These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

caps keep self-destructing!

Author
Leonidas Amarri
Kiith Paktu
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#1 - 2012-02-04 00:47:13 UTC
Make self-destruct timer on caps higher plz.. nothing sucks more (besides being the one about to lose ur cap)then when ur about to kill them and they self-destruct
mxzf
Shovel Bros
#2 - 2012-02-04 02:37:03 UTC
A dead capital is one less capital your enemy can use against you in the next battle, which is the whole point of killing them. If all you care about is the KM, you're fighting for the wrong reasons, this isn't CoD where the KDR means a lot.

However, they were talking about giving out KMs for self destructs, which would fix the whole 'issue' presumably.

tl;dr: You're not the first one that complained about such things
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#3 - 2012-02-04 06:11:47 UTC
mxzf wrote:
A dead capital is one less capital your enemy can use against you in the next battle, which is the whole point of killing them. If all you care about is the KM, you're fighting for the wrong reasons, this isn't CoD where the KDR means a lot

Please stop assuming everyone is fighting "enemies" in this game. Some of us don't give a damn about the people we're killing, or the kill mails, we just want their stuff. It's hard enough scooping up all those fighters as it is, let alone when you have to deal with the mods going poof nine times out of ten. Unless you blob the capital with hundreds of people, and where's the profit in splitting loot that many ways?

Also, INB4: LOL SHUDA BRORT MOAR DEEPS BRO.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#4 - 2012-02-04 06:44:39 UTC
HACKING!

- Each successful hacking attempt after self-destruct has been initiated, adds 10s to timer (Only one attempt possible at a time).
Add a computer core hardening attribute to some not directly beneficial module to give the capital something to waste a slot on to keep the option of a successful SD open.

If loot is really the reason for wanting the only anti-gank tool in Eve nerfed then the requirement to bring ships fitted for the task and working for it should meet no resistance, right?
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#5 - 2012-02-04 07:05:41 UTC
LOL SHUDA BRORT MOAR DEEPS BRO.

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#6 - 2012-02-04 07:16:44 UTC
Self Destruct in combat is just stupid to begin with, would make sense if there was some means of capturing a ship, but there isn't.

Actually here's an idea... new Self Destruct should jettison your pod after activation, only way to abort the self destruct at this point is a successful Hacking attempt which also hands over ownership to the Hacker.
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
Somethin Awfull Forums
#7 - 2012-02-04 07:20:10 UTC
I approve the hacking suggestion.

"We have a hostile carrier on scan. Everyone switch out thier mid slots for hacking modules".
Mag's
Azn Empire
#8 - 2012-02-04 08:30:00 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Self Destruct in combat is just stupid to begin with, would make sense if there was some means of capturing a ship, but there isn't.

Actually here's an idea... new Self Destruct should jettison your pod after activation, only way to abort the self destruct at this point is a successful Hacking attempt which also hands over ownership to the Hacker.
I don't agree. I think it's a great reverse tactic, of giving the middle finger to whomever is shooting you.

Long may it continue, but chance are you'll end up with a change for the worse imho.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#9 - 2012-02-04 08:50:34 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Xorv wrote:
Self Destruct in combat is just stupid to begin with, would make sense if there was some means of capturing a ship, but there isn't.

Actually here's an idea... new Self Destruct should jettison your pod after activation, only way to abort the self destruct at this point is a successful Hacking attempt which also hands over ownership to the Hacker.
I don't agree. I think it's a great reverse tactic, of giving the middle finger to whomever is shooting you.

Long may it continue, but chance are you'll end up with a change for the worse imho.


This.

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Akatenshi Xi
Elite Shadow Society
#10 - 2012-02-04 09:28:24 UTC
I think you shouldn't get a kill mail for self-destructs. Why? Because you clearly didn't kill it. they self-destructed. Derp derp.

I think self-destructs should be selectable with timers, or they should be instant. Every sci-fi has something about choosing your self-destruct timer for your ship or station or it is instant. Yes, some B Movies are preset timers for suspense or something.

In addition I think self-destruct should have a blast radius that affects ships by damaging them and also making it so they cannot warp for say 10-30 seconds or so. A massive explosion on a capital ship should definitely weight in the ladder on the warp effect with smaller ships being only a few seconds. Of course an explosion in space would mess with things and make it so you couldn't establish a good warp field, enough to actually warp. As for the timers being programmable, make it so only Battleships and higher could do this?

Bringing this idea up into a new ship class! The suicide bomber! How about a lightly to medium tanked ship with no weapons, only eight low slots. You could chose between armor plates which would make you harder to kill on your suicide destination but also slowly and much less agile, or warp core stabalizers, or modules that could affect the radius or damage of your explosion.

Jihad MF'ers!
Herold Oldtimer
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-02-04 10:00:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Herold Oldtimer
This has been discussed over a long peroid of time, and it usually boils down to bring more guns.

But hey, you might not get the kill, but you will get the assisted suicide.
bartos100
Living Ghost
#12 - 2012-02-04 12:38:41 UTC
I think sd timers should be longer the bigger the ship is

reaver2145
Satanic Lobster Buttplug With Hidden Unicorn.
#13 - 2012-02-04 14:28:42 UTC
ADAPT OR CRY

Bring more dps and nutes or CRY SOME MOAR
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-02-04 17:08:58 UTC
Leonidas Amarri wrote:
butthurt Oops

Pro-tip: Assume you have 119 seconds to engage, destroy, and win against a cap ship everytime you dock. If you don't, HTFU and plan better next time. If one dude can plan to gank a hulk in less then 30 seconds then you too should be able to kill a carrier in less then 119 seconds.

Entire point of self destruct....to give a middle finger, **** off someone, and create a new thread about some self created delusion of entitlement from the OP (EVE isn't chess, you don't /duel, you didn't ask if you could take the guy's ship so why should he let you have it or would not do everything in his power to prevent you from getting a KM/wreck ?). Your not entitled to anything, you only earn it when it actually appears in your KM box, a wreck is floating in space, and local spikes full of colorful language about your mother and your sexual orientation from the guy who just lost the ship. Bring a cap ship, bring more friends, or don't even engage if it is beyond your ability.
Akatenshi Xi
Elite Shadow Society
#15 - 2012-02-04 20:43:25 UTC
Aqriue wrote:
Leonidas Amarri wrote:
butthurt Oops

Pro-tip: Assume you have 119 seconds to engage, destroy, and win against a cap ship everytime you dock. If you don't, HTFU and plan better next time. If one dude can plan to gank a hulk in less then 30 seconds then you too should be able to kill a carrier in less then 119 seconds.

Entire point of self destruct....to give a middle finger, **** off someone, and create a new thread about some self created delusion of entitlement from the OP (EVE isn't chess, you don't /duel, you didn't ask if you could take the guy's ship so why should he let you have it or would not do everything in his power to prevent you from getting a KM/wreck ?). Your not entitled to anything, you only earn it when it actually appears in your KM box, a wreck is floating in space, and local spikes full of colorful language about your mother and your sexual orientation from the guy who just lost the ship. Bring a cap ship, bring more friends, or don't even engage if it is beyond your ability.


This too^
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#16 - 2012-02-04 21:27:41 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I don't agree. I think it's a great reverse tactic, of giving the middle finger to whomever is shooting you.

Nah it's lame Mag's. Given there's no means of ship capture there's no in game reason to self destruct. There's no actual real world military or conflict comparisons to this use of Self Destruct in EVE. It's mostly about Killmail and Killboard efficiency avoidance. Players that pulled out their biggest guns and now want to avoid some of the consequences of losing. It's no more tactical than tearing up your fake money and walking away from a losing game of Monopoly.
mxzf
Shovel Bros
#17 - 2012-02-04 21:39:26 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Players that pulled out their biggest guns and now want to avoid some of the consequences of losing


Consequences like losing their ship? You should clarify that you mean e-peen consequences, since that's what this thread is entirely about, the e-peen of the involved parties (mostly of the person who wants the KM but lost it due to insufficient force).
Bearilian
Man Eating Bears
#18 - 2012-02-04 21:45:17 UTC
I agree that SD timers should be based off of ship class. the bigger it is, the longer triggering self destruct should take. its really just a cowards way out, especially since it does not have area of effect damage. I under stand the whole middle finger point of view, but i beleve Xorv is correct, (and great monopoly comparison by the way).

also sd's should be placed as a km, since its not like they self destructed without cause. someone (or a group of someones) were definately responsible.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#19 - 2012-02-04 22:16:12 UTC
mxzf wrote:

Consequences like losing their ship? You should clarify that you mean e-peen consequences, since that's what this thread is entirely about, the e-peen of the involved parties (mostly of the person who wants the KM but lost it due to insufficient force).


Yes I agree it's largely about "epeen" as you put it, but not just for the winning party, also the losers. For quite a few EVE players ISK loss is not a major factor, this is especially true of those that can afford to fly around in pimped out Cap Ships. So Killboards with Corp K/D and Isk efficiency, bragging rights, or "tears" of their enemies/victims becomes the new prize. Same people are terrified of having a multi billion ISK ship loss on their personal and Corp Killboard.... even more so should it be to just a few players in subcaps.. hence the bring more people comment... As if we need any more encouragement to blob it up. Roll

The other sort of player that wants to keep Self destruct as is, would be the player that thinks EVE should should just be consensual PvP. It's there way of saying "nope I'm not playing." If you think that's a good thing, well we have nothing to talk about really.

Either way there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to have Self Destruct as it is in EVE today.
mxzf
Shovel Bros
#20 - 2012-02-04 22:39:45 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Either way there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to have Self Destruct as it is in EVE today.


I would also argue that there's no Game Lore, Real Life example, or Good Gameplay reason to change it either. I'm not saying the current system is right or wrong, I'm just saying that it is and there isn't any good reason to change it.

And, to be clear, I have no real stake in the issue one way or the other, I've never had that happen to me (and wouldn't care) and I would never bother self destructing to save face; I mostly just hate giving people what they want just because they're whining about it. It's a bad parenting technique and it sounds like a bad game design strategy too. Take my opinion as you will *shrug*
12Next page