open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Ship Crews (They're Here, They're Real, get Over it)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 : last (16)

Author Topic

Zirse
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2010.03.30 16:37:00 - [361]
 

Originally by: Ahz
Edited by: Ahz on 28/03/2010 21:47:30
This topic has come up a couple of times. I'm sure that CCP is going to have to address the idea of ship's crews at some point but I thought I'd offer this suggestion. First a complaint:

Ideas...





I like this idea, but with a few adjustments.

First of all, only replace the the hard-wirings / pirate implants. The regular attribute implants should remain in game.

Secondly, instead of having ship crews automatically escape with you and make it into your pod, have them only bail on the ship if you give the command. (Through a right-click option.) When they eject they will rendezvous with you at a station you discerned in advance, and when they leave they take the bonus with them. In some fights it might be worth the risk to keep that 3% bonus right up until the dying moments, in others you might want to preserve the crew.

Kuuijn
Blue Republic
Posted - 2010.03.30 16:50:00 - [362]
 

I haven't read through all 13 pages of this topic, so I'm just commenting on the OP. I like the idea, although I think that ships crews should be tradeable. It would make crew training a cool new sub-profession. Very Happy

Daenna Chrysi
Amarr
Omega Foundry Unit
Shadows Of Betrayal
Posted - 2010.04.03 15:21:00 - [363]
 

yeh, 13 pages is too much to read through, so my apologies if this has come up earlier.

Ship crews are a good idea, but not to give boosts to speed or gunnery or anything like that... more like ship customisation...

the ship would remember the orbit at and keep at range values specific to that ship.

if you run out of ammo, and have different ammo in your hold, the available ammo would be automatically loaded into the guns. They wouldnt speed up the reloading, but on the crucial moment, your guns would still reload if you had any usable ammo available.

ammo loaded to ships weapons could not be accidentally moved away from the ship, instead the crew would be smart enough to hold on to it, even if you accidentally select them for transfer.

The crew would remind you that your ship needs repairs, even though the ship looks fine when docked.

perhaps even remembering how many of what ammo your ship is supposed to be stocked with, and if the ammo is in your hangar freely, they would top up the ammo you have on board.

these would improve the ship, would not make any ship overly powerful, and would still cater to the need of ship crews. In essence the crew would just add extra intelligence to the functions of the individual ship.

Cedims
Posted - 2010.04.05 03:40:00 - [364]
 

I didn't have the guts to plow through the stack either, so if it's been brought up before I apologize. :)

If you use EVEMon, and bring up a ship in the "Ship browser", there is a attribute/property called "maxPassangers", for a Pilgrim it's 580 and an Avatar shows 150, which when comparing doesn't make any sense (or at least not ATM). I don't even know if the data is from CCP, is outdated but still stuck on my computer, etc. but it is interesting that it's there. I remember seeing this when I first started playing in 2008, so it's nothing new, per se. Might be used (if at all) for something "unrelated" to the actual NAME of the attribute/property too, of course, which often happens in the development process, lol.

Anyways... ;)

Davelantor
Caldari
The Resistance Movement
Posted - 2010.05.17 10:38:00 - [365]
 

/signed
defiantly

Marlus Eirontolar
Posted - 2010.05.19 03:03:00 - [366]
 

Please make this happen CCP. There is something very 'reality breaking' about piloting a Battleship with one person, let alone a Carrier.

Also it would just be one more way to customise our ships and everyone loves to do that. Even better, it would give you(CCP) a way to drain ISK by making crew an NPC only sold commodity. ... heh.. heh? :-)

Hodgekiss
Posted - 2010.05.19 10:02:00 - [367]
 

On the one hand the RPer in me would like to see some kind of crew on the ships, just for the realism factor.

On the other hand the gamer in me doesn't like the idea of adding yet another dynamic (and quite a complicated one at that) to the ship management/piloting system.
The way I see it, the skills that the pod pilot trains carry over to the crew, for example if you learn fuel efficiency to reduce the cap useage of MWD and ABs, in an RP scenario on board do you REALLY think the "captain" is down in the belly of the vessel re-routing pipes and wires to make it more efficient? Or is it far more likely that by training the skill he is actually training the Chief-Engineer? I work as a bridge-navigator on board an 80m platform-supply vessel (about the size of an EvE frigate, and far less complicated) and even on there everyone has their own job. The engineers wouldn't have a clue how to draw up a routeing plan and I wouldn't have a clue how to mess about with fuel-delivery pressures in the engines. The idea of one person training all those skills is not realistic which is why I think there already ARE crews on board.

So that brings us to how the game could be altered to give the "feeling" that there are crews on board. Maybe something as simple as changing the skills tabs to Engineering department skills, Gunnery crew skills, Drone pilot skills etc etc... re-introducing crew compliment on ship's attributes. You could also create an in-game item just called "crew" that can be bought and sold like any other item in the game, and when you buy a ship you have to buy it's compliment of crew and assign them to a ship before it will fly. This could be worked into Tyrannis by having crew training facilities as one of the planet based structures... literally harvesting the crew from the population of the planet.
The other thing I did think of would be when a ship explodes to create a lot more than one frozen corpse. Imagine popping a battleship and 2500 of the little critters explode out into space... however I can see this not contributing very much to lag issues in a big fleet fight.... asking the CCP servers to create millions of corpses in very short succession might make tranquility a sad panda Laughing

Ugly Eric
Posted - 2010.05.19 12:15:00 - [368]
 

I could sign the implant version of crew. It would be more logical. And I would like the crew to die with the ship as the modules does, so that some may survive, some die, randomly.

Attribute implants makes sense thou, so lets keep them. Only the hardwires + pirate implants would be replaced.

Pirate implant replacing crew should be in price about 4x the present implant sets, beacause in this scenario you could fly in your +4 AND pirate effects.

This could also give some room to finally implement the +6 and +7 implants.

Eric

Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
Posted - 2010.05.22 16:46:00 - [369]
 

Historical Note: For all the people mentioning that this idea has been around for years, please check the date of the first post, and then go dig around for my old wishlist thread. I know it's been around for years. I wrote it.

That said: It's nice to see, alongside POS revision requests, CCP continues to dig in their heels on this issue.

Dominic Pierce
Posted - 2010.06.22 13:22:00 - [370]
 

/signed

Melech Firesnake
Posted - 2010.06.23 05:43:00 - [371]
 

Edited by: Melech Firesnake on 23/06/2010 05:55:10
Here is the way I see Ship crews:

Crew members are specialists that you hire for a certain time (1 day, 1 week, 1 month).
While installed in a ship, a crew member replace your skill.
(For Example: In The ship where he is affected a Crew Member can give you Sharpshooter at 4. If You have Sharpshooter 3 it is better but if you have 5 you loose skill.)
More the crew member is skilled more he is expensive to hire.
You also can have allies that you do not pay....

For each point you have in the necessery command skill to pilot a ship, you can have a crew member in the ship with you.
(For example: To pilot a Prophecy you need Amarr Cruiser 3 so you can have at least 3 crew member and if you have Amarr Cruiser 5 a maximum of 5 crew members)

When a ship is destroyed, crew members and allies are killed.
Crew members do not have clones but your Allies do.

You gain Allies through special missions. Allies do not gain skills

Crazey Monkey
Gallente
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2010.06.23 06:51:00 - [372]
 

First we all should know that our ships, frigate and above, already have crews. (read the chrons) Secondly ships with crews, have escape pods for the crews. (Once again chrons)
Now my two cents in this matter, is that crews should be hired in game, they should give you small bonuses and should live after your ship is destroyed. I have a few ideas but I`ll think about it a bit more before posting them.

Yavanna Akallabeth
Posted - 2010.06.25 05:20:00 - [373]
 

I suggest crew slots just like rig slots. These are specialized crew mods that would enhance your ships command performance.

Downside is the lost of crew will give you a cost modifier to the purchase of your next crew. The modifier degrades over time so that if you lose your ship before the modifier resets the new modifier is added to whats left of the old modifier and the cost goes up.

Salensis
Gallente
Navy of Xoc
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2010.08.07 17:58:00 - [374]
 

No, no, no, no and uhm errr no.

You guys really want to micromanage things that far? and don't you have enough skills to think about and train as it is?

A player managed crew would only complicate things even more both for new players and especially the devs.

Besides, crew are only plebs, far removed from elite capsuleers, so who really cares?

Ahd Dib
Posted - 2010.08.25 20:18:00 - [375]
 

The fact that this has not been implemented concerns me greatly. As a Game Design Student I have extensively studied EVE Online and I seriously consider this type of failure to be CCP's bad point. In fact, this would be extremely easy to design. I have been working on this for quite a while and I believe that ship crews will give life to the elder players of the game while allowing better immersion and this obvious plot-hole to be filled easily. I will post more as I continue to establish the design analysis and implementation, but this is something that I feel is imperative: Listening to the players. If approached correctly this will not offend the PvPers and allow the more intuitive players a bigger puzzle in the fitting window.

so basically the problem needs to be fixed

the possible solutions are many, and I am working on singling out the best ones I can think of before I post them here.


Solostrom
Posted - 2010.08.25 23:53:00 - [376]
 

and so you totally ignored the often repeated point that balancing ship designs is complicated enough without adding this particular bit of extra insanity?

wtg

o/

Star Trek >>>>>>>>>

Gogela
Freeport Exploration
Posted - 2010.08.26 17:22:00 - [377]
 

/signed

Weena Mercator
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:49:00 - [378]
 

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Thiz R ur Crew, makn ur Cap recharg

N E questions?

Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
Posted - 2010.09.28 12:11:00 - [379]
 

Very funny, but not a really productive answer...

Asuka Solo
Gallente
Stark Fujikawa
Posted - 2010.09.28 19:23:00 - [380]
 

Having read post 1 & 2 I like this idea.

If this idea is adopted and Incarna ever released, with CCP having opted for expanding on this idea to enable us to explore the insides of our own ships and interact with your NPC crew on your ship, I'll probably never leave it.


Armtoe
Posted - 2010.10.06 00:49:00 - [381]
 

Regarding ships crews -- what I would propose is PI be used to grow and train crews -- after all what is a colony without colonists? I would have it so colonists could be grown and then trained into various specialties such as navigation, gunnery, mechanic, etc... I would then allow for the crews to be hired (traded) on the marketplace. Now regarding ships, I would designate that each ship have a complement of crew of various types and sizes. If you have a full complement of crew, you can operate your ship at full efficiency. If you lack a full crew you are penalized in the efficiency of your operation. I would also allow characters to train up skills to allow them to decrease the penalty of operating with less then a full crew. Now regarding crew behavior -- I would make it so that certain activities such as suicide ganking be opposed by ship crews. In other words -- the crew would not allow you to suicide the ship as a general proposition. However, since characters are directly connected to their ship computers they should be able to override the reluctance of their crews to perform the prohibited acts, but they do so at an efficency penalty and with a penalty being imposed upon their ability to replace the crew they just offed.

The benefit of this system is it provides further realism to the game, adds purpose to pi and provides a check and balance on behavoirs that are seemingly at odds with immersion.

I know it would be alot of coding, but I can dream.

Asuka Solo
Gallente
Stark Fujikawa
Posted - 2010.10.06 08:56:00 - [382]
 

Originally by: Armtoe
Regarding ships crews -- what I would propose is PI be used to grow and train crews -- after all what is a colony without colonists?


Yes! An actual use for Temperate worlds. Introduce different academies that train different kind of crews (engineers, officers, medical staff, or w/e) which can then be sold on the market or seeded into which ever crew seeding mechanism will be introduced to regulate ship crews.

Armtoe
Posted - 2010.10.06 15:21:00 - [383]
 

Edited by: Armtoe on 06/10/2010 15:23:47
Originally by: Asuka Solo
Originally by: Armtoe
Regarding ships crews -- what I would propose is PI be used to grow and train crews -- after all what is a colony without colonists?


Yes! An actual use for Temperate worlds. Introduce different academies that train different kind of crews (engineers, officers, medical staff, or w/e) which can then be sold on the market or seeded into which ever crew seeding mechanism will be introduced to regulate ship crews.


right now pi seems kinda drab -- sure the repetative clicking is annoying, but more fundementally, the way pi has been implemented its more like a big automated mining operation rather then teraforming and starting colonies. So lets add colonists and then put them to work in ships. As for how they will be used in ships -- it doesnt have to be complicated -- just make it so that after everything else is calculated there is a penalty for not having a full crew. Say you have 80% of a full crew -- then you get hit with a 20% penalty. Of course a system like this could be made more complicated by dividing it into subspecialties -- for instance gunners vs. nav -- lets say you have a full complement of nav so you can fly your ship at full speed, but you lack a full complement of gunners so you shoot at a penalty. I would also make it so that a player could overcome some of the penalty by training up the proper skills. Thus lacking a crew wouldbe a handicap but not necessarily fatal.

Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.10.06 16:29:00 - [384]
 

I confirm I like the ideas coming in this thread.
I understand the possible problem with balancing, but I don't think they are very big.
Of course, crew would to our ship what skills and modules already do, so there would be some redundancy, but actually we have lots of modifiers for the same attribute. One more, how can this affect things, especially whith stacking penalty?

I actually think that crew effect should stack with skill, modules and leadership effect. That is because a module will just save some work to our crew members.

As a general idea, I think that crews should be used to improve our ships in their weaknesses, and not to specialise our ship even more. I think that crews should increase versatility. I should not be able to increase my shield recharge rate when I just fit 4 shield power relays. I mean, crew effect should stack with everything, even things that usually don't stack (like cargo space mods or shield recharge rate mods).


Sephiroth CloneIIV
Rim Worlds Republic
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2010.10.06 18:48:00 - [385]
 

Just because crews do exist, that doesn't mean we need to have them like immortal heros in other games, or modules. They are faceless countless and expendable and come with every ship, they all horribly die whenever your ship explodes because they don't have escape pods, unlike you, or clones.

Considering the size of some ships, the crew slots for each one wouldn't work. Battleships have thousands and frigs have dozen/s so I heard (kind of like actual frigs and battleships in real world water). Does a titan have a million crew? How do you handle all the slots? Sounds like a confusing amount of micro management.

How about, the presence of the crew permit the ship to function normally (without, can't undock), and no crew is particularly better at the same ship then another other, the skills of the pod commander are the deciding factor in how the ship and crew works.









Dharh
Gallente
Ace Adventure Corp
Posted - 2010.10.06 20:19:00 - [386]
 

Originally by: Ahd Dib
The fact that this has not been implemented concerns me greatly. As a Game Design Student I have extensively studied EVE Online and I seriously consider this type of failure to be CCP's bad point. In fact, this would be extremely easy to design. I have been working on this for quite a while and I believe that ship crews will give life to the elder players of the game while allowing better immersion and this obvious plot-hole to be filled easily. I will post more as I continue to establish the design analysis and implementation, but this is something that I feel is imperative: Listening to the players. If approached correctly this will not offend the PvPers and allow the more intuitive players a bigger puzzle in the fitting window.

so basically the problem needs to be fixed

the possible solutions are many, and I am working on singling out the best ones I can think of before I post them here.




While you are doing that might I suggest that instead of focusing on 'crew' as the modifiers, use 'officers' that would command the crew as modifiers.

If we consider that we _already_ have crew, that have thus far been hidden from view, then bringing them into view doesn't have to include weird and painful micromanagement. Instead it could be as simple as, just adding more mentions of crew in the game. This of course would be boring so adding some skills and module like officers/crew that modify ship stats like any other non-crew skill/module.

I seriously doubt it will be that much fun to have to buy and manage hundreds of crew of various types and skill. Rather if it were
simple it could add a new dimension to ship fittings but not encumber us with crud we don't want.

Asuka Solo
Gallente
Stark Fujikawa
Posted - 2010.10.06 20:29:00 - [387]
 

Edited by: Asuka Solo on 06/10/2010 20:31:00
Originally by: Armtoe
Edited by: Armtoe on 06/10/2010 15:23:47

right now pi seems kinda drab -- sure the repetative clicking is annoying, but more fundementally, the way pi has been implemented its more like a big automated mining operation rather then teraforming and starting colonies.


Why not introduce a colonial element to the automated mining side of PI?

Instead of extractors, setup houses/shelters/skysc****rs that generate a steady flow of colonists.
Instead of factories, setup councils that generate tax from colonists (isk instead of products)
Instead of advanced factories, setup tourism/market structures which generate additional isk
Instead of storage facilities, entertainment and schools, academies, basic service provision etc which sustain colonists (the service provision factor could have effects on the output levels of generated crew and tax etc) & generate crew. Different academies for different crew types.

Create a PI system catered to sustaining colonial life in return for tax and crew/officers/R2-D2s

And as far as that suggestion goes regarding the no undocking with no crew. Awesomeness.

Armtoe
Posted - 2010.10.06 20:33:00 - [388]
 

Edited by: Armtoe on 06/10/2010 20:34:51
Originally by: Dharh
Originally by: Ahd Dib
The fact that this has not been implemented concerns me greatly. As a Game Design Student I have extensively studied EVE Online and I seriously consider this type of failure to be CCP's bad point. In fact, this would be extremely easy to design. I have been working on this for quite a while and I believe that ship crews will give life to the elder players of the game while allowing better immersion and this obvious plot-hole to be filled easily. I will post more as I continue to establish the design analysis and implementation, but this is something that I feel is imperative: Listening to the players. If approached correctly this will not offend the PvPers and allow the more intuitive players a bigger puzzle in the fitting window.

so basically the problem needs to be fixed

the possible solutions are many, and I am working on singling out the best ones I can think of before I post them here.




While you are doing that might I suggest that instead of focusing on 'crew' as the modifiers, use 'officers' that would command the crew as modifiers.

If we consider that we _already_ have crew, that have thus far been hidden from view, then bringing them into view doesn't have to include weird and painful micromanagement. Instead it could be as simple as, just adding more mentions of crew in the game. This of course would be boring so adding some skills and module like officers/crew that modify ship stats like any other non-crew skill/module.

I seriously doubt it will be that much fun to have to buy and manage hundreds of crew of various types and skill. Rather if it were
simple it could add a new dimension to ship fittings but not encumber us with crud we don't want.


When you are talking about mmo's you have to keep in mind that the immersion effect is a significant component to any game worth playing. Here, if crews exist current game mechanics create a disconnect between what we logically expect a crew to do and what acutally happens in the game and thus immerision takes a hit. For instance its reasonable to suppose that crews are not going allow suicide ganking to become a regular occurence. IMO where such disconnects exist they should be addressed for the betterment of the game. Now I dont propose the elimination of suicide ganking, I would just have it so that the crew's reaction to such an event would have to be taken into account. Your actions should have consequences, you can kill your crew if you wish, but you will have future difficulty obtaining and retaining new crew and thus will operate at a penalty until your standings improve. We already have a similar system with criminal acts, there is no reason why something like this couldnt be implemented to help immersion along and create a check on an odd ball game mechanic.

Asuka Solo
Gallente
Stark Fujikawa
Posted - 2010.10.06 20:55:00 - [389]
 

Edited by: Asuka Solo on 06/10/2010 21:03:06
Originally by: Armtoe
Edited by: Armtoe on 06/10/2010 20:34:51
Originally by: Dharh
Originally by: Ahd Dib
The fact that this has not been implemented concerns me greatly. As a Game Design Student I have extensively studied EVE Online and I seriously consider this type of failure to be CCP's bad point. In fact, this would be extremely easy to design. I have been working on this for quite a while and I believe that ship crews will give life to the elder players of the game while allowing better immersion and this obvious plot-hole to be filled easily. I will post more as I continue to establish the design analysis and implementation, but this is something that I feel is imperative: Listening to the players. If approached correctly this will not offend the PvPers and allow the more intuitive players a bigger puzzle in the fitting window.

so basically the problem needs to be fixed

the possible solutions are many, and I am working on singling out the best ones I can think of before I post them here.




While you are doing that might I suggest that instead of focusing on 'crew' as the modifiers, use 'officers' that would command the crew as modifiers.

If we consider that we _already_ have crew, that have thus far been hidden from view, then bringing them into view doesn't have to include weird and painful micromanagement. Instead it could be as simple as, just adding more mentions of crew in the game. This of course would be boring so adding some skills and module like officers/crew that modify ship stats like any other non-crew skill/module.

I seriously doubt it will be that much fun to have to buy and manage hundreds of crew of various types and skill. Rather if it were
simple it could add a new dimension to ship fittings but not encumber us with crud we don't want.


When you are talking about mmo's you have to keep in mind that the immersion effect is a significant component to any game worth playing. Here, if crews exist current game mechanics create a disconnect between what we logically expect a crew to do and what acutally happens in the game and thus immerision takes a hit. For instance its reasonable to suppose that crews are not going allow suicide ganking to become a regular occurence. IMO where such disconnects exist they should be addressed for the betterment of the game. Now I dont propose the elimination of suicide ganking, I would just have it so that the crew's reaction to such an event would have to be taken into account. Your actions should have consequences, you can kill your crew if you wish, but you will have future difficulty obtaining and retaining new crew and thus will operate at a penalty until your standings improve. We already have a similar system with criminal acts, there is no reason why something like this couldnt be implemented to help immersion along and create a check on an odd ball game mechanic.


Why not link your crew's morale/willingness to follow orders/give boosts/comply, with faction/sec standings? Surely incurring consistent standing penalties from jihad ganking in empire could go some way to a crews willingness to serve on your ship? The lower the standings, the less effective the crew, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the particular ship and thus affecting suicide ganking, but not removing it?

Lower sec standing pilots would then have to pay higher costs for a crew due to the high risk classification of the ship.

Dharh
Gallente
Ace Adventure Corp
Posted - 2010.10.06 21:03:00 - [390]
 

Edited by: Dharh on 06/10/2010 21:06:35
Originally by: Armtoe
Edited by: Armtoe on 06/10/2010 20:34:51
Originally by: Dharh
Originally by: Ahd Dib
The fact that this has not been implemented concerns me greatly. As a Game Design Student I have extensively studied EVE Online and I seriously consider this type of failure to be CCP's bad point. In fact, this would be extremely easy to design. I have been working on this for quite a while and I believe that ship crews will give life to the elder players of the game while allowing better immersion and this obvious plot-hole to be filled easily. I will post more as I continue to establish the design analysis and implementation, but this is something that I feel is imperative: Listening to the players. If approached correctly this will not offend the PvPers and allow the more intuitive players a bigger puzzle in the fitting window.

so basically the problem needs to be fixed

the possible solutions are many, and I am working on singling out the best ones I can think of before I post them here.




While you are doing that might I suggest that instead of focusing on 'crew' as the modifiers, use 'officers' that would command the crew as modifiers.

If we consider that we _already_ have crew, that have thus far been hidden from view, then bringing them into view doesn't have to include weird and painful micromanagement. Instead it could be as simple as, just adding more mentions of crew in the game. This of course would be boring so adding some skills and module like officers/crew that modify ship stats like any other non-crew skill/module.

I seriously doubt it will be that much fun to have to buy and manage hundreds of crew of various types and skill. Rather if it were
simple it could add a new dimension to ship fittings but not encumber us with crud we don't want.


When you are talking about mmo's you have to keep in mind that the immersion effect is a significant component to any game worth playing. Here, if crews exist current game mechanics create a disconnect between what we logically expect a crew to do and what acutally happens in the game and thus immerision takes a hit. For instance its reasonable to suppose that crews are not going allow suicide ganking to become a regular occurence. IMO where such disconnects exist they should be addressed for the betterment of the game. Now I dont propose the elimination of suicide ganking, I would just have it so that the crew's reaction to such an event would have to be taken into account. Your actions should have consequences, you can kill your crew if you wish, but you will have future difficulty obtaining and retaining new crew and thus will operate at a penalty until your standings improve. We already have a similar system with criminal acts, there is no reason why something like this couldnt be implemented to help immersion along and create a check on an odd ball game mechanic.


I can agree with that. Crew/Officers give different bonuses. Officers obtained in null/low-sec/pirate space would have different states, and perhaps lower possible stats (in certain areas) then a well trained elite crew/officer obtained via high standing (and alot of LP points?) in empire space. You might even have certain sec requirements to even be able to use a crew. Required negative sec status for pirate crews, required positive sec status and/or faction standing. Suicide ganking, which is usually done with throw away characters anyway, would stop you from using empire crew anyway because the character is too new and doesn't have the required skill/faction/LP points or because sec status is too low. A suicide ganker _might_ be able to use pirate crew, which _might_ even add bonuses to stats that help in said gankage. However, the costs associated with buying good crew would probably make suicide ganking unprofitable.


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 : last (16)

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