![]() |
Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Printable Version +- 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. - Remilia Scarlet - 01-28-2013 (01-26-2013, 06:41 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: Remilia, reducing the negative consequences of pvp defeat would also perhaps reduce these things like asteroid hugging (T37), base hugging (Java/Cali), run&dock&come back, etc... all these things that are generally considered "dick moves". No, it will not. RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Pavel - 01-28-2013 On the other hand Jack, it would mean even more ganking and base hugging, as you'd need to fight enemies two times sooner. Pretty much same situation like with nerfing gunboat turrets damage, gunboats kill snubs, impossible.... Will it mean we have gunboat razor snipers all over the place around? No, it will mean more ganking and base hugging. RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Jack_Henderson - 01-29-2013 Seems you guys lack a little optimism. ![]() *hands out little pink packages of "optimism +4" in a wrapping with smileys* RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - lw'nafh - 01-29-2013 (01-29-2013, 09:58 AM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: Seems you guys lack a little optimism. You'll probably go 'OMG KANGA U SO WRONG HUEHUEHUEHUE' for the sake of disagreeing with me, but it's valid in human psychology to say that the best indicator of future behaviour is past and current trends. We're all human here. Ergo, at large, we'll all continue to be morons. |