Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 20:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
Yeah, what the title says:
If you have reasonable ideas on how to make hisec "safe-ish" rather than by now almost totally "safe" for carebears again, especially as related to hisec war-decs, then please post them here. (DecShield Alliance needs to just...go away.)
If you must troll, then please make it clever, and avoid the use of juvenile, grating console-kiddy memes that make you look like an imbecile.
My Big Idea(TM):
Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Have at it, funsters! I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
![Sara XIII Sara XIII](https://images.evetech.net/characters/91235749/portrait?size=64)
Sara XIII
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
40
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 20:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
1337 |
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
206
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:Yeah, what the title says:
If you have reasonable ideas on how to make hisec "safe-ish" rather than by now almost totally "safe" for carebears again, especially as related to hisec war-decs, then please post them here. (DecShield Alliance needs to just...go away.)
If you must troll, then please make it clever, and avoid the use of juvenile, grating console-kiddy memes that make you look like an imbecile.
My Big Idea(TM):
Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Have at it, funsters!
Good idea, but not for suicide ganking. The destroyer buff made it far more isk-efficient to just use Thrashers.
There isn't really a good way to make hisec "safe-ish" without losing over 9000 players. Some people like safe zones so much they delude themselves into thinking hisec is 100% safe even after being told otherwise repeatedly. Then, they quit when they're proven wrong.
Anything short of "guaranteed kill CONCORD" punishments would allow gaming the system to create massive hisec rapefests.
Now, for some minor ways to make hisec more exciting, you can look at overhauling the bounty system, the wardec system, or maybe even an "aggression agreement" mechanic so you can fight someone without possibly aggressing their whole corp (by taking from their can). |
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
206
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Also, a thread like this belongs in "Features & Ideas Discussion", not GD. |
![Jita Alt666 Jita Alt666](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1241325039/portrait?size=64)
Jita Alt666
862
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
OP your ambition is reckless and after starting threads like this is about to be crushed. |
![rodyas rodyas](https://images.evetech.net/characters/90242766/portrait?size=64)
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
211
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:20:00 -
[6] - Quote
I should be totally safe in hi sec, using officer items should cause a glow around my ships as well as an invulnerbility shield too.
That would be a fixed and perfect hi -sec.
Thank you Threads like this generally result in anything positive.
Locked. |
![Jita Alt666 Jita Alt666](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1241325039/portrait?size=64)
Jita Alt666
862
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
Most scales that use the terminology high and low follow scales such as:
Low. Moderate. High. Very High. Extreme.
|
![Zagam Zagam](https://images.evetech.net/characters/969693131/portrait?size=64)
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
460
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
rodyas wrote:I should be totally safe in hi sec, using officer items should cause a glow around my ships as well as an invulnerbility shield too.
That would be a fixed and perfect hi -sec.
Thank you
And then you would be a perfect target for a few Thrashers.
Bounty system needs a revamp, so its not all about the podkill, but rather the ship kill too.
War deccing needs to have a defined goal, rather than "we'll stop when we feel like it".
Concordoken shouldn't be near-instantaneous. The further you are from a major object in hisec (such as a station or gate), the longer the response time. Just like in RL, if you live a block from the police station, they are there insanely quick. If you live out in the boonies, 30km from the nearest town... its going to take a bit. So... ganking on the Jita undock = instant concordoken. Ganking 80 AU from the nearest gate/station = you will get 3-4 Thrasher volleys in without a problem, maybe even 5.
And finally... if you single-shot a ship (somehow), or are already aligned, you should have a *slight* chance of getting away before Concord shows up and says hello.
|
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
206
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:09:00 -
[9] - Quote
EXTREEEEEEME-SEC? |
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
206
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
Zagam wrote: Bounty system needs a revamp, so its not all about the podkill, but rather the ship kill too.
War deccing needs to have a defined goal, rather than "we'll stop when we feel like it".
Agreed.
Zagam wrote: Concordoken shouldn't be near-instantaneous. The further you are from a major object in hisec (such as a station or gate), the longer the response time. Just like in RL, if you live a block from the police station, they are there insanely quick. If you live out in the boonies, 30km from the nearest town... its going to take a bit. So... ganking on the Jita undock = instant concordoken. Ganking 80 AU from the nearest gate/station = you will get 3-4 Thrasher volleys in without a problem, maybe even 5.
Very reasonable, I like it.
Zagam wrote: And finally... if you single-shot a ship (somehow), or are already aligned, you should have a *slight* chance of getting away before Concord shows up and says hello.
I think there are some ships that can do this now, but it's considered an exploit to evade CONCORD like that and you can get banned.
|
|
![mkint mkint](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1092178423/portrait?size=64)
mkint
618
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
assho1e noob corp griefers take advantage of screwed up wardec mechanics WAY more than their targets. Any changes to wardec mechanics need to make it dangerous to declare war. Perhaps make it so if your corp has a non-cosentual wardec on anyone, all the individuals who are in the corp at any time the wardec is active (regardless if they drop corp, or drop an alliance to shed wardecs they start etc) is flashy red to everyone in EVE until the wardec drops. Implement that change, and I'd support whatever bullshit one-sided griefing mechanics incompetent griefers need make up for how much they suck at EVE (suck too much for real PVP anyway so have to farm rookie kills.) |
![met worst met worst](https://images.evetech.net/characters/91390374/portrait?size=64)
met worst
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
47
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:18:00 -
[12] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote: Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Why not just go and kill **** in 0.0?
Ahhh. Wait. You want to shoot things that don't shoot back. Silly me. ![Roll](https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/Images/Emoticons/ccp_roll.png) |
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
206
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
met worst wrote:Lyrrashae wrote: Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Why not just go and kill **** in 0.0? Ahhh. Wait. You want to shoot things that don't shoot back. Silly me. ![Roll](https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/Images/Emoticons/ccp_roll.png) Solution to station camps is all I can think of. 20 seconds is plenty of time to cyno in a bunch of bombers and alpha the hell out of a dumb ship playing station games. |
![mkint mkint](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1092178423/portrait?size=64)
mkint
618
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:23:00 -
[14] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:met worst wrote:Lyrrashae wrote: Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Why not just go and kill **** in 0.0? Ahhh. Wait. You want to shoot things that don't shoot back. Silly me. ![Roll](https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/Images/Emoticons/ccp_roll.png) Solution to station camps is all I can think of. 20 seconds is plenty of time to cyno in a bunch of bombers and alpha the hell out of a dumb ship playing station games. If you're not smart enough to beat someone playing station games, then maybe EVE isn't for you.
HINT: it takes 2 to play a game. |
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
206
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:28:00 -
[15] - Quote
mkint wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote:met worst wrote:Lyrrashae wrote: Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Why not just go and kill **** in 0.0? Ahhh. Wait. You want to shoot things that don't shoot back. Silly me. ![Roll](https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/Images/Emoticons/ccp_roll.png) Solution to station camps is all I can think of. 20 seconds is plenty of time to cyno in a bunch of bombers and alpha the hell out of a dumb ship playing station games. If you're not smart enough to beat someone playing station games, then maybe EVE isn't for you. HINT: it takes 2 to play a game. 2... alts? Takes more than that.
Trolling aside, I know it does. Now that I think of it, lore-wise covert cynos don't make much sense either. Hisec is cynojammed, period. |
![Vaerah Vahrokha Vaerah Vahrokha](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1439129814/portrait?size=64)
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
109
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:28:00 -
[16] - Quote
What's wrong with hi sec warfare? |
![Morganta Morganta](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1099209612/portrait?size=64)
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
793
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:29:00 -
[17] - Quote
so you cant get enough people in fleet to spank your poorly chosen WTs so you want the ability to use blops to make up for the fact that you are the loser in the war?
welp, the way it usually works is somebody wins, and somebody loses you lost, deal with it.
and nice attempt to bait the goons with your idea that if they can get more ganks then mittins will use his uber leet stranglehold on CCP to make it a reality.
again nice try, but waaaaay too transparent, and misguided The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
![Opertone Opertone](https://images.evetech.net/characters/675167392/portrait?size=64)
Opertone
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
111
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:29:00 -
[18] - Quote
Rework Combat Engine.
Instead of warp disruptors. Make it so. Combat initiation prohibits warping for the next 60 seconds. Everytime you fire, warp engine needs to cool down.
Will make sniping possible, will make catching snipers also possible within 60 sec timeframe. No silly catch game. Unless you want to escape, you will get fights and fair fights more often.
No more hit and run. |
![Havegun Willtravel Havegun Willtravel](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1499637687/portrait?size=64)
Havegun Willtravel
Mobile Alcohol Processing Units
44
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:32:00 -
[19] - Quote
The best way to fix High Sec PvP is to start wtih the truth.
High Sec PvP is like the Special Olypics. No matter who wins it's for loosers.
While you seek to berate ' carebears' for wanting a " safe-ish " high sec are you not guilty of the exact same behavior ? Are you not basicaly asking how to improve your 'safe-ish ' pvp environment to make it even easier to get risk free kills ?
"and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option "
Case in point, this ^ is not PvP. Ganking has absolutely nothing to do with PvP. If anything ganking is the polar opposite of PvP and needs to be curbed.
The best way to fix high sec pvp is to move it to low sec where it belongs.
As for War Decks, add a couple zero's to the war deck fee, lets say 75 mil for a start. And an additional fee for each deck a corp launches in a season or year over a certain number, say 25 per year and the fee + 25 mil for each additional. This should start to bring some intelligence back to war decking. It will be used as it was truely intended, as an economic tool not an excuse for risk averse whiners to grief defenceless targets.
Allow podding for GCC regardless of the players or systems sec status. You do the crime you do the time. Also no docking up and hiding till your timer is up.
I agree high sec needs to be less safe. I'd just like to see that danger spread around a bit more evenly. |
![Halcyon Ingenium Halcyon Ingenium](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1570642840/portrait?size=64)
Halcyon Ingenium
Infomorph Research and Technology
127
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:36:00 -
[20] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:Yeah, what the title says:
If you have reasonable ideas on how to make hisec "safe-ish" rather than by now almost totally "safe" for carebears again, especially as related to hisec war-decs, then please post them here. (DecShield Alliance needs to just...go away.)
If you must troll, then please make it clever, and avoid the use of juvenile, grating console-kiddy memes that make you look like an imbecile.
My Big Idea(TM):
Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Have at it, funsters!
You're full of it. Most kills happen in High Sec, check your statistics on your star map.
So, in conclusion, you are either sorely deluded or an incompetant combat pilot, and therfore CCP should change nothing to accomadate you. Good day sir. That which always was, and is, and will be everlasting fire, the same for all, the cosmos, made neither by god nor man, replenishes in measure as it burns away. -Heraclitus |
|
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
208
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:40:00 -
[21] - Quote
Opertone wrote:Rework Combat Engine.
Instead of warp disruptors. Make it so. Combat initiation prohibits warping for the next 60 seconds. Everytime you fire, warp engine needs to cool down.
Will make sniping possible, will make catching snipers also possible within 60 sec timeframe. No silly catch game. Unless you want to escape, you will get fights and fair fights more often.
No more hit and run.
Confirming I fire using my warp core. |
![mkint mkint](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1092178423/portrait?size=64)
mkint
618
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:00:00 -
[22] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:Opertone wrote:Rework Combat Engine.
Instead of warp disruptors. Make it so. Combat initiation prohibits warping for the next 60 seconds. Everytime you fire, warp engine needs to cool down.
Will make sniping possible, will make catching snipers also possible within 60 sec timeframe. No silly catch game. Unless you want to escape, you will get fights and fair fights more often.
No more hit and run. Confirming I fire using my warp core.
It's actually not a bad idea if you think about it... In how many different sci-fi lores does the protagonist get stuck in battle because "warp engine is dead sir!" I'd mix it up a little though.
Ships have a "minimum capacitor to initiate warp" attribute. The capacitor consumed by warping is not changed, but you must start with a reasonable amount of capacitor to begin with. For example, the "complex systems" of a combat ship would require something like 99% capacitor, enough that running a single active hardener or ewar module will stop you from warping, while the "relatively simple systems" of an industrial ship might only need 20-30% capacitor (letting them get out of warp without full capacitor but still initiate their next warp.) Same effect as the original idea mostly, except that you can choose to leave a logi to die to cap transfer the rest of the fleet.
Yeah, it would be a messy change (rookies not being able to warp out of missions, incursions gone bad going really really bad), but I kinda like the idea of encouraging more commitment. |
![Petrus Blackshell Petrus Blackshell](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1270580029/portrait?size=64)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
208
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:04:00 -
[23] - Quote
mkint wrote: It's actually not a bad idea if you think about it... In how many different sci-fi lores does the protagonist get stuck in battle because "warp engine is dead sir!" I'd mix it up a little though.
Ships have a "minimum capacitor to initiate warp" attribute. The capacitor consumed by warping is not changed, but you must start with a reasonable amount of capacitor to begin with. For example, the "complex systems" of a combat ship would require something like 99% capacitor, enough that running a single active hardener or ewar module will stop you from warping, while the "relatively simple systems" of an industrial ship might only need 20-30% capacitor (letting them get out of warp without full capacitor but still initiate their next warp.) Same effect as the original idea mostly, except that you can choose to leave a logi to die to cap transfer the rest of the fleet.
Yeah, it would be a messy change (rookies not being able to warp out of missions, incursions gone bad going really really bad), but I kinda like the idea of encouraging more commitment.
That sounds interesting, but some considerations:
- You'd be making the Augoror useful. That's unacceptable.
- Artillery doesn't use cap, and has the highest alpha, so it would just start being used more for ganks.
- Autocannons don't use cap either.
- Cap boosters would become a necessary fitting consideration for gankers, causing less variety in fittings.
In other words, the idea needs work, or it becomes a stealth Winmatar buff. We really don't need more of those. |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:17:00 -
[24] - Quote
rodyas wrote:I should be totally safe in hi sec, using officer items should cause a glow around my ships as well as an invulnerbility shield too.
That would be a fixed and perfect hi -sec.
Thank you
Waitaminnit, you mean to tell me that Invulnerability Fields don't actually make one invulnerable?! TO THE FORU--oh, right...![Blink](https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/Images/Emoticons/ccp_blink.png)
I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:21:00 -
[25] - Quote
mkint wrote:assho1e noob corp griefers take advantage of screwed up wardec mechanics WAY more than their targets. Any changes to wardec mechanics need to make it dangerous to declare war. Perhaps make it so if your corp has a non-cosentual wardec on anyone, all the individuals who are in the corp at any time the wardec is active (regardless if they drop corp, or drop an alliance to shed wardecs they start etc) is flashy red to everyone in EVE until the wardec drops. Implement that change, and I'd support whatever bullshit one-sided griefing mechanics incompetent griefers need make up for how much they suck at EVE (suck too much for real PVP anyway so have to farm rookie kills.)
EVE is not about consensual duelling, it never was, and the very idea is anathaema to the entire core ethos of the game.
Next.
And it's not just newbie-griefers who make use of war-decs, either. Far from it, actually. I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:22:00 -
[26] - Quote
met worst wrote:Lyrrashae wrote: Allow the use of covert cynos and bridging-to in hisec. Because carebears need to discover the fun of cloaked torpedo-murder appearing out of nowhere, and think how much more lol-worthy Hulkageddon, and suicide-ganking in general would be if this were an option?
Why not just go and kill **** in 0.0? Ahhh. Wait. You want to shoot things that don't shoot back. Silly me. ![Roll](https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/Images/Emoticons/ccp_roll.png)
Post with your main.
I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:28:00 -
[27] - Quote
Morganta wrote:so you cant get enough people in fleet to spank your poorly chosen WTs so you want the ability to use blops to make up for the fact that you are the loser in the war?
welp, the way it usually works is somebody wins, and somebody loses you lost, deal with it.
and nice attempt to bait the goons with your idea that if they can get more ganks then mittins will use his uber leet stranglehold on CCP to make it a reality.
again nice try, but waaaaay too transparent, and misguided
No, we haven't lost. We rarely do. You know nothing of my/our combat record, but this is easily remedied, so why don't you just shut the **** up until you've done so? Stupid, childish, little internet-cliche.
And I want the ability to use BLOPs to move my forces faster to my target, and engage them faster, before they can re-act--by the usual station/neutral RR asshattery. This is basic tactics, I'm sure even a thoughtlessly forum-sperging idiot like you can figure this out.
And I don't give a flying **** about Goons or "mittins," whoever that is.
I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:30:00 -
[28] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote: Solution to station camps is all I can think of. 20 seconds is plenty of time to cyno in a bunch of bombers and alpha the hell out of a dumb ship playing station games.
^^This.^^
EDIT: Might also give a whole new set of "tools in the box" for bounty-hunters to choose from, if that atrociously broken waste of database space ever gets fixed, too. I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:37:00 -
[29] - Quote
mkint wrote: It's actually not a bad idea if you think about it... In how many different sci-fi lores does the protagonist get stuck in battle because "warp engine is dead sir!" I'd mix it up a little though.
Rephrase that:
"In how many different sci-fi lores...[...]...is this used as a generic, predictable-as-death-and-taxes plot device by authors when they can't be arsed to come up with something creative?"
EVE is already a pastiche of a great many generic sci-fi tropes--a pretty damned good one, I might add, but still hardly original. We don't need more.
mkint wrote: [...] Yeah, it would be a messy change (rookies not being able to warp out of missions, incursions gone bad going really really bad), but I kinda like the idea of encouraging more commitment.
We already have that:
It's called having to fight in warp disruptor/scrambler range if you want to try and get a kill. I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
![Lyrrashae Lyrrashae](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1073718283/portrait?size=64)
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
136
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:40:00 -
[30] - Quote
Zagam wrote:
Bounty system needs a revamp, so its not all about the podkill, but rather the ship kill too.
War deccing needs to have a defined goal, rather than "we'll stop when we feel like it".
Concordoken shouldn't be near-instantaneous. The further you are from a major object in hisec (such as a station or gate), the longer the response time. Just like in RL, if you live a block from the police station, they are there insanely quick. If you live out in the boonies, 30km from the nearest town... its going to take a bit. So... ganking on the Jita undock = instant concordoken. Ganking 80 AU from the nearest gate/station = you will get 3-4 Thrasher volleys in without a problem, maybe even 5.
And finally... if you single-shot a ship (somehow), or are already aligned, you should have a *slight* chance of getting away before Concord shows up and says hello.
This is eminently reasonable, I like this.
I think that last would be considered exploiting, though, as evading CONCORD is something CCP takes a dim view of.
I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |