These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Suicide Ganking: coming to an end?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Michael Holmes Holmes
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#481 - 2011-11-07 21:50:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Gealla wrote:
No, BF3 is a PVP game, CS is a PVP game, EVE is a MMORPG which entails a lot more than just PVP
No. EVE is an MMORPG where everything you do is in competition with other players — PvP.

There are exactly two thing in EVE that are not subject to PvP: accepting missions and handing missions in. Everything else is PvP in one form or another, and everything (including those two non-PvP actions) feeds the great war machine that keeps the market flowing… a market, by the way, that is all PvP the way that it is set up, even when you interact with NPCs.



With that logic, the "carebears" are engaging in PvP all the time, who are you to tell us how to play the game or even to assume that you somehow know the best and only way to play EVE.

I am gonna play the game my way, you are going to play it your way, no one way is right or wrong.
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#482 - 2011-11-07 21:52:53 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
Why not take a trip to null and see for yourself. You can survive in highsec right , so null should be like a walk in the park for you.


Been there, done that. With the right attitude and a cov ops ship.....it's as close as one can get.

Well, I guess getting more players to try low or null sec isn't the point.

Is there any point at all?

I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#483 - 2011-11-07 21:55:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Michael Holmes Holmes wrote:
With that logic, the "carebears" are engaging in PvP all the time.
Why? Do you think they are not?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#484 - 2011-11-07 21:55:44 UTC
Michael Holmes Holmes wrote:
With that logic, the "carebears" are engaging in PvP all the time
Indeed they are.
Quote:
who are you to tell us how to play the game or even to assume that you somehow know the best and only way to play EVE.
Good thing I'm not doing that, then, aside from giving tips on how to play it safely.
Gealla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#485 - 2011-11-07 21:56:33 UTC
MeestaPenni wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
Why not take a trip to null and see for yourself. You can survive in highsec right , so null should be like a walk in the park for you.


Been there, done that. With the right attitude and a cov ops ship.....it's as close as one can get.

Well, I guess getting more players to try low or null sec isn't the point.

Is there any point at all?


No...it's a computer game, games are pointless other than playing for entertainment. That's the point.
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#486 - 2011-11-07 22:01:37 UTC
Gealla wrote:
No...it's a computer game, games are pointless other than playing for entertainment. That's the point.


Thanks for the "wut?" today.

I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
VaL Iscariot
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#487 - 2011-11-07 22:03:23 UTC
SMOKE HULKS EVERYDAY!!
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#488 - 2011-11-07 22:38:12 UTC  |  Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Tippia wrote:
"who are you to tell us how to play the game or even to assume that you somehow know the best and only way to play EVE."
Good thing I'm not doing that, then, aside from giving tips on how to play it safely.


Sure you're not:

Tippia wrote:
they'll need to massively nerf CONCORD to make ganking much easier than it is right now.


Tippia wrote:
Highsec needs to be made more unsafe, not less.


Tippia wrote:
Activities in highsec need to be easily disrupted


Tippia wrote:
Everything should be relatively effortless to destroy


The very least you could do is keep it honest, Tippia.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#489 - 2011-11-07 22:47:44 UTC
Have to give Tipsy some endurance medal or something. I doubt they have slept in days with the fervent replies to this thread.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Endeavour Starfleet
#490 - 2011-11-07 22:52:24 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
We took the insurance out because having it was silly. It's like a double reward when you gank someone, you get their cargo and insurance. It won't stop suicide ganking, it just fixes something we haven't really felt made sense for a long time.



What about when people self destruct and time it for an alpha or two before CONCORD arrives? Is there a way to prevent payout for that?
CyberRaver
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#491 - 2011-11-07 22:58:02 UTC
lol, it stops nothing

Not my thrasher :(
NOES
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#492 - 2011-11-07 22:58:49 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Sure you're not: […] The very least you could do is keep it honest, Tippia.
And where in those quotes do I tell people how to play the game?
Cur
Back Door Burglars
#493 - 2011-11-07 23:03:51 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
It will slightly alter what targets people select when they suicide for profit. The affect it will have on suiciding done for LOLs or for strategic reasons is propably even more negligible.



That means a hulk isnt worth suiciding on unless you have something personal against the pilot. 99% of eve's highsec miner's sing and dance with glee.

Scum that stroke e-peen over killing said hulks and others purely because they can go "lololol i kiled dis nub im teh bestest" will cry like mistreated newborn babies and will probably quit eve as the concept of killign something that can shoot back and a chance of killing them would have the same effect as them realising their current girlfriend (if any) is actualy a transvestite.
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#494 - 2011-11-07 23:16:41 UTC  |  Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Tippia wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Sure you're not: […] The very least you could do is keep it honest, Tippia.
And where in those quotes do I tell people how to play the game?

You're so predictible. I was just about to add "In before your How so?", but you beat me to it.

Let me explain it, because you tend to think that using "how so" is some form of a get-out-of-jail-free card that some how automatically gives you the upper hand, even though I think you very well know the answer to your own question Blink. But here it is, I'll spell it out slowly.

Implementing your ideas is restricting the plays of other people, specifically those that play in hi sec. I think you've made it redundently clear you want hi sec to be highly intrusive and disruptive, as in PVP should come effortlessly from lazy/lulz PVPers to those darn "carebears", regardless on how they would like to play the game. You see, you've made it clear that you don't care that hi sec should be safer and that many players are there because of this higher security benefit. Your concern is to make hi sec easily destructible and disruptible by a few.

My hunch is that your game play hugely benefits financially from suicide ganks and destruction in hi sec. Hell, I own a few moons myself and I don't complain when there are wars going on :). But I also understand that this game needs to remain enjoyable for the majority of players (not just the grief players). You either seem to lack this understanding or simply don't give two ***** about it. My bet is on the latter.

You have no real advice for miners other than "don't fly drunk and fit your hulks properly" (Roll) and your answers usually just consist of a generic "how so?" because you think that lets you off the hook some how. Well, it doesn't.

Oh, and in before:

Tippia wrote:
How so?

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#495 - 2011-11-07 23:18:56 UTC
Tippia wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Sure you're not: […] The very least you could do is keep it honest, Tippia.
And where in those quotes do I tell people how to play the game?


Someone is testing Cleverbot on these forums, aren't they?

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#496 - 2011-11-07 23:19:11 UTC
Cur wrote:
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
It will slightly alter what targets people select when they suicide for profit. The affect it will have on suiciding done for LOLs or for strategic reasons is propably even more negligible.



That means a hulk isnt worth suiciding on unless you have something personal against the pilot. 99% of eve's highsec miner's sing and dance with glee.

Scum that stroke e-peen over killing said hulks and others purely because they can go "lololol i kiled dis nub im teh bestest" will cry like mistreated newborn babies and will probably quit eve as the concept of killign something that can shoot back and a chance of killing them would have the same effect as them realising their current girlfriend (if any) is actualy a transvestite.


Here I am at work...I "LOL'd"...and of course my boss wants to know why...


She "LOL'd" too...

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821
Sarah Ichijou
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#497 - 2011-11-07 23:31:12 UTC
So my 1.5 mil thrasher loss (after insurance) is now 2 mil?

I can accept that.
Jita Alt666
#498 - 2011-11-07 23:37:46 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
We took the insurance out because having it was silly. It's like a double reward when you gank someone, you get their cargo and insurance. It won't stop suicide ganking, it just fixes something we haven't really felt made sense for a long time.



What about when people self destruct and time it for an alpha or two before CONCORD arrives? Is there a way to prevent payout for that?


From memory, it takes 2 minutes to self destruct. I can not remember whether you can warp and keep self destruction ticker counting - if so then good on the self destruct pilot. The timing to do so shows competent game play.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#499 - 2011-11-07 23:39:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Implementing your ideas is restricting the plays of other people, specifically those that play in hi sec.
How does it restrict them when they can do the exact same things they're doing now? They just have to be a bit smart about it, and my ideas are there to make the value of smarts more clear.
Quote:
I think you've made it redundently clear you want hi sec to be highly intrusive and disruptive, as in PVP should come effortlessly from lazy/lulz PVPers to those darn "carebears"
No. PvP should come effortlessly from those who need to disrupt the activities of their opponents to those who try to hide those activities in highsec. In particular, I want it to be worth-while to have null/low-sec entities to actually base their industrial backbone in null/lowsec, rather than keeping it protected in highsec. This means making it easier to counter all the tactics that are used to put these support efforts at arms-length to the point where those entities are better off moving all of that to their home turf where it can be properly protected.

Yes, that might make it harder to go it alone as a highsec dweller, but on the other hand, you're such a small fish at that point that it should be rather easy to stay unnoticed. Of course, this opens up a new route to try to hide your alliance's support activities, and it is a difficult balance to strike between the two, but just making it increasingly safe in highsec and giving less and less incentive to do stuff locall outside of those areas, seems like the wrong way to go. It just ends up leaving those other areas largely pointless.
Quote:
you've made it clear that you don't care that hi sec should be safer and that many players are there because of this higher security benefit.
Should it? According to whom? As for the higher security, it will still be there, most notably because people will be made aware of the risks and thus stop having that false sense of security that makes it much less safe than it is…
Quote:
My hunch is that your game play hugely benefits financially from suicide ganks and destruction in hi sec.
Your hunch is wrong. Or, well… I benefit financially from them just as much as everyone else, but no, it is not something that is particularly needed for my finances to work out.
Quote:
You have no real advice for miners other than "don't fly drunk and fit your hulks properly" (Roll) and your answers usually just consist of a generic "how so?" because you think that lets you off the hook some how. Well, it doesn't.
It's sound advice, if people would just heed it, and no, I'm notr trying to get “off the hook” — I'm trying to get answers. That's why I'm asking. They're not generic; they have a very specific purpose that I have explained on multiple occasions…
Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us
#500 - 2011-11-07 23:43:12 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Michael Holmes Holmes wrote:
With that logic, the "carebears" are engaging in PvP all the time
Indeed they are.


So what you're saying is that pvp =/= pew pew, and that carebears are already pvp'ing. Question:

Where's the problem with players being safe from pew pew in a pvp centric game where pvp =/= pew pew?

Stop the spamming, not the scamming!