EVE General Discussion

CCP Greyscale:

Can you please explain to me what it is you're looking for in the Crimewatch system? I'm genuinely interested in providing you with input that I've talked through with other players and had a very positive reaction from. I helped out Sreegs in his quest for labeling botters and ex-convicts, and I received much better feedback from him in response to the player suggestions I compiled. I felt as though player input made an impact in how he's planning his "Scarlet Letter" approach. Inversely, I feel as though the comments players have made here have been shrugged off and disregarded. You seem defensive of your current plan of action, rather than open to suggestions and criticisms.

For example, your response to the Suspect/Vigilante system that was proposed and refined in the ideas and discussion forum section was very dismissive. You say that a system allowing suspects and vigilantes to fight one another "isn't the effect we're going for", but you don't state what that is. You also claimed that such a system would introduce transitive, individual kill rights, when in fact it would do just the opposite. Kill rights would no longer be convoluted because you would know EXACTLY who you could shoot, who could shoot you, and what the consequences of assisting would be. You'd be on one side or the other if you chose to participate. Simple.

As long as you continue to say "oh this is not what we want" and don't tell us what you want, we can't help you. Your current suggestions allowing for invulnerable logistics, and suspects who can't reasonably expect to retaliate are not effective in solving any of the problems of high-sec aggression, and are detrimental to high-sec PvP. By high-sec PvP, we most nearly mean fighting in high-sec that happens outside of war decs. In completely redesigning the aggression system, you have the opportunity to create robust, dynamic PvP situations that aren't based on suspects being easily killed because "you committed a crime, tough luck".

If you don't tell us what you want, we can't help you - unless of course, you don't want help or suggestions on how to create a kickass overhaul to get more people fighting each other.

Which is funny because the suggestion of a vigilante flag which floated around ideas and discussions forever removes individual aggression flags entirely. It just lets suspects and vigilantes all shoot each other, no individual aggro at all. You rep a suspect, you become a suspect. Simple.

And he said it isn't what they wanted because it re-introduces individual kill rights. I don't get it.

I guess they are still aiming for more "meaningful" PvP, the issue being that they seem to be going about it by nerfing can flipping and whatever they deem to be meaningless PvP. All the while not bothering to actually add anything to help generate meaningful PvP.

Either that or they're just trying to get rid of aggression maps, no matter the cost.

It should probably be noted that individual aggression flags are the only thing keeping you able to shoot someone once the original reason why you're able to shoot them expires. And in situations where you don't gain individual timers for attacking a person or object what happens when you're still shooting when the original reason you're able to shoot it stops being the case is that you get concorded instantly and without warning.

For example if you're shooting somebody who you're in corp with and that person is accepted into a different corp, or leaves their ship, docks up and quits corp while you're still shooting you get concorded without warning. Or if you're attacking a container like a GSC because you have aggression against its owner and the timer against the owner runs out then you get concorded without warning.

In a future with no individual timers at all everyone can look forward to getting concorded without warning even more often.

Hooray?

Except that it seems apparent that a system where suspects can flag themselves as such and vigilantes can do the same creates very meaningful PvP. You can get a group of friends and roam around high-sec as suspects trying to find fights from another group flagged as vigilantes.

That seems more meaningful to me than just flipping a can and hoping a miner shoots at you.

In fact, with such a system, a meaningful engagement might go like this:

1. Newbro in a Rifter flips a can, and becomes a suspect
2. The miner flips the can back (an action against a suspect) or shoots him, and becomes a Vigilante
3. Rifter begins shooting the miner, but the miner warps in a neutral logistic and begins to rep him. Repping the miner, who is a vigilante, turns the neutral RR into a vigilante
4. The Rifter tackles the logi instead, leaving the miner to warp off and come back in a combat ship.
5. A roaming suspect gang passes through and notices from the new icons next to the two vigilantes in local that they are nearby, and the Rifter upon seeing the local spike of friendlies tells them where he has the logi tackled at
6. The roaming gang comes in and begins killing the re-shipped miner and his logi, since all suspects and all vigilantes can shoot each other, regardless of where their flags came from - there are no individual aggro timers.
7. The suspects hold the two vigilantes in the belt, trying to escalate the fight
8. The miner calls for his friends who come in, unflagged, and engage the suspects, automatically flagging themselves as vigilantes
9. The two groups fight until a winner comes out on top, or the fight continues to escalate with more people - nearby suspects/vigilantes seeing in their intel channel where the fight is taking place

That's somewhat of an unrealistic scenario, but I think it gives you an idea of how things could escalate and bring together groups of people to create a unique PvP experience in high-sec that normally would have been a Rifter getting out-repped by neutral RR that he can't deal with.

I think any system where you flag for PVP would be largely denounced by the nonconsentuial PVP ppl. That would cause an outroar the Jedi would feel lol

The non-consensual "Oh I stole loot from a mission runner and he shot me so now he dies" PvP would still certainly exist.

Being unflagged wouldn't mean "I'm never going to get PvP'd, I'll only get PvP'd if I turn on this PvP flag to let people know I want to fight"

Instead, rolling around with a suspect/vigilante flag means you can find fights from other gangs of like-minded people who are looking for fights. It detracts nothing from the game currently, and only adds another way for people to get fights in high-sec.

In fact, even being flagged, there's still non-consensual PvP. You shoot a suspect because he took your stuff, then suddenly his friends show up and you get non-consensually PvP'd. You could argue that retaliating against someone looting your stuff is consensual PvP, because surely you know the consequences.

There's still "Whoops, you just jumped into a gatecamp as a suspect, prepare to get non-consensually blown up". Just adds more ease-your-way-in-to-0.0 mechanics to high-sec, so people can get fights if they want to.

If you're able to shoot the owner you have to be able to shoot a things owned by him as well, otherwise you wouldn't be able to shoot his drones.

A bigger issue than that is that without individual flags the only thing keeping you able to shoot a war target that you are engaging is the fact that he is in a corporation that you are at war with. That might not seem like a huge issue, but corp hopping out of a corp while you're at war is already a thing, and you can leave a corp in space by having an application in to another player corp.

So you will be able to put an application in to a corporation, go and engage war targets and if you're losing have your application accepted and everyone shooting you will instantly be concorded without warning. Even in a best case scenario where that doesn't happen the person corp hopping will be able to escape.

The reason that doesn't happen right now is that shooting anyone gives you an individual timer against them so even if they leave their corporation while you're shooting them you are still able to attack each other because of the individual timer.

Greyscale's crimewatch could not be more of a step backwards in terms of the effect it will have on gameplay.

Cops and robbers...easy like faction warfare.

You make bounty hunters...We kill them alot

we get loyalty points and our bounties

We get LP and their frozen corpses