open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Thanks for caving in CCP.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

5pinDizzy
Amarr
Pillow Fighters Inc
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:00:00 - [1]
 

Quote:

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


So there you have it, empire space is about to become ten times more boring.

I did hear the cries of the people complaining about certain aspects of suicide ganking. I would have been fine with this if you'd have said, well, they can have basic insurance covering the hull, but no Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum. But ZER0??????!!!

You know all those ISK farmers we're supposed to petition that you never ban?

They aren't going to suicide ganked either now, they must all be jumping for joy as the sound of this news.

...but I guess that was the point, look after the people with two dozen subscribed accounts.

I've played this game for over 2 years on multiple chars and I've never been suicide ganked once, and I have moved expensive stuff around, I just know how to be sensible and I bet the same could be said for a lot of people.

I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked.

- The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No.
- The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No.
- Giant gangs of mining barges? Hell No.

This update rewards.

- Macro miners and macro mission runners.
- AFK gameplay.
- That if you whine on the forums long enough you'll get your way.

So good luck on your continuing to quest Eve Empire into Warm Cuddly Town.

So come flame me forum warriors!

I don't care I'm mad enough about this change then anything I've ever heard come from them before, whatever you say to me it was worth it.

Almiel
Gallente
Distant Thunder
Perihelion Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:02:00 - [2]
 

Just self-destruct your pod.

I am for removing issurance all together, or bring it back to no default inssurance and 2 week duration.

Slanty McGarglefist
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:02:00 - [3]
 

We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Rolling Eyes

copasetic sideways
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:02:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: 5pinDizzy
whatever you say to me it was worth it.



i say this to you: fokens!

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:04:00 - [5]
 

Flame flame flame.

Also, /signed

Kelli Flay
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:04:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist
We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Rolling Eyes



RL comparrison = Failure and too much time in your mom's basement.

Matrixcvd
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:05:00 - [7]
 

pretty much bending over and giving in to all the loser pilots, i have this strange feeling the screen will just be bright pink pretty soon

Slanty McGarglefist
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:06:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Slanty McGarglefist on 06/08/2008 14:06:00
Originally by: Kelli Flay
Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist
We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Rolling Eyes



RL comparrison = Failure and too much time in your mom's basement.

Say that to those who support no insurance for suicide gankers Rolling Eyes. And this RL comparison however moot in the whole swing of things is completely true.

Bager Gray
Gallente
Federation of Freedom Fighters
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:09:00 - [9]
 

If they are going to increase concord effectivness, why not decrease the amount of high sec space.

Christari Zuborov
Amarr
Ore Mongers
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:09:00 - [10]
 

Completely agree with OP...

Another sad day for EvE.

Crying or Very sad

Kelli Flay
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:10:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Christari Zuborov
Completely agree with OP...

Another sad day for EvE.

Crying or Very sad



Yeah, I think i feel a tear forming. Rolling Eyes

Ruze
Amarr
Next Stage Initiative
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:11:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist
We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Rolling Eyes


Isn't that the same mentality the other way around? They can't accept the fact that an aggressive attack on another person in high-sec should warrant a very hard and tough punishment.

If you purposefully killed someone in front of CONCORD, knowing that you yourself would die ... shouldn't that carry a hefty punishment? It seems more than 'fair', to use the term, that if you commit the crime, you don't get insurance payouts, AND you get enough of a sec hit that you can't enter high-sec.

The lack of accepting 'responsibility' goes both ways.

Slanty McGarglefist
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:16:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Slanty McGarglefist on 06/08/2008 14:16:44
Originally by: Ruze
Originally by: Slanty McGarglefist
We live in a world where nobody can accept responsibility for their own actions and it's always somebody else's fault. It's not my fault that I AFK-hauled and got ganked! Rolling Eyes


Isn't that the same mentality the other way around? They can't accept the fact that an aggressive attack on another person in high-sec should warrant a very hard and tough punishment.

If you purposefully killed someone in front of CONCORD, knowing that you yourself would die ... shouldn't that carry a hefty punishment? It seems more than 'fair', to use the term, that if you commit the crime, you don't get insurance payouts, AND you get enough of a sec hit that you can't enter high-sec.

The lack of accepting 'responsibility' goes both ways.

But of course good sir, just don't go around crying when you made yourself a juicy target because you were AFK-flying an untanked hauler with millions in loots.

That's the only point I was chiming in on.

Privateer Stern
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:17:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Privateer Stern on 06/08/2008 14:18:11
Well, I agree to a point with CCP. It's high security space, and people in it should be more protected. If you want to fight, go to low security space, there's lots of it.

Sorry, but I am one that wanted a BIT more toward this end, so I'm with CCP.

I don't agree that it will help people with complete AFK playing, but the aspect of HIGH security space means more of what it is now.

Janu Hull
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:19:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Janu Hull on 06/08/2008 14:19:45
If you suicide gank any ship that isn't worth more than the ship you're about to lose, you're essentially a barking moron deserving of a painful reminder to play intelligently.

Stop being sloppy and target the good stuff. This isn't the death of suicide ganking, its just a reminder to gankers that this game isn't meant to be easy on the predator any more than the prey.

Steve Hawkings
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:23:00 - [16]
 

The thing is the only people that cried are the stupid ones that lost millions in a gank.

Privateer Stern
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:24:00 - [17]
 

Missed the point altogether. It's high security space and should be treated as such to those with low security rating attacking others. End of point.

Craleo
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:26:00 - [18]
 

Just leave empire and stop whining. People that whine about this change are grievers anyway. Learn to play the game and come to 0.0!

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:27:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Craleo
Just leave empire and stop whining. People that whine about this change are grievers anyway. Learn to play the game and come to 0.0!
It's not gr... oh, wait, grievers, ok.

Quelque Chose
New Eden Roller Disco Supply
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:28:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: 5pinDizzy


I can't think of anyone who deserves sympathy that's been suicide ganked.

- The people carrying 100mill in the untanked t1 hauler? No.
- The freighter carrying 99 gazzillion isk in capital ship bpo's? No.
- Giant gangs of mining barges? Hell No.




OTOH, how much sympathy do you reckon suicide gankers are worthy of? They're just bellying up to the high sec trough same as anybody else described above, with the exception that most of them also have access to profitable ratting in nullsec.

I'm not really interested in seeing high sec become a padded room either, but that's for balance reasons. If we're going to base this on who deserves "sympathy" and who doesn't I'm afraid nobody really comes out looking good.

Akkarin Pagan
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:31:00 - [21]
 

It's a fair call. Your car insurance company will not pay out under certain circumstances (in fact they try to avoid paying out in any circumstances, but that's a rant for another time).

Pend now won't pay out if Concord is involved, so you better make sure that the target you hit will net you enough isk to cover your loss.

Personally I have never been suicided, or had anyone attempt it (unless you count people who attacked me who I then killed (there's about 3 of them out there Embarassed)).

Basically this mechanic change just means that your untanked hauler with millions in the hold is somewhat safer, while that afk ferighter with untold billions in the cargo is in fact at greater risk due to the fact that there will be fewer targets.

Akkarin

Ruze
Amarr
Next Stage Initiative
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:32:00 - [22]
 

There are some other changes I'd like to see, though.

I'd like to see security grow weaker and weaker, and I think small ships should be able to attack in higher security without in ones and twos, without fear of CONCORD. If a player knows that he can get a one on one or a one on two fight in a .7 system, as long as he's in a T1 frigate, then he's more likely to get involved. Still a sec hit, still considering piracy, but as long as only frigates are involved, CONCORDOKKEN isn't alerted.

Progressive security, that is. And progressive PvP in the process. This crap about going from noob-land high sec and getting hit by three BS's at your first .4 gatecamp isn't very conducive and doesn't make a lot of sense. Those factions have lots of assets in low-sec, too.


I also think it should be harder and more expensive to make and maintain a corporation. I'm in a solo corporation, and I know how easy it is to stay invulnerable from wardecs with it.

Finally, NPC corporations should be holding points only. There needs to be some method ... I did like the taxes idea ... of pushing players out. To counter that, though, and the imbalance created from making corps harder to make, war decs need to be a two-way agreement.

Whatever. The current system works, albeit it doesn't make sense to me.

Napro
Caldari
Simplistic Syndicate
Cha0s Theory
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:32:00 - [23]
 

Why wouldn't you gank a Freighter with 99 gazillion isk worth of bpos?

Because ud lose out on the few hundred million of insurance money? rly?


Veldya
Guristari Freedom Fighters
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:32:00 - [24]
 

I agree with the no insurance for concord deaths.

I agree with higher security hits in high sec.

I think there should be no low-sec security hits.

Create L6 missions, these are level 1 variants with much higher payouts. Something you can do in a frigate ship with a PvP setup, it should pay around L3 type of rewards.

Create L7 missions, these are level 2 variants with much higher payouts. Something you can do in a cruiser with a PvP setup, it should pay around L4 type of rewards.

Create L8 missions, these are Level 4 variants with significantly higher payouts. These should be paying 3x - 5x the reward of L4s and designed for a group of people to do them. Missions take longer, you need a strong tank to do the missions and will likely need to do it with friends but the rewards is there to justify the risk.

The mission location is always in the same system as the agent reducing the risk of running into gate camps but it would breed life into low-sec for those not afraid of the risk.

Mjeh
STRONG POLITIK
Extempore Extinguo
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:33:00 - [25]
 

I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here...

As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode.

What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere.

I hear a lot of people crying and whining that suicide ganking held no risk and was too easy, but every single one of them failed to even mention that with some very basic measures you can make yourself practically immune to high sec suicide gankage. I won't even begin on some of the other common misconceptions about the ease and profitability of suicide ganking, because I think this point is strong enough in it's own right. If you play smart, you're immune. But people don't want to play smart, they want to play AFK.

And CCP now confirmed that their right to play like this weighs more heavily than the integrity of the game, so long as the whiners constitute a bigger mass of paying customers than the ones who prey upon them do. Or maybe just because they whine louder, I can't tell which anymore.

Anyway, this is going to fade into the shroud of unrememberance as just another disgruntled whine in just another disgruntled thread, so instead of writing further I'm going to cast my vote the only way it will matter somewhat. My 3 accounts will not be renewed during the next billing period. Enjoy your bearfest, it was fun while it lasted :)

Craleo
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:35:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Quelque Chose

I'm not really interested in seeing high sec become a padded room either, but that's for balance reasons. If we're going to base this on who deserves "sympathy" and who doesn't I'm afraid nobody really comes out looking good.



THIS!

And ofc, if there is several 100m in a hauler, then it's still worth it. It will just reduce the amount of random griefing ganks.

And we are talking high sec here. Get your griefing ass out of there and stop playing Eve in easy mode.

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:36:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Craleo
griefing

heheheh
Phoenix Club
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:37:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Mjeh
I don't think people fully realize what's at stake here...

As the OP title hinted at, this is CCP caving in and going back on one of their core principles, in what seems a desperate measure to keep disgruntled players who were too lazy to play on any other mode than AFK-mode.

What dies here isn't suicide ganking, because there will still be ways, what dies here is CCP's integrity and, IMO, much of what was attractive about this game in the first place; the cold, unforgiving atmosphere.

I hear a lot of people crying and whining that suicide ganking held no risk and was too easy, but every single one of them failed to even mention that with some very basic measures you can make yourself practically immune to high sec suicide gankage. I won't even begin on some of the other common misconceptions about the ease and profitability of suicide ganking, because I think this point is strong enough in it's own right. If you play smart, you're immune. But people don't want to play smart, they want to play AFK.

And CCP now confirmed that their right to play like this weighs more heavily than the integrity of the game, so long as the whiners constitute a bigger mass of paying customers than the ones who prey upon them do. Or maybe just because they whine louder, I can't tell which anymore.

Anyway, this is going to fade into the shroud of unrememberance as just another disgruntled whine in just another disgruntled thread, so instead of writing further I'm going to cast my vote the only way it will matter somewhat. My 3 accounts will not be renewed during the next billing period. Enjoy your bearfest, it was fun while it lasted :)


This is a good Post, thank you.
CCP has been our freinds for so long then all of a sudden they cave in to whiners, cry babies and generally crap players, Its so easy to mke yourself immune to these gankers yet they cant even get their heeads around it.
Next step along the line is large yellow exclamation marks above the mission objectives and a full body avatar Goblin to toss you off everytime you complete a mission.

Sheriff Jones
Amarr
Clinical Experiment
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:38:00 - [29]
 

Well now you can finally start calling it suicide ganking.

Before it was more like "going into battle knowing you'll blow up".

This won't remove suicide ganking, as it shouldn't, but it WILL remove griefganking.

I can't honestly think of anyone who wouldn't think of that as a good thing.

It's not like the cargo they go after isn't worth it.

Bartholomeus Crane
Gallente
The Crane Family
Posted - 2008.08.06 14:38:00 - [30]
 

The changes are good.

You are whining.

Please emoragequit.

Can I have you stuff?


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

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