These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Isn't it about time suicide ganking was fixed? (Not removed, just made harder).

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#21 - 2011-10-15 16:00:54 UTC
Igualmentedos wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Esagila wrote:
Definitely agree that people who die to concord should not get an insurance payout upon their death.
That would lessen the incentives to suicide gank people. Bad idea.



I disagree, the purpose for suicide ganking should be to eliminate your opponent, and in rare circumstances you would be able to turn a profit. overall, you should lose a great deal of ISK in the process (depending on target and your ship).

Insurance should be removed for those smacked down by concord.


It would happen almost as much, because yes, your tears are in fact that tasty. Every single time someone gets upset, it justifies every single cost involved in getting those tears to flow, because you must achieve op success at any cost.

Tears(anyone but their own, honestly) just make them want to do it again... Once again, no matter the cost.

Oh, and from experience, a corpies tears because a gank failed, or because you thought being ganked was actually kinda cool when he was going through saltwater withdrawals are almost as tasty as yours, just harder to get(its so easy to make highseccers cry)

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Xython
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2011-10-15 16:03:38 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Igualmentedos wrote:
If you ABSOLUTELY want to kill someone, you should be able to do it no matter where they are, but it should actually cost some isk.
Fun fact: it does, even with insurance.
Quote:
I disagree, the purpose for suicide ganking should be to eliminate your opponent, and in rare circumstances you would be able to turn a profit.
So… why should it be disincentivised? And why should it only be profitable under rare circumstances?
Quote:
overall, you should lose a great deal of ISK in the process (depending on target and your ship).
Insurance should be removed for those smacked down by concord.
Why?


The hilarious thing is that Mittani called this one right off weeks ago. Highsec carebears literally cannot grasp the concept that this isn't about isk. It's about having fun.

Just wait until the stockpiles of Bot mined Oxytopes run out in a week or two. Oh god, then we're gonna have some delicious forum rage when people go to fill their Gallente POSes and the market absolutely collapses...
Alara IonStorm
#23 - 2011-10-15 16:06:20 UTC
Xython wrote:


Why would it? It's supposed to be weak. You're supposed to have an escort if you're in a dangerous area.

Tactics that makes no sense in current game mechanics: Check.

Xython wrote:

And with the Goons around, Gallente Ice Fields are a dangerous area.

Self Gratification(the only kind a Goon understands): Check.

Xython wrote:

I'm really sorry your guys' Ice Miner Bot Alts got ganked, but that's the chances you take when you run an AFK Bot.

Baseless Accusation: Check

Bonus Points: A member Goonswarm condemning botting.

The results: definitely your average Goon post.
Epiphaniess
Verboten Technologies
#24 - 2011-10-15 16:08:00 UTC
Captain Jackoff wrote:


Insurance needs to be voided if the person dies to concord. Being able to gank targets in hi sec at little to no cost is stupid. Gankers being able to take up insurance so they can get paid to throw away their ships by comitting a crime is also stupid.



I personally vote for the removal of Insurance all together. It is bad for the game, its bad for the economy. Subsidized ships make people dependent on in game subsidization, dependance is bad. People don't really feel the pain of lost. Making to many ships disposable.

Subsidized ships are bad...Vote no to subsidized ships! Vote no to Insurance.

Lets remove it.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#25 - 2011-10-15 16:09:14 UTC
Captain Jackoff wrote:
In light of how easily the goons have been able to clear gallente space of ice miners, I say the time has finally come to fix suicide ganking. Everybody is too afraid to mine gallente ice in hi-sec. What happend to concord? Oh that's right, concord are all but worthless in this.

I can think of two changes, one of which that should have been made a long time ago.

Insurance needs to be voided if the person dies to concord. Being able to gank targets in hi sec at little to no cost is stupid. Gankers being able to take up insurance so they can get paid to throw away their ships by comitting a crime is also stupid.

Concord needs to be improved, they are supposed to deter ganking from occuring in hi-sec, but they fail at this. I suggest that concord response times are greatly improved. It should still be possible to gank a target, but you'll need more firepower and there's a high risk of concord taking you out before you destroy your target.

These changes won't stop people from ganking each other in hi-sec, but anything that makes it harder will make a huge difference.



No

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Jada Maroo
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2011-10-15 16:09:55 UTC
Definitely agree that insurance should go away entirely.
Alara IonStorm
#27 - 2011-10-15 16:10:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Epiphaniess wrote:

I personally vote for the removal of Insurance all together. It is bad for the game, its bad for the economy. Subsidized ships make people dependent on in game subsidization, dependance is bad. People don't really feel the pain of lost. Making to many ships disposable.

Subsidized ships are bad...Vote no to subsidized ships! Vote no to Insurance.

Lets remove it.

Subsidized!!!?Shocked

That's Republican for Communism!

Get rid of it... Hurry!

/Seriously though I agree, bad mechanic.
Ogi Talvanen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#28 - 2011-10-15 16:11:59 UTC
I think we need more insurance and less tank on industrial ships!
Xython
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2011-10-15 16:15:46 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Xython wrote:


Why would it? It's supposed to be weak. You're supposed to have an escort if you're in a dangerous area.

Tactics that makes no sense in current game mechanics: Check.

- SNIP -

Bonus Points: A member Goonswarm condemning botting.

The results: definitely your average Goon post.


Yes, cause Goons bot all the time. In fact, I'm actually a really, really complex dictionary script. BadPoster3000 2.1 Alpha. Fnord brisk, Blood orange away!

Silly pubbie. Botting is against the Goonswarm rules, and the last thing I'd do is break the Goonswarm rules.


As for "the tactic" (having a bodyguard), it actually does make perfect sense... as long as you're not a fat lazy AFK mining pubbie with an entitlement complex who feels he should be able to just set up his ice miner bot and come back a few billion isk richer.

But I'll bite. What "current game mechanics" exist that suggest that having an escort, or a remote rep logistics ship, or something similar covering your six no longer works? Remember, "fat lazy afk pubbie" isn't a mechanic, it's a character flaw.

I can't wait to see you carebears trying to wrap your cute little heads around the idea of needing a bodyguard and scouts and crap when they move all Ice to nullsec. You guys are going to have nervous breakdowns. Especially cause when that happens, it won't be one Brutix suicide ganking you. It'll be 20 of them. With bubbles and tackle.
Taedrin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2011-10-15 16:17:12 UTC
The *ONLY* thing that needs to be made harder is the use of recycled alts to do suicide ganking.

This used to be considered an exploit, but is now only considered an exploit if the amount of recycling is "excessive".
Ogi Talvanen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#31 - 2011-10-15 16:21:33 UTC
Last time i was ganking hulks and macks in belts funny thing is we warned them 10 minutes before in local not to mine or they will loose their ships. No one took us seriously until they lost their ships and then raged in the local. I dont get that.
Xython
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2011-10-15 16:23:33 UTC
Ogi Talvanen wrote:
Last time i was ganking hulks and macks in belts funny thing is we warned them 10 minutes before in local not to mine or they will loose their ships. No one took us seriously until they lost their ships and then raged in the local. I dont get that.


Combination of Entitlement Syndrome (the game OWES me this ore and isk) and an arrogant belief that they're invincible in highsec (which is why this is so fun).
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#33 - 2011-10-15 16:23:33 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Xython wrote:


Why would it? It's supposed to be weak. You're supposed to have an escort if you're in a dangerous area.

Tactics that makes no sense in current game mechanics: Check.



Defending yourselves is clearly a stupid thing to have to do in a pvp game.
Alara IonStorm
#34 - 2011-10-15 16:26:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Xython wrote:


Yes, I'm actually a really, really BadPoster pubbie. Botting is the Goonswarm rules, and the last thing I'd do is break the Goonswarm rules.

As a fat lazy AFK mining pubbie with an entitlement complex who feels he should be able to just set up his ice miner bot and come back a few billion isk richer. I'll bite. What exist that suggest "fat lazy afk pubbie" is a character flaw.


I can't wait to see wrap your cute little head around the guys. It'll be 20 of them.

Removed some letters, it made a lot more sense.
Hershman
Creepers Corporation
#35 - 2011-10-15 16:26:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Hershman
A man once said, "protek yose'f at all times."

Then he said, "we get a rematch tho, aigt?"


Edit: My PC instantly cut power after I pressed the POST button for this message and gave me B.S.O.D. powering back up.

I play EVE every day! Follow me at http://www.twitch.tv/matthershman
Zerra Zeta
Doomheim
#36 - 2011-10-15 16:26:49 UTC
k, just don't change 'afk' cloaking (it's a viable tactic), easy suicide ganking is sort of silly.... actually I wonder if the goons are working with hellmar
Alara IonStorm
#37 - 2011-10-15 16:28:24 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Defending yourselves is clearly a stupid thing to have to do in a pvp game.

Yes that Escort is really gonna help you when you get alpha'd Roll
David Cedarbridge
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2011-10-15 16:29:07 UTC
ooh ooh the check box game. I love the check box game.
Let me play too.

Alara IonStorm wrote:
Xython wrote:


Why would it? It's supposed to be weak. You're supposed to have an escort if you're in a dangerous area.

Tactics that makes no sense in current game mechanics: Check.
Claiming that common sense tactics don't make sense "in current game mechanics": Check

Xython wrote:

And with the Goons around, Gallente Ice Fields are a dangerous area.

Self Gratification(the only kind a Goon understands): Check.
Ad Hom Strike against "a Goon" for making a fairly plain and obvious statement: Check

Xython wrote:

I'm really sorry your guys' Ice Miner Bot Alts got ganked, but that's the chances you take when you run an AFK Bot.

Baseless Accusation: Check

Bonus Points: A member Goonswarm condemning botting.
Guilty Concience: Check

Bonus Points: Implying that somebody is guilty of something based only on rumors and heresay: Check

The results: definitely your average Goon post.


The Results: Definitely your average NPC corp member posting about those big bad goonies.
Ogi Talvanen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#39 - 2011-10-15 16:34:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Ogi Talvanen
Watch local. Be aligned. Dont afk. Use warp core stabilizer. Tank ship.
Alara IonStorm
#40 - 2011-10-15 16:34:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
David Cedarbridge wrote:

Claiming that common sense tactics don't make sense "in current game mechanics": Check

Escorts do not help with Alpha Mechanics.
David Cedarbridge wrote:

Ad Hom Strike against "a Goon" for making a fairly plain and obvious statement: Check

In my defence Goons are pretty plain.
David Cedarbridge wrote:

Guilty Concience: Check

Well I did murdered a Hooker once.
David Cedarbridge wrote:

Bonus Points: Implying that somebody is guilty of something based only on rumors and heresay: Check

I am a pretty massive hypocrite
David Cedarbridge wrote:

The Results: Definitely your average NPC corp member posting about those big bad goonies.

I never liked that movie.