EVE General Discussion

Oh, I'm sorry it's not longer 'profitable' to gank these ships anymore.

Maybe you should get off your candy ass and get more people. Those ships can still be ganked, you just need more friends and you will lose ISK doing so. But that's kind of how things work.

Because the other ships can be so easily ganked, they have to resort to these battleship class tank mining barges but suffer with lesser yield. So they lose profit, while your ganking happy ass does it for next to nothing. Now? It costs something. If you want them gone, you will have to pay the price to do so.

Or are you too stupid to figure this out for yourself?

Oh come on, does it really have to be said they're in npc corps?

That just means there is a problem with npc corps.......

Are you trying to fix NPC Corp mechanics for a type of player who earns billions a day?

Do you think you're affecting the "locust swarm" player by slapping on a 1.5 million ISK deterrent on them?




Edit: That's 1/6th the price of a "permit", or 1/160th the price of permit tanking the fleet.

Nothing like someone seeing a neighbor having fun, then having to form a Citizen's Council to stop them from this horrible activity. Kouldn't Kindness Korrupt the incautious? They'll ruin the community! What if one wants to date your sister?

Explain why this is something that actually needs to be countered, please? Other than "I really want to shoot someone, but they're in an NPC corp and I'm unwilling to throw away the ISK/security or to organise enough like minded people to gank them"



I'm not sure you appreciate exactly what you're asking there. I'm not a programmer, but based on what I've read from the more in-depth EVE blogs you're talking about CCP creating an entirely new check that determines whether a player is in an NPC corp or not (because I can't think of any currently in-game system that checks this - hence why it would need to be made up from scratch) at least every time a player changes ship, and more likely on every session change (partly because EVE's code tends towards redundancy for checks like this - look up the "Brain in a box" blog for more details - and partly because it's possible to leave a player corp and end up in an NPC corp while in space in certain circumstances, like corp disbanding or getting kicked while offline) for all players.

After that check, if a player is trying to board or onboard a restricted ship, you want it to activate another brand new system (because there's no system that looks at pilot eligibility for flying ships, except in relation to their trained skills. Note that the trial restriction is on training the skills to fly a ship, not on the ship hull itself - if you could somehow train Mining Barge 1 on a trial account, that trial character could board a Procurer just fine, it's just that you cannot train the skill, so it's a moot point) that prevents them boarding that ship.

Bear in mind those checks have to be performed very frequently and add more stress to an already stressed part of the server (again, see the "Brain in a box" blog) so you're going to end up with a lot more lag and TiDi, particularly in systems with lots of players switching ships like, say, Jita, or nullsec staging systems. Places that already tend to suffer from lag and TiDi, in other words.

And that's just the most basic implementation, because we haven't even considered exceptions yet - what happens if a pilot is in a player corp in an orca, logs out in space, then while they're offline their corp gets disbanded? Suddenly they're in an NPC corp, in a ship that can't be used in an NPC corp, but in space where they can't change ships. How does the system resolve this? Again, there are no systems coded that will automatically take control of a player's ship and force-fly it to the nearest station where they already have a ship they are allowed to fly, so that would have to be created if you wanted it to do that (and that's a LOT of variables to take into account, so it'd have to be pretty complex to not screw up and put players in stations that only have ships they aren't allowed to fly, or force them through lowsec or any of the other potential mistakes - more drain on the server's processing power). Or maybe they're just able to go about their business in their NPC corp and their forbidden ship until such time as they dock up? If so then I guarantee that system will be gamed by people forcing the kind of situation I brought up specifically to end up in an NPC corp in their forbidden ship, and then just never docking so they get to use their ships while in an NPC corp.

As I said, I don't think you really appreciate the server-side work that would have to go into your "easy" solution. That or you just have a very different definition of "easy" to me.



Is there a source for that? I mean, players have returned to NPC corps when they leave player corps for at least as long as I've been playing and those corps have neen immune to wardecs for at least as long. Dropping out of a player corp to avoid a wardec has been a thing for a very long time, CCP have confirmed they don't consider it an exploit and they've even iterated on it to prevent abuse (making it impossible for players to return to a corp they left while at war for the duration of the war or one week). To the best of my knowledge, NPC corps have always been a place to go to avoid wardecs. If that wasn't intentional, it certainly seems to have gained approval since.



Everyone already has the ability to be affected by all game mechanics. This is why you're free to shoot anyone anywhere without actually needing to be at war with them. Of course, if you do that in hisec then you'll be affected by the CONCORD game mechanic, which will cost you your ship as well as some security status. But if you really want someone dead enough you can plan for that, prepare to soak up the loss, maybe hire or recruit some allies to help and you can make them dead regardless of their wishes on the subject.

That being said, even if CCP were both able and willing to implement your suggestion, it wouldn't do what you want - the real end result would be that most of the players you most want to wardec (heavily loaded freighters, bling-fit mission runners, locust mining fleets etc) would just create a new corp and join it every 24 hours, before wardecs on the old corp actually go live. Which would once again be bad for the servers, as they would have to deal with thousands of new corps every day.

ISBoxer hater tears mixed with impoverished ganker scrub tears. This is the sweet nectar of life that sustains me.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudflation

Before you cheer too much.

I'm telling you, Moses is one bad mother ******. If you think for one minute that you're going to do something about those locusts, you're in for a surprise, Pharoah-lover. If you bastards hadn't enslaved us, you wouldn't be getting the ass kicking you so richly deserve.

See your sorry ass on the shore of the Red Sea, mother ******.

After reading a few miner posts, I see a second option to solving this issue without nerfing the skiff tank.

Reduce skiff mining yield a bit. Many miners use an Orca or other hauler and so the extra ore hold of the Mackinkaw is just useless, there's no reason to use a Mackinkaw over a Skiff. Reduce skiff yield 10% from current and we should see a few less Skiffs.