Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Caldari Raddick Explorations BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:12:00 -
[481]
Originally by: Angel Lightbringer I might not like what I'm gonna write, but if this declared by CCP as a valid tactic, I don't see a reason why using a BlackOps to evade CONCORD should be an exploit: They both are evading retribution for their action (And don't tell be being destroyed in cheap ships IS a retribution, please)
This is incorrect.
Cynoing away from CONCORD is to avoid the absolute ship-loss penalty for attacking an innocent target. This tactic is about avoiding the potential ship-loss from being hunted by faction navies (which is not an absolute death penalty). The former is punishment; the latter is deterrence. The former is purposefully designed to kill anything it encounters; the latter is purposefully designed to be avoidable.
The two are not the same.
No sig for me, thankyouverymuch. |
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:14:00 -
[482]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: MultiP If -10 security people are in high sec, then they should be fair game.
They are.
Sorry I meant their pod should be fair game. |
Angel Lightbringer
Caldari Dark Evolution Industries
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:20:00 -
[483]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Angel Lightbringer I might not like what I'm gonna write, but if this declared by CCP as a valid tactic, I don't see a reason why using a BlackOps to evade CONCORD should be an exploit: They both are evading retribution for their action (And don't tell be being destroyed in cheap ships IS a retribution, please)
This is incorrect.
Cynoing away from CONCORD is to avoid the absolute ship-loss penalty for attacking an innocent target. This tactic is about avoiding the potential ship-loss from being hunted by faction navies (which is not an absolute death penalty). The former is punishment; the latter is deterrence. The former is purposefully designed to kill anything it encounters; the latter is purposefully designed to be avoidable.
The two are not the same.
While I agree that both are not the same exact mechanic (ab)used, both are used in the same end: Kill someone and avoid true retribution, be it CONCORD or NAVY.
-Angel |
trader XI
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:27:00 -
[484]
Edited by: trader XI on 04/12/2008 18:26:49 Simple solution.
If you're -5 or lower and you pop something in Empire, No loot drops. Concord "claims it" and returns it to the killed player's hanger.
This system would stay in place until insurance is removed from the game.
Now waiting for the whines of gankers over this "not being fair". Guess the shoe's on the other foot now, eh?
|
Angel Lightbringer
Caldari Dark Evolution Industries
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:30:00 -
[485]
Originally by: trader XI If you're -5 or lower and you pop something in Empire, No loot drops. Concord "claims it" and returns it to the killed player's hanger.
Good thought.
Won't fix the killmail-whoring, but it would be a fine start.
-Angel |
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:31:00 -
[486]
Originally by: trader XI Edited by: trader XI on 04/12/2008 18:26:49 Simple solution.
If you're -5 or lower and you pop something in Empire, No loot drops. Concord "claims it" and returns it to the killed player's hanger.
This system would stay in place until insurance is removed from the game.
Now waiting for the whines of gankers over this "not being fair". Guess the shoe's on the other foot now, eh?
Actually, this is brilliant. Completely take the "neutral haulers" out of the equation, and solve that problem. If people want to suicide gank, they will have to do it without any rewards :)
EVE History Wiki
|
Ralarina
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:33:00 -
[487]
Edited by: Ralarina on 04/12/2008 18:33:08 Not reading 17 pages to see if this has been mentioned; it probably has but anyway...
Not an exploit as such however once the pace is picked up or they go after enough high sec mission runners in CNRs I'm sure it'll be "fixed". -- Ralara's Alt (due to Forum ban) |
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:35:00 -
[488]
Originally by: Reiisha
Originally by: trader XI Edited by: trader XI on 04/12/2008 18:26:49 Simple solution.
If you're -5 or lower and you pop something in Empire, No loot drops. Concord "claims it" and returns it to the killed player's hanger.
This system would stay in place until insurance is removed from the game.
Now waiting for the whines of gankers over this "not being fair". Guess the shoe's on the other foot now, eh?
Actually, this is brilliant. Completely take the "neutral haulers" out of the equation, and solve that problem. If people want to suicide gank, they will have to do it without any rewards :)
How is this fair to the pirates? There should be a reward for killing them in empire. There should be rewards to encourage pirates to come to empire. This is not a sterile place we should be encouraging chaos. Chaos keeps EVE feeling fresh
|
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:36:00 -
[489]
Originally by: MultiP How is this fair to the pirates? There should be a reward for killing them in empire. There should be rewards to encourage pirates to come to empire. This is not a sterile place we should be encouraging chaos. Chaos keeps EVE feeling fresh
Since when do pirates care about things being fair? They use every advantage and loophole they can find, i'd say it's "fair" for the carebears to do the same?
EVE History Wiki
|
Davlin Lotze
Raging Destruction N.A.S.A
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:37:00 -
[490]
If you are the miners in this equation the fix is EASY:
Get a couple RR BS and sit them in the belts with the hulks. Surely these bears have mission runner second accounts that they can purpose for the ultimate in mining intimacy :D
Domi's with a couple hulks locked each with 3 to 4 RR mods each should do the trick.
You can send the my usual 100 mil consulation fee at your convenience.
|
|
Tippia
Caldari Raddick Explorations BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:40:00 -
[491]
Originally by: MultiP Sorry I meant their pod should be fair game.
They are, too. As for NPCs attacking pods, which is what you're asking for, I think it's more in keeping with the game that only players can deliver that kind of devastating punishment.
No sig for me, thankyouverymuch. |
Ralarina
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:42:00 -
[492]
Edited by: Ralarina on 04/12/2008 18:43:01 Well, here's an easy fix.
Have concord attack any ship (not pod) that's -5 in empire.
I always figured they did anyway. *shrug* What's to lose? "pirates" warping around in empire in shuttles or interceptors from gate to gate? Use a pod. It's not like you're going to get smartbombed on a gate in high sec anyway (well no more than you do in a shuttle...)
what else would it "prevent" if concord killed the ships (and thus chased and spawned at the orca once they get in their ships) over the faction navies? It's not like you get gangs of roaming BS or hacs from -10 pilots in high sec...?
So there; easy solution; Concord kills the ships of -5 players instead of faction navies. No need for orca nerfs or big changes to high sec gameplay...
Other than the offending pilots in the OP of course.. but you couldnt do it before (not a sustained op like that) and you know this is "unintended". :p -- Ralara's Alt (due to Forum ban) |
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:43:00 -
[493]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: MultiP Sorry I meant their pod should be fair game.
They are, too. As for NPCs attacking pods, which is what you're asking for, I think it's more in keeping with the game that only players can deliver that kind of devastating punishment.
I had always thought that there was no podding in empire. and no I was not asking for NPC's to do this. It must remain with the players.
|
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:46:00 -
[494]
Originally by: Reiisha Edited by: Reiisha on 04/12/2008 18:37:54
Originally by: MultiP How is this fair to the pirates? There should be a reward for killing them in empire. There should be rewards to encourage pirates to come to empire. This is not a sterile place we should be encouraging chaos. Chaos keeps EVE feeling fresh
Since when do pirates care about things being fair? They use every advantage and loophole they can find, i'd say it's "fair" for the carebears to do the same?
Also... Why would it make sense to have security levels without any actual consequences? You're implying that all space should be 0.0.
no actually, i'm not. Read up a few posts and you will see my proposal. |
trader XI
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:48:00 -
[495]
Edited by: trader XI on 04/12/2008 18:49:57
Originally by: MultiP
Originally by: Reiisha
Originally by: trader XI Edited by: trader XI on 04/12/2008 18:26:49 Simple solution.
If you're -5 or lower and you pop something in Empire, No loot drops. Concord "claims it" and returns it to the killed player's hanger.
This system would stay in place until insurance is removed from the game.
Now waiting for the whines of gankers over this "not being fair". Guess the shoe's on the other foot now, eh?
Actually, this is brilliant. Completely take the "neutral haulers" out of the equation, and solve that problem. If people want to suicide gank, they will have to do it without any rewards :)
How is this fair to the pirates? There should be a reward for killing them in empire. There should be rewards to encourage pirates to come to empire. This is not a sterile place we should be encouraging chaos. Chaos keeps EVE feeling fresh
As it has been pointed out by the pirates with their favorite mantra: risk/reward.
Insured T1 ships used by -5 to -10 characters have no risk. So no reward.
Sure hurts being hoisted upon your own petard, eh?
|
Haakelen
Gallente Cassandra's Light Caeruleum Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:52:00 -
[496]
Remove loot, or insurance, whatever. As this method indicates, people will still do it to make you unhappy. It'd probably be easier to take measures against all of it, at once, rather than losing ships and having to adjust again and again as new tactics reveal themselves.
|
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:52:00 -
[497]
Originally by: trader XI Edited by: trader XI on 04/12/2008 18:49:57
Originally by: MultiP
Originally by: Reiisha
Originally by: trader XI Edited by: trader XI on 04/12/2008 18:26:49 Simple solution.
If you're -5 or lower and you pop something in Empire, No loot drops. Concord "claims it" and returns it to the killed player's hanger.
This system would stay in place until insurance is removed from the game.
Now waiting for the whines of gankers over this "not being fair". Guess the shoe's on the other foot now, eh?
Actually, this is brilliant. Completely take the "neutral haulers" out of the equation, and solve that problem. If people want to suicide gank, they will have to do it without any rewards :)
How is this fair to the pirates? There should be a reward for killing them in empire. There should be rewards to encourage pirates to come to empire. This is not a sterile place we should be encouraging chaos. Chaos keeps EVE feeling fresh
As it has been pointed out by the pirates with their favorite mantra: risk/reward.
Insured T1 ships used by -5 to -10 characters have no risk. So no reward.
Sure hurts being hoisted upon your own petard, eh?
huh? Follow the thread or learn to read I posted the same in http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=940258
have a read. |
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:53:00 -
[498]
Edited by: Reiisha on 04/12/2008 18:54:43
Originally by: MultiP no actually, i'm not. Read up a few posts and you will see my proposal. edit below... see here as well http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=940258
Players with -5 or lower security status are already free for all (clarifying: -5 or lower can be killed and podded without penalty by everyone). The only thing that's "new" in your proposal is the general alert of them entering high sec.
The problem described in this thread is that there is almost 0 risk involved when using this scheme. 90% of the ship's value is regained from insurance alone, and the designated hauler never gets any sec penalty or any other penalty whatsoever, even though he is collaborating with known criminals who are shot on sight otherwise.
As has been said a few posts up, there is no risk, so there should be no reward. And no, pods don't count. As they can warp out instantly, it is virtually impossible to catch them. Most people who get podded either aren't paying attention or suffer from a spot of lag, which is pretty much completely absent in the systems where this happens.
EVE History Wiki
|
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:00:00 -
[499]
Originally by: Reiisha
Originally by: MultiP no actually, i'm not. Read up a few posts and you will see my proposal. edit below... see here as well http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=940258
Players with -5 or lower security status are already free for all. The only thing that's "new" in your proposal is the general alert of them entering high sec.
The problem described in this thread is that there is almost 0 risk involved when using this scheme. 90% of the ship's value is regained from insurance alone, and the designated hauler never gets any sec penalty or any other penalty whatsoever, even though he is collaborating with known criminals who are shot on sight otherwise.
As has been said a few posts up, there is no risk, so there should be no reward. And no, pods don't count. As they can warp out instantly, it is virtually impossible to catch them. Most people who get podded either aren't paying attention or suffer from a spot of lag, which is pretty much completely absent in the systems where this happens.
ok 1) I am proposing a reward to player to HUNT the pirates. So that is something else new. 2) Players in high sec are ignoring local. i.e. tools exist to help players avoid death. There is nothing that can be done to help stupidity. 3) The system I talk about would only reward the hunters. i.e. non pirates. Currently there is no incentive for anyone to hunt them down. I'm trying to change that. 4) I disagree completely with making any part of EVE safe. This is a PVP game. There must be consequences for aggression though as well as rewards.
|
Napolean Blownapart
Instant Reload
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:15:00 -
[500]
I can't recall how many threads I've seen devoted to the "problem" of getting carebears to come to low and null sec. Some want targets. Others want increased participation in null sec alliance activities.
But it occurs to me that if gankers are leaving null sec for empire, then clearly null sec ain't the PvP paradise it's advertised to be.
I think the OP's point is valid and I further believe you shouldn't be able to jump through a gate in a pod AT ALL. Even in empire space.
|
|
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:19:00 -
[501]
Originally by: MultiP
1) I am proposing a reward to player to HUNT the pirates. So that is something else new. 2) Players in high sec are ignoring local. i.e. tools exist to help players avoid death. There is nothing that can be done to help stupidity. 3) The system I talk about would only reward the hunters. i.e. non pirates. Currently there is no incentive for anyone to hunt them down. I'm trying to change that. 4) I disagree completely with making any part of EVE safe. This is a PVP game. There must be consequences for aggression though as well as rewards.
1) That will be difficult to do, with or without the warnings. The pirates will simply stay docked or otherwise evade, just like they do now.
2) Local shouldn't be used as an intel tool in the first place, and the devs are already going to change it into delayed mode, so there's no point beating a dead horse. Also, staying docked because there's a pirate in the system is an even worse idea... I can already imagine the griefersquad having a -10 alt logged in somewhere all day long. In this manner, local doesn't help *at all*.
3) This change would pretty much result in bounties only being given out to players with 0.0 or higher sec status. Which is still flawed, because pirates can simply pod themselves and make a healthy profit, something that is already happening once their bounty gets high enough. For example, get a newbie alt down to -5 or lower, and starts getting him podded over and over for a nice profit, since noobie ships are free anyway - This is of course if you mean to forcibly put a bounty on every -5 or lower that enters high sec.
4) Currently, there are no consequences to speak of, as i explained before. The risk and reward for high sec piracy is very unbalanced at the moment to say the least, due to insurance, and the ability to scoop up the loot with no risk whatsoever with a pilot that is even protected by concord, despite collaborating with the pirates.
EVE History Wiki
|
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:24:00 -
[502]
Originally by: Napolean Blownapart But it occurs to me that if gankers are leaving null sec for empire, then clearly null sec ain't the PvP paradise it's advertised to be.
Most so called "pvp'ers" absolutely hate the notion of being on equal terms. They want a clearcut advantage and a good chance of winning before they'll risk anything at all. They don't really consider anything fun unless it is ridiculously easy and almost risk free.... Now who's the carebear? :P
EVE History Wiki
|
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:33:00 -
[503]
Originally by: Reiisha
Originally by: MultiP
1) I am proposing a reward to player to HUNT the pirates. So that is something else new. 2) Players in high sec are ignoring local. i.e. tools exist to help players avoid death. There is nothing that can be done to help stupidity. 3) The system I talk about would only reward the hunters. i.e. non pirates. Currently there is no incentive for anyone to hunt them down. I'm trying to change that. 4) I disagree completely with making any part of EVE safe. This is a PVP game. There must be consequences for aggression though as well as rewards.
1) That will be difficult to do, with or without the warnings. The pirates will simply stay docked or otherwise evade, just like they do now.
2) Local shouldn't be used as an intel tool in the first place, and the devs are already going to change it into delayed mode, so there's no point beating a dead horse. Also, staying docked because there's a pirate in the system is an even worse idea... I can already imagine the griefersquad having a -10 alt logged in somewhere all day long. In this manner, local doesn't help *at all*.
3) This change would pretty much result in bounties only being given out to players with 0.0 or higher sec status. Which is still flawed, because pirates can simply pod themselves and make a healthy profit, something that is already happening once their bounty gets high enough. For example, get a newbie alt down to -5 or lower, and starts getting him podded over and over for a nice profit, since noobie ships are free anyway - This is of course if you mean to forcibly put a bounty on every -5 or lower that enters high sec.
4) Currently, there are no consequences to speak of, as i explained before. The risk and reward for high sec piracy is very unbalanced at the moment to say the least, due to insurance, and the ability to scoop up the loot with no risk whatsoever with a pilot that is even protected by concord, despite collaborating with the pirates.
1) If pirates are evading then they are not pirating.
2)Local not being used as intel.. devs changing... have any links for that info?
3)The bounty system is broken. Maybe someone has a better idea as to how this should work?
4) The idea would increase the risk to pirates. The reward would remain the same for them. As I said in 1) if they are evading then they are not pirating. Currently strangers have NO incentive to hunt pirates in high sec. Hence the no risk issue. This has to change. NPC's will never be as smart as players hence it has to be players doing the work.
|
Tippia
Caldari Raddick Explorations BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:45:00 -
[504]
Originally by: Angel Lightbringer While I agree that both are not the same exact mechanic (ab)used, both are used in the same end: Kill someone and avoid true retribution, be it CONCORD or NAVY.
The difference is that the navies are not for retribution — they're for harassment and deterrence. You are meant to be able to avoid them. Therefore, you are in no way abusing any mechanic if you're actually able to avoid them — quite the opposite.
No sig for me, thankyouverymuch. |
Fredrick Trudeau
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:56:00 -
[505]
Originally by: MultiP How is this fair to the pirates?
It is not, nor should anything be fair to pirates. Pirates have decided to live outside of fair.
|
MultiP
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 20:00:00 -
[506]
Originally by: Fredrick Trudeau
Originally by: MultiP How is this fair to the pirates?
It is not, nor should anything be fair to pirates. Pirates have decided to live outside of fair.
I think you may have missed the rest of the discussion. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=938125&page=17#501
also pirating is a profession in EVE, same as mining and trading. They should have a say. |
Goyda
Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 20:03:00 -
[507]
Originally by: Milla Jovo
Originally by: Goyda Would you be willing to pay 14.95$ (US) to play a game where there was no risk ? Undock, warp to belt, watch your mining lasers beam, jetting a can, and then hauling it. Without having to worry about anything ?
No risk, I guess every one forgot about the NPC rats.
This is LOLz . High sec rats ? What are you mining in ? An Ibis ?
1 shield recharger and you'll be ok.
|
Po3tank
Amarr Basgerin Pirate
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 20:07:00 -
[508]
my life is hard enuff as is so plz **** off
Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal |
Po3tank
Amarr Basgerin Pirate
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 20:14:00 -
[509]
Edited by: Po3tank on 04/12/2008 20:15:05
Quote: I think the OP's point is valid and I further believe you shouldn't be able to jump through a gate in a pod AT ALL. Even in empire space.
i hope hair grows in your eyes till they bleed
Quote: It is not, nor should anything be fair to pirates. Pirates have decided to live outside of fair.
Some pirates are "fair" . you know what is not fair though? you bieng and highsec and living a care free life in a pvp game Edit:i suck at spelling and trolling....
Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal |
Goyda
Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 20:14:00 -
[510]
Originally by: Reiisha Edited by: Reiisha on 04/12/2008 18:54:43
Originally by: MultiP no actually, i'm not. Read up a few posts and you will see my proposal. edit below... see here as well http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=940258
Players with -5 or lower security status are already free for all (clarifying: -5 or lower can be killed and podded without penalty by everyone). The only thing that's "new" in your proposal is the general alert of them entering high sec.
The problem described in this thread is that there is almost 0 risk involved when using this scheme. 90% of the ship's value is regained from insurance alone, and the designated hauler never gets any sec penalty or any other penalty whatsoever, even though he is collaborating with known criminals who are shot on sight otherwise.
As has been said a few posts up, there is no risk, so there should be no reward. And no, pods don't count. As they can warp out instantly, it is virtually impossible to catch them. Most people who get podded either aren't paying attention or suffer from a spot of lag, which is pretty much completely absent in the systems where this happens.
You clearly haven't podded someone before in lowsec. It's an art but completely possible.
I think it's funny how everyone still thinks it's only -5 or lower players that are a problem. Lemmie rat for a few days and I'll come back when you're lulled into a false sense of security and I'm not -5 and when I pwn you you can put out a thread of if you're less than 0 sec status....
Stay focuse on the problem. It's not about sec status. YEs there are penalities for being low sec status, can't fly or pickup ships in high sec, if you fly through you can get podded. and plus you get humiliated by that pop up that threatens you and call you a criminal scum. I cry everytime.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |