| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
   |
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:27:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Peter Powers on 16/07/2007 13:26:59
Why?
cause its a huge efford to kill a carrier for example,
and it suxx if the pilot just self destructs, and
gets insurance for that.
No RL Insurance does pay you if you kill your own car on purpose..
and im sure it would prevent
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=557575
from happening.
|
eliminator2
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:32:00 -
[2]
yes this would be a gd idea to stop pple getting insurance if the game see's them selfdestructing makes pirate life more easyeir and funner :)
|
bRock 91
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:33:00 -
[3]
Yeah I totally agree with PP
Would be great if i was on when you killed this guy 
|
T0talD
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:43:00 -
[4]
I agree It should be removed
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
MetaForge
Ekliptika
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:43:00 -
[5]
Many people just autodestructed their ships when they get near to the date for next payment. That way they get more money then they'll spend on buying next ship. I think its quite common among those strange people who can keep a ship alive for whole 3 months. Now with rigs that practice is probably less common, but still, forcing people to shoot concord or ask friends to help them loose a ship is only annoying, not improving.
You're just killmail junkies, its important to get Your enemies killed or get loot (depending on motivation), not to get a stupid killmail :) Dead ship is a dead ship.
|
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 13:49:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon
Many people just autodestructed their ships when they get near to the date for next payment. That way they get more money then they'll spend on buying next ship. I think its quite common among those strange people who can keep a ship alive for whole 3 months.
another good reason to remove it on self destruction - thats not what an insurance is for, and thats not the way how it should work.
|
T0talD
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 14:02:00 -
[7]
They should keep it but if your in combat you shoulnt be able to selfdestruct cause thats just lame
Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon
Many people just autodestructed their ships when they get near to the date for next payment. That way they get more money then they'll spend on buying next ship. I think its quite common among those strange people who can keep a ship alive for whole 3 months. Now with rigs that practice is probably less common, but still, forcing people to shoot concord or ask friends to help them loose a ship is only annoying, not improving.
You're just killmail junkies, its important to get Your enemies killed or get loot (depending on motivation), not to get a stupid killmail :) Dead ship is a dead ship.
|
William DeMeo
Gallente
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 14:02:00 -
[8]
I doubt he autodestructed his carrier because he was nearing the insurance date tbh. And anyway, yeah, I'm a killmail *****. KM is the good stuff, if it wasn't for the killmail I'd probably only ransom. But it's still really *** loot wise, all we got was a couple of fighters, he got full insurance and all his modules were destroyed, so not much isk gain from taking him out. Self destruct in combat shouldn't exist tbh, it's just a way for crappy capital pilots to cheat their aggressors out of loot and killmails.
This is not the first time capital ships have blown up like that, hell, I've heard of it a million times (didn't the goons name a station after a certain LV teenager that self destructed his dread?) and it really needs to get fixed.
Yarr |
Washell Olivaw
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 14:14:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Peter Powers
No RL Insurance does pay you if you kill your own car on purpose...
No insurance pays out for combat vehicles being lost in combat either...
Quote:
Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
|
Lemming Wibble
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 15:02:00 -
[10]
I do like little piwats being annoyed because they spent a while shooting a capital ship - and get nothing for it at the end - personally the idea behind that amused me :) -
But yes, saying a RL insurance wouldn't pay is true - like most weapons would probably tear your own ship appart when firing them in eve - get over it - If I reckon properly, a star trek episode - to avoid capture - the captain did pop his own ship didn't he? ;) - and I saw nowhere him needing to buy a new ship - starfleet GAVE him a new one :P - with NEW mods! I'd go for that - pop your own ship, and concord will give you a brand new one, with better mods! :P
Basically, what I'm saying is that - in a combat situation, popping your ship is acceptable - and the insurance should stay as it is :)
|
Sandra Jones
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 15:20:00 -
[11]
If you self-destruct you should have a loss by doing so (like losing insurance) - right now its not realy a loss, its just taking the "win" from the ones who fight the cap pilot, and it is hard enough to kill a capital ship.
|
Washell Olivaw
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 15:21:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Lemming Wibble
If I reckon properly, a star trek episode - to avoid capture - the captain did pop his own ship didn't he? ;) - and I saw nowhere him needing to buy a new ship - starfleet GAVE him a new one :P - with NEW mods!
That's enlisted starfleet personel. Want to sign up for a tour of duty in Eve? Lousy pay, follow orders, fly the ship and fittings you're given without choice and do boring patrols and customs duty? All for a free replacement ship?
Please pick relevant comparisons.
Quote:
Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
Free Traders
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 15:57:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Peter Powers
Edited by: Peter Powers on 16/07/2007 13:26:59
Why?
cause its a huge efford to kill a carrier for example,
and it suxx if the pilot just self destructs, and
gets insurance for that.
No RL Insurance does pay you if you kill your own car on purpose..
and im sure it would prevent
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=557575
from happening.
He just denied them the killmail. He would have got the insurance anyway or the insurance system changed lately. So what's your point anyway ?
So much for killmail w***es complaining. He lost the ship, what do you want more ? Remove killmails, they destroy all the fun in this game.
Insurance on self destruction is a handy feature. Imagine you have to move many ships from 0.0 somewhere else. And you can't sell them on the market there easily. You still get less because you do not get the money you payed for the insurance back ...
Originally by: JP Beauregard
The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls.... 
|
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 16:00:00 -
[14]
you dont get loot from self destructed ships?
|
Xedrik
Supernova Industries
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 16:24:00 -
[15]
I agree with Peter Powers. But I'd also like CCP to remove insurance payouts for ships that got destroyed by CONCORD as well... It's really the same thing =)
---
"Death has a tendency to encourage a depressing view of war." |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Endica Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 16:26:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Remove killmails, they destroy all the fun in this game.
I guess I have to agree on this one.
Regarding insurance in general I'd like to see two changes:
1. No insurance for self destruction.
No loot, no killmail, no insurance. At least that'd be somewhat consistent.
2. No insurance for being killed by Concord
Of course this would have to go hand in hand with making Concord less dumb. They should stop people from continuing with shooting and charge them ISK. The victim should be able to /forgive. Only concordokken for destroyed ships.
That'd make things more reasonable.
_________________________________
- Balance is power, guard it well.. - |
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 17:04:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Remove killmails, they destroy all the fun in this game.
I guess I have to agree on this one.
i dont - killmails are important to get statistics for PVP Players - and i dont see how they destroy anything.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
2. No insurance for being killed by Concord
Of course this would have to go hand in hand with making Concord less dumb. They should stop people from continuing with shooting and charge them ISK. The victim should be able to /forgive. Only concordokken for destroyed ships.
While i sort of agree with the no insurance for concorded ships (makes sense) i dont agree with concord charging isk to make it stop - cause currently (as long as you have a usefull tank) you can survive a priate attack in high sec, cause concord shoots pirates fast (in most cases fast enough). If you change that, that would make highsec much more dangerous, and would make all that little carebears (who allready cry for beeing killed in low sec) cry a lot more
|
TimMc
The Caldari Confederation
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 17:46:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Remove killmails, they destroy all the fun in this game.
I guess I have to agree on this one.
Regarding insurance in general I'd like to see two changes:
1. No insurance for self destruction.
No loot, no killmail, no insurance. At least that'd be somewhat consistent.
2. No insurance for being killed by Concord
Of course this would have to go hand in hand with making Concord less dumb. They should stop people from continuing with shooting and charge them ISK. The victim should be able to /forgive. Only concordokken for destroyed ships.
That'd make things more reasonable.
/signed on both
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Endica Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 18:13:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Peter Powers
i dont agree with concord charging isk to make it stop
Nonono, that's not what I meant.
It would be like this:
- Char shoots other char
- Concord arrives and offender receives a modal window, telling him to stop shooting immediately.
- Concord scrambles and jams the offender and shoots down any attacking drones
- Offender gets charged for ISK in proportion to repair costs of victims ship. 20% of that money goes to Concord, 80% goes to victim. Offender may decline to pay, resulting in his ship being blown up by Concord.
- If victim's ship gets destroyed, all ships that shot it get blown up by Concord.
Overall it should still be possible to take out a ship before Concord arrives or stops you from shooting.
It would, however, be a lot more costly, since you don't get insurance.
Accidential shooting wouldn't result in ship loss anymore, though.
_________________________________
- Balance is power, guard it well.. - |
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 18:31:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Peter Powers
i dont agree with concord charging isk to make it stop
Nonono, that's not what I meant.
It would be like this:
- Char shoots other char
- Concord arrives and offender receives a modal window, telling him to stop shooting immediately.
- Concord scrambles and jams the offender and shoots down any attacking drones
- Offender gets charged for ISK in proportion to repair costs of victims ship. 20% of that money goes to Concord, 80% goes to victim. Offender may decline to pay, resulting in his ship being blown up by Concord.
- If victim's ship gets destroyed, all ships that shot it get blown up by Concord.
Overall it should still be possible to take out a ship before Concord arrives or stops you from shooting.
It would, however, be a lot more costly, since you don't get insurance.
Accidential shooting wouldn't result in ship loss anymore, though.
/sign
|
i take
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 21:22:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Peter Powers
Edited by: Peter Powers on 16/07/2007 13:26:59
Why?
cause its a huge efford to kill a carrier for example,
and it suxx if the pilot just self destructs, and
gets insurance for that.
No RL Insurance does pay you if you kill your own car on purpose..
and im sure it would prevent
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=557575
from happening.
okey sure rl.. hmm then remove insurence from any one with negative standing or bounty on them, no rl insurence would pay insurence to a criminal that uses it for this.
and when your add it, the insurence should actually only work in high sec, since 0.0 is unaccounted for by concord and therefore its impossible to know if your ship is destroyid out there or not,
etcetc
|
i take
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 21:30:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Peter Powers
i dont agree with concord charging isk to make it stop
Nonono, that's not what I meant.
It would be like this:
- Char shoots other char
- Concord arrives and offender receives a modal window, telling him to stop shooting immediately.
- Concord scrambles and jams the offender and shoots down any attacking drones
- Offender gets charged for ISK in proportion to repair costs of victims ship. 20% of that money goes to Concord, 80% goes to victim. Offender may decline to pay, resulting in his ship being blown up by Concord.
- If victim's ship gets destroyed, all ships that shot it get blown up by Concord.
Overall it should still be possible to take out a ship before Concord arrives or stops you from shooting.
It would, however, be a lot more costly, since you don't get insurance.
Accidential shooting wouldn't result in ship loss anymore, though.
why?! why is it that concord do not jam any ship that have the firepower to instant kill any ship in high sec?
your guns should not even be allowed to be active if you wanted concord to be realistic, only reason to have active guns is on a mission and concord would make sure to know what your up to in their space while you are allowed to shoot.
if concord is where you are when a attacker starts shooting one volley is all he gets in and he is jammed and locked down, any drones of his is shot down instantly, and he will be forced to pay a amount equeling to half of his ships value to concord, refusing or out of funds and he is shot down and pod killed as a result of concord and of cause not allowed in high sec for the next 24hours, which means (don't do it unless you can pay). if the vitims ship is destroyid any destroyid modules and cargo + ship will be the payment+half of the attackers ships price that is payid to the ships owner (refusing result in a 74hours high sec lockdown and a wallet of 0.00 since concord takes whatever credit you have available in their space)
you want a realism concord? i am up for it;)
|
KapnKaboom
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 21:30:00 -
[23]
I like the system the way it is now. Watching people cry and whine about it here gives us just as much, if not more, satisfaction than they get from hatemails received from their gankees. I gives a ray of sunshine to the otherwise miserable experience of losing 2 months of effort to a gang-bang squad at a gate. It's just plain fun knowing you could do something to **** the gate campers off. 
|
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 21:42:00 -
[24]
Originally by: KapnKaboom
I like the system the way it is now. Watching people cry and whine about it here gives us just as much, if not more, satisfaction than they get from hatemails received from their gankees. I gives a ray of sunshine to the otherwise miserable experience of losing 2 months of effort to a gang-bang squad at a gate. It's just plain fun knowing you could do something to **** the gate campers off.
since when do carriers come in through gates? The Example i used was not a gatecamp but a stupid carrier pilot who came to a system he doesnt know and attacked a local inhabitant. Locals reacted and started killing his carrier, he self destructed - locals lost two ships and didnt get the killmail/the loot in return - how is that related to your gatecamp story? besides no ship survives a proper gatecamp long enough to selfdestruct.
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
Free Traders
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 22:07:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Peter Powers
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Remove killmails, they destroy all the fun in this game.
I guess I have to agree on this one.
i dont - killmails are important to get statistics for PVP Players - and i dont see how they destroy anything.
Ever been prohibited by your alliance/corp leadership to engage in PvP because you loosing ships does not look good on the killboard? You call that fun? How the hell shall I learn PvP then? I mean common, if we put some work into industry, we can keep on loosing many ships a week, who the hell does care about some stupid killboard? Instead we prohibit PvP and let slide a valuable training opportunity for all the folks that care ...
Anyway there are lot of killmail "farmers" in the game that are interested in nothing but amount of killmails. They gank everything left and right.
Originally by: JP Beauregard
The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 22:21:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Ever been prohibited by your alliance/corp leadership to engage in PvP because you loosing ships does not look good on the killboard? You call that fun? How the hell shall I learn PvP then? I mean common, if we put some work into industry, we can keep on loosing many ships a week, who the hell does care about some stupid killboard? Instead we prohibit PvP and let slide a valuable training opportunity for all the folks that care ...
You cant blame killmails for you beeing in a stupid alliance/corp. If your that frustrated about such rules do something about it and join a corp wich allows you to play the game the way you want it.
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Anyway there are lot of killmail "farmers" in the game that are interested in nothing but amount of killmails. They gank everything left and right.
yarr. if you got a problem with that - stop me. I gank everyone who doesnt pay a ransom, or who i just think is wrong in his ship - and getting no killmails wouldnt change anything about that. you can read posts pro/contra killboards here. And if i wouldnt get any killmails anymore, well i would just start to write down what i killed.
|
Lord Shamino
|
Posted - 2007.07.16 23:38:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Peter Powers
cause its a huge efford to kill a carrier for example,
and it suxx if the pilot just self destructs, and
gets insurance for that.
look at it the roleplay way... surrendering means dishonour.. and you dont want the enemy to get your equipment... its just a logic step to selfdestruct...
|
Peter Powers
Serial Killers Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.17 00:39:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Lord Shamino
Originally by: Peter Powers
cause its a huge efford to kill a carrier for example,
and it suxx if the pilot just self destructs, and
gets insurance for that.
look at it the roleplay way... surrendering means dishonour.. and you dont want the enemy to get your equipment... its just a logic step to selfdestruct...
Yes please look at the Roleplaying view - If you destruct your Ship cause of "Honor" no Insurance would pay you - so its PRO roleplaying to fix it.
|
Ceta Dillar
|
Posted - 2007.07.17 00:40:00 -
[29]
Originally by: T0talD
They should keep it but if your in combat you shoulnt be able to selfdestruct cause thats just lame
Agreed.
|
Onwyn Orbatsuu
International Multi-Player Consortium
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.07.17 01:16:00 -
[30]
/signed
would make logical sense from any point of view. Insurance Fraud etc.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |