open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Suicide Ganks
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 ... : last (17)

Author Topic

Jugger Takashi
Privateers
Privateer Alliance
Posted - 2010.02.19 00:55:00 - [121]
 

The whole idea of the topic is wrong, so no support.

However, nerf insurance payout. And yes, that means for miners, missioneers and all in general. Afterall, if your stupid enough to endanger your ship to npc pirates, you should not get any payment at all, just like if concord nukes you.

Afterall, its not suppose to be a fluffy lala-land.

Shivani
Posted - 2010.02.19 11:07:00 - [122]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera
2. and no one suicide ganks empty haulers.


It happened to me 4 times in the last 2 weeks (Jita going to Amarr forth and back), and i had close to nothing (10 million cargo) in my ship. One time i was sitting in an empty hauler, the other itme i had stuff for like 1 million in cargo.

So just because it didn't happen to you, doesn't mean that it doesn't happen at all.
(Btw i wasn't afk and my hauler *WAS* tanked, pvp buffered.)

If the insurrance covers criminal activities and even makes it a good business to suicide gank, then this game mechanic lacks all logic and realism. And before you answer, that Eve is not realstic, let me tell you - and you know this very well: Eve imitates and mimics real life economics.

Graugaard
Minmatar
Internacine
Posted - 2010.02.19 17:38:00 - [123]
 

carebear tears Rolling Eyes
It would destroy a whole way to earn isk on, in eve! or not really, one rupture can suicide a inty 5. rupture = 5mill. so would be the same.

CyberGh0st
Minmatar
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2010.02.19 20:16:00 - [124]
 

Originally by: Jugger Takashi
The whole idea of the topic is wrong, so no support.

However, nerf insurance payout. And yes, that means for miners, missioneers and all in general. Afterall, if your stupid enough to endanger your ship to npc pirates, you should not get any payment at all, just like if concord nukes you.

Afterall, its not suppose to be a fluffy lala-land.


Damn that is completely insane, this is the best example of why insurance should be removed for concord related events!

I mean whats next, suicide ganking newbs in their T1 frigs just for the hell of it?

Shivani
Posted - 2010.02.20 02:25:00 - [125]
 

Edited by: Shivani on 20/02/2010 02:25:16
Originally by: Graugaard
carebear tears Rolling Eyes


And your point is...? Rolling EyesRolling EyesRolling EyesShocked

You forget that a lot of so called "carebears" keep Eve fine and dandy runnning. I even don't get all of this "carebear" calling.

This thread is about ppl moving around in high sec, not in Delve or Fountain, my friend. It's decouraging, should a newbie lose everything he/she collected, due to some kid suicide ganking in high sec without real penalty and even making a fortune out of the insurance payment. No risk involved.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.02.20 03:26:00 - [126]
 

Originally by: Shivani
It happened to me 4 times in the last 2 weeks (Jita going to Amarr forth and back), and i had close to nothing (10 million cargo) in my ship. One time i was sitting in an empty hauler, the other itme i had stuff for like 1 million in cargo.

So just because it didn't happen to you, doesn't mean that it doesn't happen at all.
(Btw i wasn't afk and my hauler *WAS* tanked, pvp buffered.)

If the insurrance covers criminal activities and even makes it a good business to suicide gank, then this game mechanic lacks all logic and realism. And before you answer, that Eve is not realstic, let me tell you - and you know this very well: Eve imitates and mimics real life economics.


1. how many times do i have to say this? high sec is NOT a sanctuary.
2. care to link the lossmails?
3. by your logic, any pvp at criminally flags at all would void insurance. but if u wanted realism like that, insurance wouldn't exist on any ship. it might be to your liking as a carebear but then again, pvp is a major facet in eve so that's not gonna happen.
4. so it's the ganker's fault some carebears r so stupid?
5. and what about the fact that it's sci-fi? hmm? that's what i thought.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.02.20 03:50:00 - [127]
 

Edited by: Anna Lifera on 20/02/2010 03:58:44
Originally by: Shivani

And your point is...?

You forget that a lot of so called "carebears" keep Eve fine and dandy runnning. I even don't get all of this "carebear" calling.

This thread is about ppl moving around in high sec, not in Delve or Fountain, my friend. It's decouraging, should a newbie lose everything he/she collected, due to some kid suicide ganking in high sec without real penalty and even making a fortune out of the insurance payment. No risk involved.


1. and the pvpers r the consumers that keep eve fine and dandy running as well. it's not so much the carebears hate any form of pvp 'cause technically, they're competing against each other to get their items sold. it's 'cause they refuse to learn and do anything about being ganked themselves and just ***** to ccp to hold their hand.
2. high sec is not a sanctuary.
3. a newb wouldn't have 100 mil+ in assets. 'cause at that point, he should've already learned a thing or two, even if it's the hard way.
4. it's an intended mechanic, with sec penalties imposed as its limitation. if u think it's so riskless, go ahead and try suicide ganking a newb ship. go ahead and keep doing it. then go rat to get back the sec status and see if it was worth it.

Kindra Blades
Cybernetic Innovations
Posted - 2010.02.20 04:16:00 - [128]
 

Suicide ganking is an art, but insurance shouldn't be paid to you if CONCORD destroys your ship. If you initiate the attack in 0.0 and are still destroyed, yea, get your insurance, but if CONCORD blows your stuff up, insurance should be dismissed.

CyberGh0st
Minmatar
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2010.02.23 22:03:00 - [129]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera
Edited by: Anna Lifera on 20/02/2010 03:58:44
Originally by: Shivani

And your point is...?

You forget that a lot of so called "carebears" keep Eve fine and dandy runnning. I even don't get all of this "carebear" calling.

This thread is about ppl moving around in high sec, not in Delve or Fountain, my friend. It's decouraging, should a newbie lose everything he/she collected, due to some kid suicide ganking in high sec without real penalty and even making a fortune out of the insurance payment. No risk involved.


1. and the pvpers r the consumers that keep eve fine and dandy running as well. it's not so much the carebears hate any form of pvp 'cause technically, they're competing against each other to get their items sold. it's 'cause they refuse to learn and do anything about being ganked themselves and just ***** to ccp to hold their hand.
2. high sec is not a sanctuary.
3. a newb wouldn't have 100 mil+ in assets. 'cause at that point, he should've already learned a thing or two, even if it's the hard way.
4. it's an intended mechanic, with sec penalties imposed as its limitation. if u think it's so riskless, go ahead and try suicide ganking a newb ship. go ahead and keep doing it. then go rat to get back the sec status and see if it was worth it.


Ratting is a reward in itself, with added bonus of sec status, I don't see it as a penalty at all.

It is also not about realism but about balance, currently the balance of risk vs reward is skewed, and should be restored.

Amyth
Perkone
Posted - 2010.02.23 22:51:00 - [130]
 


Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.02.24 04:51:00 - [131]
 

Originally by: CyberGh0st
Ratting is a reward in itself, with added bonus of sec status, I don't see it as a penalty at all.

It is also not about realism but about balance, currently the balance of risk vs reward is skewed, and should be restored.



unlike mining, which is still all reward no risk, u can't afk rat.

Arrgh Yarr
Posted - 2010.02.24 08:10:00 - [132]
 

Agree with proposal. Insurance system must be revamped, so no pay off for self-distract or CONCORD kills, slightly less ISK for T1 and more for T2 and T3.

Sepheir Sepheron
Caldari
1st Grave
Posted - 2010.02.25 10:57:00 - [133]
 

Originally by: Admiral Byng
I am sure that this is in here, but it makes sense and I didn't see it in the first 3 pages.

Concorde needs to stop paying out insurance for ships that Concorde killed. I am OK with a group of pirates killing an Itty 5 for the 5 bil in cargo the guy is moving AFK. But 10 people in t1 battleships shouldn't be able to gang up on someone's mission/exploration ship and get virtually all their cost refunded.


So what you're saying is you approve of people losing billions because they have things to do in real life while it's unfair for people to do the same to you because you're not AFK? Auto pilot was made for a reason, and that reason is people are busy and don't have time for some of the crap EVE makes them do.

Asuri Kinnes
Caldari
Adhocracy Incorporated
Posted - 2010.02.25 14:11:00 - [134]
 

Edited by: Asuri Kinnes on 02/03/2010 22:38:09
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 12/01/2010 22:02:31
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 12/01/2010 21:53:35
Guess again.

Suicide Ganking is easy because you get back the amount of ISK spent for your ship (minus mods if you go all tech 2) via insurance payouts.

lose insurance... now its not cheaper anymore.


No one said you couldn't suicide gank
..... just means it has to take a larger dent to your precious wallet.


Drake - you just don't get it. I am *not* trying to be mean or snide, but you don't. During Hulkageddon (While I was in The Bastards) the majority of Hulks/Macs that got killed, died to four or five, cheap, t-1 fit catalysts.

1M, 1.5M for hulls, and 1.5M for mods. Insurance was kewl, but not necessary. Get a t-2 strip to drop or a t-2 hardener, pretty much paid for hulls, mods and some leftover. So insurance was not an issue.

Now, if those ships were 500K ea., it would be harder to do for free, but still *not* impossible. Losing insurance would not have entered into the equation, and if insurance was removed, it still wouldn't have changed a thing.


Updated for spelling

Sanpaku Deska
Posted - 2010.03.02 17:20:00 - [135]
 

I think the issues as they're presented have been pretty well thrashed out, so I'll spare you my views -- they aren't unique.

What concerns me though, is that all of these decisions seems to ignore a couple of fundamentals of gaming, most notably the ongoing development of new players. Calculating how much an in-game miner affects the in-game economy is interesting; but let's also look at how those accounts affect the overall EVE picture in terms of long term existence.

Historically, roughly 5 years in and an MMO starts to be "at risk". Around this time, most MMO’s have run up on the rocks, and in most cases it has to do with diminishing player community and recruitment. If the game changes in such a way that a class of character becomes extinct, that can start to decay the entire game. Let’s face it – EVE needs miners and mission runners and especially noobs. Wipe out any class and you put the game at risk. Anyone want to take a look at that?

Sanpaku Deska
Posted - 2010.03.02 17:40:00 - [136]
 

Edited by: Sanpaku Deska on 02/03/2010 17:40:41
One other thing: It’s interesting to note that removing ceilings and floors on various commodities does in fact affect the economy here. Note however that when ALL prices fall, you’re not correcting; you’re in a deflationary spiral. And EVE most definitely is in deflation. Reduction in the price of Tritanium, for instance, is utterly meaningless unless you consider it in terms of the overall economy. Minerals are down. And so are ships. And components. Undsovetter… Be careful what major economic cogs you recommend changing now. Unless they’re considered in terms of the overall economy, the results may be both surprising -- and grisly.

Melcairwen Taldir
Gallente
Aliastra

Posted - 2010.03.02 18:54:00 - [137]
 


Ronz
Posted - 2010.03.03 23:10:00 - [138]
 

Supported. Suicide Ganking is too easy with no real cost or risk.

Zombika
Effective Deconstruction Initiative
Posted - 2010.03.03 23:16:00 - [139]
 

I support this i think its a good idea and suicide ganking needs to be looked into.

Addicted User
Posted - 2010.03.04 01:32:00 - [140]
 


Tyremis
The Perfect Storm
Random-Violence
Posted - 2010.03.04 01:46:00 - [141]
 

NOT supported in the least.

Mechanic working as intended. We have a good economy for a reason and it isn't because eve is a safe game. The bears do not see the big picture.

Larkonis Trassler
Doctrine.
Posted - 2010.03.04 03:46:00 - [142]
 

Originally by: CSM Summit Minutes
The CSM brought up the issue of suicide ganking and feels it is too easy. The main problem is that this is in effect subsidized by insurance. CCP is aware of the issue and has discussed it at great length in-house. CCP feels it absolutely needs to compensate newbies that attack players by mistake in high-sec. This may get changed in the future but not in the summer expansion. It was made clear that suicide ganking is an accepted game mechanic.


Dohohohoho.

Can we put this issue to bed now?

Arcturus Raz
Posted - 2010.03.04 07:15:00 - [143]
 

Yes! Anyone who disagrees should read the fine print in their car insurance policy. It's like using your car to smash the front door of a banks so you can rob it and then asking insurance to pay for the dent.

And can we maybe look in to buffing Hulks? for how much they are worth they sure as hell are not 'able to withstand the dangers off deep space'. Anybody other then me think its idiotic that you can muck a 150 mil ship with 15 mil worth of gank in less then a few minutes?

Suicide ganking is as silly as the name implies. You attack a ship get blown up and then Concord does nothing to your pod as if it was your ship that committed the crime and not you. I say once ure ship is popped, concord should be able to catch you and arrest you. Then you either make bail or your char sits in the can for a few days. Get caught again and this time you sit for a week or two and so on.

CyberGh0st
Minmatar
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2010.03.04 09:10:00 - [144]
 

Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
Originally by: CSM Summit Minutes
The CSM brought up the issue of suicide ganking and feels it is too easy. The main problem is that this is in effect subsidized by insurance. CCP is aware of the issue and has discussed it at great length in-house. CCP feels it absolutely needs to compensate newbies that attack players by mistake in high-sec. This may get changed in the future but not in the summer expansion. It was made clear that suicide ganking is an accepted game mechanic.


Dohohohoho.

Can we put this issue to bed now?


Duh, that is so dumb ...

So they rather have newbies getting blown up by suicide gankers hmm ...

If they are scared that newbies leave the game they should fix the sound engine !

Chirjo Durruti
Gallente
Posted - 2010.03.04 19:15:00 - [145]
 

+1

Merle Hausen
Caldari
Phoenix Propulsion Labs
Firmus Ixion
Posted - 2010.03.05 01:42:00 - [146]
 


Shivani
Posted - 2010.03.05 11:15:00 - [147]
 

Originally by: CSM Summit Minutes
The CSM brought up the issue of suicide ganking and feels it is too easy. The main problem is that this is in effect subsidized by insurance. CCP is aware of the issue and has discussed it at great length in-house. CCP feels it absolutely needs to compensate newbies that attack players by mistake in high-sec. This may get changed in the future but not in the summer expansion. It was made clear that suicide ganking is an accepted game mechanic.


THat's totally dumb.

How often newbies have to confirm, that tehy want to do something that is involving COncord action? 2 times? Three times?


It's like the big red button, with some text in capital letters clost to it reading: "If you press this button, the universe will blow up, are you sure about that?"

After you pressed the button another button appears asking you to confirmoif you are REALLY sure about that...

In my opionion, the following happend in the CSM/CCP discussion: The PvP-CSMler don't wan this to change, that's it.

BUt that does not matter, it is not logic, since newbies will not leave the game after acknowledging four times, that they want to blow stuff up. they will leave, if they become suicide ganked. And suicide ganked is backed up by a juicy insurrance payout. Thats stupid.



Flying ZombieJesus
Posted - 2010.03.05 13:47:00 - [148]
 

I dont think touching insurance should do it, because every once and a while I lose a ship to npc's and i'd like to get the insurance from that.

I think its a simple UI change.

Try this as a message box :

"You have just been volleyed by a battleship in jita. Explode? (Y/N)"

Sedilis
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
Posted - 2010.03.05 14:00:00 - [149]
 

Originally by: Helicity Boson
insurance after being destroyed by concord is silly, and needs to be removed.


This.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.03.07 16:13:00 - [150]
 

Originally by: Shivani
BUt that does not matter, it is not logic, since newbies will not leave the game after acknowledging four times, that they want to blow stuff up. they will leave, if they become suicide ganked. And suicide ganked is backed up by a juicy insurrance payout. Thats stupid.



if u leave because u can't take what u dish out, then that's your problem. pvp goes both ways, in case u didn't know. Rolling Eyes so once again, by all means, go ahead and suicide a newb ship if u think it's so profitable 'cause i don't see anyone posting threads crying about having their rookie ship suicide ganked.


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 ... : last (17)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only