This is ■■■■■■■■…
First the news about the ore updates. Now this… Just make HS → NS and be done with this.
1 Like
Nullsec players vs. Highsec players.
Watching EVE Online footage in media, I’m pretty sure a smoother warfare in Null is more important for PR. Also all the changes of the recent months aimed for Highsec to be more dangerous, so I think this won’t be the last change in game mechanics. To be honest, KR and Bounties are relics which lost their significance a long time ago, and probably the coding for these features is obsolete.
So the test is reasonable, I’m afraid.
They’re turning off kill rights, not CONCORD. jeez… gankers will still explode.
You completely missed the point. Actually, you appear to not have even read what you quoted…
3 Likes
He’s talking about repeat gankers with positive sec status never having to worry about being shot at whilst they wait for a target to turn up.
3 Likes
I think at this point its pretty clearthat 90% of comment writers here never had to deal with a killrught or tried to profit on one. And that makes all these arguments invalid.
3 Likes
Oh, I read it. Did you read it as you were writing
Because if you had, you might have thought ‘well, no, this is stupid, because that Tornado ganker will lose the ship just by ganking’.
Sure, but that’s not what he said. Clearly, they’ll still lose the ship.
No ganker ever cared about losing the ship if they killed the target.
KRs allowed them to lose ship without killing the target.
3 Likes
Yep, getting rid of CONCORD and faction police would provide even more capacity for Nullsec battles. Security status calculations also would be obslete - get rid of them! And I’m pretty sure all the agents in Highsec are programmed in last century code, we don’t need them either in Nullsec.
Let’s burn Jita!
After the gank they lose the ship. But before that they aren’t going to go suddenly suspect because of killrights. So they can sit and wait at gates, rather than having to warp in/bump targets with an alt.
1 Like
LOL. Of course they will lose the ship when they gank. Obviously not what I was talking about. Can you read what you were replying to, please? I was talking about they not having to worry about losing their ships while sitting at the gates waiting for a target to appear, not what happens after a target appears and they open fire…
ROFLMAO. That’s exactly what I said. I didn’t expect I would have to clarify they would still lose the ship after opening fire. My mistake for not realising that might require further clarification for some here…
2 Likes
Only if they were dumb.
Meanwhile, the whole crimewatch/bounty/killrights system has been demonstrated to seriously degrade server performance. When they’ve turned it off in the middle of a fight, performance jumped, dropped calls stopped dropping.
Rip the crap out by the roots. Replace it with something that works.
After three years of urging this change, I’m glad to see it’s being tested out. We’ll see what the impacts finally are and hopefully this will be the first step in removing the bounty system completely, potentially coming up with a new mechanic that actually does what it’s intended to do.
2 Likes
Yeah so you can be the +1 F1 monkey and watch a fight for 14 hours because this doesnt solve 10% tidi.
1 Like
Yep. That’s totally me. Just an F1 monkey. 
But even if I were? I’d rather be an F1 monkey in fights that have impacts and repercussions across the game than some highsec/small gang weenie wanking off about blowing up miners in engagements even they won’t remember in a week.
Blackout.
1 Like
Because thats what the sandbox is about. Nullsec. Right?
2 Likes
No, that’s what my preference is about. I didn’t say other people aren’t entitled to their preferred style of gameplay. But just like my right to swing my fist ends at the tip of someone else’s nose, peoples’ preferred playstyles have to be supported by code that doesn’t actively degrade the gameplay of others.
Which is why I said ‘replace it with something that works’. High sec kill rights, reprisal hunting, anti-pirate activities, etc, all have a place in EVE, and all of them should be supported by the code. But just like Brain-in-a-box five or six years ago replaced older code that impaired server performance, the current code needs to be torn out and replaced, too. The difference is, the old code that BiaB replaced was literally ‘what are my ship’s stats in space?’, so it couldn’t be turned off ahead of time.
1 Like
cough* Local cough*
How about not turning off ■■■■ without coming up with a solution on how to fix or replace them?
Imagine that they would do this with the long overdue problem of cloaky camping. And jsut turn off cloacks until they look for a solution.
2 Likes