These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A looter's trick that circumvents suspect timers.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#61 - 2016-07-23 18:10:29 UTC
Kip Winger wrote:
I ask for a level playing field, and seems like gankers just want to keep a loophole that as allowed them to score billions... trillions of ISK in loot over the years, so I understand you want nothing to change, but it does not mean it it won't.

That isn't even an EVE thing, that is just life.

*Nobody* wants "a level playing field" - everybody wants every advantage they can get in every situation....

And yet, it constantly surprises people...

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2016-07-23 18:18:02 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Kip Winger wrote:
I ask for a level playing field, and seems like gankers just want to keep a loophole that as allowed them to score billions... trillions of ISK in loot over the years, so I understand you want nothing to change, but it does not mean it it won't.

That isn't even an EVE thing, that is just life.

*Nobody* wants "a level playing field" - everybody wants every advantage they can get in every situation....

And yet, it constantly surprises people...


Correct...people want that. There is a laundry list of things I would love also that would give my advantage, however I know it would bring the game out of balance.
NotTheSmartestCookie
Shooting Blues Everyday
Gimme Da Loot
#63 - 2016-07-23 19:32:12 UTC
Kip Winger wrote:
NotTheSmartestCookie wrote:
This gameplay is a good example of emergent gameplay. The current mechanism fits the risk/reward for ganking and provides an opportunity for interesting gameplay as there is nothing to stop other parties from going for the loot too. If you want the loot and/or the killmails you will have to man up and put on your big-boy-britches.

Sadly enough the AntiGankers see player interaction as one of the least desirable aspects of EVE so their "solutions" always involve introducing more game mechanics and never involve undocking and pewing at other ships (unless it is whoring on concord kills).


Please explain your comment. You said it "fits the risk/reward". Where is the the risk? a Noob ship that gets alphed? So that a Phat Bustard can quickly swoop in and fly away with Millions.. Billions of loot avoiding the suspect tag? Bustard getting ganked....? Risk? Not FY, concord on grid to prevent a gank... safely docks. So please.... tell me more about that.

I ask for a level playing field, and seems like gankers just want to keep a loophole that as allowed them to score billions... trillions of ISK in loot over the years, so I understand you want nothing to change, but it does not mean it it won't.


Fits the risk/reward for ganking. Bolded and underlined the important part for you. You disingenuously disregard the entire context of how that wreck with valuable loot suddenly appeared. Any freighter wreck is a combination of several fails on the side of the hauler (and any inconsequential antigankers if at all present) and careful preparation and execution by the gankers. And albeit you claim that those wrecks are easy ISK you still prefer to spend your time raising a little stink in C&P rather than undocking and collecting that dank ISK yourself (or alternatively returning it to the original owner).

Making New Eden a better place 8 rounds of Void at a time.

Funny, smartest, pretty and relevant. Pick 3.

Proud shareholder in Halaima MinerBumping
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2016-07-23 19:41:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Brokk Witgenstein
Not every game mechanic you use as part of a process entitles you to balance around the entire process.
If mechanics A, B and C are used to achieve "Gank", does that mean no one can discuss A, B or C without someone pointing out that Gank is gud and the victim was stupid?

When discussing Bumping, discuss the Bumping itself please.
When discussing Looting, discuss the mechanics involving Looting.

You think you are the only ones offloading loot for free? What is stopping me from emptying cans without impunity, without suspect flag outside the ganking scenario?

A flawed mechanic is a flawed mechanic, no matter what You use it for.


Edit: I shall elaborate. I have a friend who's using a container containing valuables as bait. Whenever someone takes from it, he decloakes his strat and PvP happens. This kind of 'canflipping' is one of the few ways to grant unwilling victims a suspect flag. We really, REALLY do not need more "unforeseen mechanics" to make less suspect flags and less PvP happen.

Edit2: more perspective. When us nullsec duders blow up an Orca, a DST or a Freighter, we too have to hold the field long enough for our loot truck to arrive. Our truck is at considerable risk doing so- why isn't yours? Special snowflake needs special treatment? Highsec rules already are really soft on you; if you can't stand the idea of people actually shooting at your industrial, maybe EvE is not for you.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#65 - 2016-07-23 20:22:29 UTC
Kip Winger wrote:
I ask for a level playing field

I think you still haven't learned that nothing in EVE is fair...
If it looks fair, it isn't.
The whole meta of EVE is based around stuff that isn't fair.
And those who succeed (i.e. CODE.) are masters at tricking people into thinking they won Cool

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#66 - 2016-07-23 22:12:12 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
more perspective. When us nullsec duders blow up an Orca, a DST or a Freighter, we too have to hold the field long enough for our loot truck to arrive. Our truck is at considerable risk doing so- why isn't yours? Special snowflake needs special treatment? Highsec rules already are really soft on you; if you can't stand the idea of people actually shooting at your industrial, maybe EvE is not for you.

The transport for the loot has the exact same risk the original Freighter had, similar to the scenario in nullsec. It's just that CONCORD "protects" both ships in Highsec. Anti-ganking is perfectly free to shoot at the industrial, I don't think someone has a problem with that or cries for special protection. On the contrary, anti-ganking is here crying for a special snowflake rule to get an easy kill without sacrificing ships to CONCORD.

It does not even matter if they get what they want. The issue is not the current game mechanic, it's players like the op who are so bad at EVE they always cry for more changes in their favor. If CCP carebro enters the thread and brings forth that they implement said special snowflake mechanic to "balance" something you can bet it will take them only a few minutes to create the next thread full of tears about the next thing they think is the problem why they suck so much.

This "one more nerf"-thing is going on for years and they eventually always get what they want because of how hard they cry. You say the highsec rules are "soft on us"?? Why do you think that is the case? A decade of carebear tears, that's why. And you can't really blame us if we then take those rules and use them for our own advantage. For example, why is it so hard to kill a DST? CONCORD buffs, tank buff, who was asking for that and is now crying that we can use them too?

Evil RatKid
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#67 - 2016-07-23 23:32:42 UTC
Wooooosssshhhhhh- missed the point completely there, sis.

The transport shouldn't have the exact same risk. It's traficing in illicit goods, ergo a suspect flag is required. And you know that. It doesn't fit your narrative but I'm way past caring about "your" gameplay. It's always the same with you guys: want to act the big tough criminal, being all proud of your -10 status calling everybody else bear..... but when push comes to shove, you simply never want to put anything at risk.

Put your money where your mouth is. You want to be a criminal? Then don't expect concord to bail you out. This is the path you chose but noooo- I only want concord when it suits me. Ain't that right?

You guys crack me up. This has, once again, nothing in particular to do with ganking. If the shoe was on the other foot and bears found a way to escape their rightful punishment, you'd be all over the forums lamenting the exploit. Would you like your prey to perform an insta-logoffski to elude your grasp? Of course not. But when all of a sudden Your transport would/should be at risk but magically isn't, the tune changes dramatically.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#68 - 2016-07-23 23:58:13 UTC
Maybe I was not clear enough. It really does not matter if they implement it. As mentioned before several times, the problem is not the game mechanic. It is just plain stupid to expect that changing this will mean the looter will somehow have his hauler at risk. Obviously he will just use a different tactic to mitigate risk, the same way as it is done now with the noob ship.

See you in the next nerf thread.

Evil RatKid
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2016-08-01 16:47:01 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
more perspective. When us nullsec duders blow up an Orca, a DST or a Freighter, we too have to hold the field long enough for our loot truck to arrive. Our truck is at considerable risk doing so- why isn't yours? Special snowflake needs special treatment? Highsec rules already are really soft on you; if you can't stand the idea of people actually shooting at your industrial, maybe EvE is not for you.

The transport for the loot has the exact same risk the original Freighter had, similar to the scenario in nullsec. It's just that CONCORD "protects" both ships in Highsec. Anti-ganking is perfectly free to shoot at the industrial, I don't think someone has a problem with that or cries for special protection. On the contrary, anti-ganking is here crying for a special snowflake rule to get an easy kill without sacrificing ships to CONCORD.

It does not even matter if they get what they want. The issue is not the current game mechanic, it's players like the op who are so bad at EVE they always cry for more changes in their favor. If CCP carebro enters the thread and brings forth that they implement said special snowflake mechanic to "balance" something you can bet it will take them only a few minutes to create the next thread full of tears about the next thing they think is the problem why they suck so much.

This "one more nerf"-thing is going on for years and they eventually always get what they want because of how hard they cry. You say the highsec rules are "soft on us"?? Why do you think that is the case? A decade of carebear tears, that's why. And you can't really blame us if we then take those rules and use them for our own advantage. For example, why is it so hard to kill a DST? CONCORD buffs, tank buff, who was asking for that and is now crying that we can use them too?


You must have missed the post about ganking the looting bustard is not a valid option. But I will assist. Concord is on grid since you did the gank. This is why you pull concord away from the gates after a gank. So ganking a tanked out bustard with concord on grid, not really a option (as stated by a number of people before hand) not just me.

If you think your so great and we suck so much... why come here and cry about this? This is a very specific mechanic that was not intended for looting (as stated by your own ganker)!? Shhhhhh... Just let it happen.... But you won't, because this as an easy button for looting. This would take away your gravy train. Yes, Im sure you could come up with another option, but one that uses the crime and punishment system as intended.



Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2016-08-01 16:58:50 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Maybe I was not clear enough. It really does not matter if they implement it. As mentioned before several times, the problem is not the game mechanic. It is just plain stupid to expect that changing this will mean the looter will somehow have his hauler at risk. Obviously he will just use a different tactic to mitigate risk, the same way as it is done now with the noob ship.

See you in the next nerf thread.


There is mitigate risk.... and then there is breaking the system. Making a statement to the police stating "Well I did not actually steal the Mona Lisa, my friend just threw it in my car.. So I can drive away with no effects from the police". The police's responce... "Drat... he did the old hand off... Welp nothing we can do now". This is what your endorsing. It sounds silly in that context, but this concept is what a criminal would want to have. This is what needs to change.

Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2016-08-01 17:02:49 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:

Edit2: more perspective. When us nullsec duders blow up an Orca, a DST or a Freighter, we too have to hold the field long enough for our loot truck to arrive. Our truck is at considerable risk doing so- why isn't yours? Special snowflake needs special treatment? Highsec rules already are really soft on you; if you can't stand the idea of people actually shooting at your industrial, maybe EvE is not for you.


Well put!
Allise Soprano
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#72 - 2016-08-10 21:33:22 UTC
I have thoroughly enjoyed OP's logic getting picked apart in this thread.

Just one more nerf please XD
StonerPhReaK
Herb Men
#73 - 2016-08-11 02:10:04 UTC  |  Edited by: StonerPhReaK
Kip Winger wrote:
Gankers/looters have been using this little trick for sometime, and it seems to be growing in popularity because it is successful in circumventing risk vs reward crime mechanic.

Step one - Gank
Step two - Bring in a noob or a cheap frig to the wreck.
Step Three - Bring a Bustard to wreck
Step Four - Use Noobship as the sacrificial ship to move the wreck items into the Bustard. Noob ship goes suspect, but bustard stays normal. Even though it is now holding ganked illegal loot. If noob ship gets popped, repeat step four.

Step five - Fly illegal loot away safely in bustard that is not flashy yellow with no risk.


Even though everyone on grid saw it happen, there is minimal things that can be done since it is a flaw in the mechanic. Yes, the looter can be popped, then they can bring it back... However the transfer of loot is so quick that by the time the ship has transferred it and is suspect, it is too late.

How to fix it., two options I can think of to fix it.

1 - If you go suspect you can't transfer cargo into another ship (in highsec).

2 - If the loot is transferred into another ship, it goes suspect as well. (It is a crime to be the get away driver of a bank hist (even if your not the first one)).

* another option for #2

2(b) - If the loot is transferred into another ship, it goes suspect ONLY for everyone on grid with it (those that saw the transaction). If it warps away to a station, and no one station was at the gank site they would not know what happened and not see the looter as suspect.



Open to other ideas that prevent this loop hole in the mechanic, but lets stay on topic.

Thanks!
Kip




You forgot the most important step and the one that brings on these types of discussions.
Step .5

Step .5 : Decide to undock in one of the most violent video games known to Bob with all ones riches with the thought that everything should go safely because of :HiSec:.

Its this step that is rarely discussed and imho is what really should be prevented. Maybe a Hauling tutorial could be added to help ease the pain.

Scenario Alpha: Hemp Wellington thinks it a good idea to take billions of isk alone across a vast unforgiving spacescape of murderers villians backstabbers gankers sociopaths and white knights wearing shrubbery as shoes.

Your response to this is
A. Load up your stuff and join in. I mean, Its Hisec and should be safe right?
B. Leak said intel into the help channel alerting bads and ner-do-goods across the cluster to Hemps plan.
C. Escort Hemp and reduce his chances of being ganked nearly 100%
D. Setup a fleet at a chokepoint, gank the hapless chap and teach him a life lesson that nothing is ever safe ever. Especially in this game. Then relish in the fact that you didnt have to grind all them hours of namelss npc's or bobforbid Mining.

If the answer is A. CCP should refund the RL isk and biomass the person taking the test without a green safety button to save them.

If they answer B,C or D . The tutorial ends and the undock button isnt grey'd out anymore.

I have even better ideas if this doesnt go over well with either parties involved. They are equally as crazy and considering my marijuana induced psychosis has brought on this stream of types should prove at least to be a decent read. Much better than what weve had these last something pages.

Edit. Typro V Completed.

Signatures wer cooler when we couldn't remove them completely.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#74 - 2016-08-11 02:15:02 UTC
StonerPhReaK wrote:
D.

I choose you!

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist