These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Message Regarding "Hyperdunking"

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#501 - 2015-01-30 19:17:07 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Dangeresque Too wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Locke Deathroe wrote:
Seems to me given the current Crimewatch 2.0 mechanic and the recent changes to clones (ie. no more skills lost or medical clone cost) why not move the same crimewatch mechanic over to the pod once the ship goes boom.
Because there's no need to, since scrams and points already exist.
So by that argument, Concord shouldn't blow up your ship either because guns and missiles exist?

In order for a player to catch your pod they have to be in a max sebo'd slasher and catch a very lucky server tick, or use smart bombs. Even then, what good does catching your pod do? You don't have to pay for a new med clone, and you don't have implants, and if you are in a NPC corp the person that catches you will take a massive standings hit with that NPC corp.

The purpose of CONCORD is to remove an active threat, which is to say the armed ship flown by a pirate. A pod isn't an armed threat. The consequence of crime in EVE is reduced security status, with all of the drawbacks that that implies.



True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.

If perhaps you were unable to dock in high-sec past -5 or unable to perform market transactions in high sec... now we are talking consequence.

All we hear about from the shooty shooty crowd is risk vs reward and safety vs expectations. But when there is nothing of consequence for a ganker to be -10 other than they are fair game by others... (Everyone is fair game according to you guys so this isn't a consequence) then there is something broken.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#502 - 2015-01-30 19:20:26 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:



True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.

If perhaps you were unable to dock in high-sec past -5 or unable to perform market transactions in high sec... now we are talking consequence.

All we hear about from the shooty shooty crowd is risk vs reward and safety vs expectations. But when there is nothing of consequence for a ganker to be -10 other than they are fair game by others... (Everyone is fair game according to you guys so this isn't a consequence) then there is something broken.


Drop your sec status down to -10 then go and do what you normally do. You can then come back an tell us how it went.
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#503 - 2015-01-30 19:28:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaldi Tsukaya
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
[quote=Dangeresque Too]

The purpose of CONCORD is to remove an active threat, which is to say the armed ship flown by a pirate. A pod isn't an armed threat. The consequence of crime in EVE is reduced security status, with all of the drawbacks that that implies.


No. That is part of the mechanics of Concord. Both in the Lore and in actual gameplay, the purpose is much different.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#504 - 2015-01-30 19:29:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.
That's not true. The consequences of negative sec status are a microcosm of all of EVE: exactly what players decide them to be in a contest between different wishes, wants, and needs.

CONCORD itself is just a tax like any other, only this one is on the activity of aggression as opposed to, say, trade. It is that tax (in its two incarnations) that define highsec.

Quote:
If perhaps you were unable to dock in high-sec past -5 or unable to perform market transactions in high sec... now we are talking consequence.
No, that is not a consequence — that is idiotic and arbitrary lock-out of core game content for no sane or sensible reason whatsoever. Also known as fundamentally awful design.

Quote:
All we hear about from the shooty shooty crowd is risk vs reward and safety vs expectations. But when there is nothing of consequence for a ganker to be -10 other than they are fair game by others... (Everyone is fair game according to you guys so this isn't a consequence) then there is something broken.
No. All it is is some people refusing to make use of the tools at their disposal and willingly voiding the significant consequences of crime by letting the criminals go free. That is not broken — that is just player choice. Player choice is a cornerstone of the game. “Broken” would be if that choice was removed; if the game simply enforced one particular outcome without absolutely no player input and no ability to choose.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#505 - 2015-01-30 19:29:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
The purpose of CONCORD is to remove an active threat, which is to say the armed ship flown by a pirate. A pod isn't an armed threat. The consequence of crime in EVE is reduced security status, with all of the drawbacks that that implies.



True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.

If perhaps you were unable to dock in high-sec past -5 or unable to perform market transactions in high sec... now we are talking consequence.

All we hear about from the shooty shooty crowd is risk vs reward and safety vs expectations. But when there is nothing of consequence for a ganker to be -10 other than they are fair game by others... (Everyone is fair game according to you guys so this isn't a consequence) then there is something broken.

NPC corporations and empires are neutral parties to the interactions that happen between capsuleers. Indeed, violence between capsuleers isn't even considered "real" crime by them. High society doesn't actually get affected when one pod pilot blows up another one. So why shouldn't they be able to dock? Besides, those flashy -10 guys make for really good business, and money decides pretty much everything.

Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
[quote=Dangeresque Too]

The purpose of CONCORD is to remove an active threat, which is to say the armed ship flown by a pirate. A pod isn't an armed threat. The consequence of crime in EVE is reduced security status, with all of the drawbacks that that implies.


No. That is part of the mechanics of Concord. Both in the Lore and in actual gameplay, the purpose is much different.

The purpose of an individual, active CONCORD response team. Is that better?

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#506 - 2015-01-30 19:41:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaldi Tsukaya
Destiny Corrupted wrote:


Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
[quote=Dangeresque Too]

The purpose of CONCORD is to remove an active threat, which is to say the armed ship flown by a pirate. A pod isn't an armed threat. The consequence of crime in EVE is reduced security status, with all of the drawbacks that that implies.


No. That is part of the mechanics of Concord. Both in the Lore and in actual gameplay, the purpose is much different.

The purpose of an individual, active CONCORD response team. Is that better?


Not trying to nitpick, but establishing purpose is different than mechanics is important to the debate. I assume that the Concord pilot(s) are simply "following orders" and upholding the laws/rules that govern their behavior.

Additionally, the NPC Empires DO care about pilot/pilot interactions, or else their ships wouldn't shoot at criminal outlaw players who enter their systems. I am sure the criminal outlaw players would agree, don't you think?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#507 - 2015-01-30 19:50:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Not trying to nitpick, but establishing purpose is different than mechanics is important to the debate. I assume that the Concord pilot(s) are simply "following orders" and upholding the laws/rules that govern their behavior.

What the CONCORD pilots do has nothing to do with either — that is just lore fluff.

The purpose of CONCORD is very simple: to impose an asset tax on unlawful aggression (aggression tax being the defining characteristic of highsec).
The mechanics of CONCORD are reasonable simple, dealing with seclevel-specific spawn times for cruisers and battleships.

Quote:
Additionally, the NPC factions DO care about pilot/pilot interactions, or else their ships wouldn't shoot at criminal players who enter their systems.
If you want to nitpick, faction NPCs don't shoot at criminals who enter their systems (largely because criminals can't enter systems) — that's what CONCORD does. The factions only care about outlaws, who CONCORD couldn't care one whit about. The only overlap is sentry guns, who react to sec status changes for whatever reason.
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#508 - 2015-01-30 20:05:40 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
Not trying to nitpick, but establishing purpose is different than mechanics is important to the debate. I assume that the Concord pilot(s) are simply "following orders" and upholding the laws/rules that govern their behavior.

What the CONCORD pilots do has nothing to do with either — that is just lore fluff.

The purpose of CONCORD is very simple: to impose an asset tax on unlawful aggression (aggression tax being the defining characteristic of highsec).
The mechanics of CONCORD are reasonable simple, dealing with seclevel-specific spawn times for cruisers and battleships.

Quote:
Additionally, the NPC factions DO care about pilot/pilot interactions, or else their ships wouldn't shoot at criminal players who enter their systems.
If you want to nitpick, faction NPCs don't shoot at criminals who enter their systems (largely because criminals can't enter systems) — that's what CONCORD does. The factions only care about outlaws, who CONCORD couldn't care one whit about. The only overlap is sentry guns, who react to sec status changes for whatever reason.


Yes, I changed my post to 'Empires' to reflect that. I have to constantly mind the correct terminology when dealing with mechanics of NPC's. There are, as you stated, differences between the distinct NPC elements and their responses. (let's not get into FW or standings, lol)

Really, my point in relation to this thread is that "purpose" is what is intended, whereas "mechanics" is what actually happens. Eve players are notorious for manipulating the differences.

I love a good discussionSmile
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#509 - 2015-01-30 21:05:33 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.
If this were true the same could be said of AFKing while in space, the consequences of doing so are barely worth mentioning; primarily because there's not enough gankers to force a change in the way that they play, despite the best efforts of the gankers.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#510 - 2015-01-30 21:08:11 UTC
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.
If this were true the same could be said of AFKing while in space, the consequences of doing so are barely worth mentioning; primarily because there's not enough gankers to force a change in the way that they play, despite the best efforts of the gankers.



No one should AFK in space, nor would I advocate that they do. My problem isn't that people should AFK haul, it is that being a ganker has less consequence than being in Faction Warfare... and tbh a ganker should be hunted by all empires and that should mean something.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#511 - 2015-01-30 21:22:17 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
No one should AFK in space, nor would I advocate that they do. My problem isn't that people should AFK haul, it is that being a ganker has less consequence than being in Faction Warfare... and tbh a ganker should be hunted by all empires and that should mean something.

Why? After all, he's not at war with the factions. If he's a criminal, he's already hunted by the police, and both police and navies are purposefully design to be more of an inconvenience than anything (which is why they can be defeated).

Again, the consequences of ganking are whatever players choose them to be. If they choose “none”, then the don't have a leg to stand on if they complain that the consequences are tough enough for their tastes.
Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#512 - 2015-01-30 21:22:19 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.
If this were true the same could be said of AFKing while in space, the consequences of doing so are barely worth mentioning; primarily because there's not enough gankers to force a change in the way that they play, despite the best efforts of the gankers.



No one should AFK in space, nor would I advocate that they do. My problem isn't that people should AFK haul, it is that being a ganker has less consequence than being in Faction Warfare... and tbh a ganker should be hunted by all empires and that should mean something.

Sitting at -10 sec status has a greater implication that FW status.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#513 - 2015-01-30 21:24:24 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.
If this were true the same could be said of AFKing while in space, the consequences of doing so are barely worth mentioning; primarily because there's not enough gankers to force a change in the way that they play, despite the best efforts of the gankers.



No one should AFK in space, nor would I advocate that they do. My problem isn't that people should AFK haul, it is that being a ganker has less consequence than being in Faction Warfare... and tbh a ganker should be hunted by all empires and that should mean something.


They do get hunted.
Paranoid Loyd
#514 - 2015-01-30 21:25:28 UTC
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.
If this were true the same could be said of AFKing while in space, the consequences of doing so are barely worth mentioning; primarily because there's not enough gankers to force a change in the way that they play, despite the best efforts of the gankers.



No one should AFK in space, nor would I advocate that they do. My problem isn't that people should AFK haul, it is that being a ganker has less consequence than being in Faction Warfare... and tbh a ganker should be hunted by all empires and that should mean something.

Sitting at -10 sec status has a greater implication that FW status.

He probably thinks the police are the same that attack you, when the reality is the Faction Navy is very weak and slow compared to the Faction Police.

"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!
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#515 - 2015-01-30 21:25:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Market McSelling Alt
baltec1 wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.
If this were true the same could be said of AFKing while in space, the consequences of doing so are barely worth mentioning; primarily because there's not enough gankers to force a change in the way that they play, despite the best efforts of the gankers.



No one should AFK in space, nor would I advocate that they do. My problem isn't that people should AFK haul, it is that being a ganker has less consequence than being in Faction Warfare... and tbh a ganker should be hunted by all empires and that should mean something.


They do get hunted.



Oh boo hoo. Not really. And last I checked you can still use a cloak at -10 sec status. Ever tried cloaking in highsec of the opposing faction?

You cant even dock at a contested station of the opposing faction. Come on man, try a little

Being a ganker should mean you live your life in low security space, and risk something to come to high security to do something bad.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#516 - 2015-01-30 21:28:34 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Oh boo hoo. Not really.
Yes, really. What you're asking for is in the game already — boo hoo indeed. If it's slightly less than what FWers face from the NPCs, then that seems appropriate seeing as how you're not at war with them.

Quote:
Being a ganker should mean you live your life in low security space, and risk something to come to high security to do something bad.
Why should it mean anything of the kind? That sounds like horrible design. And it does mean you risk something when you come to highsec.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#517 - 2015-01-30 21:34:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
They do get hunted.
Oh boo hoo. Not really.
If you feel that gankers aren't hunted enough then you should do something about it, all the tools are there, the thing that is missing is people willing to make the effort.
Quote:
You cant even dock at a contested station of the opposing faction.
Which makes sense, why would they give shelter to someone they're at war with?
Quote:
Being a ganker should mean you live your life in low security space, and risk something to come to high security to do something bad.
Why? I hesitate to make a real life comparison but there's plenty of known criminals walking the streets of major cities without consequence, quite a sizable proportion of them wear suits and hold positions of influence too.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#518 - 2015-01-30 22:28:54 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:



Oh boo hoo. Not really. And last I checked you can still use a cloak at -10 sec status. Ever tried cloaking in highsec of the opposing faction?

You cant even dock at a contested station of the opposing faction. Come on man, try a little

Being a ganker should mean you live your life in low security space, and risk something to come to high security to do something bad.


I once flew a megathron through enemy faction space and attacked wartargets I found. I am still a wanted man in gal high sec for that rampage.

Also Gank ships don't fit cloaks. Before spouting nonsense like this you should go to -10 and see how much fun it is doing activities you currently enjoy.
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#519 - 2015-01-30 22:41:36 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:



Oh boo hoo. Not really. And last I checked you can still use a cloak at -10 sec status. Ever tried cloaking in highsec of the opposing faction?

You cant even dock at a contested station of the opposing faction. Come on man, try a little

Being a ganker should mean you live your life in low security space, and risk something to come to high security to do something bad.


I once flew a megathron through enemy faction space and attacked wartargets I found. I am still a wanted man in gal high sec for that rampage.

Also Gank ships don't fit cloaks. Before spouting nonsense like this you should go to -10 and see how much fun it is doing activities you currently enjoy.


The Outlaws who use their mains have my respect, for the path they choose limits their choices in gameplay. If ever there was a more (dis)honorable professionBlink
Kaely Tanniss
Black Lotus Society.
#520 - 2015-01-30 23:37:37 UTC
Wow...just wow. The tears are epic. How about this..pay attention to the game, take steps to prevent or lessen the chance you get hyperdunked (which is NOT common btw), don't carry cargo values that would make you a target to everyone or take the steps to protect it....why is this so hard? Every single PvP player has to do it. Just because you don't PvP doesn't mean you don't need to protect your assets. The sooner people realize this, the better off they will be. On and on the whining goes, asking for a change because people can't figure it out or take personal responsibility for their own safety and/or protection. It's really sad tbh. How about this...try to be as clever as the person who has targeted you. Reply after reply of "solutions" to something that is not a problem. Post your "solutions" in the game ideas forum where such "ideas" belong. The bottom line is there is no problem...there is no exploit. Get over it, adapt, and move on. What's next..calls to remove shootting other players all together? Ridiculous. Twisted

If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..