These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Self-destructing reworked

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Temba Ronin
#141 - 2012-01-24 17:25:20 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Temba Ronin wrote:
#4 Mass self destruction on a scale you are talking about happens how often? Often enough to rig the rules to make it impossible becomes a priority?

That scale may not be the most common of occurrences, but the more common occurence is like what we saw on saturday, where a few NCdot pilots in drakes (drakes) who escaped a gatecamp, safed up, selfdestructed and smugged in local about how his kill/death ratio was intact. Instead of forming a proper gang to smash the gatecampers.

Doesn't change the fact that a dread fleet has done it, simply because they fear their kill/death ratio won't be elite enough.

Zim your point is well taken it did happen, even if it does not happen as often as some seem to want to portray. I want to ask of you and the more experienced players if you think that changing the status quo might have the unintended consequence of encouraging the "self destruct to keep my elite ratio crowd" to not set out in fleets at all?

I don't think removing people's nervous escape routes is going to make them grow a pair. I think, and was encouraged by reading the minutes of the last CSM, that CCP will implement better training for new players so we don't lose the first six months we play this game avoiding where this game is played with most freedom.

Trying to stay alive in null where real live people might whack me if i get sloppy or distracted is for me a lot more fun then blowing up rats in missions. It seems like some consensus can be reached, insurance payouts for self destruction seem foolish, unless they go to the aggressing pilot. Perhaps if the aggressing pilot got the payout in lieu of the killmail they would get something besides frustration. I do support the idea of a pilot retaining the choice to destroy his ship and all it's contents if the attacker can not destroy him within a reasonable self destruct time frame for the class ship flown.

The Best Ship In EVE Online Is "Friendship", Power To The Players!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#142 - 2012-01-24 17:58:27 UTC
Temba Ronin wrote:
Zim your point is well taken it did happen, even if it does not happen as often as some seem to want to portray. I want to ask of you and the more experienced players if you think that changing the status quo might have the unintended consequence of encouraging the "self destruct to keep my elite ratio crowd" to not set out in fleets at all?

If they stop x'ing up because they could get a lossmail, then they're certainly not going to get killmails, which definitely won't improve their kill/death ratio.

I honestly don't think we can help people who are that risk averse.

Temba Ronin wrote:
I don't think removing people's nervous escape routes is going to make them grow a pair. I think, and was encouraged by reading the minutes of the last CSM, that CCP will implement better training for new players so we don't lose the first six months we play this game avoiding where this game is played with most freedom.

I don't see where this comes into the picture, this sounds more like new players.

Temba Ronin wrote:
Trying to stay alive in null where real live people might whack me if i get sloppy or distracted is for me a lot more fun then blowing up rats in missions. It seems like some consensus can be reached, insurance payouts for self destruction seem foolish, unless they go to the aggressing pilot. Perhaps if the aggressing pilot got the payout in lieu of the killmail they would get something besides frustration. I do support the idea of a pilot retaining the choice to destroy his ship and all it's contents if the attacker can not destroy him within a reasonable self destruct time frame for the class ship flown.

I see no point in letting insurance payouts go to the aggressor. I see no problem with letting mods go poof on a ship where self-destruct allowed to go off. Not initiated, but go off.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Temba Ronin
#143 - 2012-01-24 18:09:30 UTC
Thanks for the response Zim!

The Best Ship In EVE Online Is "Friendship", Power To The Players!
Kessiaan
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#144 - 2012-01-24 21:45:42 UTC
+1

Killing a cap with a smallish gang (especially a sub-BS gang) before the SD goes off is practically impossible, even if their tank is clearly broken. I know it's always been like this but if CCP is looking into it I'll add my input. Losing literally half my capital mails because I don't like to fly in giant superblobs is really irritating.

KB Link
CraftyCroc
Fraternity Alliance Please Ignore
#145 - 2012-02-01 00:15:04 UTC
Kessiaan wrote:
+1

Killing a cap with a smallish gang (especially a sub-BS gang) before the SD goes off is practically impossible, even if their tank is clearly broken. I know it's always been like this but if CCP is looking into it I'll add my input. Losing literally half my capital mails because I don't like to fly in giant superblobs is really irritating.


+1
Tiger's Spirit
Templars of the Shadows
#146 - 2012-02-01 18:38:29 UTC
-1 Not Supported.

If someone killing himself thats why generating to killmail for anyone else ?

I understand PL want more E-peen and officers loot when they using supcap blob.
Maybe the supcaps after SD, could throw a couple of Scrap Metal to them.
Dark Drifter
Sons of Seyllin
Pirate Lords of War
#147 - 2012-02-01 22:04:20 UTC
notarealgirl wrote:
yh, it seems crazy that such a short time is needed to utterly rob any benefit of organising this type of kill.



be happy it died, you just cost them billions (for a supa)

SD should NEVER create kill mail. its a good way of saying a final FU to the 300man blob that just jumped you.

longer timers yes!

insurance payout should still happen but at 50% of its total "insurance contract" payout. because lets face it we all know that supercap payouts are laughable anyway compared to the cost of the ship its self. not forgetting the fittings.


on a different note stop crying about people SDing. like i already stated, its dead isn't it? that's what you was aiming for
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#148 - 2012-02-01 22:56:56 UTC
Dark Drifter wrote:
like i already stated, its dead isn't it? that's what you was aiming for

Not everyone is just killing stuff for the sake of it. Some of us want at that super cap x-type loot piñata.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#149 - 2012-02-02 00:54:10 UTC
Tiger's Spirit wrote:
-1 Not Supported.

If someone killing himself thats why generating to killmail for anyone else ?

I understand PL want more E-peen and officers loot when they using supcap blob.
Maybe the supcaps after SD, could throw a couple of Scrap Metal to them.


The idea isn't to change it to drop loot, just to generate a record indicating who damaged the ship before it self destructed. A subcap gang can certainly catch and kill a super (thanks to the new logoff mechanics), but at this time, the intelligent Super pilot will simply initiate self destruct when it becomes clear help is not coming, and a Super's EHP is such that it essentially requires another Supercap fleet to kill it in that 2min window.

"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
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#150 - 2012-02-02 02:47:40 UTC
I would support this only if a part of the killmail recorded it as a self destruct.


The other parts I'm in full support of.

Pods IMO should take just a few seconds.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#151 - 2012-02-02 03:35:38 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
I would support this only if a part of the killmail recorded it as a self destruct.


The other parts I'm in full support of.

Pods IMO should take just a few seconds.


I'd say that's fair.

"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
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#152 - 2012-02-02 12:13:47 UTC
Generate kill mails if they're aggressed
Capitals should have a longer self destruct timer

That'd do me.
Shingorash
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#153 - 2012-02-03 13:53:52 UTC
After watching 3 Super Carriers SD last week I am going to sign this :)
Kessiaan
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#154 - 2012-02-24 03:39:03 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
I would support this only if a part of the killmail recorded it as a self destruct.


The other parts I'm in full support of.

Pods IMO should take just a few seconds.


+1, seems fair to me.

KB Link
JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#155 - 2012-02-24 10:24:33 UTC
+1 fix this already !!!!
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#156 - 2012-02-24 13:30:26 UTC
Skrypt wrote:
+1

It makes sense that SD timers have a direct relationship with a ship's size.

Does it?

I have no gripe one way or the other, but if anything it makes more sense that the bigger the ship the bigger the bomb when it blows.

The length of the fuse on that bomb is pretty arbitrary.

For purposes of the game-as-written, you engage someone, their ship blows up, you win. Who the &*%$ cares who gets credit as long as the ship is gone?

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs