These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Locator Agents cease to function on Offline Players.

Author
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#61 - 2016-09-11 02:03:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirty Forum Alt
Asveron Durr wrote:
As can be seen the end of day report at DT is positive for each party, now the thought i had is simply an optional idea.
And if you really wanted to hunt someone, quite affordable given such fees would be thought about and passed onto clients by the mercs at times. Small groups or even those as in the case of defenders might utilize the option to simply be able to have options in play, especially in the case of those whom know who their local gankers are.

at any rate im done here as I am all out of pennies for this discussion.

#1 - What in the **** do gankers or CODE have to do with *anything* relating to watch lists? If you want to propose a conspiracy theory that they stalk/harass *specific* targets often enough to need locator agents or to know when specific people are online start your own thread to be ridiculed for it.

#2 - None of the groups you linked is small. Aside from Devil's Warrior's you have literally only listed the large hub-humping groups that the small groups end up merging into... edit: And even devil's are pretty large as such groups go, or have been, I haven't checked their current numbers.

#3 - Your numbers don't take into account the cost of declaring wars, or the fact that most smaller wardeccing entities are not mercenaries and actually have to *pay* for the wardec fee, with no "client" to pass the cost on to...


I'm not saying wars can't be profitable - I've made quite a lot of profit on them in the past few years. But based on what I've seen/heard from other small operators I seem to be part of the exception rather than the rule - and many groups have already folded due to the current 50m wardec fee cost. Your price spikes would simply drive more of them away from solo/small group wardecs and into the larger groups - and yes it would also drive merc contract prices through the roof as costs got passed on to the clients.

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)

Asveron Durr
Vandanian Order
Greater Itamo Mafia
#62 - 2016-09-11 02:43:41 UTC
[quote=Dirty Forum Alt
#1 - What in the **** do gankers or CODE have to do with *anything* relating to watch lists? If you want to propose a conspiracy theory that they stalk/harass *specific* targets often enough to need locator agents or to know when specific people are online start your own thread to be ridiculed for it.

#2 - None of the groups you linked is small. Aside from Devil's Warrior's you have literally only listed the large hub-humping groups that the small groups end up merging into... edit: And even devil's are pretty large as such groups go, or have been, I haven't checked their current numbers.

#3 - Your numbers don't take into account the cost of declaring wars, or the fact that most smaller wardeccing entities are not mercenaries and actually have to *pay* for the wardec fee, with no "client" to pass the cost on to...


I'm not saying wars can't be profitable - I've made quite a lot of profit on them in the past few years. But based on what I've seen/heard from other small operators I seem to be part of the exception rather than the rule - and many groups have already folded due to the current 50m wardec fee cost. Your price spikes would simply drive more of them away from solo/small group wardecs and into the larger groups - and yes it would also drive merc contract prices through the roof as costs got passed on to the clients.[/quote]


uhm, ok wasnt going try and get into an argument here...........
The fact is though.....

O-P-T-I-O-N-A-L

#1: simply relative data, where someone might want to watch list their known local ganker or ganker warpin spy. pure and simple.

#2: yeah, large groups...so what. they can afford the said costs obviously because they make enough in a single day to do so. a good small group could also.

#3: again, say it with me....OPTIONAL, if a small group has a problem with another group, ie competting miner groups in the same system, they probably do not have a need for using a watch list, so uhm yeah.

As to rest of your vomit......

a proc unboosted currently can make 50 mill just mining veld in approx 2 hrs.

lv4 mission runner can make that in 1 hour (counting bounties, salvage, and LP store items) not too mention building rigs with the salvage and making more.

An explorer can make much more than 50 with a little luck in an hour.

An anom runner(highsec) can make 50 in a couple of hours or so.

hmm, lets see....oh yeah
3 peeps (or alts) 1 hour mining the correct rocks can build 100 destroyers to make 100 million isk UNBOOSTED and a couple of hours of running production runs.

there are many more ways and combos to make that isk in an hour or two, if those other corps could not make or support themselves for a mere 50 million isk, plus ammo, fits, replacement ships, etc, then either they did not plan too clearly or they just do not know how to EvE and should not be running a corp them selves.
For christ sakes, i made 630 billion in the first 11 months i played this game back in 2011...its not that hard to do.

on a side note: most groups that are worth anything at all have an indy group working in the background as their support to maintain supplies and supply lines...it is called logistics. and the indy have outsourcing and/or miners supplying them with what they need to do their job. Everyone started that way at some point, even if it meant running missions to begin with...i have seen a lot of individual mercs with indy corps or mining losses in their far away past, and not sure about now but i know for a fact couple of years or so back CODE was backed by their own indy/miner corps during their birth (ie b4 conference elite joined them officially)
So please save your whining for someone that plays COD or such and expects magic bullets and what not to simply appear.
Your not the exception, its pretty much a rule set, maybe those others failed because of lack of insight, forethought, and had an attitude of entitlement.

so to re-iterate keypoints: Optional, non-free intel based idea for those that wish to use it, quit trying to make it sound mandatory
Faylee Freir
Slavers Union
#63 - 2016-09-11 03:01:24 UTC
This thread isnt about the cost of wardecs. I would have quoted you but your post was a mess. Can you please clean it up a bit?

Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#64 - 2016-09-11 03:53:41 UTC
Asveron...

I think you are missing my point...

The point is, the people who would make the most use of this mechanic would be the *smaller* groups that actually *hunt* targets - which are the groups who complain the most about the price spikes. And the groups that *do not* have industrial corps on the side just to support their operations, and need all of their alts for scouting/etc.

So designing a system *only* for the groups that *don't need it* is kind of silly...


I was going to write more here - but I'll eve-mail it to you instead. We should stop derailing Ralph's thread. If you want to throw some more insults back and forth, check your mail P

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)

Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2016-09-11 04:55:30 UTC
Have my +1 Ralph. This idea would work, no strings attached.
Luscius Uta
#66 - 2016-09-13 07:38:05 UTC
Instead of locator agents simply not working on offline players, I would prefer if they would tell me the time when the target was last seen online. And there's one thing about the buddy list that annoys me to no end since I found it to be illogical - if you add someone who didn't reciprocate, they show as offline at all times. You could be located in the same system with them and they will still have a red circle next to their name, even though you can clearly tell from list of people in local that they are online. Therefore I would prefer if the buddy list wouldn't show offline/online status for people who didn't reciprocate, since that leads to silly situations like the one I mentioned above.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#67 - 2016-09-13 10:08:56 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
Instead of locator agents simply not working on offline players, I would prefer if they would tell me the time when the target was last seen online. And there's one thing about the buddy list that annoys me to no end since I found it to be illogical - if you add someone who didn't reciprocate, they show as offline at all times. You could be located in the same system with them and they will still have a red circle next to their name, even though you can clearly tell from list of people in local that they are online. Therefore I would prefer if the buddy list wouldn't show offline/online status for people who didn't reciprocate, since that leads to silly situations like the one I mentioned above.


This bugs me quite a bit too. Especially when I have to add and remove and add and remove my friends several times to get them to show up properly.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
Transgress
#68 - 2016-09-22 10:54:27 UTC
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#69 - 2016-09-22 11:50:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Woah dude, calm down satan.

Enough player hunting nerfs, please.

This game advertises bad guys but they ripped not just our fangs, I'd argue entire jaws...
Finding people is already hard enough with watchlist removal and you are wrong about nobody wanting it back, I've had 4 friends quit game over it and they weren't null/low super hunters, that garbage nerf almost removed targeted hunting.


And then people complain mercs camp pipes and trade hubs, get a load of this...

Instead add a deployable module you can drop in system where they logged off that you can tie a player name to that alarms you if you are online when it spots the player. This wouldn't be effortless like watchlists and the API standings adding tools were.

Definitely not "remove PVP" from this game instead though.
What fun is this game if we can't hunt specific people, random chaos is only fun for so long, some of us actually enjoy the stalking but not past the 24/7 job just to get a crappy kill on some dude that bought harvester drones because that is what it would boil down to.

Edit: Holy crap I just realized how super overpowered this would make logoff traps in highsec... You would have literally no way of knowing it's there for sure unless you watched the location weeks prior.

Do not want.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#70 - 2016-09-22 12:10:45 UTC
I have yet to see a single reason as to why it would be bad for people to know if the target they just ran a locator on is offline or not.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
Transgress
#71 - 2016-09-22 12:22:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
I have yet to see a single reason as to why it would be bad for people to know if the target they just ran a locator on is offline or not.

or to get intell on a target that isnt online ,
particularly given
CCP Larrikin wrote:
players privacy is an important factor to consider.

Sauce
Rawmeat Mary
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
#72 - 2016-09-22 13:27:31 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
I have yet to see a single reason as to why it would be bad for people to know if the target they just ran a locator on is offline or not.

or to get intell on a target that isnt online ,
particularly given
CCP Larrikin wrote:
players privacy is an important factor to consider.

Sauce

I still don't get the 'player privacy' thing.

'Privacy' as in 'RL privacy' information, okay, perfect.

'Privacy' in a Multi Player Online game that want to promote player interaction and conflict? The privacy of a pixel character?

CCP, are you saying you don't want players to actually interract more but, in fact, less?

'If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins onto their clothing. And if we're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order.'

Yeah, we're like that.

Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#73 - 2016-09-22 13:39:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirty Forum Alt
Rawmeat Mary wrote:
CCP, are you saying you don't want players to actually interract more but, in fact, less?

Basically all the 0.0 groups knew who the supercapital/titan pilots in their area were and watchlisted them - and then whenever the titan was online to bridge a fleet around they refused to do any operation other than possibly titan/supercapital hunting (for the bigger groups).

Supercapital/Titan pilots being wealthy and influential didn't like the fact that they didn't get easy kills and people hunted them - so they complained to CCP.

CCP either just caved in or convinced themselves that in a brilliant stroke of counter-intuitive logic they could simply remove the watch list, and people would never know if the titan/supercapital was online - so people would undock and fly/fight more.

In reality of course, EVE people being pessimistic and paranoid, Everyone just assumes the titan/supercapitals are online all the time unless they have cloaky scout eyes on every possible location they may be stored. So there are less fights than ever before. But at least between this change and citadels that allow them to dock safely the titan/supercapital pilots are finally safe/happy...


edit: Incidentally I wonder how many people buy titans/supercapitals just to ship spin them, now that they can dock and never have to be at risk...

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)

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#74 - 2016-09-22 16:32:26 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Rawmeat Mary wrote:
CCP, are you saying you don't want players to actually interract more but, in fact, less?

Basically all the 0.0 groups knew who the supercapital/titan pilots in their area were and watchlisted them - and then whenever the titan was online to bridge a fleet around they refused to do any operation other than possibly titan/supercapital hunting (for the bigger groups).

Supercapital/Titan pilots being wealthy and influential didn't like the fact that they didn't get easy kills and people hunted them - so they complained to CCP.

CCP either just caved in or convinced themselves that in a brilliant stroke of counter-intuitive logic they could simply remove the watch list, and people would never know if the titan/supercapital was online - so people would undock and fly/fight more.

In reality of course, EVE people being pessimistic and paranoid, Everyone just assumes the titan/supercapitals are online all the time unless they have cloaky scout eyes on every possible location they may be stored. So there are less fights than ever before. But at least between this change and citadels that allow them to dock safely the titan/supercapital pilots are finally safe/happy...


edit: Incidentally I wonder how many people buy titans/supercapitals just to ship spin them, now that they can dock and never have to be at risk...


I get why they did it and don't really blame them for it either. That said they should have seen this knock on effect and put in changes to the affected areas so they were not screwed over. Simply getting the message "we were unable to find the target, they must have gone to ground" or something if they are offline when they run the locator agent would be a great help to mercs.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#75 - 2016-09-23 13:23:14 UTC
Even though I'm much more likely to be on the receiving end of the hunt, I support whatever change is necessary to make your playstyle viable again. But I'd go further than that. I feel that a limited version of the watchlist should be returned to the game. But, I know CCP's reason for removing it, and since that is the case, I don't know if there will ever be a way to bring it back that can't get meta-exploited.

Setting that aside, I feel the current intel tools are lacking in this game. In regards to specifically locator agents, Ralph, your suggestion is quick and elegant. But I still feel that it is shortchanging hunters. I said it back in the thread you linked in the op, I'll say it again. Most Locator Agents are useless. They need massively buffed. To make this quick and easy, here's what I would set up.

*No more distance limitations for ANY locator agent. All agents can find people at all ranges.
*Level 1 agents give star system information (and online/offline status with lore-friendly wording)
*Level 2 agents give star system, station info if docked, or a notation if the target is out in space
*Level 3 agents give all that plus the target's ship info
*Level 4 agents get remade into other 1-3 agents to increase ease of access.

If you're dropping a sum of isk on an agent and waiting minutes for a reply, you should get more info than what you get now. But in slight disagreement with your proposal, I still think the locates should work on offline targets. Even if you get your gang into the same star system, you still have to wait an indefinite period of time for them to log in again and HOPE everyone is paying attention to local and that everyone is available for the ping when it happens.

If you'd counter with an argument that running locates on offline people is still a waste so you'd rather it not be there, then okay I'll compromise and go along with it. But I'd rather not go that route, since it still incentivizes people to not log in, whereas if there's no intel difference if they're online or off, it's an even playing field for logging in or not. I do not like incentivizing people to never log in, or log in indefinitely for no reason (the prior "counterplay" to watchlists). Incentivizing one extreme or the other is bad gameplay.

Either way, locates need buffed and I support changes that'll help you get back on the warpath.
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
#76 - 2016-09-24 09:28:14 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Guilty of scanning but not reading all three pages with that in mind here goes.

Going back to the OP if you have to pay your fee and wait while the locator agent does their thing I am OK with them telling you the player is offline as long as that is all the information you get. If you wan to get this information in an easier, faster or less expensive way then I say no.




You have obviously never actively conducted a war, then

Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi .

Bumble's Space Log

Morgan Agrivar
Doomheim
#77 - 2016-09-27 09:42:59 UTC
<--- Look how sad she is since the watch list has been removed...Sad
MrQuisno
Doomheim
#78 - 2016-09-29 13:20:38 UTC
E6o5 wrote:
I stopped doing war decs and stopped plexing alts since they broke war decs


can i have your stuff then :)
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
Transgress
#79 - 2016-09-29 13:22:41 UTC
MrQuisno wrote:
E6o5 wrote:
I stopped doing war decs and stopped plexing alts since they broke war decs


can i have your stuff then :)

who said anything about quitting?
Sitting Bull Lakota
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#80 - 2016-10-04 09:07:19 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
MrQuisno wrote:
E6o5 wrote:
I stopped doing war decs and stopped plexing alts since they broke war decs


can i have your stuff then :)

who said anything about quitting?
Quit EvE?

As a bad who wants to declare wars, I fully support the proposal.