Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lucas Avignon
Avignon Associates Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 23:29:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Esu Nahalas
Originally by: Lucas Avignon Oh and if suicide ganking is such a "big" problem, how come I don't know anyone it's happened too?
Oh fer cryin' out loud . . . I was ganked (in a T1), I was tanked, and I'm ok with it. If you want to argue for the present system, you don't need to BS.
Just in case anyone gets the wrong idea, I do not know this person.
Originally by: CCP Prism X Yeah, and while we're at it we can create a controlled environment around account hacking and credit card fraud and all the other EULA breaches..
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 23:41:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Verone
If you want to be 100% safe, in a sugar coated environment that protects you and prevents loss, Eve is the wrong game to log into.
You're wrong in this one, in EVE you will get blown up yes and people hiding their faction fitted treasures in NPC corporations is wrong but suicide ganking is removing any reason for even getting a faction fitted ship to possibly PvP with to begin with as you will go down in flames and not even in a fight worth the name.
If you want to see these ships fight introduce offers from agents in low sec to pilots with faction ships especially, much better rewards if you bring the right tools for the job kind of incentive. The current situation isn't helping anyone, collector, missioner or pirate.
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Esu Nahalas
The Night Corporation RONA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 23:42:00 -
[93]
Therefore, I do not exist. You are BRILLIANT.
|
Mikamir
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 23:48:00 -
[94]
I am new enough to the game that I won't profess to be an expert on exactly what suicide ganking is. My understanding is that someone can attack someone in high sec and while they destroy the target, they are dealt with by Concord. Now, I understand why people do this....the payout on certain hauler loot and such I guess. But, what is the real consequence? If the ganker can suicide, why are they getting anything from it. Shouldn't they have a consequence? If they are insured and lose their ship they are compensated correct? Why? Isn't it Concord that offers the insurance? Why would Concord then payout that same insurance if Concord is the one's taking the action against the ganker in the first place? Frankly, it would make more sense that if you are Concorded you don't get an insurance payout. I don't think this would stop ganking, just make the consequences worth considering before the ganker takes the action.
The more you know...the more you know you don't know! |
Ki An
Gallente Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 23:56:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Mikamir I am new enough to the game that I won't profess to be an expert on exactly what suicide ganking is. My understanding is that someone can attack someone in high sec and while they destroy the target, they are dealt with by Concord. Now, I understand why people do this....the payout on certain hauler loot and such I guess. But, what is the real consequence? If the ganker can suicide, why are they getting anything from it. Shouldn't they have a consequence? If they are insured and lose their ship they are compensated correct? Why? Isn't it Concord that offers the insurance? Why would Concord then payout that same insurance if Concord is the one's taking the action against the ganker in the first place? Frankly, it would make more sense that if you are Concorded you don't get an insurance payout. I don't think this would stop ganking, just make the consequences worth considering before the ganker takes the action.
You're right. You're new and you aren't an expert. Please read my last post in this thread for why you are wrong.
In addition, Concord doesn't pay out insurance.
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Quahodron
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 00:13:00 -
[96]
Well I`m new and definately not an expert but I don`t see any problem with suicide ganking, except *maybe* it would make more sense if insurance is not payed to a Concorded player, that`s all. Please don`t make EvE soft.
|
Vrizuh
VTECHS
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 01:03:00 -
[97]
If not modify insurance, how about allow a customised tank? Big egg on face if you go in against a freighter thinking its tanked against EM only to find the crazy bastard setup explosive, therm or kin tank.
As it is, it seems that fully utilising a freighter is rather difficult to do due to static stats, slow movement, and slow repair cycles.
Not that I would know ^^
|
Delekhaji
30 ounces
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 01:10:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Delekhaji on 07/07/2008 01:10:37
Originally by: hall monitor Edited by: hall monitor on 06/07/2008 15:57:00 It's not even evil...it's silly and wrecks the viability of the game taken in any rational context. You know I'm right. I might quit because of it and I just started...why spend all that time to just get wrecked via a method that should be an illegal exploit IMHO
Do you believe in fairy tales? I normally don't believe in such things as fairies , dragons and such but I do believe I just spotted a Troll 30 OUNCES - All you need is RUM and a little YARR |
Sniper Wolf18
Gallente Apocalypse Ponies
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 01:14:00 -
[99]
NO!
NO
NOOOOO!
Now DIAF
|
Caffeine Junkie
2 Guys In Motherships
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 01:59:00 -
[100]
Its so insanely easy to avoid getting suicided.
Autopilot = Bad.
And remember if your ship doesn't contain cargo that is worth more than the suiciding ship, you won't be attacked. If it does, try a T2 hauler with some stabs!
Nothing special, not big or clever, just 20 fighters and one hell of a tank.... |
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 02:56:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie Its so insanely easy to avoid getting suicided.
Autopilot = Bad.
And remember if your ship doesn't contain cargo that is worth more than the suiciding ship, you won't be attacked. If it does, try a T2 hauler with some stabs!
It's easy to avoid yes but when are people supposed to fly faction fitted ships, is it another alliance only feature?
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Caffeine Junkie
2 Guys In Motherships
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 02:59:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Danton Marcellus
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie Its so insanely easy to avoid getting suicided.
Autopilot = Bad.
And remember if your ship doesn't contain cargo that is worth more than the suiciding ship, you won't be attacked. If it does, try a T2 hauler with some stabs!
It's easy to avoid yes but when are people supposed to fly faction fitted ships, is it another alliance only feature?
If someone is determined to kill you no matter what, they will hunt you down and succeed. There isn't and shouldn't be total safety anywhere, but if you are worried about your faction fitted ship, stay away from Jita, Rens, Motsu etc in it, or return fire. Faction BS + Concord should certainly be able to take out some if not all of the ppl suiciding you.
Nothing special, not big or clever, just 20 fighters and one hell of a tank.... |
JanoMark
smoking blunts Mutual Assured Destruction
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 03:01:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Serenity Steele This issue was raised by the Council of Stellar Management at the first CSM meeting on 19th June, together with a set of solutions. CCP are aware of it.
/thread
|
Plumpy McPudding
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 03:02:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Danton Marcellus
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie Its so insanely easy to avoid getting suicided.
Autopilot = Bad.
And remember if your ship doesn't contain cargo that is worth more than the suiciding ship, you won't be attacked. If it does, try a T2 hauler with some stabs!
It's easy to avoid yes but when are people supposed to fly faction fitted ships, is it another alliance only feature?
People have been running around in faction fits for years and now all of a sudden people are scared to traverse high sec in them? Grow some manhood. __________________________
Fear me for I have an insatiable appetite! Proprietor and inventor of Chocolate Chip Chocolate Donut flavored Ice Cream. |
Khrillian
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 03:11:00 -
[105]
It really annoys me when people respond to statements like "suicide ganking is a problem" by saying "don't use autopilot." This is a non-response; the person is not asking you for workarounds, but asking if you agree or disagree that there really is a problem and why.
It's the same idea as when people say "amarr need buffs" and people respond by saying "dont fly amarr." It doesn't really add anything productive.
Originally by: Lucas Avignon
The only problem is these carebears that want a different game from what we have, they want high sec to be completely devoid of non-consensual pvp, that would destroy eve for me and many others.
War is non consensual, <0.5 pvp is non consensual, market pvp is non consensual. He is advocating the removal of NONE of the above. He's just suggesting that incentives for suicide ganking should be modified (maybe remove insurance) or something like that to discourage it more.
Also, if you really love risk vs reward, suicide ganking is very low risk very high reward. This is bad no?
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie Its so insanely easy to avoid getting suicided.
Autopilot = Bad.
And remember if your ship doesn't contain cargo that is worth more than the suiciding ship, you won't be attacked. If it does, try a T2 hauler with some stabs!
I get it, because align times are all 0sec so there's no way you can get suicide ganked on the other side of the gate....or while on missions in your expensive mission ship.
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie There isn't and shouldn't be total safety anywhere, but if you are worried about your faction fitted ship, stay away from Jita, Rens, Motsu etc in it, or return fire. Faction BS + Concord should certainly be able to take out some if not all of the ppl suiciding you.
Wrong again. Stations are 100% safe. Nobody can kill you while you are in a station if you are in 0.0 or empire or anywhere. Furthermore, you can have as many assets in said stations, all of which are also safe.
Do you want stations to have risk too? At some point it just becomes silly. I really think incentives should be changed so suicide ganking is less profitable. For example, concord could deny insurance to anyone it kills and fine them the NPC price of the ship they were flying. This would still allow people to suicide gank, it would just reduce the profitability to a more reasonable leve.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 03:13:00 -
[106]
I just moved over a billion isk worth of faction mods through highsec during war, whats the problem again?
|
Khrillian
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 03:28:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton I just moved over a billion isk worth of faction mods through highsec during war, whats the problem again?
The corp you were fighting against lacks spys in your corp/better intel?
|
Ralara
Caldari Vivicide
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 07:23:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Chinger
Originally by: Nebuchadnezzar I As the bob guy said. The solution is easy, no insurance when concord is involved, pretty easy, amazing ccp hasnt been capable of introducing that yet.
This would be the best idea, even so I have a feeling people would still complain.
They'd still complain because people would still do it. Haulers would still go around with 200m upto 2 billion isk in their Badger IIs and they'd still get ganked
I agree though, the insurance payout is daft for a suicide gank.
The argument that pops up when removing insurance is "what about noobs who accidently fire? That's not fair to them".
Well here's the solution to that:
If the target is DESTROYED then no insurance is paid out. If the target lives, then insurance IS paid out.
A noob isnt going to kill anyone in their small ships before concord arrives so this solves that.
"Oh but suicide gankers that fail will still get insurance!!!"
Yes, yes they will. But it's a better system that we have now and since there's no automated way to check if something's an accident or a suicide gank, it's about the best I can think up.
And I'm a suicide ganker. --
|
Kalintos Tyl
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 07:27:00 -
[109]
fix npc corp wardecks = fix suicide ganking ?
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 07:31:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Khrillian
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton I just moved over a billion isk worth of faction mods through highsec during war, whats the problem again?
The corp you were fighting against lacks spys in your corp/better intel?
right, as I yelled in my corp channel hey guys I'm moving around valuable stuff! Also it was a 0.0 alliance, so they have rather limited highsec presence.
the point is more of it was mission hub to jita during time of war (although I didn't mention that part ). and that isn't even mentioning suicide gankers which should have made it even more dangerous
basically I am saying hauling is fine, as long as it isn't on autopilot and/or in a t1 hauler. also moving stuff in a freighter is somewhat although I'm not exactly sure what 2bil worth of stuff would only fit in a freighter. (hmm maybe the freighter cans that say 48x crow, 48x ares, on them in new caldari have something to do with this) capital construction parts maybe? fill your charon with tier 3 bs, or command ships?
|
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 07:32:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Ralara
Originally by: Chinger
Originally by: Nebuchadnezzar I As the bob guy said. The solution is easy, no insurance when concord is involved, pretty easy, amazing ccp hasnt been capable of introducing that yet.
This would be the best idea, even so I have a feeling people would still complain.
They'd still complain because people would still do it. Haulers would still go around with 200m upto 2 billion isk in their Badger IIs and they'd still get ganked
I agree though, the insurance payout is daft for a suicide gank.
The argument that pops up when removing insurance is "what about noobs who accidently fire? That's not fair to them".
Well here's the solution to that:
If the target is DESTROYED then no insurance is paid out. If the target lives, then insurance IS paid out.
A noob isnt going to kill anyone in their small ships before concord arrives so this solves that.
"Oh but suicide gankers that fail will still get insurance!!!"
Yes, yes they will. But it's a better system that we have now and since there's no automated way to check if something's an accident or a suicide gank, it's about the best I can think up.
And I'm a suicide ganker.
noobs shouldn't be protected more than they are, they get a fat warning saying its a dangerous action
its already double redundant.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 07:33:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl fix npc corp wardecks = fix suicide ganking ?
what? how would that fix anything? expand on your Idea
|
Ralara
Caldari Vivicide
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 07:44:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
Originally by: Ralara
They'd still complain because people would still do it. Haulers would still go around with 200m upto 2 billion isk in their Badger IIs and they'd still get ganked
I agree though, the insurance payout is daft for a suicide gank.
The argument that pops up when removing insurance is "what about noobs who accidently fire? That's not fair to them".
Well here's the solution to that:
If the target is DESTROYED then no insurance is paid out. If the target lives, then insurance IS paid out.
A noob isnt going to kill anyone in their small ships before concord arrives so this solves that.
"Oh but suicide gankers that fail will still get insurance!!!"
Yes, yes they will. But it's a better system that we have now and since there's no automated way to check if something's an accident or a suicide gank, it's about the best I can think up.
And I'm a suicide ganker.
noobs shouldn't be protected more than they are, they get a fat warning saying its a dangerous action
its already double redundant.
I know and I agree, but that argument (noobs firing) is one of the main reasons it's there, like it or not. --
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 08:04:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Esu Nahalas
Originally by: Lucas Avignon Oh and if suicide ganking is such a "big" problem, how come I don't know anyone it's happened too?
Oh fer cryin' out loud . . . I was ganked (in a T1), I was tanked, and I'm ok with it. If you want to argue for the present system, you don't need to BS.
I also dont know anyone other than myself who have been sucide ganked. Incidently I beat the ganker (fool attacked my super tanked abaddon), looted his corpse and sold his body in jita as a slightly used exotic dancer
|
Larice
Minmatar Seven Provinces
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 09:53:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Ralara
They'd still complain because people would still do it. Haulers would still go around with 200m upto 2 billion isk in their Badger IIs and they'd still get ganked
I agree though, the insurance payout is daft for a suicide gank.
The argument that pops up when removing insurance is "what about noobs who accidently fire? That's not fair to them".
Well here's the solution to that:
If the target is DESTROYED then no insurance is paid out. If the target lives, then insurance IS paid out.
A noob isnt going to kill anyone in their small ships before concord arrives so this solves that.
"Oh but suicide gankers that fail will still get insurance!!!"
Yes, yes they will. But it's a better system that we have now and since there's no automated way to check if something's an accident or a suicide gank, it's about the best I can think up.
And I'm a suicide ganker.
This. Good post.
|
Kalintos Tyl
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 10:15:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl fix npc corp wardecks = fix suicide ganking ?
what? how would that fix anything? expand on your Idea
caldari navy + faction mods in state war academy suicide why? and btw you need 2 t1 fitted crusiers to kill industrial i duno what you fix with removing insurence?
|
000Hunter000
Gallente Missiles 'R' Us
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 11:00:00 -
[117]
try this _______________________________________________________ CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!!
|
Iva Soreass
Personal Vendetta Vendetta Alliance.
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 11:16:00 -
[118]
Edited by: Iva Soreass on 07/07/2008 11:16:45 I said it once and i say it again, Suicide ganking isn't the problem...its the insurance. NO insurance PAYOUT if concorded simple as that, insert the 'Risk Vs Reward' that this game is ment to have cause at this time suicide ganking has zero risk vs reward.
|
Planks
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 11:22:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Iva Soreass Edited by: Iva Soreass on 07/07/2008 11:16:45 I said it once and i say it again, Suicide ganking isn't the problem...its the insurance. NO insurance PAYOUT if concorded simple as that, insert the 'Risk Vs Reward' that this game is ment to have cause at this time suicide ganking has zero risk vs reward.
This. Suicide ganking is in fact carebearing. |
Melor Rend
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 11:24:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Melor Rend on 07/07/2008 11:25:30 I generally agree with the OP. Suiciding should still remain possible in EVE but should NEVER EVER be a source of income for anyone except if it's a merc-contract. That means: no insurance for the suiciders and maybe also some sort of change so the suiciders can't loot the items from their victim. That way anyone is still able to suicide other players but will only do so if it's personal or if they have a contract to kill the victim (and not as a cheap ISK-soruce).
A different possibility: Give me the option to self-destruct my ship as soon as I get suicided so the suiciders alway have the (big) risk that the target will simply self-destruct and destroy all the loot that way.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |