account solves suicide ganking IMHO.
---------------
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 18:05:00 -
[80]
suicide is only cool if you didn't insure your ships before hand.
or else it's not suicide :P
-----------------------------------
I'm working my way through college
target CCP |
R3dSh1ft
Dark Knights of Deneb
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 18:28:00 -
[81]
Originally by: frihetskjemper
Originally by: J'Mkarr Soban
Originally by: Ryas Nia
CCP nerfs empire again :( sad... All this will do is continue the trend of using NPC corps for large alliances to safely move goods around empire.
CCP give us a chance to attack their logistics at least.
This is meta gaming, and completely outwith your control. If you are using this as the basis for suicide ganking, then I'm sorely disappointed. You'll always have people with multiple accounts. Using an in game way to get at those accounts is pretty crap. Although I agree that using those accounts in the first place to move stuff around is bad. No way round it, unfortunately.
Maybe use a way to prevent multiple account from the same IP address?
ok can we get a banstick for this necromancer now its getting old
DKOD - an awesome synchronised killing machine |
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 18:45:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Nicho Void
Originally by: Ryas Nia
risk and loss are what make the game worth playing... yes they suck some times.
Remove the risk and you remove the game.
I'm too lazy to read all the posts, so if this has been addressed, I apologized.
The problem as I see it is this, how many people suicide gank with their main? I'm never suicide ganked, so I wouldn't know. If people are really ganking with their mains, fine, I'm all for it.
If, however, these are suicide ganking ALTS, the attacker has lost all level of risk....it's only reward. This is unacceptable.
In short: one character per account solves suicide ganking IMHO.
I want more characters for account because I want to experience all the different professions.
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 18:47:00 -
[83]
Yay for suicide ganking.
-
I wish I was a three foot female doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes. |
FarScape III
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 19:55:00 -
[84]
"More reasonably, people seem to generally agree on removing insurance payouts when you get concordokkened. Sounds fine to me. No arguments here."
Cool, I agree too no insurance. then it would be more normal.
A Minmater City... Cool!
My Skills |
RipleyII
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 21:32:00 -
[85]
my goodness, you little suicide kings are all gentlemen philosophers. "I don't want to gank someone to hurt , no I just want them to see that EVE is risky".
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
|
DoctorBautz
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 22:26:00 -
[86]
i dont have probs with that, if you guys would just stay away from the starters.
i have seen a lot of tries to gank the newbies and that is just ridiculous.
when i started there was a "free loot" can close to a station with a 2 year old character waiting for a newbie getting the stuff to make a fast kill.
okay there might be alts all around, but theese guys wont open a can. the only guys which got scared off are the less experienced ones. suicide gank everybody you want, but please stop theese evil tricks to starters. i even dropped cans with a warning close to that "free loot" container. if you use your passive targeter and cargo scanner and you got a good target do it. i know eve isnt hello kitty but griefing a newbie just to get a killmail stands for its own.
|
Ninja Otaku
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 23:00:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Ryas Nia
risk and loss are what make the game worth playing... yes they suck some times.
Remove the risk and you remove the game.
Don't even need to read the rest of this. This sums up what I was gonna say pretty well, thus, the QFT.
|
Kinomoto Sakura
Amarr
FW Scuad
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 00:08:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
BBUUUUUU, I like suicide ganking (not that i have ever done it tho, heh), it was funny as hell to read the weekly rants and whines, guess the whinage got on CCP's nervers, but imo concord should remain as it is now, voiding the insurance due to suicide ganking is a better "fix" for the "problem"
----------------
Game The World.
|
Kwint Sommer
Incoherent Inc
Otaku Invasion
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 00:19:00 -
[89]
risk and loss are what make the game worth playing....
remove them and the game collapses
That said, a trial account should not be able to suicide gank. Obviously this has to be accomplished through game mechanics but at present there are ways of suicide ganking with a trial account so that they can endlessly avoid sec hits and revenge.
|
SonOTassadar
The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 00:23:00 -
[90]
I think it is amusing, and the fact that Empire isn't 100% safe is one of the many reasons why this game is great.
*HOWEVER*, I think that it needs a minor nerf. Not made impossible, just make it so the consequences for the suiciders is more severe. Like no insurance payout, or something (I'm not offering that to be *the* solution). Just make it more of a gamble than it is now.
-----
Griffin -- 100,000 ISK
ECM - Multispectral Jammer Is -- 20,000 ISK
Standard Missile Launcher Is -- 10,000 ISK
War target sobbing over losing a fight in his T2 fitted Battleship -- priceless |
Elvarien
Caldari
Legion of Corpses
Federation Of united Corps
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 00:39:00 -
[91]
/signed
its part of what makes eve ... eve. Things like that should stay. Hey I dotn want to get scuicide ganked but damnit I`l laugh about it if I am dumb enough to transport a ****load of bpo`s unguarded.
>---
Witty banter. |
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 02:17:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Kinomoto Sakura
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
BBUUUUUU, I like suicide ganking (not that i have ever done it tho, heh), it was funny as hell to read the weekly rants and whines, guess the whinage got on CCP's nervers, but imo concord should remain as it is now, voiding the insurance due to suicide ganking is a better "fix" for the "problem"
I pay for insurance for losing a ship I want pay to me.
|
cal nereus
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 02:28:00 -
[93]
Edited by: cal nereus on 25/07/2007 02:28:09
/signed
Feel free to increase the cost to the suicide ganker, but the possibility of suicide ganking in high-sec space should not be removed. I'm not a fan of suicide ganking in and of itself, but I'll be fine with it if it happens to me, and I'm in favor letting people have the option to suicide gank. Big part of the game is non-consensual PvP. Don't take that away.
|
Illyria Ambri
RennTech
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 02:36:00 -
[94]
I must have missed the post somewhere about risk vs reward.
Whats the risk for suicide ganking again?
Loss of ship? Thats not a risk.. thats a fact that you accept if you want to suicide gank... therefor dosen't count as a risk
Loss of SP? possibly but only due to stupidity.
Loss of reputation? Nope.. seems most are doing the wussy thing and using disposable alts.
Still not seeing the risk to suicide ganking.
I do see plenty of risk in hauling in a freighter
but risk in suicide ganking?? Nope.. not seeing it
Remove Concord payouts to suiciders
Increase standings loss if they get concorded more then twice within a 5 hour period.
That would be a start to the risk.. but nowhere near equal to hauling freight.
------------
This is not War... This is pest control - Dalek Sek
Here come the Drums!! - The Master |
Aceoil
Murder-Death-Kill
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 03:01:00 -
[95]
i love suicide ganking
|
Richard Aiel
Caldari
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 03:05:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Richard Aiel on 25/07/2007 03:08:26
Originally by: Frug
Edited by: Frug on 13/05/2007 07:39:07
I felt the need to start this as a simple counter to that 9 page thread that might make it look like 9 pages of people agreeing with stopping suicide ganking in general (it's not but many in there say that). If I post there, I'll be undersigned, and I'm certainly not.
First of all, to people who keep asking CCP to make high-sec 100% safe: HAHAHA. Right. What game have you been playing?
More reasonably, people seem to generally agree on removing insurance payouts when you get concordokkened. Sounds fine to me. No arguments here.
The point is being able to suicide gank people is FUN and often hilarious and this whole "It will scare noobs out of eve" mentality is all wrong. The only people it'll scare is people who aren't ready for Eve Online.
I introduced 4 people to eve at about the same time. One of them was suicided for NO REASON on his FIRST F-ING DAY. You know what happened? Did he quit eve? No. He laughed, we laughed (one of his buds was there) and now it makes a great story to tell.
None of us saw it coming, none of us has any idea why it happened, but all of us agree it *****s us up. And that's the point. It's gotta happen, and you've gotta learn to laugh about it, because it really is pretty f-ing funny.
And if anyone ever takes the possibility for that fun away, I'll quit eve and take all my 231498751 accounts with me and sue you all for mental anguish.
yeah suicide ganking is great....
Thats why you shoud take a ship to Jita, hang just far enough out so that you can fire S-bombs, yell in local "im quitting EVE and I got 5 nillion isk worth of stuff to give away". When the morons flock to you, let the SBs go boom.
repeat
Originally by: RipleyII
my goodness, you little suicide kings are all gentlemen philosophers. "I don't want to gank someone to hurt , no I just want them to see that EVE is risky".
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
yeah... if yer gonna support this have the testicular fortitude (or ovarian) to back it up with the truth lol
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
|
Richard Aiel
Caldari
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 03:07:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Richard Aiel on 25/07/2007 03:11:10
Originally by: R3dSh1ft
Originally by: frihetskjemper
Originally by: J'Mkarr Soban
Originally by: Ryas Nia
CCP nerfs empire again :( sad... All this will do is continue the trend of using NPC corps for large alliances to safely move goods around empire.
CCP give us a chance to attack their logistics at least.
This is meta gaming, and completely outwith your control. If you are using this as the basis for suicide ganking, then I'm sorely disappointed. You'll always have people with multiple accounts. Using an in game way to get at those accounts is pretty crap. Although I agree that using those accounts in the first place to move stuff around is bad. No way round it, unfortunately.
Maybe use a way to prevent multiple account from the same IP address?
ok can we get a banstick for this necromancer now its getting old
do you get banned for necro? I havent yet an i been doin it a long time lol
All I ever got that for was "misspelling" BoB...
and "discussing the actions of a known hacker" which apprears to be invoking his name.
Originally by: Kinomoto Sakura
Originally by: Ha'Uler
Suicide ganking has already changed on the testserver. CONCORD now instantly kills drones and deals much, much more damage. Fully tanked Domis survive for only four seconds, tops.
BBUUUUUU, I like suicide ganking (not that i have ever done it tho, heh), it was funny as hell to read the weekly rants and whines, guess the whinage got on CCP's nervers, but imo concord should remain as it is now, voiding the insurance due to suicide ganking is a better "fix" for the "problem"
Know what? If whining gets on CCP's nerves theyre in the wrong business, cause giving in to the whiners will kill this game.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
|
Thales Archon
Gallente
Sector 7
Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 03:08:00 -
[98]
It be fun indeed
|
Cpt Fina
Insult to Injury
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 03:23:00 -
[99]
Don't fully remove the ability to suicidegank freighters in high-sec.
Give the freighters-pilots the ability to sacrifice some cargohold to tank their ships (heavily).
I also think that the the suicideattackers shouldn't get any insurancemoney so that not every freighter with a full cargohold (not much you can fill them with that doesn't cost more than a 700mil-1 bil) is a viable target.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 04:54:00 -
[100]
freighters will never get slots because even with stupid stuff like overdrives their cargohold will still be huge and they arent meant as a solo trading caravan they demand support - letting them stay in high sec is a blessing from CCP - the real way they are meant to work is having a strong escort with scouts and an alpha team in low sec or 0.0 so that any enemy scouts are destroyed and large fleets dont get alerted to possible treasure chests flying around
____ __ ________
_sig below_
devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! |
Bein Glorious
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 05:15:00 -
[101]
suicide ganking must stay or else newbies will lose another way to get rich quickly |
Akelorian
Caldari
Mercenaries of Andosia
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 05:18:00 -
[102]
/signed!
|
Saint Lazarus
C R Y O
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 05:28:00 -
[103]
URAAALL TOURNAAGGMEEENNNNT!!!!!!
------------------------------
|
Ryo Jang
Central Defiance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 05:52:00 -
[104]
as a pirate myself, i am loathed to associate myself with the scum that suicide gank in high sec. not that they do it - go ahead and try. but dont try to change the rules to make it easier, and dont try to argue against ccp when they find a way to fill the hole that your latest fotm gank technique, that you came up with to get around the basic fact that high-high sec should be 100% safe.
dont *****. find another way around it, and if that fails, find another way. you are being outlaws, and complaining when the cops tighten security. pityful. fortunately for the good of eve, the entire universe is not, and will not, be your personal gank playground. go play on the test server ffs.
|
Richard Aiel
Caldari
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 05:56:00 -
[105]
I got a great way to get rid of suicide gankers! nerf freighters so they can only be run in low sec 0.0
No more suicide gankers (other than griefers lol)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 05:57:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Ryo Jang
the basic fact that high-high sec should be 100% safe.
You must be new.
-
I wish I was a three foot female doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes. |
Ryo Jang
Central Defiance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:01:00 -
[107]
no, my char is 2 years older than yours is. i have seen how this game has changed, noone ever used to whine about how high-sec is TOO safe, until the current breed of gutless suicide "pirates" did. grow up.
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:05:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Ryo Jang
no, my char is 2 years older than yours is
I didn't say younger.
-
I wish I was a three foot female doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes. |
Richard Aiel
Caldari
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:12:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Ryo Jang
no, my char is 2 years older than yours is
I didn't say younger.
You can still have an old character and be new  you can buy characters in this game... Buy isks then buy the character... and you get posts like that one...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
|
Ryo Jang
Central Defiance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:13:00 -
[110]
Edited by: Ryo Jang on 25/07/2007 06:14:29
i made this char.
so... are you going to actually make a decent argument for your case, or just jab with strange personal accusations?
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:19:00 -
[111]
My case? Hi-Sec has never been, is not, and likely never will be 100% safe, despite the fact that it could easily be made so at any time. So to call it a 'fact' that it is supposed to be 100% safe, suggests some level of unfamiliarity with the game.
-
I wish I was a three foot female doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes. |
Ryo Jang
Central Defiance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:23:00 -
[112]
pardon me, but i remember it being 100% safe. when noone would dare to attack someone else because their ship would be destroyed. that is when the system worked, and then people found that numbers + cheap ships == greater reward for little risk. so why complain when ccp fills this ugly hole?
would you be complaining today if they had made concord deactivate offensive modules immediately upon activation from the very beginning of eve? probably not.
|
Skirge
Minmatar
Central Defiance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:29:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Skirge on 25/07/2007 06:33:17
Originally by: Richard Aiel
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Ryo Jang
no, my char is 2 years older than yours is
I didn't say younger.
You can still have an old character and be new you can buy characters in this game... Buy isks then buy the character... and you get posts like that one...
I've played eve with my original main since late 03, and I've known Ryo Jang since late 04. Talked to him on voice servers since that time frame began as well; I can assure you he is a the same Ryo Jang as he always has been. Furthermore your accusing him of being a "newb" or a bought character instead of making a case or any sort of argument to what he originally said. It's quite easy to bust out with "OMG LAWL YUR A NEWB" instead of actually making a valid point or addition to the topic. Instead of trolling the forums why don't you actually attempt of making a contribution to the topic? Or would that be to much to ask? Now why don't you go ahead and do what you think you do best, and flame away at me for actually calling you out on your ignorance; I could really care less.
As far as the original topic of this post: I agree with Ryo in a lot of respects but I also understand why it is the way it is. Concord is already the god mode police EVE. Their response time is insane and they even know where your warping to before you get there. However if you make them any stronger to the point that they immediately destroy anyone that break the rules in Empire; it would somewhat take away from the realness of it all now wouldn't it? CCP has done an amazing job with making CCP as realistic as possible without making it uptight with rules and boring. Though I have to say that losing a damn hauler because you lagged up after undocking from the station in Jita; then finally catch up to reality only to find yourself in a pod with 2 caracals on the killmail is pretty lame.
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24,000 bytes - Tallan ([email protected])
Check out our video! |
An Anarchyyt
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:33:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Skirge
It's quite easy to bust out with "OMG LAWL YUR A NEWB" instead of actually making a valid point or addition to the topic.
Why would someone waste their time thinking up an intelligent reply to something that is no more than a ridiculous statement that was never true?
|
Skirge
Minmatar
Central Defiance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:40:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Ryo Jang
the basic fact that high-high sec should be 100% safe.
Where in this statement does it say that it's supposed to be 100% safe? He's merely stating his opinion on the matter. Regardless, I'm done with this argument. Though I'm sure you'll have to add something else; feel free to add away so that you might get the last word in as you think you should. I'll go ahead and leave it at that. Have fun.
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24,000 bytes - Tallan ([email protected])
Check out our video! |
Ryo Jang
Central Defiance
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:53:00 -
[116]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
Why would someone waste their time thinking up an intelligent reply to something that is no more than a ridiculous statement that was never true?
well if you want anyone, especially ccp, to listen to you, youll need to put forward a decent arguement as to why you should be allowed to kill people in the designated safe areas.
also consider this: what does the green light beside a high sec system status indicate? then what does the blue light beside a high-high sec system status indicate?
if these systems were intended to be "slightly unsafe depending on the situation", shouldnt they look like slightly unsafe systems? why would they not be intended to be safe if they look safe? it defies logic from a game development point of view. obviously then, they were intended to be safe. so stop whining when they end your freeride.
|
Zilkin
Amarr
adeptus gattacus
Praesidium Libertatis
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:57:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Ryo Jang
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
Why would someone waste their time thinking up an intelligent reply to something that is no more than a ridiculous statement that was never true?
well if you want anyone, especially ccp, to listen to you, youll need to put forward a decent arguement as to why you should be allowed to kill people in the designated safe areas.
also consider this: what does the green light beside a high sec system status indicate? then what does the blue light beside a high-high sec system status indicate?
if these systems were intended to be "slightly unsafe depending on the situation", shouldnt they look like slightly unsafe systems? why would they not be intended to be safe if they look safe? it defies logic from a game development point of view. obviously then, they were intended to be safe. so stop whining when they end your freeride.
Here is a another thread about suicide ganking
Linkage
Check the post #30 by Wrangler.
He quite clearly says current system is working exactly as CCP intended.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 06:58:00 -
[118]
Why do you automatically assume I do this?
I must've missed the memo that says blue means 100% safe though. Would it make you feel better if it were Teal? Would that mean 93% safe?
|
Richard Aiel
Caldari
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 07:36:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Skirge
Edited by: Skirge on 25/07/2007 06:33:17
Originally by: Richard Aiel
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Ryo Jang
no, my char is 2 years older than yours is
I didn't say younger.
You can still have an old character and be new you can buy characters in this game... Buy isks then buy the character... and you get posts like that one...
blah blah im prolly his alt....
other things to make you more butthurt
cause i dont care... im out in a days and im not comin back... no you cant have my stuff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
|
Richard Aiel
Caldari
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 07:37:00 -
[120]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
Originally by: Skirge
It's quite easy to bust out with "OMG LAWL YUR A NEWB" instead of actually making a valid point or addition to the topic.
Why would someone waste their time thinking up an intelligent reply to something that is no more than a ridiculous statement that was never true?
because he's the otehr dudes alt and its important to him that his "honor" be maintained....
go RP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 07:48:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Ryo Jang
pardon me, but i remember it being 100% safe. when noone would dare to attack someone else because their ship would be destroyed. that is when the system worked, and then people found that numbers + cheap ships == greater reward for little risk. so why complain when ccp fills this ugly hole?
would you be complaining today if they had made concord deactivate offensive modules immediately upon activation from the very beginning of eve? probably not.
Suicide ganking may have been less likely in the past, but safety was never guaranteed, and that is an important part of EVE, that you aren't safe anywhere.
Had Empire been 100% safe since day 1, of course I would not be complaining, because EVE would have been a subtly different game from day 1. It is because it has been this way since EVE began that I argue that CCP shouldn't suddenly give a level of safety which never existed before just because of one arguably overpowered tactic.
I cannot argue the finer points of balancing suicide ganking as I have not been engaged in it as either the aggressor nor the victim, however the concept of making empire 100% safe is independent from suicide ganking, and it is a concept which I, and apparently CCP, disagree with.
-
I wish I was a three foot female doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes. |
Liilli Lee
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 08:11:00 -
[122]
As I see it there is more to it than just preying on defenceless targets.
Insurrance;
Usually insurrance doenst pay out on suiside, beeing killed by police isnt really suiside. But since the person KNOWS he will be popped, then lets call it "Suiside by cop". This removes insurrance for beeing popped by the law (Concord etc.). This part should keep big time haulers happy. (at least thats all im preparred to give them)
Macro miners; (and partly ore/loot thieves)
As for macro miners (they should be reported to CCP - not popped/gangked/whaterver, but CCP doesnt seem to be ..hmm.. effective on that area).
Increase the NPC belt rats. Its really kinda sad to see ICE miners beeing able to tank rats intended to introduce some element of risk in belts. 1, 2 or even 3 frig-rats isnt more than an annoying fly to these miners - in belts from 0.5 and upwards, the rats should be at least doubled. And drop in a cruiser or two in ice belts.
These ppl are often hiding in NPC corps, thus avoiding some game-related ways of dealing with them (war-decs beeing the obvious one). Force players out of NPC corps after X months of ages and/or Y skillpoints. If the player hasnt found a corp in that time, then assign him to a non-corp (ie. solo player) and allow him to war-dec'd as an individual - or create a corp for him and assign him to his own corp.
Maybe even a veeeery small sec. standing hit for taking from other players cans.
Risk vs. reward;
This is usually commented by pirates pvpers etc. - and this should ALWAYS be true.
But lets face it; pirate'ing is just for people who can't handle a real work from 9 to 5 (joke)
Pirates (and ppl shooting other players ships are pirates - even if they do it by suiside or whatever) usully shouts "there is no risk in Empie" ... but where are the bounty hunters ?? People who could "contract" killing known pirates. Let us have sellable/transferalbe kill-rights. Known pirates (even small ones) should not be able to take a walk in the mist of Empire with no risk.
|
Morwagorion
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 08:52:00 -
[123]
o/ - signed
- Remove insurance from Concord killed
- Concord should target drones as well ships
that's all
Suicide gank is fun, even from the other side.
i've never been a suicide, but i do like the "thrill" and the ability of tanking tarnsport ships
|
Nicho Void
Gallente
Hyper-Nova
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 19:34:00 -
[124]
I'm still waiting for a response to my question:
Do people suicide gank using their mains? If yes, I agree with the OP.
If no, the "risk" for the attacker is completely removed and an unbalance exists.
---------------
|
morgannax
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 19:57:00 -
[125]
well you know what, guess we're a minority but some of us dont wanna join a real corp, go to 0.0/low sec, etc
me, i am perfectly happy if i am the only living person in the game. i am happy to mine or run missions. don't care if i ever chat with anyone in the game but people who don't want to deal with all crap /pvp, etc should be able to do what they want in hi-sec and not have to worry about getting their ships/frieghters, whatever blown up by ******s. ya guys wanna kill peeps, go out into low-sec/0.0 and fight someone who WANTS to fight back
can i have a server where i am the only live person in the game please...............
|
Awateru
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 20:00:00 -
[126]
cba to read the full post, but I /sign this, and I'm currently taking a break from low/zero sec being an empire carebear.
|
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 04:02:00 -
[127]
Originally by: morgannax
well you know what, guess we're a minority but some of us dont wanna join a real corp, go to 0.0/low sec, etc
me, i am perfectly happy if i am the only living person in the game. i am happy to mine or run missions. don't care if i ever chat with anyone in the game but people who don't want to deal with all crap /pvp, etc should be able to do what they want in hi-sec and not have to worry about getting their ships/frieghters, whatever blown up by ******s. ya guys wanna kill peeps, go out into low-sec/0.0 and fight someone who WANTS to fight back
can i have a server where i am the only live person in the game please...............
Play eve with full understanding of risk involved.
|
Seymour Buttz
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 04:18:00 -
[128]
Edited by: Seymour Buttz on 26/07/2007 04:18:33
hatehatehate alts
|
Ungdall
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 04:19:00 -
[129]
Never really go into Empire, but when I do I want it to be interesting.
/signed
|
Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 05:02:00 -
[130]
Moar empire ganking plz.
Down with *****whipped noobs who want to further carebearize Eve. It's gotten carebearized enough already.
|
Hiesi
Cryo Crypt inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 05:57:00 -
[131]
Gotta pop em all! -signed-
|
Richard Aiel
Caldari
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 06:28:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Nicho Void
I'm still waiting for a response to my question:
Do people suicide gank using their mains? If yes, I agree with the OP.
If no, the "risk" for the attacker is completely removed and an unbalance exists.
a LOT of the "whine" threads about getting killed by suiciders say that the characters were EXTREMELT NEW and thats how they knew they were suiciders and not a regular gank.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
|
Metal Thong
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 06:31:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
I hope its still part of the devs vision for the game.
Their vision is to siphon off as much money from you as possible and then close eve and do something else.
|
Lady Beauvoir
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 06:48:00 -
[134]
Originally by: morgannax
well you know what, guess we're a minority but some of us dont wanna join a real corp, go to 0.0/low sec, etc
me, i am perfectly happy if i am the only living person in the game. i am happy to mine or run missions. don't care if i ever chat with anyone in the game but people who don't want to deal with all crap /pvp, etc should be able to do what they want in hi-sec and not have to worry about getting their ships/frieghters, whatever blown up by ******s. ya guys wanna kill peeps, go out into low-sec/0.0 and fight someone who WANTS to fight back
I am sorry, but I just cannot see your reasoning behind this. For example, someone complaining that their ship got attacked in high-sec might, for example, buy and sell things on the market or mine asteroids. Since I do not want anyone to compete with me on the market or mining business, do I have the right to demand that they should be made unable to compete with me for the profits on the market or those asteroids? After all, I do not want that kind of non-consensual PVP.
Everything you do in EVE is PVP. Want to mine roids? Fine, then you mined them before someone else did and he got nothing. Buy a module on the market? That's a good deal snatched away from someone else. Selling modules? You are taking a sale away from someone else and taking ISK away from him. Moving valuable cargo in high-sec? Those are things you got and someone else didn't. The massive orgy of blood and destruction ongoing in 0.0 is just a more direct way of PVP, but not at all the most damaging.
My point in short: after the instant you board your newbie ship and complete the tutorial you are participating in some form of PVP, no matter what you do. The only way not to PVP is not to play at all; and once you start, everyone is fair game.
|
Big Al
The Aftermath
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 14:06:00 -
[135]
CONCORD Police Commander places an excellent hit on you, inflicting 5079.8 damage.
Clearly CONCORD needs another buff...
|
Nicho Void
Gallente
Hyper-Nova
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 14:20:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Richard Aiel
Originally by: Nicho Void
I'm still waiting for a response to my question:
Do people suicide gank using their mains? If yes, I agree with the OP.
If no, the "risk" for the attacker is completely removed and an unbalance exists.
a LOT of the "whine" threads about getting killed by suiciders say that the characters were EXTREMELT NEW and thats how they knew they were suiciders and not a regular gank.
Thank you for your response, but I'm going to take the general silence in regards to my question as saying, "Yes, Nicho, we do use alts to suicide gank and we realize we're altering the risk/reward balance when we do so, but too damn bad, we love free ****!"
---------------
|
Jessica Lorelei
Minmatar
Vitae Mecha
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 14:22:00 -
[137]
/signed
gank away!
and this is coming from someone who can fly a freighter :P
-NEVER CONFUSE OPINION WITH FACT-
|
Asmosis
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 14:42:00 -
[138]
/signed.
I got suicide ganked on my first day during the tutorial, but managed to get back faster than him and steal his wreck loot XD
The change to insurance would be a nice idea. Seems kinda silly with concord going
"Hey sorry we blew up your ship, heres the keys to a new one"
|
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 18:29:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Asmosis
/signed.
I got suicide ganked on my first day during the tutorial, but managed to get back faster than him and steal his wreck loot XD
The change to insurance would be a nice idea. Seems kinda silly with concord going
"Hey sorry we blew up your ship, heres the keys to a new one"
You teach him a lesson that he not forget to kill a newbie make sure friend clean up.
|
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 20:13:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Nicho Void
Originally by: Richard Aiel
Originally by: Nicho Void
I'm still waiting for a response to my question:
Do people suicide gank using their mains? If yes, I agree with the OP.
If no, the "risk" for the attacker is completely removed and an unbalance exists.
a LOT of the "whine" threads about getting killed by suiciders say that the characters were EXTREMELT NEW and thats how they knew they were suiciders and not a regular gank.
Thank you for your response, but I'm going to take the general silence in regards to my question as saying, "Yes, Nicho, we do use alts to suicide gank and we realize we're altering the risk/reward balance when we do so, but too damn bad, we love free ****!"
No prepared person crying about freighter gank.
|
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.26 22:22:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Nicho Void
Originally by: Richard Aiel
Originally by: Nicho Void
I'm still waiting for a response to my question:
Do people suicide gank using their mains? If yes, I agree with the OP.
If no, the "risk" for the attacker is completely removed and an unbalance exists.
a LOT of the "whine" threads about getting killed by suiciders say that the characters were EXTREMELT NEW and thats how they knew they were suiciders and not a regular gank.
Thank you for your response, but I'm going to take the general silence in regards to my question as saying, "Yes, Nicho, we do use alts to suicide gank and we realize we're altering the risk/reward balance when we do so, but too damn bad, we love free ****!"
Alt fly dominix?
|
frihetskjemper
|
Posted - 2007.07.27 01:37:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Ryo Jang
pardon me, but i remember it being 100% safe. when noone would dare to attack someone else because their ship would be destroyed. that is when the system worked, and then people found that numbers + cheap ships == greater reward for little risk. so why complain when ccp fills this ugly hole?
would you be complaining today if they had made concord deactivate offensive modules immediately upon activation from the very beginning of eve? probably not.
Suicide ganking may have been less likely in the past, but safety was never guaranteed, and that is an important part of EVE, that you aren't safe anywhere.
Had Empire been 100% safe since day 1, of course I would not be complaining, because EVE would have been a subtly different game from day 1. It is because it has been this way since EVE began that I argue that CCP shouldn't suddenly give a level of safety which never existed before just because of one arguably overpowered tactic.
I cannot argue the finer points of balancing suicide ganking as I have not been engaged in it as either the aggressor nor the victim, however the concept of making empire 100% safe is independent from suicide ganking, and it is a concept which I, and apparently CCP, disagree with.
Empire never 100% safe.
|
|
Ivan Kirilenkov
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2007.07.27 06:59:00 -
[143]
Old thread bump - locked.
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |