These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Introducing the new and improved Crimewatch

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malcom Dax
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#361 - 2012-10-04 20:04:24 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Malcom Dax wrote:
... stuff about fleets and cans.

This used to be an issue, but it got fixed over the summer as part of the first phase of the crimewatch work. Now the can is tagged with the owner, corp and fleet at the time it is jettisoned. From then on, anyone who is in the tagged corp, or in the tagged fleet, can legally access the can. What the owner does after the can is created doesn't matter any more - He can dock, jump out, log off, join another fleet, even join another corp. The can still remembers which corp/fleet it was originally assigned to and this will never change.

Notice that it says "In the fleet registered to the container" and "in the corp registered to the container". Specifically not "in the same fleet as the owner at the time you try to take from it". Your suggested potential solution is in fact exactly what I did back in the summer!


Awesome! Big smile

.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#362 - 2012-10-04 20:04:49 UTC
BOLEVINE wrote:
-->Means harsher rules for criminals and less fun in the end. For example, "Security-status penalties are now ‘front-loaded’, so a criminal/suspect will incur the full penalty when an illegal attack starts, not when (if) the target is destroyed. "

Means less time in low sec having fun killing peeps for those who dont want to go a full -10. Less time = less fun.


Hmmm.... What is happening w/ sec status? Isn't that part of Crimewatch?

Sec Hits

  • Killing someone w/ a suspect flag gives sec hit down to -5.0
  • Killing a pod (killing w/ a criminal flag) gives sec hit to -10.0


Sec Boosts

  • Killing someone with a negative sec status gives a sec status boost up to +10.0 (so buy kill rights to up sec status?)
  • Turning in tags to up sec status from -5.0 to +5.0


The Crimewatch Fanfest vid is long... but really the part of it that makes all of this make perfect sense to me was when CCP Greyscale explained (very briefly) how the lowsec ecosystem might work with the changes to the criminal flagging mechanics and secboosting options. I've taken the liberty of linking the vid at 22:00 here where he explained it. With the forthcoming bounty system and the ability to sell killrights, all of this together will make lowsec a really interesting place to be, I think. But... we are missing two parts of the story so it's hard to see how this will happen. We have the Criminal flagging part of the story now... what we need is the bounty system (and killrights contract selling which I suspect is similar to the bounty sys) and we are missing the part about taking secstatus in the other direction via tags or killing people with a negative sec.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
#363 - 2012-10-04 20:04:56 UTC
"Stealing from a container will expose you to potential attacks from all players (but not from sentry guns)."

No more cans spam under jita....WOOW that cool, push people to real pvp, good job CCP.

EvE isn't game, its style of living.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#364 - 2012-10-04 20:05:15 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Jaangel wrote:
IF i'm a -10 pirate.

I shoot someone = on a gate in lowsec what does this mean to me?

This blog is really poor at explaining how the mechanics work for pirates. You know the people it affects the most.



The sentry guns will shoot you just as they do now, except once you leave grid they'll forget about you and won't shoot you when you return.


I think someone else asked this earlier, but I haven't seen the answer:

If you shoot at someone at a gate in lowsec, warp off grid before he dies (point is held by your cohort), and you warp back on grid, and then proceed to shoot the original target some more, do you :

a) Get another sec status hit, and gain new sentry aggro?
b) Get no further sec hit, sentries ignore you?
c) Get no further sec hit, sentries shoot at you anyway because they witnessed a sec status type action?


Answering my own question with a guess from reading other responses, but the real answer is important since sec status hits are now front-loaded.

I think the answer is C. B would be exploitable and A is a double-whammy on sec status hits.

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.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#365 - 2012-10-04 20:05:43 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:

When you've ejected from your expensive gatecamp ship, what's to stop a conveniently-placed alt-orca scooping it and insta-jumping to highsec, where it will be untouchable?


Well is it possible to disallow scooping of ships that are being targeted, just like now you can't board them?
Proddy Scun
Doomheim
#366 - 2012-10-04 20:05:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Proddy Scun
Although a threat to T1 cruisers and frigates of all type -- sentry guns alone are pretty meaningless for large ships and roam groups, especially T2-T3.

Idea Personally I think to make things more exciting for experienced HABITUAL suspects (especially gate campers), CCP should add random but infrequent NPC Navy patrols of stations and gates. The objective would be to affect habitual suspects in a way very similar to how rats harass sustained mining especially in low sec. Not so frequently as to make gate camps uncommon but often enough to add NPC risk to gate camps and to prevent sustained embargoes within EMPIRE space.

Lots of low sec gate camps are semi-AFK auto-target affairs which last all weekend. Worse its more likely in the interests of experienced pilots to join gate camps than to oppose them. Gate camps tend to be ad hoc groups for farming kills of less experienced and solo players. Since lo sec is generally NOT organized into large alliances and corps, it can take a while before a large enough group of more experienced players comes by to dislodge gate camps from some ambush spots.

PVP should not become an AFK activity even where a large fleet is ambushing individuals. Gate camping by larger groups in lo sec should entail its own infrequent risk from the EMPIRE factions -- since within sustained universal trade embargo is against factional interests not just individual pilots and corps.

I suppose larger rat/NPC convoys transiting gates and visiting stations might provide similar breaks in a static situation...as well as a prize for rival groups to fight with/over.


NOTE: Faction Navy Patrols would fly routes that transit gates and stop at stations for short random lengths of time. They would not stop at gates unless there are low faction/sec status ships to engage. That is not unless CCP wants to add complexity of gate/sentry maintenance clock (assuming gate camp has been discoing on gate or shooting sentries) or random pause if suspects were seen on directional recently. So it would be possible for alert gate camp with scouts to leave and return within minutes most the time. Of course anyone AFK might well be toast.
Jace Errata
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#367 - 2012-10-04 20:08:50 UTC
Random thought: I hope the PVP and NPC flags are called something else in-game.

tweeten

One day they woke me up so I could live forever

It's such a shame the same will never happen to you
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
#368 - 2012-10-04 20:09:55 UTC
Must be quite a party to finally throw out that ancient code and replace it. From all the Q&A, the system appears to be thought through and a very good start.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#369 - 2012-10-04 20:10:17 UTC
Proddy Scun wrote:
Idea Personally I think to make things more exciting for experienced HABITUAL suspects (especially gate campers), CCP should add random but infrequent NPC Navy patrols of stations and gates. The objective would be to affect habitual suspects in a way very similar to how rats harass sustained mining especially in low sec. Not so frequently as to make gate camps uncommon but often enough to add NPC risk to gate camps and to prevent sustained embargoes within EMPIRE space.


This is a double-edged sword. Either you make the NPCs too weak, so that they can be ignored or easily shot down. Or you make them too strong, and they will start interfering with honest fights.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#370 - 2012-10-04 20:10:27 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Being a low sec outlaw isn't something you should be punished for, this is a game after all.

I'd think it would be enough that gate guns are never ever on our side rather than actively set it up so that outlaws roaming in small gangs are helpless against fast tackling neutrals..

I think there are quite enough cons against being an outlaw (with absolutely no benefits i might add,) being an outlaw is the least rewarding career choice in eve game mechanic wise. All it really does is stack the odds against you without giving you any benefit what so ever.

Being an outlaw should have an effect like gate guns not helping us for the sake of immersion and such and because it makes sense. A lot of the time however it seems like CCP are intentionally trying discourage people from going down the outlaw path instead of accepting it as a legit career path that should have its own perks/game content the same as FW or anything else instead of just having flaws and difficulties stacked upon them......

Gate guns will always be on the side of the innocent party. If a pair of -10s or suspects start fighting on a gate, the guns will happily ignore them, since neither is innocent.


But if the two -10 guys DON'T start the fight because they are in ships that cant take sentries. But jump into a say.. Gang of three, that would be a good fight normally except they are all positive sec. They can tackle and kill one of us without the other being able to do anything at all to help

If we try to help we die to sentries. In this case the sentries are working against the passive party, not the agressing one.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Dern Morrow
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#371 - 2012-10-04 20:11:03 UTC
Hi CCP!

First, I love the changes so far. I'm a 0.0 fleet PvPer, and I often fly logistics ships and interdictors. It was always tacky that we logi could sit on the gates and jump through risk-free, so I'm glad that's being fixed.

One thing I haven't seen talked about, and would like you to say something on:

Presently, you can sit on a station in your carrier and repair it. Risk free, since you can just dock if anything happens. Given that some stations have very large dock radiuses, this means we can just chill on the station no matter how many hostiles are in local and repair it up while our fleet keeps the hostiles occupied so they aren't shooting the station down.

It would be interesting to me if perhaps the Crimewatch mechanics extended to allow for flagging logistics against stations that are hurt. This would prevent the abuse above, but it would also expose carriers sitting on stations to attack -- particularly from titans and dreads who might want to come in and gamble that 60 seconds is enough to blow one of the targets up.

Thoughts?
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#372 - 2012-10-04 20:11:08 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Tippia wrote:
@ CCP Masterplan

In regards to the T3 SP loss situation, could you care to comment on the thinking and on the possibility (or downsides) of a solution to that change in mechanics. I made a short remark on it earlier but it was kind of buried in a different post.

Right now, you list “Weapons”-flagging as causing a 60-second inability to dock, jump, abandon ship (by ejecting or storing the ship), and board ships (be it in space or from a corp hangar) unless it's done from a capsule. This is to remove the whole “ship-swapping to avoid destruction”, I presume, and the capsule exception is hidden behind the rule that makes it impossible to enter a capsule without being destroyed?

What if you adjusted the weapons-flagging rules so that:
· It does not have that capsule exception: in other words, you cannot board ships while you have a weapons flag, period.
· You are allowed to eject from (but not store) a ship while weapon-flagged.
· Ejecting resets your weapon flag timer to the full 60 seconds.
· Getting blown up clears your weapon flag timer to 0.

As far as I can see, this would maintain the ban on ship-swapping: you can't swap ships mid-battle — yes, you can eject, but it will take 60 seconds for your weapons flag to clear out, and before that, you're not allowed to board a new ship. Have fun orbiting ye olde Orca in a pod for a minute while everyone around you is allowed to shoot you. If you are destroyed, you can board a new ship… but then, that was possible under the suggested rule set as well and you have to lose a ship to get there, so this is no different than what you're proposing. If you are destroyed, you can also (almost) immediately jump through a gate or dock up, but those are still restricted by the session timer that triggers on destruction so the exploitation potential from those (re)added abilities should be minimal. Finally, this means you once again can get out of your T3 to save your SP, but you have all the weapons-flag restrictions for the next 60 seconds so the only possible thing to do is warp off and hope for the best.

Is there anything I've missed in this that would go against what your goals are? Are there any obvious loop-holes?

When you've ejected from your expensive gatecamp ship, what's to stop a conveniently-placed alt-orca scooping it and insta-jumping to highsec, where it will be untouchable?


That is a unrealistic scenario. Nobody is ever going to do that. What they will do however is eject from their ship in high-sec after baiting someone and have their alt scoop it up in the Orca and warp away ;-)
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#373 - 2012-10-04 20:11:17 UTC
Tippia wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
When you've ejected from your expensive gatecamp ship, what's to stop a conveniently-placed alt-orca scooping it and insta-jumping to highsec, where it will be untouchable?
Good point. Darn.

…unless you want to go the evil route and somehow transfer the flags to the actual ship and then onto anyone who tries to scoop it. P

Which is something we thought about, but want to avoid. Having to track flags per character and flags per item, and then deal with merging/splitting those is going to lead to even more bugs and exploits.

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#374 - 2012-10-04 20:11:31 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Arec Bardwin wrote:
Overall, great changes!

A few questions though:

- how is the transporting of illegal goods handled?
- Pods, are they legal targets if the player is criminal, suspect, LE flagged?
- criminally flagged pod cannot initiate warp?

Unchanged
Yes
Criminal pods are excepted from the "can't dock/warp in high-sec" restriction

Am I to read this that Suspect, LE, and Criminal players will ALL have legally-shootable pods (in the case of LE, to the players involved)?

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#375 - 2012-10-04 20:13:27 UTC
Is there going to be a way to boost up your sec status other than grinding 1 NPC per system??? QuestionQuestionQuestion

Signatures should be used responsibly...
TheMaster42
Scorpion Unicorn Bird
#376 - 2012-10-04 20:13:54 UTC
PvP flag will carry between systems like all the other flags, correct? (This would be a change from the current behavior.)
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#377 - 2012-10-04 20:16:19 UTC
Erik Finnegan wrote:
Must be quite a party to finally throw out that ancient code and replace it. From all the Q&A, the system appears to be thought through and a very good start.

Each time I delete a bit of the old code that has become redundant, I do a happy dance in my chair

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
Jeas Imerius
Zero-G Freelancing
#378 - 2012-10-04 20:16:47 UTC
I like how this sounds so far! I have an idea of how the new 1v1 system could work though..

Call it Dueling:

  • Right click players portrait or ship and click 'Challenge player to Duel' (must be in a ship and in space).
  • A window pops up were both parties either accept or decline. 'Insert Name has challenged you to a Duel, do you wish to defend your honor?'
  • If both accept, a 10 second timer begins during which time both players assume their positions (take 10 paces).
  • After the countdown they are free to fire on each other without incurring any flags.
  • Once a ship is destroyed the duel is over.

    • Big smile
    l0rd carlos
    the king asked me to guard the mountain
    #379 - 2012-10-04 20:17:23 UTC
    Garviel Tarrant wrote:


    But if the two -10 guys DON'T start the fight because they are in ships that cant take sentries. But jump into a say.. Gang of three, that would be a good fight normally except they are all positive sec. They can tackle and kill one of us without the other being able to do anything at all to help

    If we try to help we die to sentries. In this case the sentries are working against the passive party, not the agressing one.

    That's the hard life of an outlaw.
    Crash the gate.
    Use scout.

    Youtube Channel about Micro and Small scale PvP with commentary: Fleet Commentary by l0rd carlos
    Rengerel en Distel
    #380 - 2012-10-04 20:17:50 UTC
    It seems a lot of these questions would be answered if people read the entire dev blog, the entire thread, or just waited for it to hit the test server. At least I can only assume that the devs would love it if people actually tested each scenario that people are asking about, to make sure it follows their plan.

    With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.