These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Crimewatch pointless on arrival

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#81 - 2012-10-04 20:42:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
But what about looting wrecks from a war field flagging you to lookie-lous? What about freighter ganks being impossible to loot due to the ineffectiveness of a hauler fitted for cargo in surviving the same lookie-lous?
See above: looting war tagets (or indeed any legal targets) is no longer a crime.

Missed that. My bads.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#82 - 2012-10-04 20:44:20 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
But what about looting wrecks from a war field flagging you to lookie-lous? What about freighter ganks being impossible to loot due to the ineffectiveness of a hauler fitted for cargo in surviving the same lookie-lous?
See above: looting war tagets (or indeed any legal targets) is no longer a crime.

Missed that. My bads.
Wardeccers, rejoice. You finally got your reward mechanic and a way to fend off the competition.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#83 - 2012-10-04 20:46:23 UTC
Sarah Schneider wrote:
With no disrespect towards the huge amount of work you guys have done and still going to do (hopefully) and probably slightly unrelated to the crimewatch development. No matter how you spin in it, CCP are, moving towards that direction, all these buffs, nerfs, changes, modifications or whatever during the past few months (even years) proves that, or at least to an extent that a lot of players feel that way.

Again, I have a huge respect towards the devs, you guys are probably the best devs in terms of devs-player interaction I've seen during more than a decade of playing MMOs, so, there's that. But suffice it to say, we don't know what were the decisions made internally in CCP during the past few, we don't know whether the CCP executives made the decision to change from a pure and harsh sandbox to a more themepark styled MMO which caters a bigger market share. All we see are the impacts, what you guys did and where we think the game is moving, in which it's very clear. No matter what you, soundwave, or what other devs says.

Just my 2 isk. Please take no offense.



None taken, don't worry.

The primary goal of these changes was to simplify a horrifically complex system to the point where the average player could reasonably be expected to be able to understand approximately how it works.

A secondary goal was to try and keep the balance of power between criminals and their marks approximately where it is now. This was never going to be perfect, because the current balance of power is only possible thanks to the complexity of the current system.

There was never, at any point, any goal to make things safer. Cool story: can theft has been a pain the whole way through this process, and early on my preferred option was to do some special-casing around mining and then remove any penalties at all for stealing from cans, because it bypasses the whole issue. We felt this swung the balance too far in favor of "criminals" (it's legalization so they wouldn't technically be criminals any more), so we ended up not doing that, but hopefully this illustrates the point that "making hisec easier" was never on the agenda.

(If, of course, the complaint is actually that these changes reduces the number of people dying because they did something dumb because they didn't understand the mechanics, then yes, this change is absolutely intending to have that effect. We're not bothered about this because EVE should be about winning because you made better decisions, not because the other guy got screwed over by the interface. If you can't win on a level playing field based on better decision-making, you shouldn't be winning at all.)

La Nariz wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
~crimewatch stuff~


How will Crimewatch affect looting of ganked ships? It seems that this suspect flag change will make ganking harder which decreases risk in highsec, will there be a proportional decrease in highsec reward to compensate for this?


Ganking, not at all harder. Looting from ganks, somewhat harder. Not impossible. Yes, your loot haulers are going to be vulnerable in the time between picking up the loot and going into warp. You're EVE players. You can figure out how to minimize that period of vulnerability.

Darth Gustav wrote:
The reason you didn't just spend months removing PVP engagements entirely from high-sec instead of this sham we're getting is that you'd have been even less popular after that brief endeavor than you are currently for the results of your year's hard labor. That explanation is intuitively obvious to the informed forum reader. The results are almost exactly the same. You surely must be able to see this! That you would beg this response is...frustrating...to say the very least.


If you really want to believe that we'd bother doing, that there's probably nothing I can say to change your mind. (We didn't do that, because it would be a colossal waste of time and we have better things to do with our lives.)
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#84 - 2012-10-04 20:48:35 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
But what about looting wrecks from a war field flagging you to lookie-lous? What about freighter ganks being impossible to loot due to the ineffectiveness of a hauler fitted for cargo in surviving the same lookie-lous?
See above: looting war tagets (or indeed any legal targets) is no longer a crime.

Missed that. My bads.

If you're in the war yes its a legal wreck. Yet the looky-loos and gankers vs neutral targets will be in fact suspects when looting as your previous concern for yourself is valid..
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#85 - 2012-10-04 20:50:49 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
But what about looting wrecks from a war field flagging you to lookie-lous? What about freighter ganks being impossible to loot due to the ineffectiveness of a hauler fitted for cargo in surviving the same lookie-lous?
See above: looting war tagets (or indeed any legal targets) is no longer a crime.

Missed that. My bads.

If you're in the war yes its a legal wreck. Yet the looky-loos and gankers vs neutral targets will be in fact suspects when looting as your previous concern for yourself is valid..

That's a very good point. +1.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#86 - 2012-10-04 20:54:52 UTC
Why does it feel like every devblog mentioning highsec over the past year or more feels like I'm getting directly punched in the guts?

Belligerent Undesirables Selling Griefer Immunity
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#87 - 2012-10-04 20:56:34 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
Why does it feel like every devblog mentioning highsec over the past year or more feels like I'm getting directly punched in the guts?

Because every devblog mentioning high-sec in the past year has punched us in the gut.

I think even the people who thought they got a buff got punched in the gut. Time will tell on that one though. Twisted

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#88 - 2012-10-04 20:59:03 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
Why does it feel like every devblog mentioning highsec over the past year or more feels like I'm getting directly punched in the guts?


Because CCP want highsec to be a safe, fluffy, carebear wonderland.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#89 - 2012-10-04 21:04:42 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:

Because CCP want highsec to be a safe, fluffy, carebear wonderland.


Because everyone can turn on their guns now... ironic?
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#90 - 2012-10-04 21:07:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:

Because CCP want highsec to be a safe, fluffy, carebear wonderland.


Because everyone can turn on their guns now... ironic?

They could always turn them on before.

The irony is that now they won't - and with even more frequency than they didn't before! X

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#91 - 2012-10-04 21:08:01 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:



None taken, don't worry.

The primary goal of these changes was to simplify a horrifically complex system to the point where the average player could reasonably be expected to be able to understand approximately how it works.


IMO on this point you failed horribly - it takes two charts and a magnifying glass to figure this out now. Its way more complicated then what we already have.


CCP Greyscale wrote:

(If, of course, the complaint is actually that these changes reduces the number of people dying because they did something dumb because they didn't understand the mechanics, then yes, this change is absolutely intending to have that effect. We're not bothered about this because EVE should be about winning because you made better decisions, not because the other guy got screwed over by the interface. If you can't win on a level playing field based on better decision-making, you shouldn't be winning at all.)


Unfortunately, this is actually wrong headed and really against the spirit of eve. Eve's fun (at least for me) comes from its complexity - you are always learning, always seeing and figuring out new things. Eve has always rewarded the person who spends the time to learn the game and its mechanics. If you, make it less complex, you strip the game of its reward to the diligent player. Consequently, you make the game less interesting and rewarding. In effect, by removing its complexity you make the game more causal friendly but at the expense of the hardcore player. And we know how loyal those causal players are....

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#92 - 2012-10-04 21:18:38 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
IMO on this point you failed horribly - it takes two charts and a magnifying glass to figure this out now. Its way more complicated then what we already have.
No, it's ridiculously simple now since it can be folded into two charts. Good luck doing that with the old system.
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#93 - 2012-10-04 21:25:49 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:

Unfortunately, this is actually wrong headed and really against the spirit of eve. Eve's fun (at least for me) comes from its complexity - you are always learning, always seeing and figuring out new things. Eve has always rewarded the person who spends the time to learn the game and its mechanics. If you, make it less complex, you strip the game of its reward to the diligent player. Consequently, you make the game less interesting and rewarding. In effect, by removing its complexity you make the game more causal friendly but at the expense of the hardcore player. And we know how loyal those causal players are....


Complex does not equal better. Being inherently convoluted doesn't make something more entertaining.
Under this attitude you are more awesome than rookies who can fall for simple traps because the aggression mechanics are not plainly layed out. They get a few sobering fist fulls of aggression training then what? You go on to a new batch of rookies.
This is base mechanics. not high tier strategics.
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#94 - 2012-10-04 21:28:18 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
Ah good catch - I didnt realize that suiciding is done. So with this implementation we get: can flipping RIP, Ninja Salvaging RIP, and now Suiciding (for profit) RIP. So empire is finally safe. With eve having one large safe zone and consensual battle zones how is it different from wow?
…except that ninja salvaging still isn't being touched; that canflipping is still just as possible (and, in fact, could even see a boost if you're sly enough); and that ganking for profit under these rules was solved back in April.

Darth Gustav wrote:
Assuming high-sec war mechanics actually worked (LOL, unlike Greyscale's example of a removed feature "POS Attacks on Aggression"), under the proposed implementation you could clear the field in a high-sec war and then get mauled by lookie-lous as you try to clean up the wrecks.
Incorrect. Legal target = legal to loot = no-one can shoot you for taking the spoils of war.



When you say canflipping is still possible - have you actually looked around lately? Barge changes have taken cans largely off the field - so yea canflipping can still theoretically occur - but it wont as a practical matter. As for ninja salvaging - again it can occur, but its not as prevalent because the noc's suck up the wrecks so fast -- add this to the fact that there is always the problem of actually getting them to shoot at you and its just not that much of a factor anymore.

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#95 - 2012-10-04 21:32:20 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:

Unfortunately, this is actually wrong headed and really against the spirit of eve. Eve's fun (at least for me) comes from its complexity - you are always learning, always seeing and figuring out new things. Eve has always rewarded the person who spends the time to learn the game and its mechanics. If you, make it less complex, you strip the game of its reward to the diligent player. Consequently, you make the game less interesting and rewarding. In effect, by removing its complexity you make the game more causal friendly but at the expense of the hardcore player. And we know how loyal those causal players are....


Complex does not equal better. Being inherently convoluted doesn't make something more entertaining.
Under this attitude you are more awesome than rookies who can fall for simple traps because the aggression mechanics are not plainly layed out. They get a few sobering fist fulls of aggression training then what? You go on to a new batch of rookies.
This is base mechanics. not high tier strategics.


One of the great things in eve is getting vet null sec players who have forgotten the empire rules to blow themselves up - so its not just a newbee thing...

And as for the newbees -- isnt it better that they learn the harshness of eve early when they lose that 250k isk ship to some act of stupidity rather then at a later date when they have more to lose?

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#96 - 2012-10-04 21:32:58 UTC  |  Edited by: PinkKnife
Wait, so the people who were told "here's a rubix cube, go **** yourself" and have learned to do that, are now whining because new people are given an rubix cube that has colors on it?

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

The idea isn't make eve less harsh, its make the UI less harsh. The fundamentals of the game are still there, but you shouldn't be hindered by your ability to, or inability to interact with the environment. In this case, knowing the monstrous complexity that was the aggro system.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#97 - 2012-10-04 21:35:45 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
Unfortunately, this is actually wrong headed and really against the spirit of eve. Eve's fun (at least for me) comes from its complexity - you are always learning, always seeing and figuring out new things. Eve has always rewarded the person who spends the time to learn the game and its mechanics. If you, make it less complex, you strip the game of its reward to the diligent player. Consequently, you make the game less interesting and rewarding. In effect, by removing its complexity you make the game more causal friendly but at the expense of the hardcore player. And we know how loyal those causal players are....

Complexity for complexity's sake is stupid. That's not fun gameplay.

So here's a scenario: take a moron and a bad player. Let's say he can't make any ends meet in EvE and he just sucks at everything. Let's say this guy if left to his own devices will be totally unmemorable and never achieve remotely close to his vision. Now let's say some somewhat decent player tosses this looser-guy a bone and let's him in on some weird exception or some unintuitive mechanic that allows this looser-guy to actually start winning fights against weaker opponents because they don't know how the mechanic works. Yay... now looser-guy is winning at something. Of course this looser-guy is going to hate the changes, because his little hidden niche is going away and he has to go back to just being an unimaginative "looser-guy." Looser-guy isn't hardcore... he's not good... he just has an edge on those who are newer and might not have seen this mechanic react this or that way. In many ways, looser-guy is the psudo-PvP equivalent of a margin-scam trader in Jita. However, even the margin scammer knows that he is still a scammer. Looser-guy might not be aware that he is in fact a looser. (*winks at OP*) In this totally hypothetical and not-metaphoric scenario, we can expect looser guy to defend complexity for complexity's sake because exploiting a logical niche or error in the code requires no further thinking than initially discovering the behavior in the game. In effect, it can make you feel smart over and over again even when you are not smart. Of course looser guy is going to defend the hell out of complexity for complexity's sake given it's his sole shot at feeling superior.

You talk about highsec PvP like it's a thing. There are wars and there are ganks in highsec.


Signatures should be used responsibly...
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#98 - 2012-10-04 21:36:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Roll Sizzle Beef
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
but its not as prevalent because the noc's suck up the wrecks so fast -- add this to the fact that there is always the problem of actually getting them to shoot at you and its just not that much of a factor anymore.


You keep bring up this lame excuse. Tractor beams wont bring it into their cargo. You sit on top of the noctics and work on looting cans before they can. That's bound to make someone shoot at you. Then you have a perfectly valid limited engagement. within a mission room.

Vol Arm'OOO wrote:

And as for the newbees -- isnt it better that they learn the harshness of eve early when they lose that 250k isk ship to some act of stupidity rather then at a later date when they have more to lose?

Which this system still allows in full force. Yet they only ever had to learn can color once.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#99 - 2012-10-04 21:39:14 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
When you say canflipping is still possible - have you actually looked around lately?
Yes. There are plenty of cans to be flipped. You just have to look for a different audience.

Quote:
As for ninja salvaging - again it can occur, but its not as prevalent because the noc's suck up the wrecks so fast
…which won't happen any more with the new AI (oh, and it didn't stop ninja salvaging anyway since it just made it easier to get to the wrecks — they make your job easier).
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#100 - 2012-10-04 21:43:36 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:



None taken, don't worry.

The primary goal of these changes was to simplify a horrifically complex system to the point where the average player could reasonably be expected to be able to understand approximately how it works.


IMO on this point you failed horribly - it takes two charts and a magnifying glass to figure this out now. Its way more complicated then what we already have.


CCP Greyscale wrote:

(If, of course, the complaint is actually that these changes reduces the number of people dying because they did something dumb because they didn't understand the mechanics, then yes, this change is absolutely intending to have that effect. We're not bothered about this because EVE should be about winning because you made better decisions, not because the other guy got screwed over by the interface. If you can't win on a level playing field based on better decision-making, you shouldn't be winning at all.)


Unfortunately, this is actually wrong headed and really against the spirit of eve. Eve's fun (at least for me) comes from its complexity - you are always learning, always seeing and figuring out new things. Eve has always rewarded the person who spends the time to learn the game and its mechanics. If you, make it less complex, you strip the game of its reward to the diligent player. Consequently, you make the game less interesting and rewarding. In effect, by removing its complexity you make the game more causal friendly but at the expense of the hardcore player. And we know how loyal those causal players are....


The documentation for the old system is 40 pages long. And that is incomplete. It has this concept of an "engagement", which is kind of an amorphous blob of you and everyone you've fought recently and everyone they've fought recently and so on, which is the cause of eg the old "attack if agression"/"skynet" flag on starbases being so unpredictable; the engagement system on its own is so obtuse that Masterplan doesn't fully understand it, despite having effectively reimplemented it from scratch earlier in the year. I could give you a vague, hand-wavy explanation of roughly what it was doing, but given an arbitrary "complex situation", I couldn't tell you with real certainty what would happen if one player remote-repped another. Trust me, this system is simpler.


As to complexity, yes, EVE needs a certain amount of complexity, because that's necessary for the real goal, which is tactical and strategic depth. That's a goal because we want players to be winning based on having better judgment and better decision-making than the other guy/girl. Complex is NOT the same as complicated, and it's certainly not the same thing as obfuscated. The goal is to get as large a (useful) possibility space as possible out of as small a number of variables as possible, because simplicity is a virtue. Go basically has two rules. It's really goddamn simple. It's also sufficiently complex that there's no halfway-decent Go AI in existence. That's where we want to be aiming for.