EVE Information Portal

I'm still waiting on valid reason from dev's from this team for implementing this unfinished product that isnt persistant and cant be set to default red/off. This shouldnt be force fed to low sec or null sec players if it cant like everything else in the client be customisable by the user and remembered when i log off. Every other team has been making changes based on customer feedback from testing and forum posts and have listened to feedback from us, so far i see devs only replying to questions regarding parts of this blog people arent whining about. Lots of cool stuff coming on tuesday and this just puts a massive smudge on the icing of an otherwise decent expansion.

Have it remember our prefences or dont add it till it can.

TLDR: 1. The new log off timer is just ugly and could be implemented in a more stream lined way.
2. Persistence mechanics were fine the way they were they just needed better explanation to new players
3. Safety is an interesting idea from a simulator stand point, and just because can/mission baiting is dead doesn't mean all forms of non invited pvp are dead.
Text wall apologies all around.

"Happy Safe Fun time!" Probably not the best title for this blog considering how much negative fire its drawn, people hear that name and they automatically think: "Hello kitty Online."

Honestly I dont think any of the devs behind this are "idiots or fools" I just have to say that the giant timer, was a little much. I mean when I saw how much real estate It took up on the screen. It was almost comical.

1. Now changes that make eve more inviting to new players could be helpful because it means theres more new players to pew. But changes that are too hand holdy seem slightly counter productive to the whole EVE is hard image. The timer is just too in your face. For crime watch you have these great little timers and sound effects for keeping track of flags, why couldn't that have been used instead of this giant bulky interrupting counter that pops up on your screen. Why not just have some kind of top left hand counter that would slowly tick down to a green check mark and then when you mouse over it it would simply state:"Clear to log off safely" or something along the lines of that.

2. I have never had a problem with the log off timer being a minute. Honestly other then bot ratters in nullsec I dont think any one has had a problem with that. The first time I got killed when I was logged off aggressed was a shock, but once It was explained it made sense. I dont think you need to mess with current persistence mechanics I just think you needed to explain the current ones better to new players.

Now for the safety button at first i thought it was cool because Im a big fan of realistic flight simulators like F18 super hornet etc, games where if your joystick has a safety you actually have to disengage it if you want any of your weapons to go hot. Simulator wise I liked the idea of it. The lack of explanation in eve meant people who did there homework had an advantage. Knowledge was power. So can flipping would be dead essentially, or tricking mission runners would be dead as long as they never touched the little green button. Un complicating aggression did seem a very Un EVE thing to do. You should always be able to gank some one if that gets your jollies off, but at the same time, some one shouldn't die because they didn't dig through the forums on day one to read some archaic rule regarding agression mechanics.

When I brought up some of the concerns i read on this forum about the safety with a friend he simply asked: "Can I still gank some one in high sec?" "Yes," "So the other players safety doesn't stop me from ganking them even if its on?" "Right" " Then why would I care?"

Its going to be very easy to pick up a suspect flag come the 4th. If you think no one will be flagged because there too afraid of getting blobbed I think you'll be surprised. Will you be able to 'trick' people. No. But honestly I feel thats a leveling of the playing field. If a random person flying by is flagged people may just decide,"What the hell Ill go for it," and still end up dying any ways the same way they would if they saw some one goes red next to there can or mission.

3. It may be more costly but we can still gank people in high sec, so no, just because mission and can baiting is gone doesn't mean all forms of that kind of pvp in high sec is dead. With the bounty system people like goons may just start putting bounties on miners directly to encourage there ganking and to make it profitable. People will just have to learn how to get fights with the new system. It doesn't mean those same fights just will cease to exist. We claim were more clever then people who dont read the rules. On dec 4th we'll have to prove it when rubber meets the road. It will be more about being a pool hustler, and less about being a lawyer. You cant win every case because of sub section b clause a any longer. You have to make people think they can beat you when they dont have a chance. Its eve. How hard is that? In both those situations you used miss direction to win.

*snip*


EDIT:



Post edited for breach of the above rule - ISD Type40.

THIS WAS NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK. LOOK UP THE DEFINITION.

All I was saying that there is yet another feature which has not been finished implemented on TQ. Any business with half a brain would know this is not good practice.

If this is deemed personal and offensive then I look forward to my 3 day forum ban like you have done to another corpmate of mine.

Fantastic!

Now when I log on I will get to play "where the hell are my ships?" with the stupid inventory I can't turn off, (at this point enjoying a momentary feeling of relief that CQ at least can be turned off for good) then after several weeks of looking and having finally found it I undock, (which thanks to another CCP "improvement" takes another week) rush to join the fleet, several decades late, lock up a target hit F1... and watch the target escape as I hadn't thought about turning off the damn, stupid feature I turned off yesterday.

Thanks CCP for improving the gaming experience.

So I want to second Andy here, PLEASE before you implement a change add in that little bit of code that let's us remove it completely.

Corpmates agreeing with him, yes but he has posted on no alts tyvm.

Oh and for a pirate setting the default to green/on is a pretty stupid idea which is why Angry is asking that we all as players have the ability to choose the default setting for our own needs.

It will be quite hard to forget that your safety is enabled. Not only is there this shining green light, also your weapons are highlighted in red to show you that you cannot fire them under your current safety setting. This is quite hard to miss.

Yes, the safety setting needs to be made persistent. But the amount of rage flowing through this thread is totally exaggerated and it is quite clear that this little annoyance serves as a cover for rage aimed at the safety setting itself because some people fear that they'll miss out on easy kills.

Which isn't even true with the new pve combat flag and the ability to create pvp flags for pilots after they have logged off.

Seriously, non-consensual pvp is getting BUFFED, and all you people can do is predict doom and gloom

Sure, sure, no alts involved. Whatever you say.

As I said, I too am in favor of making the players choice of default preference persistant... but until we have that making the safety default to Green is the only sensible choice.

Again, nobody is arguing that they shouldn't be made persistant.

The point being made was that it will be virtually impossible for you to forget that the safety is on when you log in (your weapons are red, obvious green light in your face, etc.), and it takes less than a second to change it.

Hardly the end of the world, or even a serious issue. At worst, a very minor inconvenience .

Obviously not so aware of our mindset as the point is we don't care if it exists or not, we just want the release of it delayed until it persists. While CCP are rushing this change in with a real last minute we know it doesn't work but we wanna do it anyway attitude. By their own admission they know it isn't finished but they seem to be taking the attitude that they will just chuck it anyway and hope noone complains so they don't need to make it work.

You are actually trying to discredit a bunch of people arguing for the same damn point but wanting CCP to sort that out BEFORE they launch it.

Or more simply...

Don't care what it's initial setting is
Don't care if it is implemented or not
CARE that it is implemented ONLY when it is finished

If only this new safety system existed in real life, I wouldn't have accidentally ram-raided Argos.

And congratulating that lady on being pregnant when she wasn't? we'll I guess that would have still happened.

good work