Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Now you are beginning to understand.

But yes, if you actually read their posts they vaguely +1 more varied concord responses. There is nothing supporting your ridiculously over-zealous changes.


Cloaking ships do not work in high sec, if you have negative security status. A point you'd be well aware of, if you had ever had negative security status.

And again, there are no gate guns when fighting red targets in high sec. Hence mercenaries use interceptors and the like in gate camps.

Your cloak doesn't function if faction police are trying to kill you either, and it also doesn't function if an interceptor double clicks on you and hits alt+f1.

And I'm not sure why you are getting confused about gate guns, it's a simple concept. Camps in low sec are easy to run because they cannot use interceptors or small ships for tackle, high sec camps do not have gate guns and so use those ships.

It's really pretty simple.

Your proposal isn't "conflict on two fronts".

It is someone with a suspect flag, being shot by ~3-4 gate camps and a few suicide gankers with faction police jamming and neuting them.

This doesn't encourage PvP, it just makes those systems off limits.

Missions: Fighting NPCs for profit.

Faction Police: NPC deterrent designed to prevent you operating effectively in a system.

Not exactly comparable.

Greetings

Ah a morally relativistic legal system... you must be a 1%'er . There is a reason lady justice has a blindfold on.

vr
East

I understood parts of this.

East, not sure what you said. We already have a relative legal system, in that Concord will come at you based on an arbitrary scale for security status.

Nikk, your points could have been expressed more plainly.

I think you said risk vs reward should have balance wherever possible on that common good line.

The accountability part sounds like it is saying we need to use a more severe scale than that Concord one you quoted.

Lowest common denominator, context hints that you are referring to players who don't gank not needing to use the same tactics against the gankers. Might be a reference to your scale system doing this better?

Yes, I love how people that grief others suddenly start whining when even the idea of having to cope with the consequences of their actions is raised.

What is that phrase griefers like to use? HTFU is it?

Your nerf is another player's balance aspect.

And this doesn't make Concord attack anyone. They already do that for their own reasons.

As I pointed out, this creates opportunities for PvP.
And as you pointed out, it will be for players who have some degree of experience with PvP.

You seem to feel this will take these experienced fighters, and neutralize their ability to travel. As if they could be attacked more effectively in high security space than anyone could be already attacked in low security.

Eve is all about choices.

This is an absurd comparison.

Your logic would also seem to suggest noone should be flying in low sec or possibly even null sec. After all, they could be attacked!


Once again you use an example of a pilot who should know NPCs will be attacking them already.

I would suggest they fit a good tank then. Or are you saying they will be unable to cope with conditions similar to faction warfare?
Do they have PvP experience or not? If not, they can make the clear and obvious choice to not enter the system.
Or maybe invest in the effort to fix their security status even.

Choices that are obvious.


So let us be clear about your example. You have PvP pilots engaging PvP pilots.

At what point did they decide that wisdom dictated they should enter a system where both faction forces AND homicidal players could engage them?
Things might explode!

Or.... they could make a different choice since you feel this is overwhelming to them.

Little sense? How odd, as I removed no part of your original post. Perhaps you left out the context.

As to the -10 pilot you use here in reference... is this not the most extreme possible negative standing it is possible to have?
Shouldn't a pilot with such extreme standings face meaningful consequences for this?

By your own description, they are currently still able to function and attack players in high sec. This would seem to indicate current consequences are not significant to the pilot who determinedly ignores them.


So these pilots who choose to enter high sec and attack other pilots, (as you described them), would be so risk averse themselves as to not enter the systems at all??

You point out that they could still do this on the one hand, and on the other you say they would avoid the system entirely.
Perhaps you estimate these pilots badly, and they would adapt and overcome the challenge.
Maybe you even overestimate the amount of attention they would face from other players.

Perhaps the real question is why would a PvP pilot even log in, if they had no risk or challenge to face or overcome.
Making other ships explode loses it's shiny if you never risk your own going boom.

Gambler's heck is the one where they never lose.