open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Anti-Money Laundering Laws
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

Author Topic

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.09 11:27:00 - [121]
 

Originally by: Danika Princip
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
and standings (with your pirate corp) changes for bad->good transfers. (you get a sec status boost if you donate to a good toon and you are a pirate, but you may lose standing with your corp. (admittedly this is only a thought at this point and probably not the best way to handle this)



What does this mean? Do you mean i lose standings with pirate corps I might mission with, or do you mean I lose standings with the player run corp i'm a member of?

Also, how and why does this affect people like me who live in nullsec? I'm twenty jumps from concord, why should they care who I send money to?


That is a good point. I thought at first that it would only apply to NPC corp standings through some formula akin to how your faction standings are modified when you do enough missions for a corp in the faction or against it. Except that we take for a pirate faction all corps which are NPC rats. (Guristas, Bloods, angels, sanshas)

The point of null sec is a valid point. At first I thought that maybe all transactions would be 'monitored' but it goes against the nature of free-4-all in null sec, as somebody pointed out. So I think that if the characters have a home system that is not in EmpSpace, then this penalty should not apply.



Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.09 11:50:00 - [122]
 

Originally by: Imigo Montoya
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
I don't follow how making sec status rules consistent automatically make people pvp less. That it may just change the way the economy of piracy a bit, but in my opinion, if pirates are only viable if funded by carebear alts, then the profession needs some fixing on its own.


Quote:

I don't follow how current security status rules are inconsistent. If they are, what's inconsistent about them? In fact, I'd say that having a pirate (as defined by security status) paying a law abiding character to gain sec status would also be "inconsistent". Why would the pirate be less of a pirate simply by being involved with a law abiding citizen? Shouldn't the law abiding citizen just take a sec status hit for receiving "dirty money"?


Hmm, yes perhaps just the one sided hit for the law abiding citizen would be enough. My thought was that pirates can earn back status by 'donating' to good causes and corps, but I think this would be a bad idea.
Quote:

To clarify my point, the proposal wouldn't directly make people PvP less, but it would be a further discouragement to losing security status, thereby providing a disincentive to go around blowing up ships.


Not sure I agree with you here, why would it discourage anyone to losing status? A pirate is going to be a pirate regardless of these rules, and transferring money between pirates (neg status to other neg status players) have no penalty. What this rule would reflect is the real fact that if you are funding pirates, then you are becoming a pirate in the process... (albeit slowly).
Quote:

I have plenty of alts with which I transfer cash back and forward between. Most are trade alts, but some are PvP alts. This proposal would discourage me from engaging in piracy with any of my alts (currently I almost exclusively fight in nullsec anyway, so security status isn't an issue) because it would just cause a chain reaction that would hamper my regular business. It just makes a big PitA (like PI) for no good reason (unlike PI).


So are you saying that without your trader alt, your pirate would not be able to sustain a regular source of income doing pirate things (like gank, hold for random, steal, and run missions for pirate corps?) If this is the case, then this is my point exactly. If this is true, then the pirate profession is gimped and needs fixing, (a proposal of how would be out of scope for this discussion)
Quote:

Which then begs the question - how would this proposal improve EVE's gameplay exactly? I propose that it would make for more convoluted empire rules that only serve to confuse (and add a platform to grief) new players.


Because I think that piracy or 'bad' professions should not be a meta game feature (make $$$ with a good alt, then transfer $$$ to a low sec alt to play bad boy for a day) but be a real part of the economy.

Incidentally, I think the new black market booster trade coming in incarna may make smugglers and pirates more of a REAL profession. A working bounty system would too.

So why is this loophole hurting the EVE universe? Well IMHO, and you are free to disagree,
1) It's hiding a problem with piracy profession, which is gimped, and CCP is avoiding fixing it. A pirate toon should be able to play pirate 100% without meta-help from a 'good' alt.
2) meta-games are an artificial factor in the economy, which sees money flowing not because of true supply and demand, but because players are just moving cash between 'good' and 'bad' alts, essentially allowing 'good' toons to commit crimes (like assassination) without any sec rating consequences. (that's the inconsistent part)
3) It gimps the bounty system. If there were sec penalties for moving money to an alt to kill someone, then you would have to resort to posting bounties on people if you want them dead, which creates a true market demand, competition, and jobs for 'bad' players! Which is good!

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.09 12:05:00 - [123]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 09/05/2011 12:12:42
The one topic that I am still struggling with is whether or not Nullsec players should be subject to the same rules. On one hand, CONCORD does not police null sec, and doing anything will not affect your security status. So a -10 pirate killing someone in nullsec, vs a 5.0 player in nullsec, killing somebody are treated no differently, and neither of them are considered to have committed any crimes. So we would want to preserve that 'spirit of the law' in nullsec.

The problem with locality is when is a player considered a 'null sec' player, and when are they considered an 'emp space' player? Clearly we would ideally want this rule to apply only to Empsec players. But how can we classify the player?

One choice is we can use the 'home system' of the player, which is where their med clone is located. This is clear cut, but allows for exploit by way of moving med clones around.

Another choice is to use the corp of the player. So what would make a corp 'good' or 'bad'? One idea is maybe make 'restrict isk transfers' be a choice that the CEO of the corp can set on/off. If set on, then isk Xfers to criminals would incur sec status penalties, if off then nothing would happen. So then why would any corp want to set this setting to 'ON' to restrict their members? We could incentivize the corp somehow, perhaps by way of lower taxes, or a tax rebate from CONCORD on all bounties collected (because they are 'compliant' to the CONCORD clean money xfer laws).

This way, carebear corps that enforce this level of financial reporting will have all members subject to the penalties, but the members in corp in general will make more isk; or a corp can choose NOT to report finance xfers of its members to CONCORD (pirate corps, or null sec corps), and there will be no penalties to isk xfers. I think that this half solution should keep most people in the universe happy, and achieve the goal of keeping the clean money earned by carebear or mining corps clean, while enforcing a more clear in-game (as opposed to meta-game) segregation between the 'good' and 'bad' professions in the game, and the respective parts they play in the economy. It also sets a good foundation to when CCP fleshes out the 'bad' professions more, with the black market changes and Incarna.

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2011.05.09 12:44:00 - [124]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren

Another choice is to use the corp of the player. So what would make a corp 'good' or 'bad'? One idea is maybe make 'restrict isk transfers' be a choice that the CEO of the corp can set on/off. If set on, then isk Xfers to criminals would incur sec status penalties, if off then nothing would happen. So then why would any corp want to set this setting to 'ON' to restrict their members? We could incentivize the corp somehow, perhaps by way of lower taxes, or a tax rebate from CONCORD on all bounties collected (because they are 'compliant' to the CONCORD clean money xfer laws).


  1. Earn bounties
  2. get rebate
  3. CEO changes corp settings
  4. transfer money
  5. CEO changes corp settings back


I think that this whole proposal would increase the learning curve at a time when CCP is trying to lessen it (CQ NPE rework).

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.09 14:43:00 - [125]
 

Originally by: Imigo Montoya

Lowsec may not entirely be not griefing, but it certainly is less griefing.

Highsec = place for people to hang out who don't really want to get into direct player combat, and has game mechanic protection for said people. Although combat is allowed to be initiated, there are very short sharp consequences for it (CONCORD).
Lowsec = place where combat is allowed by game mechanics, but with only limited consequences.
Nullsec = place where combat can happen by anybody for any reason with no game enforced consequences.

Therefore anybody choosing to enter lowsec (and nullsec even more so) is also choosing to go somewhere they can be shot at. Shooting at somebody who chooses to be in a place they can be shot at isn't really griefing.

Or maybe I'm just talking out my ass...


"less" griefing compared to high sec? explain how high sec is more griefing when there's stronger security around, security that punishes, not protect. if u cannot adapt to that, then that's your fault for taking high sec for granted as a wow-style sanctuary to hide behind on an alt. the only possible way this would be "griefing" to u is your alt flying an expensive carebearing ship, thinking high sec is 100% safe but here's the thing: since u choose to undock even in high sec, u chose to go somewhere u can be shot at so that's not griefing either.

so yes, u r talking out of your ass.

Originally by: Rented
Edited by: Rented on 09/05/2011 00:44:26
@The Baddie

1. If your reading comprehension is too low to have found the complete lists, I can not help you. Considering it makes no difference anyways, I don't know what you're smoking.

2. If you can't manage to recognize half a dozen pirates who took part in the same killmails, I can not help you. Ever wonder how they managed to get considerably more kills then the corp they belong to did? lol.

3.

On the top 10 corp/alliance list.

Highsec griefer corp kills - 462 (41.4%)
Pirate corp kills - 346 (31.0%)
Nullsec corp kills - 254 (22.8%)
Miltia corp kills - 53 (4.8%)

*yawn* Addition is hard!


it is for u when u still don't show your work because the burden of proof still falls on u. if u're mentally incapable of doing even that, then go back to whining some more.

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.05.09 22:56:00 - [126]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
So are you saying that without your trader alt, your pirate would not be able to sustain a regular source of income doing pirate things (like gank, hold for random, steal, and run missions for pirate corps?) If this is the case, then this is my point exactly. If this is true, then the pirate profession is gimped and needs fixing, (a proposal of how would be out of scope for this discussion)


No, that's not what I'm saying - I'm only commenting on my own personal choice, and what would be a PitA, not about whether an entire profession is economically viable or not.

My PvP alts are there for fun, not for profit. This is where I fundamentally disagree with the proposal - because it would make the PvP part of the game less fun. Simple as that.

BTW, while I am very much against your proposal I'd like to thank you for listening to feedback and providing reasonable counterpoints without misinterpreting anything that disagrees with you and throwing a tanty and getting insulting (ie Anna's posts). It's really quite refreshing.

Originally by: Anna Lifera
"less" griefing compared to high sec? explain how high sec is more griefing when there's stronger security around, security that punishes, not protect. if u cannot adapt to that, then that's your fault for taking high sec for granted as a wow-style sanctuary to hide behind on an alt. the only possible way this would be "griefing" to u is your alt flying an expensive carebearing ship, thinking high sec is 100% safe but here's the thing: since u choose to undock even in high sec, u chose to go somewhere u can be shot at so that's not griefing either.


Try not to misinterpret what I've said. I thought I quite clearly explained how shooting somebody in lower security space is less griefing, but for your benefit, I'll indulge.

Sure, the "place they can be shot at" includes Highsec, but there are as I said (usually) "very short sharp consequences for it (CONCORD)". There are "less" consequences (game mechanic enforced anyway) for shooting people in lower security space, therefore, shooting in lower security space is less griefing. I would argue that in nullsec, shooting somebody isn't griefing at all, it's just the PvP area of the game that you chose to be in and expect to be shot at (even by blues) and lose ships. So to explicitly clarify (*sigh*), when I said "place they can be shot at", I was also implicitly inferring the previously stated "with less consequences" part too.

Please note I never said anything about highsec being a "wow-like sanctuary" or "100% safe" (ie, you're presenting a strawman here).

Rented
Posted - 2011.05.09 23:39:00 - [127]
 

Meh, Anna is incapable of doing anything except misinterpret, you get used to it.

@Baddie
"Show your work" lol, I've no need to spell out the obvious, honestly I'd thought I had dumbed it down enough for you, do I need to explain how addition works or were you confused by the percentages? Why continue crying and demanding proof you apparently can't understand? I'm fairly sure there's not even a point to your QQ as amusing as it is, and if you're too mentally stagnant and/or inept at EVE to wrap your mind around a chart of 10 alliance/corps it's simply not my concern.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.10 05:51:00 - [128]
 

Originally by: Glyken Touchon
Originally by: Kaelie Onren

Another choice is to use the corp of the player. So what would make a corp 'good' or 'bad'? One idea is maybe make 'restrict isk transfers' be a choice that the CEO of the corp can set on/off. If set on, then isk Xfers to criminals would incur sec status penalties, if off then nothing would happen. So then why would any corp want to set this setting to 'ON' to restrict their members? We could incentivize the corp somehow, perhaps by way of lower taxes, or a tax rebate from CONCORD on all bounties collected (because they are 'compliant' to the CONCORD clean money xfer laws).


  1. Earn bounties
  2. get rebate
  3. CEO changes corp settings
  4. transfer money
  5. CEO changes corp settings back


I think that this whole proposal would increase the learning curve at a time when CCP is trying to lessen it (CQ NPE rework).


I envision this setting be permanant part of the Corp, like its name, or at the very least, something where changes will take a day to take effect, like quitting a corp. Or have a number of times per year it can be changed, like attributes.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.10 06:45:00 - [129]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 10/05/2011 06:45:56
Originally by: Imigo MontoyaBTW
, while I am very much against your proposal I'd like to thank you for listening to feedback and providing reasonable counterpoints without misinterpreting anything that disagrees with you and throwing a tanty and getting insulting (ie Anna's posts). It's really quite refreshing.


Thanks to you (and others) as well! Although we disagree on the underlying philosophy of the use of good/bad professions as a meta-game being valid or not, it's nice to have a clear and reasoned discussion as opposed to some other (certain CSM) comments which were harsh and denegrating without justification.


Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.10 15:47:00 - [130]
 

Edited by: Anna Lifera on 10/05/2011 16:53:37
Originally by: Imigo Montoya

No, that's not what I'm saying - I'm only commenting on my own personal choice, and what would be a PitA, not about whether an entire profession is economically viable or not.

My PvP alts are there for fun, not for profit. This is where I fundamentally disagree with the proposal - because it would make the PvP part of the game less fun. Simple as that.

BTW, while I am very much against your proposal I'd like to thank you for listening to feedback and providing reasonable counterpoints without misinterpreting anything that disagrees with you and throwing a tanty and getting insulting (ie Anna's posts). It's really quite refreshing.


1. economic viability and pain in the ass r pretty much one and the same here. and if it's a pain in the ass and not viable on its own, then it should die out. look at low sec: farmed to extinction (pain in the ass to do anything non-pvp-wise so not economically viable) and yet the remaining -10s can't sustain themselves either without high sec alts.
2. where's this "fun"? since u'd rather waste all that time camping a gate all day or avoiding targets u might risk losing to instead of spending the time ratting the sec back up and generating a little income to help sustain what u do, u pretty much brought that on yourself; and as a result of that, not only is low sec deserted but the -10s have to desert as well sooner or later because they don't want to make the effort to generate more income via ratting, something they'll have to end up doing anyway. pretty self-defeating.
3. if it's so "insulting" to u, then try to think outside your perspective for once and maybe u won't be "insulted". my proposal just encourages u to rat back up above -5 to give the prey more breathing room to actually do something in low sec, no more, no less. if u're too lazy to do even that, go to 0.0 or learn to sustain yourself without hiding behind an alt in high sec.

Originally by: Imogo Montoya


Try not to misinterpret what I've said. I thought I quite clearly explained how shooting somebody in lower security space is less griefing, but for your benefit, I'll indulge.

Sure, the "place they can be shot at" includes Highsec, but there are as I said (usually) "very short sharp consequences for it (CONCORD)". There are "less" consequences (game mechanic enforced anyway) for shooting people in lower security space, therefore, shooting in lower security space is less griefing. I would argue that in nullsec, shooting somebody isn't griefing at all, it's just the PvP area of the game that you chose to be in and expect to be shot at (even by blues) and lose ships. So to explicitly clarify (*sigh*), when I said "place they can be shot at", I was also implicitly inferring the previously stated "with less consequences" part too.

Please note I never said anything about highsec being a "wow-like sanctuary" or "100% safe" (ie, you're presenting a strawman here).


this is the basis for what u feel to be "insults": because once again, it's only from your flawed, myopic and selfish point of view, not anyone else's. try to look at this from someone else's eyes or the big picture for once. if low sec is less griefing than high sec then why is it so deserted, even by -10s who have to go back to their high sec alts sooner or later? because the lack of concord and ppl's reaction to that only reinforces that low sec would grief more and *gasp* that's why the -10s hide behind their high sec alts in the first place. derp. Rolling Eyes so how is high sec any more griefing when u choose to hide behind high sec alts under concord just to sustain yourself? it all depends on whether u're killmail-whoring or hiding behind your high sec alt at the time. do u get it now because a strawman is nothing compared to your own flawed, myopic and selfish point of view. oh and if u feel u got "insulted" again, wise up or deal with it.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.10 16:10:00 - [131]
 

Originally by: Rented
Meh, Anna is incapable of doing anything except misinterpret, you get used to it.

@Baddie
"Show your work" lol, I've no need to spell out the obvious, honestly I'd thought I had dumbed it down enough for you, do I need to explain how addition works or were you confused by the percentages? Why continue crying and demanding proof you apparently can't understand? I'm fairly sure there's not even a point to your QQ as amusing as it is, and if you're too mentally stagnant and/or inept at EVE to wrap your mind around a chart of 10 alliance/corps it's simply not my concern.


translation: "these r my numbers and u can't question me 'cause i said so." it's u who doesn't understand that anyone can pull numbers out of their ass, not just u, so thx for that sorry excuse that u call "trying". but hey, while u're at it, why don't u go back to whining some more about how the proposal "griefs" the hell out of u 'cause u can't handle consequences? after all, that is what this thread is about or did u go off on your own tangent 'cause u made yourself look even worse whining about it? so plz continue. Laughing

Rented
Posted - 2011.05.11 01:02:00 - [132]
 

Oh, you find numbers confusing? This explains alot.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.11 02:14:00 - [133]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 11/05/2011 04:46:19
I actually agree with Anna in principle, though I cannot corroborate her facts on low-sec (as I have never personally lived there). But in the occasions that I have been in lowsec, they were deserted, except for the factional war zone in low sec.

So if the situation she is referring to exists, then I agree, it needs to be fixed.

Bottom line, every ecosystem (and economy) needs a balance of all participants. If one side out weighs another, the system eventually dies. Predators like lions survive because they only kill what they can eat, and only when they are good enough hunters to do so. Prey like antelope survive as a species because they have the numbers to do so.

If you allow PvPers unchecked open season on haulers and indies, then you risk killing them all off, starving yourselves of a steady income and living. Now this eventually forces everyone in this game to have both a pvp alt, AND a carebear alt in order to 'survive' as a team (metagaming!) which some on this thread argue is the POINT of EVE. But I don't think it needs to be. I think that CCP can get a LOT more players into this game if you allow people the freedom to (economically, viably) choose to play completely in the space of "farming" or "rogues", without mixing the two in order to survive. Why do you think there are so few girls in this game? Because this forced economic necessity to be a fighter in an alt is a turn off for us. Free the people from the burden of having to defend themselves if they just want to play a business mogul, or a hauler, or a ratter. Yes, this opens up the game to "farmville" players, and I'm sure our 'manly man' CSMs won't have any of that. But I think if they really *thought* about it, adding more people in EVE only helps the game, lines CCPs pockets and makes one of the best virtual micro-economies even better by ensuring future sustained growth. And there will still be plenty of places in the universe to 'be a guy'. Wink

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.11 15:33:00 - [134]
 

Originally by: Rented
Oh, you find numbers confusing? This explains alot.


Originally by: Anna Lifera
translation: "these r my numbers and u can't question me 'cause i said so." it's u who doesn't understand that anyone can pull numbers out of their ass, not just u, so thx for that sorry excuse that u call "trying". but hey, while u're at it, why don't u go back to whining some more about how the proposal "griefs" the hell out of u 'cause u can't handle consequences? after all, that is what this thread is about or did u go off on your own tangent 'cause u made yourself look even worse whining about it? so plz continue.

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.05.11 15:57:00 - [135]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera
Originally by: Rented
Oh, you find numbers confusing? This explains alot.


Originally by: Anna Lifera
translation: "these r my numbers and u can't question me 'cause i said so." it's u who doesn't understand that anyone can pull numbers out of their ass, not just u, so thx for that sorry excuse that u call "trying". but hey, while u're at it, why don't u go back to whining some more about how the proposal "griefs" the hell out of u 'cause u can't handle consequences? after all, that is what this thread is about or did u go off on your own tangent 'cause u made yourself look even worse whining about it? so plz continue.



You were spoon fed the figures and thier source. it's not his fault you have a room temperature IQ and cannot comprehend them.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.12 17:11:00 - [136]
 

Originally by: Danika Princip

You were spoon fed the figures and thier source. it's not his fault you have a room temperature IQ and cannot comprehend them.


Originally by: Anna Lifera
translation: "these r my numbers and u can't question me 'cause i said so." it's u who doesn't understand that anyone can pull numbers out of their ass, not just u, so thx for that sorry excuse that u call "trying". but hey, while u're at it, why don't u go back to whining some more about how the proposal "griefs" the hell out of u 'cause u can't handle consequences? after all, that is what this thread is about or did u go off on your own tangent 'cause u made yourself look even worse whining about it? so plz continue.

Rented
Posted - 2011.05.12 18:16:00 - [137]
 

Originally by: Anna Lifera
translation: "these r my numbers and u can't question me 'cause i said so." it's u who doesn't understand that anyone can pull numbers out of their ass, not just u, so thx for that sorry excuse that u call "trying". but hey, while u're at it, why don't u go back to whining some more about how the proposal "griefs" the hell out of u 'cause u can't handle consequences? after all, that is what this thread is about or did u go off on your own tangent 'cause u made yourself look even worse whining about it? so plz continue.


Originally by: Rented
Oh, you find numbers confusing? This explains alot.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.13 13:24:00 - [138]
 

Edited by: Anna Lifera on 13/05/2011 13:32:28
Originally by: Rented
Oh, you find numbers confusing? This explains alot.


both your trolling helps keeping this thread and my revision proposal bumped. and if u can keep repeating what each other said for long enough, then this thread will reach 500 so plz continue. Very Happy

Rented
Posted - 2011.05.14 00:15:00 - [139]
 

I might actually be worried about that aside from the overwhelming not-support you've recieved, the general crappiness of your proposal, and that I wouldn't care if it did. As I said previously, pink megathrons garner more support, I'm not concerned.

That and I finally gave in to temptation and looked up your killboard deaths and gained the very unprofound understanding of why you hate pirates so much, near as I can tell you attempted (repeatedly) ratting in very bad places with very bad fits. Among my favorites were a stealth bomber fitted with warp stabs and a megathron with a large repper but no resistances, there were others... and everyone gets a couple newbie deaths, but seriously... You really can't go blaming the pirates for your mistakes, it's part of the game. That or you can build up an irrational hate of pirates, fly into a state of permanent rage, and take up the hobby of suiciding mining ships with battleships(lol?) as you seem to have done.

Mocam
Posted - 2011.05.14 04:17:00 - [140]
 

Lots of little problems with it and, without massive reworking of many game mechanics, very easy to bypass.

I put 1 trit on the market for 1 billion ISK. My alt buys it. I use contracts. So on and so forth.

If you try and prevent this, then you block "general" buying and selling being as the buyers, sellers and contract types would then have to specify who can and cannot accept their orders - BY sec status. Talk about overly complicating the market and contracts systems.

If you did do all this reworking - now I make a bunch of trial accounts, use "disposable" alts or what not then trade with the "new char" and get my -10 his sec status back without spending large chunks of time ratting.

Let's not make things easier for those who do get their sec status trashed via some transfer mechanism so they can buy their way out of trashed sec status.

Deja Thoris
Invicta.
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2011.05.14 12:20:00 - [141]
 

Since you are thrilled to have so many replies, I'll add mine.

It's a bad idea, addressing a problem that doesn't exist and the solutions to address it are onerus to the programmers and easy to circumvent.

In short, no matter how many essays you write debating the finer points, your best case scenario is to end up with a turd wrapped in shiny paper. If presenting this idea could teach you one lesson, it should be that when its been proven to you beyond reasonable doubt that it is a poor idea, you should drop it and move on.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:06:00 - [142]
 

Edited by: Anna Lifera on 14/05/2011 16:31:45
Originally by: Rented
I might actually be worried about that aside from the overwhelming not-support you've recieved, the general crappiness of your proposal, and that I wouldn't care if it did. As I said previously, pink megathrons garner more support, I'm not concerned.

That and I finally gave in to temptation and looked up your killboard deaths and gained the very unprofound understanding of why you hate pirates so much, near as I can tell you attempted (repeatedly) ratting in very bad places with very bad fits. Among my favorites were a stealth bomber fitted with warp stabs and a megathron with a large repper but no resistances, there were others... and everyone gets a couple newbie deaths, but seriously... You really can't go blaming the pirates for your mistakes, it's part of the game. That or you can build up an irrational hate of pirates, fly into a state of permanent rage, and take up the hobby of suiciding mining ships with battleships(lol?) as you seem to have done.


1. and how long ago did these deaths happen? because unlike me, u've never set foot outside high sec for a long time; looks like u're the one who let them scare u out.
2. the difference is i'm not scared to take risk, unlike u. i have more than 10 times the kills u have, even though i inevitably have more losses; of course, that's part of the game as well. u obviously wouldn't know it since u're too scared to take a loss, judging from your own killboard. might wanna finally find the courage to get out of high sec; maybe then u'll have a reason to talk about your own killboard instead of crying about someone else's.
3. u wanna compare lol losses? let's see, u lost a ratting cruiser, battlecruiser, oh and my favorite? u lost an assault frigate to a mining ship in high sec; and that one was pretty recent. Laughing
4. fyi, suicide ganking is pvp, just like low sec pirating, especially when it's the same person's alt being ganked. not surprising that u can't comprehend the simple concept of gathering intel; u don't even understand the purpose behind a warp core stabilizer fitted stealth bomber and your experience with pvp only involves camping high sec trade hubs with a fleet because u're mentally incapable of anything else and so u can't handle any less safety than that.

anything else u wanna whine about? in either case, plz continue crying about killboards because yours is even worse and u know it, despite a fleet babysitting u in high sec. Laughing

Originally by: Mocam

...If you did do all this reworking - now I make a bunch of trial accounts, use "disposable" alts or what not then trade with the "new char" and get my -10 his sec status back without spending large chunks of time ratting.


revision: lowest sec status applies to every alt in the account and trading them between accounts makes both accounts take the same sec hit.

even though they still have to continuously spend real money to sustain this (which is good for ccp anyway), thx for bringing that up.

Originally by: Deja Thoris
Since you are thrilled to have so many replies, I'll add mine.

It's a bad idea, addressing a problem that doesn't exist and the solutions to address it are onerus to the programmers and easy to circumvent.

In short, no matter how many essays you write debating the finer points, your best case scenario is to end up with a turd wrapped in shiny paper. If presenting this idea could teach you one lesson, it should be that when its been proven to you beyond reasonable doubt that it is a poor idea, you should drop it and move on.


last time i checked, suicide ganking isn't a problem either but apparently, the -10s can't handle even the slightest risk to themselves.

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:43:00 - [143]
 

Anna, I think you need to go take your meds.

Rented
Posted - 2011.05.14 17:33:00 - [144]
 

Edited by: Rented on 14/05/2011 17:58:43
Originally by: Anna Lifera
1. and how long ago did these deaths happen? because unlike me, u've never set foot outside high sec for a long time; looks like u're the one who let them scare u out.
2. the difference is i'm not scared to take risk, unlike u. i have more than 10 times the kills u have, even though i inevitably have more losses; of course, that's part of the game as well. u obviously wouldn't know it since u're too scared to take a loss, judging from your own killboard. might wanna finally find the courage to get out of high sec; maybe then u'll have a reason to talk about your own killboard instead of crying about someone else's.
3. u wanna compare lol losses? let's see, u lost a ratting cruiser, battlecruiser, oh and my favorite? u lost an assault frigate to a mining ship in high sec; and that one was pretty recent. Laughing
4. fyi, suicide ganking is pvp, just like low sec pirating, especially when it's the same person's alt being ganked. not surprising that u can't comprehend the simple concept of gathering intel; u don't even understand the purpose behind a warp core stabilizer fitted stealth bomber and your experience with pvp only involves camping high sec trade hubs with a fleet because u're mentally incapable of anything else and so u can't handle any less safety than that.

anything else u wanna whine about? in either case, plz continue crying about killboards because yours is even worse and u know it, despite a fleet babysitting u in high sec. Laughing



1. I've gone outside highsec, not really done much though, mostly wormholes really and none of this is surprising considering I'm into industry.
2. It is amusing how according to you I'm both scared to pvp AND a murderous -10 in disguise, make up your mind lol.
3. Cruiser; shopping in lowsec, happens(I find it disturbing however that you see a not-fit cruiser as a ratting cruiser). Battlecruiser; this is my favorite death ever, took the guy 5 alts and 3 hours to take my completely disabled but not-webbed low skilled myrm down, I was lol'ing the whole time, would do again. Assault frigate; yeah, the 'mining cruiser' was anti-frigate fitted, gave it a try, it was close, would do again. There, I talked about my own killboard, but yours is moar funny.
4. Fyi, you don't have to use a battleship to gank mining ships in 0.5... you do so because you're awful. Warp core stabs LOLOLOLOLOL.
Fyi, you realize you've now
- claimed I'm obviously a self-interested murderous -10 in disguise opposing your ideas to protect myself
- claimed I'm afraid to PVP
- claimed I camp trade hubs with a fleet
- failed to realize the above are mutually exclusive


Isn't it strange how I'm barely active in PVP and I'm often in a trade hub... if only there were a profession to explain this behaviour... oh wait.... there is, durrrrrrrrrrr. Oh well, it will forever remain a mystery to those who suffer from being braindead, these may even be the same people who think warp stabs for combat are good somehow, or who use battleships in suicide ganks on mining ships in 0.5. Perhaps I too should should lemming crappy fits into low and null over, and over, and over, and over again to become a PVP pro like you. Now after running all the crappiest fits I could think of to their deaths (repeatedly), I'd better waste billions of isk using battleships for suicide ganks that cruisers can easily pull off, like a baddie who doesn't know what they're doing. Perhaps after I've done these things I'll be a PVP pro (and awful) like you.

I also like long walks on the beach, puppies, and butterflies.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.15 07:10:00 - [145]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 15/05/2011 07:10:49
okay, steering the discussion back to the original topic and proposal, I'd like to post to consideration a potential fix to the "contract 1 trit for cash" loophole.

What if the the price for contracting to private toons were not fixed at 10,000 if the parties involved were of different sides of the law? Instead they will be scaled up in proportion to how far away each of them are on the sec scale from each other? (exactly what the proposition is for the transferring of money itself.) Simple and elegant fix to that problem. Not to mention its consistent, for if we are to start 'taxing' cross secstatus isk transfers, then why not private contracts as well?

So the next thing someone will point out is what about public contracts? No, we will not put fees on that. What will stop this being a loophole then? Nothing really, but putting a public contract for 1trit for 1bil isk is putting the criminal at risk of losing lots of isk. It's sufficient deterrent that most won't bother, and hopefully we keep the flow of clean money in the clean economy separate from the money gotten through greifing means.

economists will love this, because they will more accurately be able to track the money flows on either side, thus have better visibilty in which part of the economy needs more dev love.

Keep in mind, despite many people misunderstanding the point of my (original) proposal, this is NOT a greifer/ganker nerf request. This is a request for regulation of the money flows so that sec status penalty system is consistent and visible (to the devs), and an attempt at making piracy a self sustaining part of the economy and not a shadow meta-gaming market.

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.05.15 11:54:00 - [146]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren

Keep in mind, despite many people misunderstanding the point of my (original) proposal, this is NOT a greifer/ganker nerf request. This is a request for regulation of the money flows so that sec status penalty system is consistent and visible (to the devs), and an attempt at making piracy a self sustaining part of the economy and not a shadow meta-gaming market.



And you would do this by nerfing 'griefers' (I don't think that word means what you think it means) by banning them from using the market, using contracts etc etc.

This is not needed by any stretch of the imagination. it is a terrible, terrible idea, and it would take an hour at most for it's intended target to figure out exactly how to get around it. You'd only end up ****ing off the casual crowd, not the hardcore -10 all lowsec all the time pirates.

Not being able to enter highsec is enough of a punishment. We don't need layer upon layer of overcomplicated, completely unnecessary stuff like this thrown in on top of it.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.15 12:38:00 - [147]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 15/05/2011 12:39:01
Who said anything about banning?

It's not nerfing anymore than tweaking insurance payouts was a 'nerf'. It's a tax. If you are moving mony between a -1 to a +1, its just a 2% tax. Now if you think that's too severe a measure, please do explain.

Maybe I shouldn't use the term 'griefer'. It seems to carry with it too much meaning associated with people who deliberately want to make others lives difficult. I want to stop the good<->bad toon metagaming exploitation of the sec status system.
You say making it hard for them to come into high sec is 'bad enough' but that only applies to <-5 status toons. Why do -5<x<0 toons get off scotch free? In your view do you think they should? With these changes, a good toon moving 100mil over to his gank toon will pay ~5% tax on the transfer. I think that is a completely reasonable deterrent. (we can tune the exact %s) but the point is that they should be taxed. It's the cost of laundering your isk. If you don't want to pay it, then get your rich pirate friends to fund your ganking. Not your own indy alt.

Anna Lifera
6....
HAWK Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.15 16:37:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: Danika Princip
Anna, I think you need to go take your meds.


Originally by: Anna Lifera
both your trolling helps keeping this thread and my revision proposal bumped. and if u can keep repeating what each other said for long enough, then this thread will reach 500 so plz continue.


Originally by: Rented

1. I've gone outside highsec, not really done much though, mostly wormholes really and none of this is surprising considering I'm into industry.
2. It is amusing how according to you I'm both scared to pvp AND a murderous -10 in disguise, make up your mind lol.
3. Cruiser; shopping in lowsec, happens(I find it disturbing however that you see a not-fit cruiser as a ratting cruiser). Battlecruiser; this is my favorite death ever, took the guy 5 alts and 3 hours to take my completely disabled but not-webbed low skilled myrm down, I was lol'ing the whole time, would do again. Assault frigate; yeah, the 'mining cruiser' was anti-frigate fitted, gave it a try, it was close, would do again. There, I talked about my own killboard, but yours is moar funny.
4. Fyi, you don't have to use a battleship to gank mining ships in 0.5... you do so because you're awful. Warp core stabs LOLOLOLOLOL.
Fyi, you realize you've now
- claimed I'm obviously a self-interested murderous -10 in disguise opposing your ideas to protect myself
- claimed I'm afraid to PVP
- claimed I camp trade hubs with a fleet
- failed to realize the above are mutually exclusive


Isn't it strange how I'm barely active in PVP and I'm often in a trade hub... if only there were a profession to explain this behaviour... oh wait.... there is, durrrrrrrrrrr...


1. i can see why u've stuck with industry, or to be more accurate, u've shown why; u ARE scared to pvp.
2. i've dispersed 0.0 gate camps as soon as they see 1 bomber nearby just because they can't handle a possible loss. and i've had low sec pirates docked and safespotted just because they knew i wasn't a carebear from their exhumer loss. so yes, they r -10s and at the same time, scared to pvp, just like u. what have u done? besides a few easy ganks, nothing really.
3. "shopping in low sec"...and in a cruiser too and u're calling someone else a baddie. Rolling Eyes as for your battlecruiser loss, there were only 3 involved so l2count--it helps with adding so u wouldn't have to pull numbers out of your ass like before. as for anti-frig fit kills, take a closer look at my killboard. it may take u a while to scroll through kills u'll never get, but it's there on more than one occasion; perfect for pirate wannabes like u who think u've got a guaranteed easy gank. and what difference does it make if your battlecruiser loss took 23 hours or 23 seconds? either way, u still lost it, only it's even worse in your case because instead of self-destructing, u chose to wait out those 3 hours like an idiot and still managed to pad someone else's killboard. so looking at your killboard, when will u do it again? at this rate, oh that's right--never.
4. and u don't have to hide behind a fleet to get killmails--oh wait, u do have to because that's why u're into industry; u're awful. Laughing

as for mutually exclusive, feel free to refer to #2. as for the trade hub camping, it can be done with high sec chars as well. glad to discover the existence of alts for u.

it's a profession that u've been scared into because u're scared to pvp, especially without a fleet to hide behind; grats. and that's from your crappy low sec ships and fits; in fact, that 3 hour loss of yours would've been prevented with the same warp core stabilizers u lol about, since u're too stupid and incapable of taking a loss to self-destruct. epic fail. so here u r back in high sec so go ahead; suicide gank an exhumer with a cruiser and see how that works out for u. and if u can't afford throwaway cruisers, let alone billions as a self-proclaimed industrialist, then that makes u a baddie industrialist too. Laughing

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.05.15 16:42:00 - [149]
 

Anna, can you do me a favour?

Since you rewrite the proposal when we find a way around it, can you go through this thread and give us a summary of the changes you would like to see made to ensure this proposal works they way you want it to?

Rented
Posted - 2011.05.16 00:04:00 - [150]
 

Edited by: Rented on 16/05/2011 03:10:16
1. Yes, because industry is obviously something that isn't a core part of the game, after all who needs ships, mods, and equipment? The true pro PVPers like you can do without, if only you could fit warp stabs on your pod.
2. Yes, people run in fear because you do really fail ganks on exhumers with battleships.... yeah... ITS ON THE INTERNET IT MUST BE TRUE!
3. I still shop in lowsec. Obviously there's NO POSSIBLE WAY more accounts could be involved in a kill then showed on the killmail, NOWAI!!! You speak almost as if I care O_o.
4. Shame on me for being into industry SHAME! Its not as if its a perfectly valid thing to do or anything. HOW DARE I PLAY EVE HOW THE CRAP I FEEL LIKE?! HOW DARE I!? Durr.

Quote:
as for mutually exclusive, feel free to refer to #2.

Quote:
2. i've dispersed 0.0 gate camps as soon as they see 1 bomber nearby just because they can't handle a possible loss. and i've had low sec pirates docked and safespotted just because they knew i wasn't a carebear from their exhumer loss. so yes, they r -10s and at the same time, scared to pvp, just like u. what have u done? besides a few easy ganks, nothing really.

I don't think words mean what you think they mean. Them fearsome exhumer suicides obviously display your mighty pvp prowess to the enemy, run and hide! Yes, people run in fear because you suicided exhumers... uh... that's not deluded at all, rite?

And warp core stabs.... lololololololol.

Quote:
so go ahead; suicide gank an exhumer with a cruiser and see how that works out for u


Brutix tops. You even use battleships for mackinaws ... *facepalm*... and yes they can be done by cruiser no problem. Perhaps you need to L2overload? Unless you happen to be continually running across the most heavily tanked ultra-paranoid miners of all time... which you aren't, and even if you were, L2scout scrub.

If griefers ever got embarrassed, they'd be embarrassed of you.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

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