These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Someone stole my Wei Todaki. What can I do about this?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#41 - 2014-01-17 22:58:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Qalix wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
I mean, really, when does anyone warp to another person's hisec mission site other than to steal salvage/mission items or to grief?

To help them run the site. Or when I dual box a site.



I have to believe that you are not stupid.

Therefore, I have to believe that you understand the point and are a troll.

1/10 for the attempt, you can do better.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Qalix
Long Jump.
#42 - 2014-01-17 23:50:40 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Qalix wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
I mean, really, when does anyone warp to another person's hisec mission site other than to steal salvage/mission items or to grief?

To help them run the site. Or when I dual box a site.


I have to believe that you are not stupid.

Therefore, I have to believe that you understand the point and are a troll.

1/10 for the attempt, you can do better.

I'd like to believe that you're not stupid, but if you don't take the time or make the effort to understand what it would take to implement what you're proposing or what the various types of fallout might be, I can't. Perhaps you should consider engaging in dialgoue rather than insulting people.

You're proposing a suspect flag for warping to a mission site. Please explain how you envision that working, its limitations, and how it will handle the sorts of situations I illustrated in my initial response. Who, exactly, would qualify for the suspect flag and how will CCP code the mechanics to deal with all the possibilites. While you're at it, perhaps you'll also explain how that new mechanic will fit in with the ability to scan down a ship whose mission site is invisible to probes and warp to it. Will I be penalized with a suspect flag while trying to probe down a valid war target? Will the war target be able to hide out in mission spaces indefinitely? Does being in a fleet with the mission runner affect whether you get the flag? And while you're doing that, you might also take the time to explain, or at least reflect upon, whether these sorts of limitations should be placed on missions run in losec and nosec, where the mission runner is well aware of the dangers. Were you aware that incursion sites and anomalies would be affected by what you're proposing? How do you propose that be handled? How do you propose that CCP implement a system in which pilots "own" a piece of space? How will that ownership be established? How does the game know where the edge of your space is and the rest of public space is? Are you going to propose instanced content?

Or I could save you the time by pointing out that the OP got the mission reset and the likely reason that it got reset is that CCP is well aware of this issue and, rather than implementing half-baked, knee-jerk "solutions," has opted to handle the problem through customer service. In "the old days," CCP would never have reset missions if the objective got stolen. So, cheer up, CCP has got your back.

You asked a question. I answered. If what you meant to say was "no one who isn't working with the mission runner should be warping to the mission site," then that is what you should say. But you're not going to get anywhere with that, as should be obvious if you've spent any time at all reading up on EVE development. Just because someone replies to your ill-conceived and poorly worded statement, it doesn't mean you're being trolled. If you can't handle push back, maybe the EVE-O forums are not for you.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#43 - 2014-01-18 00:47:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Qalix wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Qalix wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
I mean, really, when does anyone warp to another person's hisec mission site other than to steal salvage/mission items or to grief?

To help them run the site. Or when I dual box a site.


I have to believe that you are not stupid.

Therefore, I have to believe that you understand the point and are a troll.

1/10 for the attempt, you can do better.

I'd like to believe that you're not stupid, but if you don't take the time or make the effort to understand what it would take to implement what you're proposing or what the various types of fallout might be, I can't. Perhaps you should consider engaging in dialgoue rather than insulting people.

You're proposing a suspect flag for warping to a mission site. Please explain how you envision that working, its limitations, and how it will handle the sorts of situations I illustrated in my initial response. Who, exactly, would qualify for the suspect flag and how will CCP code the mechanics to deal with all the possibilites. While you're at it, perhaps you'll also explain how that new mechanic will fit in with the ability to scan down a ship whose mission site is invisible to probes and warp to it. Will I be penalized with a suspect flag while trying to probe down a valid war target? Will the war target be able to hide out in mission spaces indefinitely? Does being in a fleet with the mission runner affect whether you get the flag? And while you're doing that, you might also take the time to explain, or at least reflect upon, whether these sorts of limitations should be placed on missions run in losec and nosec, where the mission runner is well aware of the dangers. Were you aware that incursion sites and anomalies would be affected by what you're proposing? How do you propose that be handled? How do you propose that CCP implement a system in which pilots "own" a piece of space? How will that ownership be established? How does the game know where the edge of your space is and the rest of public space is? Are you going to propose instanced content?

Or I could save you the time by pointing out that the OP got the mission reset and the likely reason that it got reset is that CCP is well aware of this issue and, rather than implementing half-baked, knee-jerk "solutions," has opted to handle the problem through customer service. In "the old days," CCP would never have reset missions if the objective got stolen. So, cheer up, CCP has got your back.

You asked a question. I answered. If what you meant to say was "no one who isn't working with the mission runner should be warping to the mission site," then that is what you should say. But you're not going to get anywhere with that, as should be obvious if you've spent any time at all reading up on EVE development. Just because someone replies to your ill-conceived and poorly worded statement, it doesn't mean you're being trolled. If you can't handle push back, maybe the EVE-O forums are not for you.




If you were legitimately trying to advance the conversation with your comment, it didn't. Let's move on and not be mad.


As far as putting in a suspect*** flag when warping to a mission site, you do understand (I hope) that ALL criminal and suspect flags were just recently introduced into the game, right?

I believe that if CCP can develop the criminal flagging system as it is now, with all of the current triggers, that they can modify it to make warping to another person's mission site without permission a trigger as well.



The bottom line is:

1) warp origin and destination are already calculated in game

2) mission pockets are already identified as a destination for any ship warping to them

3) there is already a system in place that triggers an event based on warp destination (you have seen the mission text pop-ups when warping to pockets, right? how do you think that they are triggered?)

4) current mechanics already have overrides in place for what would otherwise be a flaggable action (opening a fleet members' can without their permission is not illegal, right? Things done to a valid WT are not illegal, right?). Obviously, these overrides would not change.


Would generating another event, a suspect*** flag in this case based on choosing to warp to a space the game already identifies as a mission pocket not owned by you or your fleet, be so hard to add to already existing game mechanics?

I believe that in-between your speculations, you are saying basically that this is a bad idea or that it cannot work. If you have specific knowledge of coding limitations in EVE and why this cannot be done, you need to share this with us.

Otherwise, I am sorry, but your objections are speculative, sensational and frankly not that helpful.

It would be better for you to simply say "I think it's a bad idea" rather than to try to justify that opinion on imaginary reasons why you think it wouldn't work. If you know something specifically as to why it won't work, please, do tell us all.


Edit:

My mistaken use of "criminal" when I intended to say "suspect" may have caused confusion. My apologies. Posts have been edited for clarity.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#44 - 2014-01-19 11:01:57 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
At least give us some counter-play options to mission theft.

Make someone go criminal immediately when warping to another person's site, at the very least.

I mean, really, when does anyone warp to another person's hisec mission site other than to steal salvage/mission items or to grief?

Trespassing is a crime in every place that I have ever been.

And, before anyone goes derpy and tries to say "this is space, there is no such thing as trespassing", EVE is a game not reality. If there can be 50k or more Ralie Ardanne or Wei Todaki in existence at one time in the EVE universe, I don't think that making mission sites the "property" of the mission runner is going to blow up anyone's gaming experience.




Please do this.



The newest awox tactic is going to be getting people to warp to your missions so you can pop them. Also everything in the mission sites IS your property. The fact you aren't defending it is not anyone's problem but yours.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#45 - 2014-01-19 23:19:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Loraine Gess wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
At least give us some counter-play options to mission theft.

Make someone go criminal immediately when warping to another person's site, at the very least.

I mean, really, when does anyone warp to another person's hisec mission site other than to steal salvage/mission items or to grief?

Trespassing is a crime in every place that I have ever been.

And, before anyone goes derpy and tries to say "this is space, there is no such thing as trespassing", EVE is a game not reality. If there can be 50k or more Ralie Ardanne or Wei Todaki in existence at one time in the EVE universe, I don't think that making mission sites the "property" of the mission runner is going to blow up anyone's gaming experience.




Please do this.



The newest awox tactic is going to be getting people to warp to your missions so you can pop them. Also everything in the mission sites IS your property. The fact you aren't defending it is not anyone's problem but yours.


You're funny man.

You kind of ignore the whole mechanic currently in place that creates a pop-up before a criminal or suspicious act is committed asking if you really want to do it.

So, yeah, BE SCARED! Someone is going to make you warp to a mission site and kill you if this change is made!

lol.

And, as to your equally foolish comment about "defending" a mission site, what exactly is it that you think can be done to a person inside your pocket right now, unless they are a WT or you have pre-existing Kill rights on them?


They are not a valid target 99.99999% of the time until AFTER they steal from your site, you know this right?

Yeah, stupidity or troll....

3/10 because I actually responded.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2014-01-20 03:40:52 UTC
dexington wrote:
Nerf Burger wrote:
I expect to be spamming d-scan in low and null but to have to do it in high-sec as well to keep people from being able to **** with you and having to warp and and wait for what could be hours is kind of ridiculous.


It's a high security system, it's not total safety. People can **** with you in hi-sec, just as they can in low-sec, and when there is a reward of +1B you better expect people to do so.


I have to agree with dexington here, he's giving you solid advice. Also weren't you saying in another thread (MTU related if I recall correctly) that you weren't advocating for absolute safety in highsec? Yet here you are complaining about having to use a viable tactic to get your thing done in highsec. What a tragedy.

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.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#47 - 2014-01-20 04:39:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Nerf Burger wrote:
dexington wrote:
Nerf Burger wrote:
Very good, it is a multiplayer game, and multiplayer games are founded on fairness, otherwise no one would play them.


EvE is not like other multiplayer games, and it's not fair. When you playing like a foolish careless carebear, who think nothing bad can happen because you are in hi-sec, you are going to be punished by players smarter then you.


It has nothing to do with being smarter. It is about taking advantage of a lack of knowledge about mundane game mechanics and catching players unaware. This game has the lowest skill ceiling of any pvp mmorpg i've ever played, don't give pirates too much credit. I suspect EVE is full of angst-filled teens and dim-witted man-children who have gotten **** on in more skill demanding pvp games and have ended up playing EVE because abusing lack of knowledge mechanics is the easiest way they can get their grief jollies off and share a little of their own frustration.

The only parts about EVE that aren't fair are the parts that haven't gotten fixed yet. To suggest EVE is supposed to be unfair is completely moronic. Why do you think we have this thing called "balance"?


Mission theft/griefing is 100% a game balance issue.


If it is ok that the missioner assume risks because the "reward is so high", then it is equally ok that the griefer/thief be made to have a measure of risk proportionate to their potential "reward" in stealing the item.


If griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually had to assume a balanced amount of risk for their actions... how tragic. They may have to farm their own tears there.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Qual
Knights of a Once Square Table INC.
#48 - 2014-01-20 07:14:30 UTC
The only thing CCP need to fix is the completion trigger. If you can pick up the item and have the mission NOT be finished then everything would be good. If you dont get it it today, try again tomorrow.

I hear you say: " But then the completion item would be farmable!" To that I say: "Yes! But at least the farmers would have to put in real work to get it, and CCP customer service would have one less worry."
Iyokus Patrouette
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2014-01-20 07:27:37 UTC
These threads do seem to be popping up more often and i might, almost, just barely agree slightly that high security space mechanics might be leaning more toward the criminals (for ease of generalization.) than to the carebears (once again... for easy generalization).

But i do not think the slight tilt in the balance is due to game design. I think it is in fact due to the criminals being much more enterprising and generally more adaptable than the carebears are.

I can imagine there were a lot of failed attempts and changes the criminals have made before they found a ship/fit/tactic that works. If the carebears took some time to think of ways to change and adapt what they do. then they could prevent a lot of these criminal activities before they begin.

currently we have what CCP has given us and while they do tend to change and be updated or over hauled, we still have to find a way to use them to our own advantage. The criminals have simply shown they are better at this than the carebears.


Now to give an answer to the OP I would personally be watching D-scan for probes etc, or wait until the known criminals have logged off to do that particular mission. Maybe consider changing your fit to give it some pvp power to actually defend your loot. run with a friend or two to clear through it quicker for more security. Options are there. finding what will work well or not, may just be a frustrating game of trial and error.

---- Advocate for the initiation of purple coloured wormholes----

Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#50 - 2014-01-20 09:14:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Iyokus Patrouette wrote:


But i do not think the slight tilt in the balance is due to game design. I think it is in fact due to the criminals being much more enterprising and generally more adaptable than the carebears are.

I can imagine there were a lot of failed attempts and changes the criminals have made before they found a ship/fit/tactic that works. If the carebears took some time to think of ways to change and adapt what they do. then they could prevent a lot of these criminal activities before they begin.




You are giving mission item thieves/griefers way too much credit for what they do.

It takes basic scanning skills, a simple frigate and time spent camping.

Maybe they had to spend a lot of time in EFT or PYFA figuring out which high slot they wanted to put that single probe launcher in....

But seriously, no matter how you look at it, game balance is off here and there is little to no counter-play.

Criminal and suspicious acts should have a level of risk that is proportionate to the potential reward for success. But right now, that equation is really off, especially with mission invasion and mission item theft.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Qalix
Long Jump.
#51 - 2014-01-20 19:48:49 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
If you were legitimately trying to advance the conversation with your comment, it didn't. Let's move on and not be mad.

As far as putting in a criminal flag when warping to a mission site, you do understand (I hope) that ALL criminal and suspect flags were just recently introduced into the game, right?

I believe that if CCP can develop the criminal flagging system as it is now, with all of the current triggers, that they can modify it to make warping to another person's mission site without permission a trigger as well.

The bottom line is:

1) warp origin and destination are already calculated in game

2) mission pockets are already identified as a destination for any ship warping to them

3) there is already a system in place that triggers an event based on warp destination (you have seen the mission text pop-ups when warping to pockets, right? how do you think that they are triggered?)

4) current mechanics already have overrides in place for what would otherwise be a criminal action (opening a fleet members' can without their permission is not criminal, right? Things done to a valid WT are not criminal, right?). Obviously, these overrides would not change.

Would generating another event, a criminal flag in this case based on choosing to warp to a space the game already identifies as a mission pocket not owned by you or your fleet, be so hard to add to already existing game mechanics?

I believe that in-between your speculations, you are saying basically that this is a bad idea or that it cannot work. If you have specific knowledge of coding limitations in EVE and why this cannot be done, you need to share this with us.

Otherwise, I am sorry, but your objections are speculative, sensational and frankly not that helpful.

It would be better for you to simply say "I think it's a bad idea" rather than to try to justify that opinion on imaginary reasons why you think it wouldn't work. If you know something specifically as to why it won't work, please, do tell us all.

A couple of things:

1. Crimewatch has been around for a very long time. It got a "recent" update and that update was specifically done to the benefit of non-pirates/gankers. It introduced all sorts of goodies, including the safety feature and global suspect flags for what used to be corp/individual-only flags (I stole from you, I got flagged to you, but no one else). In the old days, there were a lot of different ways to screw with mission runners. There are far, far fewer these days.

2. You don't understand the mechanics of mission invasions. Mission invasions have one of 3 forms: tripping aggression from the mission runner unexpectedly (e.g., shooting the MTU and getting aggression from drones set to aggressive) and then killing him; tripping aggression by goading a mission runner into action (e.g., looting a wreck and hoping he shoots at you) and then killing him; or stealing an item and running (because you don’t want to fight). In the first two cases, your solution gives them what they want without having to take any actions. They want the mission runner to shoot at them. They want the flag!! So you’d be helping them! In the third case, even if he had a flag, it wouldn’t stop him from stealing. You’d have the clearance to shoot him, but the moment you did, the limited engagement flag would be tripped. Then he reships and comes back to kill your pimp fit mission ship, which will not be able to properly tank a PvP fit ship. In the actual case of the OP, they came with a small fleet for exactly that reason. If he had offered any resistance, he would have lost the mission item AND his ship. Unless your plan is to fight off gankers, the flag does you no good. If your plan IS to fight off gankers, good luck, because they’ll be coming for you on a regular basis from that moment forward. People who don’t want to fight in the first place will be perpetually at a disadvantage in this game.

3. You don’t understand probing mechanics. I'm at war with Corp A. I see several Corp A members in my system. They aren't in the station and they aren't at a celestial, so they must be somewhere in space. I launch probes and start scanning. It's a heavily trafficked system and I have no way of knowing which ship results are theirs. I have no way of knowing who is missioning. The only thing I can do is warp to my results. So, I start warping to my results. Oh no! I warped to some dude's mission site. Now I'm flagged suspect for the next 15 mins and everyone in EVE gets a free shot at me.

4. It isn’t enough to say it’s a bad idea or won’t work, because someone will come along and ask “Why?” I presented my concerns in the question format, because that’s what one does in a dialogue. I provided you with an opportunity to address my concerns and change my mind. You’ve opted for the “I know better than anyone” approach, even when it’s clear that you have no clue what you’re talking about. But who am I to suggest that you shouldn’t tilt at windmills? You should take your idea over to the Features and Ideas subforum and give it a go.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2014-01-20 20:47:07 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
If griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually had to assume a balanced amount of risk for their actions... how tragic. They may have to farm their own tears there.


The risk is that for the effort put in, there's a good chance that you could fail due to the intended victim being aware of his surroundings. That equals time wasted & time is not free.

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.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#53 - 2014-01-20 23:26:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
If griefers, "pirates" and thieves actually had to assume a balanced amount of risk for their actions... how tragic. They may have to farm their own tears there.


The risk is that for the effort put in, there's a good chance that you could fail due to the intended victim being aware of his surroundings. That equals time wasted & time is not free.



And, really that is little to no risk at all. You know this.

If your rationalization is that the criterion for getting rewarded is time spent alone, you are actually supporting the missioner in this case.

It requires much more time/effort to run the mission chain than to log into a system and camp.

It takes much more training time to be able to fit and fly a ship to complete those missions, than to fit and fly a ship to scan the pocket.

It takes much more time interacting with the game from the missioner than the griefer/thief.


And, ultimately, the cost of failure or "risk" is disproportionately higher for the missioner than the thief/griefer, as someone has rightfully pointed out earlier in this thread.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#54 - 2014-01-21 00:41:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Qalix wrote:

A couple of things:

1. Crimewatch has been around for a very long time. It got a "recent" update and that update was specifically done to the benefit of non-pirates/gankers. It introduced all sorts of goodies, including the safety feature and global suspect flags for what used to be corp/individual-only flags (I stole from you, I got flagged to you, but no one else). In the old days, there were a lot of different ways to screw with mission runners. There are far, far fewer these days.

2. You don't understand the mechanics of mission invasions. Mission invasions have one of 3 forms: tripping aggression from the mission runner unexpectedly (e.g., shooting the MTU and getting aggression from drones set to aggressive) and then killing him; tripping aggression by goading a mission runner into action (e.g., looting a wreck and hoping he shoots at you) and then killing him; or stealing an item and running (because you don’t want to fight). In the first two cases, your solution gives them what they want without having to take any actions. They want the mission runner to shoot at them. They want the flag!! So you’d be helping them! In the third case, even if he had a flag, it wouldn’t stop him from stealing. You’d have the clearance to shoot him, but the moment you did, the limited engagement flag would be tripped. Then he reships and comes back to kill your pimp fit mission ship, which will not be able to properly tank a PvP fit ship. In the actual case of the OP, they came with a small fleet for exactly that reason. If he had offered any resistance, he would have lost the mission item AND his ship. Unless your plan is to fight off gankers, the flag does you no good. If your plan IS to fight off gankers, good luck, because they’ll be coming for you on a regular basis from that moment forward. People who don’t want to fight in the first place will be perpetually at a disadvantage in this game.

3. You don’t understand probing mechanics. I'm at war with Corp A. I see several Corp A members in my system. They aren't in the station and they aren't at a celestial, so they must be somewhere in space. I launch probes and start scanning. It's a heavily trafficked system and I have no way of knowing which ship results are theirs. I have no way of knowing who is missioning. The only thing I can do is warp to my results. So, I start warping to my results. Oh no! I warped to some dude's mission site. Now I'm flagged suspect for the next 15 mins and everyone in EVE gets a free shot at me.

4. It isn’t enough to say it’s a bad idea or won’t work, because someone will come along and ask “Why?” I presented my concerns in the question format, because that’s what one does in a dialogue. I provided you with an opportunity to address my concerns and change my mind. You’ve opted for the “I know better than anyone” approach, even when it’s clear that you have no clue what you’re talking about. But who am I to suggest that you shouldn’t tilt at windmills? You should take your idea over to the Features and Ideas subforum and give it a go.



You are still being an alarmist here.

- PvP baiting: yeah it's going to happen, as it happens already. Non-issue. Getting flagged at warp-in or after the theft only changes the timeline. If they are going to bait you, they just come back after the theft anyway. But, I would personally take the opportunity to counter prior to the theft over being forced to wait until it is actually completed. As it is now, if they choose to steal and run, there are no options for the missioner to counter.

- WTs are already exempt from actions against other WTs

- Pop-up warning before flaggable actions already exist = if you start a warp to a non-valid target (non-WT in your case) unintentionally, you get a warning before the action is completed.


As to your suggestion to post the idea in Features & Ideas, 100% solid and on point.

Edit:

Features & Ideas thread

Thanks again Qalix.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
thowlimer
Roprocor Ltd
#55 - 2014-01-21 20:44:55 UTC
The only thing that you would really need to change is to make the drop chance of the mission item 100%
that way you could kill the ninjha looter without having to shoot a 50% craps game
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#56 - 2014-01-21 21:08:29 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:

You are still being an alarmist here.

- PvP baiting: yeah it's going to happen, as it happens already. Non-issue. Getting flagged at warp-in or after the theft only changes the timeline. If they are going to bait you, they just come back after the theft anyway. But, I would personally take the opportunity to counter prior to the theft over being forced to wait until it is actually completed. As it is now, if they choose to steal and run, there are no options for the missioner to counter.

- WTs are already exempt from actions against other WTs

- Pop-up warning before criminal actions already exist = if you start a warp to a non-valid target (non-WT in your case) unintentionally, you get a warning before the action is completed.


A lot of wrong here. You want to introduce a legal penalty for 'just looking.' That's not ok. You want to rely on popup warnings (that many disable) and the safety to let people magically know if the deadspace they're warping to is the property of a WT or not. That's terrible design. Also, maybe the WT is there but its not the WT's mission? You want to make non-consensual salvaging a suspect level offense. This has been adamantly refused by CCP since salvage was introduced to the game.

Gaining a suspect/criminal flag through warping somewhere in space is a completely unworkable idea. It doesn't counter mission-griefing at all, it punishes legal activities that are not mission-griefing, and it there is no reasonable means to know if warping somewhere will result in a crime. Plus this whole mission-ownership-tresspassing nonsense.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#57 - 2014-01-22 14:35:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Batelle wrote:


A lot of wrong here. You want to introduce a legal penalty for 'just looking.' That's not ok. You want to rely on popup warnings (that many disable) and the safety to let people magically know if the deadspace they're warping to is the property of a WT or not. That's terrible design. Also, maybe the WT is there but its not the WT's mission? You want to make non-consensual salvaging a suspect level offense. This has been adamantly refused by CCP since salvage was introduced to the game.

Gaining a suspect/criminal flag through warping somewhere in space is a completely unworkable idea. It doesn't counter mission-griefing at all, it punishes legal activities that are not mission-griefing, and it there is no reasonable means to know if warping somewhere will result in a crime. Plus this whole mission-ownership-tresspassing nonsense.



Yes, I want to make "just looking" a suspicious*** act. In real life your "just looking" is called "prowling" and is a crime. And, yeah, it is really ok.

Yes, pop-ups are enough to keep those who truly have no criminal intent safe.

And, yeah, it is magical, just like your character "magically" being reborn in another body after getting podded. I think you and others can handle it.


It is totally workable, as long as the game can associate a ship to the pocket it is in and override the flag if a valid WT is present. And it allows for more counter-play against mission thieves/griefers than anything available right now.

The only valid objection since I posted the idea is that it would make make salvagers who warp into another player's pocket without permission go suspect***.

I think that the salvagers can handle it. But, of course that's CCP's call to make.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#58 - 2014-01-22 15:06:33 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Yes, I want to make "just looking" a criminal act. In real life your "just looking" is called "prowling" and is criminal.


Hah, no it isn't. Unless you live in a really really backward country.

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.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#59 - 2014-01-22 15:09:44 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Yes, I want to make "just looking" a criminal act. In real life your "just looking" is called "prowling" and is criminal.


Hah, no it isn't. Unless you live in a really really backward country.


http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/prowling/

In my backward country of the United States, people Google before they post so as to not look the fool.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#60 - 2014-01-22 15:21:12 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Yes, I want to make "just looking" a criminal act. In real life your "just looking" is called "prowling" and is criminal.


Hah, no it isn't. Unless you live in a really really backward country.


http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/prowling/

In my backward country of the United States, people Google before they post so as to not look the fool.


I was going to suggest that said backward country was the US, but I didn't want to assume. Thanks for proving my point though.

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.