| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kynoch
   |
Posted - 2004.04.16 17:07:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Kynoch on 16/04/2004 17:10:48
 Quote:
Whoever had the idea at CCP to allow players to have alts needs to be shot 
Stupid stupid stupid
OMG I love your corp name Miso!!!!
|
Koda
|
Posted - 2004.04.16 17:46:00 -
[32]
Show me a game mechanic and I'll show you 1000 lamers looking for a way to exploit it.
--------------
Share the love in the SNIGG Forums
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2004.04.16 22:25:00 -
[33]
Quote:
Show me a game mechanic and I'll show you 1000 lamers looking for a way to exploit it.
Which brings us back to "You cannot activate this module in 0.5 security space, as it would be considered an aggressive act."
If people insist on finding, and using, these sort of tactics (and they WILL) - then, that's where we're heading.
_______
"Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age." |
Lysender
|
Posted - 2004.04.16 22:44:00 -
[34]
Just say No to Gate Ganking! Gate Gankers are lame!
|
Warnei Belmid
|
Posted - 2004.04.16 23:01:00 -
[35]
In the famous words of Justin Timberlake ...Cry me a river
|
WDane
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 00:15:00 -
[36]
In 1.0 - 0.5 space why not have Concord clean up the scene of the crime and take the would be loot to the nearst station, where the victim can pick up his stuff, I mean in real life the police dont leave a murder victims property behind.
Anyhow this is an exploit, some sad dude found a way to get around the sa***uards and shared it with his little friends, come on if you want to pvp grow a set to do it against someone that expect it coming instead of jumping some trusting noob.
|
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 01:19:00 -
[37]
Safe space isn't. Even in 1.0 space, you must always assume that there are people who are going to kill you if they have the chance, and plan accordingly. Unfortunatly, this is something that evenyone learns the hard way. My learning experience ended up costing someone else (who wasn't supposed to be involved) a battleship.
Note: Always keep combat drones in your hanger unless you are actively killing something. They will respond to what they percieve as hostile action, and that perception does *not* match Concord's rules.
Harry Voyager
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 03:34:00 -
[38]
Quote:
Safe space isn't. Even in 1.0 space, you must always assume that there are people who are going to kill you if they have the chance, and plan accordingly.
The point is that it IS supposed to be. Someone finds a way to do it, CCP plug the gap; someone else finds another way to do it, CCP plug that gap; and so on and so on.
You are not supposed to have to consider the possibility of player combat in high security space, unless you're in a corp war. It simply isn't supposed to be able to happen.
_______
"Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age." |
DarkStar251
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 07:26:00 -
[39]
I'm sorry, but if you are transporting a Mem implant in a shuttle you deserve to loose it.
to have got a mem implant you must have done some level 3 agent missions, and must have a cruiser to have fought the pirates in these missions. Deliver said implant in that, and CONCORD will kill your agressors before they kill you.
|
DarkStar251
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 07:30:00 -
[40]
Also, if 0.5-1.0 is supposed to be infinately safe, why not rename it all 1.0? whats the point in a difference?
|
Grease Ball
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 08:53:00 -
[41]
GOD I HATE LAME CAREBEARS!!!!!!!!!
Nothing should be 100% safe. Nothing is 100% in RL, why should it be in a futuristic space gasme. What noob has gotten implants? He is only a noob because he is ******* stupid, not due to time played. In 2 weeks of playing Eve I have made 300 million. Am I a noob?
|
Emil Antonowsky
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 08:54:00 -
[42]
Here is an idea, go play Final Fantasy. This is a pvp game, not a mining simulator.
No better way to steal money than free enterprise. |
CT BadIronTree
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 11:07:00 -
[43]
i bet it was an american noob :PPPPPP lol
============================================
Colossus Technologies
The first and oldest corp in eve!
BadIronTree Head of Production
CSM Chat Log September 25, 2003:
Fuhry> Some things we simply cannot test, and therefore we just put it on Tranq. cross our fingers and then get into panic mode.
---------------------------------------
playing (or beta testing)since Sat, 2 Nov 2002 16:06 (beta 5)
---------------------------------------
|
Karrihn
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 13:18:00 -
[44]
Or a simpler solution would be,
Make the sentry guns Shoot the origional attacker, and then FLAG the container as Stolen property. If anyone decides to scoop it up, Concord then shoots that person. Etc...
That way the person that got ganked has a chance to get their cargo back and the buddies that tagged along with the ganker can only watch, or get blown up them selves.
|
Ulendar
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 13:38:00 -
[45]
Please take your EVE box...
Turn it around...
Look under the 'CHOOSE YOUR PROFESSION' heading..
there it reads 'Dauntless fleet commander, or the most nefarious pirate ever to terrorize the galaxy - be and do anything you'd never dare to imagen'
That scentance means that pirating is a legit profession in the game. That also means that there will be pirates in the game...
Pirating is the exact oposite of consensual PVP.
When you buy this game you acknocledge that there will be alot of pk's in the form of pirates who will try to scam, force and trick you out of your goods.
You should be aware of this and not complain about it since its included in the game package you bought.
Please stop whining about EVE and the pirating/griefing/ganking/scamming ectect. Its part of the game, if you dont like it you should 'move along'.
Its bad enough that empire space includes 80% of the populated world in EVE..
I can only imagen what will happen if people are being forced into 0.0 to remain competitive in their 'economic ventures'. I can only imagen the insane amount of whiners and flamers on the forum...
And i can only pray that CCP will for once hold true to their own vision and not place sentryguns all over 0.0 space or once again give the uber whining carebears the advantage over everyone else..
Did you actually stop to think for a moment about what your asking??
Your asking for concord/ccp to give you INVULNERABILITY in a PVP GAME. Now is there anyone else who thinks this is completely retarded and over the top or is it just me?
Why would you buy a PVP game and then complain about the PVP thats in there??
I know...why dont CCP just release a set of cheat codes and only release them those who swear on pain of death to be carebears?
Originally by: cashman
It's time for Eris to get a clue. CCP should make a statement about this.
It's the exact same things as what Zombie did, you may not attack in "safe-areas" (empire/within sentry range) without loosing your ship.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 13:44:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 17/04/2004 13:58:47
Ulendar, regardless of all that, this kind of behaviour WILL force CCP's hands and it WILL affect those of us who choose to play by the rules.
I think it is incredibly lame to fire a kestrel at point blank range to kill an industrial - it's cowardly too. The player you've ganked can't retaliate because the offending player is in a npc corp., won't ever leave 1.0 space, and will just be recycled when their security status drops low enough.
That's where the frustration comes from - there is NO chance for retaliation.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Manfred Doomhammer
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 13:57:00 -
[47]
well .. in respnse to someone stating he HATES CAREBEARS... i hate dEBILe Gankers...
and because someone asked what the difference between 1.0 to 0.5 would be... well mainly it is an indicator as to what NPC Rats you can encounter in these systems.
----
Manfred Doomhammer
Fleet Admiral
CEO ShadowTec Inc.
|
Drath
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 15:19:00 -
[48]
Well I agree that traveling anywhere in a shuttle with anything expensive is stupid, but he/she should still expect to be safe in high sec.
Also all the people saying this is a PVP game and you should expect something like this, just remember when CCP freaks out to this stuff and they nerf PVP more blame the gate ganker not the newbie.
|
Ulendar
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 15:31:00 -
[49]
Quote:
Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 17/04/2004 13:58:47
Ulendar, regardless of all that, this kind of behaviour WILL force CCP's hands and it WILL affect those of us who choose to play by the rules.
I think it is incredibly lame to fire a kestrel at point blank range to kill an industrial - it's cowardly too. The player you've ganked can't retaliate because the offending player is in a npc corp., won't ever leave 1.0 space, and will just be recycled when their security status drops low enough.
That's where the frustration comes from - there is NO chance for retaliation.
Yes i know it will...
Things that are borderline exploit get nerfed...its the way of CCP, as it has shown in the past.
The fact of the matter is that these gankings are (in most cases) a direct result of the implementation of uber concord and nutter sentries EVERYWHERE. Not to mention the security status bullcrap which is obviously a SERIOUS issue!
If people cannot pirate in the lower security areas of empire space anymore because their security rating is 'unfixable' then they will resort ot using expendable characters to do their killing for them..
The step towards using a desposable ship and go apply the same tactic to more fertile ground sis a very small one.
I'm sure there are a number of people that would have done this type of thing eventually regardless of what issues there are or are not. But those would have been only a small number of poeple and easily fixed. As it is right now there are other things that need to be fixed first and foremost before they put the lid on this..
I cannot help but feel that soemhow CCP always ends up curing symptoms and not deseases.
I am a strong supporter of a more open PVP system in EVE myself. I realize many do not want PVP. I believe however that those people are can be perfectly happy and perfectly safe within 10-0.5 system IF the issues such as those mentioned in this topic are resolved. As a countereffort from those who have the liberty of perfect safet in those systems i would ask that 0.4-0.1 become more open to PVP...or more specifically pirating. A first step would be the removal of sentry guns on the gates so that blackading becomes a possibility again (its easy enough to avoid by checking on the map), instead of the sentryguns an incremented concord respons would be a much more flexible system.
In such a way that constant blockades for days on end would not be possible...
I think its a good turnside to the medalion of perfect safety in other areas...
Untill these things are resolved however i feel that there will be, in the future, many many more incidents alike these where people find new ways of pirating and in so doing possibly lead to something that is much much worst then the good old 0.4 blockades in empire space.
People who fully support only their view of matters and feel that everyone should adapt to what THEY like and are in no way prepared to make compromises just lead to bad habbits and imho a bad game for everyone.
Maybe everyone could make a few compromises (especially the carebears *cough*) and then MAYBE we can get through to the devs to make them do what we want and then MAYBE we can all enjoy the same game without these little topics about things that are obviously bad for everyone.
There has to be measure in a mmorpg i agree...there has to be a safe place. Safe space MUST be safe from these kind of things...indeed. But its is completely unfair to expect the same from transitioning zones or unsafe space..;
With the suggestion of the threadstarter (sentries heal players), the transitioning zones which are considered 'not so safe space' would just become safer again. This is no kind of compromise and imho there is no way it works without annoying other members of the community.
Its all fair and good when your a newb/semi newb...you want to be safe, have the whole universe patrolled by concord ect. But frankly people dont know what they want untill they are a few months into the game, and evenso there is always the possibility of people wanting to try something new. You might want to be safe now, but in months, who knows, you may end up ranting here about how 'boring' EVE has become...
People should think about things for a second before they go on crusades to ban something they may find is quit 'the thing' for them in a months time.
Originally by: cashman
It's time for Eris to get a clue. CCP should make a statement about this.
It's the exact same things as what Zombie did, you may not attack in "safe-areas" (empire/within sentry range) without loosing your ship.
|
Steven Dynahir
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 15:59:00 -
[50]
Think about this..
Current situation:
1) Risk to be caught 95% for ganker, 0% for comrades.
2) Concequences 1 kestrel for ganger, 0ISK for comrades.
3) Profit, anything that was in the ganged ship.
With that kind of odds, it's very profitable, espesially when you can't die in this game. What would make situation more realistic?
- Add risk for comrades.
- Add concequences.. 0 skill clone could be fun for concequence, 1 week jail time (no playee thee), ect.
- Remove alts
- Mark loot as stolen merchandise
- ect
SigPl/HQ&Log Coy/MNB(C)/KFOR |
Archemedes
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 16:27:00 -
[51]
Ouch... that's a nasty trick. Makes me glad I normally use a speed-rigged interceptor to travel... if you can find a way to kill my 5km/sec Claw before I warp out you DESERVE my cargo.
Well, actually you MIGHT kill me if I mess up... because if you pull a Kestrel ambush on me and I happen to notice who is waiting to scoop the loot, I might just delay warping out long enough to see if I can lead those missiles you tossed over to your buddy... or your pod after Concord does it's thing. 
Wonder what message you get if you get podded by your OWN cruise missiles? 
Fortunately, the criminal flagging the devs are adding will probably fix this. If the cops (Concord) are right there next to the can (having just ganked the Kestrel) they should certainly notice someone picking up the loot...
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 16:27:00 -
[52]
Quote:
Getting rid of sentries in low sec empire
I'm still undecided over this.
It could be good or it could lead to Sarum Prime gank-fests.
A middle-ground could be no sentry guns at gates in 0.4 and under ONLY if they lead to a system that is 0.4 and under.
Therefore you could jump from Nonni into Aunenen and when you decloaked you'd have the protection of sentry guns.
However, if you warped to another gate/station in Aunenen, there'd be no sentries to protect you.
This could then tie into the progressive CONCORD response to prevent persistant hot-spots?
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Ulendar
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 17:55:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Ulendar on 17/04/2004 18:03:27
Quote:
Quote:
Getting rid of sentries in low sec empire
I'm still undecided over this.
It could be good or it could lead to Sarum Prime gank-fests.
A middle-ground could be no sentry guns at gates in 0.4 and under ONLY if they lead to a system that is 0.4 and under.
Therefore you could jump from Nonni into Aunenen and when you decloaked you'd have the protection of sentry guns.
However, if you warped to another gate/station in Aunenen, there'd be no sentries to protect you.
This could then tie into the progressive CONCORD response to prevent persistant hot-spots?
Sounds fair enough...
Sarum prime is a bit of an extreem example...i think its the only place where a 1.0 is directly connected to a 0.4 isnt it?
Not sure. In any case, sarum prime is surely a result of bad infrastructure. But putting sentrieguns ONLY on the gates that lead to 'safe space' would be acceptable imho...
Ive always considered a progressive concord response to be a better solution to the sentrieguns we have now in lower security space.
It would have to be so that there are no actual patrols in lower sec space but patrols would show up when agression is initiated, so the ods of the unexpecting victim would be leveled out by the fact that concord forces show up to help them.
It would end the old tale of key traderoutes being permanently blockaded by pirate forces. Such as mara and passari once were. Combined efforts of players and incremented concord responses would be able to break blockades easy.
Furthermore, EVE is not what it once was. Nowadays there is alot of people hunting the heads of pirates. I think if you are constantly blockading the same system, you will get alot of visitors wanting to pod you.
Mastiphal makes a good point...
when thinking about noobs, people always asume the batam mining crowd...
And never the condor/kestrel pvping crowd. There must be a place for the newbie pirates among the community aswell and lower security space in empire is perfect for them. As it stands now..they have no place. 0.0 is to hairy and everything else is impossible.
Originally by: cashman
It's time for Eris to get a clue. CCP should make a statement about this.
It's the exact same things as what Zombie did, you may not attack in "safe-areas" (empire/within sentry range) without loosing your ship.
|
The Reclaimer
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 18:43:00 -
[54]
Quote:
Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 17/04/2004 13:58:47
Ulendar, regardless of all that, this kind of behaviour WILL force CCP's hands and it WILL affect those of us who choose to play by the rules.
I think it is incredibly lame to fire a kestrel at point blank range to kill an industrial - it's cowardly too. The player you've ganked can't retaliate because the offending player is in a npc corp., won't ever leave 1.0 space, and will just be recycled when their security status drops low enough.
That's where the frustration comes from - there is NO chance for retaliation.
Since when were indy's suppose to be flow without escort? CCP has said NUMEROUS times that indys should be escorted. If you had an interceptor or two ganged with your hauler you COULD get REVENGE.
Its exactly this narrow minded soft thinking that is making Eve lose its appeal to me. ******* carebears need to sit and mine scrodite in high-sec systems with Apocs and uber mods to make riskless profits. This is something I know CCP hates and I do as well.
Why not get rid of gateguns, in low sec space, that way a friendly battleship could go blast the campers and still get away if properly setup?
I see no need to allow ppl to fly nearly the whole of eve afk. A decent pilot in an indy can get away from kestrals if he fits his ship with a bit of thinking, other than going for the BIGGEST cargo hold.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 18:46:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 17/04/2004 18:48:40
Quote:
Quote:
Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 17/04/2004 13:58:47
Ulendar, regardless of all that, this kind of behaviour WILL force CCP's hands and it WILL affect those of us who choose to play by the rules.
I think it is incredibly lame to fire a kestrel at point blank range to kill an industrial - it's cowardly too. The player you've ganked can't retaliate because the offending player is in a npc corp., won't ever leave 1.0 space, and will just be recycled when their security status drops low enough.
That's where the frustration comes from - there is NO chance for retaliation.
Since when were indy's suppose to be flow without escort? CCP has said NUMEROUS times that indys should be escorted. If you had an interceptor or two ganged with your hauler you COULD get REVENGE.
Its exactly this narrow minded soft thinking that is making Eve lose its appeal to me. ******* carebears need to sit and mine scrodite in high-sec systems with Apocs and uber mods to make riskless profits. This is something I know CCP hates and I do as well.
Why not get rid of gateguns, in low sec space, that way a friendly battleship could go blast the campers and still get away if properly setup?
I see no need to allow ppl to fly nearly the whole of eve afk. A decent pilot in an indy can get away from kestrals if he fits his ship with a bit of thinking, other than going for the BIGGEST cargo hold.
Please, Mr Troll, tell me how an escort would prevent a Kestrel pilot firing 4 cruise missiles at point blank range from ganking an indy when said Kestrel pilot is in an npc corporation in 1.0 space.
That is what this topic is about.
Being ganged has bugger all to do with it either - you can't attack someone if they are attacking a gangmate.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Nimrodel
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 18:56:00 -
[56]
Um, First thing Space is never Safe!
Then.... Um why did this n00b Undock with the implant in his cargo? Why didn't he install it in the station?
don't people who do this loose sector status?
Wouldnt this be your first hint or trouble...
One way to stop it, or discorage it might be to have Concord Podkill in higher sector Empire space, but what happens then if somone makes a mistake!
I have been podded by sentry guns for no reason in an Unequipped Badger mk2 with lots of valuables in the cargo, i wouldn't like to be podkilled as well just because of some Eve bug!
---------------------------------------------
Nimrodel
Dark Force User
Joint Espionage & Defence Industries
---------------------------------------------
Your Medium YF-12a Smartbomb hits Rusty Cloud, doing 0.0 damage. |
Mephisha
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 20:58:00 -
[57]
Quote:
Its exactly this narrow minded soft thinking that is making Eve lose its appeal to me. ******* carebears need to sit and mine scrodite in high-sec systems with Apocs and uber mods to make riskless profits. This is something I know CCP hates and I do as well.
*Trying to make a point mode on*
And your type of thinking will make eve lose it's appeal to many many other players.
Why are ppl complaining that 70+% of the population of eve is hanging out in safe space.
Well ...
Because not everybody wants to be fighting other players ALL the time.
Many ppl don't like having PvP FORCED onto them.
Most PPL don't like to be shot down by a vastly superior opponent
*Trying to make a point mode off*
These are the ppl you call carebears and they do not belong in YOUR game ... but guess what
With the influx of new players coming into eve .. do you want to give them a chance to build themselves a charater that can one day compete in your PVP arena or are you trying to GANK them out of the game as soon as you can.
I just started 2 weeks ago and i am feverishly preparing for my first PvP action. The only thing that scares me atm is not the big bad battle ship around the corner but financing those first to be expected losses.
So what do i do .... i look for some safe mining in between fights.
Think of all those peeps with less then 1M skill points in dicussions like this plzz.
Too much PvP can kill their game before it started.
I think CCP understands this and is trying to help create a place where they can safely START OFF.
------------------------------------------------
I have seen carebears with claws and PvP-Lords hiding in high sec space. So AWAY with all those terms. We are ALL citizens of EVE. |
Moksha
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 21:09:00 -
[58]
Quote:
i bet it was an american noob :PPPPPP lol
Why is that?
A) Is it because there are more Americans just buying the game now?
B) Is it because you are trying to be funny?
C) Is it because you are a trolling jerk?
I choose C.
Not funny and uncalled for.
And yes I am an American (surprise surprise)
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 21:23:00 -
[59]
Quote:
Here is an idea, go play Final Fantasy. This is a pvp game, not a mining simulator.
Sorry, but you are wrong.
Counterstrike, Worms online, etc., are PvP games. The Sims is a carebear game. EVE is both ... it's carebear in 0.5+ and PvP in <0.5.
_______
"Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age." |
Myko
|
Posted - 2004.04.17 21:34:00 -
[60]
also its been clear from recent CSM's that the dev's want to move combat away from gates (i.e. stop gankings) to belts planets etc. via POS. Hence the famous comment that "PvP = griefing" that was taken out of context.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |