EVE Search - Make sucide ganking more difficult

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Make sucide ganking more difficult

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 .. 15 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hariya	Posted - 2008.07.04 19:58:00 - [391] Originally by: Jade Constantine Its done and dusted people and on the list of priority issues for fixing! The real issue is that there was no issue. Don't attempt to fix something that wasn't broken. You know, it was made to their attention due the whines (aka democracy?). You have to always keep in mind that although 900 billion flies like eating shit, it perhaps still isn't actually very good. Even ancient greeks understood it and named it argumentum ad populum. Hello Kitty Online seems to rule.
Ava Santiago	Posted - 2008.07.04 22:42:00 - [392] Until they make it so I can refuse to do business with people via the market system and have my economic revenge upon the military specialists who have forced me to redesign my logistics and business systems, suicide ganking needs a serious cost benefit redesign. Concord doesn't provide consequences. Concord provides insurance payouts.
Dianeces The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.04 23:40:00 - [393] Originally by: Ava Santiago Until they make it so I can refuse to do business with people via the market system and have my economic revenge upon the military specialists who have forced me to redesign my logistics and business systems, suicide ganking needs a serious cost benefit redesign. ITT we learn about noob corp alts.
Dray Caldari Spartan Industries Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2008.07.05 06:29:00 - [394] Originally by: rosey palmer Edited by: rosey palmer on 04/07/2008 17:16:35 Originally by: Dray Listen to these b3llends CCP and the game you spent so much time creating will become exactly what you didn't envisage. Another whiner joins the fray. I love the ganker tears that there may be risk to their profession, while they complain about carebears that have no risk! Ganker: "I want to be safe in high sec blowing up whomever I want with no risk to myself!!! Stupid level 4 carebears have no risk to themselves" (which I agree with incidently) Rest of the game: "Lets introduce risk to the gankers since they complain that there is not enough risk in the game" Ganker: "OMG WHINE, no, I don't want risk for ME, I want risk for everyone else. I want to do whatever I want without penalty and get the FULL payout for my ship when I lose it" I love the tears! Its not a whine or tears, you just don't get it, I wont stop suicide ganking because of the insurance or the sec hit. Ok now listen carefully, suicide ganking is a good way of making isk because people are stupid and greedy as I've pointed out numerous times in this thread. Also its not my profession it's just another way of making isk. The next question is, what happens when the sec hit and the insurance voiding fails to stop it and people still come to the forums to complain?
Leandro Salazar The Blackguard Wolves	Posted - 2008.07.05 07:44:00 - [395] Originally by: Dray Its not a whine or tears, you just don't get it, I wont stop suicide ganking because of the insurance or the sec hit. Ok now listen carefully, suicide ganking is a good way of making isk because people are stupid and greedy as I've pointed out numerous times in this thread. Also its not my profession it's just another way of making isk. The next question is, what happens when the sec hit and the insurance voiding fails to stop it and people still come to the forums to complain? I can only speak for myself here and I am sure there are more than enough WOW-in-space players who would prefer all their activities being instanced who will disagree, but after a complete insurance nerf for suicide ganking, anyone who is STILL ganked either really had it coming anyway, or required some real effort on the part of the gankers, and thus those ganks will be balanced. If you are really not going to stop suicide ganking because of an insurance nerf, more power to you, you are not my 'target audience' then in the first place. Also makes me wonder why you even argue here then, in fact an insurance nerf could be advantageous to you, if all the amateur-suiciders go for greener pastures there will be more potential victims left for the pros, and they might end up being less wary after a nerf too. Make suicide ganking more difficult!
Dray Caldari Spartan Industries Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2008.07.05 09:36:00 - [396] Originally by: Leandro Salazar I can only speak for myself here and I am sure there are more than enough WOW-in-space players who would prefer all their activities being instanced who will disagree, but after a complete insurance nerf for suicide ganking, anyone who is STILL ganked either really had it coming anyway, or required some real effort on the part of the gankers, and thus those ganks will be balanced. If you are really not going to stop suicide ganking because of an insurance nerf, more power to you, you are not my 'target audience' then in the first place. Also makes me wonder why you even argue here then, in fact an insurance nerf could be advantageous to you, if all the amateur-suiciders go for greener pastures there will be more potential victims left for the pros, and they might end up being less wary after a nerf too. Fair comment, tbh my real issue is that it's easy to counter that more than anything is really what's annoying, but I do think it will make the ganking drop off which as you say is to my advantage. The only real way to stop it is imposing a massive sec hit, that' s the only thing that would deter me, which possibly might happen, because lets face it, there's more mission runners than gankers and that means more subs per month for CCP from them so it's in their interest to look after them, not that I'd quit the game, suicide ganking is one of the things I do but it's not everything for me in the game.
rosey palmer	Posted - 2008.07.05 19:36:00 - [397] Originally by: Leandro Salazar I can only speak for myself here and I am sure there are more than enough WOW-in-space players who would prefer all their activities being instanced who will disagree, but after a complete insurance nerf for suicide ganking, anyone who is STILL ganked either really had it coming anyway, or required some real effort on the part of the gankers, and thus those ganks will be balanced. If you are really not going to stop suicide ganking because of an insurance nerf, more power to you, you are not my 'target audience' then in the first place. Also makes me wonder why you even argue here then, in fact an insurance nerf could be advantageous to you, if all the amateur-suiciders go for greener pastures there will be more potential victims left for the pros, and they might end up being less wary after a nerf too. This pretty much reiterates exactly what my point was. The point (my point) was to never eliminate suicide ganking, as I have stated in NUMEROUS posts in this thread I am FOR ganking. I am just not for the full insurance payouts that go along with them. Originally by: Leandro Salazar anyone who is STILL ganked either really had it coming anyway, or required some real effort on the part of the gankers, and thus those ganks will be balanced. Exactly correct.
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba The Requiem	Posted - 2008.07.06 15:56:00 - [398] Originally by: Leandro Salazar anyone who is STILL ganked either really had it coming anyway, or required some real effort on the part of the gankers, and thus those ganks will be balanced. You know whtas funny? Thats the exact situation right now. The only difference your change will make is that the average target will need to be more expensive to be worth it. Why do you need to mission in a 1bil ship when a 200mil raven will do just fine? Not supported. I refuse to respect religious beliefs, and i refuse to respect people who hold them.
Leandro Salazar The Blackguard Wolves	Posted - 2008.07.06 21:08:00 - [399] Originally by: Sokratesz The only difference your change will make is that the average target will need to be more expensive to be worth it. Why do you need to mission in a 1bil ship when a 200mil raven will do just fine? Why do people PvP in 200 mil HACs when a 10 mil cruiser will 'do just fine'? Fun and effectiveness. Just because you don't understand how people can have fun with the mission running/ship pimping playstyle doesn't mean they don't and shouldn't. Sure, beyond a certain point a pimp ships should become suicider prey, but right now that point is way way too low imho. Make suicide ganking more difficult!
Halada Lone Star Joint Venture	Posted - 2008.07.06 22:42:00 - [400] No insurance for CONCORD killed ships. Badly needed. ★ LSJV now recruiting ★

Xaen Caldari Caritas.	Posted - 2008.07.07 01:43:00 - [401] If you don't want suicide ganked in highsec, don't be a high profit target. In the case of freighters, don't be an un-escorted high value target. Bring friends with ECM. As soon as they open fire on you they become global criminals, your friends can ECM or damp at will. Most ships won't survive the first jam cycle. NOT supporting this. - Support fixing the UI\|Suggest Jita fixes\|Compact logs
Xaen Caldari Caritas.	Posted - 2008.07.07 02:05:00 - [402] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Originally by: Sokratesz The only difference your change will make is that the average target will need to be more expensive to be worth it. Why do you need to mission in a 1bil ship when a 200mil raven will do just fine? Why do people PvP in 200 mil HACs when a 10 mil cruiser will 'do just fine'? Fun and effectiveness. Just because you don't understand how people can have fun with the mission running/ship pimping playstyle doesn't mean they don't and shouldn't. Sure, beyond a certain point a pimp ships should become suicider prey, but right now that point is way way too low imho. Unless you're running like 4 officer mods or 8 faction mods I wouldn't bother. Are you doing that? Cause in the EVE universe that would be a NotBrightÖ thing to do. Especially given that lag in a mission can kill you just as dead. - Support fixing the UI\|Suggest Jita fixes\|Compact logs
Nilder Shadowfiyah 3rd Millennium Group	Posted - 2008.07.07 12:22:00 - [403] How about ECM modules anchored in high sec near gates. This would have 2 results. It would allow the ganked to possibly escape due to lock loss by aggressors.
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.07 14:21:00 - [404] Edited by: Exlegion on 07/07/2008 14:23:29 Originally by: Xaen Unless you're running like 4 officer mods or 8 faction mods I wouldn't bother. Are you doing that? Cause in the EVE universe that would be a NotBrightÖ thing to do. Especially given that lag in a mission can kill you just as dead. You may be exercising sound economic judgement. And that's all well and fine. However, at the moment it seems suicide ganks occur primarily for the "lulz" effect with "ooh, look! shiny!" as the secondary effect (cherry on top). Suicide ganking should be a high-risk daring undertaking in high sec, of which at the moment it is none. See Jihadswarm for proof. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba The Requiem	Posted - 2008.07.07 15:47:00 - [405] Originally by: Exlegion Edited by: Exlegion on 07/07/2008 14:23:29 Originally by: Xaen Unless you're running like 4 officer mods or 8 faction mods I wouldn't bother. Are you doing that? Cause in the EVE universe that would be a NotBrightÖ thing to do. Especially given that lag in a mission can kill you just as dead. You may be exercising sound economic judgement. And that's all well and fine. However, at the moment it seems suicide ganks occur primarily for the "lulz" effect with "ooh, look! shiny!" as the secondary effect (cherry on top). Suicide ganking should be a high-risk daring undertaking in high sec, of which at the moment it is none. See Jihadswarm for proof. Wrong. Suicide ganks is a way of making a living, noone spends hours scanning missionrunners and the effort of getting half a dozen bs'es together for 'the lulz'. So basically what you are 'fighting for' is the right to fit mission ships overly expensive..well guess what..doing so comes with a risk.. I refuse to respect religious beliefs, and i refuse to respect people who hold them.
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.07 16:13:00 - [406] Socratesz, Quote: noone spends hours scanning missionrunners and the effort of getting half a dozen bs'es together for 'the lulz'. Not true. You can suicide-gank a ship with one ship alone (and another non-aggressed to scoop up the loot. Again, see any of the numerous Jihadswarm threads. Don't misunderstand. I'm not for completely nerfing suicide ganks. Nor am I fighting for the right to fit mission ships overly expensive. I am, however, against suicide-gank being risk-free or minimally risky. If you have assembled a dozen battleships and have spent hours scanning for the right target at the right time then good for you. You deserve that juicy clumsy target coming your way. That is not what I am against. IMHO, it is way too easy to suicide-gank in high sec. The consequences are just a slap in the hand and the rewards are extravagant. Anyone can do it. It doesn't take much planning, character skills, or player skills. Hell, I can use a couple of alts to suicide-gank a mining ship in high sec. And I don't think the solution to an Osprey pilot is to have escorts in high sec so he can mine Veldspar. There should be a possibility to be blown up. But I would like for the perpetrator to think it twice (or better yet three times) before ramming his disposable ship into the Osprey. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.07 17:30:00 - [407] Originally by: Xaen If you don't want suicide ganked in highsec, don't be a high profit target. Some idiots tried to suicide my AF the other night, carrying a whole 8m in datacores. 8 million isk in datacores. No officer/faction mods, jut plain T2. They didn't succeed (tank was turned on, I get nervous at times) but the point is that the practice is far too common. When you can't pass through any gate in certain regions of eve without seeing a potential suicide group or getting scanned, there are obviously not enough drawbacks to the "profession". Originally by: CCP Wrangler Not it isn't, people should be encouraged to get out in low sec space, but never forced to do so.
EYEDOLL Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2008.07.09 12:30:00 - [408] Signed
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.09 15:03:00 - [409] Originally by: Hariya Hello Kitty Online seems to rule. If that's what is worrying you then you should be thanking us instead of trolling us as we're trying to make this game less like Hello Kitty Online by making you earn your lunch instead of getting it for free. Most of us here don't want high sec safer. I personally want the rewards to justify the risk, which at the moment isn't the case. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Sin Fae Income Redistribution Service	Posted - 2008.07.09 22:06:00 - [410] Edited by: Sin Fae on 09/07/2008 22:09:30 No insurance for renegade pod pilots who engage poorly defended ships known as "Rats" Since Concord does not immediately obliterate all these ships in Hi-Sec. How can they be criminals? There needs to be a law! Thousands of blatent legal violations occur everyday, yet the agressors can have their ships insured. Oh the madness! The bottom line is a vocal minority wants a risk-free Empire space, and that I cannot endorse, and "Making suicide ganking more difficult" will do absolutley nothing to this effect. But hey if it makes completely ignorant people happy (including devs), **** it, knock yourself out.

Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.07.09 23:35:00 - [411] Where is the freaking thumbs-down sign??? CCP GET ON THIS!!! Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.07.09 23:42:00 - [412] Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Hariya Hello Kitty Online seems to rule. If that's what is worrying you then you should be thanking us instead of trolling us as we're trying to make this game less like Hello Kitty Online by making you earn your lunch instead of getting it for free. Most of us here don't want high sec safer. I personally want the rewards to justify the risk, which at the moment isn't the case. So what you are saying is that you want to nerf highsec missions?
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.10 00:17:00 - [413] Originally by: Esmenet So what you are saying is that you want to nerf highsec missions? If you have issues with Level 4 missions in high sec how about starting your own thread instead of trolling this one? One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Sin Fae Income Redistribution Service	Posted - 2008.07.10 00:43:00 - [414] Originally by: Ki An Where is the freaking thumbs-down sign??? CCP GET ON THIS!!! CCP did get on it and caved. Originally by: Jade Constantine -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not sure why this is still going on tbh. The issue got raised, supported, and presented to CCP. There was agreement from the devs that suicide ganking does need making more difficult with additional sec penalties for participating (non final blow) ships and insurance loss was also on the table. Its done and dusted people and on the list of priority issues for fixing! Chill be happy! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- July 26 - Suicide Gank Someone Day!
Frygok Minmatar M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.07.10 03:34:00 - [415] Okay, after reading this thread I have to admit I am more than a bit annoyed. First off, I have NEVER been even close to getting ganked with my empire character doing missions. Why? Because I do level 4 missions in a t2 fitted ship. It's that easy. Why people insist on using deepspace and officer fittings is beyond me, but each to their own. Secondly, I think most of the people who do suicide ganking is doing it because they have no other option in Empire. FUNNILY ENOUGH BECAUSE CAREBEARS ARE IN NPC CORPS WHICH CAN'T BE WAR DECCED OR ARE IN 1-MAN CORPS THEY JUMP FROM AFTER A WAR-DEC(sorry for the caps). How's that for no ****ing consequence or risk? And war dec is a completely legitimate part of the game (And if someone says corp-jumping to avoid war decs is a legitimate use of game mechanics, then so is suicide-ganking). IMO, it is beyond hyprocricy to whine about suicide ganking and the lack of consequences, when you time and time again see empire carebears deliberately corp jump or stay in npc corps to avoid risk with zero consequence. Fair enough, let us remove insurance so suicide ganking becomes more difficult. At the same time, kick everybody out of npc corps after 2 months, and then whenever they are in a corp that gets wardecced, and they then corpjump, that wardec follows the character (only character, not the new corp that is created/said character joins) for a week/month. Then there would be a way to add risk to now hilariously risk free high sec. And frankly, it's a natural extension of wanting to add to the risk of suicide ganking. Both things are use of game mechanics. However, one of them is a response to a use of game mechanics, the other is a reponse to a complete and integral part of the game.
Vreena Yurai-Tenshin Zaibatsu Celestial Imperative	Posted - 2008.07.10 07:29:00 - [416] Edited by: Vreena on 10/07/2008 07:30:17 Signed, though I'd like to say that you should be able to be in an NPC corp for more than a year. Doesn't make sense to me. ----- The above does not reflect the views and/or opinions of my corporation or alliance...well it could, but let's not be presumptuous, okay?
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.07.10 10:51:00 - [417] Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet So what you are saying is that you want to nerf highsec missions? If you have issues with Level 4 missions in high sec how about starting your own thread instead of trolling this one? Ah the usual lack of consistency. Risk reward is important as long as it dont affect what you do right?
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.10 11:04:00 - [418] Edited by: Exlegion on 10/07/2008 11:04:57 Originally by: Esmenet Ah the usual lack of consistency. Risk reward is important as long as it dont affect what you do right? You're barking at the wrong tree. I run all my missions in low/0.0 sec. And level 4 missions do need to be balanced. And now I will ask you again, why are you derailing this thread? One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Ki An Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum	Posted - 2008.07.10 19:50:00 - [419] Originally by: Frygok Okay, after reading this thread I have to admit I am more than a bit annoyed. First off, I have NEVER been even close to getting ganked with my empire character doing missions. Why? Because I do level 4 missions in a t2 fitted ship. It's that easy. Why people insist on using deepspace and officer fittings is beyond me, but each to their own. Secondly, I think most of the people who do suicide ganking is doing it because they have no other option in Empire. FUNNILY ENOUGH BECAUSE CAREBEARS ARE IN NPC CORPS WHICH CAN'T BE WAR DECCED OR ARE IN 1-MAN CORPS THEY JUMP FROM AFTER A WAR-DEC(sorry for the caps). How's that for no ****ing consequence or risk? And war dec is a completely legitimate part of the game (And if someone says corp-jumping to avoid war decs is a legitimate use of game mechanics, then so is suicide-ganking). IMO, it is beyond hyprocricy to whine about suicide ganking and the lack of consequences, when you time and time again see empire carebears deliberately corp jump or stay in npc corps to avoid risk with zero consequence. Fair enough, let us remove insurance so suicide ganking becomes more difficult. At the same time, kick everybody out of npc corps after 2 months, and then whenever they are in a corp that gets wardecced, and they then corpjump, that wardec follows the character (only character, not the new corp that is created/said character joins) for a week/month. Then there would be a way to add risk to now hilariously risk free high sec. And frankly, it's a natural extension of wanting to add to the risk of suicide ganking. Both things are use of game mechanics. However, one of them is a response to a use of game mechanics, the other is a reponse to a complete and integral part of the game. This is an interesting aspect of the discussion. Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
Erik D	Posted - 2008.07.13 11:17:00 - [420] Supported



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 .. 15 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.