These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Grideris
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1061 - 2012-10-22 16:52:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Grideris
CCP Masterplan wrote:
We've been reviewing the feedback since we released the crimewatch dev blog (all 53 pages and counting), and now have planned some revisions that I'll outline below:

Interdictor bubbles:
We've looked at the concerns about Weapons flags excessively penalising Interdictor pilots, and also about flags potentially propagating intel that is otherwise not available. With these in mind, the following alterations are planned:

The act of launching a Warp Disrupt Probe from an Interdictor will not give any flags.

If someone CURRENTLY INSIDE a dictor bubble attempts to warp then:
* Both the (failed) warper and the bubble owner will get a PVP flag
* The bubble owner will get a Weapons flag.

When someone's incoming warp is altered by a bubble at the destination, no flaggings will occur.

This should allow dictor pilots to more easily keep moving with their fleet. It also prevents free intel via flaggings when someone starts a warp to a distant bubble from the other side of the system.


NPC and PVP timers:
Firstly I want to emphasise the following will remain unchanged: If a player disconnects from the game, his ship will make an attempt to perform an emergency warp. This warp will be prevented by the regular forms of disruption as normal. The presence of any flag will not prevent this emergency warp from being attempted. There was some confusion about this, so I wanted to make sure everyone is clear this was never planned to change. If you disconnect whilst engaging NPCs, your ship will still make a single attempt to e-warp as normal at the moment of disconnect, provided you aren't tackled.

With that out of the way, here are the updated changes/clarifications:
* NPC flag timeout will be lowered to 5 minutes. NPC flags are not further extended after log-off.
* PVP flags CAN be created and further extended after log-off even if the owner did not have a PVP flag at the time of disconnect.. If Char A logs off in space (with or without a PVP flag), and then char B attacks A, then A will get a PVP flag. Char A's ship will then remain in space for as long as that PVP flag exists.
These changes should ensure that unavoidable disconnects (eg caused by network problems) aren't massively penalising, whilst ensuring that manually killing the client to avoid PVP is never a viable strategy.
* We are adding a 'Safe Log-off' ability, where you can go through the process of removing your ship from space BEFORE closing the client, rather than after. This will let you confirm that your ship is truly hidden, by getting it to a safe location and then going through a timer.
Before anyone panics about this become the new ALT-F4 to avoid combat or that we're making the game too safe, this does come with a number of restrictions. For example, the timer cannot be started whilst you have modules running, have incoming/outgoing target locks, have a Weapons/PVP flag, are in a fleet, etc. Should any of these required conditions change whilst the timer is running, it will be aborted.
We'll be putting a dev blog out with more details on this feature in the near future.

Please keep the constructive feedback coming!


For safe logoff, what effect does a gate cloak have, if any? (Cloaking isn't specifically listed as preventing the timer)

EDIT: Answered here - can't start timer under gate cloak.

http://www.dust514.org - the unofficial forum for everything DUST 514 http://www.dust514base.com -** the** blog site with everything else DUST 514 you need

Shandir
EVE University
Ivy League
#1062 - 2012-10-22 17:03:53 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
We've been reviewing the feedback since we released the crimewatch dev blog (all 53 pages and counting), and now have planned some revisions that I'll outline below:

Interdictor bubbles:
We've looked at the concerns about Weapons flags excessively penalising Interdictor pilots, and also about flags potentially propagating intel that is otherwise not available. With these in mind, the following alterations are planned:

The act of launching a Warp Disrupt Probe from an Interdictor will not give any flags.

If someone CURRENTLY INSIDE a dictor bubble attempts to warp then:
* Both the (failed) warper and the bubble owner will get a PVP flag
* The bubble owner will get a Weapons flag.

When someone's incoming warp is altered by a bubble at the destination, no flaggings will occur.

This should allow dictor pilots to more easily keep moving with their fleet. It also prevents free intel via flaggings when someone starts a warp to a distant bubble from the other side of the system.


NPC and PVP timers:
Firstly I want to emphasise the following will remain unchanged: If a player disconnects from the game, his ship will make an attempt to perform an emergency warp. This warp will be prevented by the regular forms of disruption as normal. The presence of any flag will not prevent this emergency warp from being attempted. There was some confusion about this, so I wanted to make sure everyone is clear this was never planned to change. If you disconnect whilst engaging NPCs, your ship will still make a single attempt to e-warp as normal at the moment of disconnect, provided you aren't tackled.

With that out of the way, here are the updated changes/clarifications:
* NPC flag timeout will be lowered to 5 minutes. NPC flags are not further extended after log-off.
* PVP flags CAN be created and further extended after log-off even if the owner did not have a PVP flag at the time of disconnect.. If Char A logs off in space (with or without a PVP flag), and then char B attacks A, then A will get a PVP flag. Char A's ship will then remain in space for as long as that PVP flag exists.
These changes should ensure that unavoidable disconnects (eg caused by network problems) aren't massively penalising, whilst ensuring that manually killing the client to avoid PVP is never a viable strategy.
* We are adding a 'Safe Log-off' ability, where you can go through the process of removing your ship from space BEFORE closing the client, rather than after. This will let you confirm that your ship is truly hidden, by getting it to a safe location and then going through a timer.
Before anyone panics about this become the new ALT-F4 to avoid combat or that we're making the game too safe, this does come with a number of restrictions. For example, the timer cannot be started whilst you have modules running, have incoming/outgoing target locks, have a Weapons/PVP flag, are in a fleet, etc. Should any of these required conditions change whilst the timer is running, it will be aborted.
We'll be putting a dev blog out with more details on this feature in the near future.

Please keep the constructive feedback coming!

Don't know about (don't fly) the dictor changes - but everything else looks like *exactly* how it should work. Suspect NPC flag timer will still kill most people who can't log in within 1-2m, but not sure how much shorter it could be while still being catch-able. Perhaps 2-4m would work better?
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1063 - 2012-10-22 17:09:48 UTC
Grideris wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:

...
* We are adding a 'Safe Log-off' ability, where you can go through the process of removing your ship from space BEFORE closing the client, rather than after. This will let you confirm that your ship is truly hidden, by getting it to a safe location and then going through a timer.
Before anyone panics about this become the new ALT-F4 to avoid combat or that we're making the game too safe, this does come with a number of restrictions. For example, the timer cannot be started whilst you have modules running, have incoming/outgoing target locks, have a Weapons/PVP flag, are in a fleet, etc. Should any of these required conditions change whilst the timer is running, it will be aborted.
We'll be putting a dev blog out with more details on this feature in the near future.

Please keep the constructive feedback coming!


For safe logoff, what effect does a gate cloak have, if any? (Cloaking isn't specifically listed as preventing the timer)

Yes, you won't be able to initiate Safe Log-off whilst under gate cloak.
(Edited my post to include this)

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

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law

Grideris
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1064 - 2012-10-22 17:15:01 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Grideris wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:

...
* We are adding a 'Safe Log-off' ability, where you can go through the process of removing your ship from space BEFORE closing the client, rather than after. This will let you confirm that your ship is truly hidden, by getting it to a safe location and then going through a timer.
Before anyone panics about this become the new ALT-F4 to avoid combat or that we're making the game too safe, this does come with a number of restrictions. For example, the timer cannot be started whilst you have modules running, have incoming/outgoing target locks, have a Weapons/PVP flag, are in a fleet, etc. Should any of these required conditions change whilst the timer is running, it will be aborted.
We'll be putting a dev blog out with more details on this feature in the near future.

Please keep the constructive feedback coming!


For safe logoff, what effect does a gate cloak have, if any? (Cloaking isn't specifically listed as preventing the timer)

Yes, you won't be able to initiate Safe Log-off whilst under gate cloak.
(Edited my post to include this)


\o/

http://www.dust514.org - the unofficial forum for everything DUST 514 http://www.dust514base.com -** the** blog site with everything else DUST 514 you need

Shandir
EVE University
Ivy League
#1065 - 2012-10-22 17:49:06 UTC
Btw - is there any reason not to give someone an NPC flag for mining, or is this something you've already considered?
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#1066 - 2012-10-22 18:04:54 UTC
As always, CCP Masterplan = best plan. I am super excited to hopefully see the end of people logging capital ships off to avoid getting killed when running sleeper sites

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#1067 - 2012-10-22 18:08:40 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
We've been reviewing the feedback since we released the crimewatch dev blog (all 53 pages and counting), and now have planned some revisions that I'll outline below:

Interdictor bubbles:
We've looked at the concerns about Weapons flags excessively penalising Interdictor pilots, and also about flags potentially propagating intel that is otherwise not available. With these in mind, the following alterations are planned:

The act of launching a Warp Disrupt Probe from an Interdictor will not give any flags.

If someone CURRENTLY INSIDE a dictor bubble attempts to warp then:
* Both the (failed) warper and the bubble owner will get a PVP flag
* The bubble owner will get a Weapons flag.

When someone's incoming warp is altered by a bubble at the destination, no flaggings will occur.

This should allow dictor pilots to more easily keep moving with their fleet. It also prevents free intel via flaggings when someone starts a warp to a distant bubble from the other side of the system.


NPC and PVP timers:
Firstly I want to emphasise the following will remain unchanged: If a player disconnects from the game, his ship will make an attempt to perform an emergency warp. This warp will be prevented by the regular forms of disruption as normal. The presence of any flag will not prevent this emergency warp from being attempted. There was some confusion about this, so I wanted to make sure everyone is clear this was never planned to change. If you disconnect whilst engaging NPCs, your ship will still make a single attempt to e-warp as normal at the moment of disconnect, provided you aren't tackled.

With that out of the way, here are the updated changes/clarifications:
* NPC flag timeout will be lowered to 5 minutes. NPC flags are not further extended after log-off.
* PVP flags CAN be created and further extended after log-off even if the owner did not have a PVP flag at the time of disconnect.. If Char A logs off in space (with or without a PVP flag), and then char B attacks A, then A will get a PVP flag. Char A's ship will then remain in space for as long as that PVP flag exists.
These changes should ensure that unavoidable disconnects (eg caused by network problems) aren't massively penalising, whilst ensuring that manually killing the client to avoid PVP is never a viable strategy.
* We are adding a 'Safe Log-off' ability, where you can go through the process of removing your ship from space BEFORE closing the client, rather than after. This will let you confirm that your ship is truly hidden, by getting it to a safe location and then going through a timer.
Before anyone panics about this become the new ALT-F4 to avoid combat or that we're making the game too safe, this does come with a number of restrictions. For example, the timer cannot be started whilst you have modules running, have incoming/outgoing target locks, have a Weapons/PVP flag, are in a fleet, are under gate cloak, etc. Should any of these required conditions change whilst the timer is running, it will be aborted.
We'll be putting a dev blog out with more details on this feature in the near future.

Please keep the constructive feedback coming!


Holy ****!!!!! Nice changes...
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#1068 - 2012-10-22 18:25:53 UTC
Those changes to the changes are 100% spot-on. Perfect!

.

Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1069 - 2012-10-22 19:44:46 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:

* PVP flags CAN be created and further extended after log-off even if the owner did not have a PVP flag at the time of disconnect.. If Char A logs off in space (with or without a PVP flag), and then char B attacks A, then A will get a PVP flag. Char A's ship will then remain in space for as long as that PVP flag exists.
These changes should ensure that unavoidable disconnects (eg caused by network problems) aren't massively penalising, whilst ensuring that manually killing the client to avoid PVP is never a viable strategy.





A THOUSAND TIMES THIS.



Can I fly to Reykjavik and buy beer for the whole sprint team responsible for this decision? Because you all deserve it.
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1070 - 2012-10-22 19:52:10 UTC
Seriously though, all my 5's dude.
Rhavas
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#1071 - 2012-10-22 20:21:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhavas
Still need to solve the T3 issue.

  • Solve the problem with logoffskis. This is good.
  • Solve the Orca ship-swap problem if it's bothering you in highsec.
  • You could take self-destruct out of the game. Can't think of a single reason this is even needed, and it causes lots of problems. (EDIT: As per post below, there is a case for pods to self destruct. I can't think of any legit reason to self-destruct a SHIP, however. Even if stuck in a WH, eject and destruct your pod. Leaves lootz in the hole, as appropriate for an abandonment.)
  • Due to storyline reasons, I'm fine with characters losing skillpoints if they are in a T3 when it explodes.

However - if you are going to have this mechanic, you have to have a way to NOT be in it when it explodes. This is a play choice that adds potential. Don't bottle it up.

If you must lock the pod in the ship, get rid of the SP loss mechanic. Otherwise let people eject (again - fine if you get rid of self destruct on eject too - eject should almost always result in your enemy stealing your ship!).

Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#1072 - 2012-10-22 20:24:11 UTC
Rhavas wrote:
Still need to solve the T3 issue.

  • Solve the problem with logoffskis. This is good.
  • Solve the Orca ship-swap problem if it's bothering you in highsec.
  • You could take self-destruct out of the game. Can't think of a single reason this is even needed, and it causes lots of problems.
  • Due to storyline reasons, I'm fine with characters losing skillpoints if they are in a T3 when it explodes.

However - if you are going to have this mechanic, you have to have a way to NOT be in it when it explodes. This is a play choice that adds potential. Don't bottle it up.

If you must lock the pod in the ship, get rid of the SP loss mechanic. Otherwise let people eject (again - fine if you kill self destruct on eject too - eject should almost always result in your enemy stealing your ship!).


Not being able to self destruct leads to people being stuck in wormholes and unable to leave.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Rhavas
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#1073 - 2012-10-22 20:30:27 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Not being able to self destruct leads to people being stuck in wormholes and unable to leave.


Fair point. Pods should be able to self destruct.

Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary

Rengerel en Distel
#1074 - 2012-10-22 22:07:38 UTC
Rhavas wrote:
Still need to solve the T3 issue.

  • Solve the problem with logoffskis. This is good.
  • Solve the Orca ship-swap problem if it's bothering you in highsec.
  • You could take self-destruct out of the game. Can't think of a single reason this is even needed, and it causes lots of problems. (EDIT: As per post below, there is a case for pods to self destruct. I can't think of any legit reason to self-destruct a SHIP, however. Even if stuck in a WH, eject and destruct your pod. Leaves lootz in the hole, as appropriate for an abandonment.)
  • Due to storyline reasons, I'm fine with characters losing skillpoints if they are in a T3 when it explodes.

However - if you are going to have this mechanic, you have to have a way to NOT be in it when it explodes. This is a play choice that adds potential. Don't bottle it up.

If you must lock the pod in the ship, get rid of the SP loss mechanic. Otherwise let people eject (again - fine if you get rid of self destruct on eject too - eject should almost always result in your enemy stealing your ship!).


Seems like they could just make you lose the skill when you eject from a T3 in space if that was the only problem. It would be nice to know what problem they're trying to fix with the no ejecting to be able to offer other solutions.

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

Oxandrolone
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1075 - 2012-10-22 22:30:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Oxandrolone
yay they finally fixed the loging off in sites bullcrap
TunaKross
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1076 - 2012-10-22 22:53:36 UTC
Best changes in a long time. For to long people have been using ALT+F4 to avoid combat.

Good work CCP Masterplan
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1077 - 2012-10-23 01:49:19 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
* PVP flags CAN be created and further extended after log-off even if the owner did not have a PVP flag at the time of disconnect.. If Char A logs off in space (with or without a PVP flag), and then char B attacks A, then A will get a PVP flag. Char A's ship will then remain in space for as long as that PVP flag exists.
These changes should ensure that unavoidable disconnects (eg caused by network problems) aren't massively penalising, whilst ensuring that manually killing the client to avoid PVP is never a viable strategy.

I'm happy about this one. There was a thread a while back complaining about freighter pilots who got caught in a lowsec tarp being able to log off while under gatecloak. The pilot logging off would expect to be able to tank the agressors for one minute and disappear. It seemed really unfair.
sc11232
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1078 - 2012-10-23 07:20:40 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
If you disconnect whilst engaging NPCs, your ship will still make a single attempt to e-warp as normal at the moment of disconnect, provided you aren't tackled.


So if one disconnects while being tackled by the NPC he or she will stay forever on the field until either downtime or killmail happens?

Sounds about right.

MisterAl tt1
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1079 - 2012-10-23 07:33:41 UTC  |  Edited by: MisterAl tt1
While that is perfect capitals won't be able to escape by logging off while the fleet is warping to them, I still backup each and every of these words:

Rhavas wrote:
Still need to solve the T3 issue.
...
However - if you are going to have this mechanic, you have to have a way to NOT be in it when it explodes. This is a play choice that adds potential. Don't bottle it up.

If you must lock the pod in the ship, get rid of the SP loss mechanic. Otherwise let people eject (again - fine if you get rid of self destruct on eject too - eject should almost always result in your enemy stealing your ship!).


In addition many people here showed their concerns that not-ejecting will ruin a practice of ejecting to save pods.
Tharkorn
Friends Of Harassment
#1080 - 2012-10-23 08:22:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tharkorn
I am not a forum freak (and unable to perform a search in here), so please bear me if this was discussed earlier...

Situation:
There is a way that flipped cans can safely be taken from a third party: Pirate flips a can and gets aggression (later: suspect flag). He has a buddy which is +10 towards him and thereby able to drag the can to his far away Orca/Hauler to safely scoop the content.

Suggestion:
Shouldn't dragging someones can also pull the timers in such an situation? I did this several times myself and got tricked this way as well. But tbh, this is stupid gap in game mechanics and really goony gameplay. So pulling timers while dragging such cans would IMHO be very reasonable.
Possible alternative solution would be that cans of aggression owners can not get pulled. This avoids setting wrecks blue as well (in case pulling timers from blue wrecks may be an issue).

Side Effects:
Sure this also means Noctis pilots are not that safe anymore while a missioning pilot still is in the site keeping aggro, but that also solves this equally lame situation. Usually you should clean up after the work not while mucking the site up. Ok, with better upcoming NPC AI this would have been solved as well ;-)