These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Balancing bumping and looting mechanics

First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#121 - 2016-01-27 10:28:21 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Yes, yes its a competitive and consequence laiden game in which:

- Someone can indefinetely (or until downtime) prevent a freighter from warping using just a bumping ship


only if the victim let's that happen
Quote:

- Having negative sec status has very limited practical consequences for a dedicated ganker char and does not limit the ability to perform ganks in hisec in any way, making sec status loss irrelevant (and consequence free)
Not only will faction police spawn to kill them but they are also open to attack to anyone.
Quote:

- Looting stuff from a ganked hauler can be made perfectly safe by using a DST or Orca and a disposable alt
If you are looting a freighter you need to use a freighter, the very ship you cant seem to protect.
Quote:

Try arguing for removal/change of any of the above mechanics and you get shouted at for being a risk-averse-carebear-emergent-gameplay-hater. Oh, the irony. Roll


No irony here, you really are a spineless risk adverse carebear with zero understanding of the game.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#122 - 2016-01-27 10:33:05 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:


No gankers really don't have any Risk... loose a 2 million Isk ship. and not have any additional security status drop, or penalty for being a criminal. Same old same old. No Risk.

So throwing 8 taloses and failing a gank is not risking 1 billion and getting not even a killmail in return?
The only reason why 30-40 people can get away with throwing t2 cats at things and kill it at a low risk of 300m is because thats 30-40 people, maybe just 25 and a few have extra characters but were talking about a cumulative time spent with GCC timer of 9+ hours, how much isk can you make in 9 hours?

Time is money, stop acting like 1 freighters time is worth an equal amount as that of 30 gankers.

Thing is even when the kill happens we still have to roll a dice on drops and even if it drops they don't always get everything.

You also run the risk of getting tackled before the gank even happens, you can get podded after it happens and you "can't highsec because you have killrights".

"But they use empty pods!" Yeah and because of that characters train 15% slower, there are consequences to everything.
You try to discuss things but you can only see your side of the argument.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Scipio Artelius
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#123 - 2016-01-27 10:51:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Try arguing for removal/change of any of the above mechanics and you get shouted at for being a risk-averse-carebear-emergent-gameplay-hater. Oh, the irony. Roll

Not at all.

Replace them with something of equal risk and I'm sure a lot of people would be open to suggestions.

But proposals made here are always about increasing safety for haulers, when it's already immensely safe and the greatest risk is for those that fail to take precautions themselves.

A lot of us don't want Eve to be a game that wraps us in cotton wool and protects us, so when the tools are already available to avoid being bumped and ganked (and a lot of us use those mechanics daily), then there is little sympathy for calls to make the game safer when people don't use the tools that are already available.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#124 - 2016-01-27 10:53:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhamnousia Nosferatu
baltec1 wrote:

only if the victim let's that happen

Nope. The only guaranteed way to get out of that situation is ganking the bumper.
Also, it's lets, not let's.

Quote:
Not only will faction police spawn to kill them but they are also open to attack to anyone.

Facpo will spawn with a delay which is long enough even for battlecruisers piloted by -10 chars to move through highest true-sec systems, so - no consequence. As for being open for attack, true but that risk is minimised/removed by use of insta undocks and tacticals.

Quote:
If you are looting a freighter you need to use a freighter, the very ship you cant seem to protect.

Heh, if you only knew what you are talking about. You only need a freighter to loot stuff larger then 50k m3 (so, large contracts and cans). If the cargo is not in a package, DST's are regularly used w/o any risk for them.

Quote:
No irony here, you really are a spineless risk adverse carebear with zero understanding of the game.

Well it seems that this risk adverse carebear understands at least one aspect of the game mechanics (looting) a bit better than you do. But please, sling some more insults, that's what you guys excel at.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#125 - 2016-01-27 11:05:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Try arguing for removal/change of any of the above mechanics and you get shouted at for being a risk-averse-carebear-emergent-gameplay-hater. Oh, the irony. Roll

Not at all.

Replace them with something of equal risk and I'm sure a lot of people would be open to suggestions.

But proposals made here are always about increasing safety for haulers, when it's already immensely safe and the greatest risk is for those that fail to take precautions themselves.

A lot of us don't want Eve to be a game that wraps us in cotton wool and protects us, so when the tools are already available to avoid being bumped and ganked (and a lot of us use those mechanics daily), then there is little sympathy for calls to make the game safer when people don't use the tools that are already available.


I understand what you mean and I'm far from advocating complete safety. However, every time I've tried arguing (based on facts, examples from the real gameplay) that some of the mechanics are... well, quite counter-intuitive to say at least and that they could use some improvements (which would make ganking more consequence laden, true) all I get back is kind of replies our lovely friend from bat country just provided - spineless, ignorant, this, that. No constructive discussion can be held in such an environment, so I don't really try discussing as much as I used to.
The fun part is, I have a feeling we'll be seeing changes to bumping in the near future and then it will be fun trolling these guys back as much as they tend to troll anyone opposing their views.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#126 - 2016-01-27 11:07:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Yes, yes its a competitive and consequence laiden game in which:

- Someone can indefinitely (or until downtime) prevent a freighter from warping using just a bumping ship (doesn't even have to be a mach, ONI or SFI with large MWD will suffice) and a disposable aggro alt in a noob ship (!). No consequences for the bumper whatsoever.
Just like a carrier can be held-down with a T1 frigate. Both are at risk if another player chooses to do something about it, and both are safe if no-one bothers to attack them. In highsec, you can attack anyone, anywhere (except rookie systems) by design. The only "safety" a bumper has is in your head.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

- Having negative sec status has very limited practical consequences for a dedicated ganker char and does not limit the ability to perform ganks in hisec in any way, making sec status loss irrelevant (and consequence free)
As I explained above, negative security status is not, and never was suppose to have so many "consequences" that criminals are unable to operate. This is a game, and criminals are very much intended to exist and for that they have to be able to function. Now that said, running a -10 has a huge number of consequences, all of which have resulted in criminals flying only cheap, disposable ships for the minimum amount of time exactly because of the impact of these consequences. They were never intended to prevent criminals from operating - there would be many easier ways for CCP to do that if they wanted.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
- Killrights against ganker chars are practically useless
Of course, because of the above consequences. You can only make a character so vulnerable to others before adding more "consequences" has little impact. This in and of itself shows you how consequential the Crimewatch system punishes -10s if a killright which makes you free to attack adds little more risk to criminals.


Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
- Looting stuff from a ganked hauler can be made perfectly safe by using a DST or Orca and a disposable alt
This is the only point where I agree there could be more game play added. Laundering the goods in space stymies the potential for a cascade of conflict resulting from a fight over the loot. But honestly, this is a minor point, and one that isn't without counter as you can use the exact same mechanics to grab the loot for yourself. Plus there has to be some balance and a chance for the pirate to get away with the loot, or they wouldn't bother in the first place.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Try arguing for removal/change of any of the above mechanics and you get shouted at for being a risk-averse-carebear-emergent-gameplay-hater. Oh, the irony. Roll
You are a risk-averse carebear or at least an enabler of them. Conflict and criminals in highsec is not even emergent gameplay - it has been specifically enabled by the Crimewatch mechanics. Freighters are suppose to be vulnerable. Criminals are suppose to be able to exist. Even when the carebear-apologists were celebrating the day after CCP patched out hyperdunking, criminals were still popping freighters as much as they had before, and exactly as the game designers intend. The same thing will happen if bumping is ever iterated on, and the daily destruction of industrials will carry on as it has for the last 13 years in New Eden.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#127 - 2016-01-27 11:14:12 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Nope. The only guaranteed way to get out of that situation is ganking the bumper.
Web escorts to get you into warp near instantly, logistics escorts, instablap cruisers, ECM, smartbomb BS. You also have the fast frigate you can position in front of a bumped freighter for it to warp to.

Quote:

Facpo will spawn with a delay which is long enough even for battlecruisers piloted by -10 chars to move through highest true-sec systems, so - no consequence. As for being open for attack, true but that risk is minimised/removed by use of insta undocks and tacticals.
If it's consequence free then why don't you use suicide gankers against the gankers? Their ships are in fact profitable to gank. Also feel free to sit still in space and see how many seconds you last, or feel free to try and do any other content in highsec such as missions, exploring, mining and so on.

Quote:

Heh, if you only knew what you are talking about. You only need a freighter to loot stuff larger then 50k m3 (so, large contracts and cans). If the cargo is not in a package, DST's are regularly used w/o any risk for them.

The current ganking tactics were invented by my corp. If you are ganking a freighter you bring a freighter as it's the only ship with a hold large enough. If the cargo will fit inside a DST the the question must be asked why was the victim not using a DST.
Iain Cariaba
#128 - 2016-01-27 11:48:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Quote:
Facpo will spawn with a delay which is long enough even for battlecruisers piloted by -10 chars to move through highest true-sec systems, so - no consequence. As for being open for attack, true but that risk is minimised/removed by use of insta undocks and tacticals.
If it's risk free then why don't you use suicide gankers against the gankers? Their ships are in fact profitable to gank. Hell if it's risk free then let's have the same penalties happen to all ships that shoot npcs in highsec, after all these penalties are in place to stop the use of offensive weaponry.

This. In fact, in one of the many identical threads to this one, I went through the math and figured out that a 5.0 sec status character can gank something like 24 bumping machs and still not reach the -2.0 threshold for penalties in highsec. Even then, it only takes 120mil isk in tags/fees to bring your sec status back up to zero, at which point you can gank 8 more machs without hitting -2.0.

The only thing stopping the white knigits from going on their own ganker gankfest is their own fear.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#129 - 2016-01-27 13:10:42 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
This. In fact, in one of the many identical threads to this one, I went through the math and figured out that a 5.0 sec status character can gank something like 24 bumping machs and still not reach the -2.0 threshold for penalties in highsec. Even then, it only takes 120mil isk in tags/fees to bring your sec status back up to zero, at which point you can gank 8 more machs without hitting -2.0.

The only thing stopping the white knigits from going on their own ganker gankfest is their own fear.


A good thing to know! But that also assumes said carebear never missions or rats between those kills. Which, if it was a 5.0 character, he/she probably will. I can tell you from experience that lowsec rats give good sec status, especially those clone soldiers.

In effect, that means by your math alone, someone can counter-gank to protect themselves dozens of times with no risk to themselves since they never reach any sort of security threshold for it to matter. So I want to requote something you said because it won't be empty quoting.

Quote:
The only thing stopping the white knigits from going on their own ganker gankfest is their own fear.


Heck, I must ask, why even wait for someone to be in danger? Why wait for a white-knight excuse? Machs are pirate BS's, that mostly have to be on grid for long periods of time waiting for something to bump. A juicy target is just sitting there waiting for you, do a pre-emptive strike with some buddies! You'll get a decent killmail and some laughs. Who knows, you might actually enjoy the game for a fleeting moment.

Get it? Fleeting, because you know, with buddies, it's a fleet, and for a split second...whatever nevermind...
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#130 - 2016-01-27 13:55:44 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:

Im not sure that is really risk.


Especially since you outright lied about pricing for the second time.

"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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#131 - 2016-01-27 13:57:02 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Nope. The only guaranteed way to get out of that situation is ganking the bumper.


You lie. I've noticed you do that a lot.

"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.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#132 - 2016-01-27 14:32:00 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Nope. The only guaranteed way to get out of that situation is ganking the bumper.

You lie. I've noticed you do that a lot.

Oh look, it's you again. Pretty please, prove me wrong instead of slinging crap around.
Also, for some reason you always sound really agitated. You should relax a bit.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#133 - 2016-01-27 14:34:43 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Pretty please, prove me wrong


I did.

You claimed the only way to get out of that situation is ganking the bumper.

That statement is wildly, flagrantly false. I really don't know what you hope to accomplish by trying to lie like that, but it probably doesn't matter anyway.

"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.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#134 - 2016-01-27 14:40:59 UTC
Quote:
The only thing stopping the white knigits from going on their own ganker gankfest is their own fear.


Not really true - if I'm a 'white knight' I don't want to engage in criminal activities in order to prevent crime, I want to do it legally. Now, if we were talking about dark knights, that would be another story. They might be willing to cross the honorabu line and engage in illicit activities under the "end justifies the means" credo in order to bring order to Hisec.

The story about medieval heroes in internet pixel spaceship world would make some sense if it was about principles, courage, intelligence or what not. However it is not. This is a story about game mechanics, simple cost/benefit calculus and their application which allows for some fairly unfortunate application scenarios. Anyway, looking forward to changes Cool.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#135 - 2016-01-27 14:44:18 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
A good thing to know! But that also assumes said carebear never missions or rats between those kills. Which, if it was a 5.0 character, he/she probably will.
So you're going to go off and carebear in your mission running ship having just given a killright to someone that associates with gankers?

Legit.


Basically people have to roll their own gank alts so they can avoid the same repercussions that gankers avoid by rolling their own gank alts.

Yes it's doable, but instead of the interesting rock-paper-scissors dynamic gameplay we get in the rest of eve, we've devolved into a single staid winning strategy: Everyone roll a gank alt to avoid the repercussions of the crimewatch system the same way gankers currently do.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#136 - 2016-01-27 14:44:58 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
I don't want to engage in criminal activities in order to prevent crime


If you're going to deliberately restrict your own options for the sake of roleplay, you have handicapped yourself.

Nothing to do with the mechanics, you just want to have your cake and eat it too, and that's not going to happen.

"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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#137 - 2016-01-27 14:47:06 UTC
"Ganking doesn't have enough consequences!"

"I refuse to gank the bumper because I don't want the consequences of ganking!"

Roll

"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.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#138 - 2016-01-27 14:49:20 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Pretty please, prove me wrong


I did.

You claimed the only way to get out of that situation is ganking the bumper.

That statement is wildly, flagrantly false. I really don't know what you hope to accomplish by trying to lie like that, but it probably doesn't matter anyway.


No you did not.
I said that the only guaranteed way of getting out is ganking the bumper. Again, please do enlighten us all on viable alternative.

Also, even if there was one, you could only say that I was lying had I knowingly decided not to disclose the alternative way of getting out in my post, which (with my s****y knowledge of game mechanics) I certainly did not do. Since you do not know what I do or don't know about bumping, you are lying about me lying. How cool is that.
Also, as I said, you should chill a bit, it's just a game buddy.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#139 - 2016-01-27 14:50:26 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
"Ganking doesn't have enough consequences!"

"I refuse to gank the bumper because I don't want the consequences of ganking!"

Roll

Ganking =/= bumping....remember we had this discussion yesterday about things being different from each other sometimes.


Bumping = no consequences
Ganking = not enough consequences for players that have rolled a disposable gank alt.

It's not so hard to understand: please review the fallacy link from yesterday and stop bloody straw-manning everything.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#140 - 2016-01-27 14:51:29 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

I said that the only guaranteed way of getting out is ganking the bumper.


And that is a lie.


Quote:

Again, please do enlighten us all on viable alternative.


Hell, they were posted on the same page as you posted your lie. Why do you need me to do your reading for you? How about you actually read the thread in the first place?

"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.