These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2011-11-26 12:03
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-11-26 12:14
  • Likes Received: 0

Grumpy Owly

Security Status 0.0
  • Imperial Shipment Member since
  • Amarr Empire Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • Price Check on Industrial/Science/Mining/Logistics Pilot in EVE Marketplace

    circa 43Mil Support Pilot: Venus Rinah

  • Getting Rid of the Undesirables (for good this time) in EVE Communication Center

    Dear Team super friends,

    Please can you add nappies into the nex store. This way certain poor elements of the criminal fraternity who are incapable of rising to a challenging fight can wear these accordingly for any "accidents" that may occur.

    I love these arguments where people have an expectation of mechanics and are incapable of adapting to a "corrected" system. Please note it is important to recognise that Bounty Hunting is a corrected process and not a new feature. This is since the criminal element has been operating under a false premise of lack of relatiatory mechanisms for their actions for years and now that there is the possibility of having to engage in PvP we shall see who are in fact the more cunning, intelligent and skillfull criminal as a result.

    Heaven forbid that as a result the aspect of criminality will need to adapt and evolve to a profession that needs more than just using advisory spreadsheets to calculate gank profit and loss potentials, consider that at last you might have to engage in a fight with others in order to operate as a criminal. Maybe as a result gameplay could potential be more fun and exciting due to this challenge? Theres a thought eh?

    EvE Darwinism at its best, +1 CCP and props to the CSM for supporting interests, roll on Winter, roll on Retribution. *smiles*



  • Getting Rid of the Undesirables (for good this time) in EVE Communication Center

    Destiny Corrupted wrote:
    Whine .. whine .. whine...

    People get to shoot me now *cry*, I feel entitled to not allow others to do this freely, but expect suicide ganking to have no consequece for criminal activity.

    I dont care, I'll just use alts like the coward I am, I dont care about EvE or gameplay, just an invalid sense of acheivement from cheating the system.

    No respect for you at all Destiny Corrupted. Your worse than all the carebear whiners with your similar "I must win at all costs" mentality.

  • Dev blog: The Retribution of Team Super Friends in EVE Information Center


    As to the debate regarding placing bounties on positive security:

    I'd kind of like to keep the mercenary aspects for this open, however given that the mandate for Concord is to protect the security related aspects of the various factions as a neutral party it may be prudent to gradiate some kind of handling fee based on secuirty.

    Such that for each point in security above the old -1 value you need to add on a admin fee in order for Concord to place the puclic notifications. Whereas to help with security incentives and Concords responsibilities in terms of keeping some semblance of order these fees are waved in relation to targets equal to or below a -1 Security value.

    Purely as an example as the values can be adjusted:

    <= -1, No additional charge to a bounty being placed.
    -1 to 0, 0.5M ISK handling fee,
    0 to 1, 1.0M ISK handling fee,
    1 to 2, 1.5 ISK handling fee,
    2 to 3, 2.0M ISK handling fee ........ and so on.

    Is this way everyone can have a bounty placed on them, but there are then additional costs to admisister bounty contracts against the more law abiding citizens.

    Otherwise, really loving the blog.

  • Can't wait anylonger for smuggling. in EVE Communication Center

    FYI: It's just criminal proposal - Smuggling

  • [Proposal] For adding Aliens? in Council of Stellar Management

    Arthur C Clarke wrote:
    Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.

  • Retribution's New Bounty System in EVE Communication Center

    I wonder on the conversion rates:

    How many "soons" in a "while"?

    How many "shakes of a lambs tail" to a "soon"?

    What is the multiplication factor by adding the (™)?

    We need a new dev blog to help determine and describe the CCP developer time measurement system I feel.

  • Retribution's New Bounty System in EVE Communication Center


    Always interesting to see heated debate based on "speculation" especially when people are already whining about finally having relevant potential consequences for their actions.

    Kind of helps to really determine just how "laissez-faire" the criminal attitudes have been and seems they are forgetting that their apparent sense of entilement where a relevant bounty system hasn't existed has been a false premise for years.

    More importantly which seems to be a point more missed in the above exchange, is just how much more potential fun might be brought back into empire space as a result of these changes with the additional PvP exchanges encouraged and the promise of a reawakening of what should be a valid profession by the Retribution expansion. Also the potential knock on consequences in helping to keep the wheels of industry turning with the additional gameplay that has been missing as a result of a "broken" mechanic.

    If embraced more by EvE community the potential for player interaction and movements towards having mechanics and tools to help control "legal" issues from a player perspective could hopefully also help to enthuse people to have them sorted out using these in game tools more as opposed to forum tools with regard to the aspects of policing player behaviour. One can hope here I suppose even if likley a pipe dream.

    Either way, thank you CCP for putting BH on the development map and hope to see some concrete facts provided in a dev blog soon (™).

  • Eve Online - Retribution - Winter Expansion announced in EVE Communication Center

    Andski wrote:
    Basically this is the "put the final nail into the coffin of hisec PvP" expansion. Hopefully now that hisec will be totally risk-free they will decide that removing L4s and incursions from hisec will prevent the risk/reward aspect of the game from being completely wiped out.

    One would think the advent of Bounty Hunting would increase PvP, not reduce it?

    Besides it wasnt a long time ago you were suggesting BH would never prevent skilled criminals from their activities?

    I still don't see it as a remedy from criminal activity, but if anything I'm hoping it might actually make High sec a more entertaining place for PvP. It at last means there might be more sensible responce to the ganker who has had it easy up to now with their easy capabilities of avoiding a fight where the target might actually shoot back at them.

    At the very least it might at last give credance to a career path that has been invalid for years in EvE and expand gameplay as a result, I see it as a great announcement for EvE and a victory for players also. +1 CCP.

    But I guess if you're conceding defeat to the law concerned individuals of High sec Andski I will understand. *smiles*

  • Eve Online - Retribution - Winter Expansion announced in EVE Communication Center


  • Go ahead CCP, listen to the people in the "make null virbant again" thread in EVE Communication Center

    1) Choice not prescription.

    2) Avoid the paranoia jelly, it really doen't taste nice and should come with a health warning. Seems to be served all over New Eden however.

    3) All regions need appropriate attention. Sure this can be done without having to adopt models of breaking others?

    4) Risk vs Reward is relevant and should be a useful aid with applying "comparative" benefits, but it doesn't mean any region should "have to" be the end game on that ladder or having a steadfast linear progression model that you should migrate to the lowest system security number possible to finish personal achievement. (Despite that EVE doesnt have an "end game" imho, except for the ban hammer and unsub button).

    5) Prefer to avoid "gameplay" monopolies, but realise some unique elements may be needed for different playstyles and regional mechanics.

    tl;dr: I don't consider EVE to be a timed conveyer belt transition into null, but that does'nt mean it shouldn't get it's "own" Love.

  • Hiding in Eve- Why We Cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I have to say this is one of "the" more exciting new proposals I've seen in a while personally and gets my support.

    It's well thought out also and considers the ramifications of both sides whilst looking at current topical thinking on a number of issues players are having problems with regarding intelligence.

    Some extra things to consider might be an extentsion to the active strategical model as an IG tool. This is where the "scout/recon" role can actually helpfully provide more of an initial role within fleets/corps/alliances. If a scout aquires a "target" he is capable of bookmarking the details and adding this information at a corporation level for shared use. At present this is used generically for varous in game needs both with military and commercial advantages.

    The extension to this could be to allow a small management to "target" related details so that commanders can effectively prioritise targets and as such help to feed information through to co-oridnated efforts of how best to "dish" out tasks to various individuals/fleets. However, I think it needs to retain the "at time" information as opposed to "real time" information as is current, so that as a complete tactical package it will never replace the need for having effective co-ordinated communications or commanders reacting to real time changes. But certainly having some strategic tool to help co-ordiante tasks fed through from scouts might add a helpful tool.

    e.g. scout finds a POS, he BM's it at organisational level. A commander can then maipulate this to than prioritise that target and or/apply specific parties for attention.

    To make this more effective then it would mean applying more information to BM's. Like a sub file which may store this strategic info feed items in by command. Likewise it could contain useful info like screen prints with some overview info feed within to help see the actual details. This occurs anyhow but needs a bit of out of game manipulation to achieve to help share. Prinicipally if this could be hosted more at the server level it could go a long way of putting the intel in recon imho.

    Other general feedback points about the ideas:

    Hopefully not go too module heavy on the hunter as the need to have lots of "toys" just to do the job as this subtracts from the combat capabilties. This is generally the balancing notion with the stealth/hunter role in that they are limited in combat effectiveness by design already by the CCP model for having these capabilties. But if tweaks to fittings compensate the changes to derived added mod use expected of the role then that works just as good. Potentially yes this could mean more a team orientated need to fullfill these things, but the need to retain some solo related gameplay here may be neccesary for various reasons including some other than just functional.

    Cloak fuel I'm happy with as a "management" issue if it can still be measured in hours as some observational recon duties are a "patience" exercise at the best of times. One obvious issue with the cargo use and fuel are firstly stealth bombers as bombs take up a lot of space, and secondly Blockade runners whose objective is to make best use of the limited cargo capacities they have currently, some issues with cyno use might be apparent here also for recon ships but if a seperate fuel bay or extension to cargo aspects can compensate here might not compromise those dedicated functions. Certainly the timings of hours might be most applicable and would go a long way to helping with AFK cloakies.

    Removal of the easy to use local chat intel issue we have currently should not really occur without having the neccesary tools for active "ships in space" network of information to help compensate for the lack of info. But I'm all for making this a more "active" benefit to intel than the passive ease of the chat channel useage presently. The need for miner awareness tools might need to be improved here as a result as the calls for miners to be active and aware can be a bit reliant on the existing intel tools like local at present for an early warning. This is mainly due to some disparities with the miner being a slug on the agility scale and not wanting to make the "suprise" element so much more easier. As you could argue with the "warp to" cloakie capabailites and fast entry into local to apply a better use of the suprise tactics there isn't a lot of time for reaction always.

    Also might be usefull to consider the "look outside the window" issue on stations if local was simply removed? The gate combat issues and camping is a bit more culturally problematic and convoluted and I don't really have a problem with it really. But I don't really have a magic wand to some of the more apparent "blob" concerns either. Some of the new mods with e-war targetting and other things might help to compensate here?

    As some potential "novelty" ideas to explore for intel focussed roles:

    1) Limited useage of drop satalites in systems and use them to d-scan in systems remotely (variable ranges)?

    2) Remote camera drones/probes, allow a drone/probe to feedback visual information from a distance.

    3) Scramble system communications, interupt d-scan integrity.

    4) Mirage projection systems. Dummy ship representation.

    5) Tracking Devices, ability to attach devices to ships to reveal its location, remotely, similar to the locater agent features.

    Otherwise the proposals to add more impact to the relevance of inteligence and the related subterfuge aspects of the gameplay should be explored more and given more emphasis as real things to consider as opposed to having an entilted expectation to having it. Keep working at it with the playerbase OP but I really like where you are going with this manifesto on the subject.

  • Probing questions in EVE Communication Center

    Vicata Heth wrote:
    I'm trying to determine what I can do to make my ship un-probeable. I know adding ECCM can do it, but that breaks my fit and I would rather avoid it. I am able to move 1200m/s with a sig radius of 195 and a gravimetric eccm strength of 32. Is all of this combined in a safe spot able to prevent me being probed down? Or do you have to be moving at interceptor speeds to be un-probeable?

    Only cloak ultimatley takes you off the "radar" with regards to probing.

    The adaptions you mention to change sig radius only help to make things more difficult for the probing skill to be more effective.

    If you consider the relative difference in distances being AUs then sub light speed isnt really a consideration in probing. Warping around in system however makes it difficult for the prober to pinpoint you in a certain amount of time of course. This is the more overlooked effectiveness of a good prober is that they know how to combine d-scan and other techniques to help reduce timings and target awareness to a scan.

  • Time to split the game? in EVE Communication Center

    Lord Zim wrote:
    Also keep in mind that since the characters being used for ganking are most likely dedicated for that purpose, putting bounties on them probably won't be much of a deterrence either.

    I don't see BH as a method to remove ganking from the game, just an optional tool people can make use of to potentially help to some level with security related issues. It will never remove the ganking profession/useage, but will allow for more interesting situations and considerations to some of those gameplay styles whilst adding more gameplay elements currently missing.

    More importantly however and it seems I need to emphasise this, it is in no way my personal objective for wanting to introduce it as a feature either to simply remove ganking from the game. I do not want it to simply being a "hard" counter to valid criminal gameplay.

  • Time to split the game? in EVE Communication Center

    Lord Zim wrote:
    You did notice that what I did was point out that if you have drones out and set to aggressive, you do not have a whole month in which to kill said perp, yes? I made absolutely no comment as to how easy or hard it was to actually kill someone when you had killrights, I just pointed out that by doing what most pubbies do (sit there with drones out and aggressive) they forfeit the killrights.

    Well I think thats the point. Some people realise the lack of value or use of even having kill rights in some cases anyway.

    But it may be a valid point that some people are just also completely unaware that if you do respond to a criminal agression in kind you will forfeit any entitlement to kill rights.

  • Time to split the game? in EVE Communication Center

    Lord Zim wrote:
    Molinator Agnon wrote:
    you can hunt the hunters with kill rights - you do have a whole month.

    Unless you're dumb and make sure you get on the killmail, which a lot of them do by having the drones out and set to aggressive mode.

    Oh well sucks to be them

    It's a bit more convoluted than that Zim.

    1) To be effective in some roles your focus is less PvP orientated by gaming choice. Just training "some" skills but being defficient to your opponent isnt an answer either.

    2) Character age and disparities.

    3) Ganking by nature allows for multiple players to attack an individual target. This give multiple Kill rights to a player for sure but also the headache of having to manage the response to all those individuals by themselves.

    4) Alt useage can be problematic to frustrate characters here within the time frame for a response.

    5) A hardcore player who plays 15 hours a day can quite easily avoid a player who can only play 2 hours a week despite best efforts made by them to invest time into trying to hunt them down.

    Considering that BH proposals actually enact a "further" cost to the individual to use in determining this kind of kill right transferall behaviour to help this process without being so impacting to the game that they have to change their profession simply to be usefully effective at hunting players.

    Since a criminal can easily use various avoidance techniques to move around feely in the EvE universe still, though some limiting mechanics will help here of course, with some future changes to CW, but believing that Kill rights as current are a deterent is rather biased or naive as a response.

  • Time to split the game? in EVE Communication Center

    Ana Vyr wrote:
    I agree that splitting the game would destroy it.

    What needs to be done is for CCP to figure out why nullsec is not where people are playing anymore and FIX IT.

    Caveats being:

    1) Choice

    2) Hopefully not breaking someone elses fun in the process.

  • Time to split the game? in EVE Communication Center

    Mara Rinn wrote:
    Grumpy Owly wrote:
    Though I will agree there is merit to split the playerbase into two shards:

    Shard 1: Mature players who are capable of respectfully extending the sandbox to others and understand the symbiosis of interests but can expect and accept some aspects of gameplay outside of their control.

    Shard 2: Selfish Asshats with unhealthy Meta interests where "winning at all costs" is the only consideration.

    Though I'm unsure wether it has a comercial future as realistically I would see shard 2 as a minority populace, but if it's sustainable? Roll

    If only there was a reliable way to sort the asshats out of the rest of the population Evil

    If I was to be baited into player possibilities of IG applied therapy where action speaks louder than words I could say Hulkageddon is one of course, for the extreme Carebear elements that are fixed about their need to win the game with no losses.

    I'm trying to get one element for the uncompromising griefer/criminal element going with Bounty Hunting to help address some of the inequalities. But I don't want to label it as "white knighting" pers se as their are suffcient considerations to it simply being a mercenary profession providing an additional security service. Also there are more criminal related aspects than just suicide ganking and the Hulkageddon issue, but it is a very topical issue to help advertise.

    Other than that, education is still key, so I guess continue the rhetoric. Maybe then its not simply a case of triage but embrassing pilots with better awareness to all the aspects within EVE, whilst trying to accomodate concerns respectfully.

    tl;dr: don't have a magic wand, would be arrogant of me to wave it, it will be an ongoing "evolution" for us all ideally.

  • Forums. No longer part of the Meta Game. in EVE Communication Center

    Actually as much as the EVE-O forums are not really an exercise in "truth" there is a valid component of Meta play aspects applied with normal concerns and interests. Its intrisically evident everytime you favour one aspect over another.

    I find this to be an extention to the IG aspects of EVE.

    Problematic areas for me however are areas like insults, debunking, manipulation, outright fabrications of issues and obstenate uncompromising biased deliveries etc etc. These elements are only used to destabalise topics or posters as opposed to actually discussing the merits of something.

    However, it is fair to say that Jita Corner at election time gets a "special dispensation" by the CCP staff and does inform the playerbase to expect some level of "propoganda" (good or bad) over and above the "normal" recommended daily allowance (?).

    My only suggeston with the political aspects of the game is, to allow it to continue, but take these concerns with a pinch of salt. Passions can sometimes be dissproportionally representative to issues as I think is self evident to most, I can be forgiving of it at the best of times to some extent. But the more extreme political stances I do find diffcult to tollerate.

    What is also useful to remember is that even large organisations who have significant "political" personalities is that the labeliing of their organisation, whilst understandably "guilty by association" and having intrinsic support, may not be a true picture of all it's members.

    Also some posters don't take themselves too seriously, but do like winding up those who are, even if it isn't helpfull overall. So also helpfull to second guess the motivations between player and character goals, a very blurred and confusing line sometimes perhaps?

    Apart from that some concensus and figures reflect that the "offical" politics are only representative of the voting populace, which is a fair consideration of any democratic ideals. But it is a minority representation and there is a view that in the main players are apathetic to these politcal elements for whatever reason. Seems to be improving however with each year though. Regardless I still think the ideals of having the CSM is at least another vehicle for players to explore in their "relationship" with CCP.

  • voting system in EVE Communication Center

    Kimmi Chan wrote:
    Yes. It's called a logon screen. If someone doesn't like the game why would they bother logging in?

    Its a valid point and a good metric to work off tbh as it at least allows a comparison of activity over time.

    Wether the actual total numbers are representative however I'm not so convinced of, it might be interesting to see how many of those logins might be just to turn over the skill queues however. That isn't me being cynical about the occasional reported apathy to actual "involved" play activity as it could just occur according to "normal" casual gaming needs. Since we do get peaks at major patch dates, so the overall image of EVE isnt represented fully daily of course.

    Either way logging in for 5 mins or 5 hours fundamentaly shows some faith with the ongoing value with EVE.

Forum Signature