These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Selfdestructing during combat: No killmail

Author
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#41 - 2012-03-14 21:06:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Ines Tegator
Mangold wrote:

Oh yes, as you seem to be active in pvp I guess we should listen you.


Put that epeen away, you'll put an eye out.

ps, for the observer who thinks his adhom has merit, we all know that everybody only has 1 character yo.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2012-03-14 23:19:12 UTC
Aqriue wrote:
Mangold wrote:
[quote=Scatim Helicon]Self
I've killed my fair share of carriers/dreads and one missed killmail doosent really matter to me but I think there's something missing in the game when it's so easy to avoid a killmail by self destructing. That has happened to me personally twice the last 2 weeks and I've lost count on how many that has self destructed in my face (it's way more than 15 by now). Yesterday's self destruct happened when he was at 25% structure so there's no arguing that he wouldn't had died to our small gang anyway.

And this is why it is fine as right now. If you can fail 15 times, then you can fail, fail, and just keep on failing like a loser.

Seriously, if you can't figure out that you don't have enough fire power and can't think to have a cap on stand by to cyno in or fly with a few more people (seriously, 25% structure will vaporize quickly with even 2 more people), then yeah you don't deserve it. More then a dozen times, you would of thought by now that you could of found a working solution instead of "CCP, I fail badly at this game. Please make it easier to put salve on my ego." Just as bad as those idiots that kept on taking on Titan Fleets in battleships, obvious solution without CCP interfence was to bring your own damn cap ships but they didn't have any and just kept on sticking their face in the door only to get punched by a Titan repeatedly (its like, you can't learn it doesn't work so why keep on trying it ? Adapt and bring those cap ships of your own or just go home)

Next up, lets ask CCP to make Hulks immune to being ganked...if you lose 2 or 3 because you keep going AFK then well its about time CCP fix that issue cause the idiot just can't figure out how to keep it alive. (Hint: This means, the more stupid you act and whine about it, then its justifiable that CCP just needs to fix the mistakes so you don't make them anymore amirite? Roll ).

You're still failing to give any reason why it should stay the way it is.

You're arguing that this is a bad idea because... making Hulks immune is a bad idea. Great non sequitur there.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Ruthless Erection
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2012-03-15 01:14:32 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
While it's pretty obvious OP went in alliance chat to ask for support for his thread, I have to agree with the premise. Self destruct should be for denying loot drop, not for denying killmails.

So you don't care about killmails and think this would be a terrible change. Some people do care about killmails, and they are in the game, so why shouldn't they? You might as well remove killmails if I can decide to deny them to my attackers.

To the "bring moar dps" crowd, the attackers brought enough DPS to kill the ship - ergo, they deserve the killmail when the ship is destroyed.


Keep talking as if you have any alliance mates, Oh wait, we killed them, took your space, and **** all over you.

Thanks! Come again!
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2012-03-15 01:25:29 UTC
Ruthless Erection wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
While it's pretty obvious OP went in alliance chat to ask for support for his thread, I have to agree with the premise. Self destruct should be for denying loot drop, not for denying killmails.

So you don't care about killmails and think this would be a terrible change. Some people do care about killmails, and they are in the game, so why shouldn't they? You might as well remove killmails if I can decide to deny them to my attackers.

To the "bring moar dps" crowd, the attackers brought enough DPS to kill the ship - ergo, they deserve the killmail when the ship is destroyed.


Keep talking as if you have any alliance mates, Oh wait, we killed them, took your space, and **** all over you.

Thanks! Come again!

I don't even know how to respond to such obvious bullshit.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Messoroz
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#45 - 2012-03-15 02:01:29 UTC
Gods Messenger wrote:
Since quite a while, alliances in 0.0 started selfdestructing their supers and carriers when they get tackled in a helpless situation

They even have forum orders about it and penalities for users who do not self-destruct and make big losses for the alliance.

Losses have become a big issue for alliances, since they show up on their killboards and make them look bad in public. So instead of taking the losses, people just self destruct their shiny ships.

What I am asking CCP for is, please change self destruct to generate killmails and make the self destruct the biggest damage dealer on the killmail, just like bubbles show up on killmails aswell as NPCs.

There shouldnt be no killmail losses in eve anymore, since, even when killmails are not supported by eve, killboards have become so important to the comunity.


Stop being butthurt that a super self destructed on you.
Asudem
Asen of Asgard
#46 - 2012-03-15 03:23:31 UTC
Why Kms when SD? SD is no kill so why a KM? Its a loss, but no kill like getting ganked, concorded ect. or even killed by NPCs in mission grids.
Zombo Brian
Doomheim
#47 - 2012-03-15 08:41:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Zombo Brian
wow, is it so important for you people to show your e-peen to everybody else? its a GAME guys and lads

everyone who pays to much attention to KBs or judges people to be good/bad because of it deserves a kick in the balls

just because a alliance has a bad KB don't mean the people are noobs all along, also a good KB doesnt mean you are looking at a decent alliance/corp whatever

example: someone sacrifices his ECM ship to let a tackled friend with a much more expensive ship escape from the tackler while the blob is moving in, he has a loss and no kill, is he a bad player?

"hur dur hur we killed one cap more tahn you're allaince we are teh best!"

edit: if a velator shoots you for 1 damage, and you self destruct, should the velator be on the killmail? yes, but the player loosing the ship should decide wether to post the killmail or not
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#48 - 2012-03-15 10:32:19 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
yes, no killmail when selfdestruct.

Why?
Other than it being the status quo, has anybody given a legitimate reason why self destructs are a valid reason to deny killmails?


I assumed it was obvious.
well its because you arent killing anything formally, if the ship is selfdestructed.
Arpad Elo
Intellectual Wookies
#49 - 2012-03-15 12:44:16 UTC
I'd like to see self-destruct leave behind a wreck. It's fair for the people that earned the kill, and it's not a big deal to leave a few wrecks around.

I'm not sure about this second point but perhaps it would be interesting to have some way of destroying the wreck of a ship that as your ship is disabled. Maybe a mod that you can fit, etc. This would be neat for fleets where you know that you're unlikely to hold the field and where you'll take a lot of losses (say like a t1 cruiser gang attacking a huge fleet, where you're hoping to win via isk efficiency but know that you're otherwise dead... might as well deny them loot with that strategy, right?). How to do that, not sure, but giving us more strategic options that require some planning is almost always good. :)
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#50 - 2012-03-15 15:56:12 UTC
Zombo Brian wrote:
wow, is it so important for you people to show your e-peen to everybody else? its a GAME guys and lads

everyone who pays to much attention to KBs or judges people to be good/bad because of it deserves a kick in the balls

just because a alliance has a bad KB don't mean the people are noobs all along, also a good KB doesnt mean you are looking at a decent alliance/corp whatever

example: someone sacrifices his ECM ship to let a tackled friend with a much more expensive ship escape from the tackler while the blob is moving in, he has a loss and no kill, is he a bad player?

"hur dur hur we killed one cap more tahn you're allaince we are teh best!"

edit: if a velator shoots you for 1 damage, and you self destruct, should the velator be on the killmail? yes, but the player loosing the ship should decide wether to post the killmail or not

Herpin your derp, kill boards can and are used to judge approximately how good a player is. As stated earlier in this thread, beyond a certain point they require more than a cursory glance in order to make that assessment. This means seeing what they fly, what fleet comps they usually fly in and the role they play. Same goes for an alliance.

Most skilled PvP pilots in Eve regularly catch carriers and force them to self destruct, because unless they choose not to hit that SD button it is almost always the end result bar a titan bridge or handy supercap hot drop. Similarly most of us have seen supers and titans self destruct in turn.

You can deny the validity of kill boards all you want, I'll even admit myself they aren't perfect, but unless you're willing to post on a character that has one I'd bet my favorite hurricane that you're just a bitter newbie, with a terrible kill board and no PvP experience.

[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]

Herold Oldtimer
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#51 - 2012-03-15 17:31:31 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Herold Oldtimer wrote:
So it can be used as a way to keep track of progress. Cool, thanks.

Why not suggest however that instead of having the game generate a "kill-mail" for selfdestructing, have the insurance not be payed to the player selfdestructing. Then if someone decides to selfdestruct, not only will they lose a ship, but also the money it took to make it. Better then to be killed and get something back.

Just a thought.

Untill then I guess [print screen] can be your good friend

Because for most players/alliances (myself included) a few billion isn't that big of a deal?


Then preventing insurance payouts sounds like the prefect solution. Players want isk sinks, capitals cost a lot of isk. If they selfdestruct to save face then they have thrown that isk right out the window, or down the sink. Or they let themselves be killed and will then atleast get back the base cost of the ship in exchange for a killmail.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#52 - 2012-03-16 05:14:41 UTC
Herold Oldtimer wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Herold Oldtimer wrote:
So it can be used as a way to keep track of progress. Cool, thanks.

Why not suggest however that instead of having the game generate a "kill-mail" for selfdestructing, have the insurance not be payed to the player selfdestructing. Then if someone decides to selfdestruct, not only will they lose a ship, but also the money it took to make it. Better then to be killed and get something back.

Just a thought.

Untill then I guess [print screen] can be your good friend

Because for most players/alliances (myself included) a few billion isn't that big of a deal?


Then preventing insurance payouts sounds like the prefect solution. Players want isk sinks, capitals cost a lot of isk. If they selfdestruct to save face then they have thrown that isk right out the window, or down the sink. Or they let themselves be killed and will then atleast get back the base cost of the ship in exchange for a killmail.

Yeah, I like this solution even better.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#53 - 2012-03-16 11:39:08 UTC
Herold Oldtimer wrote:
Then preventing insurance payouts sounds like the prefect solution. Players want isk sinks, capitals cost a lot of isk. If they selfdestruct to save face then they have thrown that isk right out the window, or down the sink. Or they let themselves be killed and will then atleast get back the base cost of the ship in exchange for a killmail.

a) It's not going to be a significant ISK sink.

b) You really do not get a lot from super/titan insurance.

c) Not many people actually bother insuring their capitals. So the impact would likely be negligible.

I'm not against revoking insurance payouts for SD on the grounds that it's just pretty silly, but it would effect WHs pretty badly and it wouldn't really have much of an impact on self destructing supers, titans or carriers.

[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]

Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#54 - 2012-03-16 12:00:45 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Herold Oldtimer wrote:
Then preventing insurance payouts sounds like the prefect solution. Players want isk sinks, capitals cost a lot of isk. If they selfdestruct to save face then they have thrown that isk right out the window, or down the sink. Or they let themselves be killed and will then atleast get back the base cost of the ship in exchange for a killmail.

a) It's not going to be a significant ISK sink.


getting killmail for a ship you didnt kill, is even less significant.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#55 - 2012-03-16 15:18:54 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Herold Oldtimer wrote:
Then preventing insurance payouts sounds like the prefect solution. Players want isk sinks, capitals cost a lot of isk. If they selfdestruct to save face then they have thrown that isk right out the window, or down the sink. Or they let themselves be killed and will then atleast get back the base cost of the ship in exchange for a killmail.

a) It's not going to be a significant ISK sink.


getting killmail for a ship you didnt kill, is even less significant.

Hiding a loss mail, for a ship you just lost, is even less significant.

See, I can write sentences that don't make sense and have nothing to do with game mechanics too.

[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]

Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#56 - 2012-03-16 15:33:23 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:

Hiding a loss mail, for a ship you just lost, is even less significant.

See, I can write sentences that don't make sense and have nothing to do with game mechanics too.


see, that statement makes absolutely sense, this is why the "issue" hasnt being adressed much by CCP.
Because its not significant.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#57 - 2012-03-16 15:39:48 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:

Hiding a loss mail, for a ship you just lost, is even less significant.

See, I can write sentences that don't make sense and have nothing to do with game mechanics too.


see, that statement makes absolutely sense, this is why the "issue" hasnt being adressed much by CCP.
Because its not significant.

In your opinion, because you're a care bear. Unfortunately that's not the only play style in the game, and if you really think CCP in any way shares your views on kill mails you may want to ask them why they just added implants.

Anyway, that's a moot point, kill mails are a part of the game whether you like it or not. And in terms of game mechanics two minutes is not a realistic amount of time for any fleet to kill a super carrier or titan, let alone multiples of them. Period. There is literally not arguing with that.

[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]

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#58 - 2012-03-16 15:44:29 UTC
Gods Messenger wrote:
mxzf wrote:
This thread again? Learn to search before posting.


I DONT KARE


We dont care about your complaint. Working as intended, bring moar deeps, bring a super.

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#59 - 2012-03-16 15:48:09 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
Gods Messenger wrote:
mxzf wrote:
This thread again? Learn to search before posting.


I DONT KARE


We dont care about your complaint. Working as intended, bring moar deeps, bring a super.

Lol, what's the most common ratting ship in sov 0.0? A carrier.

So now every single roaming gang needs super capital back up. Nice one.

[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]

Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#60 - 2012-03-16 15:52:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
Simi Kusoni wrote:

Anyway, that's a moot point, kill mails are a part of the game whether you like it or not.

SD without killmails are part of the game also; everything is part of the game whatever CCP decides to implement, so not a real argument for or agains something.

Simi Kusoni wrote:
And in terms of game mechanics two minutes is not a realistic amount of time for any fleet to kill a super carrier or titan, let alone multiples of them. Period. There is literally not arguing with that.

who said there should be a mandatory KM for everything? SD is designed to not generate one - its one of the game mechanics you are talking about.