Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I read the original post and I read every single reply in the thread.

I started out being in support in a general sort of way...by that I mean I didn't see anything inherently wrong with it. However, I saw a couple suggestions that fixed the problem without implementing the suspect flag, and I saw a mistaken opinion (not "fact" or "proof", "opinion") about the meaning of ownership, space, and trespassing. Then, I read discussions about flagging ninja salvagers and possibly turning mission pockets into pvp zones and I decided I don't like the suggestion.

To repeat, yes, I read the entire thread. YES, I understood the points made, on both sides. My response:

The initial issue is COSMOS missions being broken by gankers. The primary point of the original post is the weight attached to COSMOS missions. They're unique, they can only be done once, they have exceptionally high rewards, they're incredibly fragile.

The suggested response affects ALL missions in the game with pockets. This would therefore include mining missions, security missions, and storyline missions that include either mining or combat. However, Mining Missions, Security Missions, and Storyline Missions are not as fragile as COSMOS missions. Their time frame is longer (Most last 1 week with a few rare exceptions), the standings hit for a failure is much smaller, and there is no action or inaction that can prevent you from having access to them in the future.

If COSMOS missions are broken in some way, a fix should be provided that only affects COSMOS missions. Regular pocket missions aren't broken, so they shouldn't be subjected to the unintended consequences of a change to COSMOS missions.

I rarely if ever ninja salvage. Sometimes I salvage yellow rat wrecks in asteroid belts on my alts (I'm not allowed to on this character). But I definitely want to encourage salvagers to do their thing (and to feel as safe as possible in Eve's unsafe universe). Without their salvage, I can't manufacture rigs.

I don't gank anyone. But, I understand gankers want to play the game and have fun too. I don't think the solution to dealing with gankers is to limit their ability to gank. I think the solution to gankers is for me to build a better mission/mining ship. That means skilling properly and fitting my security mission ships with an omni-tank instead of a rat specific tank or fitting ANY tank at all on a mining ship (as a proactive defense against unintended PVP) . I also have multiple mission/mining bases. If a pesky ganker is messing with me, I can clone jump into a completely different empire and pick my play back up there. The solution to gankers messing with missioners is not to target anyone uninvited who shows up in mission space. The solution is for missioners to figure out how to protect themselves to the limit of their ability/resources.

I can see making an exception for COSMOS missions because the risk is too high for the missioner and too low for the ganker. But in regular missions the 'cost' of being ganked is simply a part of doing business and playing the game.

tl;dr This suggestion would have negative unintended consequences. A more constructive solution would be to seed COSMOS mission sites through several different locations, as well as allowing uncompleted missions to reset during downtime. Whatever the solution, it should only apply to COSMOS missions as they're the only ones that are vulnerable.

The original post was regarding the theft of very specific loot items for ransom that could wreck a players COSMOS mission line. I was originally for a change in the mission itself to make the loot item secure given the unique nature of the mission line and the item itself.

I have to give a -1 (probably with a multiplier :D ) to the idea of making players suspect for jumping to a mission site. What if I'm scanning for my lost drones and jump to yours by mistake? Am I suspect simply for warping to a freely accessible area of space? What about when I scan down a combat anomaly only to discover somebody got there before me, do I go suspect then?

Any player in any area of space is free to travel wherever they like. When (and only when) they commit a criminal act they should be tagged as such. Other than that we should be free to travel wherever we choose.

Why not move all this item theft missions in low sec ?

What would happen with agressive drones + suspect nearby? To me, that sounds like it would bridge the need to shoot the MTU first <.<

That's been nerfed now.

Those situations have been addressed in earlier posts. You will have to do a little digging to find them due to the thread crapping, though.

If you have a specific concern that has not already been addressed, just post the concern and the factual basis for it and we can discuss.

@ OP

No. Welcome to Eve.

This suggestion is clearly not as simple as just applying suspect timer to anyone who enters a mission area.

You are literally suggesting changes to fleet, fleet warp and the procedure of reconnecting after a disconnect, this is not including what needs to be changed for the ownership of mission sites to work.

And you want all this done so people can't steal loot from cosmos missions?, this is beyond ridiculous...

Only CCP knows how easy or hard it would be to implement. There are a lot of existing mechanics that do things very similar to what would be needed to for a suspect flag for mission invasion to work. They have been posted already supporting the opinion that CCP should be able to make this change.

If you know of any specific technical reasons to support your statements, feel free to post them so people can discuss.




No the intention was never to prevent mission item theft, just to raise the risk of to mission invaders (mission thieves) and balance out the risk/reward equation on both sides.

Also, to create more legal options to counter mission invasion since there are really no legitimate legal options right now.

The suggested suspect flag for mission invasion accomplishes both of these and much more.

I find it very unlikely this is going to be considered a small prioritized issue, have you any idea how many years it took for ccp to fix neutral remote repping in hi-sec?

Even minor adjustments to the drone ui have been buried in the backlog for years, you clearly need to play eve for a few more years if you honestly believe this is something that is going to be implemented any time soon.