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 : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : last (17)

Author Topic

Dograzor
The Black Rabbits
The Gurlstas Associates
Posted - 2010.06.08 09:01:00 - [181]
 

So many carebear tears.

Not supported.

SlaughterhouseDb
Posted - 2010.07.14 15:20:00 - [182]
 

Supported. Paying insurance on ship losses incurred during criminal acts breaks the suspension of disbelief. If you want to get paid for hi-sec ganking, buy a policy with the Angels/Blood/Guristas/whatever [those would be some awesome commericals].

The concept that "you can get the kill rights for getting ganked" does nothing for the miners, haulers, or traders. That's pointless, because we won't use them. We're miners, get it? Most of us don't have combat skills to compete with gankers, because we devoted ourselves to our profession. Having the cops tell you "you should go beat up that bully, we totally won't prosecute you if you do" does not mean that we will; that's a losing proposition, that's playing the gankers game. They want easy prey to come to them, for cash and prizes and lulz. (If they didn't want easy prey, they would stay in low/0.0 sec) If we don't fight, they victimize us and tell us we should fight. If we fight, they slaughter us [Shane]...until we become just like them, playing the game their way. I want to mine; I like mining. Why should I have play the game your way? I tank as much as I can. I don't AFK mine. I like to watch the dials spin, and the cargo fill up. It makes me happy. It also makes me money, but not a fraction of what it has cost me to get to where I am.

Like any sensible buisnessman, I am trying very hard to make the greatest return I can within slim profit margins. That means shaving away my tank in return for more cargo space and MLU II's, and staying in Hi-sec to live long enough to see a return on my investment. It also means grinding rocks for hours on end, lather-rinse-repeat, as well as dual-boxing so that I can haul and mine at the same time. It's engaging and entertaining and hectic. To be able to do so, I have trained and saved and run rocks for months. Why would I allow a system to continue that pays you even one isk to rob me of my efforts?

There is a phrase that goes, "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch." Well, we hi-sec miners are on the porch. So quit barking.


By the way, I applaud the true suicide gankers - the ones who are determined to kill a ship and/or pilot no matter the law, penalties, or personal loss - the ones who would do it for free. They are the ones who keep us on our toes, aligned and tanked; these 'welfare pirates' are just annoying.

Lubomir Penev
Dark Nexxus
S I L E N T.
Posted - 2010.07.14 16:19:00 - [183]
 

Originally by: Krans Hopeson
It takes 5 destroyers to take down an untanked Hulk. Total cost of fitting: probably ~5 m. On average, a T2 fit mining min/max Hulk will drop much more than that in loot.


If anything the untanked Hulk should not get insurance either, it usually takes basic precaution to get insurance (e.g. locking your car etc...).

Altogether insurance is silly and should be removed altogether.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.14 16:56:00 - [184]
 

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb

The concept that "you can get the kill rights for getting ganked" does nothing for the miners, haulers, or traders. That's pointless, because we won't use them. We're miners, get it? Most of us don't have combat skills to compete with gankers, because we devoted ourselves to our profession. Having the cops tell you "you should go beat up that bully, we totally won't prosecute you if you do" does not mean that we will; that's a losing proposition, that's playing the gankers game. They want easy prey to come to them, for cash and prizes and lulz. (If they didn't want easy prey, they would stay in low/0.0 sec) If we don't fight, they victimize us and tell us we should fight. If we fight, they slaughter us [Shane]...until we become just like them, playing the game their way. I want to mine; I like mining. Why should I have play the game your way? I tank as much as I can. I don't AFK mine. I like to watch the dials spin, and the cargo fill up. It makes me happy. It also makes me money, but not a fraction of what it has cost me to get to where I am.


1. games = fun. fun = lulz. lulz = happy. u just want to take away other ppl's lulz while u have fun...shooting rocks all day? Rolling Eyes
2. oh and low sec/0.0 pirates don't gank easy prey either? same fail excuse, different idiot that says it.
3. that's the thing with using an alt--if u have a pirate main but your mining alt gets attacked, your pirate main won't be connected to the gank u suffered. aww can't hide behind your mining alt when things aren't going your way? Crying or Very sad deal with it 'cause despite your claims, which sound just like the others, u're probably a pirate as well so htfu.

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
Like any sensible buisnessman, I am trying very hard to make the greatest return I can within slim profit margins. That means shaving away my tank in return for more cargo space and MLU II's, and staying in Hi-sec to live long enough to see a return on my investment. It also means grinding rocks for hours on end, lather-rinse-repeat, as well as dual-boxing so that I can haul and mine at the same time. It's engaging and entertaining and hectic. To be able to do so, I have trained and saved and run rocks for months. Why would I allow a system to continue that pays you even one isk to rob me of my efforts?


because your efforts have no other risk for its rewards, just like low sec/0.0 blobbing. that's why your profession has slim profit margins--because many like u have abused this otherwise riskless profession to this point. u can thank yourselves for your own continuous whining that u've brought upon yourselves. hell, i'll thank u as well. Laughing

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
There is a phrase that goes, "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch." Well, we hi-sec miners are on the porch. So quit barking.


at least that's what u claim to be on your mining alt.

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb

By the way, I applaud the true suicide gankers - the ones who are determined to kill a ship and/or pilot no matter the law, penalties, or personal loss - the ones who would do it for free. They are the ones who keep us on our toes, aligned and tanked; these 'welfare pirates' are just annoying.


there's little to no difference between the two. u're just want your mining alt to be 100% safe in high sec so it can be something u can actually hide behind, just like the alt u're posting with.

Resonanza
Posted - 2010.07.14 17:17:00 - [185]
 

Supported. Stop paying suicide gankers.

Ohmiri
Posted - 2010.07.14 18:34:00 - [186]
 

I support the general idea of making insurance less useful to those characters that repeatedly lose ships to CONCORD. Instead of denying insurance altogether, I would tie the payout to the security status at time of purchase (better would be the time of payout, but I don't know how hard that might be):
0.0 - 10.0 = full payout
-10.0 - -.001 = payout/(|sec|+1)

i.e., the absolute value of a negative security status +1 decreases the payout by that multiple. This allows the people who just try suicide ganking out once or twice, or make an aggression mistake, to refit w/out too much pain but would certainly make insurance worthless for those who get concorded a lot.

This algorithm would tie insurance and security status together in a simple, easy to understand, story-oriented way.

SlaughterhouseDb
Posted - 2010.07.14 19:17:00 - [187]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera


1. games = fun. fun = lulz. lulz = happy. u just want to take away other ppl's lulz while u have fun...shooting rocks all day? Rolling Eyes
2. oh and low sec/0.0 pirates don't gank easy prey either? same fail excuse, different idiot that says it.
3. that's the thing with using an alt--if u have a pirate main but your mining alt gets attacked, your pirate main won't be connected to the gank u suffered. aww can't hide behind your mining alt when things aren't going your way? Crying or Very sad deal with it 'cause despite your claims, which sound just like the others, u're probably a pirate as well so htfu.


I'm not a pirate. I have no alts; I have two accounts. I think your protest to my statement rides on my having a pirate main. Sorry, I can't help you there. I just mine. It may offend your sense of fun, but that's what I do. It doesn't make me wrong, just different. Personally, I don't see the fun in being a jerk to a bunch of strangers, but that's me. And this misses the point: gank all you like. Just don't expect the government to support you for breaking the law.

I don't fear lowsec/nullsec pirates - they have their playground, I have mine.

I also don't get the fun=lulz, lulz=happy. Lulz relies on making people suffer for pleasure. I don't get any pleasure from making people suffer, and I don't know a way to "Mine 4 Teh Lulz." I still have so much to learn.


Originally by: Anna Lifera

because your efforts have no other risk for its rewards, just like low sec/0.0 blobbing. that's why your profession has slim profit margins--because many like u have abused this otherwise riskless profession to this point. u can thank yourselves for your own continuous whining that u've brought upon yourselves. hell, i'll thank u as well. Laughing


You're welcome. It's nice to know my hard work provides you with the tools you need to live and play. It makes it all worth it. Everytime CONCORD wastes a ganker in a T1, I get another customer for my ships (BUY CALDARI). Again, I accept ganking [and can flippers, rats, market forces, etc] as a risk to my profession. My stance is that you should not get an insurance payout for getting smoked by CONCORD.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

at least that's what u claim to be on your mining alt.



My e-peen is very small. Very small. You cannot insult me as much as nature already has. I cannot hold up in a fight, and I have run from rats in .7 belts. I am a complete coward. But I am not an alt. Just a miner.

Originally by: Anna Lifera


there's little to no difference between the two. u're just want your mining alt to be 100% safe in high sec so it can be something u can actually hide behind, just like the alt u're posting with.

Originally by: William Shakespeare
Methinks the lady doth protest too much.


This is not about my safety; it's about insurance subsidised bullies, which I oppose. Don't change the subject, it clouds the issue.

And there is a great difference between the two types of gankers; I hope you see what I mean someday.

And what's 'htfu'? Is that some kind of martial art? I keep seeing it in your posts. Is it an acronym like STFU? What does it mean, Have To Freshen Up? Hygiene is important, but stay on topic!

Wandering Deathstriker
Posted - 2010.07.14 19:56:00 - [188]
 

I agree, gettin killed by concord should not give you money as you are breaking the law. Suicide Ganking in general seems kind of counter-productive for haulers in general. I mean courier missions are crap because of the risk of losing your collateral because of suicide gankers.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.15 05:47:00 - [189]
 

Edited by: Anna Lifera on 15/07/2010 06:06:42
Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
I'm not a pirate. I have no alts; I have two accounts. I think your protest to my statement rides on my having a pirate main. Sorry, I can't help you there. I just mine. It may offend your sense of fun, but that's what I do. It doesn't make me wrong, just different. Personally, I don't see the fun in being a jerk to a bunch of strangers, but that's me. And this misses the point: gank all you like. Just don't expect the government to support you for breaking the law.


aww it offends your sense of fun when ppl r doing what's still within the rules? try reading the insurance contract sometime.

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
I don't fear lowsec/nullsec pirates - they have their playground, I have mine.


and yet u don't wanna step foot into their playground, effectively escaping the suicide gankers, because?

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
I also don't get the fun=lulz, lulz=happy. Lulz relies on making people suffer for pleasure. I don't get any pleasure from making people suffer, and I don't know a way to "Mine 4 Teh Lulz." I still have so much to learn.


yeah, u might wanna grow up from your mental infancy if getting "killed" in a game is so much suffering to u--poor baby. Crying or Very sad u don't like it, play wow. all the protection u want with risk-free currency farming and most of all, no tear-inducing e-deaths.

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
You're welcome. It's nice to know my hard work provides you with the tools you need to live and play. It makes it all worth it. Everytime CONCORD wastes a ganker in a T1, I get another customer for my ships (BUY CALDARI). Again, I accept ganking [and can flippers, rats, market forces, etc] as a risk to my profession. My stance is that you should not get an insurance payout for getting smoked by CONCORD.


1. good--then u should have no problem with suicide ganking then?
2. and i accept adding a real risk to your profession, seeing as how u even stated u applaud us.
3. have another excuse for your stance?

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
My e-peen is very small. Very small. You cannot insult me as much as nature already has. I cannot hold up in a fight, and I have run from rats in .7 belts. I am a complete coward. But I am not an alt. Just a miner.


that is why this game (or anything that requires even a hint of intelligence) isn't for u. i'm sry to destroy what little self-esteem u have left but if u're too incompetent to even handle 0.7 sec rats... Rolling Eyes

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

This is not about my safety; it's about insurance subsidised bullies, which I oppose. Don't change the subject, it clouds the issue.

And there is a great difference between the two types of gankers; I hope you see what I mean someday.

And what's 'htfu'? Is that some kind of martial art? I keep seeing it in your posts. Is it an acronym like STFU? What does it mean, Have To Freshen Up? Hygiene is important, but stay on topic!


1. and methinks u're just trying to play an angle to push for wow cloning. semantics didn't work and real-life comparisons didn't work, so now it's the super-carebear angle. too bad u're playing eve so that fact alone defeats your sorry excuse for an argument.
2. and yes, it is about your safety because u're indirectly trying to push for it (just like all the other crybabies) since we all know u'd get flamed and trolled to death if u outright demanded that suicide ganking be eliminated completely.
3. funny how u claim there's a difference, yet u refuse to explain it. i'm guessing it's because there's no explanation for something u can just make up out of nowhere?
4. did u ever think of looking it up? of course not--like all the other crybabies, u lack the mental capacity even to think. and this is especially true in your case to be threatened by...high sec rats? sounds like suicide gankers r the least of your problems! Laughing

Galdornae
Caldari
Fat Ugly Guys Security
Posted - 2010.07.15 06:13:00 - [190]
 

Originally by: Carebears
Tears.


HTFU

That is all.

(Not supported)

Ahsekuaw
Brother Theo's Monastery
The Ancients.
Posted - 2010.07.15 15:29:00 - [191]
 

Supported.

Insurance payments resulting from Concord losses needs to stop. These are payments resulting from criminal action. What's the point of a police force in Concord if you're going to undermind their authority with an insurance payment to re-imburse a criminal action?

Perhaps a better question is who from the CSM is willing to pick this issue up and run with it?

Ahs


MNagy
Posted - 2010.07.15 16:41:00 - [192]
 

I look at it differently.

I agree with the post but with a modification.

The "Aggressor" should never have insurance paid.

That would also make can flipping a bit harder.
If you get can flipped and you kill the can flipper - they should not get insurance.

So I look at it - no insurance payouts on the 'aggressor'.


SlaughterhouseDb
Posted - 2010.07.16 15:43:00 - [193]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera


aww it offends your sense of fun when ppl r doing what's still within the rules? try reading the insurance contract sometime.


I don't recall the part of the insurance contract that refers to fun. Can you quote it for me? I read the insurance contract the last time I insured a ship; I understood it. We're proposing a change to the game, so the contract doesn't apply. We're going to change the contract, so that it doesn't pay out for piracy. We're not outlawing piracy.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

and yet u don't wanna step foot into their playground, effectively escaping the suicide gankers, because?


Because I don't want to lose my ship? I don't fear low-sec pirates because they stay in lowsec, and I don't go there. Once they come into Hisec, they become Hisec pirates.


Originally by: Anna Lifera

yeah, u might wanna grow up ...mental infancy i...poor baby. Crying or Very sad u don't like it, play wow. ... tear-inducing e-deaths.


I am sorry it bothers you that I don't want to play the game your way. But you cannot insult me into changing my mind. Again, this is not about ganking, or risk, or currency farming. This is about insurance payouts.

Originally by: Anna Lifera


1. good--then u should have no problem with suicide ganking then?
2. and i accept adding a real risk to your profession, seeing as how u even stated u applaud us.
3. have another excuse for your stance?


Thank you for restating my point. No, I have no problem with suicide ganking as an action, just as a profession. Profits from suicide ganking should proceed from salvage and cargo, not insurance fraud. We are closer to agreeing than ever! And as a reference, an excuse is something you have after you act; a reason is something you have before. The vote has not been made, so we are all expressing our reasons.


Originally by: Anna Lifera

that is why this game ... hint of intelligence... destroy what little self-esteem u have left...u're too incompetent to even handle 0.7 sec rats... Rolling Eyes


Again, insulting me will not change my mind. And for the record, I did handle the rats - I ran away. I lived to mine another day. W00t!

Originally by: Anna Lifera

1. and methinks u're just trying to play an angle to push for wow cloning. semantics didn't work and real-life comparisons didn't work, so now it's the super-carebear angle. too bad u're playing eve so that fact alone defeats your sorry excuse for an argument.


Carebears are mission runners, even I know that. I'm just a miner. I'm not a roleplayer, so I'm not playing an angel/angle. If I wanted to play WoW, I would, so that's not what this is about. I don't recall using semantics in my earlier posts, but I don't put it past me; if I did, well spotted. I do, however, fail (FAIL) to see how playing EvE invalidates my argument. Explain.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

2. ...we all know u'd get flamed and trolled to death if u outright demanded that suicide ganking be eliminated completely.
3. ... u claim there's a difference, yet u refuse to explain it. i'm guessing it's because there's no explanation for something u can just make up out of nowhere?
4. did u ever think of looking it up? of course not--like all the other crybabies, u lack the mental capacity even to think. ...high sec rats? sounds like suicide gankers r the least of your proble

I'd think many people would have given up on this by now, but I won't. Go ahead, gank all you like. My objection is to insurance payouts on pirate vehicles destroyed by CONCORD. My personal safety doesn't enter into it. The difference between a true ganker and a welfare pirate is, the ganker will kill you even if he doesn't stand to make an isk from it; he does it for lulz, love, or hate.He wants you dead, not an easy paycheck. And of course, you're right - suicide gankers are the least of my problems. I worry more about mineral prices in Jita, because, you know, I'm a miner.Very Happy

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.16 18:11:00 - [194]
 

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
I don't recall the part of the insurance contract that refers to fun...We're not outlawing piracy.


try to keep up: the contract is part of the game so it does apply. and if u wanna take away the payout, then that means i can take out exhumer mining in high sec. and i'm not outlawing high sec mining either.

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
Because I don't want to lose my ship? I don't fear low-sec pirates because they stay in lowsec, and I don't go there. Once they come into Hisec, they become Hisec pirates.


that means u do fear low sec pirates. u just said they're the reason u're too scared to even go there. Rolling Eyes

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
I am sorry it bothers you that I don't want to play the game your way. But you cannot insult me into changing my mind. Again, this is not about ganking, or risk, or currency farming. This is about insurance payouts.


likewise. after all, because of the way we play, u felt "affected" enough to cry for this change and that's why it ties in with ganking, risk, and currency farming. u're the one who wants to deter our way of playing because u're incapable of even defending yourself...in a game. Laughing

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
Thank you for restating my point...The vote has not been made, so we are all expressing our reasons.


1. insurance fraud is only punishable in real life, which means it's allowed in eve. just giving it a real-life reference does not make it "bad". ppl kill each other all the time in eve but that does not make it murder. Rolling Eyes
2. a reason can also come afterwards. and there's a reason why after all these years, payouts still exist in eve, which means it's still there for a reason--it's a game.

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
Again, insulting me will not change my mind. And for the record, I did handle the rats - I ran away. I lived to mine another day. W00t!


running away is not handling--it's running away. and if macro miners can create a program to automatically handle rats WHILE they're mining to show how easy and otherwise riskless your own profession really is, yet u can't even perform that simple task while u're actively playing, then like i said, suicide gankers r the least of your problems. Laughing

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
Carebears are mission runners, even I know that...I do, however, fail (FAIL) to see how playing EvE invalidates my argument. Explain.


1. a carebear is anyone who wants to avoid conflict entirely. that is u, which makes u a miner and a carebear.
2. u don't want to play wow, yet u want to turn eve into wow...that's some good logic there... Rolling Eyes
3. "insurance fraud"--there's your semantics, which i explained above.
4. eve does not cater to ignorance and stupidity, something u have more than enough of to even be incapable of performing a task so simple that another player can create a simple program to automate. Laughing

Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
I'd think many people would have given up on this by now, but I won't...I worry more about mineral prices in Jita, because, you know, I'm a miner.


1. that's good to know 'cause that means a. u'll be wasting even more of your time here while everyone, including me, laughs at u and b. your current "issue" with suicide gankers isn't really an issue in the first place if even an utterly incompetent carebear like u, will still mine.
2. once again, your personal safety does enter into it or else u would not be crying about it in the first place.
3. "true" suicide gankers don't profit from blowing up exhumers, at least not the exhumers that were fitted with expensive mods due to the miner's stupidity. the ones u support r the ones that r killing u,...unless u were blown up in a faction-fitted ship...oh wait...
4. don't forget the high sec rats either, lest your own incompetence costs u another faction-fitted ship. Laughing

but plz continue

SlaughterhouseDb
Posted - 2010.07.16 21:29:00 - [195]
 

I am sorry. I won't change my opinion just be cause you don't agree with me. And I won't agree with you if you only insult me.

I hope you continue to enjoy the game in your own way no matter how the vote turns out, as you can be sure I will. If this thread and the others like it are any indication, the insurance will stop covering acts of piracy, and you'll need to find a new source of income, which I can understand your being pretty upset about. If you put as much energy into creating emergent gameplay as you have into deftly refuting my arguments, I'm sure you'll be wealthy in no time. Have fun, and good luck out there!Smile

Draek
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.17 04:08:00 - [196]
 

Edited by: Draek on 17/07/2010 05:05:06
Is suicide ganking really such an amazing game mechanic?

I wish there was a better way to add risk to mining without such a lame sequence of events.

I think if a system worked similar to how rats work it might be more interesting.

Rats get tougher as the security status gets lower. If you could allow players to sign on as mercs with the local NPC pirate factions and have limits on hull type depending on sec status it would be more fun. You wouldn't be in a hulk facing ganking battleships in a .5 but, you might have to be careful of groups of roaming player mercenary pirate frigs ;). In a .7 maybe the hulls could be limited to tier 1 - 3 frigs or something similar. Perhaps limit fleet size as well *shrug*. The pirates of course are freely allowed to attack in belts (anywhere really, but station guns and gate guns would be hostile to them). It will add to the feeling that space gets more and more lawless the farther out you go. Regular sec status rules could still apply with the addition maybe of after signing on as a merc, you would be on a timer limiting your access to .8 - 1.0. Of course people who are the good guys in high sec have the advantage in being able to field any ship they like. Which makes sense since this is their "turf" and it's high sec making it difficult for pirates to have access to big ships that draw Concords attention ;).

Short version is introduce a system to make the regular players rats for short periods of time until the heat dies down.

Remove the insurance payout for suicide ganks and now you have a system that challenges both groups with risks and rewards and it's much more in the spirit of lawless space. Insurance for going kamikaze is just lame and boring.

If you don't like how I'm going about it then suggest something to make it better. I don't know why anyone would prefer suicide ganks over real skirmishes.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.17 05:42:00 - [197]
 

Edited by: Anna Lifera on 17/07/2010 05:43:16
Originally by: SlaughterhouseDb
I am sorry. I won't change my opinion just be cause you don't agree with me. And I won't agree with you if you only insult me.

I hope you continue to enjoy the game in your own way no matter how the vote turns out, as you can be sure I will. If this thread and the others like it are any indication, the insurance will stop covering acts of piracy, and you'll need to find a new source of income, which I can understand your being pretty upset about. If you put as much energy into creating emergent gameplay as you have into deftly refuting my arguments, I'm sure you'll be wealthy in no time. Have fun, and good luck out there! Very Happy


1. i was never aiming to change your opinion because once again, u r incapable of adapting. that's why u cry for this change so badly and that's why u will keep your opinion because u r incapable of even the simplest tasks just to survive in eve. if u can't even handle high sec rats, how can u even react against another player?
2. suppose that this change actually goes through--we'll just adapt, like we always have. and while we'll still continue playing, u carebears, in your complete ignorance and stupidity, will wonder why eve hasn't adapted to u. it's because u will never adapt to eve and that will never change. Laughing
3. once again, exhumer gankers don't profit from ganking exhumers, not that u're capable of understanding in your own little carebear bubble u want to stay in. and i'm well off in isk, tyvm. of course, u'd probably never seen much isk because u're too stupid to keep u and your ships alive.

Originally by: Draek
Is suicide ganking really such an amazing game mechanic?

I wish there was a better way to add risk to mining without such a lame sequence of events.

I think if a system worked similar to how rats work it might be more interesting.

Rats get tougher as the security status gets lower. If you could allow players to sign on as mercs with the local NPC pirate factions and have limits on hull type depending on sec status it would be more fun. You wouldn't be in a hulk facing ganking battleships in a .5 but, you might have to be careful of groups of roaming player mercenary pirate frigs ;). In a .7 maybe the hulls could be limited to tier 1 - 3 frigs or something similar. Perhaps limit fleet size as well *shrug*. It will add to the feeling that space gets more and more lawless the farther out you go. Regular sec status rules could still apply with the addition maybe of after signing on as a merc, you would be on a timer limiting your access to .8 - 1.0. Of course people who are the good guys in high sec have the advantage in being able to field any ship they like. Which makes sense since this is their "turf".

Short version is introduce a system to make the regular players rats for short periods of time until the heat dies down.

Remove the insurance payout for suicide ganks and now you have a system that challenges both groups with risks and rewards and it's much more in the spirit of lawless space. Insurance for going kamikaze is just lame and boring.


long story short, another fail proposal to turn high sec into low sec. at that point, ganking wouldn't even be suicide anymore and all of eve will be deserted, just like low sec, ******. Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Draek
If you don't like how I'm going about it then suggest something to make it better. I don't know why anyone would prefer suicide ganks over real skirmishes.


in other words, u can't understand the concept of a sandbox.

Altari Swift
Posted - 2010.07.17 09:13:00 - [198]
 

This strikes me as a common sense suggestion that should certainly have been added a long time ago.

In no situation should insurance be paid out to anyone killed by Concord.

It would probably also be more 'realistic' to make the insurance premiums based on security status.

High sec status = lower premiums, low sec status = higher premiums.

It's all common sense and none of it is game-ruining.

Laxyr
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2010.07.17 12:57:00 - [199]
 

Eve tries so hard to resemble real life (somebody described it very accurately as a "second job you have to pay for"), why not in this point?

Somebody said the "Insurance" in eve is not meant to actually be an "insurance":stop calling it that.

If it's supposed to be an "insurance": stop paying money to criminals.

Regards, Lax

Jasdemi
Interstellar Whine Brewery
Monocle Overlords
Posted - 2010.07.17 13:27:00 - [200]
 

Agree. No insurance payout to suicide gankers (those who were killed by (CONRORD). Why should they be awarded if they do such things?

Draek
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:15:00 - [201]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera

long story short, another fail proposal to turn high sec into low sec. at that point, ganking wouldn't even be suicide anymore and all of eve will be deserted, just like low sec, ******. Rolling Eyes



Nice counter argument. It's fail because you say so and all of Eve will be deserted because you say so.

Look, the guys out there who still want insurance for suicide ganking make a good point. Mining in high sec isn't risky enough. NPC rats are a joke and without suicide ganking .5 - 1.0 doesn't mean anything special except different amounts of ore at belts.

You want the sandbox but you don't want there to be risk. In your words you think it will become low sec. With no cruisers, T2 ships, battleships, cap ships and gate camps I fail to see how it's the same as low sec. Players would still be safe at gates and stations. You can even up the power/quantity of gate/station guns/patrols to really discourage anyone from trying to make those areas more dangerous than they should.
Which means travel between high sec becomes a little safer (since I favour removing insurance for suicide ganking).

My idea turns .5 - .7 mining into areas where carebears can start to get combat in with a known enemy (frigates). It allows more turn over of ships which in turn makes mining more profitable in the long run.

More ideas could be "pirate threat level alerts" or something of that sort in .5 - .7. Perhaps a warning via local by Concord or maybe a new interface screen could show pirate activity in the area between low - high. Or at least a system that gives the carebears a little more of an edge in knowing when they should risk it and when they should run back to .8+ or just another system.

Originally by: Anna Lifera
in other words, u can't understand the concept of a sandbox.


So suicide ganking = sandbox but the ability to join pirate groups and use small ships in .5 - .7 for PvP is anathema to that??

Why don't you suggest something that removes the suicide gank (not much risk for the ganker with insurance) and still leaves risk in high sec for miners to worry about (aside from can flippers which are so easily ignored). Better yet support something that involves getting people more involved with PvP and gives high sec "good guys" an edge over the "bad guys" which keeps the game in context with the whole null sec - low sec - high sec idea.

Just so you know I'm not an avid PvP player. I've been a carebear most my time in Eve and can sometimes win in 1v1. I mine all the time. So these changes would make things more dangerous for me. I've never been a pirate and doubt I ever will be. Still I'd like to see the pirates have more engaging gameplay and not have to resort to bending the rules all the time to have fun.


Carl Marsarlis
Gallente
Valerian Steel Inc.

Posted - 2010.07.17 23:01:00 - [202]
 


Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.18 00:03:00 - [203]
 

Originally by: Draek

Nice counter argument. It's fail because you say so and all of Eve will be deserted because you say so.


it's fail and all of eve will be deserted because u want to remove high sec and turn it into low sec. is any of this getting through to u?

Originally by: Draek
Look, the guys out there who still want insurance for suicide ganking make a good point. Mining in high sec isn't risky enough. NPC rats are a joke and without suicide ganking .5 - 1.0 doesn't mean anything special except different amounts of ore at belts.


exactly my point.

Originally by: Draek
You want the sandbox but you don't want there to be risk. In your words you think it will become low sec. With no cruisers, T2 ships, battleships, cap ships and gate camps I fail to see how it's the same as low sec. Players would still be safe at gates and stations. You can even up the power/quantity of gate/station guns/patrols to really discourage anyone from trying to make those areas more dangerous than they should.
Which means travel between high sec becomes a little safer (since I favour removing insurance for suicide ganking).


1. u fail to see it because u're too stupid to. ooh limit fleet size...oh wait, who says they need to be in one fleet? u'll still have the blobs and any anti-pirate stupid enough to engage will get baited and blobbed, just like in low sec. way to be an idiot. Rolling Eyes
2. this proposal is only really aimed to boost afk autopiloting hauling, which is probably what u really want.

Originally by: Draek
My idea turns .5 - .7 mining into areas where carebears can start to get combat in with a known enemy (frigates). It allows more turn over of ships which in turn makes mining more profitable in the long run.


the only turnover of ships that will happen will be the miners, mission runners, and any anti-pirate stupid enough to engage the multiple-fleet blobs. then missions and mining will still be unprotected (especially with the anti-pirates now dead) against the blobs so belts and mission deadspaces be deserted as a result, just like low sec. great idea... Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Draek
More ideas could be "pirate threat level alerts" or something of that sort in .5 - .7. Perhaps a warning via local by Concord or maybe a new interface screen could show pirate activity in the area between low - high. Or at least a system that gives the carebears a little more of an edge in knowing when they should risk it and when they should run back to .8+ or just another system.


right 'cause pirates never roam huh? with so many pirates roaming, u'll be lucky if u can even stay for 5 minutes in a belt/deadspace, assuming u don't get ganked before then.

Originally by: Draek
So suicide ganking = sandbox but the ability to join pirate groups and use small ships in .5 - .7 for PvP is anathema to that??


those options already exist atm. all u want is to extend low sec pirating to de-populate high sec of all producers.

Originally by: Draek
Why don't you suggest something that removes the suicide gank (not much risk for the ganker with insurance) and still leaves risk in high sec for miners to worry about (aside from can flippers which are so easily ignored). Better yet support something that involves getting people more involved with PvP and gives high sec "good guys" an edge over the "bad guys" which keeps the game in context with the whole null sec - low sec - high sec idea.


1. because this is a sandbox, not low sec, low sec, and more low sec.
2. because this isn't "good vs evil", it's Everyone vs Everyone.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.18 00:13:00 - [204]
 

Edited by: Anna Lifera on 18/07/2010 00:16:24
Originally by: Draek
Just so you know I'm not an avid PvP player. I've been a carebear most my time in Eve and can sometimes win in 1v1. I mine all the time. So these changes would make things more dangerous for me. I've never been a pirate and doubt I ever will be. Still I'd like to see the pirates have more engaging gameplay and not have to resort to bending the rules all the time to have fun.


u can claim to be whoever u want to be, just like every other carebear. the fact is, your proposal will only boost low sec pirating past low sec with multiple-fleet blobs to get around your ******ed system, clearing high sec of everyone else, just like low sec. furthermore, u want to boost afk autopilot hauling but here's the thing--with no production, what exactly r u gonna haul? and fyi, we r following the rules--u're just too stupid to understand them.

nevertheless, if who u claim to be is true, then that does explain your total lack of perspective, your ignorance, and last but not least, your stupidity. but plz continue--i'm really looking forward whatever nonsense u idiots will continue babbling. Rolling Eyes

Draek
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.18 00:35:00 - [205]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera
it's fail and all of eve will be deserted because u want to remove high sec and turn it into low sec. is any of this getting through to u?


Yes it's getting through. You don't like the idea and you think everyone will quit. I'm not suggesting chopping up .5 - 1.0 into pirate zones. .8 and up will be free of this. Hell you could confine my idea to .5 - .6 for all I care. I'm just brainstorming.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

1. u fail to see it because u're too stupid to. ooh limit fleet size...oh wait, who says they need to be in one fleet? u'll still have the blobs and any anti-pirate stupid enough to engage will get baited and blobbed, just like in low sec. way to be an idiot. Rolling Eyes
2. this proposal is only really aimed to boost afk autopiloting hauling, which is probably what u really want.



I like how you have to throw personal insults in every chance you get.
Anyways I understand there could be blobs of multi fleet pirates. Okay fine, I and 3 friends bring Battleships outfitted to pop frigates like cheap party balloons. I don't think you're understanding how limiting it is to be restricted to only frigates as a pirate.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

the only turnover of ships that will happen will be the miners, mission runners, and any anti-pirate stupid enough to engage the multiple-fleet blobs. then missions and mining will still be unprotected (especially with the anti-pirates now dead) against the blobs so belts and mission deadspaces be deserted as a result, just like low sec. great idea... Rolling Eyes



So I guess it's impossible to fight a few blobs of frigates which are confined out of stations/gates. I had no idea high sec players were so defenseless.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

right 'cause pirates never roam huh? with so many pirates roaming, u'll be lucky if u can even stay for 5 minutes in a belt/deadspace, assuming u don't get ganked before then.



Exactly, they have to keep roaming. So hopefully any pirates are doing quick hit and runs and moving on. Means if I survived an attack or I know they are there I don't have to wait long before risking getting some sweet sweet golden omber I can't get in .8.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

those options already exist atm. all u want is to extend low sec pirating to de-populate high sec of all producers.



That's not at all what I want. I am a high sec producer. Maybe I want less one man with 3 account corps being as competitive as a small tight knit corp that knows how to defend itself vs frigs.

Originally by: Anna Lifera

1. because this is a sandbox, not low sec, low sec, and more low sec.
2. because this isn't "good vs evil", it's everyone vs everyone



Actually I think you're wrong there. Maybe it can be anyone vs anyone but good vs bad is all relative. So if you want to knit pick that go right ahead. If you need me to be 100% correct in my definitions then fine it's "High sec non pirates" vs "High sec pirates". Which currently is "High sec miners/indies" vs "suicide gankers".

Anyways that's the last I'll really say on this as it's beyond the scope of the OP. I do agree with removing the insurance on suicide gankers but that fix alone doesn't fix other problems imho.

Right now low sec is rewarding if you can use it. It's just no one feels the risk is worth it. However I'm sure we can all agree going from relatively peaceful high sec into low sec is a slap in the face and can be a tall order for most small corps with little PvP experience. I'm just trying to think of ways to introduce players gradually to the enjoyable PvP aspect of the game. Maybe the answer is to add a "Mid sec" instead of my initial proposal. .1 - .3 can remain low, .4 - .6 can be mid with some pirate PvP in frigs and .7 and up can be safe everywhere including belts.

Maybe I'll post a proposal formally and see if getting the community brainstorming on this can help *shrug*. Although if everyone responds like Anna maybe I'm wasting my breath

Svarty II
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.07.18 01:14:00 - [206]
 

Seconded for common sense.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.18 01:19:00 - [207]
 

Originally by: Draek
Yes it's getting through. You don't like the idea and you think everyone will quit. I'm not suggesting chopping up .5 - 1.0 into pirate zones. .8 and up will be free of this. Hell you could confine my idea to .5 - .6 for all I care. I'm just brainstorming.


who would like the idea of more low sec when ppl can't buy any ships 'cause the market's empty? it makes no difference how this is confined--low sec is low sec. u just wanna remove high sec for more low sec, plain and simple, emptying more space and crowding yourself into the highest sec space, as well as the other carebears (assuming u r who u claim to be, which i really doubt). try coming up with a well-thought out proposal. this is the assembly hall, not features and ideas, u half-assing moron.

Originally by: Draek

I like how you have to throw personal insults in every chance you get.
Anyways I understand there could be blobs of multi fleet pirates. Okay fine, I and 3 friends bring Battleships outfitted to pop frigates like cheap party balloons. I don't think you're understanding how limiting it is to be restricted to only frigates as a pirate.


and u're not understanding how battleships can't kill anything they can't lock or track, let alone a blob of them. of course, u r a stupid carebear who knows absolutely nothing about pvp after all. that's why the insults r there.

Originally by: Draek
So I guess it's impossible to fight a few blobs of frigates which are confined out of stations/gates. I had no idea high sec players were so defenseless.


it is for u because news flash: it's not high sec anymore. and conversely, u're confined to gates and stations. u could step outside those areas if u don't mind getting farmed for killmails. great thinking again, moron.

Originally by: Draek

Exactly, they have to keep roaming. So hopefully any pirates are doing quick hit and runs and moving on. Means if I survived an attack or I know they are there I don't have to wait long before risking getting some sweet sweet golden omber I can't get in .8.


right because pirates never roam back? and those will be the only pirates that will ever come through the system? ******... Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Draek
That's not at all what I want. I am a high sec producer. Maybe I want less one man with 3 account corps being as competitive as a small tight knit corp that knows how to defend itself vs frigs.


YOU don't even know how to defend yourself against frigates. were u expecting to give your corpmates fail advice to pad your enemies' killboards? good job on being a fail ceo...

Originally by: Draek
Actually I think you're wrong there. Maybe it can be anyone vs anyone but good vs bad is all relative. So if you want to knit pick that go right ahead. If you need me to be 100% correct in my definitions then fine it's "High sec non pirates" vs "High sec pirates". Which currently is "High sec miners/indies" vs "suicide gankers".


just because u're not shooting someone, doesn't mean u're not competing against them, whether it's zapping the same asteroid or market sales. of course, someone like u obviously doesn't have the mental capacity to grasp this concept.

Draek
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.18 01:37:00 - [208]
 

Alright Anna enough.

Battleships can lock and track frigates if they use the right mods/guns. I'm suprised you didn't know that. I'm happy to have informed you.

Yes I know you can theory craft a fight where I die horribly to your carefully crafted counter. Everything in Eve can be countered. So let's not get into that.

Anyways there is no point arguing any further as you are simply presenting worst case scenarios in which the opposing side can't fight back despite having access to ships with 200x the HP and the ability to field more guns per ship while having the law on their side. If people can't handle this even in high sec a little then I doubt CCP can do anything to entice people further to low sec. Since the people you describe fighting the pirates can't organize, fight back, play smart or manage the risk. You must have a very low opinion of most the players in Eve.

My original post was that I just wanted some constructive criticism to hash the idea out and that includes adding/changing/deleting parts of it.

If you can't reply without getting your back up and without name calling then fine. Go find someone else to troll.

Quit wasting my time.

- Draek

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.18 01:41:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: Draek
Anyways that's the last I'll really say on this as it's beyond the scope of the OP. I do agree with removing the insurance on suicide gankers but that fix alone doesn't fix other problems imho.


here's an idea--try coming up with a well-thought out proposal instead of a ******ed, half-assed idea that fails so much, u can't even back it up at all. Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Draek
Right now low sec is rewarding if you can use it. It's just no one feels the risk is worth it. However I'm sure we can all agree going from relatively peaceful high sec into low sec is a slap in the face and can be a tall order for most small corps with little PvP experience. I'm just trying to think of ways to introduce players gradually to the enjoyable PvP aspect of the game. Maybe the answer is to add a "Mid sec" instead of my initial proposal. .1 - .3 can remain low, .4 - .6 can be mid with some pirate PvP in frigs and .7 and up can be safe everywhere including belts.


then instead of crying so much to nerf suicide ganking, escape it by going into low sec if u think it's really worth it. actually do something about it for once instead of throwing out stupid, spontaneous ideas in the assembly hall. Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Draek
Maybe I'll post a proposal formally and see if getting the community brainstorming on this can help *shrug*. Although if everyone responds like Anna maybe I'm wasting my breath


oh no u're not wasting your breath at all because in retrospect, it's very entertaining watching stupid carebears like u fail repeatedly with your crap that u call proposals. so by all means, continue. Laughing

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.18 01:59:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: Draek
Alright Anna enough.

Battleships can lock and track frigates if they use the right mods/guns. I'm suprised you didn't know that. I'm happy to have informed you.

Yes I know you can theory craft a fight where I die horribly to your carefully crafted counter. Everything in Eve can be countered. So let's not get into that.


oh i'm sry--r u running out of half-assed ideas to throw out or do u have nothing left to defend your current ones? funny how u're already throwing out a proposed counter, yet u supposedly don't want to theorycraft. maybe u just don't want another refute 'cause u can't even handle forums? so go ahead, at the risk of being a ******, go ahead and prove your fit that will counter a frigate blob, unless u affirm that u know absolutely nothing about pvp or eve in general.

Originally by: Draek
Anyways there is no point arguing any further as you are simply presenting worst case scenarios in which the opposing side can't fight back despite having access to ships with 200x the HP and the ability to field more guns per ship while having the law on their side. If people can't handle this even in high sec a little then I doubt CCP can do anything to entice people further to low sec. Since the people you describe fighting the pirates can't organize, fight back, play smart or manage the risk. You must have a very low opinion of most the players in Eve.


news flash for your stupid ignorant carebear brain: Shocked
1. most of the players in eve r pirates.
2. the bolded part describes the stupid carebears (aka yourself) that refuse to learn from their mistakes and adapt and expect ccp to hold their hand. u ppl r the ones *****ing and crying about this. like u said, ccp can't help u if u won't help yourself.

Originally by: Draek
My original post was that I just wanted some constructive criticism to hash the idea out and that includes adding/changing/deleting parts of it.


for the millionth time, this is the assembly hall, NOT features and ideas. wow... Shocked

Originally by: Draek
If you can't reply without getting your back up and without name calling then fine. Go find someone else to troll.

Quit wasting my time.

- Draek


u brought this on yourself when u gave half-assed ideas in the assembly hall and expected no one to counter your ******ed, half-assed arguments. if anyone's wasting your time, it's u for failing even more than your fail ideas. Rolling Eyes


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : 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