EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2011-03-06 23:08
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-03-24 13:58
  • Number of Posts: 4,823
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Rivr Luzade

Security Status 5.0
  • Kenshin. Member since
  • DARKNESS. Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Ceos + Directors rights to mute on corp chat in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Rivr Luzade wrote:
    You can't just kick someone from corp for being a bit abrasive once or for justified reasons.


    Why in god's name would it not be justified to kick someone for JUSTIFIED REASONS? What sort of justification isn't a justification?

    That "justified reason" is related to "being abrasive". Roll I encounter situations every day where being abrasive is the only reasonable and feasible course of action to deal with certain individuals.

    Old Pervert wrote:
    While I know that most eve players have exceedingly poor emotional capacities, I find it a stretch that my 7 year old has better emotional regulation than they do.

    If they've taken a loss and they're pissed off because of it, tell them to log off and have a breather, maybe a drink if it's after 12 and they're over the age of majority.

    You put him on the couch with a book. That is equivalent to muting someone out of a conversation that went too hot.

    (This goes more towards Donna thanOld) Furthermore, muted people have all the means necessary to communicate that they have calmed down: They can convo the CEO or other people to talk it through, they can send a mail, they can use other chats. They also see how long they are muted because the status message indicating the mute contains a "effective until" line.

  • Dev blog: Strategic Cruisers and You in EVE Information Center

    Ecrir Twy'Lar wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    There is not enough popcorn in all North America for whats going to happen when you change T3Cs Cool

    Yep, I smell a nerf coming.

    That's the only thing that can make them balanced again. They are tankier or as tanky as BS, as agile and fast as cruisers, deal damage up to BS ranges and have the same or even more versatility as BS/HAC.

  • Tidy up blueprints. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Small Standard Containers are your friend for sorting them however you like.

  • Jump Clone Idea in EVE Technology and Research Center

    grgjegb gergerg wrote:
    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    Yeah npc stations are not going anyplace. It would be devastating to player retention of every tone you took a break you cane back having list all your items

    They're not lost, they just get dumped in the nearest NPC station. Which might get expensive, if there's no NPC station insystem.
    https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/208289365-Asset-Safety

    Well, except for wormholes.

    The mess with asset safety is only one aspect. Sure, it is a pain in the back having to sort your items, containers, ships, modules, etc again once citadels died or got unanchored. But not being able to dock for a new mission, not being able to deliver a mission item because of removed docking rights, not being able to finish a mission, not being able to access your assets, not being able to do things at all because you got locked out of a citadel, not being able to deliver a mission because the access to the agent service got removed, not being able to find your assets, not having a reliable market in your area, having your citadels cloning service turned off either due to inactivity of the owner or nefarious intent, having to fly around every day to find a sufficiently good agent, having to pay more attention to where missions go, having to decline missions that go into low sec just because the agent moved on a whim and so on and so forth are all great things that make citadels such a success story beyond the coerced move over of industry. Roll

  • Jump Clone Idea in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    Stations will be going bye-bye very soon (tm). No reason to invest dev time in them at this point unless something gets seriously broken.

    If CCP wants to kill the game, they should go ahead with removing stations. Roll Stations don't go anywhere. Outposts will turn into citadels. And how much fun citadels are is very evident in the vast and empty stretches of null sec. Roll

  • Sell Nullsec System Names for Cash in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lothros Andastar wrote:
    No, you are overcomplicating it. Nothing to do with Sov, just anyone can pay $5 to rename any code-nullsec or WH system.

    Meaning a random muppet in Delve can pay 5€ and rename a system in Deklein, Oasa, Feythabolis or Syndicate just because and cause the people there a lot of hassle and coerce them into paying another 5€ to return the original name or at least change it into something less offensive/obnoxious? Yeah, sure, that sounds like a really great mechanic. Roll And a wonderful new money grab for CCP.

  • So The BR Sotiyos in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lothros Andastar wrote:
    Rivr Luzade wrote:
    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    Daichi Yamato wrote:
    NPCs are best used for setting the stage for players to interact.


    This and the new BR sites do just this. The real challenge isn't beating the rats it's beating the other groups after the same prize

    I doubt that. If these shipyards can get farmed by Punishers, there's no incentive for someone else to fight that. Similar as Entosis stuff it's just not worth it.

    Bring your supers with bomb fighters to kill them all. Or bring a domi fleet with Warrior II's

    Supers with bomb fighters are useless against a fleet of hundreds of Punishers orbiting the structure. Not to mention that the punisher fleet can just kill the supers one after another. And not to mention that bringing supers deep into any territory that is held by a big local group is not possible. Roll Same goes for a Dominix fleet. It's not possible, it's not fun and not worth it.

    And before someone calls me pessimist: This is the realist speaking, not the pessimist. CONDI, for instance, drops dozens of supers, titans, carriers and fax on ceptor fleets. How do you think they will respond to a super or Dominix fleet slowboating towards that structure? Not that CCP can do something about this, but engaging a Punisher fleet with supers or even a Dominix fleet deep in enemy territory is simply not feasible. Even if you very generously assumed that your fleet drove away the Punishers, you are then stuck there either tackled by the NPC or shooting the structure for another 30 minutes to get the "loot that is worth it". 30 minutes are a long time deep in enemy territory.

  • So The BR Sotiyos in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    Daichi Yamato wrote:
    NPCs are best used for setting the stage for players to interact.


    This and the new BR sites do just this. The real challenge isn't beating the rats it's beating the other groups after the same prize

    I doubt that. If these shipyards can get farmed by Punishers, there's no incentive for someone else to fight that. Similar as Entosis stuff it's just not worth it.

  • Dev blog: Increased Skill Injector Flexibility Coming On May 23rd in EVE Information Center

    Gedalya 'cuck' Rabbinowitz wrote:
    Hey, have you considered making eve an enjoyable game to play? Instead of nickel and diming the players with monetization everywhere?

    Good question. Making good and enjoyable gameplay is hard, however, which makes it a low priority for a lot of game developers. And before you ask for examples how EVE's gameplay is not enjoyable: Supers dropping on small gangs everywhere; tidi fests for citadel fights; the crap that citadels in general are with the far and wide flung incoherent and unpredictable availability of services and that you have to fly around all over the place to get stuff done; the constant release of unrefined features like citadels, predictably OP ships just for the lolz, among other things; and worst of all because your Tech III TQ hardware is rubbish after all, the enforcement of session change timers, which is the single most annoying thing in the game. Just to name a few things.

  • Kill Contracts in EVE Technology and Research Center

    You do not incentivize kills at all with your suggestion. The only thing you do is give people another bounty-thing to waste their money on. How does a 50M bounty incentivize a kill if you need to invest hundreds of millions to claim it? (No, war decs are not the solution or a way to legally kill the target because they can just leave corp to an NPC corp and switch back to another player corp.) Your kill contract does also nothing to "help getting through a gate camp that would otherwise catch you." There are no fairies popping out of no-where to remove that camp.

    I am also not the least bit interested in changing the ROE. If you don't want to see the ROE changed, that makes me happy. But your suggestion is pointless without it. A 600M bounty on my freighter pilot, for instance, did not incentivize gankers or other people to engage it, even though you get a sizeable chunk of it if you kill the freighter and only need to invest a fraction of it to destroy the ship. Limiting the payout to a single ship type is not going to help either.

    I take nothing out of context. You mentioned lots of things in the OP, Marauders, Carriers, rookie ships, to name a few things. I just added a thing. A thing, mind you, that is a lot more likely to get targeted than your completely speculative Marauder target.

  • Kill Contracts in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    The difference between this and a bounty is that bounties remain unclaimed for a long time; this is because the payout is marginal, unless you find them in a very shiny ship. My main flies with a bounty all the time, and apart from when I get killed either in home defense or roams, that bounty never gets collected.

    The contract offers a much more specific objective for a contracted player or group of players, which more closely fits the desires of the person creating the contract.

    You don't get it, do you? If your kill contract does not create a kill right, no one can legally or easily kill the target in high sec. Either the ganking is too expensive or the target does not undock during a war or just leaves corp to an NPC corp. If you go for ganking, the bounty needs to be higher than the ships that you need to gank the target. If we take freighters as example, that is at least 6-7 Taloses, or 500-600M just for the ships, profit not included. If your kill contract does not pay at least this price, who would be going to gank a target? However, if this kill contract creates a kill right even though the target has not done anything to legally earn a kill right from you (ie. has attacked your ship in high sec or attacked your pod in low sec), why should you be able to have that person killed legally? Furthermore, people could and would just blanked issue such contracts on anything that moves and is juicy or defenseless in order to get easy kills and not lose their ships in the process, effectively making ganking pointless and freighter piloting a death sentence.

    So, what is it now?

    Old Pervert wrote:
    Rivr Luzade wrote:
    Oh, this is gold. Roll Here, let me show you something: Kill: Charon See what that Charon carried? That's how you use a Courier Contract to kill someone. This is being done on a quite large scale. By this group on the kill mail in the Eitu area, it used to be done a lot by Hard Knocks Inc. with similar contracts between Jita and Amarr or to the Mastakomon area in The Forge. CFC and CODE third party on courier contracts regularly with ganks in Niarja and Uedama areas by cargo scanning freighters on the way there.

    It is quite comical that you accuse that other guy of being remarkably ignorant when you don't seem to have an idea what people can do, do, and will do to do nefarious things. Remarkably comical.Roll


    No, that is how you scam freighter pilots. Since I've been favoring marauders a lot in my previous posts, I'll continue that trend. Go ahead and kill a marauder with a courier contract. Oh... wait... you mean people won't take those with marauders? Shocked

    If I remember correctly, the forum does for me ("I fail to see how you can use a courier contract to kill someone.), you were not talking about Marauders in particular in this post. I suggest you should get your context in order first. Roll

    Your lack of knowledge about emergent gameplay mechanics is troubling, to say the least. Just because you are "favoring" Marauders does not mean that they are the only ships that you can kill with your contracts. And destroying a Marauder with 6 Taloses is a very easy task, PVP fitted or not. And even if it was a difficult task, the points above are still not answered: Who would gank a target if the bounty is not high enough to pay for the gank ships. Why should you be able to issue a kill right even though you weren't attacked in a way that gives you the justification to do that?

  • Ceos + Directors rights to mute on corp chat in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Neither CEOs nor Directors would have the option to kick someone from the corp chat, and muting does not prevent them from participating after they got a cool down period for their own good.

    The muting is not primarily meant for people being abrasive or offensive on a regular basis, that's what kicking from corp is for. It is meant to forcefully stop, for instance, a rather heated debate that got a bit out of hand and people don't want to stop even after someone told them to. You can't just kick people from corp if they don't listen to a stop in the heat of the moment, especially not if they are rather valuable and contributing members to the corp that just felt the urge to school noobs about their foolishness or got fed up with someone's complaints about losing ratting ships or dying to high sec wars repeatedly.

  • Kill Contracts in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    Rivr Luzade wrote:
    Old Pervert wrote:
    I can't see any room for exploitation, can you?

    Do I get this right: You can just setup a killright for a person without that person necessarily having done anything illegal in terms of game mechanics to kill this person without concord intervention? Does this answer your question?


    Tell me... if you collect a bounty on someone in highsec, will concord intervene?

    Truth be told I'd love to see highsec become far less highsec. But no. You do not get this right. The mechanics behind attacking someone remain the same, gate guns in low and concord in high.

    Good. And what is the point of your suggestion in this case? You put a bounty on someone's head and issue a kill contract but whoever takes the contract cannot kill this person legally. Your suggestion is not a kill contract but just another way to say "bounty". And since you need to either war dec that person or gank them in order to kill them, your bounty idea makes bounties even more useless than they where when you could just collect them with an alt. Did I understand you correctly this time?

    If you want High sec to be less high security, go to low sec space. That's what Low sec stands for and it needs more people like you to populate it more.
    Old Pervert wrote:
    3) I fail to see how you can use a courier contract to kill someone.

    All told, the only thing you've managed to do is display remarkable ignorance.

    Oh, this is gold. Roll Here, let me show you something: Kill: Charon See what that Charon carried? That's how you use a Courier Contract to kill someone. This is being done on a quite large scale. By this group on the kill mail in the Eitu area, it used to be done a lot by Hard Knocks Inc. with similar contracts between Jita and Amarr or to the Mastakomon area in The Forge. CFC and CODE third party on courier contracts regularly with ganks in Niarja and Uedama areas by cargo scanning freighters on the way there.

    It is quite comical that you accuse that other guy of being remarkably ignorant when you don't seem to have an idea what people can do, do, and will do to do nefarious things. Remarkably comical.Roll

  • Little things / Small QoL suggestions in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Suggestion: An option "Empty Folder" for Peoples & Places, bookmarks tab.
    Keywords: Folders, empty all, peoples & places
    Notes: Make emptying folders easier.
    ---
    Yes, emptying an entire folder is very powerful. Could either be limited to just personal bookmarks in order to prevent too easy abuse in corp locations, or a stricter role than communications officer for corp bookmarks as well. However, it's inconvenient to have to open and highlight bookmarks to delete then when they are in a folder meant for mass deleting bookmarks.

  • Ceos + Directors rights to mute on corp chat in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    Option 1:
    Tell those who get offended to HTFU

    Option 2:
    Tell those who are being offensive to STFU

    Depending on which option you chose, the next step is to exercise your ability to kick people from your corp who did not (S|H)TFU. Rules are rules, those who willingly disobey them are owed nothing by you or your corp.

    That's a poor argument. You can mute people in player generated channels, similar things should be possible for high ranking people in corp. You can't just kick someone from corp for being a bit abrasive once or for justified reasons. Neither should you be kick someone form corp who cannot stand criticism. Better moderation options are a lot more effective than a kick hammer.

  • When will they add more systems? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    Eve has too much space as it is. They obviously can't just take space out, but it would certainly be nice if they could.
    ...
    Throughout history, scarcity has always lead to conflict. Not enough oil? Invade a country that has some. Not enough land for your population? Hey... they've got some. Etc.

    That first point is debatable. I am in a situation where I have to constantly battle with AFK Ishtars for good anomalies because these AFK people do not want to rat in lower tier anomalies and leave the good anomalies for actively playing people. That cause constant strain for them. Less systems would just mean that these issues become more pronounced.

    PVP is certainly not fun if you live next to someone like CFC without an agreement or another big entity that roflstomps you into the ground day in, day out without you being able to use your space or live in it. If you cannot do anything else in your space than dock and wait until the storm has passed, you end up like Drone Lands: lots of empty space because no one wants it, no one can use it. Only certain people ask for less space because they ignore what less space actually means: less space for the suffocatingly big groups to use so that no one else could not even get a ****** system (in case someone desperately desires one).

  • Kill Contracts in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    I can't see any room for exploitation, can you?

    Do I get this right: You can just setup a killright for a person without that person necessarily having done anything illegal in terms of game mechanics to kill this person without concord intervention? Does this answer your question?

  • When will they add more systems? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Cade Windstalker wrote:
    More is not, in fact, always better. Eve is all about interacting with other players. Expanding things to the point that you don't run into anyone defeats the purpose of the game. On top of that adding new systems would be fun to explore for a relatively short period of time. People would spread out into the new space, it would become old space, and the thrill would disappear.

    Just my personal opinion: I would love to generate a situation where entities could live in somewhat complete isolation, develop their empires/culture/ways of living/etc unbeknownst from other players in the universe. Eventually after some long time, they would meet other players and conflicts would erupt over different opinions about dealing with certain things/about first contact/about different cultures/about something that no one knew until then. Not just for a moon, a system or a simple trade route, but conflicts over really serious, profound matters and differences, not just for the lolz.

  • Why doesent EVE have an in-game stock market? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lost maybe, but your walls of text demonstrate pretty evidently why we don't have and don't need a stock exchange/market in EVE.

  • HiSec PVP anomalies - low ships, good npc loot in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
    New players looking for a fight often go into low and their lack of knowledge about traversing low gets them killed in a gatecamp. Having the option to go into a site that doesn't last long enough to (often) attract gatecamps allows them to get an actual fight.

    Sure they'll often still lose fights in these but losing when you feel you are in contention is a lot more fun than just getting whelped 6 on 1.

    So, instead of losing their ships on a low sec/high sec gate, which in itself is a low sec island directly next to high sec or in other words what the OP wants, people now warp to a low sec island in high sec and die there. There is no difference whatsoever in terms of camping and unfun insta death. Underestimating the players' will to use this system to camp and whelp people continuously is particularly ingenuous coming from someone who used to be a CODE drone. Nothing prevents players to find these sites in busy areas (and let's be honest, no one will go into these sites in unpopulated areas because no one's there) and camp them with 6 buddies in wait for 1 clueless newbie (to stick with your example).

    Besides, even if they died repeatedly on such a low sec gate, they learned very important lessons for the navigation into and around these areas ... or at least should have if they are intelligent and observing. People who don't possess these treats rather go to the forums and demand easier to access, easier to exploit mechanics to get their PVP fix in a "safe and controlled environment".

Forum Signature

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.