| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Qui Shon
   |
Posted - 2008.06.03 21:35:00 -
[151]
 Originally by: Bellum Eternus
There is no morality in Eve. To assume so is folly.
Of course there is morality in Eve. Wherever people discern between right and wrong there is morality. The immoral seldom see themselves as such, of course, so your claim of morality not existing is consistent. Just adds another bit of realism to the game.
What did you think morality was?
|
Val Vympel
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 21:40:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
There is no morality in Eve. To assume so is folly. And you're posting like there are *zero* concequences to any 'criminal' act. That's not true. If we used your system, Eve would be a PVE server by now. 
It is clear that reason is lost on you.
Do you honestly believe that there is no morality in EvE?
Do you truly believe that ever last player/character(RP or not)of this game is a utterly selfish,self-centered carnal predator bent upon the destruction of others?
If you answer "Yes" to one or both of these questions,you are either blind,delusional and or knowingly malicious and intellectually dishonest.
If you say "Yes"...then FOLLY is assigned to your beliefs not mine.
|
brakespear
Wayward Brewing
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 21:49:00 -
[153]
Edited by: brakespear on 03/06/2008 21:52:05
Originally by: Val Vympel
It is clear that reason is lost on you.
Do you honestly believe that there is no morality in EvE?
Do you truly believe that ever last player/character(RP or not)of this game is a utterly selfish,self-centered carnal predator bent upon the destruction of others?
If you answer "Yes" to one or both of these questions,you are either blind,delusional and or knowingly malicious and intellectually dishonest.
If you say "Yes"...then FOLLY is assigned to your beliefs not mine.
This.....it is obvious from the amount of 'Corp Thief xxxxxx' threads that some form of morality is in play in Eve (OK, some may be just complaint threads but a fair amount are presented as warnings)...it may go on a more per person level than across the entire game but it is still there and a valid weight to any ingame discussion
edited.....for clarification
--------------------------------------------------
'people will always be tempted to wipe their feet on anything with 'welcome' written on it.' |
Vagablonde
Ouruboros Trading
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 22:02:00 -
[154]
Hopefully this means that CCP is looking at curbing the explosion of suicide ganking any ships that will drop more than a fully insured t1 brutix costs to replace.
I tank my haulers as much as I can, often using multiplated warships, rather than fitting expanders, but I know the maths, I know how easy it is.
It's an exploit to evade concord punishment, but having nothing to lose (a few mil isk? you can spend more than that in ammo in a fight!) in the first place is just a get around, :wordswordswords: would be spoken enforcing an over-literal interpretation but the only writing that matters is surely on the wall.
Adapt or die, gankbears. Adapt or gb2wow.
________________
the way back home is always long, but if you're close to me i'm holding on. |
Uuve Savisaalo
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 22:25:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Euriti
they're most likely also going to cave in to the nano whiners.
Completely different issue from op.
|
Oakrayven
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 22:25:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Alz Shado
Originally by: Veldya
Instead of making miners a freaking Deer, make them an Elephant. Lion is still king of the jungle and if enough of them attack they will drop the Elephant, but the Elephant is a slow moving, durable beast and because of that is not "easy" prey.
Battleships make decent jetcan miners, and it's trivially easy to fit one that can take out the occasional passing ganker (hint: Scram, Web, 5x Ogre IIs)
True story.
they make even better miners fitted out as mission runners with a PvP ready tank, plus they make mission bounties plus they make rat bounties plus being fit that way from the start they can shoot back
***** ****
Trust Aura. Aura is Your Friend.
If your too paranoid to play EVE. . .
Then your not paranoid ENOUGH to play EVE |
Oakrayven
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 22:42:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Jmanis Catharg
Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 03/06/2008 14:50:40 Quote:
."
Quote:
."
:]
The mere fact that they've (Devs, CCP. Greyscale is their mouthpiece here, verbalizing approved content that *must* have been signed off on and approved by his superiors. They wouldn't have just let him run his mouth about any random thing, right? Right?) put this information out there is a perfectly valid reason to be alarmed..
a few min worth of searching here and elsewhere I have found Grayscale talking about
moveing the tutorial off the current EvE map
Moveing all roid belts to Exploration and or missions
Interbus deliveries
"removeing" the leaning skills in some vague way that does not penalise existing or future players
Low sec Viceroys
Skill training ques
a somewhat vauge series of seemingly random and aparently conflicting ways to overhaul the mission system
Adding "exloration missions"
and the list goes on
the reality is the developers think theirs something broken. they may be right. As it is FW is going to have an impact on casual suicide ganks
***** ****
Trust Aura. Aura is Your Friend.
If your too paranoid to play EVE. . .
Then your not paranoid ENOUGH to play EVE |
ceyriot
Induseng Enterprises
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 23:17:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
From the latest devchat transcript-
"MMORPG_Taera: kimsand asks, To a carebear, EVE is primarily a game of destruction... What takes me 10 hours or more to create, takes someone 5 minutes to destroy, will there be taken some steps in the future to make some REAL safe zones, where GoonJihad will not be able to get in and have their fun on my behalf... im feeling a little like the cannon fodder ccp needs to feed the pvp'ers
Greyscale: Absolutely safe zones aren't currently on our to-do list; there's a very lengthy conceptual reason why they're a bad idea, and a much shorter explanation that it's just not EVE. That said, we do feel that the current balance is out of line and we are working on changes to various mechanisms in this area which will redress this balance
Greyscale: Before anyone jumps to conclusions, what we're mainly looking at is small, common-sense adjustments to tune down the randomized griefing and opportunistic free lunch attacks without removing the ability to make premeditated strikes and so on. There's a balance to be struck that's close to what we have currently, but not exactly the same."
*ANY* change to the existing mechanics as mentioned above is a perfect example of CCP pandering to the idiot whiners who arn't smart enough to take care of themselves and compete against the rest of Eve's players for the right to exist.
Tell me CCP, when is the hand holding going to stop?
Translation - We'll make it easier too see who's been ganking lately. We won't give barges uber defenses, but you will be able to see who has been killing you poor defenseless mining carebears.
Faction Store - Killboard |
Tippia
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 23:20:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Euriti
I said "I stopped reading right there" because of the bolded parts, suicide gank is:
a) Not an exploit
b) Not griefing
c) Not childish cheating.
And no-one says they are – not even the person you've quoted. If you had read a bit further, you might have understood this.
What he and the devs are saying is that people who use grief exploits are not PvP:ers – they are griefers. Griefing is not allowed in the game. Exploits are not allowed in the game. People who use griefing tactics, or who use exploits, are the only ones who'll be crying over these changes. The PvPers won't, neither will the carebears.
The really funny part is that your bolded parts show exactly this, and you still failed to understand it. You were the one assuming that the exploits, griefing tactics, and cheating were the same as suicide ganking. The fact that you made this assumption, rather than the person you quoted, is a pretty worrying signal about your view on what PvP in general is all about.
|
Efdi
Tritanium Workers Union
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 23:38:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Originally by: Mangtoos
The consequence for suiciding in highsec is the loss of security status. You must grind for hours in some cases for a single highsec gank, depending on what space you have to rat in.
Oh yes I can feel how painful it is to earn all that money while working sec back up...
Because we all enjoy shooting rats for hours on end, amirite?
_______________________________
Yes, I am an alt. No, I can't post with my main; he's forum banned. Yes, I will be happy to smack you with my main when I'm unbanned. |
Taedrin
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 23:44:00 -
[161]
Carebears, WoW is
------>
that way
Suicide Gankers, Counterstrike is
<------
that way.
This is EVE. Adapt or die, both of you.
|
Bad Harlequin
Chiroptera Factor
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 23:53:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Greyscale: Absolutely safe zones aren't currently on our to-do list; there's a very lengthy conceptual reason why they're a bad idea, and a much shorter explanation that it's just not EVE....
Greyscale: Before anyone jumps to conclusions, [b]what we're mainly looking at is small, common-sense adjustments to tune down the randomized griefing and opportunistic free lunch attacks
I feel sorry for Greyscale, making a carefully qualified statement and still having it thrown in his face by whiners. Give me a break. You're in favor of free lunch attacks? Where's the risk/reward in that?
Safe zones just aren't EvE and are a bad idea, don't jump to conclusions, small common-sense adjustments are being looked at, and free lunches shouldn't exist (in any aspect of gameplay, right). Okay. Which part of this offends you, exactly?
-----
-- we all live in a yellow subroutine -- |
Oakrayven
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 00:01:00 -
[163]
Edited by: Oakrayven on 04/06/2008 00:04:36
ok lets look at their options
1) beafing up the health of haulers-mining platforms
2) Allowing concord to podkill anyone who opens fire on a player ship
3) putting a Are you sure. . . then a are you REALY SURE screen up, then canceling the insurance policy on what they are flying and awarding it to the person poded
4) changeing the loot rules in high sec to Concord shoots anyone who loots a wreck that is not theirs. . . and all of the wrecks created by concord are awarded to the victem. (probably not going to happen)
5) new class of super industrial and/or super Hulk
6) adding a 30 day hold on terminations of anyone who has a security hit
7) trial accounts cant PvP
8) Allow concord to pod and capture anyone who kills another ship in high sec.
9) reduce the faction gain by 50% from ratting every time you suicide gank in empire
10) Steal panties
11) ????
12) profit
oh I forgot the best option
13) Drink Beer!
***** ****
Trust Aura. Aura is Your Friend.
If your too paranoid to play EVE. . .
Then your not paranoid ENOUGH to play EVE |
Quelque Chose
New Eden Roller Disco Supply
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 00:04:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Taedrin
Carebears, WoW is
------>
that way
Suicide Gankers, Counterstrike is
<------
that way.
This is EVE. Adapt or die, both of you.
/thread
___________________________________________
|
Kerfira
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 00:24:00 -
[165]
Edited by: Kerfira on 04/06/2008 00:30:42
For Iteron V's it's pretty easy NOT to get ganked (or at least make whoever is trying, pay)....
Three decent setups....
Mega-Tank: 31404 effective HP and carry 7500 m3.
Tank: 21975 effective HP and carry 19820 m3.
Haul: 12889 effective HP and carry 38433 m3.
Now, guess which one(s) to choose to avoid (most) gankers....
Pretty much exemplifies risk/reward.
That being said, insurance should still be removed from the game.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
DogSlime
Wilde Cards
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 00:33:00 -
[166]
If they're gonna do anything, I hope they just remove insurance for ships that get CONCORDed and leave it at that.
It makes things a bit harder for suicide gankers, but it shouldn't be made impossible to suicide gank.
Part of the appeal of eve is that you're never completely safe anywhere in space... well, except for being cloaked in a safe-spot.
If an area of eve becomes 100% safe, it becomes 0% exciting.
|
Souvera Corvus
SPORADIC MOVEMENT
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 00:49:00 -
[167]
'Free lunch attacks', sums up the current position rather nicely.
For people who misquote Darwin and harp on about EvE being all about consequences, to ignore the fact that high-sec suiciding currently has no consequences for the ganker is to be inconsistent.
Sec-stat isn't a concern for rinse-and-repeat alts and the wallet doesn't get any thinner when you're using T1 equipped BC's and cruisers.
High-sec shouldn't be completely safe but it should be safer than low-sec, which oddly enough in some places it isn't.
The guy from CCP was talking about 'balance' and as a PvP'er I'd say that anything that made suicide ganking more difficult is long overdue. If players used their own common-sense then CCP wouldn't have to do it for them.
|
Christari Zuborov
Ore Mongers
Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 01:16:00 -
[168]
There's no such thing as a free lunch, only noobs wheel-barreling around gold boullion.
If you wheel-barreled around gold boullion, it shouldn't be much of a suprise that someone comes a long and tries to take it.
|
Don Haulsalot
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 01:20:00 -
[169]
Originally by: Souvera Corvus
'Free lunch attacks', sums up the current position rather nicely.
For people who misquote Darwin and harp on about EvE being all about consequences, to ignore the fact that high-sec suiciding currently has no consequences for the ganker is to be inconsistent.
Sec-stat isn't a concern for rinse-and-repeat alts and the wallet doesn't get any thinner when you're using T1 equipped BC's and cruisers.
High-sec shouldn't be completely safe but it should be safer than low-sec, which oddly enough in some places it isn't.
The guy from CCP was talking about 'balance' and as a PvP'er I'd say that anything that made suicide ganking more difficult is long overdue. If players used their own common-sense then CCP wouldn't have to do it for them.
You need to read between the lines both ways.
To the griefer you take away his no risk all reward game mechanic that allows them to grief carebears to fund legit pvp.
The carebear thinks anything .5 and above is his sole domain and why should he need to actually NOT do stoopid things.
I have seen ccp say many times that eve is a harsh place and carebears/noobs must learn this. Then they refuse to see the flawed logic of ins payouts AND the loot! That being said to do anything to remove loot drops or change that will only hurt "legit" pvp and should never be considered.
A full 100% cut in grief ins payout is not fair to them. Maybe start with a 50% loss. That would make them be a little picky about targets.
Make them work for lunch money 
|
Don Haulsalot
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 01:24:00 -
[170]
Originally by: Christari Zuborov
There's no such thing as a free lunch, only noobs wheel-barreling around gold boullion.
If you wheel-barreled around gold boullion, it shouldn't be much of a suprise that someone comes a long and tries to take it.
You wouldn't want to see this point but if you get caught taking the gold you pay a penalty.
|
Christari Zuborov
Ore Mongers
Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 01:29:00 -
[171]
Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 04/06/2008 01:29:32
Originally by: Don Haulsalot
Originally by: Christari Zuborov
There's no such thing as a free lunch, only noobs wheel-barreling around gold boullion.
If you wheel-barreled around gold boullion, it shouldn't be much of a suprise that someone comes a long and tries to take it.
You wouldn't want to see this point but if you get caught taking the gold you pay a penalty.
Ah, yes... EXACTLY.
There's a police man on every corner, and that's why there are people everywhere with wheel-barrels.
Take the police man off every corner and guess what happens? People start devising ways to SECURELY hauling their cargo.
Hmmmmmm...
|
LuthienTinuviel
The HIgher Standard
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 01:29:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
From the latest devchat transcript-
"MMORPG_Taera: kimsand asks, To a carebear, EVE is primarily a game of destruction... What takes me 10 hours or more to create, takes someone 5 minutes to destroy, will there be taken some steps in the future to make some REAL safe zones, where GoonJihad will not be able to get in and have their fun on my behalf... im feeling a little like the cannon fodder ccp needs to feed the pvp'ers
Greyscale: Absolutely safe zones aren't currently on our to-do list; there's a very lengthy conceptual reason why they're a bad idea, and a much shorter explanation that it's just not EVE. That said, we do feel that the current balance is out of line and we are working on changes to various mechanisms in this area which will redress this balance
Greyscale: Before anyone jumps to conclusions, what we're mainly looking at is small, common-sense adjustments to tune down the randomized griefing and opportunistic free lunch attacks without removing the ability to make premeditated strikes and so on. There's a balance to be struck that's close to what we have currently, but not exactly the same."
*ANY* change to the existing mechanics as mentioned above is a perfect example of CCP pandering to the idiot whiners who arn't smart enough to take care of themselves and compete against the rest of Eve's players for the right to exist.
Tell me CCP, when is the hand holding going to stop?
Hmm well off hand the main thing that I would say is out of kilter with risk v reward is suicide ganking I have no problem with suicide ganking happening the problem I have is that basically there is no real risk to the ganker t1 b/ship fully insured means any loss made is negligable on the gankers behalf and if they get a good haul then that can potentially fund another 20? ganks... that is not risk v reward remove insurance from t1 ships that are destroyed in suiciding and it puts a little more of a dent in the gankers wallet and they have to think a little more before they do what they do.
|
Salmoneus Dinarae
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 01:32:00 -
[173]
Fixing the insurance problem along with Concord/DED (doesn't the backstory say it is actually the DED that does the policing, so why don't the ships say DED and we don't say someone got DED'd?...) lack of technological upgrades over time (gate guns) seems to be the main issues.
The police need to jam, scram, web, and last but not least...
Pod!
|
AKULA UrQuan
Druuge Crimson Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 01:39:00 -
[174]
People are starting to suicide gank empty freighters solely for the lulz. Also, the easiest way to find PvP right now is to go jetcan mine in high sec. Doesn't take very long for a can flipper to find you.
It is getting just a tad out of hand these days.
|
Jmanis Catharg
Stickler inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 02:00:00 -
[175]
Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 04/06/2008 02:01:10
Quote:
People are starting to suicide gank empty freighters solely for the lulz.
And that right there is the "free lunch" Greyscale was talking about, esp the part where two or three players run off and do lvl 4 mish for an hour and the entire escapade has paid itself off already.
|
Jamie Hara
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 02:09:00 -
[176]
Nerfing something because people do it solely for enjoyment is ********.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. |
Vagablonde
Ouruboros Trading
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 02:30:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Salmoneus Dinarae
Fixing the insurance problem along with Concord/DED (doesn't the backstory say it is actually the DED that does the policing, so why don't the ships say DED and we don't say someone got DED'd?...) lack of technological upgrades over time (gate guns) seems to be the main issues.
The police need to jam, scram, web, and last but not least...
Pod!
damn I got DEDed
'dude, it's "killed"'
nono i got DEDed!
'are you 5?'
etc
________________
the way back home is always long, but if you're close to me i'm holding on. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 02:42:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Ice Baby
It's funny how the elite "PvP"ers/griefers are the worst PvPers and need to whine here. Do a haul trip through empire and see how many cargoscans you recieve, it aint few, clearly suicide ganking is too profitable.
What about nub whine griefers coming to 0.0 and show us what they are made of?
0 oh wait I fly a blockade runner,
Originally by: Noodle Pastaman
PVP has no place whatsoever in hi sec, its a place for trade and PVE
Don't like it go to low/nil sec or go play Quake
Quite obvious thats the view of the vast majority of people who live there are, would love to see a vote on and it I think the griefers would be in for one serious shock
so you should be allowed to freely collect resources (isk/loot/minerals) without any risk at all? I am sure many people would love to be invincible in highsec, but as said thats not eve.
Originally by: Shintai
Alot of us have. But thats not the point since a freighter is rarely ganked due to the BS amount requirement, teamwork and planning. Something that excludes the majority of suicide people. And I dont think thats what we want to stop either. Its simply so rare.
But the issue is when xxxWannabeeGanker1xxx ganks an itty5 with 2million pyr in with his thorax. Simply because its worth it. And usually the character is recycled for the purpose. Very easily done on trial accounts aswell. Or one in a BC ganking the same or alittle higher value. Or the Hulk/Mack ganks with thoraxes, vexors, brutix etc over basicly nothing.
Its not about moving 100million or 20billion. Its already a problem when you move 10million up. Sometimes even empty worthless haulers get ganked. Its just so cheap and easy that you dont even have to look in the cargo.
maybe it has gotten out of hand... people ganking for 2mil pye 
Originally by: emepror
just dont forget that carebears run our economy
yep all them people moon mining in 0.0/lowsec biggest damn carebears of them all, or is all that t1 stuff that people always complain about being unprofitable actually profitable?
Originally by: FarosWarrior
I don't know what the hell the tpoic starter is whining about, highsec suiciders are nothing more then rl suicide terrorists, only difference is that they only loose a ship... irl youre really dead.
imo CCP should NOT remove any kind of highsec suicide bombing cause no-one likes it, I admit that I have not lost any ships due to those people and i'm sorry for everyone that did, but that brings in 2 more messages:
1: don't fly ships you can't afford to loose
2: CONCORD provides consequences, not safety
people have been saying #1 since the day I started eve, it was all over the nub corp chat, apparently it doesn't get through to many people.
Originally by: brakespear
This.....it is obvious from the amount of 'Corp Thief xxxxxx' threads that some form of morality is in play in Eve (OK, some may be just complaint threads but a fair amount are presented as warnings)...it may go on a more per person level than across the entire game but it is still there and a valid weight to any ingame discussion
okay, but it only takes 1 corp theft to **** off 1000 people. also think of how many corps there are in eve, and how many do get stolen from
Originally by:
Hopefully this means that CCP is looking at curbing the explosion of suicide ganking any ships that will drop more than a fully insured t1 brutix costs to replace.
I tank my haulers as much as I can, often using multiplated warships, rather than fitting expanders, but I know the maths, I know how easy it is.
It's an exploit to evade concord punishment, but having nothing to lose (a few mil isk? you can spend more than that in ammo in a fight!) in the first place is just a get around, :wordswordswords: would be spoken enforcing an over-literal interpretation but the only writing that matters is surely on the wall
thats great, maybe you should try flying something smaller and faster. I like warping before they can get off a scan
|
Jmanis Catharg
Stickler inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 02:46:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Jamie Hara
Nerfing something because people do it solely for enjoyment is ********.
God I love one-eyed-ness.
That's only half the story. Let's say CCP put in a supership which could tank concord and pop anything pretty damn quick. I'm sure everyone would find this ship damn fun. Doesn't change the fact it'd need to be nerfed for game balance.
And it *also* wouldn't change the fact that people would be stupid and say "Oh, CCP's nerfing it just because it's fun!".
|
Aeo IV
|
Posted - 2008.06.04 02:51:00 -
[180]
Gee, I wonder what possible common sense changes they could be making...
Maybe they're going to add more HP and resists to Mining barges, you know, that several million, slow-as-a-rock, nearly impossible-to-tank ship?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |