EVE Search - Thanks for caving in CCP.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Thanks for caving in CCP.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:00:00 - [1] Quote: In addition, the highly requested feature of removal of insurance in CONCORD related events will be implemented in the near future. The CONCORD changes and Security penalty will be hitting TQ this fall, with Empyrean Age 1.1. Be safe out there! CCP Fear So there you have it, empire space is about to become ten times more boring. I did hear the cries of the people complaining about certain aspects of suicide ganking. I would have been fine with this if you'd have said, well, they can have basic insurance covering the hull, but no Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum. But ZER0??????!!! You know all those ISK farmers we're supposed to petition that you never ban? They aren't going to suicide ganked either now, they must all be jumping for joy as the sound of this news. ...but I guess that was the point, look after the people with two dozen subscribed accounts. I've played this game for over 2 years on multiple chars and I've never been suicide ganked once, and I have moved expensive stuff around, I just know how to be sensible and I bet the same could be said for a lot of people. I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked. - The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No. - The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No. - Giant gangs of mining barges? Hell No. This update rewards. - Macro miners and macro mission runners. - AFK gameplay. - That if you whine on the forums long enough you'll get your way. So good luck on your continuing to quest Eve Empire into Warm Cuddly Town. So come flame me forum warriors! I don't care I'm mad enough about this change then anything I've ever heard come from them before, whatever you say to me it was worth it.
Almiel Gallente Blood Inquisition	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:02:00 - [2] Just self-destruct your pod. I am for removing issurance all together, or bring it back to no default inssurance and 2 week duration.
Slanty McGarglefist	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:02:00 - [3] We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Wrangler No Doh!
copasetic sideways	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:02:00 - [4] Originally by: 5pinDizzy whatever you say to me it was worth it. i say this to you: fokens!
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:04:00 - [5] Flame flame flame. Also, /signed - DesuSigs
Kelli Flay	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:04:00 - [6] Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! RL comparrison = Failure and too much time in your mom's basement.
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:05:00 - [7] pretty much bending over and giving in to all the loser pilots, i have this strange feeling the screen will just be bright pink pretty soon
Slanty McGarglefist	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:06:00 - [8] Edited by: Slanty McGarglefist on 06/08/2008 14:06:00 Originally by: Kelli Flay Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! RL comparrison = Failure and too much time in your mom's basement. Say that to those who support no insurance for suicide gankers . And this RL comparison however moot in the whole swing of things is completely true. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Wrangler No Doh!
Bager Gray Gallente The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:09:00 - [9] If they are going to increase concord effectivness, why not decrease the amount of high sec space.
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:09:00 - [10] Completely agree with OP... Another sad day for EvE.

Kelli Flay	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:10:00 - [11] Originally by: Christari Zuborov Completely agree with OP... Another sad day for EvE. Yeah, I think i feel a tear forming.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:11:00 - [12] Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Isn't that the same mentality the other way around? They can't accept the fact that an aggressive attack on another person in high-sec should warrant a very hard and tough punishment. If you purposefully killed someone in front of CONCORD, knowing that you yourself would die ... shouldn't that carry a hefty punishment? It seems more than 'fair', to use the term, that if you commit the crime, you don't get insurance payouts, AND you get enough of a sec hit that you can't enter high-sec. The lack of accepting 'responsibility' goes both ways. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Slanty McGarglefist	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:16:00 - [13] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Isn't that the same mentality the other way around? They can't accept the fact that an aggressive attack on another person in high-sec should warrant a very hard and tough punishment. If you purposefully killed someone in front of CONCORD, knowing that you yourself would die ... shouldn't that carry a hefty punishment? It seems more than 'fair', to use the term, that if you commit the crime, you don't get insurance payouts, AND you get enough of a sec hit that you can't enter high-sec. The lack of accepting 'responsibility' goes both ways. But of course good sir, just don't go around crying when you made yourself a juciy target since you were flying an untanked hauler with millions in loots. That's the only point I was chiming in on. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Wrangler No Doh!
Privateer Stern Minmatar Stern Brothers Ltd.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:17:00 - [14] Edited by: Privateer Stern on 06/08/2008 14:18:11 Well, I agree to a point with CCP. It's high security space, and people in it should be more protected. If you want to fight, go to low security space, there's lots of it. Sorry, but I am one that wanted a BIT more toward this end, so I'm with CCP. I don't agree that it will help people with complete AFK playing, but the aspect of HIGH security space means more of what it is now. ----------------------------------------------- I work alone, solo, because I do NOT trust people easily. My path lies in a different direction and is NOT going to change.
Janu Hull Caldari Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:19:00 - [15] Edited by: Janu Hull on 06/08/2008 14:19:45 If you suicide gank any ship that isn't worth more than the ship you're about to lose, you're essentially a barking moron deserving of a painful reminder to play intelligently. Stop being sloppy and target the good stuff. This isn't the death of suicide ganking, its just a reminder to gankers that this game isn't meant to be easy on the predator any more than the prey. In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device.
Steve Hawkings	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:23:00 - [16] The thing is the only people that cried are the stupid ones that lost millions in a gank.
Privateer Stern Minmatar Stern Brothers Ltd.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:24:00 - [17] Missed the point altogether. It's high security space and should be treated as such to those with low security rating attacking others. End of point. ----------------------------------------------- I work alone, solo, because I do NOT trust people easily. My path lies in a different direction and is NOT going to change.
Craleo Caldari Brotherhood Cartel	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:26:00 - [18] Just leave empire and stop whining. People that whine about this change are grievers anyway. Learn to play the game and come to 0.0!
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:27:00 - [19] Originally by: Craleo Just leave empire and stop whining. People that whine about this change are grievers anyway. Learn to play the game and come to 0.0! It's not gr... oh, wait, grievers, ok. - DesuSigs
Quelque Chose New Eden Roller Disco Supply	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:28:00 - [20] Originally by: 5pinDizzy I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked. - The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No. - The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No. - Giant gangs of mining barges? Hell No. OTOH, how much sympathy do you reckon suicide gankers are worthy of? They're just bellying up to the high sec trough same as anybody else described above, with the exception that most of them also have access to profitable ratting in nullsec. I'm not really interested in seeing high sec become a padded room either, but that's for balance reasons. If we're going to base this on who deserves "sympathy" and who doesn't I'm afraid nobody really comes out looking good. ___________________________________________

Akkarin Pagan Minmatar Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:31:00 - [21] It's a fair call. Your car insurance company will not pay out under certain circumstances (in fact they try to avoid paying out in any circumstances, but that's a rant for another time). Pend now won't pay out if Concord is involved, so you better make sure that the target you hit will net you enough isk to cover your loss. Personally I have never been suicided, or had anyone attempt it (unless you count people who attacked me who I then killed (there's about 3 of them out there )). Basically this mechanic change just means that your untanked hauler with millions in the hold is somewhat safer, while that afk ferighter with untold billions in the cargo is in fact at greater risk due to the fact that there will be fewer targets. Akkarin I don't mean to sound bitter and twisted, but I am, so that's how it comes out. <3 - Immy
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:32:00 - [22] There are some other changes I'd like to see, though. I'd like to see security grow weaker and weaker, and I think small ships should be able to attack in higher security without in ones and twos, without fear of CONCORD. If a player knows that he can get a one on one or a one on two fight in a .7 system, as long as he's in a T1 frigate, then he's more likely to get involved. Still a sec hit, still considering piracy, but as long as only frigates are involved, CONCORDOKKEN isn't alerted. Progressive security, that is. And progressive PvP in the process. This crap about going from noob-land high sec and getting hit by three BS's at your first .4 gatecamp isn't very conducive and doesn't make a lot of sense. Those factions have lots of assets in low-sec, too. I also think it should be harder and more expensive to make and maintain a corporation. I'm in a solo corporation, and I know how easy it is to stay invulnerable from wardecs with it. Finally, NPC corporations should be holding points only. There needs to be some method ... I did like the taxes idea ... of pushing players out. To counter that, though, and the imbalance created from making corps harder to make, war decs need to be a two-way agreement. Whatever. The current system works, albeit it doesn't make sense to me. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Napro Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:32:00 - [23] Why wouldn't you gank a Freighter with 99 gazillion isk worth of bpos? Because ud lose out on the few hundred million of insurance money? rly?
Veldya Caldari Guristari Freedom Fighters	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:32:00 - [24] I agree with the no insurance for concord deaths. I agree with higher security hits in high sec. I think there should be no low-sec security hits. Create L6 missions, these are level 1 variants with much higher payouts. Something you can do in a frigate ship with a PvP setup, it should pay around L3 type of rewards. Create L7 missions, these are level 2 variants with much higher payouts. Something you can do in a cruiser with a PvP setup, it should pay around L4 type of rewards. Create L8 missions, these are Level 4 variants with significantly higher payouts. These should be paying 3x - 5x the reward of L4s and designed for a group of people to do them. Missions take longer, you need a strong tank to do the missions and will likely need to do it with friends but the rewards is there to justify the risk. The mission location is always in the same system as the agent reducing the risk of running into gate camps but it would breed life into low-sec for those not afraid of the risk.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:33:00 - [25] I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode. What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere. I hear a lot of people crying and whining that suicide ganking held no risk and was too easy, but every single one of them failed to even mention that with some very basic measures you can make yourself practically immune to high sec suicide gankage. I won't even begin on some of the other common misconceptions about the ease and profitability of suicide ganking, because I think this point is strong enough in it's own right. If you play smart, you're immune. But people don't want to play smart, they want to play AFK. And CCP now confirmed that their right to play like this weighs more heavily than the integrity of the game, so long as the whiners constitute a bigger mass of paying customers than the ones who prey upon them do. Or maybe just because they whine louder, I can't tell which anymore. Anyway, this is going to fade into the shroud of unrememberance as just another disgruntled whine in just another disgruntled thread, so instead of writing further I'm going to cast my vote the only way it will matter somewhat. My 3 accounts will not be renewed during the next billing period. Enjoy your bearfest, it was fun while it lasted :)
Craleo Caldari Brotherhood Cartel	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:35:00 - [26] Originally by: Quelque Chose I'm not really interested in seeing high sec become a padded room either, but that's for balance reasons. If we're going to base this on who deserves "sympathy" and who doesn't I'm afraid nobody really comes out looking good. THIS! And ofc, if there is several 100m in a hauler, then it's still worth it. It will just reduce the amount of random griefing ganks. And we are talking high sec here. Get your griefing ass out of there and stop playing Eve in easy mode.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:36:00 - [27] Originally by: Craleo griefing - DesuSigs
Gridwalker Amarr	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:41:00 - [28] Originally by: 5pinDizzy So good luck on your continuing to quest Eve Empire into Warm Cuddly Town. This makes no sense. Insurance payouts for ships are the pinnacle of "warm cuddly town". Are you just complaining that things will no longer be "warm cuddly town" for YOU? You know, if you feel EVE is getting too hard for you, there are other games which may be more appropriate... -Grid
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:41:00 - [29] Stock Response: Sec Status Hit: Only occurs to one person even if a dozen are involved in the gank. Increasing this by a maximum* of 10% (+5 sec stat vs. -5 set stat) will affect solo gankers a little, but not very much. Improved CONCORD response time: Will force players, in some instances, to upgrade to a larger ship, bring a friend, or fit a few T2 modules (cheaper than going from BC to BS) Sec Status Hit Based on System Security: Ganking becomes easier to sustain in lower sec systems and harder in higher-sec systems. *No Insurance payout: Using a BC to suicide gank someone will now cost you $20 million ISK, not $5 million ISK. This will hurt your ability to profit from low-value targets, and such as someone who carries 50 million ISK of goods in a T1 hauler. It will also raise the bar for the minimum value of freighters to about 1.8 billion ISK (guessing) to be worthy of a suicide gank. However, it won't affect those who do things like carry blueprints in shuttles or officer modules in...well, anything. Profit will still be huge even after insurance payouts. This will also have no effect on suicide ganking mission runners as those worth ganking (officer/deadspace/faction fit) will still be very profitable.
Cornelius Murphy Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:42:00 - [30] Originally by: Mjeh What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere. CCP had integrity? Blimey, you live and learn!

Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:42:00 - [31] Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 06/08/2008 14:42:44 Originally by: Mjeh My 3 accounts will not be renewed during the next billing period. Enjoy your bearfest, it was fun while it lasted :) I don't want you to leave, but if you do, can I have your stuff? In another month or so, I might add my stuff to it.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:42:00 - [32] Originally by: Bartholomeus Crane The changes are good. You are whining. Please emoragequit. Can I have you stuff? -I disagree. -Yes. -Like I said, I am. ;) -No, all my lovely billions made from ganking AFKplayers and farmers are going to someone a little more deserving.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:44:00 - [33] Originally by: Cornelius Murphy Originally by: Mjeh What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere. CCP had integrity? Blimey, you live and learn! They had when they posted THIS They lost it when they posted THIS
Gojyu Ever Flow HUZZAH FEDERATION	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:45:00 - [34] Perhaps you guys should move to hello kitty online, you're playing the wrong game. Eve is a harsh, unforgiving kinda place. You guys made suicide ganking something so mundane it was considered the norm, now the harsh and unforgiving part has come around to bite you on the ass. CCP have decreed that you guys are now going to have to actually pony up some isk in order to kill someone is secure space, you know, actually have a bit of risk to go with that reward
Sheriff Jones Amarr Please Enter Password	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:47:00 - [35] What i've read here: "they loose the integrity of the cold harsh world" "it's too warm ad cuddly" "etc other references to EVE turning fuzzy" Now. If you really think EVE should be harsh, cold, etc, wouldn't this be exactly the direction? Hmm?
Bartholomeus Crane Gallente The Crane Family	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:47:00 - [36] Originally by: Mjeh -No, all my lovely billions made from ganking AFKplayers and farmers are going to someone a little more deserving. Can't blame a guy for trying ... -- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:50:00 - [37] Originally by: Gojyu Perhaps you guys should move to hello kitty online, you're playing the wrong game. Eve is a harsh, unforgiving kinda place. You guys made suicide ganking something so mundane it was considered the norm, now the harsh and unforgiving part has come around to bite you on the ass. CCP have decreed that you guys are now going to have to actually pony up some isk in order to kill someone is secure space, you know, actually have a bit of risk to go with that reward Give me a big break... Look, everyone knows all this does is raise the bar to free travels in candyland. So instead of hauling 150 million isk freely afk, people can now haul 400 million in isk freely afk because it takes that much more to make it worth while. This isn't a fix at all, it doesn't add RISK to the ganker, it gives no incentive to the hauler to play smarter, it just gives out more free hauling passes...
Xen Mind School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:52:00 - [38] so will the tutorial be changed aswell? cause if you forgot it actually tell you to shoot ppl in high sec ..... so no more new players when they will figure out that the first shot they fire in high sec will render them locked out of high sec but mehh Make love not war ccp Can i have flowers sticking out my guns plzzzzzzzzzz they are so cute
Quelque Chose New Eden Roller Disco Supply	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:52:00 - [39] Originally by: Tarminic Stock Response: Sec Status Hit: Only occurs to one person even if a dozen are involved in the gank. Increasing this by a maximum* of 10% (+5 sec stat vs. -5 set stat) will affect solo gankers a little, but not very much. Seems I recently read that somebody at CCP was considering giving all the gankers in the gang the same sec status hit. Don't remember where, CBA to look for it and I don't see any mention of it in the devblog so it might not actually be happening... just tossing it out there. ___________________________________________
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:53:00 - [40] Originally by: Christari Zuborov So instead of hauling 150 million isk freely afk, people can now haul 400 million in isk freely afk because it takes that much more to make it worth while. So tell me, what do you think it the upper limit of value that someone should have in a T1 hauler? ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)

Sheriff Jones Amarr Please Enter Password	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:53:00 - [41] Originally by: Christari Zuborov Give me a big break... Look, everyone knows all this does is raise the bar to free travels in candyland. So instead of hauling 150 million isk freely afk, people can now haul 400 million in isk freely afk because it takes that much more to make it worth while. This isn't a fix at all, it doesn't add RISK to the ganker, it gives no incentive to the hauler to play smarter, it just gives out more free hauling passes... So..umm..you're complaining that some haulers might haul more stuff, that the gankers can suicide with bigger loss? Seems to me this balances out nicely in the lucrative gank market, but avoids tiny ganks for the tiny players. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Yussef Amarr Trader's Academy Blue Sky Consortium	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:54:00 - [42] Im fine with these changes except I think it's time for empire space to start shrinking. They always need a place to start at but too many are making it home. And give more incentives to leave it and head into lower sec.
Brainless Bimbo Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.08.06 14:56:00 - [43] Insurance was only introduced as eve was too hard. It had a place when introduced but really needed to be tweaked to take into account all the other things that have evolved to mitigate the reason it was created. ...... continues overleaf.
Ardrilian Gallente Glowing Goat	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:00:00 - [44] Originally by: Mjeh ... If you play smart, you're immune... I've never been suicide ganked nor have I ever touched a mining laser other than in the tutorial. However the above quote doesn't hold true in all cases. You can hardly avoid being suicided in your Hulk if someone sets his mind to it. And when done propperly it will hardly cost any money to the one killing a 100 mil ship atm. Whether that is something that needs changing is a different story, but there are those cases where suicide ganking is very much unbalanced. And please don't tell the miners that they just have to get a second account (or a 3rd) or some corpmates guarding them while mining in high-sec because that would be pretty much out of proportion too. Did CCP listen to the whiners? maybe. However there is so much being whined about that it would be extremely hard find anything to change without supporting at least one whiner-faction. Did the pirates get hit hard with the nerf-bat this time around? most probably. Just wait till they will tune down missile damage due to the upcoming nano-changes and enjoy the CNR whines about how useless their mission-ships are now (not that I would have specific information on anything like that but everyone gets hit hard at times)
Antarr Slagh Trans Eve Organization	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:01:00 - [45] I agree with OP. CCP gave in when they shouldn't have. --------------------------------------------- Runner of the Fleet Lottos!
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:07:00 - [46] Originally by: Brainless Bimbo Insurance was only introduced as eve was too hard. It had a place when introduced but really needed to be tweaked to take into account all the other things that have evolved to mitigate the reason it was created. The whole issue with the insurance payout or not is so-so. The much bigger problem is the lowered response time of concord, this is the dealbreaker. And the principle of the matter that CCP caved in on this matter is what pounded the last nail into the coffin for my part. I'm just saying, I hope you all realize what this is implying
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:09:00 - [47] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Christari Zuborov So instead of hauling 150 million isk freely afk, people can now haul 400 million in isk freely afk because it takes that much more to make it worth while. So tell me, what do you think it the upper limit of value that someone should have in a T1 hauler? Tarm, I don't think ANYONE should have a free pass as long as they keep below a certain limit, that's not how it should work. That makes things far too static, which is what the complaints of the haulers themselves are. They feel it's too easy, there's no risk involved to gank. Once you've done your little calculation you know whether you'll win or lose, and roughly how much you're going to receive in reward. If we want to make it riskier to do this action, fine make it more risky but make it more risky in a way that a n00b can gank another n00b and profit. The way it's going to be set, they remove that from gameplay because there's an artificial profit bar that must be overcome.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:10:00 - [48] Originally by: Ardrilian stuff about barges always being volunerable Yes, this is true. I've never killed barges on the "because I can-level", but I suppose Jihadswarm is more difficult to guard against. But even there, there are easy ways to lower the risk substantially. And not surprisingly, the fundament of said ways are always - you guessed it - don't be afk.
Faife Minmatar Kinda'Shujaa	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:15:00 - [49] Originally by: Mjeh -Like I said, I am. ;) not fast enough. - -
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:16:00 - [50] Originally by: Christari Zuborov Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Christari Zuborov So instead of hauling 150 million isk freely afk, people can now haul 400 million in isk freely afk because it takes that much more to make it worth while. So tell me, what do you think it the upper limit of value that someone should have in a T1 hauler? Tarm, I don't think ANYONE should have a free pass as long as they keep below a certain limit, that's not how it should work. That makes things far too static, which is what the complaints of the haulers themselves are. They feel it's too easy, there's no risk involved to gank. Once you've done your little calculation you know whether you'll win or lose, and roughly how much you're going to receive in reward. If we want to make it riskier to do this action, fine make it more risky but make it more risky in a way that a n00b can gank another n00b and profit. The way it's going to be set, they remove that from gameplay because there's an artificial profit bar that must be overcome. So should it be economically viable to suicide gank someone with five million ISK in the cargohold of their hauler? Because currently that's profitable in the current system. A thorax can reliably chew through an untanked T1 hauler in high-sec. After insurance payout, you'll be out a few million ISK. So in order to break even you have to destroy a ship with 6 million ISK it its cargohold, or about 4-5 T2 modules. Hell, under the current system it's profitable to suicide gank an empty hauler with 2 tractor beams and expanded cargohold IIs in its low-slots. I think that's a problem. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)

Plumpy McPudding	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:18:00 - [51] Originally by: Tarminic I think that's a problem. This is no laughing matter! __________________________ Fear me for I have an insatiable appetite! Proprietor and inventor of Chocolate Chip Chocolate Donut flavored Ice Cream.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:19:00 - [52] Originally by: Tarminic Hell, under the current system it's profitable to suicide gank an empty hauler with 2 tractor beams and expanded cargohold IIs in its low-slots. WTB: Low-slot tractor beams. - DesuSigs
Pesky LaRue Minmatar L.O.S.T. Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:20:00 - [53] Originally by: Bager Gray If they are going to increase concord effectivness, why not decrease the amount of high sec space. why should they? is there not enough low-sec or 0.0 available? what so many people fail to understand that is if people want to pay $15 a month to hang out in Empire, that's THEIR business, not YOUR business. just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to. now, i personally think that people who don't venture out of high-sec are missing most of the game, but it's not MY choice to enforce that they play how I want to play. This message came from the Minmatar Messiah, accept no imitations Pesky LaRue, Minmatar Messiah Bringing Salvation To Your System Soon! ++ PRAY FOR PESKY ++
Kretin Arnon Amarr Path of the Immortals	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:21:00 - [54] Originally by: Mjeh The whole issue with the insurance payout or not is so-so. The much bigger problem is the lowered response time of concord, this is the dealbreaker. And the principle of the matter that CCP caved in on this matter is what pounded the last nail into the coffin for my part. I'm just saying, I hope you all realize what this is implying It's just changes. Just like when sentry guns or insurance were introduced. Though the changes aren't very innovative they are hardly a dealbreaker. As a low sec pirate I regard these changes as a boost. In fact chances are good that even more nice stuff will be transported careless through high sec. +--------------------------+ For now I sleep and watch
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:22:00 - [55] Originally by: Pesky LaRue what so many people fail to understand that is if people want to pay $15 a month to hang out in Empire, that's THEIR business, not YOUR business. just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to. Linkage - DesuSigs
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:24:00 - [56] Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 06/08/2008 15:26:29 Some of these replies are pretty humerous. I had a feeling what would be said if I left out one of the things about how I play eve and it worked. I got around 10 posts saying OH LOOK ITS HARD FOR YOU NOW etc... Guess what? I've never suicide ganked or even attempted it in my whole Eve Career. All you people are missing what I was trying to say in the original post about insurance. I hinted that yes I can see why people would complain and I said I could see how suicide ganking was probably too much reward for too little risk, but they've jumped from one end of the spectrum right to the other. They've gone from small risk to carebear, small penalty to suicide ganker to. Almost no risk to carebear, MASSIVE PENALTY to suicide ganker. 110 million isk insurance payout? No, ZER0. I also brought up the greater wide rammifications and even if the carebears were worthy of more aid, its too high a price to pay for the nockin effects it's going to have in empire. You can try to educate how so VERY EASY it is not to get suicide ganked but it's the usual answers. 1. Fit warp core stabbers? A. Waah, but an extra cargo expander can go there. 2. If you have 500 million in goods, why are you still in a t1 hauler? A. I only started yesterday, I don't have the skills for it, I sold GTC's for isk to buy stuff. :( Etc... I tell you what, although the principles of the EVE world are getting screwed, I am going to LOL HARD at the first whine on this forum by the carebear who accidently shot a neutral entity in a l4 mission, got concorded and recieved no insurance.
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:31:00 - [57] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Tarminic Hell, under the current system it's profitable to suicide gank an empty hauler with 2 tractor beams FITTED SOMEWHERE ON THE SHIP and expanded cargohold IIs in its low-slots. WTB: Low-slot tractor beams. BECAUSE I AM A BIG STUPID HEAD FACE Fixed. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)
Ron Bacardi Caldari SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:32:00 - [58] I've suicide ganked in the past, i don't have a problem with this change. Why? Eve is supposed to be a harsh, cruel universe! That's what all the PvPers, suicide gankers, pirates, everyone in C&P like to say. Well, it certainly isn't a harsh cruel world for suicide gankers. Besides a meager sec status loss that is easily fixed, the ISK loss is negligible. It is not a harsh cruel world for suicide gankers, it is Hello-Kitty-I-can-do-whatever-I-want-with-almost-no-consequence-world.
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:32:00 - [59] What the?? Guys? Argh Ganked... OMG, they stole mah tech 2 kidney. You know what irritates me the most that people aren't seeing? I've played it safe all these years in hauling and been rewarded by having minimal losses, having to gate grind through systems sucks, and it made it exciting seeing people lock you on gates and that, putting you on the edge of your seat. Now people are getting permission to be lazy and idiots and will reap the same benefits that I made sure I achieved but with minimal effort. Why are the people playing smart always getting nerfed and the lazy ones always getting more protection?
Pesky LaRue Minmatar L.O.S.T. Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:32:00 - [60] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Pesky LaRue what so many people fail to understand that is if people want to pay $15 a month to hang out in Empire, that's THEIR business, not YOUR business. just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to. Linkage i know you're having trouble getting your tiny mind around this, but you CAN still gank people in high-sec, it just won't be as easy. i understand that you want to stamp your foot a few times until you get some attention but go find a link to ANYWHERE that says you won't be able to suicide gank anymore and we'll all give you a little hug and wipe your tears away. This message came from the Minmatar Messiah, accept no imitations Pesky LaRue, Minmatar Messiah Bringing Salvation To Your System Soon! ++ PRAY FOR PESKY ++

Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:41:00 - [61] Originally by: Pesky LaRue Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Pesky LaRue what so many people fail to understand that is if people want to pay $15 a month to hang out in Empire, that's THEIR business, not YOUR business. just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to. Linkage i know you're having trouble getting your tiny mind around this, but you CAN still gank people in high-sec, it just won't be as easy. i understand that you want to stamp your foot a few times until you get some attention but go find a link to ANYWHERE that says you won't be able to suicide gank anymore and we'll all give you a little hug and wipe your tears away. "just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to" This statement is incorrect. See link. Impending changes are irrelevant. - DesuSigs
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:41:00 - [62] Edited by: J Kunjeh on 06/08/2008 15:43:30 Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Isn't that the same mentality the other way around? They can't accept the fact that an aggressive attack on another person in high-sec should warrant a very hard and tough punishment. If you purposefully killed someone in front of CONCORD, knowing that you yourself would die ... shouldn't that carry a hefty punishment? It seems more than 'fair', to use the term, that if you commit the crime, you don't get insurance payouts, AND you get enough of a sec hit that you can't enter high-sec. The lack of accepting 'responsibility' goes both ways. I totally agree Ruze. And I also fully support these new changes to the security standings of gankers (and no, I've never been ganked, so it's not personal). Highsec is supposed to be relatively safe compared to lowsec. You wouldn't expect to conk a sleeping homeless man over the head and steal his stuff out in front of a police office with no consequence would you? Then why would you expect to gank someone right next to CONCORD with little consequence?
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:42:00 - [63] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Tarminic Hell, under the current system it's profitable to suicide gank an empty hauler with 2 tractor beams FITTED SOMEWHERE ON THE SHIP and expanded cargohold IIs in its low-slots. WTB: Low-slot tractor beams. BECAUSE I AM AWESOME Fixed. rgr - DesuSigs
Pesky LaRue Minmatar L.O.S.T. Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:47:00 - [64] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Pesky LaRue Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Pesky LaRue what so many people fail to understand that is if people want to pay $15 a month to hang out in Empire, that's THEIR business, not YOUR business. just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to. Linkage i know you're having trouble getting your tiny mind around this, but you CAN still gank people in high-sec, it just won't be as easy. i understand that you want to stamp your foot a few times until you get some attention but go find a link to ANYWHERE that says you won't be able to suicide gank anymore and we'll all give you a little hug and wipe your tears away. "just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to" This statement is incorrect. See link. Impending changes are irrelevant. you know, you're right, let me qualify that statement - "just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to without fear of any consequences beyond losing a cheap ship" once again, if you can link me to anything saying this will stop suicide ganking, i'll pipe down. hell, i'll even send you enough ISK to buy you some kleenex and a happy meal. but the reality of this is that suicide ganking will still be possible - just like ram-raiding a store in the middle of the day on rodeo blvd is possible - it's just going to be harder and left in the realm of the "professional ganker" and not "random griefer" This message came from the Minmatar Messiah, accept no imitations Pesky LaRue, Minmatar Messiah Bringing Salvation To Your System Soon! ++ PRAY FOR PESKY ++
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:49:00 - [65] Originally by: Pesky LaRue you know, you're right, let me qualify that statement - "just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to without fear of any consequences beyond losing a cheap ship" Fair enough. And I never said this would stop suicide ganking. But one must not confuse the necessity of consequences on the part of the ganker with a right not to be ganked on the part of the gankee. - DesuSigs
Kruntologist Red Eye .Inc. Rare Faction	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:50:00 - [66] Originally by: Janu Hull Edited by: Janu Hull on 06/08/2008 14:19:45 If you suicide gank any ship that isn't worth more than the ship you're about to lose, you're essentially a barking moron deserving of a painful reminder to play intelligently. Stop being sloppy and target the good stuff. This isn't the death of suicide ganking, its just a reminder to gankers that this game isn't meant to be easy on the predator any more than the prey. This, tbh. It isn't the end of suicide ganking. This will just be the end of unintelligent suicide ganking (ie ppl attacking empty freighters hoping something good will be inside and losing very little if wrong).
Mara Kell Steel Beasts	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:51:00 - [67] Originally by: 5pinDizzy I tell you what, although the principles of the EVE world are getting screwed, I am going to LOL HARD at the first whine on this forum by the carebear who accidently shot a neutral entity in a l4 mission, got concorded and recieved no insurance. Sorry to burst your bubble, but Concord isnt triggered anymore by shooting neutral structures in missions.
Praleon Gallente Eve Liberation Force Liberty.	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:54:00 - [68] I don't normally chime in on these kinds of topics because standard internet trollery is far beneath my general concern, and I know that 95% of the responses will be thus. That being said, EVE Online is a video game that tries to simulate life in a futuristic universe with empires, rules, society, etc. I will dismantle this and all similar posts from 3 perspectives, simulation-wise, game balance-wise, and meta-game wise. 1) Simulationist One part of an Empire is "Law"... to hold any credibility, all empires must enforce laws that protect peaceful life within them. If they don't? Well, that makes them just about as useless as your average 0.0 space corp... completely incapable of controlling what happens in its own space. That's why 0.0 corps don't turn their space into 0.5, 0.7, or 1.0. In its current state, the game allows you to "suicide gank" innocent people and take, potentially, every last thing they have. The POINT of CONCORD shooting you down when you do this is to PROTECT the assets of ANYONE in their space. That's what a "government" does, and it's what this simulates. TECHNICALLY, they should stay at the scene and revive the damaged ship, protect the wreckage, and/or return the contents of the destroyed ship to the original owner... which is what the police would really do if we were to gang up and wreck a semi on the highway in real life. If we want to rob a semi truck in said fashion, we'll have to do it out in the boonies somewhere and clear out before the police arrive. They are SIMULATING the safety of controlled space in this fashion, and the proposed changes PERFECTLY REINFORCE THIS CONCEPT. 2) Game Balance "I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode. What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere." This kind of retort indicates absolutely minimal thinking about the repercussions of the behaviors of players in the game. I've never been suicide ganked. As a matter of fact, I didn't buy an obelisk because of suicide ganking being present in the game. They will in fact kill suicide ganking, as, it is not an intended method of taking people's things away from them. 0.5-1.0 space is considered "safe space" and is a place for people to play the game when they DO NOT FEEL LIKE MESSING WITH YOU. Now, how is it not balanced? It allows those who are trying to SAFELY MAKE A LIVING to be ruthlessly GANKED by those who already HAVE MADE A LIVING in EVE. This is one of EVE's forms of griefing. The dev's have CLEARLY COMMUNICATED that they intend 0.0 and lowsec to be the place for PVP. Already in game is the ability to war dec someone's corporation in high sec, to steal someone's jetcanned minerals, and to salvage other people's wrecks. These things should be enough. To be continued: Praleon CEO Judgement Klan Corporation
Lord Fitz Project Amargosa	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:54:00 - [69] Originally by: 5pinDizzy You know all those ISK farmers we're supposed to petition that you never ban? They aren't going to suicide ganked either now, they must all be jumping for joy as the sound of this news. I don't really understand this arguement TBH, obviously they should be banned, but you would have to suicide gank them all day everyday for it to make a difference. One of the systems I frequent there are dozens of them, it would be impossible to make any significant impact on them currently by suicide ganking. So I'm not sure how reducing frequency with which the fraction of a percent of them that ever so occasionally get suicide ganked; get ganked; is going to change anything at all. Quote: I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked. - The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No. - The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No. This change isn't going to make those people any safer. They will still be quite killable for quite a profit. If they fail to die though, you will lose more, thus bringing some risk into the other side of the equation.
Slanty McGarglefist	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:55:00 - [70] As you can see, CCP has most likely been instructed to stay away from the forums today. The userbase is very hostile today. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Wrangler No Doh!

Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:55:00 - [71] Originally by: Praleon I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode. What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere. QFT - DesuSigs
Nexus1972 Pat Sharp's Potato Rodeo Daedalus Hegemony	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:57:00 - [72] I dont see the problem. At the moment Suicide ganking with purchase costs and insurance means apart from a sec hit no cost to the aggressors and even that can be made up quickly. This will not stop suicide ganking - it just means that the target has to be worth killing as opposed to people just ganking ppl for the heck of it. I personally have never been ganked, but then I dont carry anything of value unless escorted. It redresses the risk->reward balance which due to the dropping costs of t1 ships means that the risk is no longer there. To the gankers this could be good for you too - just think of all the extra people that will now consider afk piloting safe now - more juicy targets, it just that you will have to pick your targets more carefully now. It also means if pilots with good standing decide to clear up a few pirates in low sec we dont take such a big sec hit ourselves now. --------------------- Pat Sharpe's Potato Rodeo
Pesky LaRue Minmatar L.O.S.T. Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.06 15:58:00 - [73] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Pesky LaRue you know, you're right, let me qualify that statement - "just because YOU want to gank people who don't want to be ganked doesn't mean you should be able to without fear of any consequences beyond losing a cheap ship" Fair enough. And I never said this would stop suicide ganking. But one must not confuse the necessity of consequences on the part of the ganker with a right not to be ganked on the part of the gankee. again, that's a very fair comment. i don't think we're going to see eye-to-eye on this but the initial knee-jerk reaction from too many people has been "OMG THIS RUINS MY FUN AND MAKES CAREBEARS HAPPY WHICH MAKES ME CRY ALONE AT NIGHT AND MAKES ME FEEL ALL 'SANDY'" when it's just another time that the old EVE addage of "adapt or die" seems very fitting. This message came from the Minmatar Messiah, accept no imitations Pesky LaRue, Minmatar Messiah Bringing Salvation To Your System Soon! ++ PRAY FOR PESKY ++
J Valkor Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:01:00 - [74] I'm sorry suicide ganking is no longer risk free? You will still be able to kill t1 haulers carrying hundreds of million in ISK with a t1 fitted BC. You are just ****ed that it is cutting into your profit margins.
Pesky LaRue Minmatar L.O.S.T. Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:02:00 - [75] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Praleon I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode. What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere. QFT ok, i agree largely with you but if CCP hadn't always believed there should be a 'relative safe-zone' then they would never have added CONCORD, sentry guns, etc, etc. i don't think it's true to say they are "caving", per se, but that they are readjusting some of the current rules to bring the game closer into line with what they have always had as their vision for EVE. it WILL still be a cold, unforgiving atmosphere, now it will just take more determination on the part of the pirate or ganker to attack people in high-sec. This message came from the Minmatar Messiah, accept no imitations Pesky LaRue, Minmatar Messiah Bringing Salvation To Your System Soon! ++ PRAY FOR PESKY ++
Praleon Gallente Eve Liberation Force Liberty.	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:07:00 - [76] Edited by: Praleon on 06/08/2008 16:10:06 "I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked. - The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No. - The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No. - Giant gangs of mining barges? Hell No." This is completely imbalanced. People doing these BORING activities in hi-sec are PAYING THE WAGES so that they can begin to participate in PVP, or at least work on the sidelines of PVP. They deserve to be completely robbed for this? Game balance wouldn't have it such that you and your gang of 10 guys get a big reward for blowing up a ship that CANNOT BE FITTED TO DEFEND AGAINST YOU. Game balance would not have you harvest a sack of BPOs from an innocent traveller and be able to turn massive profit from that which you got with little to no risk. RISK vs. REWARD. You want big reward? Go set up some moon mining operations out in 0.0, explore, invent, and haul. Steal from those who are doing it there. That's where the RISK comes in for you. This dude tugging BILLIONS of ISK worth of tritanium in Hi-Sec? He's gonna make like 15% profit for 3 hours of infinitely boring work with no risk. You want to be able to cut in on his profit and add a ridiculous risk to turn his 3 hour SNORE-A-THON into a 3 hour, potentially GAME RUINING LOSS? TOUGH SHIT. Those days are over, and CCP's wise for it. 3) Meta-Game The game above the game... where CCP earns money by attracting customers, and, we have more fun as the population and size of the game universe increases... can only be positively influenced by this change... If a group of 5 miners quit because they all lost their 100 mil ISK hulks and tons of minerals for the 4th time, that's 5 less players contributing positively to the in-game economy. That's $75 USD less for CCPs wallet, and that's 5 people walking around, anytime being asked about EVE saying, "Well, the game is okay, but, people who have been playing it for 3+ years pretty much run it and will kill you for no reason with you having no recourse. They'll blow up your ships and take everything you've got by suicide ganking, etc. I do not recommend the game"... and believe me, EVE ONLINE has enough of those walking around. So what if you quit? When you're asked about EVE Online you're going to say "omg it suxors because u used to be able to steal from innocent people and have no punishment but then they put police in and i have to hack it out in 0.0 now and lolz it sucks." Really? You and your suicide gank-squad's $75 USD is FAR LESS IMPORTANT than the miner and hauler player's $75 USD, because they are RESPONSIBLY PLAYING THE GAME rather than EXPLOITING POOR GAME AI AGAINST FELLOW PLAYERS. You and your mates are giving people incentive to QUIT the game, while he and his mates are helping people afford better ships for less money. Period. To conclude... These forums, and all proposed changes to this MMO and any other MMO I've played (DAOC, DDO, WOW, LOTRO, Planetside, Tabula Rasa, etc etc etc) are always plagued by ELITISTS who are so afraid that they'll lose their superiority that NO CHANGE is good, and by TROLLS/GRIEFERS, who only want to play the game to boost their own ego by annoying and hurting other people. OMG CCP "caved" and listened to its important user-base instead of it's self-assuming-of-importance 0.0/suicide gank crowd? LOL. Give me a break. CCP is doing a great job of LISTENING TO ITS USERS. If they didn't they'd be like the other MMOs out there, that blindly just do their own thing. CCP should listen less to its old players and more to its new. I'm neither, I'm a couple years in... EVE is the best MMO out there. Don't let your own lack of insight ruin it because you are SO concerned with trying to seem elite and hardcore. And for this issue? Take your ELITISM and HARDCORENESS out to lowsec (empty) and 0.0 (too hot for you? Oh, I thought you were good at this game.) Have a nice day and, /flame on. Praleon CEO Judgement Klan Corporation
Pithecanthropus	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:08:00 - [77] Sounds like a good fix to me. No reason why you should collect insurance when you are purposely losing your ship. That's insurance fraud. Adapt. This is a issue that should of been implemented long ago. Just because it wasn't there, doesn't make it wrong to put it in now. Maybe CCP doesn't want losers, who should be playing the game, sitting in Empire waiting for the next big suicide gank. Play the game you losers. Eve wasn't developed for people to take advantage of loopholes and get their jollies. Maybe CCP wants you to actually play their game? Ever think of that? Suicide ganking is just lame. This fix doesn't change much... expect what is right. --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man.
Trind2222 Amarr The Red Ring	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:10:00 - [78] carebars day to day. They got wardeck nerfed They Got suicide nerfed They got nano nerfed Welcome to high sec where we all can make allot isk on lvl 4 Or is a early 1. April joke.
Pithecanthropus	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:11:00 - [79] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Why are the people playing smart always getting nerfed and the lazy ones always getting more protection? I don't see an issue. You can still gank someone. You won't collect your insurance, but waa-waa-waa... cry all you want. You want the best of BOTH worlds... fat chance. Gank people... grief people all you want... but CCP is doing good here. Lose your insurance... that's the counter effect. Deal with it. --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man.
MailDeadDrop Archon Industries	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:16:00 - [80] Originally by: 5pinDizzy I am going to LOL HARD at the first whine on this forum by the carebear who accidently shot a neutral entity in a l4 mission, got concorded and recieved no insurance. There are some Eve players, myself included, that would be interested in offering player-issued insurance policies. Since they would be player-issued, and since there would be several issuers, the policies would likely have a great variety of terms; enough so that most everyone's tastes could be satisfied. Unfortunately CCP has yet to implement the mechanisms to allow such player-issued policies to exist and resist fraud. So we're stuck with CCP-issued policies. Maybe the hinted-at Winter "industrial-oriented" expansion will address this. MDD Jump Clones: 8M and NO corp switching

The Economist Logically Consistent	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:17:00 - [81] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Praleon I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode. What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere. QFT Yep. The general trend of incremental steps towards the fluffy side worries me. CSM: This so called council got elected by 5.7% of the player base! (12678 votes) Who the hell are they going to represent???
Slaver Hatastus	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:23:00 - [82] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 06/08/2008 16:21:04 This is not a balance change, this is from ONE EXTREME TO THE OTHER. I can't stress this enough. y'know, it's really hard for me to believe you're actually asking us for sympathy on how hard it is to attack someone who isn't fighting back. AND NO, I'VE NEVER BEEN GANKED
Slaver Hatastus	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:23:00 - [83] Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu I dont see whats changed, you can still kill the chumps afking through highsec space with a hold full of isk goodness. They're lowering concord response times, so while you can still kill chumps it will be much harder now. How much harder we don't know yet. hard enough for it to be a challenge instead of relatively easy money, you mean?
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:25:00 - [84] The change was a long time coming, anyone not seeing this must be blind. War declarations use them. Oh yes, that'd put you at risk at times when you don't want to be, my bad. Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav! Also Known As
Tatsujin Koufu	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:25:00 - [85] Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu I dont see whats changed, you can still kill the chumps afking through highsec space with a hold full of isk goodness. They're lowering concord response times, so while you can still kill chumps it will be much harder now. How much harder we don't know yet. Did'nt they also mention increased lock time on the DPS component of the concord response?
Atlas Oracle Minmatar Native Freshfood	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:25:00 - [86] the humor element in this is pretty much win... all the hardcore internet tough guys with their "eve is a harsh place" teddy bear and "adapt" mantra, crying about it being more costy to gank carebears. irony is a great spice. rich irony, very humorous.
Juleko	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:25:00 - [87] I'd probably have more sympathy if it weren't for the fact that suicide ganking = zero risk (just bring enough numbers) and crazy rewards, certainly compared to mission running. Suicide ganking with insurance has a fixed cost of operations. You can whine about the time it takes to plan a gank but let's be honest, it's not hard to co-ordinate 6-7 overloaded torp Ravens to fire on someone who appears on grid/undocks. And, despite what the pro-gankers say, there isn't a foolproof way of avoiding a suicide gank. You can scout ahead, you can avoid low-sec, but ultimately if you're out in a ship you've spent countless hours and ISK building up then you're screwed. Suicide ganking is so successful because it is impossible to defend against (that and the fact that people are generally stupid, but that's just the icing on the cake). No tank is going to withstand 20+ seconds of torp volleys hitting them, deadspace/officer or not. If you're tackled - you're dead, simple as that. So, raising the cost of operations isn't going to remove suicide ganking - nor should it - but it will certainly make choosing appropriate targets a bigger factor rather than the Jihadswarms and "lol suicide Badger IIs for lulz", etc.
Pithecanthropus	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:26:00 - [88] Originally by: Mjeh The issue is CCP caving in to the overwhelming whine. And yes, we all understand the economic principles behind it, but the guts displayed by CCP when they stated 'if you don't want to lose all your savings in a high sec gank, don't play like an idiot' was what kept some of us playing. Now no more. Ummm... you can still get ganked in high sec. CCP didn't cave in to anyone. I suggest you actually play Eve instead of trolling in high sec for ganks. There's so much more to this game, and you're peeved that others actually do what the devs intended for people to do. --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:28:00 - [89] Originally by: Slaver Hatastus Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu I dont see whats changed, you can still kill the chumps afking through highsec space with a hold full of isk goodness. They're lowering concord response times, so while you can still kill chumps it will be much harder now. How much harder we don't know yet. hard enough for it to be a challenge instead of relatively easy money, you mean? Ignoring the point at the core of this so blatantly that I don't know why I grace your post with a reply... Probably hard enough that you can't do it solo any more, but this remains to be seen. Keep in mind what type of targets we're talking about here. For suicide ganks we're mostly talking about tech I haulers _AUTOPILOTING_ towards a gate. Are you telling me these targets should be a challenge?
Juleko	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:30:00 - [90] Originally by: Christari Zuborov Originally by: Gojyu Perhaps you guys should move to hello kitty online, you're playing the wrong game. Eve is a harsh, unforgiving kinda place. You guys made suicide ganking something so mundane it was considered the norm, now the harsh and unforgiving part has come around to bite you on the ass. CCP have decreed that you guys are now going to have to actually pony up some isk in order to kill someone is secure space, you know, actually have a bit of risk to go with that reward Give me a big break... Look, everyone knows all this does is raise the bar to free travels in candyland. So instead of hauling 150 million isk freely afk, people can now haul 400 million in isk freely afk because it takes that much more to make it worth while. This isn't a fix at all, it doesn't add RISK to the ganker, it gives no incentive to the hauler to play smarter, it just gives out more free hauling passes... As much as it pains me to say it - this guy is right. Changing insurance doesn't alter the mechanics of suicide ganking at all, it just increases the cost. Variable CONCORD response times would be an interesting change, but I suspect that wouldn't work too well as a unilateral change.

Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:31:00 - [91] Originally by: Pithecanthropus Originally by: Mjeh The issue is CCP caving in to the overwhelming whine. And yes, we all understand the economic principles behind it, but the guts displayed by CCP when they stated 'if you don't want to lose all your savings in a high sec gank, don't play like an idiot' was what kept some of us playing. Now no more. Ummm... you can still get ganked in high sec. CCP didn't cave in to anyone. I suggest you actually play Eve instead of trolling in high sec for ganks. There's so much more to this game, and you're peeved that others actually do what the devs intended for people to do. Don't for a second assume you know what I have and haven't done in EVE, because you don't. And ... sigh... it seems I must link THIS once more, seeing as how you brought up 'intended gameplay'...
Sheriff Jones Amarr Please Enter Password	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:31:00 - [92] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 06/08/2008 16:31:12 Originally by: Juleko Variable CONCORD response times would be an interesting change, but I suspect that wouldn't work too well as a unilateral change. Those are in place already, if i understood correctly. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Tatsujin Koufu	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:31:00 - [93] Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Slaver Hatastus Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu I dont see whats changed, you can still kill the chumps afking through highsec space with a hold full of isk goodness. They're lowering concord response times, so while you can still kill chumps it will be much harder now. How much harder we don't know yet. hard enough for it to be a challenge instead of relatively easy money, you mean? Ignoring the point at the core of this so blatantly that I don't know why I grace your post with a reply... Probably hard enough that you can't do it solo any more, but this remains to be seen. Keep in mind what type of targets we're talking about here. For suicide ganks we're mostly talking about tech I haulers _AUTOPILOTING_ towards a gate. Are you telling me these targets should be a challenge? No they should not, but at the same time its so absurdly easy to kill those targets that increasing the difficulty is'nt exactly game breaking is it? I mean, its like your complaining that the turkey shoot got a bit harder cos you had had a few beers before you started :P
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:32:00 - [94] Praleon, you receive my utmost respect for your beautifully written and spot on response to this issue. Everyone who's whining should read it, think on it, then read it again and again and again until they get it.
Tatsujin Koufu	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:33:00 - [95] Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Pithecanthropus Originally by: Mjeh The issue is CCP caving in to the overwhelming whine. And yes, we all understand the economic principles behind it, but the guts displayed by CCP when they stated 'if you don't want to lose all your savings in a high sec gank, don't play like an idiot' was what kept some of us playing. Now no more. Ummm... you can still get ganked in high sec. CCP didn't cave in to anyone. I suggest you actually play Eve instead of trolling in high sec for ganks. There's so much more to this game, and you're peeved that others actually do what the devs intended for people to do. Don't for a second assume you know what I have and haven't done in EVE, because you don't. And ... sigh... it seems I must link THIS once more, seeing as how you brought up 'intended gameplay'... and again, do you know that this is going to be harder.... have you tested this? do you know the extra lock time variable involved? no, did'nt think so. Complain about it when its obviously busted, not when you dont like the idea of it
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:33:00 - [96] Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu No they should not, but at the same time its so absurdly easy to kill those targets that increasing the difficulty is'nt exactly game breaking is it? I mean, its like your complaining that the turkey shoot got a bit harder cos you had had a few beers before you started :P He he, good point.
Slaver Hatastus	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:34:00 - [97] Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Slaver Hatastus Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu I dont see whats changed, you can still kill the chumps afking through highsec space with a hold full of isk goodness. They're lowering concord response times, so while you can still kill chumps it will be much harder now. How much harder we don't know yet. hard enough for it to be a challenge instead of relatively easy money, you mean? Ignoring the point at the core of this so blatantly that I don't know why I grace your post with a reply... Probably hard enough that you can't do it solo any more, but this remains to be seen. Keep in mind what type of targets we're talking about here. For suicide ganks we're mostly talking about tech I haulers _AUTOPILOTING_ towards a gate. Are you telling me these targets should be a challenge? i don't know why you "graced" me with a reply, you didn't say anything new and it was basically for your own ego. that said - i always hesitate to bring RL into EVE but think about it, you're talkinga bout the equivalent of mugging old ladies in the street - no challenge, pretty lame, and of variable rewards. the police take notice of this behaviour and increase police patrols and arm them better so that they can stop this behaviour. the mugger sees her as weak, slow, stupid for doing what she's doing and hey, the mugger wants to take her stuff so why shouldn't he? the granny just wants to get home with her shopping in one piece, it's why she's taking the longer route, the route through the brighter streets with more people so she can feel safe. but you want it to remain easier for you? boo frigging hoo
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:36:00 - [98] Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu and again, do you know that this is going to be harder.... have you tested this? do you know the extra lock time variable involved? no, did'nt think so. Complain about it when its obviously busted, not when you dont like the idea of it Quoting the dev blog; "CONCORD has some issues, mostly that pilots are killed long before CONCORD arrives. We have decreased the response time, meaning they will arrive quicker, and we should see a more helpful CONCORD aiding those in need." I don't know how you interpret this, but it seems rather clear to me what it's saying...
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:39:00 - [99] Originally by: Slaver Hatastus i don't know why you "graced" me with a reply, you didn't say anything new and it was basically for your own ego. that said - i always hesitate to bring RL into EVE but think about it, you're talkinga bout the equivalent of mugging old ladies in the street - no challenge, pretty lame, and of variable rewards. the police take notice of this behaviour and increase police patrols and arm them better so that they can stop this behaviour. the mugger sees her as weak, slow, stupid for doing what she's doing and hey, the mugger wants to take her stuff so why shouldn't he? the granny just wants to get home with her shopping in one piece, it's why she's taking the longer route, the route through the brighter streets with more people so she can feel safe. but you want it to remain easier for you? boo frigging hoo Oh no, but that's not a good analogy. If the old lady decided to take her life savings with her for a walk on the sidewalk and then sat down on a bench for a nap, placing her valuables in plain sight for everyone to see, carelessly trusting the good intentions of her fellow citizens, then you would be getting closer to the actual scenario you're trying to describe.
Nexa Necis The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:43:00 - [100] That's a bummer of a change. I don't suicide all that much really so it's not a huge deal to me. Most of the people I have suicided are npc players who ran from wars or who refuse to make/join a corp since they fear war decs. So basically it sounds like we lose insurance payouts and take a sec status hit. So instead of cheap T1 Brutix/Domi/Geddon solo pilot suicides, maybe we will see larger gangs of cruisers/destroyers getting in on the act. Then what steps will CCP take? It would be nice if they slowed Concord's response time or something in exchange for no insurance payouts. A true griefer will sacrafice a few hundred million to make someone else miserable. It won't stop me from getting my pound of flesh.

Johli Caldari AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:43:00 - [101] In other news, CCP has tweaked autopilot so it always warps to zero, and has added NPC escorts for 1 million isk an hour that prevents any attempt of suicide ganking on the t1 hauler. In a completely unrelated note, RL Isk buying prices drop to 100 mil isk for $5 dollars.
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:55:00 - [102] Edited by: Space Wanderer on 06/08/2008 16:57:11 Edited by: Space Wanderer on 06/08/2008 16:56:29 Originally by: Mjeh I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles. Sorry, but you are flatly wrong on this. The core principle you are talking about is suicide ganking. Can you still suicide gank? yes. On anybody? Yes. In any system? Yes. As soon as they undock? Yes. Your char is still playable after you have done that? Yes. There, the core principle is still there. The only difference is that suicide gankers actually face consequences for their actions. Maybe you forgot another core principle of EVE, "each action has consequences". Or maybe you chose not to remember it. No matter. Current game mechanics allowed suicide ganks, but made consequences so small as to not be relevant. Consequences are about to change, to nothing really unbearable. Nothing else. If you want to suicide gank on someone for fun, you can do that. Just be prepared to pay the price for your fun. If you don't want to pay that price, lowsec is there for a reason. And that does not even need to be a high price, I mean, you can gank untanked T1 haulers with cruisers, wth do you need BS? I am disgusted by people saying "it's not right that my 5bil ship has been ganked in high sec", but it's equally disgusting to see people who think that they should be allowed to gank a 5 bil ship in 1.0 by paying only 10 mil. Really, this is just another nanowhine, CCP is nerfing the FOTM and everybody is crying. I am sure that the pros will just adapt their tactics, using more scouts, more cruisers and BC, instead of BS. Real gankers will still prosper, just like real nanos will still prosper, because they took their time to learn hw to play the game instead of exploiting flawed game mechanics.
Ioci Gallente Ioci Exploration	Posted - 2008.08.06 16:58:00 - [103] What is it all the bad boys say to carebears? Go to 0.0 if it bothers you that much. No concord there to muddy your game.
Eternal Error Exitus Acta Probant	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:05:00 - [104] This is ridiculous.
Anndarra Winge	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:06:00 - [105] Originally by: Atlas Oracle the humor element in this is pretty much win... all the hardcore internet tough guys with their "eve is a harsh place" teddy bear and "adapt" mantra, crying about it being more costy to gank carebears. Hmmmm... the taste of Pirate tears. So-so SWEET. But come on guys, I worked out over lunch how me and a dozen friends could make lots of isk suicide ganking with disposable alts. Just takes a little organization and planning. Cost is a week of training to get the alts into half-decent ships and a couple 100k for the ships. Who cares about the security - dispose of the alt while you sweep up the loot.
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:07:00 - [106] Originally by: Mjeh -I disagree. -Yes. -Like I said, I am. ;) -No, all my lovely billions made from ganking AFKplayers and farmers are going to someone a little more deserving. Would you consider giving your stuff to the self-described "Worst Pirate in EvE"? Namely, Me? Tactical Logistics using the last T1 Frigate hull!
Retorrent Changsuun	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:07:00 - [107] Ok after reading bout the changes I think I agree with the OP. I am a newbie to the game (only been playing bout a month)and if it wasn't for someone ganking me I would have never learned to better protect myself when hauling expensive things, I wouldn't have learned to not use AP when hauling so in all its made me a better player. I mean nothing gets my blood pumping when hauling cargo and someone locks and scans me. So why nerf it? High sec space will just be blah without some form of danger in it. I know my chara isn't ready for low sec space yet so it was cool knowing that I could still be attacked at any time it added such an element of fun getting nervous when I spotted a few ravens at a gate I realy hope it dosn't change the game too much.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:09:00 - [108] Originally by: Space Wanderer Current game mechanics allowed suicide ganks, but made consequences so small as to not be relevant. Consequences are about to change, to nothing really unbearable. Nothing else. If you want to suicide gank on someone for fun, you can do that. Just be prepared to pay the price for your fun. If you don't want to pay that price, lowsec is there for a reason. And that does not even need to be a high price, I mean, you can gank untanked T1 haulers with cruisers, wth do you need BS? I am disgusted by people saying "it's not right that my 5bil ship has been ganked in high sec", but it's equally disgusting to see people who think that they should be allowed to gank a 5 bil ship in 1.0 by paying only 10 mil. Really, this is just another nanowhine, CCP is nerfing the FOTM and everybody is crying. I am sure that the pros will just adapt their tactics, using more scouts, more cruisers and BC, instead of BS. Real gankers will still prosper, just like real nanos will still prosper, because they took their time to learn hw to play the game instead of exploiting flawed game mechanics. First, this is not about the insurance money, as has been stated 50 times. Again, what's much worse is the increased ability of Concord. I am disgusted that everyone seems to take it for granted that if you throw 10 million isk and some cruel intentions into the mix, you instantly have yourself a 4 billion isk cnr-kill. This is not true. There are many, many factors going into this equation, I'm sure you can work out at least some of them if you gave it a little more effort. No, this isn't a FOTM-whine. It's a whine about seing CCP backing down on their principles, core principles that made EVE stand out from the rest of the MMO crowd for some of us, at the face of the Massive Forum Whine (tm). This is nothing new in the MMO world, lots of other MMOs have done it before EVE. I'm just very disappointed to see it happen with CCP. But then again, maybe it's happened before but I just didn't notice it because the change at the time didn't concern me. shrug
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:10:00 - [109] Why have insurance when we have free noobie ships? And thank you CCP for doing something about this issue; it won't stop me from shooting at haulers but then I always did it for the isk and it wasn't about the fun. PS thanks for lowering the hurt for low sec pirating too Originally by: Galliana Foresta And sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cos I wouldn't eat the filthy mother ****er.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:11:00 - [110] Originally by: Bish Ounen Would you consider giving your stuff to the self-described "Worst Pirate in EvE"? Namely, Me? He he, I would but it's already promised away to someone else - sry

Farham Titan Industries Technology Team	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:11:00 - [111] So what exactly does this break about High Sec? You have to be more picky with your suicide ganks now. It will still be plenty worth ganking a freighter or hauler, you just have to do a little math now. I mean seriously, suicide ganking right now is just carebearing. Why hang around with a bunch of boobs when you can play with a nice set of TITTS? Titan Industries Technology Team
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:17:00 - [112] Originally by: Nexa Necis That's a bummer of a change. I don't suicide all that much really so it's not a huge deal to me. So basically it sounds like we lose insurance payouts and take a sec status hit. So instead of cheap T1 Brutix/Domi/Geddon solo pilot suicides, maybe we will see larger gangs of cruisers/destroyers getting in on the act. A true griefer will sacrafice a few hundred million to make someone else miserable. It won't stop me from getting my pound of flesh. I'm happy as I will still shoot haulers filled with loot, I will still setup groups of throw away chars in destroyers to attack haulers and people I dislike. AND the best part is that with these new rules it will take out all the carebears out of the pirating game. So I'm still happy, and will continue to be happy. Originally by: Galliana Foresta And sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cos I wouldn't eat the filthy mother ****er.
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:18:00 - [113] Originally by: Mjeh No, this isn't a FOTM-whine. It's a whine about seing CCP backing down on their principles, core principles that made EVE stand out from the rest of the MMO crowd for some of us So you say, but what's the core principle they have backed down? You can still suicide gank. High sec is still not safe. The only thing I can see is that they have FIXED another core principle of this game, "actions have consequences".
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:20:00 - [114] Originally by: Farham So what exactly does this break about High Sec? You have to be more picky with your suicide ganks now. It will still be plenty worth ganking a freighter or hauler, you just have to do a little math now. I mean seriously, suicide ganking right now is just carebearing. Comprehension failure? This isn't about insurance
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:20:00 - [115] Originally by: Bloody Rabbit I'm happy as I will still shoot haulers filled with loot, I will still setup groups of throw away chars in destroyers to attack haulers and people I dislike. AND the best part is that with these new rules it will take out all the carebears out of the pirating game. So I'm still happy, and will continue to be happy. This. High sec will still be dangerous. Just suicide ganking will be for professionals, not amateurs.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:22:00 - [116] Originally by: Space Wanderer Originally by: Mjeh No, this isn't a FOTM-whine. It's a whine about seing CCP backing down on their principles, core principles that made EVE stand out from the rest of the MMO crowd for some of us So you say, but what's the core principle they have backed down? You can still suicide gank. High sec is still not safe. The only thing I can see is that they have FIXED another core principle of this game, "actions have consequences". It always did, and they backed down in the sense that this is not a new "problem" but they have stood by their initial statement on the matter until the wall of whines finally got so tall that they caved in and gave the whiners what they wanted.
Mjeh STRONG POLITIK	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:22:00 - [117] Originally by: Space Wanderer Originally by: Bloody Rabbit I'm happy as I will still shoot haulers filled with loot, I will still setup groups of throw away chars in destroyers to attack haulers and people I dislike. AND the best part is that with these new rules it will take out all the carebears out of the pirating game. So I'm still happy, and will continue to be happy. This. High sec will still be dangerous. Just suicide ganking will be for professionals, not amateurs. 1/10 for effort. really
Cors The Scope	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:24:00 - [118] When you work in Retail, almost every single training seminar starts out the same way, with a question. Question: "What's the First Rule of Retail sales?" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Answer: "The Customer always lies." Question: What's the 2nd Rule of Retail Sales? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Answer: "The Customer is always wrong." In 99.9 % of cases the first series of queries we use with costomers proves this right. They Lie to you right from the start. EG: Q: How big is the room you want to use this stereo in. Customers Answer: It's a 15'x15' Room. Reality: It's a 5'x7' We sell them an over sized stero, that blows their ears out. Q: What do you do with your computer? Customer Answer: Not much. Little email, some web browseing. You know, general stuff. Reality: They're the leader of a 0.0 alliance quad boxing while useing TS/Vent/Winamp/IE/firefox/exelspreadsheets to mine on an alt/while watching a 1080P movie they downloaded/with 50 torrents running in the background... We sell them a lowely Celeron Processor equiped basic PC that implodes when they try to start all the apps they use. Moral of the story. 99% of the whines the devs see, are complete crap, have no REAL impact on the game. I doubt CCP listens much to to the whiners. Other then to send around compay emails with the funniest ones. I find this funny. Everyone is looking at this from the point of view of the Carebears getting a break and finding empire safer. Did anyone think of looking at it from the OTHER side? The world just got MORE harsh for a significant portion of the player base. HARDER. All those Pirates/suicide gankers now have a harder time doing the "Evil" things they do. Is this not the definition of Hardcore? Doing something that is now a LOT harder, and a LOT more dangerous? Ohnoes, suicide gankers are now going to have to actually LOOK and CALCULATE if it's worth it to gank that mission runner. Maybe they'll just have to go to low sec and start pirateing THERE like the rest of us. Or...GASP move to 0.0 and PVP with the rest of us. OHNOES They'll have to interact with PEOPLE instead of solo ganking in empire..
mishkof Caldari Finis Lumen Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:24:00 - [119] Wow look at this thread. Free to pick and choose targets with the ability to destroy it based on scanner results and a quick risk assesment, and it only costs less then 10 mil because of insurance? I am having trouble deciding who is the whiney ass carebear in this situation the people that "suicide gank, or the "Afk haulers". Pick better targets, and oh noes you have to rat to get your sec rating up a little more...rat...to get your sec rating up...to do more "suiciding"... I own a T2 BPO and Capital alt, therefor all of my views will be pro-Capital Alt/T2 BPO orientated. Please pick one of the following settings for your response. []hate me []troll me []smack me
Anndarra Winge	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:26:00 - [120] Originally by: Anndarra Winge Hmmmm... the taste of Pirate tears. So-so SWEET.[:twisted: Quote: I'm sorry, Pirates at least use some brains and skill and give you half a chance to shoot back (and only half if they are any good) and maybe ransom your way out. Pirates deserve your respect (not a lot, but some). Suicide gankers are just carebear-wannabee pirates - Not brave enough to go live in lowsec or 0.0 and not smart enough to earn a seat on the empire gravy train.

Esu Nahalas The Night Corporation RONA Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:26:00 - [121] Originally by: Mjeh It always did, and they backed down in the sense that this is not a new "problem" but they have stood by their initial statement on the matter until the wall of whines finally got so tall that they caved in and gave the whiners what they wanted. And now the wall of whines is even taller. Ironic. So the question I would like to see addressed is, are suicide gankers latent whiners, and they are finally coming out of the closet?
Captain Porter	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:31:00 - [122] Edited by: Captain Porter on 06/08/2008 17:33:57 Quote: In addition, the highly requested feature of removal of insurance in CONCORD related events will be implemented in the near future. The CONCORD changes and Security penalty will be hitting TQ this fall, with Empyrean Age 1.1. Be safe out there! CCP Fear Look at it this way...this is now true risk vs. reward. Think about it, you can still pop stuff the difference is you will be more selective in what you pop to make it worth it. Some ships carry that can give you over 200M isk (if not all destroyed) and you only have to pay out 60M(Drake fully fitted to tank new Concord) for your ship. You still make 140M.
Space Wanderer	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:38:00 - [123] Edited by: Space Wanderer on 06/08/2008 17:38:38 Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Space Wanderer Originally by: Mjeh No, this isn't a FOTM-whine. It's a whine about seing CCP backing down on their principles, core principles that made EVE stand out from the rest of the MMO crowd for some of us So you say, but what's the core principle they have backed down? You can still suicide gank. High sec is still not safe. The only thing I can see is that they have FIXED another core principle of this game, "actions have consequences". It always did, and they backed down in the sense that this is not a new "problem" but they have stood by their initial statement on the matter until the wall of whines finally got so tall that they caved in and gave the whiners what they wanted. You know, I was going to answer to this that although suicide ganking has always been a valid and supported game mechanic, in no place have devs ever stated that their consequences were balanced. I could have pointed out that you might, only might, have mistaken your own opinion as "core principle". I could have told that maybe, only maybe, the nerfs happen when statistics show that some aspect of the game is so unbalanced that everybody and their dog do it. But really, your refusal to even consider even one of those possibilities, and to consider trolls anybody who has a different opinion than yours, qualifies you for only a single reply, your own words: "1/10 for effort. really" What a waste fo electrons...
Beltantis Torrence	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:42:00 - [124] Edited by: Beltantis Torrence on 06/08/2008 17:42:07 For a bunch of "rough and tumble" pirates you guys sure do whine a lot.
Valan The Fated	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:42:00 - [125] OMG its finally here I'm so excited. Hello Kitty in space! Basically implemented to protect macro hauling and mining. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game four years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
Praleon Gallente Eve Liberation Force Liberty.	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:44:00 - [126] J Kunjeh, I thank you for actually reading my post, it is good that at least some people actually read these threads rather than blindly shooting off a stupid comment. To those of you that skipped it, I posted a dual post, fairly long justification for the changes as proposed by CCP. I justified it in terms of simulation (CCP creating an RPG Game World with lifelike rules), Game Balance (In terms of why it is skewed in the risk/reward department to allow suicide ganking against unarmed players), and the Meta Game (why it is intelligent of CCP to listen to players and make these kinds of changes). If you're short on time, move right along, but if you're here for a while, why not have a look at my posts above before you continue your "omg I can't gank unarmed people no mo" whines. Praleon CEO Judgement Klan Corporation
Atlas Oracle Minmatar Native Freshfood	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:48:00 - [127] Originally by: Beltantis Torrence Edited by: Beltantis Torrence on 06/08/2008 17:42:07 For a bunch of "rough and tumble" pirates you guys sure do whine a lot. this
DogSlime Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.06 17:54:00 - [128] Edited by: DogSlime on 06/08/2008 17:54:21 This whining is unbelievable. Suicide ganking will have consequences... instead of having almost no consequences as it does now... and people are whining like mad, and threatening to quit the game... I never realised how many people were fans of the "free" suicide gank, or how whiney they would be about it being changed. So much for "hardcore"
Pesky LaRue Minmatar L.O.S.T. Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:09:00 - [129] Originally by: DogSlime Edited by: DogSlime on 06/08/2008 17:54:21 This whining is unbelievable. Suicide ganking will have consequences... instead of having almost no consequences as it does now... and people are whining like mad, and threatening to quit the game... I never realised how many people were fans of the "free" suicide gank, or how whiney they would be about it being changed. So much for "hardcore" hardcore is a state of mind. many of these guys think it's hardcore to jump AFK players in crappy ships with no defenses - are you really surprised that they're upset that griefing people just got harder for them? This message came from the Minmatar Messiah, accept no imitations Pesky LaRue, Minmatar Messiah Bringing Salvation To Your System Soon! ++ PRAY FOR PESKY ++
Karlemgne The Black Fleet The Black Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:12:00 - [130] Sorry I couldn't make out what you were saying through all the crying. Were you complaining that it now might actually cost you 30 million isk to try and suicide gank someone? Because if you were, wow. I mean just wow. Who cares? Just be more discrete about the targets you pick. Seriously. -Karlemgne

Wendat Huron Stellar Solutions	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:15:00 - [131] Edited by: Wendat Huron on 06/08/2008 18:15:21 Read it in the wrong tone of whine, nevermind. These forums are FUBAR, upgrade this decade!
Bartholomeus Crane Gallente The Crane Family	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:17:00 - [132] Originally by: Karlemgne Sorry I couldn't make out what you were saying through all the crying. Were you complaining that it now might actually cost you 30 million isk to try and suicide gank someone? Because if you were, wow. I mean just wow. Who cares? Just be more discrete about the targets you pick. Seriously. I hereby order you to cease and desist being reasonable. Such behaviour is utterly unacceptable here and totally spoils the fun for the rest of us. -- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Steve Hawkings	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:18:00 - [133] Originally by: Slaver Hatastus Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Slaver Hatastus Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Tatsujin Koufu I dont see whats changed, you can still kill the chumps afking through highsec space with a hold full of isk goodness. They're lowering concord response times, so while you can still kill chumps it will be much harder now. How much harder we don't know yet. hard enough for it to be a challenge instead of relatively easy money, you mean? Ignoring the point at the core of this so blatantly that I don't know why I grace your post with a reply... Probably hard enough that you can't do it solo any more, but this remains to be seen. Keep in mind what type of targets we're talking about here. For suicide ganks we're mostly talking about tech I haulers _AUTOPILOTING_ towards a gate. Are you telling me these targets should be a challenge? i don't know why you "graced" me with a reply, you didn't say anything new and it was basically for your own ego. that said - i always hesitate to bring RL into EVE but think about it, you're talkinga bout the equivalent of mugging old ladies in the street - no challenge, pretty lame, and of variable rewards. the police take notice of this behaviour and increase police patrols and arm them better so that they can stop this behaviour. the mugger sees her as weak, slow, stupid for doing what she's doing and hey, the mugger wants to take her stuff so why shouldn't he? the granny just wants to get home with her shopping in one piece, it's why she's taking the longer route, the route through the brighter streets with more people so she can feel safe. but you want it to remain easier for you? boo frigging hoo Ban Analagy, Old ladies dont carry billions.
Naga Elohim	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:31:00 - [134] i don't see what the hubub is. CCP is doing the right thing here. They arent making it impossible to suicide gank. Just a bit harder. I've been ganked once in a 0.5 system, and ive done my fair share of ganking. in fact after i got ganked i thought it was such a good idea to do so myself. I took apples and made apple pie. And i can't lie it's very rewarding. However, the there are more risks involved now (or when the patch comes out) for suicide gankers. Althought it might not be as easy anymore, it could still be done to an effective degree. CONCORD will own you faster and you will take a bigger sec status hit. Also, I think they are making it so its harder to get your sec status back up. So some of you thinking it will be easy to circumvent this change will be quite surprised (angry). If you haul 3 bil in mods and bpos, dont autopilot...EVER! It's common sense. But i do agree with the proposed changes from CCP. In fact it should have been done long time ago. Also, whiners pay thier fees to play like anyone else and are, infact, intitled to whine as much as they want. I just think whining and trolling are a waste of time, constructive criticism and intelligent suggestions add to the game and enhance it... Which is what CCP is doing now....enhancing the game. [please do continue with the nerdrage-stfu-noob flaming. Im bored at work and its very entertaining]
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:33:00 - [135] What part of recyclable alts dont you understand when you talk about penalties being effective? --- Originally by: Roguehalo Can you nano Titans?
Naga Elohim	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:37:00 - [136] Oh yeah and to those who fly nano ships and suicide gank, you guys got owned this week by CCP. I hope its still as fun for you all. Ive only been playing for a year and 8 months but ive never seen CCP taking this much action on complaints of nano-kamikazi. Good Job CCP!!. Really...Good Job!
Vladimir Ilych Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.08.06 18:39:00 - [137] Might this not be a boon for the suicide gankers? Now the afk pilots who haul hugely valuable kit around high sec will be even less careful perhaps? If the people that use this tactic just pick their targets carefully I bet their will still be money in it.
General Urlana	Posted - 2008.08.06 19:10:00 - [138] I think it's a good change to remove the insurance payout in these cases. Makes it a little more costly to the attacker. But in the end i don't imagine you'll see a big difference but it will possibly tone down some of the more meaningless kills. I've only ever been killed once but i think the guy thought he was in low sec. Popped my retriever in 0.5 space at a belt. Looked away only to look back wondering hey why is my ship moving...hmmm this is gonna hurt pop guy lost a t2 fitted vagabond. Funny enough i looted 10m or so from his wreck afterwards. more than made up for everything. but the point is you can haul stuff around but just don't be careless expecting the game should hold your hand from the bad guys. You will die sometimes but that's the game you signed up to play. If you don't like it i would suggest finding a new game. You still can't afk with expensive items in your badger and expect to survive the trip but at least it will make the attackers pick targets a little more efficiently
Terminus adacai Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.07 03:04:00 - [139] Originally by: Steve Hawkings The thing is the only people that cried are the stupid ones that lost millions in a gank. Negative.... I have never been suicide ganked and have always thought the mechanics of it were way skewed to the gankers. This change is a long way in coming. Opinions reflected on my posts are just that, my opinions. They do not reflect views held by my corp or alliance.
Trathen Minmatar SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.08.07 03:16:00 - [140] Edited by: Trathen on 07/08/2008 03:16:33 Cave in? We are talking about the same team that felt the need to release a "Boost Patch" because their thin skin couldn't handle the nerf whines, right? You see, the real sandbox is designing the game yourself! _

Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.07 03:22:00 - [141] Originally by: Cors Ohnoes, I cannot understand the basic ideas about risk and reward. Fixed. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Xtreem Gallente Knockaround Guys Inc. Exxxotic	Posted - 2008.08.07 03:33:00 - [142] i'm not bothered about the actual changes, more annoyed about the fact this has been fine and worked for 5 years now, yet they change it now just for the newer crowd, as the older crowd, who has been here almost the entire of those 5 years i find it annoying they are now saying, well yeah actually you have been paying for a game we have now deemed not correct untill 5 years later? It was fine how it was, ganking in high sec has always happened, just with more player base, more people have posted about it, higher amounts have been lost, and more people have copied. I for one am going to war dec several corps, and i hope others do to, and in retrospect to this change make it actually less safer for people in general :)
Veldya Caldari Guristari Freedom Fighters	Posted - 2008.08.07 03:51:00 - [143] Originally by: Mjeh I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode. What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere. I hear a lot of people crying and whining that suicide ganking held no risk and was too easy, but every single one of them failed to even mention that with some very basic measures you can make yourself practically immune to high sec suicide gankage. I won't even begin on some of the other common misconceptions about the ease and profitability of suicide ganking, because I think this point is strong enough in it's own right. If you play smart, you're immune. But people don't want to play smart, they want to play AFK. And CCP now confirmed that their right to play like this weighs more heavily than the integrity of the game, so long as the whiners constitute a bigger mass of paying customers than the ones who prey upon them do. Or maybe just because they whine louder, I can't tell which anymore. Anyway, this is going to fade into the shroud of unrememberance as just another disgruntled whine in just another disgruntled thread, so instead of writing further I'm going to cast my vote the only way it will matter somewhat. My 3 accounts will not be renewed during the next billing period. Enjoy your bearfest, it was fun while it lasted :) Anyone who quits because of recent changes is not the kind of player we want around in EVE. When something seems too good to be true and everyone flocks to it then invariably it is. There is a reason for there being High-Sec space, if CCP wanted just low-sec or just conquerable space then they could have done that. None of the changes will stop people ganking haulers, the risk is now not solely placed on the victim. You need to gank targets of value in high-sec. I want to make sure there is a healthy life for pirates but I think the vast majority of their work should be in low-sec. It is just currently far too easy to grief in high-sec, especially when you have T1 griefers vs T2 victims. It was just not a remotely fair or balanced system. More has to be done though to have more people want to go to low-sec space outside of FW.
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.07 03:53:00 - [144] Originally by: Veldya More has to be done though to have more people want to go to low-sec space outside of FW. Well, then low-sec has to pay better. Which it doesn't Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Veldya Caldari Guristari Freedom Fighters	Posted - 2008.08.07 04:03:00 - [145] Originally by: Mjeh Originally by: Ardrilian stuff about barges always being volunerable Yes, this is true. I've never killed barges on the "because I can-level", but I suppose Jihadswarm is more difficult to guard against. But even there, there are easy ways to lower the risk substantially. And not surprisingly, the fundament of said ways are always - you guessed it - don't be afk. You are talking about ships which have mining cycles from 3 minutes to 10 minutes and they have in some cases a split second to jump when they are locked onto. It is very unrealistic to expect someone to have that level of awareness for high-sec space. In low-sec or 0.0 you have more notice because you have a lot more time to warp out as soon as a non-friendly enters local, in high-sec there are masses of neutrals in belts and you don't have the same kind of buffer. Mining gankers relied heavily on being wolves in sheeps clothing, there are a lot of noobs salvaging or after the rats themselves in combat ships, it is just not realistic to expect high sec miners to trillions in losses to ships they can't even adequately insure, the advantages were ALL in favor of the ganker.
Trathen Minmatar SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.08.07 04:05:00 - [146] I think there is two separate arguments here mashed up in that goddawful slippery-slope-doomsayer thing. -Suicide ganking probably needed a fix. It was way too easy and way too profitable. Was this the way to do it? Who knows but it won't save the true idiots AFK hauling with things ten times the value of an uninsured battleship. -Pulling out the big picture, we can see that the almost-safe hi-sec space is even safer and way too profitable. This is a problem. In strict risk/reward terms, 0 risk should equal 0 reward. After the nerf, the only risk most high-sec players see isn't a loss, just "less gain" (ninja salvaging, can flipping). Wee. This is where everyone says, "But we just mission-run on our own. How does that affect you?" Well, the same reason twinking ruins other games. If I'm scraping around in low-sec and decide to come to empire to replace mods and a ship, guess what other buyers I get to compete with? Mission-runners! That's right, while PvPers were off losing their umpteenth ship, mission-runners were making a crapton more money. Then when I go to buy a mod, oops, they are insanely expensive because mission-runners just made 200 million ISK grinding missions for 2 hours so who cares if they blow it all on a handful of upgrades. They're not going to lose them anyway, right? Granted, its not really bad yet, but it could be. _
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2008.08.07 04:12:00 - [147] /signed with the OP Disappointment abounds. Click me! You know you want to...
Novemb3r Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2008.08.07 04:34:00 - [148] Originally by: Anndarra Winge Originally by: Atlas Oracle the humor element in this is pretty much win... all the hardcore internet tough guys with their "eve is a harsh place" teddy bear and "adapt" mantra, crying about it being more costy to gank carebears. Hmmmm... the taste of Pirate tears. So-so SWEET. But come on guys, I worked out over lunch how me and a dozen friends could make lots of isk suicide ganking with disposable alts. Just takes a little organization and planning. Cost is a week of training to get the alts into half-decent ships and a couple 100k for the ships. Who cares about the security - dispose of the alt while you sweep up the loot. Enjoy your ban for using disposable alts to avoid sec penalties. -
Darth Vaders Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.07 05:00:00 - [149] Edited by: Darth Vaders on 07/08/2008 05:00:43 It really annoys me to see people whining on this. Lets face the facts. What was happening before was that some people could form a big big gang of torp ravens with t1 fitting and top insurances and go hit someone that posessed no faction or complex modules just because they could do it with 0 cost. = GRIEFING. Now that no insurance will be paid this can still happen only that this time there will be a big cost for the ganging. Still the gangs can gang people like before only that this time the victim must be in a pimped ship with expencive modules or something that will provide a profit bigger than the gang's loss. So there is still danger out there. You can't go around in a t1 hauler carring a titan bpo. But newbies and the not so rich people can do their trading in relative safety. So quit whinning you know very well that what you were doing before was griefing and exploiting a game mechanic that was designed to reduce the loss of an unfortunate player , not to help the old timers grief the newbies.
JanoMark Smoke n Burn Intrepid Proprietary Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 05:13:00 - [150] I for one support this change. You don't get money for burning down your own house. Unless your really sneaky and pull it off.

Darth Vaders Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.07 05:20:00 - [151] Edited by: Darth Vaders on 07/08/2008 05:23:08 Originally by: Trathen I think there is two separate arguments here mashed up in that goddawful slippery-slope-doomsayer thing. -Suicide ganking probably needed a fix. It was way too easy and way too profitable. Was this the way to do it? Who knows but it won't save the true idiots AFK hauling with things ten times the value of an uninsured battleship. As you know traveling with a hauler setting it to autopilot takes very long time to make any sence. So i never do it.But you have to respect the player that has a busy real life and still wants to play. So he can set the autopilot while he washes the dishes. To you may seem bad form of gaming but some people don't have much time. So they deserve some fun since they pay each month the same cash you pay to CCP. Now,as i mentioned before the "idiot" that does this can still be ganged like before if he carries expencive stuff since the profit you get by the droped modules will be bigger than your loss. Quote: -Pulling out the big picture, we can see that the almost-safe hi-sec space is even safer and way too profitable. This is a problem. In strict risk/reward terms, 0 risk should equal 0 reward. After the nerf, the only risk most high-sec players see isn't a loss, just "less gain" (ninja salvaging, can flipping). Wee. You ve got to be kidding. I have been to 00 and you can make 50 millions in a couple of hours with average spawns. Hey, did i mention once that i killed a dread gurista and he droped me a Rattlesnake BPC? And there are also the complexes with the expencive modules they drop that you make billions in a couple of hours. Where do you find buyers for them? You guessed right. In high sec. Now if you can gang people in high sec with 0 cost you are hurting your potential buyers. So people won;t buy your Machariel BPC and your complex modules because since ganging would cost 0 to the attacker noone would take the rist to buy them. So you would have to rat all the time to make a living.= boring for you. Quote: This is where everyone says, "But we just mission-run on our own. How does that affect you?" Well, the same reason twinking ruins other games. If I'm scraping around in low-sec and decide to come to empire to replace mods and a ship, guess what other buyers I get to compete with? Mission-runners! That's right, while PvPers were off losing their umpteenth ship, mission-runners were making a crapton more money. Then when I go to buy a mod, oops, they are insanely expensive because mission-runners just made 200 million ISK grinding missions for 2 hours so who cares if they blow it all on a handful of upgrades. They're not going to lose them anyway, right? No because the average mission runners don't replace their modules as often. That drops the prices at the market since they donl;t generate much demand. Instead if you can go blow them up all the time with 0 cost they will have to buy more modules raising the prices overall due to increased demand. So it's the opposite of what you said.
oooo000oo0o0o0o0o0o000o0	Posted - 2008.08.07 05:37:00 - [152] What I find totally hilarious about this thread, is that all the people who used to say to all the people who used to make threads about removing insurance payout for gankers is that: eve is a tough place, harden the ** up; and then would go gank a mackinaw or three, are now the ***es whining about the fact that CCP just made the game more difficult. GG CCP. Seriously I could bath in all these gankers tears all day long. Go gank some more mackinaws while you still can tough guys.
Veldya Caldari Guristari Freedom Fighters	Posted - 2008.08.07 06:49:00 - [153] Originally by: Darth Vaders As you know traveling with a hauler setting it to autopilot takes very long time to make any sence. So i never do it.But you have to respect the player that has a busy real life and still wants to play. So he can set the autopilot while he washes the dishes. To you may seem bad form of gaming but some people don't have much time. So they deserve some fun since they pay each month the same cash you pay to CCP. I don't think the changes will affect haulers that much, most that get hit are worth billions and you can still take them out relatively cheaply compared with the likely payout. The problem with insurance is that it has made it profitable to gank almost anything due to insurance payout and because Concord doesn't pod people. The changes will force high-sec gankers choose targets of value or targets of hate rather than just almost anything that moves because the risk & consequence is low. I don't think there is the need to protect someone who is afk for very long periods of time on autopilot. Quote: You ve got to be kidding. I have been to 00 and you can make 50 millions in a couple of hours with average spawns. Hey, did i mention once that i killed a dread gurista and he droped me a Rattlesnake BPC? How about the carrier drop in 00 that carries 50 million of tritanium and several millions of other minerals? As for the danger of 00 they are not so big if you know what you doing. I knwo that all 00 farmes are as carebears when they are rating or mining as the carebears in high sec. You see a non friendly at local you refer it in agony to the alliance scout channel and you go hiding into a safe spot. WOW! Seems so dangerous You must be real heroes out there. The problem is the PvE danger levels are Low-Sec, High Sec, 0.0 and the reward vs risk is 0.0, High Sec, Low-Sec. You need high paying missions designed for small fast ships which will attract a PvE element in low-sec. That is something that needs addressing, it is one thing to make high-sec harder on pirates but their niche play ground is slim pickings. If we don't resolve the low-sec problem then we will just see people build look to find holes in the new mechanics, find something else to abuse. Quote: No because the average mission runners don't replace their modules as often. That drops the prices at the market since they donl;t generate much demand. Instead if you can go blow them up all the time with 0 cost they will have to buy more modules raising the prices overall due to increased demand. So it's the opposite of what you said. Mission runners are the biggest market for faction and complex loot, only part of that is servied via missions. I think the removal of insurance payments for concord deaths will have a bigger effect on the market because dying was generating money and they were in turn re-purchasing ships and cheap modules. There reduced demand for disposable ships will likely cause a slight depression in the market and reduce demand which will help to reduce prices. An oversupply of resources will keep prices low, at present ships and several minerals are near the cap level where the demand is lower than the self-destruct insurance value of a ship. There is no evidence I have seen that killing mission runners or mining ships has slowed down the supply of resources. But if anything the constant loss of suicide ships has probably peaked some of the more popular gankmobile prices higher than they would normally. Market is quite flexible even in the light of massive change, I think they really need to look at removing T1 drops from missions/rats and I question the value of keeping insurance in any form because it is causing a significant artificial control for mineral prices thus capping how low things like ships can drop to demand and supply pressure.
hedfunk Caldari Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.07 09:25:00 - [154] I endorse the OP.
Poison Punch	Posted - 2008.08.07 10:39:00 - [155] I agree that this patch will reward AFK gameplay.
Carrier Eleven Gallente EVE Posting Service	Posted - 2008.08.07 10:54:00 - [156] Edited by: Carrier Eleven on 07/08/2008 10:55:02 Originally by: 5pinDizzy I did hear the cries of the people complaining about certain aspects of suicide ganking. I would have been fine with this if you'd have said, well, they can have basic insurance covering the hull, but no Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum. But ZER0??????!!! hmm, just like real world. Use your car to commit a crime, it gets trashed in the process, you think your insurance is going to pay out? Hardly. Originally by: 5pinDizzy They aren't going to suicide ganked either now, they must all be jumping for joy as the sound of this news. ...but I guess that was the point, look after the people with two dozen subscribed accounts. I've played this game for over 2 years on multiple chars and I've never been suicide ganked once, and I have moved expensive stuff around, I just know how to be sensible and I bet the same could be said for a lot of people. I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked. - The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No. - The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No. - Giant gangs of mining barges? Hell No. This update rewards. - Macro miners and macro mission runners. - AFK gameplay. - That if you whine on the forums long enough you'll get your way. So good luck on your continuing to quest Eve Empire into Warm Cuddly Town. So come flame me forum warriors! I don't care I'm mad enough about this change then anything I've ever heard come from them before, whatever you say to me it was worth it. They didn't make ganking impossible. They just made it a little tougher to do, and with a more realistic set of consequences. As you pies are always saying "adapt or die" Until then I will continue to enjoy your tearful whines greatly!!
Lord Zoran House of Tempers	Posted - 2008.08.07 10:58:00 - [157] Edited by: Lord Zoran on 07/08/2008 10:58:33 Originally by: Janu Hull Edited by: Janu Hull on 06/08/2008 14:19:45 If you suicide gank any ship that isn't worth more than the ship you're about to lose, you're essentially a barking moron deserving of a painful reminder to play intelligently. Stop being sloppy and target the good stuff. This isn't the death of suicide ganking, its just a reminder to gankers that this game isn't meant to be easy on the predator any more than the prey. clearly this, if you can't make a profit without the insurance payout find another profession......
Carrier Eleven Gallente EVE Posting Service	Posted - 2008.08.07 11:03:00 - [158] Originally by: Mjeh Whiney ragequit can I haz yer stuffs??
ZaKma Body Count Inc. The Requiem	Posted - 2008.08.07 11:17:00 - [159] So instead of costing a few hundred mil it will now cost you 1-2 bil to suicide a freighter. While in my last corps we did some freighter suicides that dropped up to 25 bil in loot. I hardly see the issue here. It makes it a little harder sure, but there will always be dumb people in empire hauling too much waiting to get killed. ✖ Arachnophobia ✖
Shevar Minmatar A.W.M Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2008.08.07 11:40:00 - [160] Originally by: Praleon I don't normally chime in on these kinds of topics because standard internet trollery is far beneath my general concern, and I know that 95% of the responses will be thus. That being said, EVE Online is a video game that tries to simulate life in a futuristic universe with empires, rules, society, etc. I will dismantle this and all similar posts from 3 perspectives, simulation-wise, game balance-wise, and meta-game wise. 1) Simulationist One part of an Empire is "Law"... to hold any credibility, all empires must enforce laws that protect peaceful life within them. If they don't? Well, that makes them just about as useless as your average 0.0 space corp... completely incapable of controlling what happens in its own space. That's why 0.0 corps don't turn their space into 0.5, 0.7, or 1.0. In its current state, the game allows you to "suicide gank" innocent people and take, potentially, every last thing they have. The POINT of CONCORD shooting you down when you do this is to PROTECT the assets of ANYONE in their space. That's what a "government" does, and it's what this simulates. TECHNICALLY, they should stay at the scene and revive the damaged ship, protect the wreckage, and/or return the contents of the destroyed ship to the original owner... which is what the police would really do if we were to gang up and wreck a semi on the highway in real life. If we want to rob a semi truck in said fashion, we'll have to do it out in the boonies somewhere and clear out before the police arrive. They are SIMULATING the safety of controlled space in this fashion, and the proposed changes PERFECTLY REINFORCE THIS CONCEPT. 2) Game Balance "I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here... As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode. What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere." This kind of retort indicates absolutely minimal thinking about the repercussions of the behaviors of players in the game. I've never been suicide ganked. As a matter of fact, I didn't buy an obelisk because of suicide ganking being present in the game. They will in fact kill suicide ganking, as, it is not an intended method of taking people's things away from them. 0.5-1.0 space is considered "safe space" and is a place for people to play the game when they DO NOT FEEL LIKE MESSING WITH YOU. Now, how is it not balanced? It allows those who are trying to SAFELY MAKE A LIVING to be ruthlessly GANKED by those who already HAVE MADE A LIVING in EVE. This is one of EVE's forms of griefing. The dev's have CLEARLY COMMUNICATED that they intend 0.0 and lowsec to be the place for PVP. Already in game is the ability to war dec someone's corporation in high sec, to steal someone's jetcanned minerals, and to salvage other people's wrecks. These things should be enough. To be continued: 1) Show me 1 country which can stop me from killing someone? Or has police on the scene 5 seconds afterwards? Instant or near instant police respond timers are highly unrealistic. 2) So you are just a wimp? A freighter functions perfectly fine for ~400 million worth of cargo. It was designed to transport stuff like a full load of trit not a full load of megacyte. 3) CCP has become big due to being a niche game where violence flourishes. This is one of the reasons they don't have the same problem s as normal MMORPG's that bleed members over time (instead they have been gaining members over time). Now they are stepping out of the niche and atleast loosing me as a customer. Wether this will turn out to be a good choice or not will only be seen in the future, but I won't recommend it anymore. --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs

Shevar Minmatar A.W.M Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2008.08.07 11:43:00 - [161] Originally by: Farham So what exactly does this break about High Sec? You have to be more picky with your suicide ganks now. It will still be plenty worth ganking a freighter or hauler, you just have to do a little math now. I mean seriously, suicide ganking right now is just carebearing. It just promotes more AFK hauling. --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs
Pesadel0 Minmatar Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.07 11:56:00 - [162] What i feel is that allot of devs that stayed allot of time with us ,and that had a dream about a game that everyone could do what they wanted but had never a sense of security is slowly declining, and a new age of devs that didnt even play UO or other PVP centric MMO of old are just crapping eve with their so called S*** balance and eventually will destroy eve, i like to call them the WOW instant gratification MMOers ,and it is a shame really. It is not the nerfs that get under my skin ,is the shift of focus that i saw in 2004 in balance and always trying to remain true with their vision, now we have fear saying things like "not sportsmanship" to kill people just to grief someone. Another Dev saying they are thinking changing how wars work ,giving a chance to the defenders to dictate the terms of war.... Maybe i'am getting old but it pains me greatly that a dream like EVE is ,in my view, being carebearized like UO trammel style. ------------------------------------------------------------------
Maglorre	Posted - 2008.08.07 12:01:00 - [163] Originally by: Meh And ... sigh... it seems I must link THIS once more, seeing as how you brought up 'intended gameplay'... I love how you keep linking to this. It's awesome, did you read it? Quote: While travelling on auto pilot is a good option to have it may not always be the safest thing to do when transporting extreme valuables I bolded a little bit for you. Please define "extreme" for me. You do realise it is currently feasible to suicide a hauler in some cases simply for their T2 fittings right? Doesn't seem very extreme to me.
Lexandrius Megens Interstellar Federal Forces	Posted - 2008.08.07 12:49:00 - [164] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Quote: In addition, the highly requested feature of removal of insurance in CONCORD related events will be implemented in the near future. The CONCORD changes and Security penalty will be hitting TQ this fall, with Empyrean Age 1.1. Be safe out there! CCP Fear So there you have it, empire space is about to become ten times more boring. I did hear the cries of the people complaining about certain aspects of suicide ganking. I would have been fine with this if you'd have said, well, they can have basic insurance covering the hull, but no Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum. But ZER0??????!!! You know all those ISK farmers we're supposed to petition that you never ban? They aren't going to suicide ganked either now, they must all be jumping for joy as the sound of this news. ...but I guess that was the point, look after the people with two dozen subscribed accounts. I've played this game for over 2 years on multiple chars and I've never been suicide ganked once, and I have moved expensive stuff around, I just know how to be sensible and I bet the same could be said for a lot of people. I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked. - The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No. - The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No. - Giant gangs of mining barges? Hell No. This update rewards. - Macro miners and macro mission runners. - AFK gameplay. - That if you whine on the forums long enough you'll get your way. So good luck on your continuing to quest Eve Empire into Warm Cuddly Town. So come flame me forum warriors! I don't care I'm mad enough about this change then anything I've ever heard come from them before, whatever you say to me it was worth it. I have a trade alt that moves valuable stuff that does not take much m3 but is worth plenty per m3, but that has been kamikaze ganked over 3 times. I lost 2 ships and over a couple of hundred mil isk to the ganking in 0.5 and even 0.8 systems. Not to mention my comrade that lost 3 ships to the same kamikaze noobs. So I had to get the alt some skills to let it use a heavy plated and shielded cruiser with max hp/passive resists to offer some form of protection against the kamikaze Brutixes and Dominixes that lurk around. Since I implemented that anti kamikaze ship, it got attacked 9 times, however all 9 failed in killing it. Last time even 2 Brutixes shooting at my alt at the same time could not even get the shields down (10% left). And the banks of armor plates were still shining in the sun. I enjoyed all of the 9 times. Now I just let it run on autopilot on my notebook to provoke the kamikazes to shoot it and i go lounge on my lazy couch and watch TV in the meantime, keeping a look on the screen and laugh my balls off when yet another fool bites the dust and gets wtfconcorded haha However one thing I did always wonder, and that is why did they get insurance when its a concord event? That seems like you use your car in a bank robery and the cops wreck it when you try your getaway and you want money from ur insurance because the corps wrecked your car. That is no way gonna happen in real life and that is exactly what CCP had in mind with concord events. So I will enjoy it even more when the new insurance will be implemented! haha suckers
Poritt	Posted - 2008.08.07 13:22:00 - [165] tbh I have only been suicide ganked once and it was the best thing to happen to me. I learnt that there is no time in this game when I was safe. After the initial nerdrage I'm gonna quit I picked myself up, dusted myself off and learnt from my experience, and therefore I have not let it happen again. In short this nerf is a bit like a prositute for carebears. It will give them what they want but not what they need. I am sad to see the change.
Soulita Gallente Inner Core	Posted - 2008.08.07 13:42:00 - [166] Awesome change. A bit overdue, but hey - better late than never. This want halt suicide ganking, but it will even out riscs for the ganked and the gankers. Very nice.
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 14:29:00 - [167] Originally by: Steve Hawkings The thing is the only people that cried are the stupid ones that lost millions in a gank. Clearly, patently untrue. I've been speaking out against suicide ganking for quite some time and I've never been suicide ganked, never lost a tenth of an ISK to gankers in any way and have never been adversely affected by it. I've played in both high sec and 0.0 during that time and these days spend most of my time in 0.0 where, interestingly enough, such things don't happen. Despite that, I still see it as wrong, terribly abusive and for intents and purposes an exploit as it was. Better now, although whether it will be enough remains to be seen. Shooting people right in front of the cops should get you kicked out. Really, it's not a hard concept to wrap your head around if you get it out of your posterior long enough. Yes - some people do actually support changes that aren't in some way benefitting personally just because they believe them to be right. It may be hard for you sociopaths to believe but some of us do actually do it. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
Maximillian Bayonette White Lion Manufacture and Salvage	Posted - 2008.08.07 14:38:00 - [168] Edited by: Maximillian Bayonette on 07/08/2008 14:38:03 Originally by: Jarvis Hellstrom Yes - some people do actually support changes that aren't in some way benefitting personally just because they believe them to be right. It may be hard for you sociopaths to believe but some of us do actually do it. But no people can actually oppose changes unless they are personally affected by them, right? It's just those opposing this nerf that are sociopaths, amirite?
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 14:48:00 - [169] Originally by: Mjeh The much bigger problem is the lowered response time of concord, this is the dealbreaker. And the principle of the matter that CCP caved in on this matter is what pounded the last nail into the coffin for my part. I'm just saying, I hope you all realize what this is implying I know I do. People like you will have to either pick their targets much more carefully or go shoot at people who can shoot back. Or leave of course. I'd prefer you pick either of the latter two options. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 15:24:00 - [170] Originally by: 5pinDizzy <snip> With platinum insurance and probably waiting around for around 40 minutes for the right victim, you've probably just lost about 10 mill from the ship loss, but if all went well and the right stuff didn't get destroyed you probably made around 100-150 million from the cargo loot. So to clarify, you've netted 90-140 million ISK profit for forty minutes work. Quote: Now we look at it from the other side. Accumulating the cost of that hauler, the insurance and fitting cost for it, and mining/producing the contents took, probably 6-10 HOURS OF DRUDGERY Net profit from all those boring hours? Zero. That's how the post should read. Whether you like people who play that AFK game or not, they keep the economy running and you are ruining THEIR enjoyment of the game. Perhaps they are people like my fiancee (a miner) who frequently has to AFK fly or haul because they only time she has to play is while at home watching our little one. Or do you think that she should lose a couple days worth of work and production because she thought that dealing with a little one who needs attention - who might be sick, or hurt, or upset - is more important than watching her internet spaceship for that particular 2 minutes? Many people playing in high sec are there because that's the only way they can play the game AT ALL due to real life concerns. 0.0 levels of attention make the game unplayable for them. And so do folks like you. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)

Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 16:04:00 - [171] Originally by: Mjeh Comprehension failure? This isn't about insurance I think the comprehension failure is more localized to Mjeh. The only person I've heard grouse about the increased Concord reaction time is you - which seems to imply you usually gank alone and with ships that won't be up to the job with the new response times. Getting a friend will allieviate that nicely. The reduced time of response affects team gankers not in the least. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
Bald Rikk The Legendary Fleet	Posted - 2008.08.07 16:06:00 - [172] Initially I thought these changes were a bit, well, harsh. I have now had a bit of time to reflect and one good thing has come from it. A false sense of security that will come about. Many people will quite suicide ganking entirely, few will make a steady living out of it. But the number of people who fancy a quick gank for some fun will have... get this... easier targets. Why will there be easier targets? That false sense of security this change brings to the AFK haulers and miners - more will be inclined to afk again as the will likely feel safer. -- Baldrikk Originally by: CCP Explorer You can still steal their stuff.
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 16:33:00 - [173] Originally by: Jim McGregor What part of recyclable alts dont you understand when you talk about penalties being effective? That may be the reason for faster Concord response times. Grinding an Alt up to the level required to successfully tank and gank will now take longer making them somewhat less 'disposable' - or at the very least harder to replace. Of course, personally I loathe the 'Alt Game' and wish they'd find a way of making it an exploit. But I realize that I'm entirely in the minority and that such isn't a reasonable position to expect CCP to support. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
Maximillian Bayonette White Lion Manufacture and Salvage	Posted - 2008.08.07 16:39:00 - [174] Originally by: Jarvis Hellstrom That may be the reason for faster Concord response times. Grinding an Alt up to the level required to successfully tank and gank will now take longer making them somewhat less 'disposable' - or at the very least harder to replace. Of course, personally I loathe the 'Alt Game' and wish they'd find a way of making it an exploit. But I realize that I'm entirely in the minority and that such isn't a reasonable position to expect CCP to support. It IS an exploit to use disposable alts for ganking. It is also not effective. This is a strawman setup by people who don't like suicide ganking. Suicide gankers might use alts, but they are NOT disposable ones.
mingmin	Posted - 2008.08.07 16:59:00 - [175] I own a freighter and theres nothing i can do to stop myself becoming ganked, i have no slots i cant fit wcs, i can't align any faster, theres nothing i can do apart from warp to each gate and jump and warp again very slowly to the next gate. And no i dont carry gazzilions of bpo's in my hold why would i, they fit in a interceptor, what a stupid concept put forward by the op, i carry the stuff that i mined myself, to trade hubs. so..what do i do even if i could bore people into ganging with me for a long and slow journey, they cant protect me, i would still get insta popped by a gang intending to take a freighter, the pies alts would'nt get flagged for taking my loot, only to me in a pod. so i ask you what do i do when you cry and moan about the changes, what amazing suggestions do you have for me?
Highwind Cid	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:20:00 - [176] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Isn't that the same mentality the other way around? They can't accept the fact that an aggressive attack on another person in high-sec should warrant a very hard and tough punishment. If you purposefully killed someone in front of CONCORD, knowing that you yourself would die ... shouldn't that carry a hefty punishment? It seems more than 'fair', to use the term, that if you commit the crime, you don't get insurance payouts, AND you get enough of a sec hit that you can't enter high-sec. The lack of accepting 'responsibility' goes both ways. I like this post. A lot.
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:22:00 - [177] Originally by: Maximillian Bayonette But no people can actually oppose changes unless they are personally affected by them, right? It's just those opposing this nerf that are sociopaths, amirite? People can oppose or support anything whether it affects them or not, although by playing EVE it will always have some affect at least in a cascade fashion if it is an EVE change you are supporting or opposing. Whether or not it's sociopathic support depends entirely on the reason for such support. And it's spelled "Am I right?" May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:31:00 - [178] Originally by: Maximillian Bayonette It IS an exploit to use disposable alts for ganking. It is also not effective. This is a strawman setup by people who don't like suicide ganking. Suicide gankers might use alts, but they are NOT disposable ones. But if it were disposed of, say, a week later, who would file the petition? Or even know that it had been done? It may have been declared an exploit but if it's unenforceable, it isn't a very useful one. May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:36:00 - [179] Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 07/08/2008 17:37:43 Originally by: mingmin I own a freighter and theres nothing i can do to stop myself becoming ganked, i have no slots i cant fit wcs, i can't align any faster, theres nothing i can do apart from warp to each gate and jump and warp again very slowly to the next gate. 1. Yes there is something to stop you being ganked, it takes around at least 20 battleships + support to suicide a freighter, if you don't carry more then around 2 billion in goods, you aren't going to get suicide ganked as it isn't cost effective for them, it's already assumed half the stuff will blow up with the freighter. I've never been ridiculously wealthy like some, but isn't 2 bill a fair margin to work with? 2. You put all your stuff into a secure can, then put it into a courier package, and they can't scan you. The only problem is to stop the people doing it for lulz. But that side of eve is always going to be there. Yes if 20 plat insured battleships suiciding a freighter will only lose them 600,000 million odd isk to the Freighters 800,000 million thats unfair. But is it fair instead that they lose more like 2.7 billion with the changes? Originally by: mingmin And no i dont carry gazzilions of bpo's in my hold why would i, they fit in a interceptor, what a stupid concept put forward by the op, i carry the stuff that i mined myself, to trade hubs. That was the point, why should I feel sorry for the freighters I've heard about getting popped before full of bpo's when you can ferry them around in an interceptor.
Doppleganger Minmatar Imperium Technologies	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:44:00 - [180] This must be a good change. All of the good changes have stirred up alot of controversy. .

Felix Dzerzhinsky Caldari Wreckless Abandon Un-Natural Selection	Posted - 2008.08.07 21:55:00 - [181] I really don't know what kind of new culture is being encouraged in eve these days. Trading, Industry were forms of pvp back in the day, you would fight your competition by ganking them and disrupting their trade routs. You had to band together to accomplish goals. There was no 'safe-space' and there were always people around you waiting for you to slip up. AFK was something you did in the station, when you pressed undock, you were playing the game with near full attention. These days that rissk element, the high stakes game is going. With ratters rushing off to pos' in 0.0 to the massive protection in empire and of course the complete death of low sec. . .the idea that pvp in eve was never consentual is slowly dissapearing. I would not be suprised if a lot of people wanted battlegrounds and whatnot - so that those who 'want' to fight can go off and fight and leave the carebears alone. But if eve does that, it loses its origional purpose: to be a nasty, dark, griefer filled universe where might makes right. Its not 'fair' but it was sure fun. ---- GO BLUE!!
Balrokenx Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 22:14:00 - [182] yay wow in space incoming.
Eran Laude Gallente The Aduro Protocol	Posted - 2008.08.07 22:23:00 - [183] Originally by: Balrokenx yay wow in space incoming. Yes, it's called Star Trek Online Next please /antitroll
Quincunx Minmatar Subspace Anomaly	Posted - 2008.08.07 22:55:00 - [184] I think the changes make EVE an even more harsher and colder place. For the suicide gankers that is. Isn't that what people want? :p Kinda nanve to whine about these changes when the same people want EVE to stay harsh and cold.
mingmin	Posted - 2008.08.08 01:18:00 - [185] Originally by: 5pinDizzy 2. You put all your stuff into a secure can, then put it into a courier package, and they can't scan you. sadly this is not the case they can scan courior packages, cans whatever, if its your hold they can scan it
SiJira	Posted - 2008.08.17 14:18:00 - [186] yes because somehow the game should be changed or not changed considering how it will affect farmers Trashed sig, Shark was here
Niccolado Starwalker Shadow Templars	Posted - 2008.08.17 14:42:00 - [187] Originally by: Sheriff Jones What i've read here: "they loose the integrity of the cold harsh world" "it's too warm ad cuddly" "etc other references to EVE turning fuzzy" Now. If you really think EVE should be harsh, cold, etc, wouldn't this be exactly the direction? Hmm? The problem is they want EVE to be harsh against their targets, not against themselves! its easier to blame it all on the carebears, then on the Pirate suicideganking PvPer! And its ofcouce not good that the 100% suicide gank success rate is reduced to maybe 60 %. This because they deserve to win ofcource! I think the changes are good. Now both side have something to loose! The "carebear" might still loose his cargo while the suicider now have a chance at failing the mission! Ofcource, that is not fun since its always the prey that should loose! But hey! This is typical whine where the center of the whine is based on the whiners pure egoism. Originally by: Dianabolic Your tears are absolutely divine, like a fine fine wine, rolling down your cheeks until they flow down the river of LOL
oilio Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.08.17 14:57:00 - [188] These changes can't go through fast enough. Suicide ganking will become a proper skilled profession requiring planning and resources. Cheap-kill weekend pseudopirates will be upset of course... which is wonderful So... adapt or die!!!! oh wait! you don't want to adapt... die
Andrest Disch Amarr EXILED WINGS	Posted - 2008.08.17 15:15:00 - [189] In between this, faction warfare, reduced response time for CONCORD and the upcoming wardec nerfs hinted at by CCP, EVE's gunna be a much more boring place.
oilio Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.08.17 15:26:00 - [190] Originally by: Andrest Disch In between this, faction warfare, reduced response time for CONCORD and the upcoming wardec nerfs hinted at by CCP, EVE's gunna be a much more boring place. Faction warfare has made eve boring? The removal of insurance from suicide ganking makes eve more boring? That's garbage. Wardecs might be another issue. It's gonna be a very fine balance if CCP decide to mess with wardecs. That could go horribly wrong.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one 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.