EVE General Discussion

Edit: The post was in practice deleted.

In it's place I just say: CCP, please don't assume all of us players understand what you mean when you say "The answer is obvious." Even if some of us might understand it, some of us don't and what is worst: some of us may think they do but don't. Result can be a PR catastrophy.

RR not receiving aggro flags for helping out victims of crimes…? Meh. Who cares. It's such a rare edge case that it just adds a fun tactic.

The real question is: are you still planning on flagging people as suspect for butting in on wardecs (e.g. assisting a war target)? Is the idea of docking/jumping timer transfers to assisting ships still intact? Are you still planning on introducing the “safety” system to keep people from getting themselves killed when helping the wrong ship?

Those are the ones that will actually deal with the “neutral RR” problem as everyone knows it — not the non-transitive nature of the player-to-player mappings.

Yeah this all the way. CCP Greyscale with respect, this scenario will have bad consequences when it is abused to the extent that a sudden "quick fix" has to be implemented. We all know what happens with "quick fixes".

The problem with low/null is that there you may end up as the "nonconsensual" participant in PvP. See, most folks only want nonconsensual anything when they are the aggressors, not recipients...

…except that that's not really what he said. He said that, if you rep someone who's fighting a suspect, their 1v1 flag will not be transferred to you.

Repping someone with a GCC “felon” status is a completely different matter and will most likely earn you a felon status of your own. It's not a matter of flag transfer, but of committing a crime and getting flagged for it all on your own.

What he's suggesting is a good idea because it means they don't have to keep track of the mess of interlinked person-to-person aggression flags that clogs up the current CrimeWatch system, and instead replace it with two generic flags — suspect and felon — and a single, non-transitive “defensive” flag so those suspects and felons have a chance of shooting back when someone comes gunning for them.

fact is i dont even mind half the ideas being put up buy ccp thow i belave there not very well thought out as thay stand
Currently from what grayscale has said this system will forse anyone who engages in unconsentual pvp out of hs over time while leaveing behind all mission runners to keep liveing in hs safely without fear of any consequences for there carebearing ways sucide ganks aside of corse

Dont cearbearing mission running guys disurve to be killed i for one think thay disurve warm hugs form my missles on a stady baisis

He said nothing of the kind, so no.

Really? invincible logi? the disconnect between the perception of Eve and its reality is getting larger and larger. Eve is supposed to be this big open world hardcore pvp game - but the reality is that it is almost an entirely consensual pvp system - its a large safe zone with battle zones of consensual pvp surrounding it. In effect, just like wow. In empire there are only 4 ways of getting pvp - can flipping, war deccing, suiciding, and ninja salvaging. Of these, ninja salvaging has been nerfed to hell, and war deccing has been and remains borked - even with the recent changes, it is easy as hell to avoid the war dec. Now can flipping which was in essence a consensual act as the target never had to attack you if he didnt want to and was a dicey affair because he could bring his entire corp to help him, is going to be rendered an impossible affair due to invicible logi. So the net effect is an ever decreasing pool of potential pvp. What really hurts about this is that null and low sec are about blobs, hot drops, and capitals. Whereas, empire pvp was more about the small low scale grp pvp. Moreover, the population of low and null are simply not what empire is. If this is the trend IMO there is going to be an overall decrease in the the opportunities for significant amounts small scale pvp.

Ok, so.

Here is the presentation from Fanfest, which you should watch if you're curious about this stuff and you haven't seen it already.

We had a discussion this morning about the specific case of people RRing vigilantes. We're currently considering treating it like all other "neutral RR" situations under the new system, ie suspect-flagging you if you RR a vigilante, as this seems to iron out a lot of the wrinkles here and makes it more consistent with the rest of the design.

We want to be clear at the same time, though, that getting a suspect flag is a punishment for doing something "bad". As with the current system of killrights etc, it's not intended as a tool that you can abuse to do further "bad" things with impunity, and while we're generally OK with people abusing some of the loopholes in the design and/or UI presentation to use such systems for unintended purposes, the design intent is for suspect flagging to be something that you want to avoid or at the very least treat as a drawback, not an opportunity. If you find yourself saying "but then if I get a suspect flag, I'm at a disadvantage!", you should consider that this is likely intentional. This is EVE: we permit you to do whatever you please, but we mandate negative consequences for some actions, to encourage a generally healthy player ecosystem.

As to can-flipping in particular, this is something that we assume will become largely ineffective with the "safeties" system, which should hopefully lessen the usability issues which are at the root of this gimmick. People losing out because they made a bad decision is great. People losing out because they didn't fully understand the decision they were making is not ideal. We realize that, for people who've dedicated a portion of their careers to "hisec PvP" of this particular stripe, this will be disruptive to their play experience, but given that there are plenty of other forms of PvP available (many of which incidentally end up generating a much stronger net contribution to the game), we're confident that such players are more than capable of transitioning rapidly to other, more robustly-supported occupations.

I think a lot of the lack of clarity has to do with people not being fully familiar with how they proposed to change the flagging mechanics, so when Greyscale says something, they assume it will apply as a change or addition to the current mechanics, rather than the upcoming one.

So, in this case, when he's talking about not transferring flagging, people assume that none of the flags we have right now will be transferred… and that's kind of technically true, I suppose, but only because none of the flags we have right now will even exist. You can't transfer something that no longer exists, now can you?

He didn't say that. He actually said that neutral RR (in its most common form) will come at a price: it will flag the RR as a suspect — i.e. a free-for-all target… Now add in the whole “inherits docking timers” idea (which I haven't seen them retract), and RR will most definitely not be the way it is now.

Same thing as now: you will be chased by the faction police in 1.0 systems.