open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked let the outlaws to 0.5!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic

Hasak Rain
Amarr
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:00:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Hasak Rain on 07/03/2008 12:00:04
Originally by: Orion Eridanus
Anything that reduces the number of alts in the game is good therefore I fully support the OP's suggestion.



lol

All my other earlier points in this thread aside, that is probably the number one reason why this will never happen.

More Alts = More subs = more money for CCP.

True you can make an alt on your main's account but a lot of people like running two characters at once and will pay to save the time of having to log.

Martin Mckenna
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:06:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Nova Fox
if this happens 0.5 woudl empty out and become another low sec space nobody would bother with, if you want a better idea check my idea in my sig.
#

Seriously did you think about what you just said there.

Pirates would not be able to be the agressors in 0.5 becuase they would be shot down by concord. But if someone felt they had what it takes to kill the pirate the pirate could engage back.

So its no risk for your avrage empire dude, just a risk for the pirate...

Like the idea alot but would have to be looked into more detail first.

Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:11:00 - [33]
 

0.5 - CONCORD doesnt respond to attacks in space away from gates or stations.

Simple really.

C.


Drasked
North Face Force
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:14:00 - [34]
 

Did the same suggestion about a year ago when i was still into pirating low-sec.

But here we are now, stopped pirating and 3 accounts further.

Hasak Rain
Amarr
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:15:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Martin Mckenna
Originally by: Nova Fox
if this happens 0.5 woudl empty out and become another low sec space nobody would bother with, if you want a better idea check my idea in my sig.
#

Seriously did you think about what you just said there.

Pirates would not be able to be the agressors in 0.5 becuase they would be shot down by concord. But if someone felt they had what it takes to kill the pirate the pirate could engage back.

So its no risk for your avrage empire dude, just a risk for the pirate...

Like the idea alot but would have to be looked into more detail first.



That is assuming the pirate is solo. What I imagine is the low sec pirate comes into 0.5. Some Empire guy opens fire on him and the pirate's buddies in his gang that no one knew about come warping in from the belt they were hiding in and kill the Empire guy 8 versus one.

Empire guy comes to the forum and whines about how the mechanics should be changed.

Sort of like how all of you are doing right now. Very Happy

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:17:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 07/03/2008 12:18:15
Originally by: Hasak Rain

I sympathize with anyone who has to use an alt to move things to and from Empire because of sec status but it is no different than when the gatecampers tell "Mr. Soloer" to use an alt to go through those gates into Low sec or Null or else risk getting ganked.

Or how about "get some friends?" I am constantly seen posts of people telling others to get some friends to check the gate so why can't you get friends to haul into Empire for you?

Sorry but the sword cuts both ways. Adapt or die. Razz



I have, just like everyone else, adapted.

I've got friends who drag me ships, and I've got alts (same account) to drag my modules and sell my loot. That's hardly a issue - I'm doing very fine, really (I believe I've explained the process of operating in low-sec on the same account in another thread just a bit back, look it up).

The thing is, it's not much of a 'consequence', it's merely a inconvenience (and I don't like the whole alt business on principle honestly) to have to use alts for hauling/etc.

Having 0.5 something you can come into (but have concord responding to any agression/etc) would mean I could dump it in the local 0.5 system for selling/buying and could dispose of the alts which is something I would love to be able to do even if it did increase the risk when it comes to loot hauling/resupplying for me compared to what it is now (which is incredibly low).

I can see the problem with suiciding ships there, though.

Originally by: Hasak Rain

That is assuming the pirate is solo. What I imagine is the low sec pirate comes into 0.5. Some Empire guy opens fire on him and the pirate's buddies in his gang that no one knew about come warping in from the belt they were hiding in and kill the Empire guy 8 versus one.


Aggro mechanics don't work this way.

The pirate's friends cannot respond to any agression versus him, even if they're in fleet/etc/etc, they get a gcc and sentry (and therefore, concord) aggro for firing on someone who fired on their outlaw friend.

sheila tankian
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:17:00 - [37]
 

what about making the faction police a little easier to beat instead of almost permajam instapop so on etc so you can fight your way in or run from them at least?

concord stays the same of course and no faction spawning right away but with higher sec more reinforcements from the faction police.

any good?

Orion Eridanus
Dark Ashes
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:17:00 - [38]
 

A lot of you don't seem to understand the risk, to the pirate of all people. If the pirate needs to go a 0.5 system to get supplies chances are he's gonna be in a hauler, last time I checked a hauler isn't gonna be able to suicide gank anything on its own.

Now what anti-pirate or hauler who's lost his hauler in low sec wouldn't jump on the opportunity to extract some vengance on the outlaw in a hauler? BTW because he's an outlaw his pod is fair game as well.

To all those saying there would be an increase in the number of suicide ganks, whats stopping the outlaw from just creating an alt to do that, nothing thats what.

Plus this has the potential to lead to new market hubs other than jita ours, rens, amarr

I see nothing wrong with adding the 0.5 system as an additional border system. In 0.4's we can shoot who ever we want. In 0.5's we can't shoot anyone unless fired upon but everyone can shoot us. Seems like a fair trade off with the potential for much profit and plenty of risk involved as well.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:19:00 - [39]
 

actually no i wasnt thinking...

i was only going off the title and multitasking way to many things and forgot to read.

0.5 should allowed concord low sec players in but imo if you got the factions to hate you in the area you arnt going to be docking anywhere in those systems.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:20:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: sheila tankian
what about making the faction police a little easier to beat instead of almost permajam instapop so on etc so you can fight your way in or run from them at least?

concord stays the same of course and no faction spawning right away but with higher sec more reinforcements from the faction police.

any good?


Yeah, and they could stop locking like every ship is a sensor-boosted stilleto, that'd work too.

Wet Ferret
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:20:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Orion Eridanus
A lot of you don't seem to understand the risk, to the pirate of all people. If the pirate needs to go a 0.5 system to get supplies chances are he's gonna be in a hauler, last time I checked a hauler isn't gonna be able to suicide gank anything on its own.

Now what anti-pirate or hauler who's lost his hauler in low sec wouldn't jump on the opportunity to extract some vengance on the outlaw in a hauler? BTW because he's an outlaw his pod is fair game as well.

To all those saying there would be an increase in the number of suicide ganks, whats stopping the outlaw from just creating an alt to do that, nothing thats what.

Plus this has the potential to lead to new market hubs other than jita ours, rens, amarr

I see nothing wrong with adding the 0.5 system as an additional border system. In 0.4's we can shoot who ever we want. In 0.5's we can't shoot anyone unless fired upon but everyone can shoot us. Seems like a fair trade off with the potential for much profit and plenty of risk involved as well.


You say that as if -10 pirates would only go into highsec to haul stuff. I imagine that's the last thing they would do, TBH.

Hasak Rain
Amarr
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:22:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: Hasak Rain on 07/03/2008 12:22:33
Originally by: Orion Eridanus
A lot of you don't seem to understand the risk, to the pirate of all people. If the pirate needs to go a 0.5 system to get supplies chances are he's gonna be in a hauler, last time I checked a hauler isn't gonna be able to suicide gank anything on its own.

Now what anti-pirate or hauler who's lost his hauler in low sec wouldn't jump on the opportunity to extract some vengance on the outlaw in a hauler? BTW because he's an outlaw his pod is fair game as well.

To all those saying there would be an increase in the number of suicide ganks, whats stopping the outlaw from just creating an alt to do that, nothing thats what.

Plus this has the potential to lead to new market hubs other than jita ours, rens, amarr

I see nothing wrong with adding the 0.5 system as an additional border system. In 0.4's we can shoot who ever we want. In 0.5's we can't shoot anyone unless fired upon but everyone can shoot us. Seems like a fair trade off with the potential for much profit and plenty of risk involved as well.


Read my last post before this one. All this does is setup yet another way a Pirate can bait an unknowing player.

You can argue that the Empire guy could just not engage the pirate but where is the risk to the pirate then?

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:24:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Wet Ferret

You say that as if -10 pirates would only go into highsec to haul stuff. I imagine that's the last thing they would do, TBH.


You'd have three potential reasons to go:
(a) haul (but quite definitely NOT in a hauler)
(b) suicide gank (this would obviously be a problem)
(c) bait people into attacking (this is obviously very risky, given your gangmates CANNOT help you without getting a gcc, and, therefore, concorded)

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:24:00 - [44]
 

How about this?

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=625147&page=5#125

Related to a larger idea, but pirates all over the place, more or less.

Orion Eridanus
Dark Ashes
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:24:00 - [45]
 

If the system worked like kill rights or can flagging then only the pirate that was attacked would be able to shoot back, any others that got involved would be concorded

Hasak Rain
Amarr
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:25:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: Hasak Rain on 07/03/2008 12:28:36
Originally by: Orion Eridanus
If the system worked like kill rights or can flagging then only the pirate that was attacked would be able to shoot back, any others that got involved would be concorded



Okay, that would be a bit more reasonable then.

Edit: I do like this idea in theory. I just don't like the hypocrisy of pirates wanting mechanics changed in EvE to make thier game easier after they are constantly telling carebears to "suck it up...EvE is harsh" whenever they whine about something.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:26:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Hasak Rain

Read my last post before this one. All this does is setup yet another way a Pirate can bait an unknowing player.



Learn the aggro rules for outlaws.

If me and five of my outlaw buddies are, say, in fleet and sitting at a gate and five anti-pirates jump in, this is what happens:
-they primary X.
-X can shoot at all of them in retaliation
-the rest of us get a GCC for shooting any of their ships.

GCC in low-sec means sentry aggro, which is tankable. GCC in high-sec means concordokken.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:26:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Orion Eridanus
If the system worked like kill rights or can flagging then only the pirate that was attacked would be able to shoot back, any others that got involved would be concorded


That IS how it works.

Do any of you people PvP in low-sec??

Drasked
North Face Force
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:27:00 - [49]
 

They should just remove all the faction police from the game, so that -10 can go anywhere but on their own risk of course, this will bring you 1 step closer to being able to police for yourself.

If this is not an option then they should just leave it the way it's now; "if you lower your sec you will have to live with the consequences"

Orion Eridanus
Dark Ashes
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:29:00 - [50]
 

Yes Captain I pvp in low sec, I just had to explain it in carebear terms so they would understand it.Wink

Hasak Rain
Amarr
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:33:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Hasak Rain

Read my last post before this one. All this does is setup yet another way a Pirate can bait an unknowing player.



Learn the aggro rules for outlaws.

If me and five of my outlaw buddies are, say, in fleet and sitting at a gate and five anti-pirates jump in, this is what happens:
-they primary X.
-X can shoot at all of them in retaliation
-the rest of us get a GCC for shooting any of their ships.

GCC in low-sec means sentry aggro, which is tankable. GCC in high-sec means concordokken.



Thanks, I admit I didn't know that. I assumed that anyone in a gang could shoot at an aggressor. I figured everyone in the gang was considered "one entity."

Then again, I only pvp solo in null sec. Very Happy

Hasak Rain
Amarr
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:34:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Orion Eridanus
Yes Captain I pvp in low sec, I just had to explain it in carebear terms so they would understand it.Wink



A carebear who could probably take you out. Wink

Wet Ferret
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:34:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Cpt Branko

You'd have three potential reasons to go:
(a) haul (but quite definitely NOT in a hauler)


That's quite what I meant, as someone suggested that they would be defenseless in a hauler

Quote:
(b) suicide gank (this would obviously be a problem)


This is the main issue I think, as it undermines the idea of punishing players for doing just that

Quote:
(c) bait people into attacking (this is obviously very risky, given your gangmates CANNOT help you without getting a gcc, and, therefore, concorded)



Yeah, taking this into consideration, it wouldn't be such a terrible thing. But, honestly I wouldn't mind if I could work for the pirate factions who's standings I've ruined but I don't see that happening either Confused

Maor Raor
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:35:00 - [54]
 

Make 0.4 behave this way and you fix 2 problems.

You get carbears into lowsec (Via concord protection) and spread out the empire population a bit.
And you get you outlaw accessable market hubs in 0.4

much better idea

Kyoto Luyi
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:35:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: SleepingBuddah
I think it would be fun it the outlaws could live in 0.5
It means CONCORD will response on criminal agression, but Navy should not KOS the outlaw.

0.6 and higher works fine now, but 0.5 is like 'border' security between lowsec and highsec and outlaws should be allowed there.

/fail

Carebear rat wannabe...

Orion Eridanus
Dark Ashes
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:37:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Maor Raor
Make 0.4 behave this way and you fix 2 problems.

You get carbears into lowsec (Via concord protection) and spread out the empire population a bit.
And you get you outlaw accessable market hubs in 0.4

much better idea


yes a much better idea to make non consensual pvp even more difficult

Roy Batty68
Caldari
Immortal Dead
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:46:00 - [57]
 

This sort of thing has been suggested many times before. Traditionally people respond to these suggestions with, "Do the crime, do the time". But meh, sounds like a fun sort of thing to me.

That being said, I can immediately see an easy bait tactic flashy reds could use.

- Setup a jetcan near a gate in a .5
- Wait for some CNR or similar to come along
- Lock the CNR and hope they have lock-back still enabled
- Fire a torp or cruise at your own jetcan

Should the CNR player be afkish, seeing a flashy red apparently shooting at them (missile explosion + flashing red might confuse them), a fair percentage of players could be baited into firing back.

Wee! Good times. Laughing



Burnharder
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:50:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Orion Eridanus
Originally by: Maor Raor
Make 0.4 behave this way and you fix 2 problems.

You get carbears into lowsec (Via concord protection) and spread out the empire population a bit.
And you get you outlaw accessable market hubs in 0.4

much better idea


yes a much better idea to make non consensual pvp even more difficult


No, he's right. Turn it around. What is the point of outlaws going into a 0.5 if they cannot initiate an act of aggression, unless it's just so they won't necessarily need to wash their sec status in-between suicide ganks? So,

(1) Outlaws avoid some of the consequences of suicide ganking - this is bad

(2) More empire players head out of 0.5 into 0.6, effectively turning 0.5 into a kind of 0.45, ie. mostly empty.

(3) The whole idea is a non-sequitur, because the premise is based on the fact that empire players will just stick around as normal when their system gets more dangerous. They won't. That is why low sec is so empty.

Neeeeeeeeeeexxt.


Orion Eridanus
Dark Ashes
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:57:00 - [59]
 

People are still stuck on the suicide ganking subject, the Goons have been going at it pretty hard for the past few weeks and they aren't outlaws, so whats the difference if an outlaw does it?

You at least get a nice flashy indicator giving you a heads up to make your escape, where as with others you get nothing, just a single ship in the belt to close the distance on you then the rest of his gang on top of you, followed by a brief period of lag and then a belt full of wrecks and pods

Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:58:00 - [60]
 

I really don't think outlaws suicide ganking will be a problem. Nobody can sit flashing red on a highsec gate for extended periods of time and not be ganked one by one. That suicide gankers are protected by CONCORD until they engage is why the tactic is viable. You park a bunch of gank BS on a normal highsec gate and make them targetable one by one, well if they last long enough for a juicy hauler to come through I'll be surprised. Really I don't think it'd change much. People would camp em for outlaws and we'd just send alts/friends to get the ships. Just like we've always done.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

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