open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Self Destruct Balancing
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Gardon Three
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:41:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Gardon Three on 16/02/2009 01:31:08
In the last few months I saw several capital ships trying to kill a small gang and ended by being tackled themselves. When those capital pilots realized that they were dead for sure they activated self destruct.
This is not right. In a small ship is impossible to do this but in a capital ship the 2 min are more then enough to self destruct. This is not the way to play this game. We try to make a plan to trap a enemy and he self destruct. Where is here the ratio between risk and win?
When a capital ship is lost u lose money (the ship value) but is a lost for your personal and corp/alliance record.

The self destruct should be changed.
I have a few suggestions: <=== I said suggestions

BAD 1. Make Self Destruct impossible when u are locked. BAD

2. Make Sekf Destruct with differed time: frigate 1 min - bs 4 min - capital 15 min.
Why this is against the self destructive concept? A biger ship should be much harder to self destruct when a frigate.

BAD 3. Make Self Destruct impossible when u have agro similar to log of agro.BAD

4. If u Self Destruct u lose insurance. U burn your house u dont get any money from insurance.

5. Some of u said something about a killmail even if self dustruct.

CCP is time to do something. This is as bad as dual mwd was some time ago.

Goonda
Minmatar
DOMINATIO
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:49:00 - [2]
 

It sounds like a legitimate tactic to me.

I do like your option #4 though.

Kinda like burning down your own house. If someone is stealing stuff from your house and rather than letting them get away with the stuff you burn the house down. Would the insurance pay to rebuild your house?

Apolluon
Gallente
No Limit Productions
Looney Toons.
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:52:00 - [3]
 

Less QQ please.

the rainingdeath
Infinity Enterprises
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.02.12 20:54:00 - [4]
 

The only one I agree with is #4 and what Goonda said.

Ki Tarra
Ki Tech Industries
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:20:00 - [5]
 

Wrong forum: try this one.

How about the simple option of logging the kill record for everyone involved in the kill even if the ship dies as a result of self-destruction?

Only a cross-reference entry to get the kill to appear in the relevant players history is needed, there is no need to duplicate all of the details in the database.


... or why is it that you care that they self-destruct, they are just as dead.

Elaron
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:21:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Gardon Three
Where is here the ratio between risk and win?
The opponent has lost their ship because of you. That is your victory.

Self destruct was included deliberately to allow pilots some small chance of denying their vanquishers their full measure of satisfaction. Think of it as a way of them giving you some small return on the grief you caused them.

I tacitly agree with (4) on your list (insurance fraud), and a killmail should be generated for the victors in the engagement if self-destruction occurs while aggressed by other players, but other changes are unnecessary.

Katarlia Simov
Minmatar
Cowboys From Hell
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:16:00 - [7]
 

I agree that self destructing should generate a kill mail, given to the player who did the most damage in the fight, and credit the self destruct with the remaining. Would work fine, and would allow kill boards to show that you won.

I think that self destructing to deny a kill mail is cheap and shouldn't be facilitated. I mean, you should feel good for 'winning', but its nice to have 1) Proof and 2) Bragging rights. I mean, technically, you could see a bundle of carriers go nuts on each other, but the loosing side self destructs everything, gets 2 capital kills and the killboard reads that as a win for the other team.

Hesod Adee
Dark-Rising
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:50:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Katarlia Simov
I agree that self destructing should generate a kill mail, given to the player who did the most damage in the fight, and credit the self destruct with the remaining. Would work fine, and would allow kill boards to show that you won.


Yes. Name and shame the people who self-destruct, see if that stops them. If it doesn't, then we can talk about changing gameplay.

Though denying insurance along with the name and shame sounds tempting.

Elaron
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:21:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Hesod Adee
Name and shame the people who self-destruct, see if that stops them.
If in a no-win situation, why would the person who self-destructed feel any shame?

mcnuggetlol
Amarr
Via Crucis Inc.
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:29:00 - [10]
 

Let's have self destructs do aoe damage depending on the ship size, make it more of a final **** you then just a way of avoiding killmails.

RisenPhoenix
Shadowyn Corp.
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:43:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: mcnuggetlol
Let's have self destructs do aoe damage depending on the ship size, make it more of a final **** you then just a way of avoiding killmails.


**** yes

Isabella Montague
Gallente
RUDE Alliance
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:49:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Isabella Montague on 12/02/2009 23:49:52
Originally by: Katarlia Simov
I think that self destructing to deny a kill mail is cheap and shouldn't be facilitated. I mean, you should feel good for 'winning', but its nice to have 1) Proof and 2) Bragging rights. I mean, technically, you could see a bundle of carriers go nuts on each other, but the loosing side self destructs everything, gets 2 capital kills and the killboard reads that as a win for the other team.


I don't really see how it's cheap. Seems to be functioning as intended to me. The whole point of self-destructing is to prevent your enemy from gaining something.

If you're going to grant people their kill mails, then you might as well just remove self destruct from the game since it would no longer serve a purpose anyways.

The only one I agree with is #4

NightF0x
Gallente
Intergalactic League of Terrorists
Posted - 2009.02.12 23:59:00 - [13]
 

Would you be upset if there were no killmail system?

Marcus Gideon
Gallente
Federal Defense Operations
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:34:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Marcus Gideon on 13/02/2009 00:40:24
Boo hoo... I can't stroke my epeen! And I so love printing out the killmails and covering the walls of my mom's basement!

Self Destruct, or Scuttling, is purely designed to prevent the aggressor from walking away with your property. So whining on forums because you "worked so hard" to get someone elses gear, and you were denied the satisfaction of a little email that says "U R sew awsum. Gud 4 U!"

Cry me a river, build a bridge, and get over it. Or better yet, bottle up those tears, because I use them to fuel my Capacitor.

Irn Bruce
Posted - 2009.02.13 00:36:00 - [15]
 

CCP are talking about the T3 ships causing SP loss when you lose them, but ejecting or self destructing stopping this loss. They say in the latest dev blog this will give a reason to eject or self destruct. I really don't think self destructing needs any more incentive than it already has. For a start I think that self destructing a T3 ship should definitely not save you from the SP loss. I agree with the ejecting point though. You'll have to weigh up the benefits of it. You either eject, hope they don't notice and destroy your ship anyway, or you face losing SP (one level off a random subsystem skill, so if you have them all maxed it'll take one from a lvl 5 down to a lvl 4) or you risk them getting a free (probably very valuable) T3 ship out of it. The only saving grace is I can't imagine anything cruiser sized being able to tank for long enough to let the self destruct timer run down. Although it would make it even more annoying to lose the killmail if you had managed to beat one in a frigate, for example.

In broader terms, self destructing should pod you. When a captain goes down with his ship, he should actually go down with it. Right now there is no drawback to self destructing at all. If it podded you, and you were PVPing with expensive implants or an out of date clone, you'd stand to lose something at least. If you're even thinking of self destructing, losing the ship is irrelevant, because it was going down anyway. So if you self destruct, the only ones that lose out are the people who had beaten you. I would be happy for this to cause AoE damage though. You self destruct your ship, you lose your pod, but you might take some of them out with you (though it shouldn't be too strong) You'd also have to weigh up the consequences of doing this in highsec, as you'd take a big sec hit if you did it outside Jita 4-4 for example.

Sir Wolfgang
Gallente
Posted - 2009.02.13 01:59:00 - [16]
 

#1-3 Would Not keep balance, and just seem to me your on the other end of it and do not like the feature
#4 Is a good idea that should be done! You dont get money for burning down your house... Well Unless you do it right.

Sir Substance
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:03:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: mcnuggetlol
Let's have self destructs do aoe damage depending on the ship size, make it more of a final **** you then just a way of avoiding killmails.


its not a way of avoiding killmails, if the ship self destructs, it doesn't drop loot.

that is why you self destruct. it already is a final "**** you", its denying the enemy any financial compensation for their actions.

F4LC0N
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:34:00 - [18]
 

I wish npc's would also self destruct or warp off when you break their tank.

shi'ako
Posted - 2009.02.13 04:41:00 - [19]
 

I do like #4, its more Real and nasty, very EvE.! Evil or Very Mad

The others no itís a legitimate option, and needs leaving in.
Though maybe a kill mail should be produced to the last person to shoot it prior to detonation?
That way its only denying them loot not getting you out of the fact u messed up and lost your ship. Laughing

Typhado3
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.02.13 05:50:00 - [20]
 

umm please forgive my noobishness but aside from not getting a killmail what does self destructing do?

Great Citlalicue
Posted - 2009.02.13 06:15:00 - [21]
 

Gardon,

Your suggestion (point 1 and 3) are illogical and is completely against what self destruct suppose to accomplish. Essentially you are proposing to only allow ships to self destruct when they are in no danger?

What you actually proposing is to prevent capital ships form self districting. I donít really care if they do or donít but please donít ask for complex solutions to simple problems.

Kalia Masaer
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Posted - 2009.02.13 07:31:00 - [22]
 

I like the insurance fraud bit to discourage people from self destructing and it would be good to show the kill mail for some proof a ship was destroyed.

Sir Substance
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
Posted - 2009.02.13 10:12:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Typhado3
umm please forgive my noobishness but aside from not getting a killmail what does self destructing do?


*sigh* i will list everything a self destrict does, fot the ebenefit of those incapable of reathing the thread.

1. prevents loot dropping.

if you descruct your carrier, you make sure your attackers cant ge ttheir theiving little hands on those 40mil+ capital reppers/triage modules etc.

2. hides you.

the flash (and on occasion ensuing lag) of a ship going up in smoke can hide your pod emergence long enough for you to warp off. otherwise, your pod appears on grid, targettable, slightly before you are actually able to make it move, meaning interceptors can snag you before you have a chance.

distant 3. prevents your enemies epeen from growing because he doesnt get a killmail.

as you can see, it has two very big advantages to its use, but everyone is crying over the third, because apparently a text document is everything.

SpawnSupreme
Posted - 2009.02.13 11:19:00 - [24]
 

works fine leave it alone

H Lecter
Gallente
The Black Rabbits Academy
The Gurlstas Associates
Posted - 2009.02.13 12:53:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Elaron
The opponent has lost their ship because of you. That is your victory.

Self destruct was included deliberately to allow pilots some small chance of denying their vanquishers their full measure of satisfaction. Think of it as a way of them giving you some small return on the grief you caused them.

I tacitly agree with (4) on your list (insurance fraud), and a killmail should be generated for the victors in the engagement if self-destruction occurs while aggressed by other players, but other changes are unnecessary.


This.

I also once believed that self destructing was lame - but then I experienced a logoffski. Since then I think it's a very valid tactic and shows that you had at least the balls to admit that you had lost the engagement.


Osiris Andras
Amarr
Posted - 2009.02.13 13:29:00 - [26]
 

the only thing I agree with on that list is 4. People shouldn't get insurance back on something they destroyed willingly.

Also, a little splash on a self destructed ship would be nice, gives not-bob a reason to lose their titans :D

Joe Skellington
Minmatar
Matari Legion Holding
Matari Legion
Posted - 2009.02.13 15:09:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Joe Skellington on 13/02/2009 15:09:41
Originally by: Gardon Three
In the last few months I saw several capital ships trying to kill a small gang and ended by being tackled themselves. When those capital pilots realized that they were dead for sure they activated self destruct.
This is not right. In a small ship is impossible to do this but in a capital ship the 2 min are more then enough to self destruct. This is not the way to play this game. We try to make a plan to trap a enemy and he self destruct. Where is here the ratio between risk and win?
When a capital ship is lost u lose money (the ship value) but is a lost for your personal and corp/alliance record.

The self destruct should be changed.
I have a few suggestions:

1. Make Self Destruct impossible when u are locked.
2. Make Sekf Destruct with differed time: frigate 1 min - bs 4 min - capital 15 min.
3. Make Self Destruct impossible when u have agro similar to log of agro.
4. If u Self Destruct u lose insurance.

CCP is time to do something. This is as bad as dual mwd was some time ago.



Your argument sounded good until I read what you wanted which sucks in my opinion. all they need to do is change the self destruct to be able to set your own time to destruct. Making it not able to use in lock or aggro defeats the whole purpose of Self Destruct.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.02.13 19:28:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 13/02/2009 20:08:17
#4 is cool, agreed

For the killmail, just let do the ship damaging itself with the minimal damage required to destroy it and give the final blow to the person which dealt the most damage to it.

So if the ship is selfdestructed without being engaged it does the full damage to itself and hence the owner gets a killmail (because he did the most damage).

Would the ship selfdestruct during a fight, some damage is already dealt by the enemy, the required final damage at the countdown finish will be unlikely enough for the final blow (unless the victim initializes selfdestruct in an early stage of the fight) and hence the killmail would go to someone else but the owner.

Maybe the selfdestruct may be connected with deactivation of all modules discouraging pilots using it in a fight (my apologies I dont know if its already so, never selfdestructed a ship)...

testalus rima
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.02.13 20:10:00 - [29]
 

agree with #4 -> see insurance too

narciasss
Posted - 2009.04.24 17:42:00 - [30]
 

I totally AGREE with marcus, cry me a flippin river if you dont like it when i self destruct my ship. Thats what i am trying to get you to do. That is the purpose when the victim has no hope to hold onto.


Pages: [1] 2

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