These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

If the "sandbox" means that hi-sec miners should be free to hi-sec mine...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Luis Graca
#21 - 2012-05-15 05:37:35 UTC
trust me you can't stop suicide ganking
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#22 - 2012-05-15 07:33:39 UTC
Sandbox means decisions have consequence.

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
nat longshot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2012-05-15 07:40:23 UTC
Surfin's PlunderBunny wrote:
Pok Nibin wrote:
AT the risk of repeating myself:

Let's see. The griefers/gankers (whatever) win. All miners turn in their barges for PvP-fitted vessels. Lacking minerals all manufacturers invest in PvP ships as well. Griefer/Ganker (Whatever) Heaven ensues. Ships are lost, replaced, lost, replaced until one day....

...you go to the shop and the cupboard is bare. There are no more ships.

Yeah, it seems the "EVE is for PVP" crowd's logic is supreme. It was there in front of us all along! The goal in EVE is Pods at Five Meters. We bump each other for a few hours and log out satiated and satisfied.

How stupid could we be for missing such an obvious truth? Thanks griefers, gankers, (whatever).
Our eyes are now opened.

And to think I've spent all this time training. (I've got Pods to V.)


Lots of minerals come from mission runners so meh Pirate


not anymoe they dont Drones dont drop anything anymore so your info is WRONG!!

 [13:12:18] CCP Punkturis nat longshot you're a cutie.. OH YAH I WIN!!
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#24 - 2012-05-15 07:46:43 UTC
Will Rufus wrote:
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
...wouldn't that also mean suicide gankers should be free to suicide gank?



weeeeelllllll, not necessarily, the sec goes down in increments of 0.1 for a reason and was copied from Elite so has a heritage as well. Its a sliding scale of safety 1.0 is gated community type safe and 0.6 is the edges of the dodgy area of town where tourists are warned not to go. So, going by this in a way your are right, it's should be more a case of as the sec gets higher then it should get harder and harder. This is where things need to change I think.

I can't remember, but wasn't this the case once?.

P.S. this is only an opinion - nothing more.


I guess that means I live in a 0.4. Thankfully, in Winter the shady types hide indoors; unfortunately it's not winter anymore; fortunately, I'm moving to somewhere else soon and I don't have to deal with it. Where I'm moving is kinda touristy and lower pop. so should be nice. Used to be, (most of the time), and still seems pretty quiet even if it doesn't have much police presence. Sort of like an unfrequented 0.5. Is there any place that gets above that anymore?
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Tor Gungnir
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2012-05-15 07:58:12 UTC
Luis Graca wrote:
trust me you can't stop suicide ganking



You could make it so that a Hulk requires and equally expensive ship to suicide gank.

Just sayin'.

Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you.
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-05-15 11:05:40 UTC
This thread again huh?

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
Pok Nibin
Doomheim
#27 - 2012-05-15 15:37:31 UTC
See the rookie ship - the new titan!

The right to free speech doesn't automatically carry with it the right to be taken seriously.
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-05-15 16:12:43 UTC
In the time it takes to train for a hulk, the same monthly cost of the subscription you paid could be better spent on a dozen meals to keep your belly full and get greater satisifaction out of each one....there for the best suggestion is to just cancel your account and don't bother to be a miner anymore. Stupid boring ass profession anyway, don't need them and they are not wanted. **** their monthly subscription, we just want them to be expensive targets while spouting they need to fit tank but bitchwhine to CCP to nerf Titans when the same guys could of flown anything but a sub cap ship that didn't explode like a hulk with a fail tank (<-- too soon?). Yeah, when its the hulk pilot's problem to fit tank to his ship that explodes to a destroyer its the other guy's problem to not fly a sub cap ship that explodes to a Titan...which means un-nerf titans. Both are responsible for making their ships not explode, so step up out of a battleship and get into a capital ship.

Problem solved, who ******* cares anymore when you can't mine anymore and a buff to mining industry at the same time when Titans start owning sub-cap fleets again. Win/Win!
Metal Icarus
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#29 - 2012-05-15 16:25:53 UTC
the sandbox should also mean if a guy suicide ganks your crap, you corp should be able to defend your corp member.

but no, a corp member cannot shoot the ganker or he will be concorded.

Sandbox my gawd damn ass.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#30 - 2012-05-15 16:32:15 UTC
nat longshot wrote:
Surfin's PlunderBunny wrote:
Pok Nibin wrote:
AT the risk of repeating myself:

Let's see. The griefers/gankers (whatever) win. All miners turn in their barges for PvP-fitted vessels. Lacking minerals all manufacturers invest in PvP ships as well. Griefer/Ganker (Whatever) Heaven ensues. Ships are lost, replaced, lost, replaced until one day....

...you go to the shop and the cupboard is bare. There are no more ships.

Yeah, it seems the "EVE is for PVP" crowd's logic is supreme. It was there in front of us all along! The goal in EVE is Pods at Five Meters. We bump each other for a few hours and log out satiated and satisfied.

How stupid could we be for missing such an obvious truth? Thanks griefers, gankers, (whatever).
Our eyes are now opened.

And to think I've spent all this time training. (I've got Pods to V.)


Lots of minerals come from mission runners so meh Pirate


not anymoe they dont Drones dont drop anything anymore so your info is WRONG!!



Rats drop loot in missions, loot refines in to what? Oh yes, minerals. Back under your rock you go please.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#31 - 2012-05-15 16:41:43 UTC
nat longshot wrote:
Surfin's PlunderBunny wrote:
Pok Nibin wrote:
AT the risk of repeating myself:

Let's see. The griefers/gankers (whatever) win. All miners turn in their barges for PvP-fitted vessels. Lacking minerals all manufacturers invest in PvP ships as well. Griefer/Ganker (Whatever) Heaven ensues. Ships are lost, replaced, lost, replaced until one day....

...you go to the shop and the cupboard is bare. There are no more ships.

Yeah, it seems the "EVE is for PVP" crowd's logic is supreme. It was there in front of us all along! The goal in EVE is Pods at Five Meters. We bump each other for a few hours and log out satiated and satisfied.

How stupid could we be for missing such an obvious truth? Thanks griefers, gankers, (whatever).
Our eyes are now opened.

And to think I've spent all this time training. (I've got Pods to V.)


Lots of minerals come from mission runners so meh Pirate


not anymoe they dont Drones dont drop anything anymore so your info is WRONG!!


Drones now have bounties, mission rats have bounties and non meta 0 mods, minerals are still obtainable from the loot drops, you just have to be prepared to reprocess meta 1+ modules to get at them.

l2read patch notes

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Kievan Arakyd
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2012-05-15 18:11:25 UTC
Metal Icarus wrote:
the sandbox should also mean if a guy suicide ganks your crap, you corp should be able to defend your corp member.

but no, a corp member cannot shoot the ganker or he will be concorded.

Sandbox my gawd damn ass.


which is why concord needs to be removed entirely. you whining miners begged for more concord so now itll kill you faster too.

Got my Dust514 key...
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2012-05-15 18:19:32 UTC
Henry Haphorn wrote:
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
Spurty wrote:
... Build a sand box for your town.

Charge people to play in it.

When they turn up to play, Kick sand in people face in the sand box.

It's really not a good analogy (sand box)

HTH


But the town wouldn't be kicking sand in the face of people. The people would be kicking sand in each others face's. Why should the town be involved in a personal dispute between two people?


Congratulations. You perfectly explained CCP's stance on the sandbox.
If this were true, then Concord, GCC and all of the various rules / repurcussions associated with aggression would not be in-place.

As things currently stand, CCP is heavily involved in these disputes despite the claim of "sandbox" and 'players make the content.'

Furthermore, CCP exercises a very heavy hand when it comes to the economics of the game, dramatically tweaking resource availability, taxation rates and various PvE aspects that impact the "sandbox" far more than any player v. player activities.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#34 - 2012-05-15 20:13:42 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Sandbox means decisions have consequence.


Only if those are the rules.

Classically "sandbox" refers to non-linearity and a lack of set objectives. Essentially rules without externally defined purpose.

The rules mean decisions have consequences, a sandbox could give you a god-tool to do anything you want.

I think people often misunderstand that.
Romar Agent
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#35 - 2012-05-15 20:17:02 UTC
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
...wouldn't that also mean suicide gankers should be free to suicide gank?
Yes, by all means.

And people should be free to complain about it as well.

It's a sandbox.
Ila Gant
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2012-05-15 20:39:09 UTC
Luis Graca wrote:
trust me you can't stop suicide ganking

CCP certainly could. They shouldn't, but they could.

Regarding the OP: When I played in sandboxes as a kid, the other kids were generally not permitted to hit each other over the head with their shovels. Parents or teachers (or "lunch mothers") kept an eye on things to make sure nothing got too out of hand. Children playing in sandboxes need oversight, after all.
Flakey Foont
#37 - 2012-05-15 20:44:45 UTC
A new and exciting topic!
Herold Oldtimer
State War Academy
Caldari State
#38 - 2012-05-15 21:28:35 UTC
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
...wouldn't that also mean suicide gankers should be free to suicide gank?


Try to look at it this way. It is easy to mine in high-sec, but hard to gank.

In null-sec it is easy to gank, and hard to mine.
bongsmoke
Visine Red
420 Chronicles of EvE
#39 - 2012-05-15 21:52:54 UTC
Herold Oldtimer wrote:
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
...wouldn't that also mean suicide gankers should be free to suicide gank?


Try to look at it this way. It is easy to mine in high-sec, but hard to gank.

In null-sec it is easy to gank, and hard to mine.



Its not hard to mine in null, just getting your ship there. Its not ganking in low or null sec either, imo.

Still ganker in hi-sec should be allowed to be ganked by gankee without fear of retaliation, i mean isnt that what ganking is all about?

By retaliation, i mean by the ganker, obviously concord gives you 30 days.
Previous page12