These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Is CrimeWatch vaporware?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#101 - 2012-07-16 05:28:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Gogela
Ohh Yeah wrote:
You're right. With the currently-proposed system, your logis will never be flagged - might as well officer fit them. The currently-proposed system is idiotic.

When you shoot at suspects, you should be flagged as a vigilante, and when you assist a vigilante, you should be flagged as a vigilante. So now you're sitting there with your 1 battleship and 10 logi, maybe some other vigilante friends. You honestly believe that there won't be corps or large groups of players who do nothing but flag as suspects and come zonk you on the gate? Maybe even make it a good fight?

But absolutely, as long as the logis never get flagged as per CCP Greyscale's flawless logic, you could 100% sit on the Perimeter gate with an instalocking tackler, a BS, and RR and blap dudes all day long.

Edit: I also like how you made a post and then went back and edited it afterwards to add insults about my alliance losing ships worth a fraction of their AT budget.

Yah. I used to be in hirr. It was awesome. Everyone was drunk or high and it was genuinely hilarious all of the time... even when nothing was coming through the gate we were on. There will be corps that form up to do nothing but. I may join one. Why not? No skin off my schlong...

Also: It wasn't really an insult. The jab at your flag ship.... maybe a little. I'm a big AT ship aficionado though, and it WAS very gutsy of PL to field them like they did (I'm putting their fleet at about 170 billion ISK fit not counting implants). It was the best alliance match I've ever seen. Very exciting to watch.... so kuddos to them. I'm amazed they didn't loose a Malice. From time to time I fit an AT ship and take it out to fight on sisi. Most of the time it's a PL pilot that kills me... and that's a fact. So much respect...

Edit: I would like to see things chain more in crimewatch. I would love to make empire more dangerous and have the probability of things spinning totally out of control and have entire empire systems collapse under the weight of complex aggression mechanics grow exponentially. I can't think of any better way to make empire vibrant and fun. At the same time, I appreciate the technical difficulties and from what I understand of what CCP Greyscale has written in other threads, I don't know how a solution can be found. I've thought a lot about it... I've got nothing.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Ohh Yeah
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#102 - 2012-07-16 05:33:10 UTC
Gogela wrote:

Yah. I used to be in hirr. It was awesome. Everyone was drunk or high and it was genuinely hilarious all of the time... even when nothing was coming through the gate we were on. There will be corps that form up to do nothing but. I may join one. Why not? No skin off my schlong...



Problem is, with the current system, you'll never catch many suspects. They can't gang up and work together. Give suspects the ability to fight back together against the people shooting them and you'll get tons of fights on gates. It'd be interesting and maybe worth giving a shot.

As long as 50 people can shoot 1 suspect with only that suspect being able to shoot back via individual aggression timers, there's no point. You'll only catch a few stupid suspects in T1 looting/salvaging frigates. The rest will avoid gates like the plague until their timer is gone.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#103 - 2012-07-16 05:39:33 UTC
Ohh Yeah wrote:
Gogela wrote:

Yah. I used to be in hirr. It was awesome. Everyone was drunk or high and it was genuinely hilarious all of the time... even when nothing was coming through the gate we were on. There will be corps that form up to do nothing but. I may join one. Why not? No skin off my schlong...



Problem is, with the current system, you'll never catch many suspects. They can't gang up and work together. Give suspects the ability to fight back together against the people shooting them and you'll get tons of fights on gates. It'd be interesting and maybe worth giving a shot.

As long as 50 people can shoot 1 suspect with only that suspect being able to shoot back via individual aggression timers, there's no point. You'll only catch a few stupid suspects in T1 looting/salvaging frigates. The rest will avoid gates like the plague until their timer is gone.

You underestimate the power of the dumb side of the force...

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Pipa Porto
#104 - 2012-07-16 05:40:28 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
CONCORD provides consequences for anyone shooting anyone who has yet to do something wrong. Innocent until actually guilty.


Yeah cause the police totally wouldnt bother a known bank robber who is taking guns out of his car and walking into a bank

Real life comparisons work real well here lol

Pipa Porto wrote:
Besides that, how do you suggest Concord tell the difference between some newbie in a Catalyst warping to a belt to rat and a ganker in a catalyst warping to a belt to shoot Hulks?


remove CONCORD

Bet you werent expecting that...


Where did I make a Real Life Comparison? CONCORD provides consequences once you do something wrong and not a moment before. Why should CONCORD randomly decide that some Catalysts deserve death? As it is, your history of ganking is taken into account. The Faction Navies will hunt you and you can be preemptively shot at.


I'm not surprised by it. I think you've suggested it before. And I think I've pointed you to LowSec before. Lowsec is pretty much HS without CONCORD. Enjoy.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Werst Dendenahzees
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#105 - 2012-07-16 05:47:03 UTC
Concord should work like the police in GTA, if you can make it to a station and change paintjobs, they forget everything you ever did.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#106 - 2012-07-16 05:48:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
Concord should work like the police in GTA, if you can make it to a station and change paintjobs, they forget everything you ever did.

Didn't you hear what Greyscale said? Fun gameplay isn't allowed in highsec.

People who want to instigate conflict in highsec must be punished and their actions discouraged, not be acknowledged as engaging in a completely legitimate style of gameplay and given tools to make that type of gameplay more fun and rewarding for everyone involved.
Ohh Yeah
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#107 - 2012-07-16 06:00:14 UTC
Yeah, why would you want to expose players to interesting, compelling gameplay as soon as they start playing?
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#108 - 2012-07-16 06:02:28 UTC
mkint wrote:
I'm not sure I'd care. This is not the first time Grayscale will have implemented something game breaking that only benefits some very specific people. Why would anyone want to play a game that gets developed to keep dev-friends empowered at the cost of everyone else?


What "dev-friends" does it benefit and what other changes has he made for the benefit of "dev-friends?"

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Ohh Yeah
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#109 - 2012-07-16 06:03:50 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
mkint wrote:
I'm not sure I'd care. This is not the first time Grayscale will have implemented something game breaking that only benefits some very specific people. Why would anyone want to play a game that gets developed to keep dev-friends empowered at the cost of everyone else?


What "dev-friends" does it benefit and what other changes has he made for the benefit of "dev-friends?"


he nerfed titans

must be a goon alt for sure

maybe even shadoo's boyfriend
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#110 - 2012-07-16 06:04:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
You should talk to GM Homonia about teaching people that highsec is for PVE and if that anyone bothers you while you're missioning or mining you're entitled to have them banned. What we all really need is more carebears who think they are entitled to safety.
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#111 - 2012-07-16 06:05:50 UTC
Ohh Yeah wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
mkint wrote:
I'm not sure I'd care. This is not the first time Grayscale will have implemented something game breaking that only benefits some very specific people. Why would anyone want to play a game that gets developed to keep dev-friends empowered at the cost of everyone else?


What "dev-friends" does it benefit and what other changes has he made for the benefit of "dev-friends?"


he nerfed titans

must be a goon alt for sure

maybe even shadoo's boyfriend


I doubt many of the "titans are fine" guys played EVE, let alone in 0.0, before the titan nerf.

Not that nerf, that nerf.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
mkint
#112 - 2012-07-16 06:07:47 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
mkint wrote:
I'm not sure I'd care. This is not the first time Grayscale will have implemented something game breaking that only benefits some very specific people. Why would anyone want to play a game that gets developed to keep dev-friends empowered at the cost of everyone else?


What "dev-friends" does it benefit and what other changes has he made for the benefit of "dev-friends?"

Remember that one time Grayscale destroyed trillions of isk of value in sov upgrades that completely destroyed alliances and coalitions, and further entrenched others?

What kind of player do you think would benefit from being able to use neutral RR with impunity? Maybe the kinds who have big ol' piles of anom and moon min isk to plex lots of logi alts? Maybe the kind that Grayscale actively goes out of his way to make game-wide sweeping changes to benefit?

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#113 - 2012-07-16 06:10:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
I don't think you understood the situation in which you'd be able to use neutral RR without anyone ever being able to shoot at you.

It's totally irrelevant to goons and nullsec alliances in general, even when they're in highsec.
Ohh Yeah
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#114 - 2012-07-16 06:14:06 UTC
mkint wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
mkint wrote:
I'm not sure I'd care. This is not the first time Grayscale will have implemented something game breaking that only benefits some very specific people. Why would anyone want to play a game that gets developed to keep dev-friends empowered at the cost of everyone else?


What "dev-friends" does it benefit and what other changes has he made for the benefit of "dev-friends?"

Remember that one time Grayscale destroyed trillions of isk of value in sov upgrades that completely destroyed alliances and coalitions, and further entrenched others?

What kind of player do you think would benefit from being able to use neutral RR with impunity? Maybe the kinds who have big ol' piles of anom and moon min isk to plex lots of logi alts? Maybe the kind that Grayscale actively goes out of his way to make game-wide sweeping changes to benefit?


You're right, it'd be such a joy to be able to spend all of our tech ISK on logi alts so we can use them in high-sec without getting shot at
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#115 - 2012-07-16 06:14:33 UTC
mkint wrote:
Remember that one time Grayscale destroyed trillions of isk of value in sov upgrades that completely destroyed alliances and coalitions, and further entrenched others?


what

mkint wrote:
What kind of player do you think would benefit from being able to use neutral RR with impunity?


AFAIK neutral RR in wardec PvP will still work as it does - you get flagged upon repping somebody at war. In Crimewatch(TM) the current design will allow logistics to rep somebody shooting a suspect flagged player while still being "protected" by CONCORD.

Having to suicide gank a player who is assisting legal targets on the field is bad design.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#116 - 2012-07-16 06:15:27 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
CONCORD provides consequences for anyone shooting anyone who has yet to do something wrong. Innocent until actually guilty.


Yeah cause the police totally wouldnt bother a known bank robber who is taking guns out of his car and walking into a bank

Real life comparisons work real well here lol

Pipa Porto wrote:
Besides that, how do you suggest Concord tell the difference between some newbie in a Catalyst warping to a belt to rat and a ganker in a catalyst warping to a belt to shoot Hulks?


remove CONCORD

Bet you werent expecting that...


Where did I make a Real Life Comparison? CONCORD provides consequences once you do something wrong and not a moment before. Why should CONCORD randomly decide that some Catalysts deserve death? As it is, your history of ganking is taken into account. The Faction Navies will hunt you and you can be preemptively shot at.


I'm not surprised by it. I think you've suggested it before. And I think I've pointed you to LowSec before. Lowsec is pretty much HS without CONCORD. Enjoy.


wait since when can you not bring dreadnaughts and **** into lowsec?
Oh yeah... you can, so that comparison fails too

and btw; real life comparison: Innocent until proven guilty. Unless thats the in game rule of law in this game too and if so then CONCORD are just retards

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

mkint
#117 - 2012-07-16 06:16:13 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
I don't think you understood the situation in which you'd be able to use neutral RR without anyone ever being able to shoot at you.

It's totally irrelevant to goons and nullsec alliances in general.

it's useful for any who want to go around being a nuisance in highsec.

Personally, I don't understand how people think the existing aggro system is complicated. It's not. You do something against someone, they get aggro rights on you. It's basically a "do you deserve it?" equation. All this new "well, you're now a suspect but then you become a vigilante, then you can be a sheriff but you have to chew space-tobacco" crap is just some dude trying to justify his position in a company that can no longer keep track of it's own employees. Bureaucracy at work.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#118 - 2012-07-16 06:17:13 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:


AFAIK neutral RR in wardec PvP will still work as it does - you get flagged upon repping somebody at war. In Crimewatch(TM) the current design will allow logistics to rep somebody shooting a suspect flagged player while still being "protected" by CONCORD.

Having to suicide gank a player who is assisting legal targets on the field is bad design.



damn I hate agreeing with Goons but Ownt like this guy: http://youtu.be/FM1gEZXzunI

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#119 - 2012-07-16 06:17:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
mkint wrote:
it's useful for any who want to go around being a nuisance in highsec.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Go back and actually read the posts. The people who will be able to receive RR without the RR getting flagged will be people shooting suspect flagged characters. The only thing goons do in highsec is gank folks and very occasionally shoot at war targets, in neither of those situations will they be using RR either at all or in a way that it won't be attack-able by someone.

mkint wrote:
Personally, I don't understand how people think the existing aggro system is complicated. It's not. You do something against someone, they get aggro rights on you. It's basically a "do you deserve it?" equation. All this new "well, you're now a suspect but then you become a vigilante, then you can be a sheriff but you have to chew space-tobacco" crap is just some dude trying to justify his position in a company that can no longer keep track of it's own employees. Bureaucracy at work.


This part is pretty much exactly the case. I get the impression that CCP Greyscale just wants to be able to say that he completed some big project and doesn't even remotely care what the actual outcome is. He very obviously couldn't care less about crimewatch actually leading to sensible, working gameplay that is fun.
Ohh Yeah
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#120 - 2012-07-16 06:18:56 UTC
mkint wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
I don't think you understood the situation in which you'd be able to use neutral RR without anyone ever being able to shoot at you.

It's totally irrelevant to goons and nullsec alliances in general.

it's useful for any who want to go around being a nuisance in highsec.



Yeah I don't think that having RR that is immune from being shot by criminals is anywhere near as effective as just suicide ganking ice miners.

It's like you're fishing for a connection between CCP decisions and Goonswarm, but you keep catching boots.