These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

End of the Awoxer? Is eve getting too soft?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#181 - 2015-02-04 04:10:38 UTC
In the Veers 'Verse men are men and chickens are nervous.... and all restaurants are Taco Bell.

Not gonna stop shooting up your back yard. You want to mission in peace, go to low or null where pve belongs.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#182 - 2015-02-04 04:21:59 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Solonius Rex wrote:
So youre against any form of nonconsensual PVP in highsec?

I'm pretty sure that he's stated very clearly multiple times that he is.


Completely false by the way...time to stop believing your own talking points

Nah, you're not going to get us with the "pvp in low/null/wh can be nonconsensual also" technicality. Anyone in those areas of space is aware of the lack of law enforcement (or is there by mistake or ignorance), and saying that one does not consent to pvp in those areas is a rather ridiculous premise. It's as ridiculous as claiming that one can find nonconsensual pvp in a round of CoD, because no one actually wants to die/lose in any type of competition with others in a video game; they just want to kill/win.

You have stated before that you want all pvp gone from high-sec, which is the only area in the game where that concept has objective meaning.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#183 - 2015-02-04 04:28:48 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Solonius Rex wrote:
So youre against any form of nonconsensual PVP in highsec?

I'm pretty sure that he's stated very clearly multiple times that he is.


Completely false by the way...time to stop believing your own talking points

Nah, you're not going to get us with the "pvp in low/null/wh can be nonconsensual also" technicality. Anyone in those areas of space is aware of the lack of law enforcement (or is there by mistake or ignorance), and saying that one does not consent to pvp in those areas is a rather ridiculous premise. It's as ridiculous as claiming that one can find nonconsensual pvp in a round of CoD, because no one actually wants to die/lose in any type of competition with others in a video game; they just want to kill/win.

You have stated before that you want all pvp gone from high-sec, which is the only area in the game where that concept has objective meaning.


Still false....I have never stated that I want all PvP gone from highsec. What I do want is more severe consequences for criminal behavior, so that would be criminals need to make a real cost-benefit analysis, and have to focus on high value targets instead of just sprees of orgy bloodshed in Uedama. Should a freighter with 10 bil of goodies be at risk? Sure. An empty one? Nope.
Kaelynne Rose
WTB Somalians
#184 - 2015-02-04 04:41:06 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Solonius Rex wrote:
So youre against any form of nonconsensual PVP in highsec?

I'm pretty sure that he's stated very clearly multiple times that he is.


Completely false by the way...time to stop believing your own talking points

Nah, you're not going to get us with the "pvp in low/null/wh can be nonconsensual also" technicality. Anyone in those areas of space is aware of the lack of law enforcement (or is there by mistake or ignorance), and saying that one does not consent to pvp in those areas is a rather ridiculous premise. It's as ridiculous as claiming that one can find nonconsensual pvp in a round of CoD, because no one actually wants to die/lose in any type of competition with others in a video game; they just want to kill/win.

You have stated before that you want all pvp gone from high-sec, which is the only area in the game where that concept has objective meaning.


Still false....I have never stated that I want all PvP gone from highsec. What I do want is more severe consequences for criminal behavior, so that would be criminals need to make a real cost-benefit analysis, and have to focus on high value targets instead of just sprees of orgy bloodshed in Uedama. Should a freighter with 10 bil of goodies be at risk? Sure. An empty one? Nope.


Y it kosher for you incursion runners to be basically immune and ungankable then?
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#185 - 2015-02-04 04:42:57 UTC
Kaelynne Rose wrote:
[quote=Veers Belvar]

Y it kosher for you incursion runners to be basically immune and ungankable then?


Well tanked Mauraders are essentially ungankable in highsec. These are expensive combat ships designed to withstand a lot of incoming firepower, and nimble enough to escape when needed. It makes perfect sense why they are hard to kill. Elite PvE players in top of the line ships don't make very good targets.
Kaelynne Rose
WTB Somalians
#186 - 2015-02-04 04:43:55 UTC
I actually awoxed a 3man incursion corp a week ago. Always with logi tho so had to settle for a shuttle and 100mil pod instead of blingship.

U guys are too safe
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#187 - 2015-02-04 04:49:29 UTC
Kaelynne Rose wrote:
I actually awoxed a 3man incursion corp a week ago. Always with logi tho so had to settle for a shuttle and 100mil pod instead of blingship.

U guys are too safe


Any incursion runners stupid enough to be in a player corp deserve what they get. Yes, incursion runners are extremely safe when doing PvE. But so are members of the blue donut....Eve is a game where people look for safety when grinding isk...and it is not hard to get it if you are good at the game. The goon supercapital fleet is also very safe, so what? Nothing wrong with safety.
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#188 - 2015-02-04 04:49:57 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Kaelynne Rose wrote:
[quote=Veers Belvar]

Y it kosher for you incursion runners to be basically immune and ungankable then?


Well tanked Mauraders are essentially ungankable in highsec. These are expensive combat ships designed to withstand a lot of incoming firepower, and nimble enough to escape when needed. It makes perfect sense why they are hard to kill. Elite PvE players in top of the line ships don't make very good targets.


Not going to argue on the gankability of marauders, I actually believe you there. But here's a counterpoint for you, if you get the things you wish for and non-consensual pvp in high sec becomes limited to suicide ganking alone... won't marauders effectively become immune to death in high sec? Well, aside from the few that are silly enough to open fire on mission flippers, but I'm sure once that happens enough it will become the new bloody shirt to wave.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#189 - 2015-02-04 04:56:24 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Kaelynne Rose wrote:
[quote=Veers Belvar]

Y it kosher for you incursion runners to be basically immune and ungankable then?


Well tanked Mauraders are essentially ungankable in highsec. These are expensive combat ships designed to withstand a lot of incoming firepower, and nimble enough to escape when needed. It makes perfect sense why they are hard to kill. Elite PvE players in top of the line ships don't make very good targets.


Not going to argue on the gankability of marauders, I actually believe you there. But here's a counterpoint for you, if you get the things you wish for and non-consensual pvp in high sec becomes limited to suicide ganking alone... won't marauders effectively become immune to death in high sec? Well, aside from the few that are silly enough to open fire on mission flippers, but I'm sure once that happens enough it will become the new bloody shirt to wave.


Yes, I would expect that the end of awoxxing and wardeccs would pretty much make marauders unkillable....but honestly that is the case already. Most marauder pilots already avoid player corps because of awoxxing and wardecc concerns, and even the suicide gankers find killing them difficult. It's really the miners and haulers who do the exploding in highsec....marauders have always been pretty safe unless they do something stupid like be in a player corp, shoot at mission griefers, etc....so honestly I don't see much impact from highsec PvP changes to ships which are already essentially unkillable.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#190 - 2015-02-04 05:02:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Veers Belvar wrote:
Still false....I have never stated that I want all PvP gone from highsec. What I do want is more severe consequences for criminal behavior, so that would be criminals need to make a real cost-benefit analysis, and have to focus on high value targets instead of just sprees of orgy bloodshed in Uedama. Should a freighter with 10 bil of goodies be at risk? Sure. An empty one? Nope.

Marginalizing high-sec pvp to the point that it doesn't happen in all but the most extreme edge cases is the same thing as removing it. Exceptions don't make rules. Saying that you'd be fine with still having 10b-ISK suicide-ganks or something in high-sec as long as all other types of pvp were no longer possible in the area doesn't somehow make you supportive of high-sec pvp with consequences. It's just lawyer speak that you use to cover your bases in case someone calls you out for being in favor of removing non-consensual pvp from high-sec, which you are.

Veers Belvar wrote:
Well tanked Mauraders are essentially ungankable in highsec. These are expensive combat ships designed to withstand a lot of incoming firepower, and nimble enough to escape when needed. It makes perfect sense why they are hard to kill. Elite PvE players in top of the line ships don't make very good targets.

I've yet to see an incursion-running ship (although I'm sure some exist) with more EHP than a DCUII-tanked Orca, or bulkheaded freighter. Incursion ships do get ganked, albeit in lower numbers, because ganking haulers/freighters is more profitable.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#191 - 2015-02-04 07:11:21 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

Yes, I would expect that the end of awoxxing and wardeccs would pretty much make marauders unkillable....but honestly that is the case already. Most marauder pilots already avoid player corps because of awoxxing and wardecc concerns, and even the suicide gankers find killing them difficult. It's really the miners and haulers who do the exploding in highsec....marauders have always been pretty safe unless they do something stupid like be in a player corp, shoot at mission flippers, etc....so honestly I don't see much impact from highsec PvP changes to ships which are already essentially unkillable.


And you don't see there being a problem with a single ship class being fairly well invincible as a result of the 'peace and order' you are trying to push? As it stands at least those who don't wuss out and drop corp do stand some risk of losing their ship during wardecs. Until the changes go into effect the best way to really take one out is via safari, and soon that will become a great deal more difficult.

Peeps keep sayin 'think of teh chillunz!', and yet nooblets generally don't have enough assets to really be worth preying upon. I'm becoming more and more convinced that regardless of the rhetoric, nobody on those soapboxes gives a rat's ass about the newbies, they're just screaming for more safeguards to protect their precious shinies.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#192 - 2015-02-04 07:25:29 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
I'm becoming more and more convinced that regardless of the rhetoric, nobody on those soapboxes gives a rat's ass about the newbies, they're just screaming for more safeguards to protect their precious shinies.

That's pretty much how it is everywhere; in all games, and even in real life. Demands appear much more palatable when the goal seems noble.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Interfectorem Tacet
Doomheim
#193 - 2015-02-04 07:46:25 UTC
Wow this is still going after 10 pages!!

apart from a fair bit of bitching about a few players it has given some interesting points of view.

For myself I'm not sure that make a 'mechanically' safe zone is in the best interest in EVE. And if they made High sec safe from unwanted aggression outside of suicide ganks then they would have to nerf the ability to make isk into the ground or you would simply break the game from an economic standpoint.

After some reflection I am not to bothered what they do with highsec as i will adapt as always and if eve stops being fun for me then I will leave. pretty simple really.

Fly dangerous o7
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#194 - 2015-02-04 08:20:15 UTC
Give us a decent topic and we'll argue for page after page.
Double that when the derps come out with the pants on their heads.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
Light Sigh No
Doomheim
#195 - 2015-02-04 19:12:37 UTC
Veers is actually on point here. Not that it is good but CCP has already declared that somepoint this year all aggression will be removed from high sec. No wars, no ability to gank other players, no duels etc. You will have to travel to low or null for pvp.

As he has stated multiple times, Veers will be getting what he wants as CCP "enhances and brings better gameplay" to the community.
Odeva Pawen
Fliet Pizza Delivery
Of Essence
#196 - 2015-02-04 19:28:43 UTC
From now on, I will be marking anyone who directly quotes Veers as feeding a troll.

Overheat Keyboards! Load Rage posts! Prepare for a long, seething, back and forth about irrelevant things!
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#197 - 2015-02-04 19:41:56 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
We need to get people out of npc corps not give them more incentive to remain in them

Raise the tax from 11% to, say, 40%. Sounds like pretty good incentive to me. Why should absolute protection be almost free?


Changing the tax rate from 11% to 40% would take a dev half a second, but wouldn't be worth even that much effort for the result it would create. One or two NPCs might decide to become real people, but such a high tax rate would cause many more to log out and not come back. A significantly higher NPC tax rate is not going to help improve highsec.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#198 - 2015-02-04 19:55:48 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
We need to get people out of npc corps not give them more incentive to remain in them

Raise the tax from 11% to, say, 40%. Sounds like pretty good incentive to me. Why should absolute protection be almost free?


Changing the tax rate from 11% to 40% would take a dev half a second, but wouldn't be worth even that much effort for the result it would create. One or two NPCs might decide to become real people, but such a high tax rate would cause many more to log out and not come back. A significantly higher NPC tax rate is not going to help improve highsec.

Good. These people would be replaced by others who would actually consider this to be the norm, move out of NPC corporations into player corporations, and actually be entertained enough to become long-term subscribers. Lose some players now to have more tomorrow.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#199 - 2015-02-04 20:56:19 UTC
I'm going to ask this again because I never do get an answer - why the obsession with shooting easy targets that have no idea how to fight another player? If people want to stack ISK in highsec, why not let them?

Let's talk about the more relevant problem that all the people who live and stack cash in nullsec are so bored out of their minds that the best entertainment they can find is to ship 100 catalysts to Uedama and f1 some freighters? Everybody does some sort of risk-averse carebearing to finance their gameplay, some of you are just less obvious about it.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#200 - 2015-02-05 02:12:04 UTC
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
I'm going to ask this again because I never do get an answer - why the obsession with shooting easy targets that have no idea how to fight another player? If people want to stack ISK in highsec, why not let them?
If people want to relieve others, who often make foolish choices, of that isk, why not let them?

Quote:
Let's talk about the more relevant problem that all the people who live and stack cash in nullsec are so bored out of their minds that the best entertainment they can find is to ship 100 catalysts to Uedama and f1 some freighters?
Hisec is where the profitable prey is, much like the real world crime tends to be higher where the population density is higher, especially when that population wallows in their perceived safety and relies on others to provide it.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.