These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Crimewatch pointless on arrival

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#141 - 2012-10-05 00:36:22 UTC
Sheynan wrote:
PS: And Is it that impossible to align a hauler to a safe and then to hit "loot all" and "warp" in quick succesion ?

When that hauler is a freighter, yes it's considerably more difficult.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#142 - 2012-10-05 00:38:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Simpler is not better.
Yes it is, in particular if, as in this case, it removes difficulty that stems from things being pointlessly convoluted.

Quote:
When that hauler is a freighter, yes it's considerably more difficult.
Not really, no. Just use the same quick-warp techniques that would have saved the original freighter. Or, if he carries the right loot, use a sacrificial lamb and an Orca (or two). Oh, and just nuke the competition and steal their stuff as well, legally.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#143 - 2012-10-05 00:40:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Tippia wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
CCP, how about you back off from turning this game into kindergarten by allowing us to keep current player/corp aggression mechanics, but in the interest of fairness make those flags last for a full day instead of fifteen minutes?
Sure, if you can explain how to do that while at the same time removing the horrid spaghetti of player-to-player flagging and the many many many obscure cases and opaque conditions that characterise CW1.0

They just said in the dev blog that "Performing an action against another player that gets you a Criminal flag will also award a kill-right to that person." How difficult would it be to just copy the code into a second type of kill right, that lasts a day, and is given to the victim of theft, and possibly every other member of his corporation?

Tippia wrote:
They're giving us a far better rule set.

As a player whose EVE career consisted solely of pvp, who has experienced every form of pvp in the game (yes, that includes the markets!), who has run and is running a mercenary/empire war corporation while having other characters in other mercenary/war corporations, and who has primarily focused on high-sec pvp from 2007 (though I did/do everything else as well, including FW, wormhole evictions/defenses, null warfare, and pre-2009 piracy), I respectfully disagree.

I might not have been here since beta, but eight years of hands-on experience still counts for something. Were you around when they introduced can-flagging in the first place? That was a good change; no one cried because of that.

Yes, Crimewatch does make a bunch of really good changes such as those affecting neutral RR and Orcas, but the suspect flag kills the deal.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#144 - 2012-10-05 00:40:17 UTC
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Simpler is not better.
Yes it is, in particular if, as in this case, it removes difficulty that stems from things being pointlessly convoluted.

It's removing a lot more than that.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Kasuko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#145 - 2012-10-05 00:43:24 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Real life analogies have never convinced anyone of anything ever P

The reason that stealing flags you to everyone is pretty simple: there's not an obviously better solution that doesn't add a ton of complexity. We're kicking around the idea of replacing the suspect flag with an LE in this case, but it's making my spider-sense tingle, and in any case we want to use LEs as little as we can possibly get away with because they make the situation inherently less readable than global flags. We'll have a proper look at it in a couple of weeks when we have time to do a full exploration, but there's a good chance the current plan will go ahead, because it's simple and it's good enough for most of the cases we care about.


I agree, leave it! If you want to be a bully and your want to mess with someone else's game (which IS and SHOULD be allowed) then there should be consequences. If I see a bigger player picking on a newb I want to be able to beat the crap out of them. Now I can. I'm thinking roaming Justice Fighters will become a good profession now :P PVP for people like me with a conscience!
Myxx
The Scope
#146 - 2012-10-05 00:44:11 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:






A secondary goal was to try and keep the balance of power between criminals and their marks approximately where it is now. This was never going to be perfect, because the current balance of power is only possible thanks to the complexity of the current system.

There was never, at any point, any goal to make things safer.



You should reconsider much of your plan, and much of how CONCORD functions, and what your goals for highsec actually are. As it stands, you've missed that goal by a mile and have made it inherently safer, intended or not. This is not a welcome side effect by anyone except carebear extremists.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#147 - 2012-10-05 00:47:26 UTC
Kasuko wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Real life analogies have never convinced anyone of anything ever P

The reason that stealing flags you to everyone is pretty simple: there's not an obviously better solution that doesn't add a ton of complexity. We're kicking around the idea of replacing the suspect flag with an LE in this case, but it's making my spider-sense tingle, and in any case we want to use LEs as little as we can possibly get away with because they make the situation inherently less readable than global flags. We'll have a proper look at it in a couple of weeks when we have time to do a full exploration, but there's a good chance the current plan will go ahead, because it's simple and it's good enough for most of the cases we care about.


I agree, leave it! If you want to be a bully and your want to mess with someone else's game (which IS and SHOULD be allowed) then there should be consequences. If I see a bigger player picking on a newb I want to be able to beat the crap out of them. Now I can. I'm thinking roaming Justice Fighters will become a good profession now :P PVP for people like me with a conscience!

You can accomplish that by joining his corporation, or having him join yours. If you want to be a vigilante, you are not without recourse.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#148 - 2012-10-05 00:51:16 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
They just said in the dev blog that "Performing an action against another player that gets you a Criminal flag will also award a kill-right to that person." How difficult would it be to just copy the code into a second type of kill right, that lasts a day, and is given to the victim of theft, and possibly every other member of the corporation?
Not very, but that would put quite a large damper on theft — larger than the current idea since it's easy to work around it — especially in combination with other killright changes that seem to be in the works…

Oh, and setting up hundreds of player-to-player flags qualifies quite nicely as horrid spaghetti too.

Quote:
Yes, Crimewatch does make a bunch of really good changes such as those affecting neutral RR and Orcas, but the suspect flag kills the deal.
How so? It only seems to kill the deal in one rather small category: theft. It also makes the deal for giving PvP a reward system — something you should enjoy — for making lowsec PvP far more vibrant; for the extermination of all things neutral support; etc. For someone who “is running a mercenary/empire war corporation”, you're being oddly contrary toward a change that should literally make your day. Your play style scored a massive jackpot with this one.

James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's removing a lot more than that.
No, it really isn't. Or, well, yes, it's removing a bunch of horrid edge-case abuses that have grown out of that tangled mess. That's a good thing too.
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#149 - 2012-10-05 00:58:46 UTC
People who think its safer are actually just as risk adverse as the prey they hunt.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#150 - 2012-10-05 01:04:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Not very, but that would put quite a large damper on theft — larger than the current idea since it's easy to work around it — especially in combination with other killright changes that seem to be in the works…

Oh, and setting up hundreds of player-to-player flags qualifies quite nicely as horrid spaghetti too.

Kill rights aren't flags. They're entries in a database with specific attributes, probably no different than market orders. If the issue is that CCP's infrastructure can't handle the creation and maintenance of a few thousand such entries every day, then the problem is much deeper than "it's too complex, guys."

Tippia wrote:
How so? It only seems to kill the deal in one rather small category: theft. It also makes the deal for giving PvP a reward system — something you should enjoy — for making lowsec PvP far more vibrant; for the extermination of all things neutral support; etc. For someone who “is running a mercenary/empire war corporation”, you're being oddly contrary toward a change that should literally make your day. Your play style scored a massive jackpot with this one.

Is your play style at all similar to mine? I'm all for freedom of expression, but unless you've done what I do for any reasonable amount of time, calling Crimewatch a win for me means you're simply operating on assumptions about both my play style and what I should and shouldn't enjoy.

CCP already gutted my profession with Inferno. We've had exactly two paid jobs since April, whereas before that time we were almost constantly booked. I really don't see how this change should make my day. Should I be excited that I will be able to shoot can thieves freely now? I really don't see how this will be the case, since theft is now going to become much rarer. There's nothing exciting about sitting in a 1400mm Machariel in a hub waiting for someone to become a suspect, along with another 120 people who are going to be doing the exact same thing.

So please, list a couple of ways that this change is going to "literally make my day." Please also describe in some detail what jackpot I'm winning.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#151 - 2012-10-05 01:19:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's removing a lot more than that.
No, it really isn't. Or, well, yes, it's removing a bunch of horrid edge-case abuses that have grown out of that tangled mess. That's a good thing too.

So freighter ganking and looting is a "horrid edge-case abuse"?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#152 - 2012-10-05 01:22:45 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's removing a lot more than that.
No, it really isn't. Or, well, yes, it's removing a bunch of horrid edge-case abuses that have grown out of that tangled mess. That's a good thing too.

So freighter ganking and looting is a "horrid edge-case abuse"?

Those that can pull off a freighter gank have the resources to web sling their recovery freighter. Question is, why are you so worried about it?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#153 - 2012-10-05 01:23:59 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's removing a lot more than that.
No, it really isn't. Or, well, yes, it's removing a bunch of horrid edge-case abuses that have grown out of that tangled mess. That's a good thing too.

So freighter ganking and looting is a "horrid edge-case abuse"?

Those that can pull off a freighter gank have the resources to web sling their recovery freighter. Question is, why are you so worried about it?

The more appropriate question is, why aren't you worried about it?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#154 - 2012-10-05 01:26:33 UTC
Would it make more sense if wrecks belonged to the killers :(
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#155 - 2012-10-05 01:33:18 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Would it make more sense if wrecks belonged to the killers :(

They do, if it was a legal war kill. You don't murder someone and say dibs on the car keys. The authorities frown upon that.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#156 - 2012-10-05 01:36:16 UTC
Err that's not currently how it works. The wreck belongs to the owner of the destroyed ships, the involved parties just have rights to loot it without getting flagged.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#157 - 2012-10-05 01:37:38 UTC
Obligatory Popcorn

It'll be interesting to see how the new crimewatch actually works in practice, in fact I'll reserve further comment until it's actually a thing.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#158 - 2012-10-05 01:39:18 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
It'll be interesting to see how the new crimewatch actually works in practice, in fact I'll reserve further comment until it's actually a thing.

By which point it doesn't matter how much you hate it, there will be no going back.

Read: unified inventory.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#159 - 2012-10-05 01:40:37 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
[quote=Vol Arm'OOO][quote=CCP Greyscale]


As to complexity, yes, EVE needs a certain amount of complexity, because that's necessary for the real goal, which is tactical and strategic depth. That's a goal because we want players to be winning based on having better judgment and better decision-making than the other guy/girl. Complex is NOT the same as complicated, and it's certainly not the same thing as obfuscated. The goal is to get as large a (useful) possibility space as possible out of as small a number of variables as possible, because simplicity is a virtue. Go basically has two rules. It's really goddamn simple. It's also sufficiently complex that there's no halfway-decent Go AI in existence. That's where we want to be aiming for.


Yea but you are not adding strategic depth - your removing most of it - for instance (i know this will get me flamed) the orca nerf - the orca allowed people to switch ships midfight which allowed folk to outthink their oppontents adding a strategic component to the game - now your locking us into our ships meaning that the fight is essentially decided before it begins. In short, the changes are pointing in the direction of less opportunities for folk to engage in asymetrical combat - meaning that fights will be more predictable and ultimately more boring.

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#160 - 2012-10-05 01:41:20 UTC
Also inferno wardecs.

One something hits singularity it's practically set in stone.