+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. (/showthread.php?tid=92857)
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - VoluptaBox - 01-23-2013
That'll lead to even more QQ which defeats the whole point of what Sindy's trying to say.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - AshHill07 - 01-23-2013
(01-23-2013, 12:57 AM)Hone Wrote: I say put in shiploss on death (with balances such as cheaper stuff, ships more easily available, all equipment available everywhere ect.) And remove time out entirely.
I can tell you know, ship loss on death will do the opposite. People will rage even more that they got gank killed, because there was little they could do about it.
That said, battleships in thier current state can't run from overwhelming odds unless they get lucky with a cloak. Countermeasures on battleships are pointless since theres pretty much a 0% success rate against CD's, and even if you do manage to survive long enough to cloak, whos to say someone won't just use the missile tracking bug to keep yo CD'd until you come out of it.
Bringing up anouther scenario, how long before traders bring up the QQ about being killed by bombers/cruisers demanding stupid amounts, which will definatly increase since some people are just trolls and will want people to loose thier ships.
I'm sure others can think up many other reasons why its also a terrible idea.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Jack_Henderson - 01-23-2013
This is a "4h is too long, reduce it" thread and not a "shiploss on death" thread.
Please stay on topic.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - sindroms - 01-23-2013
Not enough people on the server to actually provide more areas with the same activity.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - sindroms - 01-23-2013
No, I mean we have only 200 people maximum on 100+ systems.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Jack_Henderson - 01-23-2013
There used to be more activity centers (Dublin, Gold Rush), T23 (Tau Madness Period), Omega 7 (Constant War), but with the decisions to spread activity to different systems and open more possibilities player hubs disappeared.
I miss the old hubs where all the rp&pvp, as well as the rage and lulziness concentrated. I can also understand why efforts have been taken to reduce these centers, as they were the constant origin of reports, QQ, rage and frustration.
I understand that efforts have been taken for the new version to concetrate activity again in a few centers (deleting holes that lead traffic from lanes, some secondary ore fields might go, unlawful bases get closer to the zones of interest, asteroid fields get passages that enable reasonable cap ship transfer, etc), so I think this might be the right way and I am looking forward to it.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Sangria - 01-23-2013
Hi Karlotta, how're we doing today?
oh smug, I should've logged my [LN] to help you out. Sorry!
oh my, mods ninja'ed me
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - DSE)Spartan - 01-23-2013
Back on topic ?
I say 2 HRS no entrance to the system one is killed in. Simple... and more realistic.... in my opinion...
regards,
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - roadrunner - 01-23-2013
Keep it as it is, change to another char explore.
Server is allready becoming into a lolwoot pvp area. where players gives a *insert word* about prober RP.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Sava - 01-23-2013
Quote:.And it's quite simple actually, don't DIE.Better just hug your favourite base or cap NPCs till enemies get dry so you can kill em easily.
Or sit in your guard system and cyber with your faction mates. Noone suffers that way.