| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
F'nog
Amarr
Celestial Horizon Corp.
Valainaloce
   |
Posted - 2008.04.27 05:24:00 -
[1]
Sadly, yes, but hear me out.
There have been a lot of arguments about it lately, and by lately I mean about 5 years, but here's a possible way to make it work:
You don't get an insurance payout if Concord responds to your attack AND you DESTROY the other person's ship.
This way it should protect most of the accidental aggression that a new player can do, or lag can induce. If you're not actively trying to kill the other guy, chances are you'll stop shooting and his ship will survive. You'll still lose yours, but you'll get insurance.
Thoughts, flames? Feel free to tell me why I'm wrong. But don't just say that no payouts is not the answer, as I think it is a good way to force suiciders to choose their targets carefully, and not just blast anyone they see.
 Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari
F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said
|
techzer0
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 05:29:00 -
[2]
Yay I agree completely. No insurance if concord responds and the other guy dies. If the other guy lives and you die to concord... you still get insurance?
Suicide "put him in structure" ganks incoming!
------------
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
It's great being a puppetmaster 
|
F'nog
Amarr
Celestial Horizon Corp.
Valainaloce
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 05:40:00 -
[3]
Originally by: techzer0
Yay I agree completely. No insurance if concord responds and the other guy dies. If the other guy lives and you die to concord... you still get insurance?
Suicide "put him in structure" ganks incoming!
comedy gold, but gang mechanics could help solve some of the potential abuse.
Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari
F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said
|
Galan Amarias
Amarr
Dark Tide Rising
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 06:23:00 -
[4]
There is no problem with the current mechanics, constant whinning on the forums aside.
Alert pilots flying paranoid, as you should be when you have billions in your cargo hold, will live. AFK pilots moving billions will die. Demanding the insurance not pay out is just petty.
Seccond, RL analogies are pointless. Pend has prooven they will pay whatever happens as long as you are at the helm when your ship pops. Concord and Pend are different corporations. Corporations who do not have oversight from a common goverment. There is no logical ingame reason for one to effect the other in the manner you are requesting.
The solution to Suicide Ganking is to alter the playstyle of the gankee, not the mechanics of the ganker.
-Galan
The answer to empire ganking |
Zeba
Minmatar
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 06:26:00 -
[5]
I'd say /signed to teh OP but thats against teh forum rules. 
inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan |
Diek Ran
Amarr
Autonums
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 06:32:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Diek Ran on 27/04/2008 06:32:16
I had the same thought.
__________________________________
Originally by: Verlyn
I know it's my own fault,
BUT THATS NOT THE POINT!
|
Freya Runestone
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 06:53:00 -
[7]
Insurance doesn't need to go. People hauling billions in a T1 hauler without support AFK need to go.
suicide ganking works because people don't do it smart when they move their assets, if it wasn't worth the time you had to wait for a good target or wasn't worth the ISK return. Then people wouldn't do it, simple as that.
|
Aki Corrino
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 07:37:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Freya Runestone
Insurance doesn't need to go. People hauling billions in a T1 hauler without support AFK need to go.
But even without insurance those would still be profitable to gank, so whats your point?
T1 haulers pop to a lone brutix.
Removing insurance will make gankers pick their targets more carefully. Right now even haulers with 20m in cargo are getting ganked... Also people just killing stuff because they can, not for profit (jihadswarm?) will have to at least make some financial sacrifices. I support the OP
|
Leandro Salazar
The Blackguard Wolves
Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 07:48:00 -
[9]
The problem with suiciders isn't popping stupid afk T1 haulers with insane loot. Insurance hardly plays any part there as that can be done with throwaway caracals. But that 5 T1 BS can gank a mission setup worth as little as 500 mil and come away with a profit is so utterly wrong.
And please don't tell me to use a scout everytime I jump a gate to do a mission, that goes against the very spirit of highsec. (Yeah I know most of you gankers will laugh about a highsec spirit...)
The OPs idea is pretty good, the suiciders would keep a sa***uard against failed ganks and thus pretty much keep the risk level the same (not that I think they need it, but I guess they require some pampering being the bears they are), but for the case of success they require much more reasonable target values, making suiciding high profile targets a niche profession again rather than something everyone can do if he is just enough of an ***.
You want ME for the CSM!
There is no 'n' in turret
There is no 'r' in faction
There is no 'a' in Scorpion |
Black Otis
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 07:55:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Aki Corrino
Right now even haulers with 20m in cargo are getting ganked... Also people just killing stuff because they can, not for profit (jihadswarm?) will have to at least make some financial sacrifices. I support the OP
Tell me about it!
I pulled the Bestower out of mothballs today for a cleanup run of all the crap in various scattered stations. Maybe 50 jumps all together. A couple of hours at the most and a cargo not exceeding 20 mil.
In that time I got scanned six times and had two gank attempts on me.
Too many bored yahoos with too much ISK in the wallet, methinks.
Maybe this Factional Warfare thing will add something new to keep these people busy.
IMO the whole situation is simply that peeps are running out of interesting things to do and, for now, high sec ganking seems to be the new hobby. Next month it'll be something else.
|
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N.
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 08:13:00 -
[11]
Originally by: F'nog
Sadly, yes, but hear me out.
There have been a lot of arguments about it lately, and by lately I mean about 5 years, but here's a possible way to make it work:
You don't get an insurance payout if Concord responds to your attack AND you DESTROY the other person's ship.
This way it should protect most of the accidental aggression that a new player can do, or lag can induce. If you're not actively trying to kill the other guy, chances are you'll stop shooting and his ship will survive. You'll still lose yours, but you'll get insurance.
Thoughts, flames? Feel free to tell me why I'm wrong. But don't just say that no payouts is not the answer, as I think it is a good way to force suiciders to choose their targets carefully, and not just blast anyone they see.
Well thought out technical solution to a mythical problem.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
Ki An
Gallente
Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 08:14:00 -
[12]
I thought the topic said it wouldn't be a suicide insurance whine, but it is. Why open a new thread without any new content?
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 08:37:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Ki An
I thought the topic said it wouldn't be a suicide insurance whine, but it is. Why open a new thread without any new content?
Why respond with nothing to say, or any new arguments?
I support anything that will keep suicide ganking viable when it comes to big juicy unprotected targets, but help the current situation where the max cargo you can move around is dictated by how many T1 setups it takes to gank your ship.
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 08:44:00 -
[14]
This is an elegant way to solve the suicide ganking profitability issue without compromising the noob protection. I support it.
------------------------------------------
|
Euriti
Gallente
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 08:54:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Freya Runestone
Insurance doesn't need to go. People hauling billions in a T1 hauler without support AFK need to go.
100% true.
I do ganks on an alt in a thrasher, the only people i get to gank are afk hauling shuttles/noob ships with faction items, capital skillbooks or BPs.
I can't touch those who warp to zero.
|
Ki An
Gallente
Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 08:58:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Pohbis
Why respond with nothing to say, or any new arguments?
I support anything that will keep suicide ganking viable when it comes to big juicy unprotected targets, but help the current situation where the max cargo you can move around is dictated by how many T1 setups it takes to gank your ship.
This has been discussed over and over again in other (better) threads. I was questioning the need to make a new one.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |