These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 MODULE] Autodestructive cargobay

Author
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#1 - 2016-06-01 08:31:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Well this thread gave me an IDEA.
What about a module fitted to freighters that would DESTROY all cargo in the event of inevitable destruction of ship? Like an "autodestructive cargobay". Would need to be activated manually, effect would be immediate and icon for this module would take form of a red button. Lol
Would give additional 10% more cargospace (reduction from 20%). Cool
Would reduce Hull points by 10%.

More I think about it, it becomes even more funny.
darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#2 - 2016-06-01 08:53:12 UTC
Sounds interesting. But I think it should make the cargo bay smaller not larger and if a module like this was introduced the normal drop rate from kills should be increased.
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#3 - 2016-06-01 09:04:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
More cargospace if for more stuf that would be destroyed. Do you think that gankers would still gank those, I think that CODE would, and that would be so fun to watch.

In the spirit of EVE, assuring that destruction of vessel can be inevitable, but at least you would deny all loot. Player choices matter.
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2016-06-01 10:25:19 UTC
Sounds like a wonderful module for those butthurt noobs who cannot deal with loss.

No thanks.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#5 - 2016-06-01 10:37:25 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:
More cargospace if for more stuf that would be destroyed. Do you think that gankers would still gank those, I think that CODE would, and that would be so fun to watch.

In the spirit of EVE, assuring that destruction of vessel can be inevitable, but at least you would deny all loot. Player choices matter.
Perhaps CODE might (although if this was the norm probably not for long as ganking freighters with no drops gets expensive quick), but what about all the other gankers who are after the loot? Why would you want to remove one of the main motivations for players to attack other players in the game?

Piracy is suppose to be a profession in this game. I fail to see how removing loot drops is going to bring content to the game or make it better in any way.

Player choices matter. If you choose to undock in something, you are taking the risk that someone is going to try and take your stuff so you better make provisions to defend yourself. No, CCP is not going to give you a way to deny the victor the spoils of a PvP engagement just to satisfy your childish desire for spite. If you lose your stuff to a pirate, man up and give them the 'gf' they deserve for beating you.


Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#6 - 2016-06-01 12:16:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Quote:
Why would you want to remove one of the main motivations for players to attack other players in the game?

One of the main motivator was not always loot, but a destruction of others vessels and making others lives miserable. With this module, both gankers and haulers can live a miserable life. Cool

If the gankers would want to attack, and the haulers would choose to equip this module. They would.

And module is only for freighters that cant defend themselves as a ships. Especially against gankers.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#7 - 2016-06-01 13:01:15 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:
Quote:
Why would you want to remove one of the main motivations for players to attack other players in the game?

One of the main motivator was not always loot, but a destruction of others vessels and making others lives miserable. With this module, both gankers and haulers can live a miserable life. Cool

If the gankers would want to attack, and the haulers would choose to equip this module. They would.

And module is only for freighters that cant defend themselves as a ships. Especially against gankers.


If you want to make ganker's lives "miserable" why don't you just do one of the many things you can do to keep your freighter safe? Then you can thumb your nose at the gankers and get to keep your stuff.

Asking the game to just be made more aggravating for subset players for no reason that you have provided doesn't seem like something CCP is going to implement.

People's stuff is suppose to be at risk to, and be taken by, the other players. Yes, that even includes the freighter pilots that you falsely assert "can't defend themselves as ships". Actually, especially those fat loot pinatas called freighters whose primary design purpose is to put them at risk of attack so hauling is actually a profession rather than just something you click 'autopilot' to do.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#8 - 2016-06-01 13:43:06 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Piracy is suppose to be a profession in this game. I fail to see how removing loot drops is going to bring content to the game or make it better in any way.

Ah the tired old removing game play options argument, which we can only interpret as this would remove some of the gankers game play options. And yet I can see at least one very interesting game play option this module would produce, I will simply call it trolling for gankers. Can I make a ship and fit that will attract a gank simply so I can self destruct it to deny the gankers any profit. With the tables turned and their profits stripped away by a player choice action I wonder if the gankers would "man up" as you put it and offer a GF? Would they man up and admit that they had been out played or would they simply rage about how unfair it is that we were able to deny them the profits from their efforts? Like you are doing right here in this topic.
Lan Wang
African Atomic.
Dreadnought Diplomacy.
#9 - 2016-06-01 13:56:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Lan Wang
plot twist: module fitted makes you suspect

Edit: creates an aoe explosion, you lose security status everytime you use it, cannot be fitted to blockade runners :)

still a stupid module anyway

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#10 - 2016-06-01 14:05:25 UTC
I would be for it, but it should definitely cut the cargo space, not increase it. I'd say 30-50%, with a huge, high damage explosion that leaves your pod as a criminal for the terrorist act you just caused for at least an hour. Everyone destroyed in the blast, be it ganker or innocent bystander now has kill rights on you.

You will lose the ship, all cargo, and your pod will be fair game. You may or may not get the attackers, even outside of High Sec where CONCORD assures it, but it will cost you.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#11 - 2016-06-01 14:05:54 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Ah the tired old removing game play options argument, which we can only interpret as this would remove some of the gankers game play options.
It would remove one of the primary motivations for players to attack one another in the sandbox. At the very least it would have to come with a massive hit to cargo capacity to balance this (unlike the bonus the OP proposed) to make it a purely military baiting strategy, rather than just a salve to sooth the bruised ego of haulers who have just lost a PvP engagement.

I remind you that pirates are suppose to exist and ability to take each other's stuff is at the very core of the design of this full-time PvP sandbox.

Donnachadh wrote:

And yet I can see at least one very interesting game play option this module would produce, I will simply call it trolling for gankers. Can I make a ship and fit that will attract a gank simply so I can self destruct it to deny the gankers any profit.
You can already troll gankers now. If you want more tools I think there is also room for some module that screws with cargo scanners or the like to mess with pirates. But if you want to just deprive the victor of his prize out of some sense of spite, that is terrible game play that just removes the motivation to pirate. Both the victim and the victor are left unsatisfied which is not something a game feature CCP is going to willingly add to the game.


Donnachadh wrote:
With the tables turned and their profits stripped away by a player choice action I wonder if the gankers would "man up" as you put it and offer a GF? Would they man up and admit that they had been out played or would they simply rage about how unfair it is that we were able to deny them the profits from their efforts? Like you are doing right here in this topic.

Of course most would. I always try offer up a gf when I miss a gank.

Lol, there is no "raging" here. I am just pointing out to the OP why there is exactly zero chance of this being implemented. CCP loves the conflict that piracy brings to the game - they built Eve after all. They aren't going to patch it out so a bunch of pouting sore losers can feel slightly better about their in-game failures.

Eve has precious few conflict drivers as it is. Expect more ways to take other players stuff, not less, as we go forward.
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#12 - 2016-06-01 14:14:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Black Pedro wrote:
Nana Skalski wrote:
Quote:
Why would you want to remove one of the main motivations for players to attack other players in the game?

One of the main motivator was not always loot, but a destruction of others vessels and making others lives miserable. With this module, both gankers and haulers can live a miserable life. Cool

If the gankers would want to attack, and the haulers would choose to equip this module. They would.

And module is only for freighters that cant defend themselves as a ships. Especially against gankers.


If you want to make ganker's lives "miserable" why don't you just do one of the many things you can do to keep your freighter safe? Then you can thumb your nose at the gankers and get to keep your stuff.

Asking the game to just be made more aggravating for subset players for no reason that you have provided doesn't seem like something CCP is going to implement.

People's stuff is suppose to be at risk to, and be taken by, the other players. Yes, that even includes the freighter pilots that you falsely assert "can't defend themselves as ships". Actually, especially those fat loot pinatas called freighters whose primary design purpose is to put them at risk of attack so hauling is actually a profession rather than just something you click 'autopilot' to do.


Nor freighters will be unkillable, nor any loot will be at no risk, it would just all go POOF!. Lol
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#13 - 2016-06-01 14:19:54 UTC
Quote:
deprive the victor of his prize

Ha ha ha, deprive the ganker of the easy loot you mean. With no hesitation so much players would make this choice. Lol
Cyrus Tybalt
Blap n Pew
#14 - 2016-06-01 19:26:58 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Nana Skalski wrote:
More cargospace if for more stuf that would be destroyed. Do you think that gankers would still gank those, I think that CODE would, and that would be so fun to watch.

In the spirit of EVE, assuring that destruction of vessel can be inevitable, but at least you would deny all loot. Player choices matter.
Perhaps CODE might (although if this was the norm probably not for long as ganking freighters with no drops gets expensive quick), but what about all the other gankers who are after the loot? Why would you want to remove one of the main motivations for players to attack other players in the game?

Piracy is suppose to be a profession in this game. I fail to see how removing loot drops is going to bring content to the game or make it better in any way.

Player choices matter. If you choose to undock in something, you are taking the risk that someone is going to try and take your stuff so you better make provisions to defend yourself. No, CCP is not going to give you a way to deny the victor the spoils of a PvP engagement just to satisfy your childish desire for spite. If you lose your stuff to a pirate, man up and give them the 'gf' they deserve for beating you.




Piracy is supposd to be a profession in this game, yes.

But how many real pirates do you know of that basically destroyed the ships they were targeting BEFORE looting them?
Paranoid Loyd
#15 - 2016-06-01 19:47:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
I realize you are probably just trolling for attention but giving you the benefit of the doubt, they just removed the ability to one-shot wrecks, what makes you think they want to put a module back in that would basically negate that change?

With the exception of CODE and a few other small groups I don't know many gankers that are not ganking for the isk, so stop spouting that BS about only doing it for destruction.

"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!

Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#16 - 2016-06-01 20:09:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
I have even made up a description:
"Facing rising number of high secutity roaming gangs of pirate capsuleers desperate for destruction, who made lifes of freighter pilots around New Eden miserable, different tactics have been tested and tried. Some pilots started rigging their cargoholds with explosives, to completely obliterate the cargo and deny any loot to those seeking it.

This modification to cargohold completely strips out every unnecessary piece of equipment and packs structural beams with industrial grade explosives rigged to explode in case pilot choose to push the button before cargohold breach and inevitable destruction of vessel. You know you would not regret it. As for those expecting to loot the wreck, you probably wouldnt care about their feelings. Rig it to explode and pray that it wil not get off prematurely."

Lol
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2016-06-01 20:24:20 UTC
Sure, you can have a module that would instantly be fit to every single freighter in eve.

But it reduces you to 1 structure HP, and removes all your resistances. That should balance it nicely. Roll
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#18 - 2016-06-01 20:59:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Cyrus Tybalt wrote:


Piracy is supposd to be a profession in this game, yes.

But how many real pirates do you know of that basically destroyed the ships they were targeting BEFORE looting them?


Great idea.

Module that allows you to steal loot right out of a ships cargo bay without destroying the target ship. User goes suspect.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Lan Wang
African Atomic.
Dreadnought Diplomacy.
#19 - 2016-06-01 21:54:14 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Cyrus Tybalt wrote:


Piracy is supposd to be a profession in this game, yes.

But how many real pirates do you know of that basically destroyed the ships they were targeting BEFORE looting them?


Great idea.

Module that allows you to steal loot right out of a ships cargo bay without destroying the target ship. User goes suspect.


yes! we can call it a Plunder Beacon Pirate

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#20 - 2016-06-01 22:05:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Cyrus Tybalt wrote:


Piracy is supposd to be a profession in this game, yes.

But how many real pirates do you know of that basically destroyed the ships they were targeting BEFORE looting them?


Great idea.

Module that allows you to steal loot right out of a ships cargo bay without destroying the target ship. User goes suspect.

Only after Autodestructive cargoholds will become a reality. That would make some sense then. But tie it with boarding parties and boarding mechanics. Of course every such boarding action in high sec would get you an instant suspect flag. Cool

And boarding should take some time.
12Next page