| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] .. 21 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
raWill
   |
Posted - 2008.09.02 08:16:00 -
[571]
Fantastic changes. Now just remove cargo scanners from the game and remove the ability to receive insurance payout for any ganking. |
Dr Octavius
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 13:17:00 -
[572]
I am pleased that CCP have realised that the reality of a pirates life was high risk with great reward but very often short lived, I know this wont end high sec ganks but I can see the pirate attacks being more accurate with their victims.
I also notice those who speak against this have a negative standing and those for this have a positive...just a thought |
Deija Vu
Minmatar
TalCorp Enterprises
Einherjar Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 13:27:00 -
[573]
Im very happy to see this change to suicide ganking.
|
Varies
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 14:27:00 -
[574]
Edited by: Varies on 02/09/2008 14:31:08
I guess I would consider myself an empire carebear, but I am a little wary of these broad reaching changes. As I believe other posters have pointed out, when some factor of gameplay becomes an issue, you (CCP), go at it with a sledge hammer instead of delicate tools. Changing many facets of what you are trying to balance, with what seems a dis-regard to what else it impacts.
I am concerned that the ramifications of what you are proposing will force pvp pirates into old tried and true aspects of their "trade", and that is low sec gate camping. Which I view as exceedingly boring for them, increasingly annoying to me, and while may result in a reduction in the number of pirates, also reduces a playstyle's viability. I am concerned with a phrase, "be careful of what you wish for".
If the primary concern is with suicide ganking in empire high sec systems, I agree with the an increased in standings reduction but what does it do really? A large percentage of the ganking is done with alts that are in npc corps, somewhat disposable characters, easily replaced with a new one when sec status gets too low. So does this really do anything at all?
Dropping insurance payout on concorded ships. Perhaps. But unlikely to do much, if anything to disuade gankers, the targets they hit are low defense, high value targets like an industrial hauling a full load of morphite, or several high value BPOs (yes many haul this way, I do not), the risk/reward is too great for them to pass it up, even if they lose 5-10 cruiser/BS attacking the industrial/transport, if it drops even half the load of morphite for example, they are way ahead.
It seems to me, that this is once again a case of leave the nerf bat in the closet, and find a better solution by affecting that which is affected. Namely the person who got GANKED!
My solution: Provide cargo insurance, adjustable based on cargo value, with some percentage forfeited based on a successful transport. Those that want to protect their cargo, can do so, those that want to risk it, can, and pirate gankers (while i hate them), continue to thrive as a playstyle.
I should add, that cargo insurance, should only be an option for starting high sec to ending high sec transport.
|
X24c
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 15:22:00 -
[575]
this is a great idea. Now here it comes, There are so many can fliping jerks in Hisec. why dont you pod them as soon as they flip the can.
Also Mission running is hard enough when you are a new player. why do you let other players scan out your missions and salvage them or take the item that you were after?
|
machstem
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 16:12:00 -
[576]
congrats new changes sound great cant wait to see the difference
|
machstem
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 16:31:00 -
[577]
Finally CCP is doing something about the pirates! Its about time, if they are to coward to go to lowspace and gank gates this will force them were they belong! Im tired of hearing the same Ol' Pirates cowards laughing at scoring someone elses loot, but whinning about Concord and the change in rules! IM LAUGHING NOW! Go be a pirate where you can.  
|
Daneau
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 17:04:00 -
[578]
All in all i kind of like griefers getting the short end of the stick, but i do agree that low-sec needs to be a lot
more useful to provide an arena for those who wish to hunt
people trying to explore the riches. What i do not agree with is the people that say we must increase the rewards of low-sec, inflation is bad enough as it is atm. The way to make low-sec better is to _decrease_ the profitability of high-sec without touching 0.0 and with making low only slightly better than it is today. High should be relatively safe but low profit while low should be high reward and the risk to go with it, not the other way around as it is today.
tpb Daneau
|
Vendetta X
Torchwood 1
PROBABLE CAUSE
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 20:32:00 -
[579]
anything that makes Pirates whinge makes me laugh, lots and lots. Thanks for putting s smile on my face.
|
Mystral Seraphita
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 21:39:00 -
[580]
Edited by: Mystral Seraphita on 02/09/2008 21:39:58
Edited by: Mystral Seraphita on 02/09/2008 21:39:49
wow - this is getting explosive. i would like to wade in here with my two cents:
i am a firefighter. i know all about insurance fraud.
collecting insurance money on an item that is destroyed with deliberate intent by the owner, or if action is taken by the owner that will result in the known destruction of said item, it is insurance fraud. i'm pretty sure it is as illegal in every other country as it is in the US.
think about that before ****ing and moaning about how the "carebears" forced CCP to make these changes.
that being said, this insurance issue should be resolved before needing a CONCORD buff - if "suicide" gankers realize that they are going to lose money on their ships, risk vs reward comes into play. if suicide ganking is still profitable due to insurance fraud (please read above for any confusion about this), then think about a CONCORD buff.
as to the security hits... who cares? pirates will be pirates . if they are forced to move to low sec space, so be it. if they can't find any "easy" or "carebear" targets out there, tough - last i checked, the pirates of the high seas were run out of business as more and more armed ships representing legitimate governments move into the area and forced them out. piracy still exists today, but where is it? in the middle of nowhere, on the fringes of civilization and government control.
and if you still can't deal with the logic of this reasoning, well, i guess you take this game way too seriously. get out of mom's basement and discover real life. |
|
|
Vargrh
Gallente
Medo.
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 21:55:00 -
[581]
Edited by: Vargrh on 02/09/2008 21:57:29
so basically CCP are giving a BOOST to empire isk farming multi barge 'player spawns', by detering players from ganking them...
And allowing the level 4 mission running cochroaches to isk farm all day in empire without consequence...
Eve used to be rich with player led content, it is now becoming an isk farming and 'fleet lag pvp' experience. |
Brenten007IND
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 22:44:00 -
[582]
 Originally by: Fox Walken
Few issues with this.
2. Protecting carebears... wish CCP would stop doing this - it is in their nature to whine, so let them, don't feed them, part of EVE's success is that it remains viable for non-consentual PKing, every other game that nerfs this and gives into the bears loses players to EVE. Until EVE gives in too..........
3. Macrominers boost - why? this will benefit macro miner isk sellers way more than the bears.
4. The law of unintended consiquence - there has long been an issue with war-targets in high-sec leaving corps to get enemies concorded, now they can do it to even more effect with the insurance nerf.
The best thing about EVE is that no-one is safe, even in high-sec. Do not feed the bears anymore concessions
And you wonder why theres no new player accounts being created in the millions like World of Warcraft (11 million). This is the exact reason why. Personally I perfer a pvp server where theres a no hold bars and you can do whatever the heck you want. Of course, PVE server will have full restrictions of non pvp action unless flagged. CCP will never gather enough clients if a newb's keeps getting killed during their trial accounts in 1.0 - .5 space. Many will just get mad and quit the game all together and will never come back. In addition, for every newb killed within the first month there is a high chance that they will never play again. Which I know that a lot of the pirate don't care. However, it hits CCP bottom line. It's 14.95 a month lost per account. If you multiply it by a 1000 new accounts being created per day and for 30 days. That is an extra $448,500.00 per month lost in extra revenue. So tell me CCP are you really going to support pirates or carebares. Or create a seperate servers for pvp.
One last thing, in history, Pirates has always destroyed towns, villages, cities, and many other civilization in the past. (A good example is Ghost towns that was once run by outlaws.) The question is, will it destroy this game. Will subscription start dropping until there no one is left on the server but pirates. Check those active accounts. Will you even be able to rival WOW 11 million active accounts across the world.
Only Time will tell...
|
Dzajic
Gallente
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 16:15:00 -
[583]
If someone tested it? How much faster does CONCORD arrive and how much faster do they kill?
Insurance removal was all that was needed to nerf suicide ganking, and that was alone maybe to heavy. Faster stronger CONCORD, and increase in sec loss is BAD, you hear CCP! I'm as carebear as they come (ok I do pvp occasionaly, a little, but still very bearish...) and I think that this nerf was overdoing it.
And CCP, please, dont nerf war decs. Yes, several new players starting a corp will be war decced to oblivion, and their only choice if they wish to play on corp level is to beg a 0.0 alliance to take them in... Still, dont kill war decs
|
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2008.09.04 12:18:00 -
[584]
About sec loss for podding, could criminal status of the poddee be taken into account?
I took -16.5% for podding a pie in a 0.4, because he wasn't an outlaw (yet). He attacked me, I popped his ship then his pod. Podding him was somehow legal as I didn't get crim flagged for it nor did he get killrights, because he was under criminal timer.
I don't favor completely free podding of people under GCC, but maybe halving the penalty, they have been bad after all...
|
su ling
|
Posted - 2008.09.05 00:05:00 -
[585]
I have been suicide ganked 2 since playing this game, it is no fun for the players who r not interested in pvp to spend time gaining skills to do things then have a bunch of wanna be pirates come in and waste there ships, if you wanna gank people go to low sec and only come to high sec to obtain the materials us care bears provide.
This is the best fix i have heard of since starting this game, good job |
Prismariana
Amarr
The Green Machine
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 02:29:00 -
[586]
I think this nerf as many whiners complain is not even far enough really. Truely make high security space... high security like it should be.
Gank someone in high sec when not in a wardec with them or part of faction war and the ganker should be criminal flagged and their security status dropped to -5.0 at once. Forceing them to rethink the cost and value of ganking other players.
I think the concord buff is actually small really compared to what it should be. In a high security area of .8-1.0 concord should be able to respond almost immeadiately or within less then one minute. In 0.6-.7 maybe 2 minutes and so forth. Thus making ganking or pking even harder for those not in a wardec or part of a faction war.
Let the pirates whine about it, let the griefers cry about it. So what, make them go back to the area they should be playing in 0.5-0.0 space where such activities really belong, not in .8-1.0 space.
I think gankers or suicide players should loose all insurance money period. No payout for any reason. You destroy your own ship take the full loss of it and deal with it like an adult.
If a pirates ship is popped by concord for attacking in high security space, no insurance either, but in lower space it would be allowed because of the possibility of corrupt insurance agents.
Make players start to think again and actually have to deal with loss and consequences of their actions.
As towards macro miners... stop whining, macro mining has been part of every online game since they existed. Grow up, stop whining that someone can make more isk quicker then you. I dont macro mine, I play the game.
Flagging someone as a macro miner just because they make many or constant miner runs and back to station in any set period of time is a bad idea. I personaly when mining can mine constantly for 8 hours or more at one time or another and do nothing else. Plus there are mining bots out there that are smart now, that can be programmed to take a break every so often to make them look like a real player. |
Milamber Stone
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 05:52:00 -
[587]
Hear Hear, well said!
Play the game and stop whining about people whining!
Pirates are some of the biggest whiners in the game and that has become evident in this thread completely.
The changes represent a more balanced game that just makes pirates have to use even more skill to kill "carebear" targets.
|
Patriak Marlowe
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 01:52:00 -
[588]
These changes are drastic but acceptable, this is a great increase for the protection of the NPC corpmember.
Add to this list that NPC corps take 20% tax and then more pilots will join Player corps.
This tax could even be called WARTAX to finance the Faction War!?!
Anyway, basically this tax would represent the cost of NPC corps in keeping security in highsec, ie. paying Concorde for protection etc.
As it is all players are getting a free ride as long as they are in a NPC corp.
Player corps => wardec from the pirates/gankers/griefers.
ONLY TWO THINGS IN LIFE ARE GUARENTEED, DEATH AND TAXES!
I would allso suggest best reactiontime in Hi sec and increasingly lower responsetime and having the worst responsetime in 0.5sec!
|
Lubomir Penev
interimo
|
Posted - 2008.09.14 02:16:00 -
[589]
Originally by: Prismariana
I think the concord buff is actually small really compared to what it should be. In a high security area of .8-1.0 concord should be able to respond almost immeadiately or within less then one minute. In 0.6-.7 maybe 2 minutes and so forth. Thus making ganking or pking even harder for those not in a wardec or part of a faction war.
Hi! You are stupid. CONCORD is there within 20 sec in 0.5 and faster in higher sec.
--
I'm done whining about AFs, it looks like they are making them right \o/ |
Blackjack Turner
Caldari
Inverted Awareness
|
Posted - 2008.09.15 10:56:00 -
[590]
Was the insurance "bug" fixed? I shot at a Gallente pilot last night as an experiment, and was in my pod very fast from the faction gate guns. I also got my insurance money. Granted, Concord did not appear to be involved. And while the patch notes point to the blog, which details taking away the insurance pay out when Concord is involved, it is not specifically addressed in the patch notes.
So, is it only when Concord pops your ship? Or was it never implemented?
|
|
|
Valkerias
|
Posted - 2008.09.17 00:45:00 -
[591]
A.) Has not yet been implemented.
B.) Only when your ship popped by CONCORD.
|
Raven x1
|
Posted - 2008.09.18 06:05:00 -
[592]
It all because they dont wont to WORK like a miner for the ISK they got to steel it the little pantie wastes.
|
LordSax7648
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 18:12:00 -
[593]
While this might not put a stop to suicide gankings, it will certaintly put a more deserving consequence to it. I know I'm tired of the countless ships sitting in .6 and .5 space trying to score a quick kill on unsuspecting players, trying to hit that one in a million lottery "kill". With a little ambition these folks could be making isk the old fasion way...."EARNING IT!"
LS
|
Tac Ginaz
The Righteous Few
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 18:57:00 -
[594]
I do not see how any of this helps suicide ganking.
Its all about economics. If I see a freighter hauling billions of isk worth of stuff and I really wanted to grief the poor SOB, I know I could easily find a small squad quite willing to sacrifice a 200-300 mill worth in battleships to terminate the freighter and then pick up some loot. Faction loss standing?
Isk > Faction.
The only true way to stop suicide ganking therefore, is to go after the offender's ISK.
Take the value of the ship lost. Multiply it by the number of items that were destroyed or dropped by the ship's explosion (including # of modules and each individual cargo item). Charge that as a penalty to EACH player involved in the gank. modify the above by space sec rating.
If the character that is fined does not have enough isk in their wallets they have 10 days to pay the fine otherwise account is suspended. Accounts with fines cannot be sold to other players.
Victim receives the ISK from the fines from 2 players max. Meaning the victim in this case, recoups a lot of his lost items.
|
LordSax7648
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 19:03:00 -
[595]
Also for you whinners.....
Eve is a great game because it provides opportunities for all type of players (not just pvp and pirate scum). CCP hasn't stopped the suicide gankers, but just added some teeth to the consequences of these actions. So go ahead..nail the poor bastard and take his stuff...but enjoy the next few days building your standing up before you can do it again, if nothing else there will be one less pirate s****at the gate for a while. This isn't pvp or pirates roaming low sec belts for their prey. There is no glory here on the kill...attacking a defenseless industrial ship...give me a break. Call a spade a spade, these folks are simply out trying to get easy isk, how is this any different than what the countless macrominers are doing every day?
Up to now these scumbags have had all the cards. So they lose a fully insured ship with low cost mods. The victim meanwhile has lost costly cargo and can't get but a small percentage back on their ship, as most have the costly cargo rigs. Spare me the shouldn't use those rigs as the owners don't intend these ships for combat and in fact will go out of their way to keep it that way. You want to talk about risk to reward? Yeah as long as it's stacked in your favor...Please.
So cheers to CCP for evening the playing field a bit and I look forward to the insurance deployment!!!
LS
|
Dr Chicago
|
Posted - 2008.09.23 19:59:00 -
[596]
Newb observation
I only have a couple of weeks in EVE and I don't know all the Eve vernacular yet but as a recent outsider to the community, and after reading what appears to be 22 pages of two sides of the sandbox story. Let me see if I get this straight?
Side 1: Dudes in mining barges "Carebears?" who use possibly macro's to mine 24/7 and make loads of ISK are getting pirated by player characters who make more ISK from the loot then the ship costs +insurance payoff.. These Side 1 dudes loose the minerals and the cost of the uninsured portion of the ship possibly... They complain alot?!
Side 2, Dudes who figured out how to game the game by whacking and taking minersls, salvage, and insurance profits from "Carebears" whom game the game expecting no risk by being in high sectors and whine to CCP cause they have to macro longer and harder for a couple of days.
Did I comprehend all that right from all 22 pages?
Both sides sound like genuine entrepreneurs, and with being an entrepreneur comes risks along with the rewards.. I say why fix whats not broken <Opinion>
I entered the Eve universe realizing that every sector had danger and a potential for my virtual ship loss and possibly character death, it actually
for me adds to the game experience. I get amped up on every jump, will I be targeted and or jumped in the next system? Without that the game is actually endless training clicks at times...
If your in a "carebear" mode of entrepreneurship, and banking huge ISK then
the fix would be hire a security firm to protect your assets...Thats real life drama in a game environment, suck it up and deal with it..
OK I get yelled at alot for thinking to far out of the box but with that risk comes rewards sometimes as well.. and often I am way out of line..
All Best!
Dr. Chicago
|
Akira117
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 14:27:00 -
[597]
Good job bending over for the whiners, what made this game unique you are destroying.
999.times {print " The Cake is a lie."} |
Yawgmoth
Amarr
Solar Storm
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 23:40:00 -
[598]
Originally by: Shinigami
Edited by: Shinigami on 06/08/2008 10:27:02
Originally by: Esmenet
EVE looking less and less unique and interesting every dev blog these days.
It's only a matter of time before they introduce "podbound" items/ships, and make it possible to opt-out of pvp. Did these new devs get recruited at blizzcon?
CCP Fear? More like CCP FuzzyBunny.
We already do have podbound items... Implants!
As to the changes I don't really see any problem. All it will do is stop people from suicide ganking empty shuttles and any ship that will drop less loot than their ship costs.
"So how did you survive this long in 0.0 with no MWD?"
'I didn't. I died. Alot' |
Jstar999
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 12:32:00 -
[599]
Hello,
As a novice player I have no problem with the way sec status is lowered, but i do have an issue with the fact that once your sec status get low it is almost impossible to get it back up again, this is a great bother for me because yes i got a bad standing (warpscrammed a pod while someone else shot it to pieces)and it's almost impossible to get it up again. CCP might think of something to get up your staning faster (maybe followed by a cool down period of a certain time) to enable players to get back into Hi sec after they did something stupid (possibly unintended or unaware of the consequences)
Regards
Jstar999
|
Shaylar
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 15:15:00 -
[600]
Funny how this reminds me of soooo many other games like Ultima Online....
People start to die they complain and soon after that the world is made ultra care bear safe and guess what, within 1-2 years the game dies off to everyone over the age of 25
They quit and everything goes down hill....
Who cares if someone macroing dies, its a weak way to play the game anyways, if you are too lazy to actually play the game then go do something else!
cowards lol |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] .. 21 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |