Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 15, 2024, 12:35:46 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Eve Online  |  Topic: Winter Expansion - Desperate times 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Winter Expansion - Desperate times  (Read 73426 times)
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11843


Reply #105 on: October 30, 2011, 04:32:23 AM

The defender can do plenty to prevent it.

You only have to survive 6 seconds for concord to save you. If you have ship sophisticated enough to be worth killing, you are more than capable of fitting a tank or using logistics support.

If you doing something immoral to attract ammunition delivery, like blue ice mining you can stop, and mine any other type of ice in the game.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
ajax34i
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2527


Reply #106 on: October 30, 2011, 06:27:05 AM

It's sensible because it's not really a huge nerf to suicide ganking; the amount gained from the insurance (for the ship) is an afterthought in many cases, as the weaponry required for the alpha strike is more expensive.  It would move the threshold of cargo value at which gankers attack up a little bit, but not much.  The change would appease a lot of suicide gank victims without really doing anything to repay them or reduce the number of attacks.
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #107 on: October 30, 2011, 06:35:12 AM

Removing insurance from high sec gankers?  Sensible.  What we get?   :CCP: 

CVA have been peddling this age old how to fix our Eve mantra since I can remember. But I think I and others have said before, CCP would have to open a whole new department just to handle the influx of petitions from noobs who genuninely got Concorded and didn't receive insurance. So you have CCP hire all those extra petition staff just to make ganking a teeny weeny bit more of a hindrance, but in no way stop people doing it. You would have to do something else to prevent ganking and to be honest I'm not sure if you should eliminate the kick in the balls parts of the game.

But if you want to you're doing it wrong with that suggestion.


I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #108 on: October 30, 2011, 06:47:52 AM

An alternative approach, just off the top of my head, could be insurance payback for the victims cargo.

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
Reg
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5274


Reply #109 on: October 30, 2011, 06:50:53 AM

Just have all of a destroyed ships' cargo also be destroyed.
Brolan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1395


Reply #110 on: October 30, 2011, 07:55:51 AM

An alternative approach, just off the top of my head, could be insurance payback for the victims cargo.

Think of all the scams that would spawn.
Brolan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1395


Reply #111 on: October 30, 2011, 08:27:39 AM

Just have all of a destroyed ships' cargo also be destroyed.

Not a bad idea.  I always thought idea of blowing up a ship, and then having some of the cargo survive intact in easy to pickup containers, was silly.  If you wanted to recover cargo from a wreak it should be like salvaging.

But if you JUST wanted to loot cargo you could require the gank ships to disable all offensive weapons, web, dock, and board the cargo ship.  You could resolve the boarding combat with a mini-game or make it part of Dust.  This also means the cargo ship wouldn't have to be destroyed, just disabled.  The gankers could get all of the cargo they wanted and not just some (or none) of it.
Reg
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5274


Reply #112 on: October 30, 2011, 08:32:44 AM

That's an interesting idea. Too bad CCP isn't capable of anything more demanding than changing a data entry in a spreadsheet these days.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11843


Reply #113 on: October 30, 2011, 09:44:09 AM

Just have all of a destroyed ships' cargo also be destroyed.

Part of the problem with this is that hi sec pvp isn't some kind of unforeseen abomination, it is the game working exactly as designed.

People who carry billions of isk of cargo are certainly rich enough to be able to afford to protect it. The fact that they have to do so is what keeps transportation a relevant consideration, this causes regional market variation which is a critical part of the way the economic game works in eve.

I appreciate this would be a terrible mechanic in WoW, but hard travel has to be a fact of life if you want EVE's economy in your game.

As for invalidating insurance, it would only shift the equation by a few tens of millions of isk, which isn't a big deal since the aggressor will be aiming for 1 billion+ targets if he is ganking for profit, and won't care about a 50M payout if he is on a purely altruistic mission such as the current goon ops in gallente space. It would, however, screw up new players who accidentally shoot the wrong thing, so it is probably not a good idea.

People generally overstate the impact hisec pvp has on EVE. It is an issue if you are rich enough to be a target and therefore rich enough to protect yourself. It is an issue if you don't pay attention to easily avoidable and very rare ~player generated content~ such as a hulkaggeddon or Goonswarm's campaign to liberate blue ice. Aside from that the average EVE player in high sec has zero reason to fear attack.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #114 on: October 30, 2011, 11:33:09 AM

Think of all the scams that would spawn.

I can't think of any to be honest.

Just have all of a destroyed ships' cargo also be destroyed.

That would defintely be the way to eliminate ganking altogether. Not sure if that should be done, I guess people still can't accept that Eve is supposed to be harsh world filled with pitfalls.

« Last Edit: October 30, 2011, 11:55:52 AM by Amarr HM »

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
Reg
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5274


Reply #115 on: October 30, 2011, 11:50:51 AM


That would defintely be the way to eliminate ganking altogether.

Oh I'm sure there would still be quite a few that would keep ganking just for the fun of it.
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #116 on: October 30, 2011, 12:10:40 PM

CCP doesn't want highsec ganking gone is the thing and not because of any economy concerns or whatever.

The guys at the top of CCP, are all old school 'azzrape' UO players.

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
Brolan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1395


Reply #117 on: October 30, 2011, 06:04:21 PM

If you pay off stolen cargo with insurance you just doubled it's value for all intents and purposes.  So what's to keep one player from loading high value cargo into a T1 Indy, then flying out to be purposely ganked by a friend.  He gets his money back and the friend sells the cargo and gives him a kick back.  Then they do it again, and again, and again.
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #118 on: October 30, 2011, 06:17:13 PM

I was never meaning to payout full value of cargo that would be awful, payout base mineral value or perhaps some base item costs in the same way as how ship insurance works. Likewise you still have to pay an insurance fee even if your journey is safe. It could be easily tied into the courier contracts.

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
Kageru
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4549


Reply #119 on: October 30, 2011, 09:16:12 PM


It makes no sense to get recompensed for a concorded ship and removing that compensation would make suicide ganking a little less lucrative.

But it won't happen because, as said, CCP think a gank is good PvP gameplay.

Is a man not entitled to the hurf of his durf?
- Simond
Surlyboi
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10963

eat a bag of dicks


Reply #120 on: October 31, 2011, 07:58:08 AM

That and even if they did remove all monetary incentives for ganking, there'd still be a segment of the population that did it just to farm the fucking tears.

Tuned in, immediately get to watch cringey Ubisoft talking head offering her deepest sympathies to the families impacted by the Orlando shooting while flanked by a man in a giraffe suit and some sort of "horrifically garish neon costumes through the ages" exhibit or something.  We need to stop this fucking planet right now and sort some shit out. -Kail
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11843


Reply #121 on: October 31, 2011, 08:23:44 AM

Also, if ccp's aim was to stop hisec pvp it would be much easier to just prevent people shooting each other in hisec.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Phildo
Contributor
Posts: 5872


Reply #122 on: October 31, 2011, 09:05:09 AM

The first time I ever got concorded, I was in Amarr chasing wardecs with an RRBS fleet.  We had parked on one of the gates when a red non-wartarget Vagabond landed there with us.  I opened fire without realizing what I was doing, then panicked and started calling for reps when Concord showed up and began killing me.  Half my fleet was blown up because of a rookie mistake.  I'm pretty sure one or two of you were there for this.  If insurance was removed entirely from getting Concorded, people who make rookie mistakes like that would also get screwed over.

Why do you folks hate newbies?

PS We were fighting Ushra'Khan at the time.  Do you want Ushra'Khan to win?
Gets
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1147


Reply #123 on: October 31, 2011, 09:08:07 AM

Hybrid and (tiny) T2 ammo blog: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012

Railgun change explained in graph form:

eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11843


Reply #124 on: October 31, 2011, 09:49:56 AM

The reason that graph is bullshit, is that it ignores how railgun accuracy is hilariously bad. The change to blasters makes sense, but blaster boats need a hell of a speed increase for anyone to care.

It doesn't matter how much damage a Diemos is missing for.

Not that I have a problem with this, Caldari have missiles, Gallente have drones, and in EVE there is no reason to obsess over every weapon system being equal.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #125 on: October 31, 2011, 10:44:23 AM

The first time I ever got concorded, I was in Amarr chasing wardecs with an RRBS fleet.  We had parked on one of the gates when a red non-wartarget Vagabond landed there with us.  I opened fire without realizing what I was doing, then panicked and started calling for reps when Concord showed up and began killing me.  Half my fleet was blown up because of a rookie mistake.  I'm pretty sure one or two of you were there for this.  If insurance was removed entirely from getting Concorded, people who make rookie mistakes like that would also get screwed over.

Indeed I remember that and everytime someone brings up the remove insurance argument it's the first thing that springs to mind. Also the time I tried to shoot up an asteroid in my first Level 1 mission.

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
Thrawn
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3089


Reply #126 on: October 31, 2011, 10:54:50 AM

would make suicide ganking a little less lucrative.

Would probably have almost no noticable change on the amount of people doing it.

"OH NO, I only made 500mil this gank instead of 550mil!"

Almost all of this ganking stuff needs to be broken to it's own thread, none of it is anything that hasn't been said a bunch before.  swamp poop

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."
5150
Terracotta Army
Posts: 951


Reply #127 on: November 03, 2011, 06:03:29 AM

The problem being, BS guns can't hit a goddamn thing.  Especially without significant investment in gunnery skills.  So they've invented a wonder ship that has a battleship's sig and can't hit anything smaller than a battleship but has much worse tank than a battleship.  Where do I sign up?  Anyone who can fly a battleship should definitely be in one rather than one of these things, unless they have some amazing bonus we haven't been made aware of yet, or cost like 10 mil.

Given the prices (at least at release) of the tier 1 (Ferox was what? 25mil at launch) & 2 (Drake is about 35mil?) BC's I can't see the tier 3 BC being significantly cheaper than a tier 1 BS (~50mil).

Not seeing the point myself
ajax34i
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2527


Reply #128 on: November 03, 2011, 10:54:22 AM

Also if you look at the Amarr battlecruiser model (they just released a blog about it), it clearly has only 4 turret hardpoints.  Thus, yes it's a battlecruiser that has battleship guns, but CCP never promised they'd be 8-slot gunships.  So, half the tank, half the DPS, same price, similar sig radius, skills for T2 large guns still required, probably more cap/juice issues than a battleship (cause I'm assuming smaller capacitor), and possibly issues with not enough cargo space for ammo.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2011, 10:57:09 AM by ajax34i »
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11843


Reply #129 on: November 03, 2011, 12:29:10 PM

The database leak listed it as 8 guns.

While that leak may be wrong, I have more faith in that than I do in concept art.

Especially when actual in game art doesn't always match the number of installed turrets anyway.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11843


Reply #130 on: November 03, 2011, 12:30:41 PM

Also I think is very unlikely that an Amarr ship is going to suffer ammo capacity issues jesus christ.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2011, 12:51:58 PM by eldaec »

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
tgr
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3366

Just another victim of cyber age discrimination.


Reply #131 on: November 03, 2011, 12:32:57 PM

Them crystals are huge.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11843


Reply #132 on: November 03, 2011, 12:44:52 PM

I say that, but OTOH running incursions occaisionally my absolution can literally not carry enough scorch.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #133 on: November 05, 2011, 07:02:46 AM

As a previous subscriber who has very little intention of returning unless they improve the game in all the areas that I feel deserve attention. First I never understood why the game had to be so grindy in the first place, they already have subscriber income and I'm sure there's more ways to keep the gameplay addictive and engrossing without making you click on your screen a hundred times a minute.

hings I'd personally like to see changed/fixed.

* Fix 0.0 obviously top of the list. Start with the tedium that is POS shoots. See below.
* Fix titans so they can take out POSes alone. I don't mean instantly jesus just fix the whole mechanic.
* Reduce 24 hour timer for clone jumps it's archaic.
* Fix bounty hunter system (will never happen so whatever)
* Proper collisions with collidables
* Password security needs to be replaced with a proper user control system, having to wash rinse repeat passwords is tedious.
* Fix all cluttery and tedious GUI controls
* More incentives for small groups or people who want to PvP solo from time to time
* Ignore assault frigs, they work as intended and the Minmatar ones are pretty decent anyway why all the fuss?

TLDR; make Eve less boring & more fun.

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
Gets
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1147


Reply #134 on: November 05, 2011, 08:16:17 AM

I'll get right on it shouldn't be too hard.
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #135 on: November 05, 2011, 10:40:41 AM

I knew I could count on you. After all these are desperate times.

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #136 on: November 05, 2011, 10:48:45 AM

I think it's amazing the reaction Mittani has wrestled from CCP, very impressed. Just hope they have the wherewithall to improve the game experience.

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
calapine
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7352

Solely responsible for the thread on "The Condom Wall."


Reply #137 on: November 05, 2011, 10:49:28 AM

Well, for what its worth, POS, 0.0 and GUI issues are in the pipeline.

Restoration is a perfectly valid school of magic!
Amarr HM
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3066


Reply #138 on: November 05, 2011, 10:54:07 AM

That's good to hear, also this tickled my fancy, I remember Endie giving out about how dated the skyboxes were for a game based solely in space. Baby steps I suppose.

I'm going to escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the Earth, obliterate it and you with it.
calapine
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7352

Solely responsible for the thread on "The Condom Wall."


Reply #139 on: November 05, 2011, 10:57:29 AM

Shamelessly stolen from the official forums:

Mechanical changes:

1. New ships: 3rd tier battlecruisers with oversized guns
   Minmatar: Tornado
   Gallente: Talos
   Amarr: Oracle
   Caldari: Naga
‪2.‬ New T2 modules
‪3.‬Adjustments to Assault Frigate bonuses (Delayed)
‪4.‬ Balancing for hybrid weapons and ships
‪5.‬ Balancing for T2 ammunition
‪6.‬ Adjustments and balancing to capitals and super-capitals (exact changes to fighter drones seem not to be set in stone)
-- Additional information: Minmatar capital ship balancing, re-thinking the initially proposed Fighter nerf
‪7.‬ Time dialation
‪8.‬ Something with Faction Warfare (specifics unannounced!)
‪9.‬ Something with new EWAR drones (specifics unannounced!)
‪10.‬ Something about T2 rigs manufacturing (specifics unannounced! possibly t1->t2 salvage conversion)
‪11.‬ Player-deployed Customs Offices for P.I.
‪12.‬ Loot All Button on wrecks
‪13.‬ Session change timer changed from 30 seconds to 20 seconds (on sisi)
‪14.‬ Nullsec: increased value of individual anomalies
‪15.‬ Corporation bookmarks (limit 250) and updates to BMs in general; CCP announces intention to make Alliance Bookmarks
‪16.‬ Changes to starbase logistics (fuel pellets and removal of some pos timers)

Cosmetic & Metagame changes:

‪17.‬ Implants on pod killmails
‪18.‬ New font
‪19.‬ Scalable UI
‪20.‬ New Raven model
‪21.‬ New model for the Condor/Crow/Raptor
‪22.‬ New nebulae background
‪23.‬ New capital cyno effects, now on Sisi
‪24.‬ New captains' quarters, one for each race now
‪25.‬ The glorious return of Engine Trails!
‪26.‬ Some improvements to shadows
‪27.‬ Gun icons are being rectified and made easier to see
‪28.‬ Fitting window now shows DPS output (on sisi)
‪29.‬ Show Full Body in character show-info window (on sisi)
‪30.‬ Ship textures and shaders are being updated in preparation for decals & logos on ships, etc.
‪31.‬ Some petition changes (categories for Stuck Character, additional details to be announced)

Restoration is a perfectly valid school of magic!
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Eve Online  |  Topic: Winter Expansion - Desperate times  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC