These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fanfest: Crimewatch

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vila eNorvic
#501 - 2012-03-24 01:37:20 UTC
Lady Spank wrote:
1. Uninterrupted 1v1 fights just discourage people from actually roaming about trying to find a fight. The more people just doing safe-mode 1v1 in high sec, the less people out there enriching the PVP game.
I don't see how it would do that any more than the current mutual can-taking method does.

baltec1 wrote:
Because the victims corp cant come and blow the can flipper awayRoll
Of course they can - EVERYONE can!

Destiny Corrupted wrote:
So you're saying for the sake of a bit of realism, criminal actions in EVE should have residual consequences, much like in real life?
Yes! You've got it at last.

baltec1 wrote:
The victim can avoid can flipping easily by not ejecting their cargo into space.
In the same way that I can avoid being mugged by not going out, or avoid being burgled by not having a home?

rootimus maximus wrote:
I often "canflip"... my other toons. There are plenty of times when it's move convenient to jetcan stuff for a different toon to pickup. Given that my toons are mostly in different corps, that'll mean I'm going to be flagged for criminal behaviour that actually isn't.
Well, actually it is. The game laws apply to in-game conditions. The fact that two characters happen to be controlled by the same player doesn't alter their in-game legal situation. If you want to use those tactics put the characters in the same corp - no problem.
Vila eNorvic
#502 - 2012-03-24 01:37:50 UTC
Liam Mirren wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
My question, with the proposed changes, if I continued to do this, once I took from the wreck, would everyone on station be able to shoot me?
Yup, and anyone shooting you would then also be flagged to everyone else.
I think Greyscale has already said that they are specifically trying to avoid that situation.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#503 - 2012-03-24 02:06:18 UTC
Ludi Burek wrote:


Finally, since you're trying to fix high sec pvp, how about you remove those NPC corps. Those a-holes live in a immunity bubble. And don't give me that "new players" spiel. Most of NPC corp are alts and career carebears. If you don't want to remove it, limit the character age so high skilled mission runners, miners, transport characters can't hide there. I was going to say RR alts, but you seem to be addressing that issue already Lol


When it comes to war decs, please consider that many botters and farmers hide in sub 10 man corps. These guys are impossible to nail down as they remake corps as soon as decced. Address this real issue.

Or at least severely tone down high sec pve rewards so I can stop raging at seeing these exploiters wander around in complete safety.

ccp listen to this guy
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#504 - 2012-03-24 02:21:43 UTC
CCP Greyscale

Can-flipping as-is will be impossible once the safeties are added. People should be able to choose to do dumb things, but they should also have the information they need to figure out that the thing they're doing is dumb.

Duelling we're planning to support with an explicit mechanic rather than the current hacky workaround.

[quote=FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:

Wait...so I can shoot someone without being concorded now? But can flipping carries the same penalty as actually firing on someone? I don't know whether to laugh maniacally or cry.



If I understand correctly I can steal a can, get a 'suspect' flag and everyone can shoot me. Not much different then it used to be and perfectly fine, as long as the sentries don't join in on the fun.

I'd love it if players could use their hacking skill to de-anchor secure cans. It could tie in nicely with the new suspect flag. The scavengers get to clean up all the spammed secure cans a bit, empty broken down posses, and go after secure can miners, but at quite a big risk of havng to hang around for quite a while when hacking a can..

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
Cyras DeValera
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#505 - 2012-03-24 02:50:15 UTC
Quote:
Can-flipping as-is will be impossible once the safeties are added.


Good bye, EVE, hello WoW in Space.
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#506 - 2012-03-24 03:58:28 UTC
as long as we don't have 'guard-whacking' ala Trammel...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
None ofthe Above
#507 - 2012-03-24 04:04:56 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Ludi Burek wrote:


Finally, since you're trying to fix high sec pvp, how about you remove those NPC corps. Those a-holes live in a immunity bubble. And don't give me that "new players" spiel. Most of NPC corp are alts and career carebears. If you don't want to remove it, limit the character age so high skilled mission runners, miners, transport characters can't hide there. I was going to say RR alts, but you seem to be addressing that issue already Lol


When it comes to war decs, please consider that many botters and farmers hide in sub 10 man corps. These guys are impossible to nail down as they remake corps as soon as decced. Address this real issue.

Or at least severely tone down high sec pve rewards so I can stop raging at seeing these exploiters wander around in complete safety.

ccp listen to this guy


LOL, obsessed much?

Post with your alt! Ban PC corps!

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Nephilius
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#508 - 2012-03-24 04:32:23 UTC
KMs for self-destructing ships? Grats, Eve Community, the whiners score another victory.
"If."
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#509 - 2012-03-24 05:28:06 UTC  |  Edited by: OT Smithers
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
OT Smithers wrote:
Terminal Insanity wrote:
They do have that right to do stupid things. And in space, when you do something stupid, it gets you killed. That is how you learn.
How about you protect me when i approach a cyno dominix with my webbing loki and cant get away in time? i mean, if i was smart i'd have stayed out of point range, but hey i'm dumb and i need you to hold my hand through it.

Seriously though, carebear gets canflipped and gets a POPUP WARNING EXPLAINING EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN when he steals it back. If he chooses to ignore it the first time, that's his own fault and he receives his lesson. If he refuses to listen to it time and time again, that's his own stupidity getting him killed.


You are talking about carebears and consequences while crying that it will be more difficult for you to to pursue the risk and consequence free high sec griefing you currently enjoy. Roll

The risks and consequences of "high sec griefing" are defined purely by the attitudes of the players being "griefed." Learn how to defend yourself, or learn how to not be such an overt target. Otherwise, you only have yourself to blame. I can't name a single time that I was griefed, though I can name plenty of times when I lost assets that I would rather have kept. I see no reason why carebears should receive special treatment. People who prefer to not be victims in this game pay for their subs too.


You think that I am the victim of high sec griefing? I am a pirate. I live in Tama. I cannot go to high sec. As there is apparently some confusion I will attempt to be a bit clearer:

It is ridiculous for high sec griefers to lament changes that help protect new players, and the very definition of hypocrisy when they do so with the claim that such changes ruin the risks and challenges of Eve PvP.

As for these changes, as I have said, the idea that someone won't be able to shoot back is LAME.
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#510 - 2012-03-24 05:43:55 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Garmon wrote:
Harrigan VonStudly wrote:


IF player A gets ganked on the Jita 4-4 undock and his freighter drops billions in loot and I steal some why should I be shootable by every player on the undock?


Probably because of this thing called risk vs reward, maybe


I'm fine with being shot at by anyone that wants to shoot at me (I'm -10 after all...) but I would appreciate being able to shoot back without being Concorded. As for my personal preference, I'd say that the right solution is to have high sec PVP flags. You are either flagged for PVP or you are not. Taking any PVP action (from can baiting to shooting someone that's PVP flagged) flags you for PVP.

Yes, that might mean that high sec belts become blood baths as corps, alliances, and friends escalate over a can flip... but why is this a bad thing?

-Liang


Sounds fine to me.
T'Pawhl
Doomheim
#511 - 2012-03-24 06:33:48 UTC
People on EVE talk about WoW a lot.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#512 - 2012-03-24 11:28:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Ronuken
Cyras DeValera wrote:
Quote:
Can-flipping as-is will be impossible once the safeties are added.


Good bye, EVE, hello WoW in Space.


Can flipping as it stands:

Player A finds clueless noob (B), jet can mining.
Player A steals everything from the can and puts it in their own can. (Giving B rights to attack them)
Player B doesn't attack them (Generally a mining fit with no guns). They do however, take what was theirs back, clicking through the warning message like the idiot that most people are when they get one*.
Player A proceeds to blow them away with no real risk to themselves.


Player A finds clueless noob (B), jet can mining.
Player A steals everything from the can and puts it in their own can. (Giving Everyone rights to attack them)
Player B doesn't attack them (Generally a mining fit with no guns). They do try to take their stuff back. They get stopped, with a message telling them that it's illegal, and they'll have to turn their safety off. If they are stupid enough to do /this/, then they can steal it back.

Then, 1 of three things happens:
Player B turns the safety off, steals back, and is blown away.
Player A gets bored and wanders off
Player C comes along and tries to blow player A away



As long as the problem with player A not being able to fight back is resolved, then it's pretty much all good. All this will do is protect clueless newbies from their own stupidity. If they're actually willing to fight, then they'll be able to. If they're not, then it's pretty much just taking away a risk free kill.






* I've done tech support. I can't count the number of times people have told me they got a warning message, but they didn't read it and hit ok. A person might be smart. People are idiots.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Adunh Slavy
#513 - 2012-03-24 12:05:18 UTC
Liam Mirren wrote:
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Liam Mirren wrote:

They already get a warning message if they do something that gets you flagged, so what you're advocating is already in place.


Not really, since they can click ignore/cancel and uncheck the box right then and there as things are now. Noobie presented with a dialog box they may not understand.

This new system means they can't do the action at all until they enable it deliberately. There is no "do it anyway" button on the message.



"WARNING, IF YOU CLICK YES THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE YOU'LL BE ****** SIDEWAYS. DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE? YES/NO"

How fcking difficult is it?



Ask a can baited noob, they'll have more perspective I am sure.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Adunh Slavy
#514 - 2012-03-24 12:06:32 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Revajin wrote:
Wait wait wait. Let me get this straight. If you steal from a can now you are considered a criminal and anyone can attack you rather than just the can owner?

Why are can flippers mad about this?


Because Greyscale's initial position was people shoot the can flipper, he can't shoot back or he'll be concorded. :)

-Liang



But that is not the position any more by all accounts, so drop it :)

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Mr LaForge
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#515 - 2012-03-24 12:06:43 UTC
Can we get a blog about this?

Stuff Goes here
Unforgiven Tu
State War Academy
Caldari State
#516 - 2012-03-24 12:45:20 UTC
Sometimes CCP should just listen to the small guy for a change -----> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=85394
Adunh Slavy
#517 - 2012-03-24 13:00:24 UTC
Vila eNorvic wrote:

rootimus maximus wrote:
I often "canflip"... my other toons. There are plenty of times when it's move convenient to jetcan stuff for a different toon to pickup. Given that my toons are mostly in different corps, that'll mean I'm going to be flagged for criminal behaviour that actually isn't.
Well, actually it is. The game laws apply to in-game conditions. The fact that two characters happen to be controlled by the same player doesn't alter their in-game legal situation. If you want to use those tactics put the characters in the same corp - no problem.




Set individual standings to +10 between characters, problem solved, can even tractor +10 cans afaik

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Adunh Slavy
#518 - 2012-03-24 13:10:14 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Adunh Slavy wrote:

Not so sure about consensual war decs, but the limited engagement / duel and flagging interference from others as a global suspect is the way to go, ship it.


Doesn't need to be consensual, just needs to be limited Smile



Agreed! The war dec talk addressed some of the concerns, including my self, had in that regard.

One thing that came up in the war dec presentation question was, Neut RR in war. Will that be flagged as "suspect" too? Please tell me it will be flagged as suspect! Smile From what I can surmise, it will be. Neut RR distorts the whole war in high sec game play in favor of the meta and mechanics abuse.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
knowsitall
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#519 - 2012-03-24 14:17:08 UTC
First a disclaimer. i did not see the video and have only read page 1 of this thread so sorry if it is s repeat or misintrepation.

I read the suspect flag thing i like this idea but with a tweek. make the victim have to send a distress signal to flag the suspect. this was 1v1 pvp can still happen with can flipping and afk characters get no advantage .

Knowsiitall
Zircon Dasher
#520 - 2012-03-24 15:50:57 UTC
So can flip = flagged to everyone?

How the hell am I supposed to web my freighter alt into warp without being shot at by every Tom,****,and Harry?

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.