Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:02:00 -
[1]
Firstly thank you for "fixing" this problem that occured this morning. Also sorry to start a new thread, but I think a lot of us are asking the same question. I figure that you most likely wouldnt be returning to the threadnaught, so I thought to ask here.
Anyways the question is about #3, it is a very vague and broad rule. Subject to many different perspectives, as we are already seeing in the threadnaught. Would you please give an example of exactly what you mean, or better yet a rewording.
Some might argue that Chribba(in the Veldnaught) having a larger cargo bay than a hulk , would be "using his capital shipÆs attributes to gain an advantage over other players".
Whould this be? Or using a high sec carrier as a mission salvager(cargo hold again)? Or mining with a carrier with maxed drones out(+5 mining drones impossible for other non high sec cap ships)?
I understand that of course as the GM you want to leave a blanket rule in of sorts, so if something that was never thought of now becomes a problem you have the "rules" to back you up. I personally fell though that the wording of #3 is just going to end up griefing you and your GM staff, with lots of people petitioning for all sorts of percieved injustices they suffer because these "relic" cap ships are in high sec.
Originally by: GM Grimmi Greetings everyone,
About those capital ships in high secà
First, IÆd like to apologize for this whole debacle. The simple truth is that our policies on capitals in high sec were not all that clear internally as well as officially. In hindsight, we should have given the matter more thought and discussion before acting, a valuable lesson to learn and weÆll remember it in the future. The general idea was that no capitals should be allowed in high sec and then we had some vague un-official guidelines on ships built before changes and whatnot. Those rules were never really actually set in stone and hence the situation we face now.
This is an excellent opportunity to change all that. We have therefore decided to set the following rules for capitals in high sec:
1. Capital ships may under no circumstances be used for aggression.
2. If at war, or with war declaration pending, you may not take your capital ship out of station.
3. You may not use your capital shipÆs attributes to gain any sort of advantage over other players while in high security space.
4. Breach any of the above and receive 2 weeks ban and off to low sec with your capital.
Along with those brand new actual rules, we will move ChribbaÆs Veldnaught back to Amarr, and will also move any other capital ship, by request, that was built in high sec before these changes were introduced. Anyone who had a viable high sec capital moved and wants it back should petition and we will take care of it as soon as possible.
With actual official rules on capitals in high sec, we should be able to make things work without further issues. We will be diligent about enforcing the new rules and anyone found in breach of them will have the offending capital ship moved out of high sec without advance notice, reversal or reimbursement. A two-week ban will also be imposed on the owner.
Thank you for your feedback, patience and understanding.
GM Grimmi Lead Game Master
Thank you for your time, and your concern.
Mitnal and the rest of you community managers, I humbly plead that you allow this thread to stay opened so it can get the clarification that rule #3 so richly deserves.
To the rest of you, please keep it civil no matter which side of the Veldnaught you may sit on. --
|
Hungo
Minmatar The Unholy Allance
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:04:00 -
[2]
Poor chribbas dread got moved to low sec, he *****ed, ccp buckled, attention *****, simple as that and your not helping
Mods kill this thread, no need for it
|
Locke DieDrake
Human Information Virus
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:06:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Hungo Poor chribbas dread got moved to low sec, he *****ed, ccp buckled, attention *****, simple as that and your not helping
Mods kill this Character, no need for it
FTFY ______________________________________________ Goon FC(08/12/06):"its a trap" "that thing is fully operational" |
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:09:00 -
[4]
Errr.... I'd kinda like a clerification on rule 3 too. Seems to me that a dred's tank makes it all but immune to suicide ganks, a clear advantage that it would have compared to any other vessel mining in high-sec.
Sounds to me like it would have an inherant advantage anytime it undocked.
|
Jana Clant
New Dawn Corp New Eden Research
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:12:00 -
[5]
You got a point, that rule doesn't make much sense. Cap ship's attributes are very different than sub-capitals, just by undocking you're already at advantage. (imagine someone wants to pod you to destroy your implants, but can't because you're under a ridiculous amount of HP?)
9 out of 10 blueprints prefer New Eden Research!
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:12:00 -
[6]
locke...hungo, while I appreciate your passion on the matter, even if your both in conflict, I would hope we can keep this thread free of the drama llama. There is already a +35page threadnaught for that.
I really hope that everyone can understand that this is a dispassionate attempt to further understand the rules that the GM's have impossed today. Not only for the owners of these high sec cap ships, but also for those that wish to "grief" said owners. As to exactly what can and cant be considered an advantage, besides its combat ability. --
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:14:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine Errr.... I'd kinda like a clerification on rule 3 too. Seems to me that a dred's tank makes it all but immune to suicide ganks, a clear advantage that it would have compared to any other vessel mining in high-sec.
Sounds to me like it would have an inherant advantage anytime it undocked.
Who would want to suicide gank a cruiser mining veldspar?
|
Locke DieDrake
Human Information Virus
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:17:00 -
[8]
Treelox- I'll keep the drama elsewhere....
As for the issue... here is the thing that people don't seem to be understanding.
The High Sec cap ships are an ODDITY. Nothing more. Owning one confers NO ADVANTAGE because actually using one in high sec would result in a petition and then a GM would move it to low sec. This has been true LONG before the "clarified" rules came about.
The VeldNaught is a well known landmark in eve. I for one think that is cool. A little bit of history in a player built world.
______________________________________________ Goon FC(08/12/06):"its a trap" "that thing is fully operational" |
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:18:00 -
[9]
Originally by: baltec1
Who would want to suicide gank a cruiser mining veldspar?
Don't have first hand, recent knowledge, but retrievers used to get suicide ganked a lot. They're so thin you can do it in a crappy cruiser.
Why? Cause it's fun, I guess.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:25:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Originally by: baltec1
Who would want to suicide gank a cruiser mining veldspar?
Don't have first hand, recent knowledge, but retrievers used to get suicide ganked a lot. They're so thin you can do it in a crappy cruiser.
Why? Cause it's fun, I guess.
So other than goons there are not many wanting to do that for fun. So realy the risk of getting poped while mining veld is very low meaning a veld scoffing dreads tank is not that important.
|
|
Alora Venoda
GalTech Giant Space Amoeba
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:25:00 -
[11]
in general, for most hi-sec activities, a CAP ship would be at a disadvantage anyway... for example, i don't think a dread would do better at a level 4 combat mission compared to a battleship. and since it cannot leave the system, i am really not sure how it could possibly have an advantage over someone else...
i suppose he could use it to grief miners by bumping them... ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ Take away the risk and it would make flying around in space utterly pointless.
Take away the flying around part and you make EVE into a space themed spreadsheet application. |
Soporo
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:25:00 -
[12]
Quote: Don't have first hand, recent knowledge, but retrievers used to get suicide ganked a lot. They're so thin you can do it in a crappy frigate.
Changed that for accuracy.
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Locke DieDrake Treelox- I'll keep the drama elsewhere....
As for the issue... here is the thing that people don't seem to be understanding.
The High Sec cap ships are an ODDITY. Nothing more. Owning one confers NO ADVANTAGE because actually using one in high sec would result in a petition and then a GM would move it to low sec. This has been true LONG before the "clarified" rules came about.
The VeldNaught is a well known landmark in eve. I for one think that is cool. A little bit of history in a player built world.
Yes Locke the previous and I thought offical policy of no aggression fit under this idea. Unfortunetly we are already seeing ppl stating in the threadnaught that just the huge cargo hold of the Veldnaught is an unfair advantage. If this is the way the GM's wish to interpret rule#3, then the Veldnaught would no longer be the Veldnaught, since it would not be allowed to mine into its larger cargo bay. This is why im asking for a bit of clarification.
I thought the old rules, that I had thought were "offical", were straight forward enough, "dont agress, period, or you get moved to low sec.". These new rules are pretty straight forward along the same lines aswell, except for rule#3. Rule#3 already has plenty of internet lawyers spinning their brains for work arounds. --
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:27:00 -
[14]
Gaining an advantage would be:
Triage, Using Capital Reps, Using a Clone Vat Bay, Using a Ship Fitting, stuff like that.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Schalac
Caldari Apocalypse Reign
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:28:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Originally by: baltec1
Who would want to suicide gank a cruiser mining veldspar?
Don't have first hand, recent knowledge, but retrievers used to get suicide ganked a lot. They're so thin you can do it in a crappy cruiser.
Why? Cause it's fun, I guess.
Try a frigate. http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=bjhuyg&id=3618615&page=1&filter=losses#mail
But yes I would love to see what the barrier is pertaining to rule #3 on the new set. I could think of many reasons that every cap ship should be moved to low sec but not one to keep them there. And the case of it being a relic from an other time in EVEs history holds no weight.
|
Masaru Ibuka
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:29:00 -
[16]
Revelation Dreadnaught
3 x Miner II 8 x Aoede Mining Upgrades 2 x Cargo Optimization Rig I 2 x Cargo Optimization Rig II 5 x Miner Drone II
1. 873 Yield per Minute 2. > 12k Cargo Space 3. Near Invincibility
= Advantage
|
Ampoliros
Shadow Company G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:30:00 -
[17]
I'll guess that what they're largely meaning is the usage of capital-specific modules to gain an advantage. You can't use your highsec carrier in triage to remote rep you through missions, or a highsec rorqual to compress ore or clear your missions, etc
At least, that's how i take it ----------------------------- Signature for sale :o |
Digital Solaris
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:31:00 -
[18]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt Gaining an advantage would be:
Triage, Using Capital Reps, Using a Clone Vat Bay, Using a Ship Fitting, stuff like that.
Poor suicide gankers, they don't have it easy.. stricter insurance policies, harsher security penalties and now capital repair systems.
|
Letava
Gallente Svefn-G-Englar
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:31:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Schalac
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Originally by: baltec1
Who would want to suicide gank a cruiser mining veldspar?
Don't have first hand, recent knowledge, but retrievers used to get suicide ganked a lot. They're so thin you can do it in a crappy cruiser.
Why? Cause it's fun, I guess.
Try a frigate. http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=bjhuyg&id=3618615&page=1&filter=losses#mail
Or 6.
-----------------------
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:32:00 -
[20]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt Gaining an advantage would be:
Triage, Using Capital Reps, Using a Clone Vat Bay, Using a Ship Fitting, stuff like that.
In my opinion I agree with you. I assume by "using a ship fitting", you mean the carriers ship fitting feature.
But what about using Drone Control Units? What about the beefer tank? What about the larger cargo hold?
There is a lot of grey area, and that is my point. I am sure that not all of us would agree on all things, and that is why I am asking for GM clarification. Not only so we all know where things stand, but also to forestall the bunch of petitions that are sure to occur against high sec cap ships, because of the greyness of the rules. --
|
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:34:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Ampoliros I'll guess that what they're largely meaning is the usage of capital-specific modules to gain an advantage. You can't use your highsec carrier in triage to remote rep you through missions, or a highsec rorqual to compress ore or clear your missions, etc
At least, that's how i take it
My point being I dont want "I'll guess" or "I'll assume" to be what we are operating under. I think it should be "I know" or "The GM's specified". That is the whole point of my thread here. --
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:44:00 -
[22]
Clarification of rule #3 ?
You may not assign fighters from your carrier to other pilots engaging in PvP. You may not use gang links on capitals to boost other pilots engaging in PvP. You may not repair, rearm, resupply or otherwise help other pilots engaging in PvP. Assuming for a second there ever was a player titan in highsec, you may not join a gang with pilots engaged in PvP.
Seems pretty clear to me
_
SHOPS || Mission rewards revamp || better nanofix
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:45:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Treelox
Originally by: An Anarchyyt Gaining an advantage would be:
Triage, Using Capital Reps, Using a Clone Vat Bay, Using a Ship Fitting, stuff like that.
In my opinion I agree with you. I assume by "using a ship fitting", you mean the carriers ship fitting feature.
But what about using Drone Control Units? What about the beefer tank? What about the larger cargo hold?
There is a lot of grey area, and that is my point. I am sure that not all of us would agree on all things, and that is why I am asking for GM clarification. Not only so we all know where things stand, but also to forestall the bunch of petitions that are sure to occur against high sec cap ships, because of the greyness of the rules.
Well the tank has nothing to do with anything since high-sec rats aren't even close to breaking a BS tank or a number of other smaller ships. And you can't use it for missioning.
And the few extra miner bots and bigger cargo hold are really just pure nitpicking and semantics.
Frankly, people who would petition that are probably filed under the large amount of other ridiculous petitions they get on a daily basis.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Trebor Notlimah
Lone Star EVE Group
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:50:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Trebor Notlimah on 27/08/2008 22:50:59 I just love how this little crappy issue can distract from the REAL problems with eve.
<3 Trebor
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 22:56:00 -
[25]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt Well the tank has nothing to do with anything since high-sec rats aren't even close to breaking a BS tank or a number of other smaller ships. And you can't use it for missioning.
And the few extra miner bots and bigger cargo hold are really just pure nitpicking and semantics.
Frankly, people who would petition that are probably filed under the large amount of other ridiculous petitions they get on a daily basis.
I fully agree with you, question is do the GM's? --
|
Sandra Tyrell
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 23:18:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Schalac I could think of many reasons that every cap ship should be moved to low sec
List a few then.
On a general note, not just in this thread: God some of you people are small. Even ugly. And I don't mean physical size or outward appearance.
|
fazeley
Empire Assault Corp The Firm.
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 23:29:00 -
[27]
Edited by: fazeley on 27/08/2008 23:29:10 By all that is holy, please god let this be a troll. I can't bear to think that someone cares this much about someone mining in a dread.
|
Lance Fighter
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 23:34:00 -
[28]
Originally by: fazeley Edited by: fazeley on 27/08/2008 23:29:10 By all that is holy, please god let this be a troll. I can't bear to think that someone cares this much about someone mining in a dread.
Chribba's was not the only highsec capitol.
Originally by: Dheorl
Originally by: Akita T yawn
I never knew it was possible to stretch your ego THAT much in 1 post
|
Juleko
|
Posted - 2008.08.27 23:36:00 -
[29]
People often bring up mining as being a PvP mechanism and although I don't do it myself I agree that it is. Bringing a bigger and/or faster mining ship to a roid party than the guys you're competing with confers you an advantage over them - the difference being that with sufficient funds they can do likewise, with high-sec capitals being the exception. Ultimately being able to mine faster than other people means you can control the market accordingly, you can set mineral prices lower than pilots in regular high-sec ships can comfortably afford to compete with - and this most definitely is a form of PvP.
I've always liked the fact that in Eve there's been no glass ceiling in any aspect of the game - if you have sufficient ISK and/or sufficient time to train skills then you can be every bit as efficient/good as the next guy. Sadly capitals in high-sec (since they can no longer be built there) are essentially an unattainable Eve endgame+1 for a select few that no one else can hope to ever achieve. That, fundamentally, is a bad thing imo.
A dread in high-sec, as highlighted already, is all but invincible and is certainly not something that can realistically be suicide-ganked. If Chribba (or anyone) was providing minerals en massT to one half of a warring alliance then he would most definitely be conferring a PvP advantage by using it. There's a bigger picture to look at here beyond the "omg Chribba is so great why oh why must he have to suffer".
Rule #3 is shadier than I'd like it to be and it's a shame really that CCP have buckled on this simply because so many people were outraged that a single individual was inconvenienced. No one seemed to appreciate the bigger picture on this one - they just saw Chribba in trouble, didn't even engage their brains to think about how PvP is more than just pew-pew, and rage-posted. Had Chribba not been affected by this at all I doubt there would have even been half as many pages crying about the sky falling, GMs/CCP wouldn't have had to buckle, and perhaps we'd have a more consistent game for all as a result.
|
Atlas Oracle
Minmatar Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 00:22:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Sandra Tyrell On a general note, not just in this thread: God some of you people are small. Even ugly. And I don't mean physical size or outward appearance.
agreed.
the most broken thing about this game is not a bug, or CCP, or a nerf... it's the people who play it.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |