These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#161 - 2012-10-05 01:44:46 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
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.

To be perfectly fair, what the Orca allowed you to do was simply bail out of any fight when it wasn't going your way, as long as you were using something smaller than a battleship. That's not tactical depth; that's total invulnerability.

Not all dev decisions are bad. It's just that the bad ones are really bad.

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

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#162 - 2012-10-05 01:47:37 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
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.

To be perfectly fair, what the Orca allowed you to do was simply bail out of any fight when it wasn't going your way, as long as you were using something smaller than a battleship. That's not tactical depth; that's total invulnerability.

Not all dev decisions are bad. It's just that the bad ones are really bad.

Hey, I can agree with that. Sometimes devs nail it. So far that seems to usually come from balanced dialogue with the players about the matter, but meh.

They definitely get it right sometimes.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#163 - 2012-10-05 01:49:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Also inferno wardecs.

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

Exactly. Worrying about changes after they happen is entirely pointless. Going into damage control mode to fix terrible changes takes much more effort and energy on everyone's part than simply adjusting the development process to suit the product's needs. People who advocate waiting until deployment to pass judgement on changes that are available to be tested and discussed today are the same people than never voted in their lives, but always blame government policies for how terrible their lives are.

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

captain foivos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#164 - 2012-10-05 01:51:48 UTC
If players are supposed to be the new police, why does CONCORD have to have the same super-fast response time? It's another nerf to ganking.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#165 - 2012-10-05 01:53:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Kill rights aren't flags. They're entries in a database with specific attributes
So are the flags. Those mass-copied kill rights are still far more complex and prone to spaghetti than a single attribute owned by the criminal in question.

Quote:
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.
I'm operating on the description you've given me, which suggests that you would stand to benefit plenty from having a reward system attached to PvP — a system you're now being given courtesy of the new flaggin system (and the suspect flag in particular).

Quote:
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.
Any legal kill you get gives you a reward and the ability to defend that reward.

James Amril-Kesh wrote:
So freighter ganking and looting is a "horrid edge-case abuse"?
As luck would have it, neither is being removed so their status is quite irrelevant.

captain foivos wrote:
If players are supposed to be the new police…
They're not.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#166 - 2012-10-05 01:54:25 UTC
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
So freighter ganking and looting is a "horrid edge-case abuse"?
As luck would have it, neither is being removed so their status is quite irrelevant.

I admire your ability to dance around a point. I really do.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#167 - 2012-10-05 01:56:02 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I admire your ability to dance around a point. I really do.
Maybe you should hold the praise until I've started.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#168 - 2012-10-05 01:57:48 UTC
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I admire your ability to dance around a point. I really do.
Maybe you should hold the praise until I've started.

Seeing as I haven't said anything about freighter ganking and looting being removed, merely nerfed to the point where highsec is significantly safer for freighter pilots, you are.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#169 - 2012-10-05 01:58:12 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
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.

To be perfectly fair, what the Orca allowed you to do was simply bail out of any fight when it wasn't going your way, as long as you were using something smaller than a battleship. That's not tactical depth; that's total invulnerability.

Not all dev decisions are bad. It's just that the bad ones are really bad.


That was only part of it - which could have fixed by transfering aggro to the orca. The orca used to be the swiss army knife of ships. I used to keep in mine, a frig, a sb, a rapier and a cane. I would have the orca follow my main. When I got a fight I could see what they brought and switch up accordingly. The orca made semi-solo pvp more viable as it expanded my envolope of engagement. Now, if t hey come in a ship I cant beat my choices are limited to declining the engagement or dying. So where is the strategic depth? The game is becoming more linear and the rock, paper, scissors elements are being enhanced.

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#170 - 2012-10-05 02:00:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Quote:
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.
I'm operating on the description you've given me, which suggests that you would stand to benefit plenty from having a reward system attached to PvP — a system you're now being given courtesy of the new flaggin system (and the suspect flag in particular).

Quote:
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.
Any legal kill you get gives you a reward and the ability to defend that reward.

I'm not a programmer so I won't try to press a point about aggression flag code (though I still firmly believe that CCP has an obligation to find a way around this issue with "complexity" they seem to have).

I have no idea what you meant by these other two responses though. I don't understand what you mean by "reward system," I don't understand how exactly I'm benefiting, and I don't understand what you mean by "legal kills" giving me a reward and the ability to defend that reward. Please elaborate.

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
#171 - 2012-10-05 02:01:47 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Seeing as I haven't said anything about freighter ganking and looting being removed
…aside from saying that they were (or were you just being silly and quoting things that had nothing to do with what you were saying for no good reason?):

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"?
So yes. You have indeed said that freighter ganking and looting is being removed. As luck would have it, they're not.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#172 - 2012-10-05 02:03:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Seeing as I haven't said anything about freighter ganking and looting being removed
…aside from saying that they were (or were you just being silly and quoting things that had nothing to do with what you were saying for no good reason?):

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"?
So yes. You have indeed said that freighter ganking and looting is being removed. As luck would have it, they're not.

It's not removing it directly, but that is an indirect result, yes. You're ignoring the consequences of the changes.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#173 - 2012-10-05 02:03:25 UTC
captain foivos wrote:
If players are supposed to be the new police, why does CONCORD have to have the same super-fast response time? It's another nerf to ganking.

Ah yes, because players fill every nook and crevice in space and any attempt at a gank anywhere will see dozens of white knights pouring out of the woodwork to halt these dastardly acts like telepathic Imperial guard.
"Stop right there, criminal scum!"
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#174 - 2012-10-05 02:04:28 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
That was only part of it - which could have fixed by transfering aggro to the orca. The orca used to be the swiss army knife of ships. I used to keep in mine, a frig, a sb, a rapier and a cane. I would have the orca follow my main. When I got a fight I could see what they brought and switch up accordingly. The orca made semi-solo pvp more viable as it expanded my envolope of engagement. Now, if t hey come in a ship I cant beat my choices are limited to declining the engagement or dying. So where is the strategic depth? The game is becoming more linear and the rock, paper, scissors elements are being enhanced.

Aggro transfer wouldn't have fixed anything since so many fights happen on stations that the Orca could immediately dock after you shove your ship inside of it. The total invulnerability aspect wouldn't go away in the majority of engagements. Also, you can still switch ships, you simply can't do it during an active engagement. I also utilize the Orca to have access to a variety of ships for different situations when I'm "away from home."

Look, I agree with you on principle. I simply think that the Orca thing itself was very bad for gameplay.

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
#175 - 2012-10-05 02:10:45 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
I have no idea what you meant by these other two responses though. I don't understand what you mean by "reward system," I don't understand how exactly I'm benefiting, and I don't understand what you mean by "legal kills" giving me a reward and the ability to defend that reward. Please elaborate.
By reward system, I mean reward system: a system that rewards you for what you're doing.

An example of a reward system is what you get for running a mission: base agent ISK rewards, LP, time bonuses, standings, looting rights, and usually a nice pile of bounties. The looting rights, in particular, are interesting: they entail your right to take stuff from a wreck and your right to shoot anyone else who tries it without your permission.

With CW2.0 — and the S-flag in particular — you gain a reward system: you get looting rights, which entail your right to take stuff from a wreck and your right to shoot anyone else who tries it without your permission. This right only extends to legal kills.

If you don't understand what a legal kill is, then maybe you shouldn't be trying to lecture me about knowing about play styles and about assumptions about “mercenary/empire war corporation[s]” and highsec-PvP, since it's course 101 for those activities. By legal kill I mean a legal kill: a kill that CrimeWatch allows you to make without any repercussions.

Quote:
It's not removing it directly, but that is an indirect result, yes. You're ignoring the consequences of the changes.
The consequence of the change is that looting and ganking will work just fine with a few adjustments. Plans and tactics have been in the works since April.
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#176 - 2012-10-05 02:21:09 UTC
One of the truly big disconnects between the new player and the actual functioning of eve is the way sec status works - the idea that the dangerousness of a .4 to 0.0 system is largely the same without regard to the level of the system and that a 1.0 system is just as dangerous as a .5 system. As long as we are talking about crime watch, and aggro mechanics - why not get to the root of the problems and bring the game inline with intutive player expectations? Its past time that concord got nerfered - confine concord to 1.0 to .9 systems. From .8 to .1 have a varying responsefrom system specific navy ships depending upon the level of the system. IMO this would add strategic depth and put more sand into the box. Of course those that are combat adverse might find things more interesting - but they would still have their safe zones - only fewer of them.

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.

Dessau
The Scope
#177 - 2012-10-05 02:27:00 UTC
I'm sorry, this thread has exhausted my supply of tinfoil. Could anyone spare some?
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#178 - 2012-10-05 02:37:36 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
One of the truly big disconnects between the new player and the actual functioning of eve is the way sec status works - the idea that the dangerousness of a .4 to 0.0 system is largely the same without regard to the level of the system and that a 1.0 system is just as dangerous as a .5 system. As long as we are talking about crime watch, and aggro mechanics - why not get to the root of the problems and bring the game inline with intutive player expectations? Its past time that concord got nerfered - confine concord to 1.0 to .9 systems. From .8 to .1 have a varying responsefrom system specific navy ships depending upon the level of the system. IMO this would add strategic depth and put more sand into the box. Of course those that are combat adverse might find things more interesting - but they would still have their safe zones - only fewer of them.

Two reasons:

1) That would be hard and require actual work.
2) The objective is not to make PVP be good or make sense, it's to make it so that people are discouraged from doing it in the designated risk-free zone.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#179 - 2012-10-05 02:43:36 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
I have no idea what you meant by these other two responses though. I don't understand what you mean by "reward system," I don't understand how exactly I'm benefiting, and I don't understand what you mean by "legal kills" giving me a reward and the ability to defend that reward. Please elaborate.
By reward system, I mean reward system: a system that rewards you for what you're doing.

An example of a reward system is what you get for running a mission: base agent ISK rewards, LP, time bonuses, standings, looting rights, and usually a nice pile of bounties. The looting rights, in particular, are interesting: they entail your right to take stuff from a wreck and your right to shoot anyone else who tries it without your permission.

With CW2.0 — and the S-flag in particular — you gain a reward system: you get looting rights, which entail your right to take stuff from a wreck and your right to shoot anyone else who tries it without your permission. This right only extends to legal kills.

If you don't understand what a legal kill is, then maybe you shouldn't be trying to lecture me about knowing about play styles and about assumptions about “mercenary/empire war corporation[s]” and highsec-PvP, since it's course 101 for those activities. By legal kill I mean a legal kill: a kill that CrimeWatch allows you to make without any repercussions.

So my reward is that I'll now be able to shoot the people who take from the wreck of a "suspect" that I kill. But, since he was a suspect to begin with, everyone would be able to take from his wreck. Even if I get the final blow, I wouldn't be able to shoot other people who take from the suspect's wreck. So, this case isn't an example of the reward system you claimed it to be a part of.

In the case of war, I would share ownership of my dead enemy's wreck with its owner. In this case, I would have the right to shoot random neutral parties who take from this wreck. However, once again, so would everyone else. I can concede that war target wreck ownership is a minor bonus. But it's just that: a minor bonus. This is obviously not the jackpot that you earlier said I won. What is?

PS: No need for personal attacks. Asking for elaboration on what you meant is different from asking about elaboration on what something is. Also, at no point did I lecture you. I only justified my opinion based on my experience with the game; I never questioned your own, but I did question whether you shared in my experiences to be able to comment on how exactly these changes affect my own play style.

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

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#180 - 2012-10-05 02:46:06 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
One of the truly big disconnects between the new player and the actual functioning of eve is the way sec status works - the idea that the dangerousness of a .4 to 0.0 system is largely the same without regard to the level of the system and that a 1.0 system is just as dangerous as a .5 system. As long as we are talking about crime watch, and aggro mechanics - why not get to the root of the problems and bring the game inline with intutive player expectations? Its past time that concord got nerfered - confine concord to 1.0 to .9 systems. From .8 to .1 have a varying responsefrom system specific navy ships depending upon the level of the system. IMO this would add strategic depth and put more sand into the box. Of course those that are combat adverse might find things more interesting - but they would still have their safe zones - only fewer of them.

The high/low/null dynamics seemed intuitive enough for me when new once I was able to get information that was true and not outdated or perpetuated misinformation from others. It was simple to view it as 3 bordered zones fundamentally. They had some minor differences within then but the same general engagement rules and consequences applied.

Your solution being more intuitive seems debatable and would likely complicate the idea of what to expect as far as NPC reactions based upon security levels of a system for those not already familiar with them.