| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
copasetic sideways
   |
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:02:00 -
[61]
THE SKY IS FALLING....
|
Sheriff Jones
Amarr
Please Enter Password
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:02:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 06/08/2008 08:06:25
Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 06/08/2008 08:05:38
Umm...if i read that right:
"Higher the security of a system = bigger/faster security + bigger security hit?"
How on earth is this a "bad" thing? Seems logical to me 
Low sec= pirate pewpew place.
High sec= secured and empire looks after its own.
Something is wrong in the game, yes, WRONG, if a high security place is a "pewpew" place for the pirates.
And no i don't consider my any of the affiliations like pirates, carebears or such. It's just logical concord thinking.
My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit. |
Serj Darek
Minmatar
Mentally Unstable Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:02:00 -
[63]
 Originally by: Gamesguy
Funny how all the carebears are saying "adapt or die!" when a week ago they were the ones who've been failing to adapt and whining for the past...two years?
QFT! 
First!
|
Zephyr Rengate
dearg doom
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:05:00 -
[64]
I say the only thing to improve Eve is to add arena, that way pvpers can pvp in a safe instance without harming mission runners. Also in pvp instance there would be no concord. That would solve the whine about new concord spawn times.
|
David Ryan
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:06:00 -
[65]
Edited by: David Ryan on 06/08/2008 08:06:30
This is disgusting.
STOP AFK HAULING
Problem solved.
No changes needed.
-------------------
|
El'Niaga
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:12:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: El'Niaga
EVE is suppose to be risk vs reward.
Currently their is little to no risk for the pirates/gankers in hi sec. They get more than their ship back in insurance.
This helps level the playing field. You can still gank in hi sec. If your doing it for fun you can blow up anything, just be out what you spent on it. If your trying to be a pirate, then you need to make sure its worth it as a target. (Use a Cargo Scanner, and a Ship Scanner...)
Below .5 the change in insurance will not affect anything.
The sec hits as described make more sense.
Where is the risk for the npc corp level 4 mission runner in a CNR? When there is risk for him I would gladly support a nerf to suicide gankers.
Increasing risk is not nerfing the reward, increasing risk is implementing things like tradable killrights and fixing the bounty system. This is just a plain nerf.
When he gets into low sec, that or he has to accept less isk a day as you get one from almost any level 3 or 4 agent within 5 jumps of low sec at regular intervals. He can choose not to take those, but doing that more often than once every 4 hours hurts his ability to do it in the future.
The other way is to flip his cans and hope he's stupid or that he shoots at you. Most are sadly and then you kill them, since they have a global and can be shot without concord interference. Indeed that is how most mission runners are killed today, not by suiciding. Most suiciding targets industrials, mining barges, freighters, exhumers and transports.....
|
Gaia Thorn
Mortis Angelus
The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:18:00 -
[67]
Originally by: El'Niaga
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: El'Niaga
EVE is suppose to be risk vs reward.
Currently their is little to no risk for the pirates/gankers in hi sec. They get more than their ship back in insurance.
This helps level the playing field. You can still gank in hi sec. If your doing it for fun you can blow up anything, just be out what you spent on it. If your trying to be a pirate, then you need to make sure its worth it as a target. (Use a Cargo Scanner, and a Ship Scanner...)
Below .5 the change in insurance will not affect anything.
The sec hits as described make more sense.
Where is the risk for the npc corp level 4 mission runner in a CNR? When there is risk for him I would gladly support a nerf to suicide gankers.
Increasing risk is not nerfing the reward, increasing risk is implementing things like tradable killrights and fixing the bounty system. This is just a plain nerf.
When he gets into low sec, that or he has to accept less isk a day as you get one from almost any level 3 or 4 agent within 5 jumps of low sec at regular intervals. He can choose not to take those, but doing that more often than once every 4 hours hurts his ability to do it in the future.
The other way is to flip his cans and hope he's stupid or that he shoots at you. Most are sadly and then you kill them, since they have a global and can be shot without concord interference. Indeed that is how most mission runners are killed today, not by suiciding. Most suiciding targets industrials, mining barges, freighters, exhumers and transports.....
And yes he doesnt have to go into lowsec unless you choose a agent close to a lowsec system.
And ganking mission runners is being nerfed and has been nerfed already remember "lofty scam" that was swiftly dealt with once the carebears started whining about being shot and loosing their ships.
|
Zephyr Rengate
dearg doom
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:19:00 -
[68]
The lofty trick was dealt with to stop any problems occuring through FW.
|
copasetic sideways
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:20:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Gaia Thorn
And ganking mission runners is being nerfed and has been nerfed already remember "lofty scam" that was swiftly dealt with once the carebears started whining about being shot and loosing their ships.
tsk!
it was hardly "swiftly" dealt with... please stop posting just because you love the clackety-clack of your keyboard...
|
Xavieer Naidoo
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:20:00 -
[70]
At last. And to all the people saying that insurance should still be paid after you get blown up by concord, imagine this:
Insurance company, someplace, somewhere:
- "Good morning, can I please have my insurance paid. My car got blown up..."
- "What happened sir ?"
- "Well... I robbed a bank, shot two people, and then police came after me, so I took my car and tried to ran away. They blocked the streets and wrecked my car. I also got arrested..."
- "Oh... that's no problem sir. Here you go. Your platinium insurance. Enjoy it along with all the money you stole. Have a nice day."
Yeeeeaaaaah. Very immersive. Also makes so much sense. 
So a big YARRR! to those changes. 
|
|
|
Jeremy Paxman
Special Doc
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:23:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Jeremy Paxman on 06/08/2008 08:24:22
Originally by: copasetic sideways
THE SKY IS FALLING....
--------------------
In Soviet Cornwall, cows tip you. |
Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:23:00 -
[72]
Ah, the sweet sound of pirate tears
What, people actually have to think about whether a suicide gank is worth the risk? You have to *gasp* actually scout and get intel? The horror! Flee too Delve/other games! Rabble rabble rabble!
In short: excellent changes. Suicide ganks are still possible, but are no longer automatically profitable. As should be.
|
Sheriff Jones
Amarr
Please Enter Password
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:23:00 -
[73]
Exactly Xavieer, this is why i ask, AGAIN, and i know i KNOW, logical thinking is hard for some people:
Why shouldn't higher security system equal higher security?
It seems that all the pirates/gankers who get hellbent around here think that the whole of EVE should be 0.0 
My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit. |
Rhanna Khurin
Minmatar
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:24:00 -
[74]
I wouldn't want to be a suicide ganking vagabond pilot right now.....
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:25:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
Quote:
We also changed the functionality and reduced the spawn. CONCORD now spawns in groups of 3 ships: 2 frigate sized vessels, which will lock the aggressor down in place, and a heavy hitting battleship to reduce his or her ship to metal scraps. The frigates will lock almost instantly while the battleship takes longer to lock, and the aggressor is made more aware of his or her impending doom.
While they may have made them arrive faster, it seems like they've also made it so that you can survive CONCORD a bit longer. Anyone else think it looks like this?
Yes, I have noticed it too, but naturally "suicide ganking should be subsidized by CCP" people will not consider that.
I must admit that I like Bellum suggestion of removing insurance completely after a character has 60 days of play. Or maybe a better option is to increase the cost of insuring as the ships loss go up (broken for categories), for example the first time you insure a BS you pay the current values, after a BS insurance payout has been given to you the insurance price go up a 5%, with the second insurance payout 10% and so on.
That will give new players a buffer when they start playing with a new tier of ships bu after some time will make insurance non convenient.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:26:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Xavieer Naidoo
At last. And to all the people saying that insurance should still be paid after you get blown up by concord, imagine this:
Insurance company, someplace, somewhere:
- "Good morning, can I please have my insurance paid. My car got blown up..."
- "What happened sir ?"
- "Well... I robbed a bank, shot two people, and then police came after me, so I took my car and tried to ran away. They blocked the streets and wrecked my car. I also got arrested..."
- "Oh... that's no problem sir. Here you go. Your platinium insurance. Enjoy it along with all the money you stole. Have a nice day."
Yeeeeaaaaah. Very immersive. Also makes so much sense.
So a big YARRR! to those changes.
About as realistic as making a claim like this:
"I'd like to claim my insurance on my raven please"
"What happened sir?"
"I strapped a machine gun onto it and drove it to Somalia where I attacked the local militia there, unfortunately an RPG hit it and now its wrecked".
Makes about as much sense as suicide gankers getting insurance.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:28:00 -
[77]
Originally by: El'Niaga
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: El'Niaga
EVE is suppose to be risk vs reward.
Currently their is little to no risk for the pirates/gankers in hi sec. They get more than their ship back in insurance.
This helps level the playing field. You can still gank in hi sec. If your doing it for fun you can blow up anything, just be out what you spent on it. If your trying to be a pirate, then you need to make sure its worth it as a target. (Use a Cargo Scanner, and a Ship Scanner...)
Below .5 the change in insurance will not affect anything.
The sec hits as described make more sense.
Where is the risk for the npc corp level 4 mission runner in a CNR? When there is risk for him I would gladly support a nerf to suicide gankers.
Increasing risk is not nerfing the reward, increasing risk is implementing things like tradable killrights and fixing the bounty system. This is just a plain nerf.
When he gets into low sec, that or he has to accept less isk a day as you get one from almost any level 3 or 4 agent within 5 jumps of low sec at regular intervals. He can choose not to take those, but doing that more often than once every 4 hours hurts his ability to do it in the future.
The other way is to flip his cans and hope he's stupid or that he shoots at you. Most are sadly and then you kill them, since they have a global and can be shot without concord interference. Indeed that is how most mission runners are killed today, not by suiciding. Most suiciding targets industrials, mining barges, freighters, exhumers and transports.....
A mission runner in motsu has zero chance of being offered a mission to lowsec, and he makes more isk than the majority of 0.0 ratters who carry much more risk.
Stop dodging the point.
|
sakana
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:28:00 -
[78]
They only released this blog now to try and stop people complaining about the nano-nerf.
|
Xavieer Naidoo
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:36:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Gamesguy
About as realistic as making a claim like this:
"I'd like to claim my insurance on my raven please"
"What happened sir?"
"I strapped a machine gun onto it and drove it to Somalia where I attacked the local militia there, unfortunately an RPG hit it and now its wrecked".
Makes about as much sense as suicide gankers getting insurance.
Concord is the Police. Somalia is the lawless space (0.4-0.0) where no laws apply. The assumption is quite simple - EVE is a harsh world where people shoot themselves. Insurance companies know it and pay you if your actions are not against the law. In empire we have the law, outside it - we don't, hence you didn't brake any by pirating / ganking / pvping / whatever.
|
Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
Imperial Servants
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:38:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Serj Darek
Originally by: Gamesguy
Funny how all the carebears are saying "adapt or die!" when a week ago they were the ones who've been failing to adapt and whining for the past...two years?
QFT!
Just as funny as seeing all the suicide gankers crying foul now 
|
|
|
Tenoh
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:38:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Tenoh on 06/08/2008 08:40:13
finaly ccp doing something good for a change.Wish they would make guard npcs attack low security fkrs on sight and make then a free game.
I'd also would love to see Concord pod-killing the fkin gangers.Taking their insurance is a good step.FU bloody griefers.
It would be nice also to call Concord if your attacked,just like police.
|
Gaia Thorn
Mortis Angelus
The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:41:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Originally by: Serj Darek
Originally by: Gamesguy
Funny how all the carebears are saying "adapt or die!" when a week ago they were the ones who've been failing to adapt and whining for the past...two years?
QFT!
Just as funny as seeing all the suicide gankers crying foul now
Cause we always get the shortend of the stick.
whilst the "bears" get what they want.
|
Sheriff Jones
Amarr
Please Enter Password
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:41:00 -
[83]
Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 06/08/2008 08:41:52
Here's another LOGICAL example for you who complain about "carebears winning":
You say; "EVE is a harsh cold place!"
Ok, let's go with that. It's a cold bad place.
Fine enough? Good.
When someone says; "Yes it is! Let's remove insurance!"
What do you say? Riiight.
So which is it? Cold and harsh? Or cold and harsh but only if you're not a pirate/ganker!
My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit. |
Shadowsword
COLSUP
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:43:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Vaal Erit
1) Faster concord repsonse = who cares. Won't change ganking industrials or T1 ships with tons of loot.
Might change where freighter ganks are concerned, however...
Quote:
4) Future removal of insurance from suicide ganks = WTF NO. HELL NO.
So what? All it does is raise the profitability bar toward true idiotic carebears. Won't change much where cruisers/bombers are concerned, it only really change with battlecruisers and battleships.
Besides, think about all the lazy guys in t1 haulers who'll think CCP nerfed suicide-ganking to oblivions, and get careless again...
------------------------------------------
|
Gaia Thorn
Mortis Angelus
The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:56:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Sheriff Jones
Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 06/08/2008 08:41:52
Here's another LOGICAL example for you who complain about "carebears winning":
You say; "EVE is a harsh cold place!"
Ok, let's go with that. It's a cold bad place.
Fine enough? Good.
When someone says; "Yes it is! Let's remove insurance!"
What do you say? Riiight.
So which is it? Cold and harsh? Or cold and harsh but only if you're not a pirate/ganker!
Dont mind em removing insurance, what i do mind is that they alter the gameplay giving penalty sec hits a increase and that includes everyone in the gang.
then to kick pirates in the nuts even more they say if u have 5.0 in sec status and u kill someone -1.9 u take a less sec hit ?
so the bears can shoot lowsec dwellers and such and take a less hit for it whilst the rest get a drop i dont even want to think about.
|
Mika Meroko
Minmatar
Crayon Posting Inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 08:58:00 -
[86]
meh, this just raise the bar to gank a target....
nothing has really changed,
quite frankly, even with the easy ratting to get the sec status up...
alot of targets just arent worth it...
but
an Faction fitted CNR is still a faction fitted CNR.. =P
granted, the profit margins goes down... but something about having a net gain from sucide ganking (even a failed one) feels like an exploit to me...
oh and yes... Eve is DYING.... =P
Originally by: CCP Atropos
I pod people because there's money to be made in selling tears.
|
Terror Rising
Death Of Fallen Angels
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:00:00 -
[87]
Y'know I actually enjoy my alt getting targetted by dumb gankers, had 5 ravens with torps target my mission running golem outside a station. The minute they open fired I just redocked and undocked to enjoy their wrecks ... Twice this has happened in the last few weeks ..
I think the dumbing down of eve is more to do with the gankers half the time
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:05:00 -
[88]
I don't know about the exact balancing of suicide ganking because I don't have the numbers. Creating an exception in the insurance mechanic for one particular group of people seems a poor way of handling it though. The other changes sound like they make sense, but the insurance one should be looked at I think. However, the way it is worded suggests there is no debate on this one.
Also, 10/10 to Xavieer's "RL Insurance Comparison" troll above. Perfect execution, you sound just like a genuine moron. Most people can't do it that well.
Finally:
Regardless of whether I agree with the changes or not, this seems to hold true more with every passing day.
-
DesuSigs |
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente
The Aduro Protocol
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:05:00 -
[89]
Gaia can I have your stuff :3
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 09:07:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Gaia Thorn
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Gaia Thorn
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
It hasn't made the carebears safe, just safer.
Now all they need to do, is limit the freedom in starter corporations and it's a great change.
Well why would you need to be safer ?
Why is it always the pvp'ers way of life getting nerfed whilst the carebears roam around free with no need for adaptation ?
Why do the idiots need protection from the smarter in a game that is suppose to be a unforgiving harsh enviroment ?
Because there's more of us. CCP are running a business and they cannot afford Eve to be too harsh. There aren't enough blood-thirsty weirdos in the gaming community to keep such a thing going.
One thing.
who is gonna buy youre ships ?
since the carebears sledom lose ships in missions and if they do build a new one from the salvage and recycling of mods ?
Alliances. Corporations at war. Players upgrading. Pirates (who will still exist) paying the new gank price. Victims of ganking (who will hopefully now not include quite so many random victims).
As others (including CCP) have written:Ganking at the moment is too easy and is getting silly. People are being ganked 'just because' and that is a threat to the future of the game. I fully support ganking but it should require skill, teamwork and planning. Ideally it should not happen to noobs just flying around minding their own business trying to learn the game.
--
(Sarcastic mission running veteran, 4+ years)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |