open All Channels
seplocked Crime and Punishment
blankseplocked Suicide Gankers making this game cheap.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Havohej
Du'uma Fiisi Integrated Astrometrics
Posted - 2008.06.03 01:28:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Orar Ironfist
Originally by: Havohej


While I do agree with this sentiment, your post doesn't contain enough NHL Stanley Cup Finals content Sad




Damn bra. You going for posting record or something?Shocked


Nah, just tryin' to get some Pens love goin!

Opertone
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.06.03 05:21:00 - [32]
 

yes, suicide ganking is wrong when you get money back via insurance

to the posters here, you aren't nice or smart, should not have posted if you have nothing to say, rather start alternative thread and support suicide ganking, 'Why suicide ganking is good for EvE?'

Havohej
Du'uma Fiisi Integrated Astrometrics
Posted - 2008.06.03 06:05:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Opertone
yes, suicide ganking is wrong when you get money back via insurance

to the posters here, you aren't nice or smart, should not have posted if you have nothing to say, rather start alternative thread and support suicide ganking, 'Why suicide ganking is good for EvE?'


Laughing @ 'you aren't nice or smart'.

One more post toward the record (whatever the record is :P)

CptDelta
Seraphin Technologies
KrautbreaK
Posted - 2008.06.03 06:36:00 - [34]
 

Edited by: CptDelta on 03/06/2008 06:36:21
yust remove the insurence from the ship in the moment where CONCORD is involved ...

Euriti
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.06.03 08:01:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk
Originally by: Red Flag


If I used my automobile to commit a murder, a crime, would the insurance company pay for the death of that person? If the drug police take my car because I was using it to sell drugs, would the insurance company pay me for my loss?




boring

If you drove your autombile into a war zone (0.0) and it got destroyed would you get insurance would you get insurance? nope

By all means drop insurance for crimes related offences, just drop it for 0.0 pilots to.

SKUNK


THIS IS SO IRL! WE'RE FLYING INTERNET SPACESHIPS 20K YEARS IN DA FUTURE WHILE PEW PEW SHOOTING LAZ0RZ AND USING NUCLEAR BOMBS V2.

This game is not meant to be realistic.

Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2008.06.03 08:04:00 - [36]
 

I got a typhoon cheap, insured it, t1 fitted it, and suicide ganked a hulk with 2 Cargohold rigs. The whole phoon + fittings cost 65M, insurance payed out 75M Cool

A net gain for the wallet!!!!

Dariah Stardweller
Gallente
NO U111 Enterprises
Posted - 2008.06.03 08:12:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny
I got a typhoon cheap, insured it, t1 fitted it, and suicide ganked a hulk with 2 Cargohold rigs. The whole phoon + fittings cost 65M, insurance payed out 75M Cool

A net gain for the wallet!!!!
What did you get from the hulk?

Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2008.06.03 08:58:00 - [38]
 

Crap... notice the tank Laughing

I suppose it could've worked... had my autocannons been shooting cups of pudding

Expanded Cargohold II
Infiltrator II, Qty: 2 (Drone Bay)
Shield Recharger II, Qty: 3
Strip Miner I

Jack Hellbender
Posted - 2008.06.03 10:05:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
whiners are making this game cheap

ccp not posting telling you guys to SHUT THE **** UP makes me want to quit


can i have your stuff Twisted EvilTwisted Evil

Tuberider
Pothouse Cartel
IDLE EMPIRE
Posted - 2008.06.03 10:13:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Havohej
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
whiners are making this game cheap

ccp not posting telling you guys to SHUT THE **** UP makes me want to quit


While I do agree with this sentiment, your post doesn't contain enough NHL Stanley Cup Finals content Sad

Hockeys a girls game Laughing
real men play eve, oh wait doh only us sad feckers ugh

Vrabac
Zawa's Fan Club
Posted - 2008.06.03 10:20:00 - [41]
 

Havent ever actually done any suicide ganking myself (at least not intentionally Laughing) but as I see it insurance plays very minor role. How? Buy a brutix for 20 mil. Fit it for few more mil. Pop a hundreds of million worth hauler or frig (often even much much more than that)... who cares about 20 mil for the brutix? Smile This of course doesnt cover freighter suicides that require a lot of bs but those aren't that frequent.

Of course if high sec dwellers could be arsed to play the game less while being afk and actually not use autopilot all the time, and in addition to that fit stuff other than cargo expanders when they dont need all the space would help. But I somehow think that's too much to ask. Razz

Grarr Dexx
Amarr
Kumovi
The G0dfathers
Posted - 2008.06.03 10:51:00 - [42]
 

CONCORD does not prevent, they only provide consequences.

Aki Uurtem
Gallente
Ruthless Aggression
Posted - 2008.06.03 11:34:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Havohej
Nah, just tryin' to get some Pens love goin!


Crosby ftw, tbh. Nobody here likes the little ****, but if he's gonna bring the cup to Halifax I'm willing to pretend Laughing

Tanja Cyprus
Posted - 2008.06.03 12:24:00 - [44]
 

tbh yes, suicide ganking is cheap, as is corp theft, scamming and whatever else tactics people are imagining up to get easy or no risk kills.

As the methods that are supposed to give you more safety in high sec (see the word high?), do not seem to work anymore, I vote for making high sec like low sec. If someone agresses, everyone can shoot them. Let's see who starts to whine when pirates/gankers/griefers will have their asses kicked by the playerbase that can police themselves.

Also do some namechanges will you? Some stuff is really misleading:

Concord Police Officer ... Police ... like help the crime victim, prevent crime, ... nah, theft is a crime, do they care? no. The politically correct terminus should be something like Concord retaliation Officer, Concord seems to have absolutely nothing to do with police.

War ... like I declare on you, so I can fight you anywhere... no wait, actually I do this so I can fight someone else who lands in a gang with both of us, together with you. Hence it should be called something like ambivalent alliance-war thing, cause you never really know what it is.

Fleet... like, we fight together and all others are the bad guys ... but hey no, fleet is like, Join the "butcher me for free T-Shirt club" or something like that.

Corp ... Corp should be something like, "Join the club to take freebies from hangar-Club"

Trade... something like "rule 1: read the small print, rule 2: read the small print, rule 3: read the small print, if you're still not convinced it's a scam, you read wrong"

Seriously game mechanics should actually do what they imply, right now they don't, people taking advantage of this (which is prolly human, i mean 90% of the world are prolly *******s) actually exploit. CCP doesn't recognize it as that though and they don't adjust game mechanics apropriately, they just say it's fine with us.

Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
whiners are making this game cheap

ccp not posting telling you guys to SHUT THE **** UP makes me want to quit


yes please do quit, you'll make EVE a better place by doing so.

\o/

Right now a Pirate in high sec doing ganks/scams and whatever is protected by game mechanics much better than anyone else. That's pretty wrong imho ...

They say don't trust anyone not in corp not in alliance... nowhere, ever, because you never can, there is no safety ... I mean, can I please have a single player version of the game? You wan't PvP? you can have it. anywhere you like. Just one thing should be clear in advance, and that's that PvP is going to happen. Makes for much more challenging fights ... ofc the lowlifes don't want that, so they whine back all they can. In low sec and 0.0 it's clear, so you can prepare. If high sec needs the same preparations, just remove high sec, it has become redundant anyway.

But anyways, if you don't like it, noone forces you to play it... just hope enough people get the idea over time ....

Dariah Stardweller
Gallente
NO U111 Enterprises
Posted - 2008.06.03 12:33:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Vrabac
Havent ever actually done any suicide ganking myself (at least not intentionally Laughing) but as I see it insurance plays very minor role. How? Buy a brutix for 20 mil. Fit it for few more mil. Pop a hundreds of million worth hauler or frig (often even much much more than that)... who cares about 20 mil for the brutix? Smile This of course doesnt cover freighter suicides that require a lot of bs but those aren't that frequent.

Then ppl shouldn't object to having the insurance fixed. I myself am not against suicide ganking, I see it as a
viable playstyle. But the insurance payout for getting blown up by concord is just dumb imo.


ShadowMaiden
Amarr
Atrocity.
Posted - 2008.06.03 12:48:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Red Flag

It's just that it's cheap! It's like an exploit.


CCP decide what is an exploit, if you don't like suicide ganking go play something else



Originally by: Red Flag
If I used my automobile to commit a murder, a crime, would the insurance company pay for the death of that person? If the drug police take my car because I was using it to sell drugs, would the insurance company pay me for my loss?

In the example above, note that I didn't say I used the car to kill someone by accident. I'm talking about a murder, if I murdered someone in my car do you believe the insurance company would pay for it?

Insurance companies are in the business to make money. They're not going to pay out if they can find any wiggle room that say they don't have to. Why should Eve insurance being going bankrupt supporting criminals?



Using RL examples to make a point is gonna get your post edited by a mod.

Vrabac
Zawa's Fan Club
Posted - 2008.06.03 12:59:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Dariah Stardweller
Then ppl shouldn't object to having the insurance fixed. I myself am not against suicide ganking, I see it as a
viable playstyle. But the insurance payout for getting blown up by concord is just dumb imo.




This is dumb in a way. But it's no dumber than getting insurance payout while being criminally flagged, being outlaw, going into any risky place knowing the risks, stations letting flagged people or outlaws dock in the first place and so on and so on. Game is simply working the way that the moment your ship blows up, you get payed according to the level of insurance you selected and invested into. It doesnt care how it happened, just as it doesnt care about a lot of other stuff.

In the big picture, it doesnt really matter. As I said, getting 20 or even 50 mil more or less for a ship is unimportant enough to be ignored or simply not considered a problem, and pretty much rightfully so. On the other hand if someone is blowing up people for no reason other than personal fun, and doesnt do it for the loot than it can be viewed as a problem, but than again I do that in low sec a lot and it doesnt really differ much technically speaking other than in high sec attacker's destruction is something that can't be avoided. But than again, just because it's high sec doesnt mean immunity. The amount of people getting suicide ganked in high sec is more related to amount of people there are in high sec in the first place than to insurance mechanics. To put it in simpler words, it's much easier to find a target in high sec than in low sec, and average high sec dweller doesnt use local chat nor scanner for his protection because he either doesnt know about it, doesnt think anything can happen to him or (and this could is imo most important) both his local chat and scanner are filled up with hundreds of other high sec bears doing the same thing so noticing anything unusual is next to impossible. Solution? Move away from overpopulated places maybe. Roids are just as good elsewhere I bet. Smile

Chris Jerrico
Posted - 2008.06.03 13:00:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: ShadowMaiden
Using RL examples to make a point is gonna get your post edited by a mod.


Why? CCP many times supported their ingame policy by real examples, Concord for example. They said many times, that Concord working like real law forces, they chasing criminals after crime is done. True. But, real law forces also don't allow to commit the same crime by the same person X times in a row. Now in game it is like: "I'm Concord, I'm law here, I know You, You killed 234 haulers here, but I'm not going to take you down unless You kill 235 hauler..." Imagine how it would be in real life with this attitude...

Karentaki
Gallente
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.06.03 13:29:00 - [49]
 

Every time someone uses real-life examples to support changing GAME mechanics in a way to help them, GOD KILLS A KITTEN!!!

Think of the poor kittens before you post Crying or Very sad


Anyway - Suicide ganking is allowed because it is fun for a lot of players, and is easily preventable by not being an idiot.

High-sec is SAFER not SAFE.

Excuse the blatant disregard for the safety of kittens Laughing, but here's a RL example:

If you were to walk down the street in real life carrying 10 million dollars in a plastic bag, labelled as such, it is almost certain you would get 'ganked' in some way, even if there were police present. Greed is a powerful motivator, and a careful criminal could easily get away from the police with minimum consequences given enough planning.

Just be thankful you have CONCORD at all. If the pirates had our way, there would be no highsec, only huge areas of lowsec.Shocked

Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment.
Posted - 2008.06.03 13:39:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Grarr Dexx
CONCORD does not prevent, they only provide consequences.


And there in is the problem. Loosing a fully insured ship, to gain billions in loot is hardly of any consiquence at all is it? Even if nothing drops, they are only out of pocket a few million ISK when all is said and done.

The consiquences need to be harsher so that its only worth ganking the silly tool with mega amounts on his ship, and not some poor guy with 1-2 items on his ship.

Tomo Yamaoka
Gallente
Strix Armaments and Defence
Posted - 2008.06.03 13:57:00 - [51]
 

Well, if you are looking for a less lop sided vision, perhaps make the penalties more harsh so as to suit the crime. Maybe start having ships impounded in empire stations, assets locked by empire banks, stargate privileges revoked by empire governing bodies, cloning facilities made off limits, perhaps even clones removed and destroyed in empire cloning facilities. This might make the concept of lawlessness a bit more risky when applied to high sec empire space. If people want to be real pirates and outlaws, make them live like it. Add some consequence for crimes in empire territory. This would also add some new money making methods for PC corps outside of empire space, especially ones with their own outposts and POS's.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.06.03 14:01:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny
I got a typhoon cheap, insured it, t1 fitted it, and suicide ganked a hulk with 2 Cargohold rigs. The whole phoon + fittings cost 65M, insurance payed out 75M Cool

A net gain for the wallet!!!!


How much did you pay to insure it though?

Hanso Sparxx
Deep Penetration Inc.
Predatory Instincts
Posted - 2008.06.03 14:14:00 - [53]
 

Weapons should be automatically off lined in high sec

*duck*

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.06.03 14:24:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Chris Jerrico
Originally by: ShadowMaiden
Using RL examples to make a point is gonna get your post edited by a mod.


Why? CCP many times supported their ingame policy by real examples, Concord for example. They said many times, that Concord working like real law forces, they chasing criminals after crime is done. True. But, real law forces also don't allow to commit the same crime by the same person X times in a row. Now in game it is like: "I'm Concord, I'm law here, I know You, You killed 234 haulers here, but I'm not going to take you down unless You kill 235 hauler..." Imagine how it would be in real life with this attitude...


you mean the real life with the sub-20% clear-up rate for crimes?

If you want to make insurance more realistic then fine. And we'll make CONCORD more realistic too - they turn up anywhere between 30 mins to 3 days after the event, drink some of your coffee and then there's a 90% chance that 2 weeks later you get a letter saying that the case has been closed for lack of evidence.

Lady Karma
Posted - 2008.06.03 14:28:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Tanja Cyprus
I vote for making high sec like low sec. If someone agresses, everyone can shoot them. Let's see who starts to whine when pirates/gankers/griefers will have their asses kicked by the playerbase that can police themselves.



When someone agresses in high sec, they are globaled and everyone CAN shoot them. Not only that, but concord comes along and bbq's them. You seem confused

Originally by: Tanja Cyprus

Right now a Pirate in high sec doing ganks/scams and whatever is protected by game mechanics much better than anyone else. That's pretty wrong imho ...


Nope, they are protected by EXACTLY the same game mechanics, that's because they are playing the same game. You have this idea that pirates log in under different rules

Cry more Wink



Lana Torrin
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2008.06.03 14:28:00 - [56]
 

90% chance of getting a letter? In my world its more like 50% chance of getting a letter and 50% chance you never ever hear anything about it ever again.

Lady Karma
Posted - 2008.06.03 14:34:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Dariah Stardweller
Then ppl shouldn't object to having the insurance fixed. I myself am not against suicide ganking, I see it as a
viable playstyle. But the insurance payout for getting blown up by concord is just dumb imo.




I don't think anyone would really mind if insurance was removed. The most common suicide ships are T1 cruisers and T1 BC. These ships are so cheap, the loot you get should easily replace it.

The problem is how do you, through programming, differentiate between a suicide ganker, and a young mission runner in his first ever drake, that maybe shoots his gang mate, or autolock backs and accidentally agresses someone on a gate.

A lot of new players die to concord, and removing insurance from that first raven or drake, would be a very costly lesson for them.

Melllo champers
Posted - 2008.06.03 15:13:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Red Flag
They're everywhere now, it's a profession!



Yup.

CCP removed complexes. Resulted in price explosion of certain modules.

CCP gave freighters containment fields. Resulted in freighters dropping loot.

Players found new ways to make isk and a new profession was born.

Fifth Horseman
Posted - 2008.06.03 16:03:00 - [59]
 

Whatever you think makes Eve cheap is being swiftly undone by CCP, a 50% price hike is anything but cheap.

So you've got nothing to moan about, Eve has NEVER been more expensive.

Dariah Stardweller
Gallente
NO U111 Enterprises
Posted - 2008.06.03 16:03:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Vrabac


This is dumb in a way. But it's no dumber than getting insurance payout while being criminally flagged, being outlaw, going into any risky place knowing the risks, stations letting flagged people or outlaws dock in the first place and so on and so on. Game is simply working the way that the moment your ship blows up, you get payed according to the level of insurance you selected and invested into. It doesnt care how it happened, just as it doesnt care about a lot of other stuff.

The entire insurance system is dumb yeah, so how about starting fixing it with removing it for pps who got into a scrap with Concord. Seems like a good first step towards making the insurance system "smarter". Smile


Pages: 1 [2] 3

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