These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Pretty tired of what you're doing CCP

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gorgoth24
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2013-06-26 06:14:41 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

One way to make it work would be to have the Ransom contract fail if the ship is destroyed within X amount of time. So if you pay and you get blown up then you get your ransom back. Though it may be unrealistic, it is all i can think of to make it work so far.


Just wanted to highlight this. It's a far better mechanic then the one I suggested
Mark Androcius
#22 - 2013-06-26 10:04:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Mark Androcius
Player A enters amount of ransom and clicks accept, player B receives the ransom request.
Player B informs player C who is in player B's corporation or just a mate.
Player C aligns and warps and as player C lands, Player B accepts the ransom.
Player C now warp scrams and webs player A.


Spot the issue.

All this will yield, is more ways to scam people.

Besides, i'd rather be podded with a billion iskies in implants in my head, then pay a lowlife "beggar" ( which is basically what you are if you do this ) even 0.00001 isk.

https://androcius.wordpress.com
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#23 - 2013-06-26 10:39:34 UTC
ISD Suvetar wrote:
Hi,

I'm intrigued by your Ransom Idea so I've moved your thread to Features and Ideas discussion.
Perhaps you could flesh your idea out a bit more, how would this affect Warp bubbles, for example ?

Thanks for your comments though, we do appreciate it.



Indeed, the man makes a point still.

-10 means absolutely nothing in this game for several reasons and the first one is how easy it is to get it, the little and easy to counter mechanics making so there are so many pawns claiming to be pirates but absolutely not acting like one.
Just random F1 pawns and ransoms honored by the gankee finishing in his ship and pod kill on top of isk loss leads exactly to the point people once caught just don't pay any ransom and wait the dude the light up his guns and finish what he started anyway.


He makes a very good point and should really make someone at CCP interested in piracy to think a bit about his idea that is a really good one, simple, easy to implement but also easy to exploit if not done correctly.


removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-06-26 11:00:20 UTC
Mark Androcius wrote:
Player A enters amount of ransom and clicks accept, player B receives the ransom request.
Player B informs player C who is in player B's corporation of just a mate.
Player C aligns and warps and as player C lands, Player B accepts the ransom.
Player C now warp scrams and webs player A.


And this is exactly why players don't pay ransoms anymore or at least very few, because chances they get any further than the next gate are 99.9%, chances the pirate does not honor his ransom are 99.9%

Already lost a 2B+ Tengu for being lazy+pod, all for over 3B like this, was asked ransom but didn't payed and will never pay because I know my ship will finish killed by an alt corp or neutral alts from the same guys at the next gate or the one after.
Killboards are a greater reason to not honor a ransom than the other way around, maybe there are some pirate corps who honor their ransoms, that doesn't mean players will start taking their route over there rather than somewhere else.

Once caught I consider the loss already done and so do the majority of players as it seems, now if we got at this point do you guys think a feature would be enough to reverse the bad reputation and no trust in pirates words?

No, I don't think so.

Quote:
All this will yield, is more ways to scam people.


Exactly, because for every feature CCP implements the number of possibilities to exploit is absolutely staggering and the worst about it is that it's done on purpose.
-10 doesn't mean absolutely nothing in this game aside having a red tag with a white skull, it's barely any better or worst than Jita scammers, any one can do it and have little to no consequences at all for their actions.

About bubles: I think where this feature would or could be successful it's in low sec and should stay away from null, thus the bubbles issue wouldn't exist at all.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#25 - 2013-06-26 11:50:16 UTC
Roy Kring wrote:
How about updating piracy?

I was -10 trying out solo piracy for a year, the odds were really against me but I like a challenge.

One thing that really bothered me were ransoms, I often caught peoples pods and would try ransoming them.
Out of at least 100 pods I caught, only 2 guys payed me, one for 100m the other for 200m and I let both of them go.

The VAST VAST majority of people wont pay you because it's a trust game that other selfish people have ruined for the rest of us by killing them anyways.

I had an idea where a player (could be any player or only those with -5 and lower security status) could right click the character they're attack and select "Ransom" or something of that nature.
The initiating player could then write an amount of isk in the small box and hit accept. If the player on the receiving end of the ransom clicked accept on the box that came up, they would pay the pirate the agreed amount of isk and combat would be instantly stopped for 60 (or XX time) seconds and both locks would be broken for the duration allowing the victim to warp off safely
It's a raw idea that i'm sure could be refined but that's the basic idea.

Sorry; felt it best to snip a portion of your post to allow this idea to be discussed without trolling or derailment - ISD Suvetar


Essentially you want a gameplay mechanic to counter what you see as incorrect gameplay by other players?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#26 - 2013-06-26 12:51:18 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Essentially you want a gameplay mechanic to counter what you see as incorrect gameplay by other players?
To be fair, his suggestion made more sense when it was part of the original longish "wtf are you doing to EVE, CCP" rant that got snipped. However, rants and snipping, as I'm sure you know. So this is what we've got left.

If I were him and I wanted to honor bounties but everyone else in my profession kept screwing it up for me, I'd be a bit annoyed too.
supernova ranger
The End of Eternity
#27 - 2013-06-26 17:42:49 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
ISD Suvetar wrote:
Hi,

I'm intrigued by your Ransom Idea so I've moved your thread to Features and Ideas discussion.
Perhaps you could flesh your idea out a bit more, how would this affect Warp bubbles, for example ?

Thanks for your comments though, we do appreciate it.



Indeed, the man makes a point still.

-10 means absolutely nothing in this game for several reasons and the first one is how easy it is to get it, the little and easy to counter mechanics making so there are so many pawns claiming to be pirates but absolutely not acting like one.
Just random F1 pawns and ransoms honored by the gankee finishing in his ship and pod kill on top of isk loss leads exactly to the point people once caught just don't pay any ransom and wait the dude the light up his guns and finish what he started anyway.


He makes a very good point and should really make someone at CCP interested in piracy to think a bit about his idea that is a really good one, simple, easy to implement but also easy to exploit if not done correctly.




How about having under -5 standings with the sovereign holder of the system?.... that would mean allot and be a big commitment
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-06-26 17:53:24 UTC
If it is guaranteed that you pay what is asked and get what is promised, then it's a contract, not a ransom.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
paritybit
Solarmark
#29 - 2013-06-26 19:03:26 UTC  |  Edited by: paritybit
I've been a pirate for a little over 2 months now. In that time I've earned over 125,000,000 isk from successful ransoms. This is not a huge number, but I like to think it's fairly substantial.

You need to be part of a respected organization that has some semblance of evidence that you do indeed let pods go once they've paid the ransom.

While I would like a way to guarantee a payment will make them safe, I don't see it as something CCP or the more vocal players would like to have in their game.

If, instead of a guarantee, there was some way to apply some sort of "honor" points to a pilot or group that would probably help. But then that system would quickly be abused and probably ineffective. Instead, since it's a social game, we end up with social outlets as the only way to gauge reputation.

TL;DR it's interesting; good luck.

Edit: actually, after thinking about it ... couldn't we have some new type of contract that pays out after X minutes but only if the player wasn't podded in those X minutes? This is still not a guarantee, but it will prevent payment if the player is podded. As a balancing mechanism, maybe there's a "brokers fee" that goes to NPCs as part of the deal. Nothing prevents people from doing it the old-fashioned way to get around the brokers fee.
Roy Kring
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2013-06-28 03:01:28 UTC
I just checked back to this thread for the first time in a while and I'm really surprised that so many people liked my ransom idea, I really didn't expect that. I also wanted to apologize about the fact that this thread started out as a rant, i'm sorry my temper got the best of me. I just would LOVE to see ccp focus more on lowsec, undeniably the most neglected part of the entire game. You guys were really brainstorming here and that put some hope back into my heart. Again CCP and everyone i'm really sorry this started out as a rant but I hope we can put it back onto a good focused path.
Gorgoth24
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2013-06-28 04:21:33 UTC
Roy Kring wrote:
I just checked back to this thread for the first time in a while and I'm really surprised that so many people liked my ransom idea, I really didn't expect that. I also wanted to apologize about the fact that this thread started out as a rant, i'm sorry my temper got the best of me. I just would LOVE to see ccp focus more on lowsec, undeniably the most neglected part of the entire game. You guys were really brainstorming here and that put some hope back into my heart. Again CCP and everyone i'm really sorry this started out as a rant but I hope we can put it back onto a good focused path.


While I like your idea, I feel you're unjust saying that lowsec has received no love from CCP. In Retribution as part of the Crimewatch update, lowsec lost GCC and as such became much more fun to PvP in. In Odyssey, lowsec received a buff to lowsec ores designed to draw more miners to lowsec and the addition of the tags for sec status idea that was intended to draw more people into the belts of lowsec (since those rats are lowsec-only). And while FW continues to frustrate me to no end as all they seem to do is fit WCS, the active FW system of plex-based grinding has brought far more targets into the PvP area in lowsec.

But, on a personal note, the ability to rant constructively should be commended :)
Tristanor
Majorum Gnavita In Industria
#32 - 2013-06-28 06:19:53 UTC
I like somehow the idea....but see a lot of difficulties to work it out.

The way i could see it work is not in making the invulnerability of a ransomed guy/girl. If that would be the case we would fly duo all the time and ransom each other when under attack :)

But in RL :) people would speak around about what happend. And with that talk about the person that would live up to their ransoming and who did not. So that would be the way i would approach it. Not using an external website for that but for something like the honesty factor...

A new skill ransommer would be applied. When you have it you get the ransommer value in your stats, for all people to see.
If a ransom contract is made, ánd the person ransommed lives for yet another .. day.. another dock...whatever :) then its ticked a plus 1 if not its a minus 1.

So on a toons in the ransoming business one would see: ransom contracts made, paid and survivors.

That way a well..... how does one say? ....honest? ransomer can stand out in the crowd.....

And all gameplay stands intact.

Myself? I rater selfdestruct then pay :) but maybe .....maybe if i would meet an "honest"ransommer ....:p
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
#33 - 2013-06-28 07:41:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Aquila Sagitta
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Nice Idea, but yeah, very exploitable. Neutral alts always ruin the day with stuff like this. ;(
Agree to ransom > ransomer can't engage you > neut alt pods you
Agreeing to ransom gives you temporary invulnerability > Use mechanic to fly into enemy fleet at perfect range + warp to 0/cyno

One way to make it work would be to have the Ransom contract fail if the ship is destroyed within X amount of time. So if you pay and you get blown up then you get your ransom back. Though it may be unrealistic, it is all i can think of to make it work so far.


I like this idea. Make it like a contract you can setup before hand. You input the amount you want to ransom for and when you hit the ransom button it will popup on their screen. The contract will pay half upon acceptance and other half would be payed when the pilot is safe. I don't think there should be any invuln at any time with ransom. Only problem I see with this method is how to tell when the pilot is 'safe'. Once you enter warp or have session timer might work. Def needs some fleshing out.

Edit: About the honor points idea: Make these ransom contracts viewable like regular contracts and be able to see if there are a lot of failed contracts. Much like couriers. Put a button in the ransom window that links to that characters previous ransom contracts so you can quickly decide if this guy is worth giving money to.

Blue-Fire Best Fire
Marcus Harikari
#34 - 2013-06-28 07:46:40 UTC
how about in lowsec, if the pirate offers a ransom, his lock is broken, and if he aggresses the victim again within the span of X seconds, CONCORD shows up and kills the pirate, just like for a gank in highsec

so therefore the pirate has the CHOICE to go back on his word, but he will suffer consequences

it's like...by offering a ransom, the pirate is dialing up CONCORD and telling them where he is

not sure how this would fit into any lore in nullsec, since there is no CONCORD there at all, right?
Aurora Fatalis
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2013-06-28 12:25:51 UTC
If you really want to do ransoms, do it through Chribba.

If Chribba told you not to trust him, would you?
Purps
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-06-28 13:07:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Purps
How about an "Escort Contract", paid when the person actually docks up safely.

Agree the contract based on the current ship docking, be it a pod or BS, at which point the cash is handed over on a successful dock.

If you wanted to expand it for actual escort contracts have an option to set a destination station.
DSpite Culhach
#37 - 2013-06-28 13:13:29 UTC
I do actually like ideas like these, but cringe at the fact that it "hardwires" yet another mechanic into the game, and also that players will just try and find ways to abuse it, ways that may in fact have nothing to do with the original intent of it being for ransoms.

It would be easier - and far more weird :) - to have a list of official pirate groups on a web page that follow this code, so when someone grabs you, you pass the link, show you are "ransom approved" and then at least, if they blow you up anyway - and some will - you can get them taken off the list and/or group.

I mean, mine isn't a solution, but I'd rather have that then a new coded mechanic. Providence is NRDS, but I'm pretty sure people not in approved corps don't fly around thinking themselves untouchable; every so often I'm sure some neutral gets popped cause he looked suspicious, and it gets sorted out later by someone.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#38 - 2013-06-28 13:33:02 UTC
Poor idea.

Kidnapping, ransoming, etc is criminal activity. There are no rules. Trying to enforce any rule-set through game mechanics will be doomed to failure because someone else not bound by the rules can still be on hand to recapture the victim.

If you want to trust the pirate, pay the man. If you don't, don't. If you want to negotiate, chat with him.

Programming anything along the lines of enforcing rules for lawless behavior is silly.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-06-28 14:07:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
Gorgoth24 wrote:
I feel that this title is overly negative, and I'm conflicted on the subject, but I'm willing to give it positive suggestions.

Basic mechanics: Ransom has two boxes. Agressor inputs the amount asked for, the pod inputs a yes/no/counter-offer. If the agressor then accepts, it conveys a 60s invulnerability to locking of the pod by anyone. This timer should be set to 0 upon session change. The ransom should also be automatically declined if you are in the process of ransoming and are podded.


That 60 seconds invul timer seems like a bad idea, after all just one guy accepted, not the whole enemy fleet or the 3rd party that is about to warp in. Also that would be exploited by small gangs ransoming themselfs just so they can warp throuth gate camps in invul mode.

Also, that would a little bit like paying 100mil mil to everyone in System just because You accepted a contract for some items for 100mil isk.

No, uppon accepting there should only be a 30 - 60 seconds weapons hold timer, just between the two parties involved, no effects on bubbles, if You accept that while still being in one, it's Your own fault.

Here's a different suggestion:

You (the pirate) define the height of the ransom, the other guy then sets the amount of time the weapons hold timer should be active.

And now the different part: the other guy also sets the height of compensation if You fail to comply.

Meaning, You can still shoot him, but then You'll have to pay the predefined amount for failing to comply to the ransom contract You previously agreed to.

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#40 - 2013-06-28 15:00:12 UTC
Lame idea. -1. Removing risk through artificial means is bad.
Previous page123Next page