These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Delay on MTU scooping player wrecks created in range

Author
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#1 - 2016-04-20 00:04:44 UTC
Currently mobile tractor units loot all white/blue/nullsec/WH wrecks instantly if they are created within 2500m of it.

It is fine for rats but right now it's a pretty nice way to deny loot to pvpers.

Could we get a 2-5 sec delay on looting of player wrecks so there is a possibility of us getting it?

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#2 - 2016-04-20 00:42:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
PvP'rs defined very very loosely as people ganking people on undocks and gates where someone else enough time to cuddle up to your target and deploy an MTU (Which takes 10 seconds to online) within 2500 m3 of your target.

Thankfully CCP gave you the tools to defeat this nefarious problem.

You can kill the MTU before it scoops your items. You can kill it after it scoops your items and still get half of it back. If it's not within 2500 M to start with you can put a tractor on the wreck yourself as soon as it pops, denying the enemy a chance to tractor it. You can drop your own MTU closer to the soon to be wreck than the vultures MTU.

Just as you tell your prey, "Harden up and play using the tools CCP gave you, stop whining they need to make everything just right to avoid inconveniencing you",
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#3 - 2016-04-20 07:52:31 UTC
Eh its more about the people you hit where you can't kill MTU first, like hotdropping ratters and ganking mission runners in their missions, you can't always quite have the luqury of killing a 50k ehp structure.

I get carebears like extra layers of safety and loot denial and yeah we are already in the HTFU mode, but it would be nice if we got a bone or two after constant and continuous nerfs y'know Lol

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Ben Ishikela
#4 - 2016-04-20 11:51:42 UTC
Or increase MTU droprate to 100%. might also fix it.

Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#5 - 2016-04-20 11:54:39 UTC
This is one of those things that doesn't happen very often, but when it does it's incredibly annoying. I think the better solution would be for MTUs to have a higher drop rate.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#6 - 2016-04-20 13:37:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Ben Ishikela wrote:
Or increase MTU droprate to 100%. might also fix it.


Maybe not 100%, but higher than 50%.

100% would mean someone could fill an MTU with a ton of pricey stuff, kill it for a multi-billion isk kilmail, and then rinse repeat.

This is bad because : A: Easily abused killboard padding is annoying, and B: If player bounties or FW LP payouts for kills treat an MTU as an extension of the pilot like killmails do, you could use a bunch of MTU's and a ton of pricey mods + an alt to rapidly cash out bounties or generate an insane amount of LP through FW kill rewards. Kind of like what goons did with freighters filled with obscure price manipulated items.

I don't know if it works that way with FW/Bounties, but definately a potential issue.


But it could go up to 80% without running into those issues.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#7 - 2016-04-20 14:00:21 UTC
I would say working as intended and -1 to any changes for the MTU.
The tools to solve your problem are already in the game, do you have the creative mindset to figure out how to use them?
No I will not tell you what to do but the first thing that comes to mind is alts.
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
#8 - 2016-04-20 20:25:37 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Ben Ishikela wrote:
Or increase MTU droprate to 100%. might also fix it.


Maybe not 100%, but higher than 50%.

100% would mean someone could fill an MTU with a ton of pricey stuff, kill it for a multi-billion isk kilmail, and then rinse repeat.

This is bad because : A: Easily abused killboard padding is annoying, and B: If player bounties or FW LP payouts for kills treat an MTU as an extension of the pilot like killmails do, you could use a bunch of MTU's and a ton of pricey mods + an alt to rapidly cash out bounties or generate an insane amount of LP through FW kill rewards. Kind of like what goons did with freighters filled with obscure price manipulated items.

I don't know if it works that way with FW/Bounties, but definately a potential issue.


But it could go up to 80% without running into those issues.


Do killboards even track MTUs? If so why? Tracking MTUs on a killboard is about as useful as tracking asteroids. Rats should be tracked before MTUs, at least they shoot back (however poorly).
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#9 - 2016-04-20 20:40:06 UTC
Corvald Tyrska wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
Ben Ishikela wrote:
Or increase MTU droprate to 100%. might also fix it.


Maybe not 100%, but higher than 50%.

100% would mean someone could fill an MTU with a ton of pricey stuff, kill it for a multi-billion isk kilmail, and then rinse repeat.

This is bad because : A: Easily abused killboard padding is annoying, and B: If player bounties or FW LP payouts for kills treat an MTU as an extension of the pilot like killmails do, you could use a bunch of MTU's and a ton of pricey mods + an alt to rapidly cash out bounties or generate an insane amount of LP through FW kill rewards. Kind of like what goons did with freighters filled with obscure price manipulated items.

I don't know if it works that way with FW/Bounties, but definately a potential issue.


But it could go up to 80% without running into those issues.


Do killboards even track MTUs? If so why? Tracking MTUs on a killboard is about as useful as tracking asteroids. Rats should be tracked before MTUs, at least they shoot back (however poorly).


Yes, MTU's show up on killboards as a loss for the person who deployed them. Similarly, in game, a destroyed MTU shows up as a killmail for the one who killed it and as a lossmail for the one who lost one.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#10 - 2016-04-21 04:40:02 UTC
Ben Ishikela wrote:
Or increase MTU droprate to 100%. might also fix it.

That works.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#11 - 2016-04-21 04:41:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Donnachadh wrote:
I would say working as intended and -1 to any changes for the MTU.
The tools to solve your problem are already in the game, do you have the creative mindset to figure out how to use them?
No I will not tell you what to do but the first thing that comes to mind is alts.

When warping in the gank fleet taking industrial with 27.5k of stront is a bit of a problem because they either align slowly or don't have enough cargo.

Anhenka wrote:
Ben Ishikela wrote:
Or increase MTU droprate to 100%. might also fix it.


Maybe not 100%, but higher than 50%.

100% would mean someone could fill an MTU with a ton of pricey stuff, kill it for a multi-billion isk kilmail, and then rinse repeat.

This is bad because : A: Easily abused killboard padding is annoying, and B: If player bounties or FW LP payouts for kills treat an MTU as an extension of the pilot like killmails do, you could use a bunch of MTU's and a ton of pricey mods + an alt to rapidly cash out bounties or generate an insane amount of LP through FW kill rewards. Kind of like what goons did with freighters filled with obscure price manipulated items.

I don't know if it works that way with FW/Bounties, but definately a potential issue.


But it could go up to 80% without running into those issues.

You need to destroy the item for it to enter the LP payout or bounty payout. 80-90% drop rate is also fine, 50% is not.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Iain Cariaba
#12 - 2016-04-21 06:30:30 UTC
This suggestion is the very definition of "this mechanic is unfair, change it to benefit me."

Really, Arya, you're one of the last people I expected to take the carebear tactic to propose a change.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#13 - 2016-04-21 13:43:45 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
This suggestion is the very definition of "this mechanic is unfair, change it to benefit me."

Really, Arya, you're one of the last people I expected to take the carebear tactic to propose a change.

Never thought of this angle before, but you are correct she is whining just like a carebear.

So let me add another -1 to your suggestion.
Your opponent has figured a way to figuratively flip you the social finger AND rob you of the spoils of your victory at the same time.
Rather than a problem to be solved by CCP I see this as a very creative use of the mechanics and tools available to all of us. So that brings me back to my first post, do you have the creative ability to turn the mechanics and the tools back to your favor, or are you going to continue to whine to CCP because someone stole what you think should be yours simply because?
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#14 - 2016-04-21 14:26:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Donnachadh wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
This suggestion is the very definition of "this mechanic is unfair, change it to benefit me."

Really, Arya, you're one of the last people I expected to take the carebear tactic to propose a change.

Never thought of this angle before, but you are correct she is whining just like a carebear.

So let me add another -1 to your suggestion.
Your opponent has figured a way to figuratively flip you the social finger AND rob you of the spoils of your victory at the same time.
Rather than a problem to be solved by CCP I see this as a very creative use of the mechanics and tools available to all of us. So that brings me back to my first post, do you have the creative ability to turn the mechanics and the tools back to your favor, or are you going to continue to whine to CCP because someone stole what you think should be yours simply because?


Oh don't get me wrong I will be fine even if this doesn't get any changes. I wouldn't mind if carebears figured out something themselves, the issue is CCP are introducing too many safety mechanics that make this game a less dangerous place, I've been in the "harden the **** up mode" for the last 5 years coping with nerfs and safety buffs, the thing is were supposed to just watch and eat crap while carebears whine and get buffs.

At least wreck shooting was nerfed, even though it was accompanied with a myriad of other nerfs like hull hp buffs.

I would be fine with MTUs if they weren't dirt cheap but they cost only 8m ISK.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#15 - 2016-04-21 16:33:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
Iain Cariaba wrote:
This suggestion is the very definition of "this mechanic is unfair, change it to benefit me."

Really, Arya, you're one of the last people I expected to take the carebear tactic to propose a change.

The mistake is that the mechanic as it is doesn't actually benefit anyone it just screws one party out of loot by forcing everything to be rolled through the loot drop system twice. The party that lost the ship is no more likely to get their modules back because the MTU is still going to be destroyed and looted and the additional loss will add an extra potentially expensive loss to their killboard.

MTUs are pretty fine, generally speaking, but them functioning as a kind of "automatic screw you machine" is pretty lame.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#16 - 2016-04-22 04:34:04 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
This suggestion is the very definition of "this mechanic is unfair, change it to benefit me."

Really, Arya, you're one of the last people I expected to take the carebear tactic to propose a change.

The mistake is that the mechanic as it is doesn't actually benefit anyone it just screws one party out of loot by forcing everything to be rolled through the loot drop system twice. The party that lost the ship is no more likely to get their modules back because the MTU is still going to be destroyed and looted and the additional loss will add an extra potentially expensive loss to their killboard.

MTUs are pretty fine, generally speaking, but them functioning as a kind of "automatic screw you machine" is pretty lame.

Basically this.

Not a single time when MTU ate my loot did that thing survive for longer than a minute or two it took me to kill it. The owner never even came close to getting anything but a lossmail.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#17 - 2016-04-22 13:41:51 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
Oh don't get me wrong I will be fine even if this doesn't get any changes. I wouldn't mind if carebears figured out something themselves, the issue is CCP are introducing too many safety mechanics that make this game a less dangerous place, I've been in the "harden the **** up mode" for the last 5 years coping with nerfs and safety buffs, the thing is were supposed to just watch and eat crap while carebears whine and get buffs.

All of the recent changes help to keep those who would be victims of ganks / war decs just a little bit safer, and yet from the other side since these changes affect all ship equally (in relative terms) they have had very little impact on those who pursue the traditional PvP game play style of going out and looking for others that want to engage in a fight. Another aspect here, you whine about these things as a nerf to your play style and in a way they are, but they are also a signal from CCP to ALL players, stop shooting at those who do not want to be shot at or we will change the game to protect the cash flow we get from those players.
And before you go off on me about core principals of the game and you are not safe anywhere, or the usual this is a PvP centric game adapt or get out line of crap I will simply respond "real cash money needed to pay the bills" in the end this will trump EVEN THE CORE PRINCIPALS of the game.

Arya Regnar wrote:
Not a single time when MTU ate my loot did that thing survive for longer than a minute or two it took me to kill it. The owner never even came close to getting anything but a lossmail.

You PvP types are big on telling the carebears to bring friends to avoid ganks etc, in point of fact the "bring friends" is an answer given to virtually anything and everything that a carebear may post, and yet here you are whining that you have to bring friends to deal with the MTU that is stealing your loot. That is the very definition of hypocrisy, telling otheres that they need to bring friends to deal with their problems and then turning around and asking for CCP to solve your problem so you do not need to bring friends.

The MTU is not the problem here your entitled attitude is the problem.
If there is an MTU then do not engage.
Destroy the MTU FIRST and then engage.
OR bring a friend specifically to deal with the MTU
Don't have friends then deal with it, but no you cannot have changes to the game simply because you refuse to bring friends.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#18 - 2016-04-23 10:13:56 UTC
I would try to explain why bringing a guy to kill MTU thats under the guy you want to gank is a bad idea but yeah.

I know you know what you are talking about.

HTFU #68

It must be hard shooting rats.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#19 - 2016-04-23 14:54:02 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
I would try to explain why bringing a guy to kill MTU thats under the guy you want to gank is a bad idea but yeah.

I know you know what you are talking about.

HTFU #68

It must be hard shooting rats.

I was wondering when you would roll out the usual carebear who does not understand line of crap. Thank you for ending the waiting period on that and thank you for playing that trump card. In my real world life full of chaos, confusion and uncertainty it is comforting to know there are still a few things I can count on.

Ah I see from the quoted post above that this is about making ISK from a gank.
You gank for profit or we would not be having this conversation and you would not have asked for this change to the MTU.
Your targets have figured out how to use the tools and mechanics in the game to minimize your profit from ganking them, sounds like genius level thinking to me and as stated before the game working as intended. So again I ask are you smart enough to use the tools and mechanics of the game to counter this? Based on your responses so far I would have to say no you are not.

You state that it is a bad idea to bring in another player / character to destroy the MTU, why?
What is it about bringing friends to help that is bad in this specific circumstance?
Is it the lost profits to you because you have to share?
Is it the difficulty of having to find friends?
Or maybe it is the incredible difficulty of adding just one more ship to your gank fleet?

And yes I do want to hear your explanation of how and why it is a bad idea to bring a friend to the party to handle the MTU, because I will be brutally honest the only reason I see here is simple greed. You do not want to share the profits from your gank with anyone else, so you want CCP to change the game so you do not have to share with one more person. Either that or managing just one more character pushes you over the limit of what you or your computer can handle.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#20 - 2016-04-24 01:37:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Donnachadh wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
I would try to explain why bringing a guy to kill MTU thats under the guy you want to gank is a bad idea but yeah.

I know you know what you are talking about.

HTFU #68

It must be hard shooting rats.

I was wondering when you would roll out the usual carebear who does not understand line of crap. Thank you for ending the waiting period on that and thank you for playing that trump card. In my real world life full of chaos, confusion and uncertainty it is comforting to know there are still a few things I can count on.

Ah I see from the quoted post above that this is about making ISK from a gank.
You gank for profit or we would not be having this conversation and you would not have asked for this change to the MTU.
Your targets have figured out how to use the tools and mechanics in the game to minimize your profit from ganking them, sounds like genius level thinking to me and as stated before the game working as intended. So again I ask are you smart enough to use the tools and mechanics of the game to counter this? Based on your responses so far I would have to say no you are not.

You state that it is a bad idea to bring in another player / character to destroy the MTU, why?
What is it about bringing friends to help that is bad in this specific circumstance?
Is it the lost profits to you because you have to share?
Is it the difficulty of having to find friends?
Or maybe it is the incredible difficulty of adding just one more ship to your gank fleet?

And yes I do want to hear your explanation of how and why it is a bad idea to bring a friend to the party to handle the MTU, because I will be brutally honest the only reason I see here is simple greed. You do not want to share the profits from your gank with anyone else, so you want CCP to change the game so you do not have to share with one more person. Either that or managing just one more character pushes you over the limit of what you or your computer can handle.



My targets have realized nothing they just happen to sit on MTUs because they are lazy and that's what carebears do.

Some goes for nullsec hotdropping.

The only issue with MTUs that I have is the 1 server tick instant looting of MTUs of wrecks that are right on top of it.

It would be fine if MTUs had less hitpoints but sadly they most often have more HP than the ratting ship/whatever is on top of it.

If this was a conscious effort it would be cool but it's not it's another let's give carebears everything without them making any effort to improve their situation.

Quote:
You PvP types are big on telling the carebears to bring friends to avoid ganks etc, in point of fact the "bring friends" is an answer given to virtually anything and everything that a carebear may post, and yet here you are whining that you have to bring friends to deal with the MTU that is stealing your loot. That is the very definition of hypocrisy, telling otheres that they need to bring friends to deal with their problems and then turning around and asking for CCP to solve your problem so you do not need to bring friends.


On topic of bringing more dudes we are already bringing 15-35 alts/people with every nerf we need to bring more and for everything like this we need to bring one extra or more, the only people doing the HTFU are the "PVPers".

I didn't have a single tactic of mine buffed in the last few years on the other hand I've had everything I do continuously nerfed, and I deal with it. This instant looting MTU mechanic doesn't benefit anyone and as such I ask for a change, I know it's pointless though, the carebears outnumber us 20 to 1 and CCP don't give a damn about any of that non consensual pvp quality of life improvement.

I guess this makes it a rant, just close the thread.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

12Next page