These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

No Eve Player Should Miss This Article

Author
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-08-28 08:51:23 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.


Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Pookie McPook
The Whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch
#42 - 2012-08-28 08:51:31 UTC
Back in the day suicide ganking was a touch and go kind of thing. Your ship could be almost the cost of the ship you were going to kill. It took a degree of work and research to find out if the ship held anything of value and if the pilot was likely to be able to counter your threat before Concord arrived. Nowadays a new pilot in a T1 destroyer can go rip up a sizeable reward without any work and with little comeback. Anything that redresses the risk v reward balance is a good thing.

My rule of thumb is that anything I can do should be made harder.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#43 - 2012-08-28 08:51:53 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Trash article on themittani.com nonshocker.


>wants 0.0 turned into ****
>wants hisec to be safer

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#44 - 2012-08-28 08:52:37 UTC
Pookie McPook wrote:
Back in the day suicide ganking was a touch and go kind of thing. Your ship could be almost the cost of the ship you were going to kill.


yeah and back then you also lost basically nothing in suicide ganking somebody because l0l insurance

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#45 - 2012-08-28 08:54:56 UTC
Andski wrote:
rodyas wrote:
^ Maybe you should try low sec out or perhaps null, if a safer area is not making the game enjoyable.


maybe you should accept that all this reduction in risk needs an accompanying reduction in rewards

bye-bye hisec incursions, l4s, etc


Perhaps manageable and deal making.

How much of a reduction in rewards will there be, for no more ninja gankers, or ninja salvagers showing up in missions?

Don't really care about incursions anyhow, but you can contact their representatives to work out a deal.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
#46 - 2012-08-28 08:57:11 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.


Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.


I agree that this was CCP's intention if we are to believe what they write in the Devblog. Whatever the intent was when those blogs where written and words said, the question is whether or not they where a good idea.

Does adding the risk of getting suicide ganked in high sec make the game better? and if so, for who? How do new players benefit? How does the community benefit? How does the business benefit?

I think old doctrines should be questioned and I'm still trying to understand how suicide ganking benefits the game in any way.

The reality of Eve is that, if you don't love it like it is today, you should probobly go ahead and unsub. 

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#47 - 2012-08-28 08:58:05 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.


Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.


It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.
Ghazu
#48 - 2012-08-28 08:59:01 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.


Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.


It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.


What you want them to do? Help you hold it when you pee pee? it is safe enough.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984

Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#49 - 2012-08-28 09:00:00 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.


once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#50 - 2012-08-28 09:02:22 UTC
Andski wrote:
once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi

I'm not sure what GCC means.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#51 - 2012-08-28 09:02:35 UTC
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
I think old doctrines should be questioned and I'm still trying to understand how suicide ganking benefits the game in any way.


simple: it makes you use common sense so that you can make rational decisions like "hmm maybe I shouldn't autopilot this freighter with 30 billion ISK worth of stuff"

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#52 - 2012-08-28 09:03:41 UTC
hmmmm... I've seen it before - I'll probably see it again.
After UO (fel/tram) and then SWG (TEF removal), can't say I'd be surprised.
Ah well...

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
#53 - 2012-08-28 09:07:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Kryss Darkdust
Andski wrote:
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
I think old doctrines should be questioned and I'm still trying to understand how suicide ganking benefits the game in any way.


simple: it makes you use common sense so that you can make rational decisions like "hmm maybe I shouldn't autopilot this freighter with 30 billion ISK worth of stuff"


Thats it? Really? That's why we have suicide ganking? Seems to me that the trade off, of having suicide ganking in the game as some sort of lesson to not use one of the in game options (auto pilot) is a bit .... silly in comparison to the potentially thousands of players that might subscribe and play this game, making it stronger if high sec was safer and their was a Pure PvE component to the game.

I mean if thats really it, than yeah, **** it. Ban sucide ganking. The trade off is not worth it. I honestly thought there would be more to it than that.

The reality of Eve is that, if you don't love it like it is today, you should probobly go ahead and unsub. 

Ghazu
#54 - 2012-08-28 09:10:52 UTC
Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Saw "Mittani.com" in the header, said "Oy Vey" and took wide pass.


Saw your random 2 alt vanity corp tag, thought "lol irrelevant random hisec pubbie" and ignores.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#55 - 2012-08-28 09:12:28 UTC
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
I mean if thats really it, than yeah, **** it. Ban sucide ganking. The trade off is not worth it. I honestly thought there would be more to it than that.

Or ban autopilot.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2012-08-28 09:12:58 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Andski wrote:
once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi

I'm not sure what GCC means.

That's telling.
Please go read up on aggression mechanics before you post your two cents in this thread.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Ghazu
#57 - 2012-08-28 09:13:51 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Holy crap that was a well made article of nutter and whack job.

I really loved "Having demonstrated that the exhumer change was simply a nerf to aggression dressed up as a "rebalance", a number of important questions remain."

Yeah because it made so much sense to have a deep space non-combat ship with a hull made from the same thing as this set of articles, Tin Foil.

Is there an award for nut job of the year? Normally James 315 trolls a lot, I suppose this could be one really long arse troll. I was waiting for his Final Solution as this really came over as a manifesto.

Remember when you went all crazy about issler dainze?

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984

Matriarch Prime
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#58 - 2012-08-28 09:19:13 UTC
Andski wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.


once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi


If I rob a bank, the police aren't going to blow up my car and leave me to walk away, and my friends certainly will not be able pick up the bags of money and just walk away.

The current system is nonsense. At the minimum, a high sec ganker should be detained, and fined, and any goods remaining would be returned to the victim.

What happens right now isn't exciting emergent gameplay, its exploitative behavior of an patched together system. The only reason it exists is because of the developer's reluctance to remove player freedom.

I like big guns. I can not lie. You other suckas can't deny. When I warp in, with an itty bity sig, with an arty in your face, you get sprung. You want to pull out your debuffs, 'cause you want to loot my stuff...deep, in a worm with nary, an escape but you can't stop staring. 'Cause, Oh crap!, Baby's got Point!

Ghazu
#59 - 2012-08-28 09:20:05 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
I mean if thats really it, than yeah, **** it. Ban sucide ganking. The trade off is not worth it. I honestly thought there would be more to it than that.

Or ban autopilot.

But you still can't ban stupid people, which is the most valuable resource in the game.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#60 - 2012-08-28 09:20:48 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
Andski wrote:
once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi

I'm not sure what GCC means.

That's telling.
Please go read up on aggression mechanics before you post your two cents in this thread.


Or you could just explain what it means and why the previous statement I made that you picked up on was wrong. I'm sorry if it's beneath you to explain something like that to someone who doesn't know better for the sake of a civil discussion.