These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Fix logistic concord warning!
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kiyl
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
#21 - 2011-11-27 17:21:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Kiyl
Ammzi wrote:
This is a rage QQ post for CCP introducing something that broke something else big time (surprise?). You have been warned.

Logistics getting warnings and concord algorithm disabling their cap transfers is ANNOYING AS HELL AND MUST BE FIXED.
When I am in the same corp as my logi parter and our whole alliance is at war with a second alliance concord algorithm (which is probably made by a group of drunk and corrupted cops!) gives me a warning and disables my energy transfers to my logi partner while we try to keep out fleet alive.

Oh, and how many time does this happen on a timescale of say 1-2 min. combat? It happens 3 times. Seriously? You are trying to "protect" me by disabling my energy transfers with my corp mate who is in the same war as we both are repping alliance members?

Do you know how big of a pain this is? We aren't even neutral logistics for the love of god.
Please fix the code for this Sad

*collapses on ground and starts crying*



Im going to go out on a limb and say that this is because of this fight here:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=11706204

Our Logi that was in corp was having trouble with this as well, they had the boxes checked and it would shut off after every cycle..

P.S: Thanks for the being the only guy with the balls to bring out a battleship, twice, and lose it both times xD
Velicitia
XS Tech
#22 - 2011-11-27 17:27:26 UTC
(troll)
or ... stop protecting the carebears from themselves and put logi back?
(/troll)

OK, seriously though -- if there isn't a "dammit CONCORD, I know what I'm doing" box on there ... it is sorely needed. I can't stand the memos when I re-install (e.g. new computer) and it cries that I shouldn't go to lowsec, or "hi! this is the market!", this should be no different...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Amro One
One.
#23 - 2011-11-27 17:46:12 UTC
Looks like some one is slow to pay attention.

At least you don't have to relock them as if you where jammed.

Stop your bitching you lazy phook.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#24 - 2011-11-27 17:55:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Ammzi
Kiyl wrote:

P.S: Thanks for the being the only guy with the balls to bring out a battleship, twice, and lose it both times xD


Hahaha, I have been kicking myself in the balls all night for that... undocking in an abaddon with 10 % armor. *facedesks severely*.
I'll remember that the rest of my life.

But thanks for a good fight. o7
Kiyl
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
#25 - 2011-11-27 17:56:22 UTC
The issue isn't that the message is there in the first place, its that it doesn't dissappear when you check the box. It will shut off the reps and make you close it again, and thus how I lost that megathron in the fight up there^. The blazing angels guys lost so many ships cause they're just bad...
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#26 - 2011-11-27 17:58:05 UTC
Point being that feature is broken and needs to be fixed.
Maximille Biagge
Hydra Eternal
#27 - 2011-11-28 19:11:42 UTC
I blame incursions...
Horus Menvra
DREAD DOWN DREAD DOWN
#28 - 2011-11-28 21:52:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Horus Menvra
Liam Mirren wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
add in a check mark declaring never show me this again.


No, because then it won't warn when you need it. What needs to happen is the warning (in regards to wardecs) not being given if you rep a corp/alliance member.


I disagree with you Liam. There should be an opt-out check-box that prevents the warning from appearing again, and also prevents your modules from being turned off (obviously, you should be able to reset this in the escape menu). This would put this warning in line with virtually every other warning (ie CONCORD warning for illegally shooting someone) in the game. If you want to be safe, you can either put up with the warnings every time a new aggression flag comes in, or take the time to re-enable the warning when you're going to run incursions. If you don't want the hassle, and you disable the warnings, then it's your own fault if you get blown up due to incoming aggression. You can't have your cake, and eat it too.

Putting in this check-box should be significantly easier to implement than the changes to the aggression mechanics needed to check if you can already be legally shot by whomever the incoming aggression flag is against. Both approaches solve the problem, but the check-box should take less time/effort to implement, and is therefore more likely to happen.

I realize that the Devs are quite busy, and this obviously won't be released tomorrow, but could we please get some Dev input as to whether they think this is reasonable suggestion? Or whether their intent was to marginalize logistics in HS/LS PVP?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#29 - 2011-11-28 22:31:35 UTC
Yea it does seem rather odd and ridiculous, that you can't tick a box to stop it happening.

It would be a simple fix, without a change to the actual mechanic.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Astrid Stjerna
Sebiestor Tribe
#30 - 2011-11-28 22:32:03 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
This is a rage QQ post for CCP introducing something that broke something else big time (surprise?).


Rage posts (besides not being very constructive) are a Not Allowed thing on the forums.

/me hunkers down to wait for the lock.

I can't get rid of my darn signature!  Oh, wait....
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#31 - 2011-11-28 22:43:59 UTC
Maximille Biagge wrote:
I blame incursions...

It is actually incursions that are to blame, or more accurately incursion runners whining about being killed.
NickyYo
modro
The Initiative.
#32 - 2011-11-28 22:47:04 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
This is a rage QQ post for CCP introducing something that broke something else big time (surprise?). You have been warned.

Logistics getting warnings and concord algorithm disabling their cap transfers is ANNOYING AS HELL AND MUST BE FIXED.
When I am in the same corp as my logi parter and our whole alliance is at war with a second alliance concord algorithm (which is probably made by a group of drunk and corrupted cops!) gives me a warning and disables my energy transfers to my logi partner while we try to keep out fleet alive.

Oh, and how many time does this happen on a timescale of say 1-2 min. combat? It happens 3 times. Seriously? You are trying to "protect" me by disabling my energy transfers with my corp mate who is in the same war as we both are repping alliance members?

Do you know how big of a pain this is? We aren't even neutral logistics for the love of god.
Please fix the code for this Sad

*collapses on ground and starts crying*



What your really crying about is..

"CCP I can no longer use my logistic alt in the neutral NPCorp to remote rep me and my corpies in time of war."

A lot of merc corps do this to avoid losing their logistic alts, its basically an exploit, nice fix CCP!

..
Horus Menvra
DREAD DOWN DREAD DOWN
#33 - 2011-11-28 23:01:23 UTC
NickyYo wrote:


What your really crying about is..

"CCP I can no longer use my logistic alt in the neutral NPCorp to remote rep me and my corpies in time of war."

A lot of merc corps do this to avoid losing their logistic alts, its basically an exploit, nice fix CCP!



You do realize that this affects all RR in HS/LS, not just neutral? This mechanic trips when you have a new incoming aggression flag. For example:

1. Player A in corp 1 steals from player B in corp 2. Gaining an aggression flag towards corp 2.
2. Player C assists player A in some fashion (reps, remote sebo, etc), gaining an aggression flag towards corp 2.
3. Player B shoots player A, giving player A an individual aggression flag towards player B.
4. Player C's reps shut off and he receives a warning, regardless of what corp he's in, due to the incoming aggression flag towards player B, even though he is already aggressed towards corp 2.

As you can (hopefully) see, this change affects everyone - meaning neutral and in-corp logi. The best solution, in my opinion, is to introduce a check-box that disables the warning and prevents your modules from being turned off. This way, an entire class of ships aren't completely marginalized, and those who want protection (namely incursion runners) have it.
NickyYo
modro
The Initiative.
#34 - 2011-11-28 23:15:59 UTC
Horus Menvra wrote:
NickyYo wrote:


What your really crying about is..

"CCP I can no longer use my logistic alt in the neutral NPCorp to remote rep me and my corpies in time of war."

A lot of merc corps do this to avoid losing their logistic alts, its basically an exploit, nice fix CCP!



You do realize that this affects all RR in HS/LS, not just neutral? This mechanic trips when you have a new incoming aggression flag. For example:

1. Player A in corp 1 steals from player B in corp 2. Gaining an aggression flag towards corp 2.
2. Player C assists player A in some fashion (reps, remote sebo, etc), gaining an aggression flag towards corp 2.
3. Player B shoots player A, giving player A an individual aggression flag towards player B.
4. Player C's reps shut off and he receives a warning, regardless of what corp he's in, due to the incoming aggression flag towards player B, even though he is already aggressed towards corp 2.

As you can (hopefully) see, this change affects everyone - meaning neutral and in-corp logi. The best solution, in my opinion, is to introduce a check-box that disables the warning and prevents your modules from being turned off. This way, an entire class of ships aren't completely marginalized, and those who want protection (namely incursion runners) have it.


No,
You lot complain about GTC prices so high that because incursions are easy this is a nice fix.
It fixes incursions and fixes grefier corp exploits with the neutral reppers.

..
JC Anderson
RED ROSE THORN
#35 - 2011-11-28 23:19:55 UTC  |  Edited by: JC Anderson
Ammzi wrote:
This is a rage QQ post for CCP introducing something that broke something else big time (surprise?). You have been warned.

Logistics getting warnings and concord algorithm disabling their cap transfers is ANNOYING AS HELL AND MUST BE FIXED.
When I am in the same corp as my logi parter and our whole alliance is at war with a second alliance concord algorithm (which is probably made by a group of drunk and corrupted cops!) gives me a warning and disables my energy transfers to my logi partner while we try to keep out fleet alive.

Oh, and how many time does this happen on a timescale of say 1-2 min. combat? It happens 3 times. Seriously? You are trying to "protect" me by disabling my energy transfers with my corp mate who is in the same war as we both are repping alliance members?

Do you know how big of a pain this is? We aren't even neutral logistics for the love of god.
Please fix the code for this Sad

*collapses on ground and starts crying*


Blame the people who came up with the creative way to have entire incursion gangs destroyed by Concord. It's the reason the initial part of this 'band-aid' was applied in the first place.

Though I agree its sloppy and not all that great of a permanent solution. Hope they can figure out something better.
Horus Menvra
DREAD DOWN DREAD DOWN
#36 - 2011-11-28 23:22:35 UTC
NickyYo wrote:
No,
You lot complain about GTC prices so high that because incursions are easy this is a nice fix.
It fixes incursions and fixes grefier corp exploits with the neutral reppers.


You don't understand aggression mechanics in the slightest, do you?
NickyYo
modro
The Initiative.
#37 - 2011-11-28 23:29:10 UTC
Horus Menvra wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
No,
You lot complain about GTC prices so high that because incursions are easy this is a nice fix.
It fixes incursions and fixes grefier corp exploits with the neutral reppers.


You don't understand aggression mechanics in the slightest, do you?


No

..
Morganta
The Greater Goon
#38 - 2011-11-29 00:43:01 UTC
Horus Menvra wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
No,
You lot complain about GTC prices so high that because incursions are easy this is a nice fix.
It fixes incursions and fixes grefier corp exploits with the neutral reppers.


You don't understand aggression mechanics in the slightest, do you?


hell he doesn't even know the difference between GTC and PLEX
Horus Menvra
DREAD DOWN DREAD DOWN
#39 - 2011-11-29 07:29:12 UTC
Quick bump for the Devs now that they're awake again. Any chance we can get a Dev comment on the feasibility/desirability of adding a check-box to prevent the new aggression warning/disabling of reps?
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#40 - 2011-11-29 07:39:17 UTC
NickyYo wrote:
Horus Menvra wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
No,
You lot complain about GTC prices so high that because incursions are easy this is a nice fix.
It fixes incursions and fixes grefier corp exploits with the neutral reppers.


You don't understand aggression mechanics in the slightest, do you?


No


Wow ... I specifically stated I was not using a neutral alt. Sorry, but you are stupid, sir.
Previous page123Next page