These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

shooting pods that have GCC will be legal. SoundWave approved. But when ?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2011-11-23 12:55:53 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Raneru wrote:
I would guess that one of the reasons for not allowing pods to be killed legally is to help new players. They accidentally get themselves concorded and find themselves sitting in a pod saying "wtf?". What they generally don't want is someone coming along and also podding them, probably costing them SP.




Yes, but it would stop the station humping "hi-sec PvPers" that like to sit in docking range in brick Proteuses and Vindi and such with slave implants.

I would LOVE for the GCC flag to transfer to pods.

Why would anyone who is currently piloting a Proteus or a Vindicator get a GCC?


lol good point...

.....your right, cmbat agression sure transfer too, anything to get the yappy shts off the undockTwisted
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2011-11-23 17:22:25 UTC

The "station humping highsec PvPers" will run into problems anyway,
as the mechanics for this will get changed.

At least that's what i've read about it,
maybe CCP dropped that again ...
Saint Lazarus
Spiorad ag fanaiocht
#83 - 2011-11-23 17:46:32 UTC
Even if they changed this it would just mean people would make SURE to have no implants installed before doin a high sec gank, it would actually make it even MORE pointless to pop pods in high sec. Leaving it as is you might get an odd person here or there with an expensive pod who wasnt expecting it.

So seriously.......whats the point, pods are cheap unless the pilot thinks its semi safe to leave implants in.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#84 - 2011-11-23 17:50:16 UTC

You're reducing the topic to a rather small, chance based part of it.

Maybe read the OP again without reading only what you want to read.

It's not about shooting pods with "expensive implants",
it's about shooting pods of pilots who are criminals.

The point is that they are criminals and it doesn't make sense
not being able to legally shoot the pod of a criminal.
Saint Lazarus
Spiorad ag fanaiocht
#85 - 2011-11-23 17:57:57 UTC
I'm just asking why, dosent benefit anyone, and might negatively affect newer players as someone else pointed out.

Makes plenty of in-game sense that CONCORD would outlaw pod killing outside of sanctioned Wars, so its not immersion breaking either.


So its not going to increase risk, its not adding immersion, it might have negative effects on newer players.......pros?
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#86 - 2011-11-23 18:05:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Solstice Project
Pros..

It gives guys like me more to do, because i like shooting pods that have bounty.

I do it even if get CONCORDed, but constantly upping my sec for something
i believe is a niche business doesn't really up the fun.

It would encourage more player to player interaction ... miners hiring people
or encouraging people to pod gankers.

It fills a hole in the logic, which actually adds immersion.

Victims of ganks may get a feeling of "i can fight back at least SOMEHOW",
which is a good thing, because it increases the chance that they keep mining.

Oh and it actually increases risk, because it seems that pods aren't warping out
that fast anymore after the ship explodes ... and when the pod is gone,
there comes the hassle and the cost for the clone.

I know it's actually a change with small benefits,
but i believe that they add up.

More player interaction.
More sense for the bounty system.
A bit more hassle for gankers.
Miners wouldn't feel totally helpless.

Maybe there are other points, but i'm in a hurry now.
Feel free to add some. ^^
Jetset Movashaka
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#87 - 2011-11-23 18:48:57 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:

You're reducing the topic to a rather small, chance based part of it.

Maybe read the OP again without reading only what you want to read.

It's not about shooting pods with "expensive implants",
it's about shooting pods of pilots who are criminals.

The point is that they are criminals and it doesn't make sense
not being able to legally shoot the pod of a criminal.


By that logic, people who steal an apple should have their hands cut off. Which is severely outdated, outmoded, and far beyond a reasonable punishment. If EvE "isn't the real world", then perhaps it's a society hundreds or even thousands of years ahead of our current one. What makes you think they would *regress*?

It may be "reality", it may not be, it may be "reality within a game", or "a game with it's OWN reality". but there ARE certain ethical and common-sense concepts that are universal.

I mean, we're in SPACESHIPS... shooting... SPACESHIPS... with... LASERS (and such). Not running around in spacesuits, wielding scimitars (and by that I mean the sword, not the ship) or claymores (and by that I mean the sword, not the ship), or rapiers (by that I mean the sword, not the ship).


Perhaps podding SHOULD be allowed, if the pilot THEMSELVES podded someone. Then they're guilty of murder, and not just property damage.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2011-11-23 23:25:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Solstice Project
Gankers cost you your ship ... and you compare that to stealing an apple.


You are bringing real life into a game.

There are only those rules the makers apply to the game.

There are only those common beliefs, (is "common beliefs" the right wording here ?)
that every player accepts by and for himself,
or those that get forced onto him ... by the makers.


Just because you believe things are "right",
doesn't mean that there needs to be a global consensus about ...
... what you believe is "right".

You could be "wrong", too.

You can't tell and don't know if it's a "regress". They could be living by the hard laws of nature,
instead of that sickening [whatever] people believe they have in "modern" societies.


Anyway, philosophy is offtopic.


The concept of "Live and Death" doesn't apply at all,
simply because we can not die.

There is no murder in EvE,
because nobody can die.

One can only commit suicide, or "his girlfriend deleted his characters".


Common-Sense is something that even in the real world doesn't get applied, (or used)
and in EvE we're still a bunch of humans sitting in front of a computer,
and aren't people from an imaginary future, living with beliefs you think these people "have" ...

... or "may have" ... but actually: "may or may not have".



LONG STORY SHORT:

You went totally offtopic.
Please stick to the topic at hand, or open another thread about it. :)


I only want to be able to legally shoot pods that have a GCC,
simply because they are criminals and because it makes sense, too.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2011-11-23 23:40:52 UTC
Raneru wrote:
I would guess that one of the reasons for not allowing pods to be killed legally is to help new players. They accidentally get themselves concorded and find themselves sitting in a pod saying "wtf?". What they generally don't want is someone coming along and also podding them, probably costing them SP.



A new player doesn't have med clone insurance costs - the first one is free for over a million SP so no SP loss. They also won't be packing expensive implants and losing the pod would put them back to where? That's right, their home station where they'll need to go to get their replacement ship - or home vs arnon which will remind them to change their home station as they move around.

The costs of losing their SHIP will hurt the new players vastly more than losing their pod at the get-go. It would be a virtually zero lose for them and instantly move them to their home station to get a replacement vs flying there in a pod.

Anyone beyond that "freebie med clone" coverage SHOULD know better and an accident that puts 'em in their pod to be shot at... A bit of annoyance to them but I'd doubt they'd go ape crazy over an issue and, again, it should be trivial costs even to them.

Sorry but I don't see this as a valid concern and yes, I am one of those who advocates protecting new players - fairly heavily.
el alasar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2011-12-05 15:22:47 UTC  |  Edited by: el alasar
Raneru wrote:
I would guess that one of the reasons for not allowing pods to be killed legally is to help new players. They accidentally get themselves concorded and find themselves sitting in a pod saying "wtf?". What they generally don't want is someone coming along and also podding them, probably costing them SP.

as you do have a medical clone and always can and should get a new medical clone after you have been podded, there is no risk in loosing SP.
especially for low amounts of total SP, the cost for clones is rather cheap. as mocam pointed out "the first one is free for over a million SP"! furthermore, compare those costs to the loss of the ship and modules.
i dont see any noob protection necessary.

check the moderated 10000 papercuts evelopedia page! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Little_things_and_ideas_-_low_hanging_fruit_-_10000_papercuts comment, bump(!) and like what you like
el alasar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#91 - 2011-12-05 16:26:05 UTC  |  Edited by: el alasar
+1, i totally support this proposed change (allow podding during GCC.)

while we are just at it, furthermore i would like
1. kill rights to be extended to allow podding. implants are a noteable factor for success in pvp and as such should be also on the table. => please support extend personal kill rights to allow podding. (like GCC does soon)
2. allowance to attack players with bounty anytime everywhere, there is a reason they got bounty first place. concord should look away.
3. placing bounty should be always possible once a criminal act towards you has been committed, not only when the criminal has below -1 sec status. (*)

(*) we all know bounty hunting needs to be fixed, e.g. by YABS ... there should also be a way for the criminal to get rid of a bounty e.g. by paying back a multiple of the bounty to concord or the victim. and collecting bounty through alts needs to be stopped.

Jetset Movashaka wrote:
By that logic, people who steal an apple should have their hands cut off.

in eve, that is exactly what should be allowed, because in eve...
1. you can get new hands any time
2. new hands dont cost much
3. the crime you committed first place probably cost the victim much more than a new pair of hands for you

@Solstice Project: maybe add those 3 links explaining the game mechanics to your top post and/or summarize what is currently possible/not possible(allowed with sanctions). it is tricky and many posters seemed surprised that what you are proposing is not currently allowed.

check the moderated 10000 papercuts evelopedia page! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Little_things_and_ideas_-_low_hanging_fruit_-_10000_papercuts comment, bump(!) and like what you like
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#92 - 2011-12-05 17:02:47 UTC

Thank you for your contribution, el alasar.

Not want to talk anything you said down, but i believe that asking for one change per thread
is what is wanted, so maybe you should open up another thread with your ideas
and we can crosslink them ?

I really believe that people who are actually surprised about not
being able to kill pods with GCC are a positive influence to the cause.

I will add the first two links to the top post after i have read the third one,
which i have to go through first.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2011-12-05 17:05:58 UTC
Quote:
The new bounty sytem is situational, the hunter gets what he shoots. If the bad guy flies in a shuttle with an empty clone, shooting him will pay out almost nothing.


I can not agree with that idea, simply because gankers use cheap thrashers and empty clones anyway.
Myrdraeus Keaunt
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#94 - 2011-12-05 17:24:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Myrdraeus Keaunt
Had a longer, better post but the boards ate it. Apparently there's a lot of gankers slapping CCP net admins around like *****es.

As a ganker, I wouldn't notice the change in mechanic. You will not catch my pod. I assume someone's going to try for it anyway and I'm in warp before I'm exploded. If you did manage it, I'd be congratulating you and laughing at my own fail. The only people this mechanic change could possibly hurt are newbs who are surprised by their ship suddenly being replaced by a pod and sit around there waiting to be targeted. Me? I'm warped out and in a station before you realize what happened.

I've had all the experiences on the other side of this as well. I was annoyed. I did stupid newb crap. I didn't cry about it and try to get the game changed.

You've got a month to plot your revenge and catch them in something expensive. Why isn't that enough?

But yeah, go ahead and beg CCP to change it. They won't, and even if they did you'd not get me. Next thing you'll be asking for is, "CCP, could you nerf pods in hi-sec so we can catch them?" Because you're a bunch of ****ies that don't understand and can't handle this game.
StillBorn CrackBaby
Doomheim
#95 - 2011-12-05 17:27:58 UTC  |  Edited by: StillBorn CrackBaby
Solstice Project wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Yogsoloth wrote:
Translation =

Please let me kill unarmed pods in high sec without repercussion, as I am too scared to go into low sec or null. Plus my KB is terribad and I could use some help.

You seem to have missed the point.
He wants to shoot unarmed pods in highsec as repercussion.

Highsec dwellers everywhere should rejoice at the notion, since this brings risk to what they believe is a risk-free endeavour. Roll


Are you really sure you understand ?

Doesn't seem so.

Tippia understands everything. She's one of my favorite posters...


Myrdraeus Keaunt wrote:
As a ganker, I wouldn't notice the change in mechanic. You will not catch my pod.

I'll catch you, you just wait and see...

(StillBorn waves his fist in defiance)...
el alasar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2011-12-05 17:30:03 UTC
Myrdraeus Keaunt wrote:
As a ganker, I wouldn't notice the change in mechanic. You will not catch my pod. I assume someone's going to try for it anyway and I'm in warp before I'm exploded. If you did manage it, I'd be congratulating you and laughing at my own fail. The only people this mechanic change could possibly hurt are newbs who are surprised by their ship suddenly being replaced by a pod and sit around there waiting to be targeted. Me? I'm warped out and in a station before you realize what happened.

probably very true. but then, you should not get punished for even trying to get your pod.
not only noobs that got concorded by accident might be surprised, but also less experienced/skilled gankers not warping out in time.

check the moderated 10000 papercuts evelopedia page! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Little_things_and_ideas_-_low_hanging_fruit_-_10000_papercuts comment, bump(!) and like what you like
el alasar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2011-12-05 17:37:29 UTC
@Solistice i agree, 1 thread per topic / change (as i preach in my ideas collection article Roll). just felt i needed to write it here once. so deep in the thread those lines will be lost soon anyways. just a little scared if i start threads on such "outrageous" ideas people will bash me just because of my sec status lol. just look at Myrdraeus Keaunt post lol.

this gets offtopic... all readers, ignore advised:
Solstice Project wrote:
Quote:
The new bounty sytem is situational, the hunter gets what he shoots. If the bad guy flies in a shuttle with an empty clone, shooting him will pay out almost nothing.

I can not agree with that idea, simply because gankers use cheap thrashers and empty clones anyway.

i agree. it is not satisfying. i would also like to see some LP or isk from the system for doing successfull head hunting, but so far it has been quite impossible to come up with an idea to make it not easily exploitable. when you read my post #33, even this can be exploited, see #35.
true head hunting also means putting your ship at risk - higher risk than doing pve. thus there should be some more reward to it. sadly no clue how to do it so far... still thinking...

on the other hand... maybe ganking in itself is part of the problem... that it is possible first place to deal so much damage in so short time with so little invest. some thoughts in this post #75...
Quote:
usual ganker/pvp'er argument: if less ships got blown up, whom to sell any stuff to? well, either people carry on with doing lots of mining/industry/pve to afford some pve, or - if pvp ship loss rate wasnt as high - they could spend a lower percentage of their time in mining/industry/pve to do more pvp. this would mean more engagements, more adrenaline. how? increase the chance to survive engagements, e.g. by
- overall increase of HP for all ships. favor hull HP, making them harder to utilize for logistics. new tactics, more variety.
- make warp scrambling chance-based like ECM. (favors web+bounce tactics)
- introduce first/new counter(s) to high alpha (e.g. new logistics: remote resistances or Chaff (reducing signature radius))
- factor victim's and attacker's sec status in to concord response times. make high standings give you an advantage!
this would change balancing, making ganking harder - it needs more players or more expensive fitting to accomplish the job. and adds unforeseeable variables to the ganking game!

i find it ridiculous how easy it is to gank a 170k EHP freighter in highsec. do the math what you are "allowed" to fit on a pve-BS not to be eligible for ganking. laughable.

check the moderated 10000 papercuts evelopedia page! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Little_things_and_ideas_-_low_hanging_fruit_-_10000_papercuts comment, bump(!) and like what you like
Myrdraeus Keaunt
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#98 - 2011-12-05 17:40:47 UTC
StillBorn CrackBaby wrote:

Myrdraeus Keaunt wrote:
As a ganker, I wouldn't notice the change in mechanic. You will not catch my pod.

I'll catch you, you just wait and see...

(StillBorn waves his fist in defiance)...


I find I'm on the fence here. On the one hand, I like a challenge and don't just hand pod kills to anyone. On the other hand, hearing the tears of those that got popped when they shot a flashy pod is quite laughable and would be sorely missed.
Myrdraeus Keaunt
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#99 - 2011-12-05 17:46:35 UTC
el alasar wrote:

on the other hand... maybe ganking in itself is part of the problem... that it is possible first place to deal so much damage in so short time with so little invest. some thoughts in this post #75...
Quote:
usual ganker/pvp'er argument: if less ships got blown up, whom to sell any stuff to? well, either people carry on with doing lots of mining/industry/pve to afford some pve, or - if pvp ship loss rate wasnt as high - they could spend a lower percentage of their time in mining/industry/pve to do more pvp. this would mean more engagements, more adrenaline. how? increase the chance to survive engagements, e.g. by
- overall increase of HP for all ships. favor hull HP, making them harder to utilize for logistics. new tactics, more variety.
- make warp scrambling chance-based like ECM. (favors web+bounce tactics)
- introduce first/new counter(s) to high alpha (e.g. new logistics: remote resistances or Chaff (reducing signature radius))
- factor victim's and attacker's sec status in to concord response times. make high standings give you an advantage!
this would change balancing, making ganking harder - it needs more players or more expensive fitting to accomplish the job. and adds unforeseeable variables to the ganking game!

i find it ridiculous how easy it is to gank a 170k EHP freighter in highsec. do the math what you are "allowed" to fit on a pve-BS not to be eligible for ganking. laughable.



A) PvE fit BS get ganked a lot. One made the news not too long ago because of how much the gankers made off him. It's a legit tactic.

B) If you mine in 1.0 space the difficulty of ganking you goes up quite a bit. Stay out of .5 to eliminate risk. Don't mine in .5 in a retriever. Stay aligned, etc...etc... It's not like those getting ganked aren't actually asking for it by bringing paper hulls into the least secure hi-sec they can find (because it makes them more ISK) and then go AFK. I'm sorry but....I'm just not sorry. If you were actively playing the game and using any amount of strategy or even tactics...I would not be able to gank you so easily.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#100 - 2011-12-05 17:49:32 UTC
Speaking as someone who loves shooting pods, I support the OP wholeheartedly.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016