These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Self destruct disabled by warp disrupt/scram

Author
Sydious
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2012-01-02 17:21:33 UTC
I don't know if this has been proposed in the past, but a quick search didn't turn up anything similar.

In the same vein of how the logoffski trick has been removed in crucible, the self destruct is the only tactic that's still bothering supercap killers. So I propose a new idea that shouldn't be dificult to implement. As long as a ship is warp disrupted or scrammed, the self destruct shouldn't work. The only exception to this rule should be pods because you can't eject from a pod if somebody chooses to grief you by holding you in place.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2 - 2012-01-02 17:47:26 UTC
Because if a ship self destructs, it isn't just as dead?

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#3 - 2012-01-02 18:10:38 UTC
Sydious wrote:
I don't know if this has been proposed in the past, but a quick search didn't turn up anything similar.

In the same vein of how the logoffski trick has been removed in crucible, the self destruct is the only tactic that's still bothering supercap killers. So I propose a new idea that shouldn't be dificult to implement. As long as a ship is warp disrupted or scrammed, the self destruct shouldn't work. The only exception to this rule should be pods because you can't eject from a pod if somebody chooses to grief you by holding you in place.

Meh it's been suggested, not implemented. Also, it has some issues with forcing people to eject.

Your suggestion, extending suicide timers based on EHP/size, providing KMs whilst still denying loot, providing loss mails without the aggressors on etc. have all been suggested before. Think it passed one of those silly CSM vote things too.

If CCP haven't implemented it by now, chances are they aren't going to.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Sydious
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2012-01-02 19:13:07 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Because if a ship self destructs, it isn't just as dead?

A dead super is nice, a dead super with a sexy killmail is better.
Messoroz
AQUILA INC
#5 - 2012-01-02 20:07:49 UTC
Because it would be griefable by pointing a ship and going afk(and for some reason the super not having any drones or neuts fitted). Self destruct is an option for when you don't want to sit there all day.
Endeavour Starfleet
#6 - 2012-01-02 20:18:12 UTC
No, I do not support this.

If someone decides to self destruct to deny a killmail and loot it is valid tactic that encourages you to bring more DPS to do the job in time.
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#7 - 2012-01-02 20:22:16 UTC
Point of self-destruction is prevention of loot, not the killmail. Face it, no matter whether the killmail is made or not, you still forced your enemy to self-destruct and his loss is real.

Making the self-destruction impossible with some module on enemy ship makes no sense neither from game mechanic nor fiction point of view. Not only it would prevent the valid game mechanic of denying loot to the enemy, how can you explain someone to disable the explosives on enemy ship remotely? By magic?

E-peen don't count as a valid reason for changing the way the game works. Grow up.
leviticus ander
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2012-01-02 20:28:01 UTC
why not just get them to fix the kill mail system? if you would still get a KM for doing damage to a ship that self destructed, then I think a lot of this whining would be averted. make it so it just checks for who did the most damage, and give them the KM.
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#9 - 2012-01-02 20:39:24 UTC
leviticus ander wrote:
why not just get them to fix the kill mail system? if you would still get a KM for doing damage to a ship that self destructed, then I think a lot of this whining would be averted. make it so it just checks for who did the most damage, and give them the KM.


Now this is one sensible idea.
Endeavour Starfleet
#10 - 2012-01-02 20:39:52 UTC
leviticus ander wrote:
why not just get them to fix the kill mail system? if you would still get a KM for doing damage to a ship that self destructed, then I think a lot of this whining would be averted. make it so it just checks for who did the most damage, and give them the KM.


Because it encourages group play. Just bring enough DPS to kill the target before its timer runs out.
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#11 - 2012-01-02 20:44:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Nestara Aldent
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
leviticus ander wrote:
why not just get them to fix the kill mail system? if you would still get a KM for doing damage to a ship that self destructed, then I think a lot of this whining would be averted. make it so it just checks for who did the most damage, and give them the KM.


Because it encourages group play. Just bring enough DPS to kill the target before its timer runs out.


And if you have large enough group already, but your resources are stretched thin?

In recent PL vs -A- titan showdown two -A- titans were destroyed by PL and appeared on the killmail. Other six self-destructed.

And PL had 22 titans I believe and hundreds of subcaps at their disposal. No alliance can bring much more.
Endeavour Starfleet
#12 - 2012-01-02 20:47:11 UTC
Then they get to choose. Ridding the field of enemies or getting jucy killmails.

Seems balanced to me.
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#13 - 2012-01-02 20:50:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nestara Aldent
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Then they get to choose. Ridding the field of enemies or getting jucy killmails.

Seems balanced to me.


Except your idea of balance is completely arbitrary. You dislike pvp so you disagree with every sensible proposal about pvp out of spite.

They couldn't choose. They couldn't kill all eight of them in time to prevent self-destruction.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#14 - 2012-01-02 20:59:20 UTC
Nestara Aldent wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Then they get to choose. Ridding the field of enemies or getting jucy killmails.

Seems balanced to me.


Except your idea of balance is completely arbitrary. You dislike pvp so you disagree with every sensible proposal about pvp out of spite.

They couldn't chose. They couldn't dps all eight of them in time to prevent self-destruction.

It always makes me laugh when people say "bring more DPS".

Then two threads over you see the same people QQing about blobs.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Endeavour Starfleet
#15 - 2012-01-02 21:05:59 UTC
Nestara Aldent wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Then they get to choose. Ridding the field of enemies or getting jucy killmails.

Seems balanced to me.


Except your idea of balance is completely arbitrary. You dislike pvp so you disagree with every sensible proposal about pvp out of spite.

They couldn't choose. They couldn't kill all eight of them in time to prevent self-destruction.


Please don't use libel towards me. This has nothing to do with spite. And I do like PVP.

They couldn't clear all of them in time so they obviously focused DPS on ones they could kill in time (Or the pilot was silly enough not to self D when it was obvious he was going down without time for another DD)

That is why it has a timer. It is balanced. Giving a killmail for a SD will lessen the need of group play (even if it is less in that particular case) and thus I am against it.
Goose99
#16 - 2012-01-02 21:11:12 UTC
Sydious wrote:
Whine & butthurtOops

Nestara Aldent wrote:
Additional butthurtOops


Kb humping is an inalienable right. I blob, therefore I deserve epeen pumpage. In fact, CCP should just give me free kms.Roll

Get a life.Lol
Hadez411
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2012-01-02 21:26:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Hadez411
Giving them the killmail would also be my idea of a solution. Its rather discouraging to building a kiting ship to catch, as was my case, a raven navy issue and widdle it down to nothing all by your self like the big ol pimp that you are... just to see him self destruct and rob you of any proof of your accomplishment.


ORRRRRRRRRRRRR..... now here's where it gets interesting...

change it so that if you self destruct, a HUGE percentage of your modules drop and alot more than normal can be salvaged from the wreck. Lets say, because it was a much more calculated destruction of your ship than having mis-aimed holes blown through your hull.
This way, you are going to lose either way, by feeding your enemies your mods and salvage or by losing it on a mail. This will, Im pretty sure, encourage people to just suck it up and die or self destruct strategically rather than spitefully, so that an ally can scoop their stuff and run or they can come back after their side wins the fight but took some losses, and scoop their stuff.




All this or drastically increase self destruct time on aggressed ships so it can no longer be used as a little hateful way to get the last word in on someone who is kickin the crap out of you fair and square.
Endeavour Starfleet
#18 - 2012-01-02 21:33:39 UTC
I will never support doing anything that affects the SD causing no module or loot drop. Why would you NOT set charges on your modules and cargo bay?

System is fine the way it is.
Bearilian
Man Eating Bears
#19 - 2012-01-02 21:33:45 UTC
not supported, if someone wants to self destruct, there should never be anythign prolonging the fight
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#20 - 2012-01-02 21:42:21 UTC
The only true solution to these issues is to remove killmails from the game entirely.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

123Next pageLast page