These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New danger in high-sec pod ganking.

Author
Ageanal Olerie
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-01-18 20:11:48 UTC

CONCORD doesn't take kindly to it.

Therefore not only does the ganker get podded, but CONCORD will also execute a random clone of the high-sec pod ganker.

It could be an implantless jump clone, or it could be your fully max-fitted primary clone. You never know, but in any case you'll want to max-out your jump clone installations.



Sylveria Relden
#2 - 2015-01-18 20:20:09 UTC
Ageanal Olerie wrote:

CONCORD doesn't take kindly to it.

Therefore not only does the ganker get podded, but CONCORD will also execute a random clone of the high-sec pod ganker.

It could be an implantless jump clone, or it could be your fully max-fitted primary clone. You never know, but in any case you'll want to max-out your jump clone installations.



I'd agree with this with the condition that it's based on whether the ganker destroyed the pod in question, or just the ship.

"What's good for the goose..." after all :)

TL;DR If you didn't read the entire post perhaps you're probably ADHD. (seek help)

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2015-01-18 20:32:53 UTC
And they're going to get my clones in deep nullsec, in a station owned by my alliance, by...?

And this is needed because...?

And this is balanced because...?

And this is, in any way, a positive change for the game because...?
Sylveria Relden
#4 - 2015-01-18 20:39:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Sylveria Relden
Danika Princip wrote:
And they're going to get my clones in deep nullsec, in a station owned by my alliance, by...?

And this is needed because...?

And this is balanced because...?

And this is, in any way, a positive change for the game because...?


I think they're mainly referring to the ganker in hisec after CONCORD response, not CONCORD being given sweeping rights to destroy a pod no matter its location. At least, that's what I gathered from this.

TL;DR If you didn't read the entire post perhaps you're probably ADHD. (seek help)

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#5 - 2015-01-18 20:46:44 UTC
How about...

"Players should be responsible for dealing *extra* punishments against other players... not rely on NPCs to do a job they don't want to put effort into."


Also...

- clones don't cost money anymore. Podding suicide gankers won't affect them.

- NPCs destroying a player's random clone somewhere in the game is FAR too much of an overreach. Even players can't do that to each other in 0.0 space (where players can own stations).

- I suspect the OP is an alt of this guy here.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#6 - 2015-01-18 20:48:05 UTC
Shoot it yourself, quit asking for the NPCs to do what you're too lazy to do.

"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.

Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-01-18 20:48:31 UTC
Ha ha. Ha. Ha. No.

If I can get my pod out of a fight on Brave newbies home station in Null sec, you can get your pod out of a gank in high sec. If I can burn my -security status self across high sec and not get ganked along the way, you can get your pod out. Pick a celestial and spam warp.


The 'Police' are there to Enforce the law, not exact vengeance. The 'Law' is you shoot someone in high sec, you get your ship destroyed. Concord fulfills this role. It's not up to them to carry out your vengeance. That's your job.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#8 - 2015-01-18 20:53:38 UTC
Pod them yourself, it's outrageously funny.
Sylveria Relden
#9 - 2015-01-18 20:54:58 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
How about...

"Players should be responsible for dealing *extra* punishments against other players... not rely on NPCs to do a job they don't want to put effort into."


Also...

- clones don't cost money anymore. Podding suicide gankers won't affect them.

- NPCs destroying a player's random clone somewhere in the game is FAR too much of an overreach. Even players can't do that to each other in 0.0 space (where players can own stations).

- I suspect the OP is an alt of this guy here.


Agreed - except for one point, which is CONCORD was introduced with this purpose in mind, else they would not have been introduced, no? (not arguing whether it's "acceptable" they were introduced, but the role of CONCORD in hisec) That said, if they're going to do the job- albeit with conditions (as I stated previously, it would be dependent on the severity of the "crime") they should be doing the job entirely. Unsure whether it's the best solution, because likely game mechanics would need to be changed drastically (CONCORD does not currently destroy pods, for example in ANY case)

Money cost is irrelevant to the pod cost itself- but implants are still a viable argument here. If you spent money on implants for increased training time reductions, it's an investment. The only reason this would even be an issue is if the ganker is also wearing implants when they're out "hunting", yes?

Agreed with the "overreach" as well, it should be limited to the current engagement of CONCORD with the ganker in question- and they should have the same ability to evade said engagement as they would any other against a player (such as warping to another location once ship is destroyed) I don't under ANY circumstances think they should just be able to destroy a pod outside of the engagement area.

No idea on OP alt status, etc. I think anyone can only speculate.

TL;DR If you didn't read the entire post perhaps you're probably ADHD. (seek help)

Sylveria Relden
#10 - 2015-01-18 20:56:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Sylveria Relden
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Pod them yourself, it's outrageously funny.


Agree with this, too. I often ponder whether "hisec" is even necessary- and why or why not players themselves aren't banding together to form "police forces" or merc groups (not talking about Crime and Punishment here, just in general) if they're so consistently concerned with defending themselves.

EDIT: I was going to stop above but thought I'd elaborate some more here-

It amazes me that everyone wants to play "solo" in hisec to make more iskies yet there's no existing "solidarity" of any sort- outside of small player corporations. It really makes me want to take the side of gankers here because they're right. If you think this is a "solo" game, and you do nothing but complain that people blew your ship up- it's really an empty complaint. Usually there's a counter to everything. Why not hire someone to scout? Why not hire protection? Are you really THAT greedy with your isk? Does it really cut that far into your "profit margin"?

I think the biggest problem here is really the imbalance- because if you're going to introduce CONCORD and "hisec" do it right and have them defend- or just remove the BS mechanic completely. Just my 2 isk worth.

TL;DR If you didn't read the entire post perhaps you're probably ADHD. (seek help)

Li Mu'Bai
Absurdity of Abstractions
#11 - 2015-01-18 21:01:17 UTC
I think the OP is referring to people specifically ganking pods, and not destroying the pod after a gank. It happened to me once, but it was just an empty clone. I know its happened to other people, especially on traffic controlled gates.

Which, if that's the case, I just say get something that provides a LITTLE more protection than a tritanium bubble filled with goo. Get an Assault Frigate and use that to fly from place to place. Still fast, provides better protection for your capsule, and not a lot of gankers care enough to bother with every AF that passes their way, so long as you're not autopiloting.

Which, if you're autopiloting in your capsule... You get what you deserve.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#12 - 2015-01-18 21:03:16 UTC
I think we found the new gold standard for troll bait. Impressive.

Also anyone else bored forum browsing while stuck in the A-C clusterfuck?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#13 - 2015-01-18 22:35:21 UTC
Sylveria Relden wrote:

I think they're mainly referring to the ganker in hisec after CONCORD response, not CONCORD being given sweeping rights to destroy a pod no matter its location. At least, that's what I gathered from this.



No the op says ganker gets podded and concord executes a random clone
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#14 - 2015-01-18 22:37:55 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Sylveria Relden wrote:
I think the biggest problem here is really the imbalance- because if you're going to introduce CONCORD and "hisec" do it right and have them defend- or just remove the BS mechanic completely. Just my 2 isk worth.

CONCORD was never designed to defend players. Ever.

They were designed merely to exact a base level cost for unwanted aggression (war declaration fees OR lose your ship, take a security penalty, and not be able to fly anything except a pod in high-sec for 15 minutes).

Beyond this... it is up to players to make things harder for other players.


tldr; the game never was (nor ever will be) designed to protect you.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2015-01-18 22:42:54 UTC
As much as I would love to see the tears of the gankers in local, I'm going to have to disagree.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#16 - 2015-01-18 22:43:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
ShahFluffers wrote:



tldr; the game never was (nor ever will be) designed to protect you.




all of the warning windows

the safety feature

temporary immunity after undock

removing the item called charon

removing corp on corp violence >.>
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2015-01-18 22:58:02 UTC
my ONLY issue with this is, im pretty damn sure the EMPIRES own those cloning facilities, and dont take too kindly to CONCORD overstepping boundaries. whats in space is in space, but once you start trouncing about in stations your under someone else's rules
Lugh Crow-Slave
#18 - 2015-01-18 23:12:41 UTC
really that is your only reason??

if lore is your only reason then that is a poor reason to shoot down a mechanic you other wise believe in.


I for one have many problems with this idea most of which are stated above
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2015-01-18 23:38:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Omnathious Deninard
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:



tldr; the game never was (nor ever will be) designed to protect you.




all of the warning windows

the safety feature

temporary immunity after undock

removing the item called charon

removing corp on corp violence >.>

And yet you can still and all ways will be able to b attacked anywhere for any reason by anyone, with no warning. I think the system is still working just as well as it used to.

Edit: No to the OP don't fly in a pod if you don't want to get podded.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Sylveria Relden
#20 - 2015-01-18 23:55:25 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Sylveria Relden wrote:
I think the biggest problem here is really the imbalance- because if you're going to introduce CONCORD and "hisec" do it right and have them defend- or just remove the BS mechanic completely. Just my 2 isk worth.

CONCORD was never designed to defend players. Ever.

They were designed merely to exact a base level cost for unwanted aggression (war declaration fees OR lose your ship, take a security penalty, and not be able to fly anything except a pod in high-sec for 15 minutes).

Beyond this... it is up to players to make things harder for other players.


tldr; the game never was (nor ever will be) designed to protect you.


I'm in agreement here- my point is that they either need to go all the way with implementation, or remove it- because right now it's half-a**ed and I think that's why there's a lot of confusion among those who roam in hisec (thinking it's supposed to be "safe", which it's really not)

Not once have I *ever* undocked thinking it as safe- anywhere. I also think that it's moronic for people to whine about being "protected" when the answer is all around them- they just choose to believe otherwise. The game can be very confusing for some- because the reality here is that we say "Ask for help" but in the same premise we say "Trust no one"... for newer players I'm sure this isn't easy to grasp, either.

TL;DR If you didn't read the entire post perhaps you're probably ADHD. (seek help)

12Next page