| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Farscape Hw
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
   |
Posted - 2007.09.09 07:07:00 -
[301]
its no secret who my alt is. go have a look at his sec status for yourself,
Shamis Orzoz
|
Cass Daystar
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 08:29:00 -
[302]
Having read the OP, but not the intervening posts, my suggestion is this:
Make any cans/wrecks that are dropped from a ship aggressed in highsec and outside the Yulai convention (ie: CONCORD killed the suicide-gankers) be the PROPERTY of the VICTIM, not the killers!
IF CONCORD is going to go to the trouble to kill the gankers then why does it make sense for them to legitimize the ownership of the wrecks they caused? How does this make sense?
Make the ownership of the wrecks belong to the victim in a suicide ganking, or any death that would have involved CONCORD.
How does this prevent suicide ganking? Well, CONCORD hangs around at the site of the wreck until it despawns. Any attempt by a third party (including the killers themselves in new ships) to access the wrecks will be immediately viewed as a criminal action and will result in another CONCORDING.
In addition to this, remove any insurance payouts for CONCORDING. Don't reward criminal behavior.
Finally, I think this could be taken one step further. If a suicide gank squad attacks a player, and they get CONCORDED, make THEIR wrecks the property of the VICTIM in the attack. This will REALLY discourage suicide gank squads.
|
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 08:36:00 -
[303]
 Originally by: Cass Daystar
Having read the OP, but not the intervening posts, my suggestion is this:
Make any cans/wrecks that are dropped from a ship aggressed in highsec and outside the Yulai convention (ie: CONCORD killed the suicide-gankers) be the PROPERTY of the VICTIM, not the killers!
IF CONCORD is going to go to the trouble to kill the gankers then why does it make sense for them to legitimize the ownership of the wrecks they caused? How does this make sense?
Make the ownership of the wrecks belong to the victim in a suicide ganking, or any death that would have involved CONCORD.
How does this prevent suicide ganking? Well, CONCORD hangs around at the site of the wreck until it despawns. Any attempt by a third party (including the killers themselves in new ships) to access the wrecks will be immediately viewed as a criminal action and will result in another CONCORDING.
In addition to this, remove any insurance payouts for CONCORDING. Don't reward criminal behavior.
Finally, I think this could be taken one step further. If a suicide gank squad attacks a player, and they get CONCORDED, make THEIR wrecks the property of the VICTIM in the attack. This will REALLY discourage suicide gank squads.
I think kill rights were CCP's concession on the suicide kill front, people have been asking for negated insurance off of concord death for ages now and CCP is disinterested.
As far as flagged wrecks, so what? If I aggress first that means I'll anticipate ship destruction and have my corpmate loot both wrecks and be gone. No way you'll dock, grab a ship in time and get back to your wreck in time to save any of your gear (barring a freighter) I suppose. What's the flag duration on theft in that case--15 min for the offender's corp?
___
Junkie Beverage: i use your tears to cyno in my laughter
|
Falkus Windowmaker
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 09:35:00 -
[304]
Edited by: Falkus Windowmaker on 09/09/2007 09:42:10
Originally by: Billy Sastard
I did not read all the replys, nor the full OP. However I just have to comment on one thing stated in that OP...
"Concord is here to protect the innocent"....
WRONG..
Concord is here to punish the guilty.  As long as they aggressors get their punishment, Concord is happy and has done their job as they see it.
The offenders are not really punished though. Losing a disposable suicide ship is not punishment at all. Especially since they end up keeping what they were going after. In real life if you rob a bank and the cops show up and there is a shoot out the odds of you running away with the money you stole or coming back to the scene of the crime to retrieve your stolen goods equals close to none. The odds of your friends coming back and picking up any cash you dropped while robbing a bank are also close to known.
The same should happen in EVE. If Concord shows up and there is a fight your odds and that of your buddies of coming back and looting stuff should be close to none in hi sec space unless you develop a plan to take on or distract Concord while they hover around the scene of the crime. Wreckage, and can rights should go to the victim and your sec rating should drop for engaging in hostile acts in hi sec space.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 11:31:00 -
[305]
No risk my ass. I just lost 2 t2 fitted geddons for no gain. First occator I ganked had all the expensive loot pop, and the 2nd was a nano crane that popped the mwd and manage to jump before I could kill it(although I probably shouldntve tried to engage when it was only like 6k off the gate).
|
Cpt Fina
Insult to Injury
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 11:35:00 -
[306]
Originally by: Gamesguy
No risk my ass. I just lost 2 t2 fitted geddons for no gain. First occator I ganked had all the expensive loot pop, and the 2nd was a nano crane that popped the mwd and manage to jump before I could kill it(although I probably shouldntve tried to engage when it was only like 6k off the gate).
The risk vs reward for high sec gankers are borked. Apparently it lies in the best of your interests not to admit this.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 11:38:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Cpt Fina
Originally by: Gamesguy
No risk my ass. I just lost 2 t2 fitted geddons for no gain. First occator I ganked had all the expensive loot pop, and the 2nd was a nano crane that popped the mwd and manage to jump before I could kill it(although I probably shouldntve tried to engage when it was only like 6k off the gate).
The risk vs reward for high sec gankers are borked. Apparently it lies in the best of your interests not to admit this.
Thats some convincing argument right there.
|
Cpt Fina
Insult to Injury
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 11:47:00 -
[308]
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: Cpt Fina
Originally by: Gamesguy
No risk my ass. I just lost 2 t2 fitted geddons for no gain. First occator I ganked had all the expensive loot pop, and the 2nd was a nano crane that popped the mwd and manage to jump before I could kill it(although I probably shouldntve tried to engage when it was only like 6k off the gate).
The risk vs reward for high sec gankers are borked. Apparently it lies in the best of your interests not to admit this.
Thats some convincing argument right there.
"OMG I fitted a trillion NOSes on my ibis and still lost, NOS is fine"
"OMGZOrZ my battleship was doing 7km/s but i got caught by a huginn, nanoBS are fine"
ôA couple of combatfitted haulers killed my canflipping cruiser, OMG they are overpoweredö
I couldn't care less if you tried to gank a hundred haulers without success. It is pretty obvious that the risk vs reward for high sec gankers are borked. Your personal failed attempts hold little value in regards of a valid argument.
|
xOm3gAx
Caldari
Stain of Mind
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 12:45:00 -
[309]
Originally by: Ridley Scot
Edited by: Ridley Scot on 09/09/2007 05:49:53
Edited by: Ridley Scot on 09/09/2007 05:30:13
Originally by: Farscape Hw
anyone who suports what the op said is a complete and utter carebear noob. you have no idea of what this game is about.
the whole thing that makes eve what it is is the risk vs reward. you putting extremly expensive stuff in your t1 frig cargohold is a massive risk. its your own dumb fault for setting a destination and hitting autopilot.
if you ppl keep whining and ccp change the rules to suite you damn noobs who have no concept of what eve is, THEN it will become less fun and the real experienced players will start to leave the game. we are not playing WOW. this is eve online. you being able to be killed anywhere in the game is very much a huge factor in why ppl choose this game over others.
now for your irrellevant real life scenario...
the stupid guy who got mugged was carrying crazy amounts of money in his wallet, and wearing a gold watch and platnum chain around his kneck. the guys who robbed him gave the goods to thier buddy just before the cops got there. therefore the cops arrest the guys and they go to jail for robbing him (its not like you get out with your ship intact). but the money is gone never to be seen again by the victim.
stop being a whiny little noob and go back to your agent mission.
Risk versus reward?
Well some hypocrit you are... What is the real risk you and your frineds are taking to do this? Few tech 1 fitted and fully insured Mymidons or Domis? And what kind of reward are you getting for ganking haulers in empire hm?
As for the fact you call youself "experienced" player... It must take a lot of skill to exploit game design flaw to gank a solo hauler I guess... Do you really think that what you do is so special and others cant do it? Ofcourse they could, its just that not everyone is ready to go so low and abuse the game mechanics and other players in this game.
You and your friends have found a loophole in the game, and now you are exploiting the flaw to gain advantage and get some easy ISK. Nothing new though, other then the fact that CCP is refusing to recognize it until they fix it. The same thing they did with super fast battleships, Privateers wardeccing half of EVE population etc etc.
People like you are easy to find in just about every Internet game, you are looking for an easy way to take unfair advantage of other players, and it doesnt matter what that might be as long as you dont get banned. So dont call yourself experianced player, people with real skill dont need tricks to win.
I dont see whats so hypocritical about it. It takes far more skill (and balls) to attack someone in high sec then it does in any other security. Reason being is because you WILL lose your ship. You also have to make sure your kitted well enough that u can kill them before concord kills you... eg: 5 seconds or less...
Its nearly impossible to do with a drone boat except maybe the myrm but only because it can outlast a domi but a small measure in terms of passive tankability.. though those tanks are not cheap..Tech 1 fitted ships is the way to go yes but in all reality you do need some t2 / named gear to make the job sure fire.
Again where is the loop hole you keep arguing it but when someone like myself in a prior post shows a valid argument against your "point" you take your argument to others this in its self shows you have no idea what your talking about. Attacking someone in high sec is not a loop hole its a game mechanic and if the VICTIM does not fly safe then they will die eventually by someones hands. You can easily avoid being ganked in high sec using either a frieghter (only those willing to use 10-13 decent kitted BS will drop one before the concord gank) or a tanked bc / bs seeing as frigs and haulers can't tank and even a poorly kitted gank cruiser will drop them with decent skills.
-----------
"Mercinaries never die, we just go to hell to regroup." -xOm3gAx '99
|
Ravenal
The Fated
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 13:03:00 -
[310]
Originally by: Grath Telkin
"PvP in EVE is consentual(sp), you agree to it when you log in"
this is not your standard MMO, here there be monsters
:D - pure gold
. |
Needo
Minmatar
Swedish Academy
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 13:08:00 -
[311]
C'mon guys.
The problem is not that high sec ganking can take place.
The problem is that a high sec ganking has no risk that is even near the reward-level because the blockade is protected by CONCORD. Anyone that would have wanted to blow them away because their behaviour sux cannot do so. That is broken game mechanics imo. And you guys call it PvP? What you're doing is mining haulers.
___________________________________________
You are never alone in schizophrenia.
___________________________________________ |
Lorde Falcao
Gallente
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 14:45:00 -
[312]
Edited by: Lorde Falcao on 09/09/2007 14:46:37
Originally by: Needo
C'mon guys.
The problem is not that high sec ganking can take place.
The problem is that a high sec ganking has no risk that is even near the reward-level because the blockade is protected by CONCORD. Anyone that would have wanted to blow them away because their behaviour sux cannot do so. That is broken game mechanics imo. And you guys call it PvP? What you're doing is mining haulers.
You act as though some idiot loading, say, a full pithi set into his shuttle is somehow CCP's fault, like it's on-par with a bugged complex. The game is a sandbox - people can do what they want, as long as it isn't an exploit. And shooting people in high-sec is not an exploit. Why would there even be different levels security space it was? Everything should be 1.0, .1, and 0.0 if that were the case.
This is not something requires CCP to intervene. People just need to stop loading expensive stuff into T1 haulers, newbie ships, and shuttles. Or not autopilot. Or use a scout. If people moved their expensive stuff in a plated battleship, 99% of the time it would get where it was going.
But people are lazy. They want to do the absolute minimum amount of work possible, so they load their expensive mods into a cheap/fast ship and put it on auto-pilot so they don't have to do ANYTHING.
Why don't you actually try blowing up a ship in empire before you talk about how much skill it requires? Try blowing up a fully extended rook. It may not be rocket science, but we've underestimated the strength of several ships and let them get away, and lost a bunch of BCs and battleships because of it.
But again, this is not something CCP needs to "fix". People just need to stop putting expensive stuff into paper-thin ships, or not use auto-pilot, or use a scout, or get an escort. There are plenty of ways to counter empire gankers, but it isn't CCP's job to come up with and enact those counter-measures because you are lazy.
|
Needo
Minmatar
Swedish Academy
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 15:13:00 -
[313]
Quote:
You act as though some idiot loading, say, a full pithi set into his shuttle is somehow CCP's fault, like it's on-par with a bugged complex. The game is a sandbox - people can do what they want, as long as it isn't an exploit. And shooting people in high-sec is not an exploit. Why would there even be different levels security space it was? Everything should be 1.0, .1, and 0.0 if that were the case.
This is not something requires CCP to intervene. People just need to stop loading expensive stuff into T1 haulers, newbie ships, and shuttles. Or not autopilot. Or use a scout. If people moved their expensive stuff in a plated battleship, 99% of the time it would get where it was going.
But people are lazy. They want to do the absolute minimum amount of work possible, so they load their expensive mods into a cheap/fast ship and put it on auto-pilot so they don't have to do ANYTHING.
Why don't you actually try blowing up a ship in empire before you talk about how much skill it requires? Try blowing up a fully extended rook. It may not be rocket science, but we've underestimated the strength of several ships and let them get away, and lost a bunch of BCs and battleships because of it.
But again, this is not something CCP needs to "fix". People just need to stop putting expensive stuff into paper-thin ships, or not use auto-pilot, or use a scout, or get an escort. There are plenty of ways to counter empire gankers, but it isn't CCP's job to come up with and enact those counter-measures because you are lazy.
Allow this idiot to ask you if you think CCP designed CONCORD to protect the high sec gankers from everyone that would like to get rid of them? Do you also think that high sec was designed to give gankers a secure environment to do their ganking in?
If you read my post you would have noticed that I do not complain about haulers being killable in secure space. What is broken game mechanics is that high sec in this case means high sec for the gankers only and low sec for the traders.
Ps. I own a hauler but I did not use it in a long time.
___________________________________________
You are never alone in schizophrenia.
___________________________________________ |
Lorde Falcao
Gallente
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 16:51:00 -
[314]
Originally by: Needo
Allow this idiot to ask you if you think CCP designed CONCORD to protect the high sec gankers from everyone that would like to get rid of them? Do you also think that high sec was designed to give gankers a secure environment to do their ganking in?
If you read my post you would have noticed that I do not complain about haulers being killable in secure space. What is broken game mechanics is that high sec in this case means high sec for the gankers only and low sec for the traders.
Ps. I own a hauler but I did not use it in a long time.
I'm afraid I don't understand how CONCORD protects us. Anyone I've blown up has killrights on me for a month, and I'm usually in one of two places if they want to come after me. Your post isn't very clear at all, quite frankly, and your arguement doesn't make sense. You also haven't addressed any of the points I made, but that's ok, I'll just take that as a concession that I'm right.
|
Lorde Falcao
Gallente
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 16:58:00 -
[315]
Edited by: Lorde Falcao on 09/09/2007 16:59:29
edit: double post
|
Needo
Minmatar
Swedish Academy
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 17:02:00 -
[316]
Quote:
I'm afraid I don't understand how CONCORD protects us. Anyone I've blown up has killrights on me for a month, and I'm usually in one of two places if they want to come after me. Your post isn't very clear at all, quite frankly, and your arguement doesn't make sense. You also haven't addressed any of the points I made, but that's ok, I'll just take that as a concession that I'm right.
Try the same gank-setup in low sec and you'll see the difference. 
The broken thing is that the ganker has not "broken the law" before he killed anyone and noone can touch them even though everyone and their mothers know what they are doing. So, ganker is protected by high sec until the ganker has selected the target and choosed to leave protection. I.e. ganker has full control over whether the environment is secure or not secure, while the target is on constant not secure environment. Giving that piece of control to the ganker is what is the broken game mechanics.
I have no problem with that you cannot run autopilot in secure space, thats just fine. However, the gankers now sit in such a sweet spot having full control that everyone is not playing on equal terms. I think it needs to be fixed somehow. Best way would be to give the ganker a much harder sec hit, then they cant do it so frequently. The other thing is to remove insurance, that also makes it too easy. That's my opinion atleast. With a potential reward of 2 bil you really should risk your neck all the time, not just when you choose to.
___________________________________________
You are never alone in schizophrenia.
___________________________________________ |
Captian Internet
Lead Bricks
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 17:17:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Needo
However, the gankers now sit in such a sweet spot having full control that everyone is not playing on equal terms.
Oh man did you mention fair fights
This isn't the 1600's man
Local Thread 107-b,War without a victor penalties,Navigation Shortcuts |
xOm3gAx
Caldari
Stain of Mind
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 18:37:00 -
[318]
Edited by: xOm3gAx on 09/09/2007 18:37:27
Originally by: Needo
Quote:
I'm afraid I don't understand how CONCORD protects us. Anyone I've blown up has killrights on me for a month, and I'm usually in one of two places if they want to come after me. Your post isn't very clear at all, quite frankly, and your arguement doesn't make sense. You also haven't addressed any of the points I made, but that's ok, I'll just take that as a concession that I'm right.
Try the same gank-setup in low sec and you'll see the difference.
The broken thing is that the ganker has not "broken the law" before he killed anyone and noone can touch them even though everyone and their mothers know what they are doing. So, ganker is protected by high sec until the ganker has selected the target and choosed to leave protection. I.e. ganker has full control over whether the environment is secure or not secure, while the target is on constant not secure environment. Giving that piece of control to the ganker is what is the broken game mechanics.
I have no problem with that you cannot run autopilot in secure space, thats just fine. However, the gankers now sit in such a sweet spot having full control that everyone is not playing on equal terms. I think it needs to be fixed somehow. Best way would be to give the ganker a much harder sec hit, then they cant do it so frequently. The other thing is to remove insurance, that also makes it too easy. That's my opinion atleast. With a potential reward of 2 bil you really should risk your neck all the time, not just when you choose to.
The gankers only have any control over the situation because they TAKE control the same control that the victims could easily take by flying ships that require more then its worth to destroy while using cargo containers in their hold to prevent people from scanning them thus making them far more secure and less of a target as you do not know if the cans are empty and many times they are.
Also, gankers already take a HUGE sec hit .5 for agressing and another .5 for destroying said ship you can add 1.25 to that as well if they decide to pod you or do so accidently with smart bombs as this does happen on occasion. As it is for each "gank" if you have 0.0 sec status you are forced to move to a lower sec system unless you fix your status which is usually not worth the time.
One more thing im all for insurance being removed FROM EVERYTHING. That should make piracy far more lucrative and cause many more ransoms to be paid.
And on your final note of the potential reward of 2 bil... try reversing that with a potential loss of 2bil you would THINK that someone would be SMART enough to take precautions to prevent losing said 2bil. Which inherently increases said risk for the ganker thus causing them to second guess whether or not its really worth it since they may lose just as much to gain just a little.
Eg: Losing 5 bs to gank a BS or super tanked bc is really not worth it after everything is said and done since insurance really doesnt give you 100% you need to subtract the cost of insurance first and then subtract the cost of all equipment used which usually cuts back the insurance to covering a mere 20-30mil if your lucky. Now multiply that by 5 and you get 100-150mil back at the cost of (using tier2 bs we'll say) 500mil in ships (after insurance).
And the risk is definatly greater then the reward since there is no garuntee that you will get the loot or destroy your mark. That being said it takes alot of skill and practice (which inherently causes losses) to be able to successfully suicide gank a SMART target that does not make themselves and easy mark. Which may include using an escort to attack anyone who attacks you but i guess that's just to difficult for people who lack the brain power to think outside the box and can only stand to blame others and whine about things.
Get a clue, get over it, and start thinking. It might save you a few bil.
-----------
"Mercinaries never die, we just go to hell to regroup." -xOm3gAx '99
|
xOm3gAx
Caldari
Stain of Mind
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 18:39:00 -
[319]
Almost forgot... there is no such thing as fair. Deal with what you got and adapt dont complain about it do something about it.
Adapt or die.
^^ remember those words.
-----------
"Mercinaries never die, we just go to hell to regroup." -xOm3gAx '99
|
Needo
Minmatar
Swedish Academy
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 19:03:00 -
[320]
I am not writing on behalf of myself, I have never been high sec ganked, nor will I most likely.
I wrote that simply because the mechanics of high sec ganking is borked. That's it. Call everyone stupid all you like, it doesnt change a thing. It doesnt take any brains to gank, and it doesnt take much brains to avoid it, but that has nothing to do with it. The system can still be broken, and it is. The gankers are too safe while they are choosing their targets.
___________________________________________
You are never alone in schizophrenia.
___________________________________________ |
Phil Miller
Ocean Dynamics
Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 19:05:00 -
[321]
/signed
Great analogy with the story, I liked it.
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24000 bytes -Hutch ([email protected]) |
OneSock
Crown Industries
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 20:30:00 -
[322]
There should be no insurance payout for suicide gankers. It just makes no sense to compensate for a deliberate act.
I lost an Astarte to a pair of suicide drakes, in a 0.5 sec system concord took 20secs to turn up, by then it was all over. I think they were after my faction med repper which wasn't worth a whole lot. Maybe they made a few mill on it after replacing their T2 fit drakes, but I lost about 220m worth of ship. no compensation for me and I had no means of defence.
Kill rights are no compensation. I'm just not into spending time and isk on these lamers. Much more enjoyable and profitable things to be doing.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 20:35:00 -
[323]
Originally by: Needo
I am not writing on behalf of myself, I have never been high sec ganked, nor will I most likely.
I wrote that simply because the mechanics of high sec ganking is borked. That's it. Call everyone stupid all you like, it doesnt change a thing. It doesnt take any brains to gank, and it doesnt take much brains to avoid it, but that has nothing to do with it. The system can still be broken, and it is. The gankers are too safe while they are choosing their targets.
Repeating the same thing over and over without stating a reason makes you a troll and a moron.
|
Captian Internet
Lead Bricks
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 20:40:00 -
[324]
Originally by: OneSock
There should be no insurance payout for suicide gankers. It just makes no sense to compensate for a deliberate act.
I lost an Astarte to a pair of suicide drakes, in a 0.5 sec system concord took 20secs to turn up, by then it was all over. I think they were after my faction med repper which wasn't worth a whole lot. Maybe they made a few mill on it after replacing their T2 fit drakes, but I lost about 220m worth of ship. no compensation for me and I had no means of defence.
Kill rights are no compensation. I'm just not into spending time and isk on these lamers. Much more enjoyable and profitable things to be doing.
If you remove insurance from getting concoredokkendthen on principle you should lose insurance for going into low sec and 0.0
Local Thread 107-b,War ,Navigation Shortcuts |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising
FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 20:41:00 -
[325]
Originally by: Captian Internet
If you remove insurance from getting concoredokkendthen on principle you should lose insurance for going into low sec and 0.0
Why? That logic makes no sense.
|
Captian Internet
Lead Bricks
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 20:46:00 -
[326]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Captian Internet
If you remove insurance from getting concoredokkendthen on principle you should lose insurance for going into low sec and 0.0
Why? That logic makes no sense.
Because the base argument being used against insurance payouts for getting concordokken'd is that they are committing a crime and should not get paid. Going into a lowsec entry is a high risk situation and going into a 0.0 entry is a VERY high risk situation (except maybe l4x I rarely see it camped lol).
The arguments being thrown out are "Any real insurance company would not insure criminals" where in reality any one entering 0.4 through 0.0 and dying should get higher insurance rates based upon what they are saying and self destructing your ship would be considered insurance fraud.
Thats what I'm getting at
If insurance is such an issue just remove it all together less isk pouring into the game anyways.
Local Thread 107-b,War ,Navigation Shortcuts |
Okkie2
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 21:15:00 -
[327]
Edited by: Okkie2 on 09/09/2007 21:16:30
=> xOm3gAx
Nice story, but i don't agree at all with it. It's just wrong if a ganker can look at a target and knows in front if it will be profitable or not to kill him.
Killing a target should and will always be possible, but a ganker should not be able to calculate in front if he must attack a target or not. Also his target should have a way to defeat himself. Atm the only thing that works is to make sure his cargo is worth less then the gankers would loose if they would kill him. He cannot defend his ship with a gang (there's no aggression until it's too late), the sec-hit for killing him is nothing more then a few hours ratting in low-sec (which is a great way to make isk)
There's just no risk in suicide ganking atm, you know what you loose, you know what you get (on average) so you also know the profit.
|
Giatshi
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 21:59:00 -
[328]
Originally by: Farscape Hw
anyone who suports what the op said is a complete and utter carebear noob. you have no idea of what this game is about.
the whole thing that makes eve what it is is the risk vs reward. you putting extremly expensive stuff in your t1 frig cargohold is a massive risk. its your own dumb fault for setting a destination and hitting autopilot.
if you ppl keep whining and ccp change the rules to suite you damn noobs who have no concept of what eve is, THEN it will become less fun and the real experienced players will start to leave the game. we are not playing WOW. this is eve online. you being able to be killed anywhere in the game is very much a huge factor in why ppl choose this game over others.
now for your irrellevant real life scenario...
the stupid guy who got mugged was carrying crazy amounts of money in his wallet, and wearing a gold watch and platnum chain around his kneck. the guys who robbed him gave the goods to thier buddy just before the cops got there. therefore the cops arrest the guys and they go to jail for robbing him (its not like you get out with your ship intact). but the money is gone never to be seen again by the victim.
stop being a whiny little noob and go back to your agent mission.
Maybe you dont understand the concept of risk vs reward.....when you take a chance on a unknown set of variables....that is risk
When the outcome is not a certanity,and you proceed anyways,that is risk.
What is being discussed here is "acceptable loss".The outcome is a known factor,and the loss is trivial,the reward however is immense.
And the "acceptable loss" is made trivial with the useage of an alt,that presumably most of these suicide gankers have already.
|
xOm3gAx
Caldari
Stain of Mind
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 23:16:00 -
[329]
Originally by: Okkie2
Edited by: Okkie2 on 09/09/2007 21:16:30
=> xOm3gAx
Nice story, but i don't agree at all with it. It's just wrong if a ganker can look at a target and knows in front if it will be profitable or not to kill him.
Killing a target should and will always be possible, but a ganker should not be able to calculate in front if he must attack a target or not. Also his target should have a way to defeat himself. Atm the only thing that works is to make sure his cargo is worth less then the gankers would loose if they would kill him. He cannot defend his ship with a gang (there's no aggression until it's too late), the sec-hit for killing him is nothing more then a few hours ratting in low-sec (which is a great way to make isk)
There's just no risk in suicide ganking atm, you know what you loose, you know what you get (on average) so you also know the profit.
Use cargo containers in your hold and the ganker does not know what you have and cannot calculate what is in your hold. That answers problem 1.
Fly with friends in a corp together that solves the problem of defence as long as your in a ship that can take 2k dmg in the first volley you will never have an issue. And 2k post resist dmg isnt hard to tank. But it does require thinking a little. They attack you they must attack your friends as well. Its an MMO not a single player game.
Have you ever ratted in low sec? I suggest you try it. It took me 3 months to go from -5 to -.9 playing every day. In 0.0 it woulda taken a week at most. Neither of which are enjoyable and in both cases tend to be rather dangerous.
So basicly you wasted my time with your post as i answered all the same questions again. In all cases it is more then possible to prevent high sec gank and VERY easy to prevent if you simply think about it. Obviously its not everyones strong point however it is still something that is possible.
The only thing i do agree with you on (and even then its still not a 100% agreement) is the you know what you lose and you know what you get on average part. However there is more risk in it then you give it credit for as if everyone flew with half a brain and protected themselves even the cheap cargo can way (costs maybe 2mil max and adds extra cargo space!) it would reduce the number of suicide ganks and remove the cargo knowlege from the ganker and thus remove the "estimated" profit margin. This in its self would essentially kill high sec ganking if everyone did it.
But no... no one thinks about the little things you can do to protect yourself ingame you all only come to the forums to whine when you think its an exploit or a flaw and whenever you lose thats what it is.
If there were no ways to protect yourself that i could think of (within seconds mind you) then i would be incline to agree however this is not the case and as thus your argument is flawed. If you can show me how it is NOT possible to protect yourself (give me details) then i'll admit being wrong but seeing as i've provided the ways to protect yourself already and they are things people currently do i don't think its a necessity for you to even bother as the examples i provided nullified your argument.
-----------
"Mercinaries never die, we just go to hell to regroup." -xOm3gAx '99
|
Cpt Fina
Insult to Injury
|
Posted - 2007.09.09 23:35:00 -
[330]
Originally by: xOm3gAx
Use cargo containers in your hold and the ganker does not know what you have and cannot calculate what is in your hold. That answers problem 1.
Cargocontainers does not work to shield off cargoscanning.
It IS very hard to protect yourself from suicideganks and still making the haul worth anything at all. Sure haulers could hire all of the mercs in game and whipe out everyone in local one jump ahead each jump... but it is not viable.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |