open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Serious Security
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (22)

Author Topic

Nofonno
Amarr
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:25:00 - [31]
 

Very nice dev-blog, well put together. Althought I have never been ganked and I never ganked, I think that the changes proposed are beneficial for most of the players.

We'll see on SiSi Cool


Plave Okice
Krazny Oktyabr Revolyutsiya
Yezhovshchina
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:25:00 - [32]
 

Have you forgotten what this game was supposed to be about?

Where are the old devs who made this game a dark and harsh universe?


Reikku
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:32:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Plave Okice
Have you forgotten what this game was supposed to be about?

Where are the old devs who made this game a dark and harsh universe?



Originally by: CCP Fear
Be safe out there!


Hopefully this answers to your question of where CCP is steering this game.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:35:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Dev blog

In addition, the highly requested feature of removal of insurance in CONCORD related events will be implemented in the near future.


Do NOT put this in. This is a hugely terrible change. If you want to modify insurance, then MODIFY INSURANCE.

Explain to my why suiciding ganks get no insurance, but SUICIDING into 0.0 or SUICIDING your own ship via self-destruct gets you insurance.

Explain to me why Pend Insurance Inc. would insure any ship that is to be flown by a player in a 0.0 alliance or a -10.0 pirate or someone who loses 10 ships a day or someone shooting Gallente/Amarr/Minmatar/Caldari ships in a mission. No, if insurance doesn't make sense for suicide ganking then you have to modify it for ALL types of SUICIDING and RISKY behavior.

This is a bad move CCP. If you do this, there needs to be *balance*, a way for pirates to increase security standings or at least get SOMETHING cool out of it. The pirates/suicide gankers and such are the people providing non-NPC content, nerfing them is penalizing players for interacting with each other in a god damn mf'ing MMORPG.

The rest of the changes I don't care about, but FFS no insurance on suiciding ships is flat-out caving to the whiners, you have ZERO basis or reasoning on this change and I'm calling you out right now. Nerfing level 4 missions is a "highly requested feature" so where is that?

Frug
Omega Wing
Snatch Victory
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:39:00 - [35]
 

****ing garbage

Viper ShizzIe
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:40:00 - [36]
 

Glad to see that a decrease in the profitability is also being included in this hisec PvP nerf.

Oh, wait.

Did every single person at this company get heat-stroke in Morocco and decide to make idiotically stupid changes to game mechanics?

Harris
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:40:00 - [37]
 

I don't think its sad.
It places consequences in your way that you have to consider more seriously than before. Isn't that what Eve is aboutQuestion
Ganking will still happen - which is good. I suspect it will be more intel-driven targets now, rather than 'just-happened-to-scan-his-cargo-at-the-gate-and-liked-what-I-saw'.

I particularly like the fact that there will be some sort of difference between Hi & Null sec rather than just acting as a buffer zone between 0.1 and 0.4. I think that should be developed further in the future.

Kyguard
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:42:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Viper ShizzIe
Glad to see that a decrease in the profitability is also being included in this hisec PvP nerf.

Oh, wait.

Did every single person at this company get heat-stroke in Morocco and decide to make idiotically stupid changes to game mechanics?


Wish I knew.. ;Z

Nelson Vandermark
Black Omega Security
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:44:00 - [39]
 

Wow CCP kinda of crumble pretty hard.

Harris
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:48:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Vaal Erit
....you have ZERO basis or reasoning on this change...


The fact that just engaging the target would allow you to break even in some cases so that everything that dropped would be profit is the basis and that's plenty imo.

I do agree that the base insurance at least should continue to apply as a minimum if you lose your ship in any circumstances.

Perhaps it should work that you only get your 'premium insurance' payout if you lose your ship to other players (as opposed to CONCORD) or NPC (i.e criminal) pirates. Don't know how the logic would apply to FW tho...Confused

Khamal Jolstien
Caldari
THORN Syndicate
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:48:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Plave Okice
Have you forgotten what this game was supposed to be about?

Where are the old devs who made this game a dark and harsh universe?




Quoted for emphasis. Where are you guys? CCP? Anyone? The nano-nerf I can understand, but seriously? The main drawing point to the game is being phased out.

Tomic
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:56:00 - [42]
 

Oh great, another move to carebears online.Rolling Eyes

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:56:00 - [43]
 

CCP you took my only weapon against Makrominers away!

Please do not let them destroy our game. If you take suicide ganking away, PLEASE remove THEM first!



Jim Raynor
Caldari
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:56:00 - [44]
 

Lame. Mega Ultra Lame. All you are doing is reinforcing people to be stupid. AFK Industrials ahoy.

Andrue
Amarr
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:57:00 - [45]
 

Interesting ideas but I think it could go further. How about allowing a security gain (or at least no loss) for ganking someone with bad security standing?

Maximillian Power
Minmatar
Legio Immortalis
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:00:00 - [46]
 

I don't understand why the criminals whine.

Think this is a good thing myself - Always thought suicide ganking was too easy.

It will still happen. It will still happen a lot. People will still make a lot of ISK from it. The fact that you need to work a lot more after doing it to get back in and do it again is a good thing. The fact that the target has to have a more in their hold is a good thing.

What does this really mean:

1. It is still very profitable and worthwhile ganking a newb ship or hauler with faction goodies.
2. That freighter you want to gank better have some nice stuff in there before you spend 12 domis (or whatever it is these days) to pop it.
3. Smart gankers will still make a lot of ISK.
4. More and more people will still afk with stupidly expensive stuff in their holds.

5. No-one will read this through the haze of whining.

Little Matt
Caldari
New Fnord Industries
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:01:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Little Matt on 06/08/2008 07:01:27
What I find amusing and not at all ironic is the people who are complaining about this.
Or, more accurately, their affiliations.

Pandemic Legion,
REPO,
Incredibly brave forum alts (pirate characters maybe?)
etc...


Reikku
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:07:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Little Matt
Edited by: Little Matt on 06/08/2008 07:01:27
What I find amusing and not at all ironic is the people who are complaining about this.
Or, more accurately, their affiliations.

Pandemic Legion,
REPO,
Incredibly brave forum alts (pirate characters maybe?)
etc...




Yeah would you imagine that. Empire carebears dreaming of rainbows and absolutely riskless afk-mining not complaining and those who thought they were playing a game where no place was safe complaining. Didnt see that coming.

Kazuma Saruwatari
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:07:00 - [49]
 

About time. I'm all for suicide ganking and all, but having 2-month-old newbies trying to take on a T2 tanked indy just to grab the named T1 loot I haul around is a bit grating.

going in, I get agressed by t1 frigates

going out, I get agressed by the same two, now in cruisers (yay)

Both cases, new CONCORD spawn.

Only damage done: Lag.

MarcusCole
Gallente
Sock Robbers Inc.
Syndicate.
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:09:00 - [50]
 

While you're nerfing different playstyles into oblivion would you care to take a look at the players who spend their entire careers in noob corps, unable to be attacked and generally not interacting with others at all.

If say after 3 months (arbitrary time) they were moved into their factions militia via some sort of graduation ceremony idea it would provide some sort of gradual introduction to the harshness of eve without making them entirely fair game in high sec. In addition they should not be allowed to rejoin the starter corp, the factional militia BECOMES their default corp.

the nerf bat should swing both ways

Apertotes
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:10:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Andrue
Interesting ideas but I think it could go further. How about allowing a security gain (or at least no loss) for ganking someone with bad security standing?


well, you know, not everybody can kill any thief/murderer, only the police, and the police, on EVE, is concord.

but i think your idea would be perfect for 0.0, but sadly security gains/losses are deactivated there

Ron Wright
Shark Investments
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:16:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Andrue
Interesting ideas but I think it could go further. How about allowing a security gain (or at least no loss) for ganking someone with bad security standing?


Would be good for LowSec Systems!

Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar
Shark Investments
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:17:00 - [53]
 

Edited by: Nautsyn Thome on 06/08/2008 07:18:28
Originally by: Maximillian Power
I don't understand why the criminals whine.

Think this is a good thing myself - Always thought suicide ganking was too easy.

It will still happen. It will still happen a lot. People will still make a lot of ISK from it. The fact that you need to work a lot more after doing it to get back in and do it again is a good thing. The fact that the target has to have a more in their hold is a good thing.

What does this really mean:

1. It is still very profitable and worthwhile ganking a newb ship or hauler with faction goodies.
2. That freighter you want to gank better have some nice stuff in there before you spend 12 domis (or whatever it is these days) to pop it.
3. Smart gankers will still make a lot of ISK.
4. More and more people will still afk with stupidly expensive stuff in their holds.

5. No-one will read this through the haze of whining.


I agree that the game mechanic "suicide gank" is not a very good thing. I am NOT a criminial, but it was the ONLY thing i could do against makro's! Petitioning them did absolutly nothing. And if it does, it takes way too long. You all who think "great job CCP, suicide ganking sucks" please understand that there are worse things in eve, which mean even more unbalance in this game, like makros.

-unfair wars (due more financial power)
-real money trading
-unfair ressources (pos fuel en mass)
-ruined pos fuel market and therefore
-ruined gameplay as an ice miner (who realy sits in his mackinaw)because it's absolutly not worth the time

A Makro-group of 6 Accounts makes 500 mio isk a day, in a week, all of this accounts payed their online fee for a month, and in the remaining 3 weeks they make 1,5 billion isk! please ccp do not let this happen anymore! ffs Rolling Eyes

Kern Hotha
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:17:00 - [54]
 

None of the security changes are necessary.

Removal of insurance payout for Concord actions is necessary (and long overdue).

Kyguard
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:19:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Little Matt
Edited by: Little Matt on 06/08/2008 07:01:27
What I find amusing and not at all ironic is the people who are complaining about this.
Or, more accurately, their affiliations.

Pandemic Legion,
REPO,
Incredibly brave forum alts (pirate characters maybe?)
etc...




I am complaining, where does that put me? PL pet or something more sinister..

If you don't have anything constructive to add apart from CAODesque and trolling comments, don't hit the post button.

--

I gotta give in to the insurance changes as I can see that as a good countermeasure to people using 5m cheap BS to highsec gank. However, the rest of the changes are absolute garbage and I don't say that about any change I dislike or don't agree with. This is a path that I believe is steering away from the dark and unforgiving universe of eve that we all know and love.

I don't know where you get your information from, but the grind from negative sec status to positive sec status is not an easy one nor a short one. It requires patience and it really is as I called it, a grind. There's fun about it the first few days and then it ends and turn into neverending weeks of this activity.

Finally, with this change you would be promoting more afk play than present. Even at present with how highsec security mechanics, you still have a large number of the playerbase that conduct afk play in empire, some pay for it, some don't and some learn, some don't learn. The way eve is right now, there is a perfect-sized gap between security of traveling AFK in empire and traveling at the wheel.

This patch would shorten that gap too much from where I'm standing and I'm sure a lot of people would agree with me.

Daan Sai
Polytrope
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:21:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus

The funny thing is, this won't even slow down the high sec killings that much. It may raise the bar a bit on what is considered worth killing, but it won't stop it. Thank God.


Second time in a week I agree with the Pirate!

It may cut down on 'I'm bored...' ganking, and make it more purposeful when it happens. This should work towards a balanced cost/reward system, and I really hope it doesn't stop high sec ganking.

BTW, did I miss a bit? The mentioned that they thing ratting back up sec status is too easy, and didn't say what they were doing to change that.

Ralitge boyter
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:25:00 - [57]
 

Finally CCP does know how to make a game fun it just takes them a while to actually implement these kinds of things.

Current ganking is really taking some of the fun out of playing EVE, even in high sec space moving around in anything smaller then a Battle Cruiser is basically waiting to die. Add some lagg to that and you will usually be crawling out of a clone vat before you even saw anyone at the gate when you are in anything smaller then a BC.

jatkot
Caldari
North Star Networks
The Kadeshi
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:28:00 - [58]
 

I love that idea. It means that CCP have been thinking of some great thingsIdeaIdea. Just not implement more bugs!

You have my approval to implement it!!

Shadowsword
The Rough Riders
Ares Protectiva
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:33:00 - [59]
 

Disclaimer: I never suicide-ganked, I've been suicide-ganked once (surfing for pictures of barely-clad chicks while afking is Bad. Bad, I tell you). I also haul billions+ cargos in empire now and then.


Having said that, I think the suicide ganking nerf is too much. Removing insurance would have been enough, imho. But boosting concord response time? If Concord still neut/jam/impotent you, that might make it just too hard.


Quote:
It is too easy to gain back lost standing, taking only a few days to erase all the damage done by ganking. This is about to change.


More penalty when doing something naughty, I understand. But will you also change number of npc you need to kill to recover from a sec statut hit?



PS: At first I tougtht it was an april 1th dev blog.

Franga
NQX Innovations
Posted - 2008.08.06 07:34:00 - [60]
 

Sounds very good. Particularly the insurance feature. Long time coming.


Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (22)

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