These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#961 - 2012-10-10 10:41:57 UTC
Echo Mande wrote:
Why should setting off a smartbomb in highsec, even if nothing gets hit, net you a suspect flag?

There are actually legitimate uses for smartbombs in PVE situations. Scraping close-orbitting NPC frigs off your battleship rather than waiting for your drones to do it comes to mind.

Also, please make the icon area used for crimewatch moveable like the target icons are. Not everyone wants these icons in the top left of the screen.

Activating a smartbomb only gives you a Weapons flag. It is only when your smart bomb hits another player that other flags can be triggered.

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

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#962 - 2012-10-10 11:25:27 UTC
Would still like an answer to my question about how sec hits and sentry aggro will interact in cases where someone aggresses an illegal target on a gate in lowsec, warps off, and then comes back to resume shooting:

Quote:
According to the blog, taking actions that cause you to receive a sec status hit while on grid with sentry guns will make the sentries attack you. If you then warp off, the sentries will immediately forget about your wicked ways and will let you be until you next do something in front of them that causes a sec hit. The blog also states that when you attack and kill a player ship, you only get a single, front-loaded sec status hit. What then happens if I aggress a neutral in sight of the sentries (taking my full front-loaded sec hit and receiving a suspect flag), then warp off grid and come back to resume shooting? Specifically, will my actions still be covered by that first sec hit, and will the sentries start shooting me again? There seem to be four possible outcomes:

a) I take an additional sec status hit, sentries start shooting me again
b) I take no additional sec status hit, sentries start shooting me again
c) I take no additional sec status hit, sentries ignore me
d) I take an additional sec status hit, sentries ignore me

I assume (b) is what will happen, but I'm not sure based on the blog alone.
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#963 - 2012-10-10 11:45:40 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:

Activating a smartbomb only gives you a Weapons flag. It is only when your smart bomb hits another player that other flags can be triggered.



Just double checked this and it doesn't seem to be on the table so I though I'd ask:

What happens if I shoot someone else's canister?

Is that still GCC'd straight away?

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#964 - 2012-10-10 12:16:56 UTC
Tsubutai wrote:
Would still like an answer to my question about how sec hits and sentry aggro will interact in cases where someone aggresses an illegal target on a gate in lowsec, warps off, and then comes back to resume shooting:

Quote:
According to the blog, taking actions that cause you to receive a sec status hit while on grid with sentry guns will make the sentries attack you. If you then warp off, the sentries will immediately forget about your wicked ways and will let you be until you next do something in front of them that causes a sec hit. The blog also states that when you attack and kill a player ship, you only get a single, front-loaded sec status hit. What then happens if I aggress a neutral in sight of the sentries (taking my full front-loaded sec hit and receiving a suspect flag), then warp off grid and come back to resume shooting? Specifically, will my actions still be covered by that first sec hit, and will the sentries start shooting me again? There seem to be four possible outcomes:

a) I take an additional sec status hit, sentries start shooting me again
b) I take no additional sec status hit, sentries start shooting me again
c) I take no additional sec status hit, sentries ignore me
d) I take an additional sec status hit, sentries ignore me

I assume (b) is what will happen, but I'm not sure based on the blog alone.



CCP Fozzie from page 3 wrote:
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.


Not sure if this means c) or d). d) would sound logicalestest?

.
Pipa Porto
#965 - 2012-10-10 13:39:51 UTC
Suisidol Trenchcoat wrote:
Complaining about the lack of friends? Who says I am? It was merely a statement. What my complaint is about is that it's used to just bounce around a ship as large as a freighter who is helpless to do anything about it on it's own. No shots are fired (yet), nothing overtly hostile is done until later when the gang is all assembled, but meanwhile that freighter sure isn't going anywhere. And rather than "strike at the heart of the complaint" why not actually give information? "Bunch of reasons" just doesn't seem that informative despite all the details you gave

I'm all for people getting together and shooting up a freighter if they want to. If the gain outweighs the cost then by all means....warp scram that ship, launch the drones, and fire the missiles....but bumping seems like it's taking advantage of mechanics that I seriously doubt were intended to paralyze people.


Reasons for keeping bumping:
Keeping Titans out of POS shields.
Bumping Carriers off their undocks.
Reducing the Cost of Ganking Freighters down to pre-Crucible levels.
Preventing people from crashing gates.
Countering Station games.
Making money off Miners.
Stealing ships from POSes.
and more.

A guy alone with a bump ship can't really do anything to kill a Freighter. A lone Freighter can simply log off to escape indefinite bumping. Advantage: Freighter Pilot.

A guy with a bump ship and a gank squad can kill a Freighter. A Freighter with friends in ECM or DPS ships can fairly easily disrupt an attempted suicide gank (even if the gank squad has a significant numerical advantage). Advantage: Freighter Pilot.

In both cases, the Freighter has the advantage. Only in the case of the guy with the Bump ship bringing friends and the Freighter pilot not bringing friends does the guy with the bump ship have the advantage. Complaining that the Freighter can't do anything in this event is complaining that people who bring friends along have advantages over those who don't.


By the way, a 100MN MWD Bump SFI has a mass of about 60Mkg and, maxed out, moves at around 19km/s. A Charon has a mass of 960Mkg and moves at about 93m/s. The SFI has about 13 times the momentum of the freighter, and 2,700 times the Kinetic Energy of the Freighter (gotta love squaring velocities). It makes perfect sense that the Freighter would get wildly bumped.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Rengerel en Distel
#966 - 2012-10-10 13:40:42 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:

Activating a smartbomb only gives you a Weapons flag. It is only when your smart bomb hits another player that other flags can be triggered.



Just double checked this and it doesn't seem to be on the table so I though I'd ask:

What happens if I shoot someone else's canister?

Is that still GCC'd straight away?


Is someone elses canister an illegal or legal target? Once you have that answer, go look at the chart again.

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
Pipa Porto
#967 - 2012-10-10 13:59:16 UTC
Daioh Azu wrote:
Those that are new to EvE often panic when so much as targeted by another player, occasionally leading to some "humorous" results. Older, more experience players typically don't. When I said, "nerves of steel" , I mean nothing more than that.


Then what was your point?


Quote:
If calling it "teaching" is what lets you get to sleep at night then good for you, but you certainly aren't teaching anyone that "shooting someone allows them to shoot back." I'm sure some victims of your bait a switch techinque are already aware of that. Why else would you need to choose a bait ship that doesn't even have a threatening sounding name let alone one that poses a real danger. All you are really are teaching is that you can change ships even in the middle of combat. The worth of that lesson is up to CCP to decide.


Again, the mission runner is the one chosing to engage a Frigate in their Battleship and getting bit by that choice. The thing they get to learn is that they can get bit by that choice.

Crimewatch 2.0 is removing the possibility of that lesson.

Quote:
Thank you, this clears some of my confusion. I'm gonna assume the bump is done by the Orca because its larger mass would make it more effective, if so then your bait ship probably needs a web or two. Bumping with a frigate wouldn't be nearly as effective since you'd need more speed and many mission sites prohibit MWD. I have seen frigate fits that include an oversized AB and can reach near MWD speeds but leave little room for anything else.


Mission Pockets stopped disallowing MWDs over a year ago. MWD Orca Best Orca.
Why would the bait ship need a web?

And again, a 60s timer would be very nearly impossible to deal with via bumping Orca.

Daioh Azu wrote:
The idea of changing ships in the middle of combat is an anathema to me, so saying I have little experience with this tactic is true. However, just because I don't like a tactic doesn't make it invalid.


What's the problem with setting traps in the only way effective against HS mission runners? You can't set bait for the rest of your gang to hook because of CONCORD. You have to bait the mission runner into shooting a weak ship and switch to a stronger one. Without it, Mission runners can't be significantly messed with. And that kind of safety is anathema to EVE.

Quote:
You say the point drops the instant you eject and I want to believe you. That is how it should work. With the exception of network latency and propagation delay, the target should be able to warp away to anyplace to which he is aligned as soon as your bait ship is not piloted. However, I have pointed out one instance where a player gets the full benefit on a complete cycle while also enjoying the benefits of another that prevents the use for the first. I'd just like to be certain of the truth before I commit my support.


Which instance is that? Do you mean the MWD-Cloak trick? Because that's due to the fact that, while you're piloting a ship, modules always finish their cycles.
I'm saying that the point drops as soon as you eject because you're no longer piloting the ship. Just like your point drops as soon as you explode. (Technically, your point drops on the next 1HZ server tick, but it's more or less the same thing)

[INTENTIONALBADQUOTETOAVOIDLIMIT=Daioh Azu]Perhaps then the PVP or W-flag should also prevent sending and receiving of fleet requests just as the session timer does.

By the way, isn't the entire bait a switch tactic about ensuring YOUR victory?[/quote]

That would have fairly far reaching and problematic consequences aside from obvious implimentation problems (like: whose flag stops you from sending fleet requests just the boss or any member, how do you deal with fleet ads, etc).

Isn't the entire "shooting at a harmless frigate from your battleship" tactic about ensuring YOUR victory? EVE's not about fair fights, it's about winning. The Mission runner thought they had an easy winning fight when they chose to press the fire button. Why protect them from that choice?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#968 - 2012-10-10 14:02:05 UTC
Daioh Azu wrote:
Of course, Mr White Knight will automatically know that the call for help in local came from a an actual carebear and not one of your own alts. If he chooses the right one he gets a little PVP, if he chooses the wrong one he gets Concord. How many Monty Hall moments like that will it take before those cries for help get as ignored as do car alarms?


No, he doesn't. Nothing your fleetmates do can ever get you CONCORDed without the unsuppressible pop-up. If he picks the wrong fleet, he shows up to the mission pocket and sees that his fleetmate has the suspect flag and shoots his fleetmate (the only target that doesn't trigger the unsuppressible CONCORD popup).

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#969 - 2012-10-10 14:03:26 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Karl Hobb wrote:
Daioh Azu wrote:
Of course, Mr White Knight will automatically know that the call for help in local came from a an actual carebear and not one of your own alts. If he chooses the right one he gets a little PVP, if he chooses the wrong one he gets Concord. How many Monty Hall moments like that will it take before those cries for help get as ignored as do car alarms?

Mr. White Knight runs with his safety switches on (really, CCP? I thought this was EVE... Roll) and can't actually activate weapons against a target that will get him CONCORDed. Thus, Mr. White Knight always gets a little PvP if he wants it.


Think outside the box... this is how you ambush Mr. White Night...

Put Alt A in a Remote Repping Battleship. Put Alt B in a bait hull (ideally a non-threatening yet combat capable ship)
Become a suspect with Alt B, and have Alt A aggress Alt B, so Alt B can "fake tackle" Alt A.
Then call out for help in Local with Alt A and fleet up with Mr. White Knight,
Mr. White knight warps in to save the day, sees suspect flagged Alt B, and engages (because he thinks Alt A is his friend!).
Alt B can then return fire on Mr White Knight, and does so with a vengeance.
Mr White Knight is originally not too worried, as he obviously wouldn't have aggressed unless he thinks he can destroy Alt B. However, Mr White Knight is in in for a battle-changing surprise when Alt A suddenly applies remote repair assistance to Alt B, allowing the non-threatening ship to win the fight.

That's how you screw over Mr White Knight!!!!


And then Mr White Knight can tackle the now Suspect Alt A while calling for help in local advertising 2 free kills.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Tarunik Raqalth'Qui
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#970 - 2012-10-10 14:31:41 UTC
Here's an idea: instead of Mr. White Knight bringing a logi to try to rep the victim carebear, why doesn't he bring an ECM ship to the party to jam out the attacker? This allows the carebear to actually get away instead of getting everyone tangled in a stalemate...


Also: @Masterplan: will the W flag on HICs get refreshed with each cycle of the bubble? (The charts don't really make that clear.)
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#971 - 2012-10-10 15:05:08 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Having nothing but an NPC flag at the moment you log-off will keep you in space for a non-extendible 15 minutes. (Numbers subject to change)

So the 15 minute NPC flag is still in? Everyone seems to assume that this was only a misstatement, because Soundwave said it was at EVE Vegas. Please clarify.

.
Singulis Pacifica
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#972 - 2012-10-10 15:09:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Singulis Pacifica
CCP Masterplan wrote:

Please be aware that we're evolving the design based on internal developments, and external feedback (such as this thread). This is exactly why I have to put a disclaimer on every post that these rules are subject to changes and additions.


Oh, I'm fully aware of that things change. This one however is rather drastic and defies logic somewhat. By the new rules:

Young kid A is bullied by bullies B, C, and D.
A fight breaks out, but A is quickly on the losing side.
E and F decide to step in and take one for the team by protecting the hurt young A.
Accoding to the new rules:

this would give G to Z the opportunity to massively fight E and F? And what do the teachers/supervisors do? Nothing. They (E and F) are now flagged "suspect" after all. Don't you see what a strange situation this is?

Another example:
Germany declares war on France
French civilians trying to escape from the horrors of war go to Belgium. Belgium is neutral but will now not provide support because they are then a target for Luxembourg, the Netherlands and all other nations to attack?

It should be very simple:
If you pick a fight with someone, you can expect neutrals to intervene. If the Goons assault a freighter and I happen to be around in a logistics cruiser and I decide to repair the freighter, then it's the risk of the Goons, not my risk. They started to pick a fight first, so they are the ones facing the consequences of this action.

As long as the freighter is not a suspect himself, you can expect that some neutrals are going to defend the freighter. You give neutrals the opportunity to legally fight the ones assaulting the freighter, but once it comes to logistics, you look the other way and say... no.
Pipa Porto
#973 - 2012-10-10 15:20:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Singulis Pacifica wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:

Please be aware that we're evolving the design based on internal developments, and external feedback (such as this thread). This is exactly why I have to put a disclaimer on every post that these rules are subject to changes and additions.


Oh, I'm fully aware of that things change. This one however is rather drastic and defies logic somewhat. By the new rules:

Young kid A is bullied by bullies B, C, and D.
A fight breaks out, but A is quickly on the losing side.
E and F decide to step in and take one for the team by protecting the hurt young A.
Accoding to the new rules:

this would give G to Z the opportunity to massively fight E and F? And what do the teachers/supervisors do? Nothing. They (E and F) are now flagged "suspect" after all. Don't you see what a strange situation this is?


Nope. E and F can only be shot by whichever of B, C, and D that they've shot. If they RR A, they're only marked Suspect if A has shot back at any of the suspects B, C, and D.

Given that CCP is unwilling to allow aggression chains, it's either Suspect flagged logi or CONCORD protected Logi. Suspect flagged Logi is the better of the two.

Singulis Pacifica wrote:
As long as the freighter is not a suspect himself, you can expect that some carebears are going to defend the freighter. You give carebears the opportunity to legally fight the ones assaulting the freighter, but once it comes to logistics, you look the other way and say... no.


Ummm... You're legally allowed to shoot anyone who goes GCC without any repercussions. How often do people actually take advantage of that?

And in Crimewatch 2.0, repping someone who hasn't shot anyone won't get you the suspect flag. Only repping someone involved in a Limited Engagement (meaning they shot at a suspect) marks you as a suspect (repping a suspect flags you as one as well, ofc).

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Singulis Pacifica
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#974 - 2012-10-10 15:29:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Singulis Pacifica
Pipa Porto wrote:


Ummm... You're legally allowed to shoot anyone who goes GCC without any repercussions. How often do people actually take advantage of that?


Not a lot, but it does happen. It's the incentive for players to "police" high-sec, if you will.

Pipa Porto wrote:

Nope. E and F can only be shot by whichever of B, C, and D that they've shot. If they RR A, they're only marked Suspect if A has shot back at any of the suspects B, C, and D.

And in Crimewatch 2.0, repping someone who hasn't shot anyone won't get you the suspect flag. Only repping someone involved in a Limited Engagement (meaning they shot at a suspect) marks you as a suspect (repping a suspect flags you as one as well, ofc).


That's what I thought too. Those are the initial rules, but CCP Masterplan then changed that (which can happen of course, everything is subject to change). The latest on this is:

CCP Masterplan wrote:
Looks like I forgot to include the other, inverse rule, which goes something like this:
Assisting a non-corp/alliance/miliitia-mate with a PVP flag would get you a Suspect flag
Again, this one is still under discussion


So this now means that even if there is no LE between A and B, supporting either of them (assuming A and B are legally attacking each other) as a neutral logistics pilot will give you a suspect flag.

I liked the original version. Just plain and simple. Sh (censored) happens, neutral logistics does too.
Che Biko
Alexylva Paradox
#975 - 2012-10-10 15:35:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Che Biko
CCP Masterplan wrote:
If we start propating LEs, we basically end up back with the old aggression-graph, where assisting a single target can end up flagging you to an un-knowable set of people. That is what we're trying to avoid with the flag system.

Well, I would prefer an un-knowable set of people to being flagged to EVERYONE. I mean, at least the un-known set has a chance of being less people than everyone.
Is there no easy way to code the thing that assisting the vigilante in an LE will get you the same flags as attacking the suspect in that LEQuestion

Coordination Channel for Consolidated Space Rescue Cooperation

Open Letter to the Aidonis Foundation Directorate
Pipa Porto
#976 - 2012-10-10 15:46:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Singulis Pacifica wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:


Ummm... You're legally allowed to shoot anyone who goes GCC without any repercussions. How often do people actually take advantage of that?


Not a lot, but it does happen. It's the incentive for players to "police" high-sec, if you will.


My point was that defending the Freighter is already possible with no changes.

As a bonus, applying RR to the Freighter being ganked will not give you a Suspect flag because the freighter can't shoot anyone to give it a PvP flag (engaging it in an LE).


Singulis Pacifica wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:

Nope. E and F can only be shot by whichever of B, C, and D that they've shot. If they RR A, they're only marked Suspect if A has shot back at any of the suspects B, C, and D.

And in Crimewatch 2.0, repping someone who hasn't shot anyone won't get you the suspect flag. Only repping someone involved in a Limited Engagement (meaning they shot at a suspect) marks you as a suspect (repping a suspect flags you as one as well, ofc).


That's what I thought too. Those are the initial rules, but CCP Masterplan then changed that (which can happen of course, everything is subject to change). The latest on this is:

CCP Masterplan wrote:
Looks like I forgot to include the other, inverse rule, which goes something like this:
Assisting a non-corp/alliance/miliitia-mate with a PVP flag would get you a Suspect flag
Again, this one is still under discussion


So this now means that even if there is no LE between A and B, supporting either of them (assuming A and B are legally attacking each other) as a neutral logistics pilot will give you a suspect flag.

I liked the original version. Just plain and simple. Sh (censored) happens, neutral logistics does too.


Yes, that's the point. The intent of that is to reduce the incentive to use neutral logistics.

You only get the PvP flag for shooting someone. So either you're butting into an LE with logi or you're butting into a Wardec with logi.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
#977 - 2012-10-10 15:59:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jarin Arenos
CCP Masterplan wrote:
If you are not warp-scrambled, your ship will always attempt to do a 1-million km emergency-warp if you disconnect (outside of a forcefield). It will then wait out any log-off timers at this position. Whilst here, you can be scanned down as normal.
Having nothing but an NPC flag at the moment you log-off will keep you in space for a non-extendible 15 minutes. (Numbers subject to change)

The emergency warp remaining in place pretty much clears up all my complaints to this point. Thanks for clarifying that that feature will remain. The few remaining edge-cases (scram frigates if the new AI has eaten your drones) can be addressed (or not) once testing on the new AI commences.

But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#978 - 2012-10-10 16:00:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
Singulis Pacifica wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:


Very shortly after the Dev Blog was punished, some people repeatedly asked what happens when a neutral assists a party engaged in a legal battle.... This was left out of the dev blog, and asked repeatedly....

He finally answered it... so what exactly are you flipping out about? The answer is moderately good... In short, neutral assistance flags you as a suspect...


I'm not "flipping out" as such, but your answer and his answer is inconsistent with what has been written down in the link I mentioned in my previous post. A legal battle does not give any additional neutral that provides assistance a suspect flag. Merely a PvP flag and/or a Weapons flag, nothing more. The fact that this is now changed isn't necessarily a bad thing and I don't dislike Masterplan for it as such. It's just that because of this, things become blurry and he's on that same slippery slope as the original Crimewatch is: trying to cope with every single exception.


First off, any system they put in place NEEDS to address every potential scenario to be functional. If it doesn't, it'll create loopholes that WILL be exploited. Also, the main idea is to create a system that uses mostly global flags rather than A can attack B who can attack C type flags (which we currently have).

Limited engagements were setup to handle what happens when logistics interfere with a Vigilante vs Suspect scenario, so the suspect can attack the logistics. There was no equivalent discusion in the dev blog. Now, we absolutely, 100% need the Neutrals interfering with RR in a LEGAL battle gain a suspect flag, otherwise highsec warfare becomes a mockery, where everyone just brings a fleet of neutral logistics with them that can NOT be attacked when they interfere.


Singulis Pacifica wrote:

So just leave it as is: wars are never fought fair and square. Wars are dirty and it will bring out the best and worst in people. If a neutral decides to pick sides in a legal battle, he should not become a suspect that everyone else can fire at. It's the nature of a sandbox. Stuff like this can happen. CCP wants players to be involved. Well, this would do the opposite. A neutral will just shy away from any involvement as it would lead to him being flagged as a suspect, thereby potentially rewarding the aggressor.

As example: High-sec space.

Players A to L fly Tornados
Player M is in a freighter
Player N is a neutral

A to L gank M. N is a neutral, but will now think twice before assisting M. This essentially rewards aggressors knowing that they will not have to deal with neutrals defending M through means of repairing him. Neutrals can only defend M by attacking A to L as they have now become criminals.


Scenario 1: Mr Freighter is an illegal target. Freighters cannot actually aggress a Player, and as such will NEVER be in a limited engagment. [s]As long as Mr. freighter doesn't attack back, he's can get free logistics, where the logistics pilot won't get flagged a suspect. <-- *edit* CCP stated the Logi's Suspect flag triggers when repping a neutral with a PvP flag... I'm about 99% certain they meant to trigger on a Weapons flag, which makes my scenario correct. If they don't trigger on weapons flag, but on the PvP flag... then this is WRONG and repping the freighter makes you a Suspect, and completely breaks incursions!

Scenario 2: Mr Freighter is a legal target for the Tornados. If you do NOT flag the logistics pilot, then Mr. Logistics can rep and rep and rep and non of the Tornado Pilots can do anything about it. They can't even attack the logistics ship... do you not comprehend how incredibly bad this would be for highsec warfare???

So, the lesson is, DONT use logistics in highsec unless you are prepared to go suspect. How is this a problem, as you can still help the freighter if the tornados go criminal and/or suspect.


Singulis Pacifica wrote:

What I am favor of however, is that if player N decides to repair M, is that he's not only PvP flagged, but also a viable target for A to L. Essentially, that would mean that the legality of a fight is transferred to the neutral alongside the flags. So it would come down to: You can assist a player as a neutral and, provided the player you assist has no suspect or criminal flag, you will not get one yourself. However, as you are interfering in a battle, all players that are registered to have been engaged in a battle with the one you are assisting can now shoot legally at you as well. But only these players can do so. Other neutrals will not. This legality should only transfer to players interfering with the initial party:

A and B pick a fight.
neutral C supports A.
B can also shoot C now.
neutral D supports B.
A can shoot D, but C can not without penalties.

As long as none are flagged suspect, then A and B would get PVP and at least one will have a Weapons flag, C and D would get a PVP and a Weapons flag, depending on the one they support.


This is the system we have now.... where crimewatch has to keep track of A can shoot B who can shoot C who cannot shot A who can Shoot D who..... This grows cumbersome, and is what CCP is trying to escape from.

Here is a better idea: Add a Good Samaritan Flag
Singulis Pacifica
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#979 - 2012-10-10 16:03:26 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:


Yes, that's the point. The intent of that is to reduce the incentive to use neutral logistics.

You only get the PvP flag for shooting someone. So either you're butting into an LE with logi or you're butting into a Wardec with logi.


Then you're not getting the point yet. I understand that there are bad ways in which neutral logies are applied and so called good ways.

A bad way:

A and B are at war with each other. B has a neutral logi alt that reps him which appears once B starts to lose the fight. It's annoying, but it happens. That's the nature of a sandbox. War is ugly. I understand that CCP tries to prevent this from occurring, but then they are trying to intervene into something they shouldn't as it severely hurts the good ways in which neutral logies are applied

A good one:
The Goonswarm example I mentioned earlier.
If they attack a freighter in Uedama, they have 20 seconds or so before they go poof by CONCORD. If I see the freighter being attacked, I can aid the freighter by attacking the Goons which would just give me a PvP and weapons flag. Or if I am in a logistics cruiser as a neutral pilot, I could aid the freighter by repping it. Yet, the aggression motive (attacking Goons) is allowed, but the protection motive (repping the freighter) would give me a suspect flag.

I know there are good and bad sides to repping. Bad ones happen more often than good ones, but isn't that the nature of EvE? Completely removing the aid of logistics pilots hurts the game more than allowing neutral logistics to exist in relative safety. It simply tries to limit the sandbox CCP is famous for.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#980 - 2012-10-10 16:07:00 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Karl Hobb wrote:
Daioh Azu wrote:
Of course, Mr White Knight will automatically know that the call for help in local came from a an actual carebear and not one of your own alts. If he chooses the right one he gets a little PVP, if he chooses the wrong one he gets Concord. How many Monty Hall moments like that will it take before those cries for help get as ignored as do car alarms?

Mr. White Knight runs with his safety switches on (really, CCP? I thought this was EVE... Roll) and can't actually activate weapons against a target that will get him CONCORDed. Thus, Mr. White Knight always gets a little PvP if he wants it.


Think outside the box... this is how you ambush Mr. White Night...

Put Alt A in a Remote Repping Battleship. Put Alt B in a bait hull (ideally a non-threatening yet combat capable ship)
Become a suspect with Alt B, and have Alt A aggress Alt B, so Alt B can "fake tackle" Alt A.
Then call out for help in Local with Alt A and fleet up with Mr. White Knight,
Mr. White knight warps in to save the day, sees suspect flagged Alt B, and engages (because he thinks Alt A is his friend!).
Alt B can then return fire on Mr White Knight, and does so with a vengeance.
Mr White Knight is originally not too worried, as he obviously wouldn't have aggressed unless he thinks he can destroy Alt B. However, Mr White Knight is in in for a battle-changing surprise when Alt A suddenly applies remote repair assistance to Alt B, allowing the non-threatening ship to win the fight.

That's how you screw over Mr White Knight!!!!


And then Mr White Knight can tackle the now Suspect Alt A while calling for help in local advertising 2 free kills.


And then we can have a fun and proper escalation.... Good times by all!