These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Sec Hauling/Mining Kills - TY CCP for No Protection

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#481 - 2014-08-29 21:27:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Benny Ohu wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it:

- buy myself an armored truck and blow yours
- bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck.

Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude. Bear


so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours?
you are aware how stupid that is, right?


He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps.

that's not how responsibility works

also what is this line of conversation even about this is the only post in this thread i've cared to read besides falcon's which are beautiful posts made by a beautiful man


The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.

A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.

The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.
Paranoid Loyd
#482 - 2014-08-29 22:14:53 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.

A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.

The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.


A can only force B if B allows it. Everyone is provided with the tools to mitigate risk. If you choose not to use them that is no one's fault but your own.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Solecist Project
#483 - 2014-08-29 22:21:29 UTC
This just came to my mind.


Eve online - When Carebears Attack! - Hulk (Exhumer) PvP





Isn't that guy awesome?? :D

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Hengle Teron
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#484 - 2014-08-29 22:29:54 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
This just came to my mind.


Eve online - When Carebears Attack! - Hulk (Exhumer) PvP





Isn't that guy awesome?? :D

great vid
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#485 - 2014-08-29 22:30:37 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:

The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.


They are, to exactly the same degree that their "victims" bother to protect themselves.


Quote:

The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.


"bothering to defend yourself" is not a playstyle being "forced" on B, he should be doing it anyway if he weren't a halfassed excuse for a gamer.

Failure to do things right can and should have consequences.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Natural CloneKiller
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#486 - 2014-08-29 22:37:11 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
You were flying a Prorator and you were not cloaked up despite hauling a contract with massive collateral.

Seriously, if you have a load like this, fly your ship like everyone is out to get you because probably that is actually the case. You had the ship to do so and still you failed. CCP already gave you everything you needed to protect yourself and you did not apply the cloak. Thus: POP!



Do you haul?
Makari Aeron
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#487 - 2014-08-29 23:01:49 UTC
Quick solution, don't live in hisec.

CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty.

CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP
Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#488 - 2014-08-29 23:02:52 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:
There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.

Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.

Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.

The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor.


Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction.

Smile



I liked your comments until here. That is not risk. It's a loss, but it's not risk. It's about as 'risky' as blowing someone up when you haven't scanned their cargo. The point was that ganking ships are so cheap, losing a dozen of them makes zero difference. Your response does not address that in the slightest.

Try again.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#489 - 2014-08-29 23:06:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Dorian Wylde wrote:
I liked your comments until here. That is not risk. It's a loss, but it's not risk.
Uhm. Yes, that's what risks are: the chance of a loss. The loot fairy is the most risky (not to be confused with risqué) b-word in the entire galaxy.

Quote:
It's about as 'risky' as blowing someone up when you haven't scanned their cargo.
No, it's not. The loot fairy does not care about scanners — she just punishes you with Meta-3 hardeners when you're praying for a deadspace booster.

Quote:
The point was that ganking ships are so cheap, losing a dozen of them makes zero difference. Your response does not address that in the slightest.
The point rested on a thoroughly flawed notion of what risk actually is. His response addressed it by describing the risk involved.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#490 - 2014-08-29 23:06:41 UTC
I would love to see a well functioning bounty system. It would be nice if bounty hunting was a viable profession.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#491 - 2014-08-29 23:11:14 UTC

My only regret is that I have but only one bucket to give: ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ ಥ_ಥ

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Nicolai Serkanner
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#492 - 2014-08-29 23:31:06 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it:

- buy myself an armored truck and blow yours
- bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck.

Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude. Bear


so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours?
you are aware how stupid that is, right?


He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps.

that's not how responsibility works

also what is this line of conversation even about this is the only post in this thread i've cared to read besides falcon's which are beautiful posts made by a beautiful man


The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.

A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.

The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.


I like to play a version of monopoly where only I can build hotels and my opponents can not. Unfortunately for me that version doesn't exist ... just as your preferred version of EvE doesn't. You have to do with the version that does.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#493 - 2014-08-29 23:58:15 UTC
I've hauled loads implants worth 2+ billion in and out of Jita multiple times, in T1 industrials. I've never been ganked because I don't give anyone the opportunity to cargo scan me.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#494 - 2014-08-30 00:01:49 UTC
And LOL at getting ganked in a Prorator.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#495 - 2014-08-30 00:10:57 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it:

- buy myself an armored truck and blow yours
- bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck.

Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude. Bear


so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours?
you are aware how stupid that is, right?


He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps.

that's not how responsibility works

also what is this line of conversation even about this is the only post in this thread i've cared to read besides falcon's which are beautiful posts made by a beautiful man


The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.

A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.

The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.


I read that crappy blog and it's garbage. No one is forcing you not to run missions or not haul 10 billion ISK worth of stuff in an untanked Iteron V.

Also, failing to grasp the basic premise of EVE Online: You and that author are doing that.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#496 - 2014-08-30 00:43:32 UTC
Paul Maken wrote:
4.) The addition of the Tier 3 battlecruisers, especially the high alpha of the Tornadoes, reduced the cost of ganking with fewer larger ships until the insurance change came to balance that out.


*cough*Samepatch*cough* *cough*theywerestillmoreexpensivethanprepatchbsganking*cough*

In other words, there has been exactly one patch that buffed ganking, and all that did was allow gankers to spend ISK instead of time if they wanted the convenience of not being -10. (You can gank just fine as a -10)

Quote:
Overall, the changes have balanced out to keep the risk/reward relationships in check.


You forgot a whole lot on your list of nerfs to ganking. Starting with the biggest and first one:

CONCORD stopped being tankable.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
CCP Falcon
#497 - 2014-08-30 00:44:35 UTC
Dorian Wylde wrote:
Try again.


Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree. Smile


CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon

Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#498 - 2014-08-30 00:47:10 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
Dorian Wylde wrote:
Try again.


Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree. Smile



Never let the facts interfere with telling a good story.


I feel like I've been saying this a lot recently.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Foxstar Damaskeenus
why did i join this corp
Not Purple Shoot It.
#499 - 2014-08-30 00:57:05 UTC
Duchess Amarrian wrote:

The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.

cheers






Congradulations Luukje and NaturalCloneKiller

"[this thread] is a cesspit of trolling and flaming" ISD Buldath
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#500 - 2014-08-30 00:57:28 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
Dorian Wylde wrote:
Try again.


Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree. Smile




[ ] Rekt

[ ] Not Rekt

[x] Falcon Punched

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.