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 : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (22)

Author Topic

Larkonis Trassler
Doctrine.
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:38:00 - [151]
 

CCP really do appear to be losing their way here.
There are plenty of mechanics in place for players to avoid being suicide ganked.
Spawning Concord in their belts/gates they intend to travel through.
Using a scout.
Using a corp mate with a web to get their freighter through without being scanned.
All this does is gives idiots extra security which they do not deserve.
Tears aside with this and the nano changes (which were due but not to that extreme) I am seriously looking at my eleventy billion accounts and whether or not I wish to continue.

If you want suicide ganking for 'lulz' to stop. Bring back NPC mineral buy orders to stabilize the market somewhat. Currently mods and ships are too cheap, that is what is funding the speight of suicide ganking atm.

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:38:00 - [152]
 

...and yeah, low-sec needs to be made more enticing and profitable. But that's a separate matter.

Fuddlesticks
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:38:00 - [153]
 

Edited by: Fuddlesticks on 06/08/2008 11:39:06
Originally by: Pesadel0


Low-sec been long time dead.I lolled when i read in the blog that this was a way to encourage more ganking in low sec :)


Which is fine - We'll see how it pans out, but I can hardly fault you for being amused. It's when people spread doom and gloom with no basis for what they're saying that I want to slap someone..you know, cause it's "cool" to go "omg this will kill EVE!".

*EDIT: un-pyramiding my post*

Ron Wright
Shark Investments
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:41:00 - [154]
 

Edited by: Ron Wright on 06/08/2008 11:46:22
BAN MACROMINERS and actually start reading petitions about them and the "Suicideganking-Problem" disappears by itself....

[Edit]
in times where suicideganking is more effective to get them out of the game instead of petitioning them and let CCP do the punishment stuff you can't start to penalize the ones that really want to do smth against those macroguys...

Korinn
Habitual Euthanasia
Dystopia Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:41:00 - [155]
 

Originally by: Fuddlesticks
I semi-agree with that, atleast as far as the highsec ganking thingie.
Lowsec piracy though? Yeah it's dead..as far as if this change will do anything in bringing it back to life? Maybe not, but it's a step in the right direction imho.


Yeah don't get me wrong I kinda agree with the varied sec hit thing based on system status (not based on victim security rating though, just because someone has run loads of highsec missions they should be less of a target because they give a bigger sec hit? Confused), what I don't agree with is someone effectively writing a blog attempting to solve 2 problems with 1 set of solutions that deals with neither effectively, continuing to prove that the route CCP has taken recently with regards to game design have changed significantly since I started playing.

Rather than introducing more options, or ENCOURAGING people back into lowsec, they simply reduce the number of options with blanket nerfs, and effectively try and FORCE people back into lowsec by making it more of a grind to recover sec.

It's not going to work, and unless lowsec becomes a damn sight more target-rich, we'll be sitting in the same place in half a year whinging about how CCP applied another patch which achieved absolutely jack **** apart from annoying people Laughing

(yes I'm trying to control my nerdrage over the fact we've had 2 blanket-nerf, over-complex dev bog solutions in 2 weeks, both of which have asked people to test and yet the test server has yet to be mirrored even after it was said it would be done last week Neutral)

Veldya
Guristari Freedom Fighters
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:43:00 - [156]
 

Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
CCP really do appear to be losing their way here.
There are plenty of mechanics in place for players to avoid being suicide ganked.
Spawning Concord in their belts/gates they intend to travel through.
Using a scout.
Using a corp mate with a web to get their freighter through without being scanned.
All this does is gives idiots extra security which they do not deserve.
Tears aside with this and the nano changes (which were due but not to that extreme) I am seriously looking at my eleventy billion accounts and whether or not I wish to continue.

If you want suicide ganking for 'lulz' to stop. Bring back NPC mineral buy orders to stabilize the market somewhat. Currently mods and ships are too cheap, that is what is funding the speight of suicide ganking atm.


Spawning Concord to avoid getting ganked is against the rules.

You can't blame the high-sec miners who have had enough. The writing was on the wall for months but nobody chose to behave responsibly. Now you have your consequences.

Pesadel0
the muppets
RED.OverLord
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:44:00 - [157]
 

Originally by: Fuddlesticks
Edited by: Fuddlesticks on 06/08/2008 11:39:06
Originally by: Pesadel0


Low-sec been long time dead.I lolled when i read in the blog that this was a way to encourage more ganking in low sec :)


Which is fine - We'll see how it pans out, but I can hardly fault you for being amused. It's when people spread doom and gloom with no basis for what they're saying that I want to slap someone..you know, cause it's "cool" to go "omg this will kill EVE!".

*EDIT: un-pyramiding my post*


I spell doom and alot of pirates spell dooom because this is a shift in the psychological balance,you have the means to not get killed in high sec ,but you dont use them you are lazy and stupid ,and now even CCP helps the lazy and the stupid .

Dont get me wrong we will still suicide gank ,what i find hilarious is CCP position in all of this ,the cold hard place eve was is transforming into a warm place for stupid people and that i see a problem.

Dev Rom
Caldari
Masterminds Industries
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:45:00 - [158]
 

Edited by: Dev Rom on 06/08/2008 11:49:34
Guys, what creazy insurance would insure criminal' ships???
And what insurance would pay for a ship loss because of a criminal act???
And what insurance would accept to insure again something belonging to a well known criminal?

PLEASE, don't cry for this you pirates! This is simply a good sense patch. Full stop.

If Eve have to be some kind of simulation, insurance have to make sense!!!

Tchu
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:45:00 - [159]
 

Please change name of this game to Hello Kitty Online. Empire will be carebears paradise soon, well done =(

Veldya
Guristari Freedom Fighters
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:45:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: Ron Wright
BAN MACROMINERS and actually start reading petitions about them and the "Suicideganking-Problem" disappears by itself....


I agree macro miners should be hunted down and banned... by CCP.

I don't know why anyone would macro mine, there are so many easier ways to make isk in and outside of empire.

Laudicia
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:49:00 - [161]
 

ATM you can get in to -10 in just a couple of kills.
However to raise the standing it takes to much time.

I think in low sec you shouldnt have such high standing loss.
As people take the risk to get in to lower sec.


Korinn
Habitual Euthanasia
Dystopia Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:49:00 - [162]
 

Edited by: Korinn on 06/08/2008 11:49:37
Originally by: Pesadel0
Dont get me wrong we will still suicide gank ,what i find hilarious is CCP position in all of this ,the cold hard place eve was is transforming into a warm place for stupid people and that i see a problem.


It's funny because it's almost _exactly_ like the nano nerf in the fact that both have perfectly adequate counters which are well documented *EVERYWHERE*, and yet CCP still feel the need to make massive changes to areas of the game which aren't especially "broken" (in need of slight rebalance maybe) rather than sorting out major issues such as the market (price of mods + base minerals) and the UI Laughing

FireFoxx80
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:50:00 - [163]
 

Originally by: BritishInvader
Also, insurance not being paid out in CONCORD events is going to lead to a huge amount of crippled newbies who accidentally shot someone in highsec with their shiny ship, got CONCORDED, and lost all their money.


+1 to that. I've lost a ship to CONCORD before (after being in Eve for 3 years), because of ill-explained game mechanics and poor documentation. If newbies start loosing their ship and all their ISK, then you can bet your conversion rate from trial>full will drop.

Saying that, I don't mind insurance payouts being modified by the standing. The blog mentions the difference in security rating between pilots, so perhaps insurance should also fit with this (-10% to insurance payout, if a -5 player unlawfully kills a +5 one).


The best thing about Eve, to me, is that despite how much of a pirate or Caldari-hating scum you are; you can always claw back standing for the other side. Fine if low-sec rats no longer give out security increases, but you have to offset that with something else the pirates can do to increase their standing(1).


(1) Could CONCORD start having low-sec agents, which specifically improve security rating (I understand they did this in the olden days of Eve). Give 'convicts' low-grade missions, such as hauling garbage and other boring missions ('go clear out this drone infestation'), and the power to raise their -10 rating to something less dangerous. At least then, they'd have to suffer the same risks as high-sec mission runners (such as being probed out and ganked!)

Typhado3
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:53:00 - [164]
 

hmm pvp might now move to low sec/0.0, which I'm pretty sure is what ccp intended. Yeah I know a lot of ppl out there like to stay in empire to pvp and this is a pretty major nerf to them but I've always believed empire ganking should be for those you really hate or trying to find that gtc seller with the officer fitted cnr. But hey that's just my opinion and I havn't been ganked (I have more than half a brain) and I haven't ganked (I like my 5.1 sec status) so I'll leave talking about balance to the people that care/know what they are talking about. however that does bring me on to my point:

1. What about those people who have >+5 sec status?

iirc it was once possible to have your sec status go all the way up to 10 at one point until it was changed to max of 5 (I may be totally wrong here as it was a few years ago back in my noob days). There are probably a few people out there who still have the high sec status of 10 or so. Does this mean some of the grizzled ancient carebears will have extra penalties for ganking them which no other player can ever reach?

2. drones.

ok this one I'm even less sure about but iirc rouge drones don't give sec status increase (ignore this point if wrong). With new mechanics coming in for sec status could it be possible to make sure they do effect security status (concord tried to send an attack against them last I remember rp wise).

3 more drones.

do concord stop your drones? I don't know about empire ganking mechanics but from what I understand the moment concord show up your jammed and dieing. If they are slowing down the dieing part (by making the bs take longer to lock you and less ships show up) wouldn't this make ganking domi's the obvious choice for suicide ganking as they can do extra damage with their drones while other ganking ships sit there jammed.

Dex Nederland
Caldari
Lai Dai Infinity Systems
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:54:00 - [165]
 

Slight boost for anti-pirates \0/
It is all in perspective.

Still need to figure out the security penalty for a +5 security status pilot attacking criminals of various security rating.

Wouldn't it be a harsh cruel universe if >+5 security pilots could attack -10 pirates without having to worry about a security lose - wait, anti-pirates/bounty hunters can shoot first blasphemy!

Eve is dark and harsh, but it should be that way for everyone; not just those following the rules Wink

Granmethedon III
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:56:00 - [166]
 

Terrible proposal, utterly terrible. Another way to remove the scope and depth from Eve by removing the one thing that makes Eve greater than any other MMO by making there be a certain element of risk at all times and instead helps turn it into another dull grinding paradise. Way to go.

Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
Posted - 2008.08.06 11:57:00 - [167]
 

Originally by: Typhado3

do concord stop your drones? I don't know about empire ganking mechanics but from what I understand the moment concord show up your jammed and dieing. If they are slowing down the dieing part (by making the bs take longer to lock you and less ships show up) wouldn't this make ganking domi's the obvious choice for suicide ganking as they can do extra damage with their drones while other ganking ships sit there jammed.


That's how it used to be up until the LAST nerf to suicide ganking. It's not commonly known/remembered that suicide ganking has already been severely nerfed. Now, drones are jammed by CONCORD.

Hoody
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:00:00 - [168]
 

Originally by: Fuddlesticks

macro-miners is not something that's being covered in any patch ever


Fyp

Falun Assad
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:00:00 - [169]
 

Quote:
But what for the future?

We have a taskforce (Named TaskForce Doughnut!) which is dedicated to looking over these changes and proposing plans for the future. We have already started work on the above, but the future holds more changes.

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

The CONCORD changes and Security penalty will be hitting TQ this fall, with Empyrean Age 1.1.

Be safe out there!

CCP Fear



Ohh great, now the last weapon against macro miners goes down the sink....

excellent thinking there... Rolling Eyes

Unless you do something against 7+ noobcorper squads in Hulks or mackinaws mining 23/7, you should not implement this. Right now a disco-geddon is the only weapon against them, take away insurance and nobody is going to fight them anymore, so they can finally ruin mining as an income for legitimate players.

Eleana Tomelac
Gallente
Eclats de verre
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:01:00 - [170]
 

Less security loss in lowsec, well, this could make pirating a possible part time activity, which is a good move.

The loss for lowsec could be significantly lower, not just a bit, we could have amateur pirates raise into activity, shooting randomly factional warfare pilots. But as always, as for a sandbox, people will dig it or not, other will even say it's bad sand...

The cost of popping a mining barge in hisec was ridiculously low, even for the more expensive T2 ones, it was just a joke. Loosing a brutix to a mack, well... Too easy with insurance and top cheap fitting + faction ammo (just the guns loaded with 20 bullets or so, still cheap).

Planning to kill people and scanning them on a trade route will still be possible, for better loot only. Well, no one should afford to randomly pop industrials and barges.

Roy Batty68
Caldari
Immortal Dead
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:04:00 - [171]
 

ShockedLaughing
Keep fighting those symptoms, CCP! Pretty soon your game is going to look like a mummy with all the patches to the patches to the patches.

WHY IS IT SO CHEAP TO SUICIDE GANK???
What caused that in the first place? Why is ship costs down to nearly a profit with insurance? Why is base cost so apparently out of wack? It didn't used to be... hmmm... I wonder if one or two of your past changes brought this about... What do you think?


Keep coddling the 6 month whiney wonders, CCP!! The game used to be about evolving, learning, adapting. Your game will never be WoW. You shouldn't even try to please that crowd. What makes your game great is the very fact that it ****es that lot off. It is a totally different way of thinking that alot of refugees from other games just never get. It's natural that they whine. And they'll continue to whine after these changes as well.

A poor man's WoW will just be something no one plays.


I'm not so worried about this specific change. It's just the change in theme and direction that seems to be eminating from CCP HQ lately. Hold the line, man. Carebears will whine you out of a buisness.


ArmyOfMe
Hysera.
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:05:00 - [172]
 

the insurance changes were bound to happen, the other changes are a bit meh tbh

Syrinthal
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:07:00 - [173]
 

While I do gank to afford GTC's to afford gametime to actually play (yay for being a student in the 3rd world :D with the :jewclaw:)

I think the reduction in reaction time is a pretty stupid idea - the rest I dont really have an issue with. Sec status losses will **** a lot of good high sec pvpers off :/

Cant fix lag or make pvpers happy? HALP TAH BEARZ!
Think your market share is small cos everything isnt mass market appeal? MAKE SUM NERFZ
Why bother trying to keep the game cold and gritty? I for one would love pink stations and cute flower named "space buggies", om nom nom

Rhak Amharr
Minmatar
Genos Occidere
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:08:00 - [174]
 

Edited by: Rhak Amharr on 06/08/2008 12:09:21
Originally by: CCP Fear
Low security (0,3-0,1) is basically getting a reduction in security penalty from it's current values. So in essence, the lowest of security, just got harsher.


Originally by: Devblog
...It is too easy to gain back lost standing...

So, you made low security more harsh by making those who go there to shoot non wartargets / non outlaws take 1 hour less to grind their sec back to -1.9? And you seriously call it "harsher"?
-- rant begin --

In my opinion, there are 4 groups of people going to lowsec:
- Pirates who do not care about sec status
- People who shoot at enemies only (anti-pirates -> pirates, FWer -> other faction FWer, etc.), no standing loss
- People who don't know what they're doing, but in general they don't shoot other players, no standing loss
- People who do it for the rush of doing missions/ratting/plexing in lowsec, no standing loss

Oh, I forgot a fifth group, for which this is actually good: Our beloved Weekend PVPers, who run missions / rat in 0.0 during the week to build up funds and sec status so they're not outlaw, and who blob the crap out of everything on weekends. Great thing they need to grind less for sec status.

-- rant end --

I'm glad you didn't call this a lowsec buff, otherwise this post would contain IRL threats. :)

agent apple
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:09:00 - [175]
 

I believe I can safely speak for many of us when I say,

Dear Devs, Go Back to WOW

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:12:00 - [176]
 

Originally by: Granmethedon III
Terrible proposal, utterly terrible. Another way to remove the scope and depth from Eve by removing the one thing that makes Eve greater than any other MMO by making there be a certain element of risk at all times and instead helps turn it into another dull grinding paradise. Way to go.


Yeah. The element of risk for the highsec gankers has been immense so far. Rolling Eyes

Fuddlesticks
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:13:00 - [177]
 

Originally by: Hoody
Originally by: Fuddlesticks

macro-miners is not something that's being covered in this patch


Fyp


Please don't "fix" my qoutes for me..I mean I say, and I say what I mean.
If you think it's a deliberate thing that's being avoided by CCP, then please..share..What can be done to stop macrominers.

Kvarium Ki
Igneus Auctorita
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:15:00 - [178]
 

Edited by: Kvarium Ki on 06/08/2008 12:17:36
Edited by: Kvarium Ki on 06/08/2008 12:16:29
If you are going to do this then limit the ship types that people can fly while in NPC corporations.

You shouldn't be abble to fly a freighter, any type of mining barge, battleships, battlecruisers or T2 ship while in an NPC corp.

You shouldn't be abble to stay in an NPC corp for ever and be pretty much immune to pirate attacks.


Eleana Tomelac
Gallente
Eclats de verre
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:17:00 - [179]
 

Originally by: Falun Assad

Ohh great, now the last weapon against macro miners goes down the sink....

excellent thinking there... Rolling Eyes


The main weapon is called a GM...

The number of macro miners has been much reduced in some places, it takes some time to check a galaxy of asteroid/ice belts...
At least in the ice belt we use, there used to be 100+ people, now, there are like 30, and they look like players with a corporation and I don't always see the same people when we are there. The 70 others were always there and would be macros, banned macros.

Korinn
Habitual Euthanasia
Dystopia Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.06 12:18:00 - [180]
 

Originally by: agent apple
I believe I can safely speak for many of us when I say,

Dear Devs, Go Back to WOW


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : 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