These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New Freighter's - Mandated by EULA Section 16

First post
Author
Emma Muutaras
State War Academy
Caldari State
#41 - 2014-08-03 08:24:46 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Emma Muutaras wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Emma Muutaras wrote:

but really the best way to really hurt gankers and indeed everyone else is if the miners went F*** it and went on strike for a month after all no ore = no minerals = no production = no ships gankers might find it hard ganking in rookie ships lol


I always laugh when I see this.

Carebears never fail to overestimate their own importance to the economy. Has it never occurred to you that some of us are literally the people selling you freighters, retrievers, and mining lasers?


i have always built my own also i live in null sec and get most of my minerals from melting modules i get fro free via ratting still i wouldn't under estimate the amount of ore mined in high sec and its clearly being brought or they wouldn't do it


That giant run-on-sentence does not in any way contradict what I said.


wasn't trying to contradict i'm sure a lot of gankers do sell freighters/barges best way to sell a item create more demand :p

just stateing a lot of ore is mined per day in high sec and if ALL that ore suddenly disappeared for a month the inflation of the market would make current plex prices look cheap

anyway kinda going off topic a we bit so i will just leave it there
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#42 - 2014-08-03 11:06:36 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Why should 1 person be able to keep a freighter effectively pointed without fear of being concorded for as long as they wish?


Setting aside the odd case of extremely bad luck, this can only happen if the freighter pilot fails to do things properly (ie: get a corpmate or alt to web the freighter into almost instawarp).

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#43 - 2014-08-03 11:11:12 UTC
Maybe the carebear crowd could first decide if we are completely irrelevant and have no impact at all on the game, or if CCP should completely break the game with one of the silly ideas in this thread because we can't be stopped with available tools?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#44 - 2014-08-03 11:15:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Emma Muutaras wrote:

just stateing a lot of ore is mined per day in high sec and if ALL that ore suddenly disappeared for a month the inflation of the market would make current plex prices look cheap


People stockpile, you realize.

Hell, you know the price of the Procurer? For a long, long while after the barge buff it's market price was LESS than what it cost to make. The stockpile from before the buff still has yet to be depleted. It is completely unprofitable to actually make the damned thing. I think there are more than a few Battlecruisers that are in the same boat, their stockpiles were never depleted so their price is hilariously low.

If you think one month of however many miners you can actually get to go on strike will effect anything, you are wrong. First of all, I highly, highly doubt that you could get more than the small percentage of people that comprises the most butthurt miners to actually agree to it in the first place.

And even if you did succeed in getting a fair amount of people, all you are going to do is just make the guys who ISBox a twenty man fleet even richer.

That's the funny thing about capitalism. It tends to move things around to fill the void in high demand markets.

[edit: Oh, another thing. If you really try to deplete the mineral stockpile, all you would do is make Chribba really rich. Pretty sure that guy has more of it than anybody.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Gaijin Lanis
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2014-08-03 13:54:51 UTC
Bumping a ship out of manual warp is within the rules. Bumping a ship out of emergency warp is an exploit.

Therefore, if you're getting bumped without a friendly webbing alt, log off. If they continue to bump you, they're breaking the game rules, and you can report them without getting laughed at by GMs.

The above was written and posted with nothing but love in my heart for all.

HardRockLife
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
#46 - 2014-08-03 14:18:43 UTC
So what is the method to escape CODE nuking fleets? Seeing as they are now ganking on gates so bumping isnt even needed.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2014-08-03 14:22:29 UTC
HardRockLife wrote:
So what is the method to escape CODE nuking fleets? Seeing as they are now ganking on gates so bumping isnt even needed.


An alt in a T1 frigate.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#48 - 2014-08-03 14:22:39 UTC
HardRockLife wrote:
So what is the method to escape CODE nuking fleets? Seeing as they are now ganking on gates so bumping isnt even needed.


The best method to avoid being ganked is, and always has been, not being on grid when the gank ships arrive.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

HardRockLife
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
#49 - 2014-08-03 14:25:00 UTC
afkalt wrote:
HardRockLife wrote:
So what is the method to escape CODE nuking fleets? Seeing as they are now ganking on gates so bumping isnt even needed.


An alt in a T1 frigate.

Tried that, got shot
Frigate lived freighter died
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2014-08-03 14:30:42 UTC
Then you were doing it wrong.
HardRockLife
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
#51 - 2014-08-03 14:45:43 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Then you were doing it wrong.

Never said it was my freighter, but still tried it with one. End result was webbing helps, but code can gank you on decloak.
So how do you counter that? Particuarly with regard to say chokepoint systems.
I mean alpha and vexor ganks are tank and run
DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2014-08-03 14:58:34 UTC
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Mag's wrote:


Bad OP troll post is bad.


The sad part is - I know this dude. He's not trolling. Really. It's amazing.



sorry DJ....You do not know me and there is no affiliation between us what-so-ever. None.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#53 - 2014-08-03 14:59:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
HardRockLife wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Then you were doing it wrong.

Never said it was my freighter, but still tried it with one. End result was webbing helps, but code can gank you on decloak.
So how do you counter that? Particuarly with regard to say chokepoint systems.
I mean alpha and vexor ganks are tank and run

Tank and run? From Concord? Or did I misread your point?

Also no one said it was 100% effective, as nothing should be. But if done right with corp mates and in use with other options, it's damn near close.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#54 - 2014-08-03 15:11:13 UTC
Well I'm sure glad you're not my scout.

Done correctly, scouting is 100% effective. It's slow, granted but it always works. A healthy paranoia is the key - of course one doesn't need to be paranoid to NOT jump into enough CODE people to pop you at decloak. That's more a case of basic common sense.
DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2014-08-03 15:11:18 UTC
Another solution would be have to a mid slot for a Micro Jump Drive for the freighter that would at least give the freighter the opportunity to jump to 25km away from the gank in order to align and therefore make it safely to their next location.

The problem with these High Sector Gankers is that they are mostly alts of Null Sector PvP er's who believe that they are benefiting the environment and manufacturing industry and CCP as a whole by blowing up ships in High Sector like they do in Null Sector so that subscribers will be forced to purchase Plex in order to regain the destroyed ISK which is actually more detrimental to the environment than it is beneficial.


....Here's a new idea for the PVP Crazed subscribers of EvE - Online....quit playing in this environment and go play Valkyrie where there is constant PvP all the time.

Because none of you unless you have an GM, DEV or ISD tag by your name are allowed to infer that you are working for CCP which you are by trolling these threads and posting nothing at all the contributes to the discussion which once against violates Section 16 of the EULA.

Those of CODE and their pets posting in threads that are part of the Ideas Forum need to realize that this is not the Role - Playing Forum of the site but a forum where ideas are generated to be discussed about.

And since you do not have constructive ideas of your own because you are stupid to say the least then you must constantly attack others to feel better about yourself....

It's not the rest of the communities problem that you lack the idea building skill....that's your problem. So just sit there and play pew pew and leave the actually thinking up to those who are not on Xanax or Lithium.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#56 - 2014-08-03 15:16:26 UTC
Go read the newbie FAQ. Specifically the section 7.2 about avoiding PvP
DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2014-08-03 15:18:52 UTC
Odithia wrote:
I believe repeated bumping is similar to tackling (propultion jaming) and should award a suspect timer to the bumper, other than that I think current figthers with low slots are pretty well balanced.


It could be considered Web Stasisfying because the actions of the bump ship do in fact slow the forward progress of the freighter much in the way that a Web slows the overall velocity of the ship.

Bumping should be considered a reason for suspect but only after the ten bump where the bumping pilot would be suspect for one minute and would be able to attacked by anyone close by.

Limiting the suspect flag to one bump would cause problems everywhere especially in crowded ports.

If the replies to this post cannot stay on topic then perhaps another dose of Valium is necessary.
DrysonBennington
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2014-08-03 15:34:12 UTC  |  Edited by: DrysonBennington
This will probably be booed upon by CODE and called an exploit because it does not favor their Carebear Ganking Boards but after taking a stance against their idiocy and ridiculousness there is no alternative.

This method of avoiding PVP on a gate by a freighter involves Gate Bouncing.

Gate Bouncing involves landing on a gate traveling through the gate and right before the freighter jumps through the gate open several web browsers at a time. Once the freighter passes through the gate it will emerge 999,996 - 1mil km away from the gate that it has just passed through then allowing the freighter to safely make it way to the next location.

I have used this process several times gate after gate after gate and it does in deed work every time.

I have also created a petition to CCP about the process as well as posting the process in the bugs an issue workarounds to make certain that it is not an exploit. No word has been returned yet as whether it is an exploit or not.

But given the mentality of High Sector gankers and their methodology, which is rather lazy to blob a fleet of Kittens to a freighter and destroy it, has left us with no alternative to employ such a tactic to ensure that freighter and orca transports make it to their destinations so that cargo gets to where it needs to be so that inflation does not occur.

Inflation does not occur because shipments are on time. Inflation results as a cause of lost property where the property owner must then increase the prices of their products in order to offset the loss. An increase that permeates the rest of the market which can then be directly linked back to the Ganker who are destroying such products that cause the prices to be increased.

No matter how you try to spin the pictures in your mind through reverse engineering you are wrong.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#59 - 2014-08-03 18:22:18 UTC
Pheusia wrote:
Other players blowing my ships up interferes with my enjoyment of the game therefore DCUs should give 100% shield resists.


I am still waiting for the Invulnerability Field to give me invulnerability!

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#60 - 2014-08-03 18:41:50 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Unless you know of a way to change a decade old fluidic motion physics system to prevent it. Because CCP sure doesn't.


Well, if you actually looked at my suggestion, you would have noticed that it would introduce a new mechanic that wouldn't even touch the decade old fluidic motion physics system . People would still be allowed to die, the gankers would just have to be ship spinning instead of sipping a nice cocktail outside, waiting for a text from their friend to tell them they have a freighter bumped.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

So, I ask you a question. Why should someone who is actively engaged in NOT playing the game be given any protection at all?


Why should someone be able to bump someone for 10 minutes because he is waiting for his buddies that are currently actively engaged in NOT playing the game by taking a bio, to come back and get a kill? I'ts fair enough to keep a ship locked down for a minute to a minute in a half without sacrificing a ship to keep it in place. I'm sure plenty of ganks can, and still will happen.

Gaijin Lanis wrote:


Therefore, if you're getting bumped without a friendly webbing alt, log off.


This is currently the counter to simply being bumped (Provided an an alt in a newbie ship didn't do 1 damage to your freighter). So why should the only counter once you have been bumped, be to log off and stop playing the game for a bit?

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.