These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How many more players must we lose to bullying

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#801 - 2017-04-04 10:33:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

And now you are complaining that you don't get enough reward for ganking?


So you suggest that the low skilled characters of a low reward area of space can afford that, dang you are being stupid...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#802 - 2017-04-04 10:34:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Firstly I've already mentioned that Zombie exploited grid bounderies in another post recently and the reason I mentioned it was to point out the reason they did so - because ganking in high was so difficult they chose to have their accounts banned to do so.

Clearly had ganking been so prevalent and easy they would not have done it. Ganking was not a part of high sec in the early years. End of story.


* Snip Rubbish I cant be bothered replying to*

Quote:
Oh and the Oveur post clearly states what I think it does. Pretending his use of "pirating" was not a reference to ganking is laughable. It was piracy at the time because ganking in high was close to non-existant and the term ganking which now refers to high sec suicide was not being used.

His statement in Bold "that's the point of highsec" refers directly to it being relatively safe. Word lawyer all you like you'll still be wrong.


And he was wrong. He wouldn't be the first dev to be so and he won't be the last. The evidence is, once again, in the reality of what is, rather than what one dev said (contradicting what all the other devs have said). That reality is that if high sec was intended to be safe, why are our weapons not entirely disabled there? Why is it that I am able to lock a player's ship and open fire on them at all? Why give magic space police a time til arrival depending on sec status instead of just have them magically spawn right next to you? The game is simply not designed the way you think it is, and never has been. It could be quite easily, and yet in the almost fifteen years of its existence, it has never gone that route.

Uhuh. He was only the executive producer of EvE online for the first half decade or more :)


Black Pedro wrote:

Even CCP Oveur acknowledged on the forums that you can shoot players anywhere and there is not suppose to be a safe space in this game:

CCP Oveur wrote:
[Y]ou can PvP anywhere, as long as you take the consequences, you know this already.


No one said it should be otherwise. You could PvP anywhere in EvE from day 1 - in high with war decs, in high with extremely costly suiciding.

PvP everywhere is fine with me. PvP anywhere without the intended risks and consequences is not. It wasn't to Oveur either clearly.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#803 - 2017-04-04 10:42:18 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

And now you are complaining that you don't get enough reward for ganking?


So you suggest that the low skilled characters of a low reward area of space can afford that, dang your are being stupid...

I suggest you learn what people mean when they talk about risk/reward and don't confuse it when people talk about player pirating each other.

Tell me, has the fact that the Freighter is more attractive to gank than the bumper to do with the CONCORD game mechanics which are the same for all ships or with the fact that one of them made himself a target by transporting too much valuables?

Evil RatKid
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#804 - 2017-04-04 10:46:13 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

And now you are complaining that you don't get enough reward for ganking?


So you suggest that the low skilled characters of a low reward area of space can afford that, dang your are being stupid...

I suggest you learn what people mean when they talk about risk/reward and don't confuse it when people talk about player pirating each other.

Tell me, has the fact that the Freighter is more attractive to gank than the bumper to do with the CONCORD game mechanics which are the same for all ships or with the fact that one of them made himself a target by transporting too much valuables?


What makes an area high risk? Are you seriously telling me that null sec is high risk because of NPC BS or dreads, seriously man you have no idea, no idea at all, no wonder you stay in hisec ganking defenceless ships.

Loot means something to you which is why you lot whined over the freighter wreck EHP, isn't that right...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Black Pedro
Mine.
#805 - 2017-04-04 10:52:03 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Black Pedro wrote:

Even CCP Oveur acknowledged on the forums that you can shoot players anywhere and there is not suppose to be a safe space in this game:

CCP Oveur wrote:
[Y]ou can PvP anywhere, as long as you take the consequences, you know this already.


No one said it should be otherwise. You could PvP anywhere in EvE from day 1 - in high with war decs, in high with extremely costly suiciding.

PvP everywhere is fine with me. PvP anywhere without the intended risks and consequences is not. It wasn't to Oveur either clearly.
Of course. Then we are all on the same page. If you shoot someone in highsec you should suffer the intended consequences. You, I and CCP Oveur all agree that highsec is a suppose to be a zone where you are not suppose to be safe and are at risk to both wardecs and suicide ganking. Perhaps we might not agree on the exact details of how sufficient and appropriate the current consequences are for illegal aggression, but at least we agree on the general concept that this is how the game is suppose to work.

Wow. I didn't expect such a happy resolution on page 41 of this threadnought.


The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#806 - 2017-04-04 11:13:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
* Snip good points I can't counter honestly so I'll just call it rubbish as if that'll make what he said go away*


Additionally, your favourite dev quote, the only one you have to support your position in any degree, whether wrong or not, telling me he's 'someone important' in any capacity is little more than an appeal to authority. I don't care if he's the godking of the universe, if he's wrong he's ******* wrong, and if he meant in any capacity that high sec is meant to be safe in that post you keep holding up for the world to see, that one comment that contradicts every other dev comment regarding high sec safety ever made otherwise, then he is simply wrong. But the lengths you'll go to to cling to that which helps validate your personal fantasies have been noted. Please continue deluding yourself, because you're deluding no one that matters with this garbage.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#807 - 2017-04-04 11:14:19 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Black Pedro wrote:

Even CCP Oveur acknowledged on the forums that you can shoot players anywhere and there is not suppose to be a safe space in this game:

CCP Oveur wrote:
[Y]ou can PvP anywhere, as long as you take the consequences, you know this already.


No one said it should be otherwise. You could PvP anywhere in EvE from day 1 - in high with war decs, in high with extremely costly suiciding.

PvP everywhere is fine with me. PvP anywhere without the intended risks and consequences is not. It wasn't to Oveur either clearly.
Of course. Then we are all on the same page. If you shoot someone in highsec you should suffer the intended consequences. You, I and CCP Oveur all agree that highsec is a suppose to be a zone where you are not suppose to be safe and are at risk to both wardecs and suicide ganking. Perhaps we might not agree on the exact details of how sufficient and appropriate the current consequences are for illegal aggression, but at least we agree on the general concept that this is how the game is suppose to work.

Wow. I didn't expect such a happy resolution on page 41 of this threadnought.



There are no real consequences now. When Ovuer wrote that the consequences were very great today they're not. That's the crux of the issue.

An analogy would be in 1855 the consequences of crime x was a 1 pound fine. If the same crime today still resulted in a 1 pound fine then it would hardly be a deterrent. In Eve its even worse because the consequence is much much less than in 2005.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#808 - 2017-04-04 11:19:22 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Black Pedro wrote:

Even CCP Oveur acknowledged on the forums that you can shoot players anywhere and there is not suppose to be a safe space in this game:

CCP Oveur wrote:
[Y]ou can PvP anywhere, as long as you take the consequences, you know this already.


No one said it should be otherwise. You could PvP anywhere in EvE from day 1 - in high with war decs, in high with extremely costly suiciding.

PvP everywhere is fine with me. PvP anywhere without the intended risks and consequences is not. It wasn't to Oveur either clearly.
Of course. Then we are all on the same page. If you shoot someone in highsec you should suffer the intended consequences. You, I and CCP Oveur all agree that highsec is a suppose to be a zone where you are not suppose to be safe and are at risk to both wardecs and suicide ganking. Perhaps we might not agree on the exact details of how sufficient and appropriate the current consequences are for illegal aggression, but at least we agree on the general concept that this is how the game is suppose to work.

Wow. I didn't expect such a happy resolution on page 41 of this threadnought.



There are no real consequences now. When Ovuer wrote that the consequences were very great today they're not. That's the crux of the issue.

An analogy would be in 1855 the consequences of crime x was a 1 pound fine. If the same crime today still resulted in a 1 pound fine then it would hardly be a deterrent. In Eve its even worse because the consequence is much much less than in 2005.


You're talking about the consequences that the game itself imposes on players.

Nobody that understands EVE cares about those. The only consequences that matter in regards to player-generated content are the consequences that other players bring to the field. That is, if gankers aren't facing the consequences of their actions against other players, then it's only the other players that have themselves to blame for not taking action to impose them. Otherwise, ship loss is still a consequence, no matter how 'small' it is, it's still a consequence. And if people actually adapted to what EVE is instead of trying to make it something that it isn't, you would be seeing harsher consequences for gankers on the daily.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#809 - 2017-04-04 11:31:24 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Aaron wrote:
Indeed it is. I'm hoping it will prompt the likes of Dracvlad, Infinity and Herzog to look into what Elite 1 was and how it was played.

As always I admire your enthusiasm and positive thinking. I highly doubt they are interested in a honest discussion though.


Well first of all I played the first Elite and got to Elite status if that helps you both, Aaron stop being so arrogantly smug superior, it gets you into trouble.

And honesty is not something that gankers like you have at all. The twisting and turning, the name calling and the moving of goal posts on this thread has been truly epic, I have been reading this with wry amusement and a large box of popcorn since my last post.

I have said what I needed to on bumping and the fact that it is against the hardness of Eve, I refuted one ganker aligned player saying it will be too hard by detailing kills on the max cargo Charon with 12 characters with SB and Catalyst at a pinch even if the catalyst one was a second hit the maths still add up on the 182,580 EHP and showing that his words were false, anyone with a brain will see that with the cost of such a gank as compared to the reward that the risk reward is way out of kilter.

I pointed out in my first post in here that the issue is not so much the war dec system but the players, in any case I am in 0.0 and enjoying the hell out of it, having PL next door is actually quite fun, but for people like you I doubt you would be up to it...

Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#810 - 2017-04-04 11:31:40 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
1-Dumb people make highsec a low risk/high reward area
2-bumpers can get ganked too
3-pretty sure you're as relevant to PL as you are to this thread

Gf


Add to that a Gila and a Bhal, was a GF in Thrashers, having fun mate.

What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

Are you calling freighter gankers dumb?

No
I'm calling people that don't want to fight back and then come on the forums to make threads like these dumb
Gf

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#811 - 2017-04-04 11:32:18 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Aaron wrote:
Indeed it is. I'm hoping it will prompt the likes of Dracvlad, Infinity and Herzog to look into what Elite 1 was and how it was played.

As always I admire your enthusiasm and positive thinking. I highly doubt they are interested in a honest discussion though.


Well first of all I played the first Elite and got to Elite status if that helps you both, Aaron stop being so arrogantly smug superior, it gets you into trouble.

And honesty is not something that gankers like you have at all. The twisting and turning, the name calling and the moving of goal posts on this thread has been truly epic, I have been reading this with wry amusement and a large box of popcorn since my last post.

I have said what I needed to on bumping and the fact that it is against the hardness of Eve, I refuted one ganker aligned player saying it will be too hard by detailing kills on the max cargo Charon with 12 characters with SB and Catalyst at a pinch even if the catalyst one was a second hit the maths still add up on the 182,580 EHP and showing that his words were false, anyone with a brain will see that with the cost of such a gank as compared to the reward that the risk reward is way out of kilter.

I pointed out in my first post in here that the issue is not so much the war dec system but the players, in any case I am in 0.0 and enjoying the hell out of it, having PL next door is actually quite fun, but for people like you I doubt you would be up to it...


Me, arrogant? My opinion is superior to no one. My opinion is based on the state of current affairs and facts nothing more. My only real point here is that the PvP in this game was originally designed to be harsh. What is your view on this? Why does it seem that you don't have any respect for what the founder wanted?

Most will agree that it is in fact you who is arrogant.

And by the way drac, not all of us can afford to retire at a young age and spend most of our time on eve. All of your posts stink of arrogance and self importance as if you are all knowing.

Accept eve was purposely designed to very very harsh from day 0.

Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#812 - 2017-04-04 11:38:29 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

And now you are complaining that you don't get enough reward for ganking?


So you suggest that the low skilled characters of a low reward area of space can afford that, dang your are being stupid...

I suggest you learn what people mean when they talk about risk/reward and don't confuse it when people talk about player pirating each other.

Tell me, has the fact that the Freighter is more attractive to gank than the bumper to do with the CONCORD game mechanics which are the same for all ships or with the fact that one of them made himself a target by transporting too much valuables?


What makes an area high risk? Are you seriously telling me that null sec is high risk because of NPC BS or dreads, seriously man you have no idea, no idea at all, no wonder you stay in hisec ganking defenceless ships.

Loot means something to you which is why you lot whined over the freighter wreck EHP, isn't that right...

The wreck ehp was demanded by nullsec entities so they could loot caps and supers...

And to be honest, it was not logical for a 10m ehp ship to have a 100hp wreck hahahah

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#813 - 2017-04-04 11:47:59 UTC
Aaron wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Aaron wrote:
Indeed it is. I'm hoping it will prompt the likes of Dracvlad, Infinity and Herzog to look into what Elite 1 was and how it was played.

As always I admire your enthusiasm and positive thinking. I highly doubt they are interested in a honest discussion though.


Well first of all I played the first Elite and got to Elite status if that helps you both, Aaron stop being so arrogantly smug superior, it gets you into trouble.

And honesty is not something that gankers like you have at all. The twisting and turning, the name calling and the moving of goal posts on this thread has been truly epic, I have been reading this with wry amusement and a large box of popcorn since my last post.

I have said what I needed to on bumping and the fact that it is against the hardness of Eve, I refuted one ganker aligned player saying it will be too hard by detailing kills on the max cargo Charon with 12 characters with SB and Catalyst at a pinch even if the catalyst one was a second hit the maths still add up on the 182,580 EHP and showing that his words were false, anyone with a brain will see that with the cost of such a gank as compared to the reward that the risk reward is way out of kilter.

I pointed out in my first post in here that the issue is not so much the war dec system but the players, in any case I am in 0.0 and enjoying the hell out of it, having PL next door is actually quite fun, but for people like you I doubt you would be up to it...


Me, arrogant? My opinion is superior to no one. My opinion is based on the state of current affairs and facts nothing more. My only real point here is that the PvP in this game was originally designed to be harsh. What is your view on this? Why does it seem that you don't have any respect for what the founder wanted?

Most will agree that it is in fact you who is arrogant.

And by the way drac, not all of us can afford to retire at a young age and spend most of our time on eve. All of your posts stink of arrogance and self importance as if you are all knowing.

Accept eve was purposely designed to very very harsh from day 0.


I did not presume that you had not played Elite and you had not made Elite level, that you did on me is arrogance.

If you look at my earlier criticism of bumping you will see that it is based on a segment of players having such an easy game with that naff mechanic, that is against what I see as Eve, in terms of being a hard game. If you really say to me that you think that having the ability to point someone for a long period of time with no consequences to set them up perfectly for the exact fleet to just warp in and get to it then you don't get Eve and I am disappointed in you and I always saw you warts and all as someone who hung tough...

So is Eve only supposed to be tough for some players or all players?

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#814 - 2017-04-04 11:49:02 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
1-Dumb people make highsec a low risk/high reward area
2-bumpers can get ganked too
3-pretty sure you're as relevant to PL as you are to this thread

Gf


Add to that a Gila and a Bhal, was a GF in Thrashers, having fun mate.

What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

Are you calling freighter gankers dumb?

No
I'm calling people that don't want to fight back and then come on the forums to make threads like these dumb
Gf


Except that I fight and blow things up?

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#815 - 2017-04-04 11:55:41 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
1-Dumb people make highsec a low risk/high reward area
2-bumpers can get ganked too
3-pretty sure you're as relevant to PL as you are to this thread

Gf


Add to that a Gila and a Bhal, was a GF in Thrashers, having fun mate.

What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

Are you calling freighter gankers dumb?

No
I'm calling people that don't want to fight back and then come on the forums to make threads like these dumb
Gf


Except that I fight and blow things up?

See, this is why no one likes you in these threads
You keep on avoiding any statement we make instead of having the balls to admit we were right..
It's not that hard to do tbh

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#816 - 2017-04-04 11:57:15 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
The wreck ehp was demanded by nullsec entities so they could loot caps and supers...

And to be honest, it was not logical for a 10m ehp ship to have a 100hp wreck hahahah


Dom, the wreck EHP was logical, that is not the issue, the simple issue was that is was the speed that it got changed when AG started ganking freighter wrecks and more importantly who pushed it to CCP.

It destroyed emergent gameplay, gameplay which CCP seemed to be totally unaware of, but most of all it was the AG players being in the same boat as the gankers and taht gankers failed badly, I was on comms with Loyal and that was so funny, he raged hard, sounded like an enraged miner on heat.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#817 - 2017-04-04 12:01:49 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
The wreck ehp was demanded by nullsec entities so they could loot caps and supers...

And to be honest, it was not logical for a 10m ehp ship to have a 100hp wreck hahahah


Dom, the wreck EHP was logical, that is not the issue, the simple issue was that is was the speed that it got changed when AG started ganking freighter wrecks and more importantly who pushed it to CCP.

It destroyed emergent gameplay, gameplay which CCP seemed to be totally unaware of, but most of all it was the AG players being in the same boat as the gankers and taht gankers failed badly, I was on comms with Loyal and that was so funny, he raged hard, sounded like an enraged miner on heat.

It killed content for Rham and like 7 guys in null
Not a big loss imo, especially if you don't get anything from it

Remind me, who cried so hard that Hyperdunking got nuked in about 2 weeks?
Thought so ;)

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#818 - 2017-04-04 12:04:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
1-Dumb people make highsec a low risk/high reward area
2-bumpers can get ganked too
3-pretty sure you're as relevant to PL as you are to this thread

Gf


Add to that a Gila and a Bhal, was a GF in Thrashers, having fun mate.

What is the loot benefit that you get from a bumper which requires 3 Talos to be sure of, as compared to a freighter.

Are you calling freighter gankers dumb?

No
I'm calling people that don't want to fight back and then come on the forums to make threads like these dumb
Gf


Except that I fight and blow things up?

See, this is why no one likes you in these threads
You keep on avoiding any statement we make instead of having the balls to admit we were right..
It's not that hard to do tbh


Why, because I point out the reality and you cannot call me a carebear to refute me personally and you twist and turn to make points that expose even more that certain gankers have a huge advantage that makes it easy, and they do all they can to defend that, this is actually indefensible in terms of this game but you chaps do and I love it...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Black Pedro
Mine.
#819 - 2017-04-04 12:06:36 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

There are no real consequences now. When Ovuer wrote that the consequences were very great today they're not. That's the crux of the issue.
I think we are making progress then. Ok, so if you were CCP IZ, what three changes would you make to impose sufficient consequences on illegal aggression that would still fit with the vision you, I and CCP Oveur have of a highsec where suicide attacks are still possible?

See, from my perspective, I think criminals already have almost all the consequences possible, certainly once they are an outlaw and below -5 security status. They have an infallible NPC police force that prevents them from using real combat ships or defending themselves, are free-to-shoot to all the other players, lose their ship on any illegal attack in a fraction of a minute, have killrights against them that prevent them from raising their security status to avoid retribution, and are given a time-out from playing after each illegal action. You could make some of these harsher - a longer lock out time or killrights last longer and so forth but it wouldn't change things much in my opinion as they are already so harsh that criminals are never in space except en route to a target and then only in disposable ships, but if there are some you think need raising that would give sufficient consequences to criminals I would be happy to hear which ones. You could add some more - like locking -5's out of NPC stations, but that wouldn't do anything to the organized criminals who already have shown to be able to operate out of Bowheads/Orcas or citadels, only make life even more difficult for budding criminals.

Or is your problem just with the math that it costs too little to explode another ship in highsec? If so, what value do you think a freighter should be able to carry and not be a target for highsec pirates?

Which consequences should be dialed up more or added, and at what point will you consider them sufficient?

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#820 - 2017-04-04 12:06:58 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
The wreck ehp was demanded by nullsec entities so they could loot caps and supers...

And to be honest, it was not logical for a 10m ehp ship to have a 100hp wreck hahahah


Dom, the wreck EHP was logical, that is not the issue, the simple issue was that is was the speed that it got changed when AG started ganking freighter wrecks and more importantly who pushed it to CCP.

It destroyed emergent gameplay, gameplay which CCP seemed to be totally unaware of, but most of all it was the AG players being in the same boat as the gankers and taht gankers failed badly, I was on comms with Loyal and that was so funny, he raged hard, sounded like an enraged miner on heat.

It killed content for Rham and like 7 guys in null
Not a big loss imo, especially if you don't get anything from it

Remind me, who cried so hard that Hyperdunking got nuked in about 2 weeks?
Thought so ;)


I don't know where you pulled two weeks from, lmao it was a lot longer than that.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp