These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Introducing the new and improved Crimewatch

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bart Starr
Aggressive Structural Steel Expediting Services
#341 - 2012-10-04 19:43:46 UTC

Wait, why would sentry guns attack outlaws? Has this been changed?

As I understand it: Sentry guns are essentially 'Concord'. They don't instapop you, they don't scram, but they respond to the same 'stimuli'.

Right now, anything that causes a 'Concord response' in highsec causes a sentry gun response in lowsec. (GCC)
Its fairly consistent.

Currently, an outlaw does not have a GCC because they haven't done anything bad 'recently'.

Is this another 'Concord Buff' where sentry guns now attack people merely for having low sec status?

Perhaps some serious thought should be given to removing Faction Navy, if gate guns are going to simply instapop any 'small fast' outlaw ship that tries to undock or jump through a gate.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#342 - 2012-10-04 19:44:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Garviel Tarrant
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
If me and a corpmate are roaming in low sec and we are both outlaws, is it still possible for people to attack one of us without getting 'aggression' to the corp of the person they are attacking? It's really annoying because a small gang of little ships that cannot survive combat under sentry guns can basically be picked apart by fast lockers and cannot respond at all, with no risk at all to the neutrals who do it. For example if we're in two cruisers and one gets tackled by a condor, all he can do is go back to the gate and jump out. The other cruiser will die if it does anything, basically, and all this is no risk to the neutral guy in the frigate (unless he's really bad).


Could i get a response to this question since its something we run into quite often and its really hard to deal with.

Also i love these changes.. I might just walk down to CCP hq, break in and start hugging people.

That's the penalty you have to live with for being an outlaw. Consequences and all that...


Being a low sec outlaw isn't something you should be punished for, this is a game after all.

I'd think it would be enough that gate guns are never ever on our side rather than actively set it up so that outlaws roaming in small gangs are helpless against fast tackling neutrals..

I think there are quite enough cons against being an outlaw (with absolutely no benefits i might add,) being an outlaw is the least rewarding career choice in eve game mechanic wise. All it really does is stack the odds against you without giving you any benefit what so ever.

Being an outlaw should have an effect like gate guns not helping us for the sake of immersion and such and because it makes sense. A lot of the time however it seems like CCP are intentionally trying discourage people from going down the outlaw path instead of accepting it as a legit career path that should have its own perks/game content the same as FW or anything else instead of just having flaws and difficulties stacked upon them......

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#343 - 2012-10-04 19:46:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdiel Kavash
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Does this mean we can finally use a tractor beam on any and all wrecks in 0.0 space? (Specifically player wrecks - it's not that easy to ask everyone in a 150 man fleet to abandon their wrecks after a battle!)

I'll have to look in to this one

Much appreciated! Big smile

CCP Masterplan wrote:
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Let's say a corp A is passing through lowsec with a small fleet of dudes. They spot a random hauler on a gate and kill it. Now they can freely continue on their way without having to worry about gateguns or even Concord if they happen to pass through highsec (which is beyond awesome).

However, let's say that a corp B intercepts them in highsec while corp A pilots still have a Suspect flag. (Corp B pilots have no flags in this scenario.) Can the fleet of corp B simply pick off targets from corp A's fleet one by one, while everyone else in corp A other than the one person being targeted can do nothing about it?

That's the compromise for letting you in to high-sec even after you've recently done something bad (killing the hauler). You won't be instakilled by CONCORD, but player justice is still something you have to deal with.

Well I'm completely fine with dealing with the corp B fleet. However the proposed mechanics allow them to be practically invulnerable while they rip my fleet apart - it's not the player fleet I'm dealing with, it's the invulnerability granted to them via game mechanics.

(A technicality though; they need to hold tackle somehow, which causes aggression. This means that if they tackle one ship, the rest of my fleet can warp off. They can still pick off crucial ships though without any way to prevent it. Or they can use a heavily tanked ship to hold tackle on many ships at once, with only the tackled ships being able to respond. Now imagine that they bring some abomination with 8 points and point all of my logistics.)

If you're concerned with the "you ganked a defenseless hauler, now SUFFER you bad boy!", replace the hauler with obliterating an enemy fleet. If we fire the first shot, we get S flags. And if for example we're flying a long-range fleet and they're close-range, not firing first is a dumb idea.
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#344 - 2012-10-04 19:47:11 UTC
Absocold wrote:
Giving light interdictors a 'W' flag just for activating an interdiction sphere launcher will make them unable to jump through a gate after doing so. Dics are supposed to be able to jump after launching a bubble as long as no one tries to warp in it, this was broken for a while and was only recently fixed, you're about to break it again.

Nope. It was always intended to work this way, but never did. Then it got fixed so that it would prevent you from jumping after launching. Then it got broken again recently.

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
Miles Forrester
Eire Engineers
Pandemic Horde
#345 - 2012-10-04 19:47:26 UTC
Altrue wrote:
If I understood well, logistics assisting someone with only a LE timer (like someone self-defending himself against a criminal) will be flagged SUSPECT and be able to be attacked from everybody around ?

Why don't just replicate the timers from the player who receives the assistance, like with every other case ? (Meaning copy the LE timer instead of a SUSPECT timer.)

I also don't understand why an agressor in low sec could jump back to high sec safely.

Edit : Quote here : "Assisting someone who is engaged in an LE will cause the assistor to receive a Suspect flag."


I'd support changing assistance to copy the LE instead of receiving the Suspect flag and here's why:

- Alice steals from Bob's can
- Alice gets Suspect flag
- Bob (or someone else) gets a combat ship and starts to attack Alice
- Bob is now engaged in a LE with Alice
- Bob is losing and calls out to the corp/alliance for help
- Charlie responds and goes out with a (e.g.) logistic ship
- Charlie starts repairing Bob's shield and/or armor/cap
- According to the ruleset, Charlie would get the Suspect flag for helping a corp/alliance member

Either I'm wrong or something doesn't add up here.
Sergi Arro
Organized Chaos IZS
Aggressively Passive Bears
#346 - 2012-10-04 19:48:03 UTC
Sorry if this has been asked before, but I'm not going through 17 pages...

If I am in a mission site and I end up dc'ing while I have the NPC flag, does my ship stay their until either i get back online or my ship blows up?

Let's assume the dc is very bad (maybe a big storm knocked out power over a wide area). If I can tank whatever is there indefinitely, do I stay in space until downtime, being shot at my npcs? I would assume this is the case as the flag is "activated when a player uses offensive modules against an NPC (or vice-versa). " and that it goes on to state "Having this flag will prevent a ship from being removed from space if the pilot logs off."

Thanks in advance!
Styth spiting
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#347 - 2012-10-04 19:49:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Styth spiting
In regards to can flipping.

Flipper and Hauler warp in.
Flipper flips can. Places contents in new container. Receives flag(s).
Hauler then takes contents from container. Receives no flag.

So basically if you flip cans with an alt or with a friend which is basically how most people do it these days, the only thing that changes is your flipper ship can be attacked, which if you're in a noob ship wouldn't even matter (if you looking for can loot, not kills).
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#348 - 2012-10-04 19:50:39 UTC
T RAYRAY wrote:
Regarding the eject discussion, please ensure that it is only the Weapon flag that prevents eject. If the PVP flag prevents eject it will be used the grief people caught at belts by perma-pointing a ship until downtime, the pointed pilot could not eject but would be bound to the ship even while logged off until DT kicks off the tackler.

Confirming that ONLY the Weapon flag will impose restrictions on ejecting.

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#349 - 2012-10-04 19:52:06 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
If me and a corpmate are roaming in low sec and we are both outlaws, is it still possible for people to attack one of us without getting 'aggression' to the corp of the person they are attacking? It's really annoying because a small gang of little ships that cannot survive combat under sentry guns can basically be picked apart by fast lockers and cannot respond at all, with no risk at all to the neutrals who do it. For example if we're in two cruisers and one gets tackled by a condor, all he can do is go back to the gate and jump out. The other cruiser will die if it does anything, basically, and all this is no risk to the neutral guy in the frigate (unless he's really bad).


Could i get a response to this question since its something we run into quite often and its really hard to deal with.

Also i love these changes.. I might just walk down to CCP hq, break in and start hugging people.

That's the penalty you have to live with for being an outlaw. Consequences and all that...


As an outlaw myself I would be wondering why anyone would be on a gate with a cruiser and a frigate that can't take gate guns for any period of time...the only time I would be fighting in either of those on a gate just about alone is if the other person is an outlaw as well...

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#350 - 2012-10-04 19:52:21 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Andre Vauban wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Mizhir wrote:
Dierdra Vaal wrote:
Do I understand it correctly that if two players are in a Limited Engagement, and a third player reps one of the two, the third player becomes attackable by everyone and not just the people in the LE?


Thats how I understand it. But one of the two players will be attackable by everyone aswell since he was already flagged for something in the first place. The LE just allows him to defend himself without committing more crimes.

Exactly this. Interfering in an LE will get you a suspect flag


This is a bad idea. Example: I am in a fleet with logi and none of the fleet is -5. A single pirate attacks one member of the fleet, which requires the logi to rep that person. However, by repping that person the logi is suspect flagged so the logi starts taking gate guns and can be freely engaged by the rest of the pirate gang without them getting the suspect flag and getting gate guns? That is not cool.


There is no LE going on in your example, as far as I can tell. The first pirate will get an S flag on attacking. (Assuming this is lowsec. In 0.0 nothing happens and in high he'll get concorded.) However your friend gets no flags* and the logi can freely rep him. Moreover, your entire fleet can now attack the aggressing pirate without repercussions, as he is a suspect.

* He will get a PvP (aka logoff) flag, however that has nothing to do with gateguns.


Let me rephrase that then:

Pirate A enages a neutral B on the gate. A receives a criminal flag and the gate guns start shooting him. B than engages A back creating a LE. B's friends in logi (C and D) show up and chain up. C reps B. C then receives a suspect flag and the gate guns start shooting him. D also receives a suspect flag since he just repped a suspect and the gate guns start shooting him too. Now all of A's friends can come in and shoot C and D without taking any flags nor being engaged by the guns.

I'm fine with C and D being engaged by anybody, but its not cool that they also have to endure gate guns for repairing the victum in this case.

.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#351 - 2012-10-04 19:55:19 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
If me and a corpmate are roaming in low sec and we are both outlaws, is it still possible for people to attack one of us without getting 'aggression' to the corp of the person they are attacking? It's really annoying because a small gang of little ships that cannot survive combat under sentry guns can basically be picked apart by fast lockers and cannot respond at all, with no risk at all to the neutrals who do it. For example if we're in two cruisers and one gets tackled by a condor, all he can do is go back to the gate and jump out. The other cruiser will die if it does anything, basically, and all this is no risk to the neutral guy in the frigate (unless he's really bad).


Could i get a response to this question since its something we run into quite often and its really hard to deal with.

Also i love these changes.. I might just walk down to CCP hq, break in and start hugging people.

That's the penalty you have to live with for being an outlaw. Consequences and all that...



... In addition to all the others?

It's the only time in the game I can think of where you cannot assist your corpmates in combat at all.
Burseg Sardaukar
Free State Project
#352 - 2012-10-04 19:55:38 UTC
Sergi Arro wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked before, but I'm not going through 17 pages...

If I am in a mission site and I end up dc'ing while I have the NPC flag, does my ship stay their until either i get back online or my ship blows up?

Let's assume the dc is very bad (maybe a big storm knocked out power over a wide area). If I can tank whatever is there indefinitely, do I stay in space until downtime, being shot at my npcs? I would assume this is the case as the flag is "activated when a player uses offensive modules against an NPC (or vice-versa). " and that it goes on to state "Having this flag will prevent a ship from being removed from space if the pilot logs off."

Thanks in advance!


It sounds like only the PVP flag can be re-applied after you log, so you have to only survive 15m. I honestly do think this should be more like 5 minutes, but I think all timers need a bit of a shrink... 15 minutes has been the de facto amount forever and I guess that's what everyone wants (?).

Can't wait to dual box my Dust toon and EVE toon on the same machine!
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
#353 - 2012-10-04 19:56:43 UTC
What about freighters or ships in general logging off right after a gatejump and thus vanishing without anyone being able to get them ?

Will this issue also be addressed ?
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#354 - 2012-10-04 19:57:21 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
If me and a corpmate are roaming in low sec and we are both outlaws, is it still possible for people to attack one of us without getting 'aggression' to the corp of the person they are attacking? It's really annoying because a small gang of little ships that cannot survive combat under sentry guns can basically be picked apart by fast lockers and cannot respond at all, with no risk at all to the neutrals who do it. For example if we're in two cruisers and one gets tackled by a condor, all he can do is go back to the gate and jump out. The other cruiser will die if it does anything, basically, and all this is no risk to the neutral guy in the frigate (unless he's really bad).


Could i get a response to this question since its something we run into quite often and its really hard to deal with.

Also i love these changes.. I might just walk down to CCP hq, break in and start hugging people.

That's the penalty you have to live with for being an outlaw. Consequences and all that...


As an outlaw myself I would be wondering why anyone would be on a gate with a cruiser and a frigate that can't take gate guns for any period of time...the only time I would be fighting in either of those on a gate just about alone is if the other person is an outlaw as well...



Some people's idea of being an outlaw is roaming and pvping..

Not instalock camping, no risk pvp and other such terribleness people like Scum and TunDraGon do to soil the name of pirates everywhere.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#355 - 2012-10-04 19:58:00 UTC
Tippia wrote:
@ CCP Masterplan

In regards to the T3 SP loss situation, could you care to comment on the thinking and on the possibility (or downsides) of a solution to that change in mechanics. I made a short remark on it earlier but it was kind of buried in a different post.

Right now, you list “Weapons”-flagging as causing a 60-second inability to dock, jump, abandon ship (by ejecting or storing the ship), and board ships (be it in space or from a corp hangar) unless it's done from a capsule. This is to remove the whole “ship-swapping to avoid destruction”, I presume, and the capsule exception is hidden behind the rule that makes it impossible to enter a capsule without being destroyed?

What if you adjusted the weapons-flagging rules so that:
· It does not have that capsule exception: in other words, you cannot board ships while you have a weapons flag, period.
· You are allowed to eject from (but not store) a ship while weapon-flagged.
· Ejecting resets your weapon flag timer to the full 60 seconds.
· Getting blown up clears your weapon flag timer to 0.

As far as I can see, this would maintain the ban on ship-swapping: you can't swap ships mid-battle — yes, you can eject, but it will take 60 seconds for your weapons flag to clear out, and before that, you're not allowed to board a new ship. Have fun orbiting ye olde Orca in a pod for a minute while everyone around you is allowed to shoot you. If you are destroyed, you can board a new ship… but then, that was possible under the suggested rule set as well and you have to lose a ship to get there, so this is no different than what you're proposing. If you are destroyed, you can also (almost) immediately jump through a gate or dock up, but those are still restricted by the session timer that triggers on destruction so the exploitation potential from those (re)added abilities should be minimal. Finally, this means you once again can get out of your T3 to save your SP, but you have all the weapons-flag restrictions for the next 60 seconds so the only possible thing to do is warp off and hope for the best.

Is there anything I've missed in this that would go against what your goals are? Are there any obvious loop-holes?

When you've ejected from your expensive gatecamp ship, what's to stop a conveniently-placed alt-orca scooping it and insta-jumping to highsec, where it will be untouchable?

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#356 - 2012-10-04 19:58:33 UTC
BOLEVINE wrote:
-->Means harsher rules for criminals and less fun in the end. For example, "Security-status penalties are now ‘front-loaded’, so a criminal/suspect will incur the full penalty when an illegal attack starts, not when (if) the target is destroyed. "

Means less time in low sec having fun killing peeps for those who dont want to go a full -10. Less time = less fun.


Presumably you'll only go -5 if all you're shooting is ships in lowsec. It wasn't mentioned in this devblog, but I assume that the earlier announcement that you could only go -10 by shooting pods still holds.

Quote:
example 2," Weapons Flag: This flag is activated by using offensive modules against another player (or simply by activating certain non-targeted weapons such as smartbombs). Having this flag will prevent a character from performing actions such as jumping, docking and switching ships in space. This flag functions in all areas of space."

->Means we cant jump back through another low sec gate to disrupt the guy your trying to lock down. So less freedom to move around and PVP in low sec means less fun.


This timer is only 60 seconds. The effect is the same as it has always been. You fire your guns in pvp, you can't dock or jump for 60 seconds. No change.

Quote:

Also, it sounds like we wont be able to 1v1 for a while.... " We're also working on a replacement for the usage of loot-theft as a way to initiate consensual 1v1s without incurring criminal penalties that we hope to release for Winter."


Why won't you be able to 1v1 for a while? The CW2 changes are coming in winter, and so is the consensual 1v1 system (they hope).

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Sulindra
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#357 - 2012-10-04 20:00:09 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Re 15 minute NPC timer: there is a small adjustment I would suggest. Make it so that cloaking devices stay active when a person logs off.

Why? Imagine someone diving deep into 0.0 space with an intention to kill rats or do exploration sites. They don't have any stations or towers to hide in. With CW2 they can't save themselves by simply logging off - which is nice. However, to end a play session, they now have to wait 15 minutes while literally doing nothing. If they have a cloak and warp off to a safespot, they are virtually invulnerable for the duration of the timer anyway, so why not just let them warp off, cloak, and log out? Functionally it would be equivalent to them waiting out the timer cloaked, only it would save them 15 minutes of real life time.


Cloak up and go make a sandwich 15 minutes saved.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#358 - 2012-10-04 20:00:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
CCP Masterplan wrote:
When you've ejected from your expensive gatecamp ship, what's to stop a conveniently-placed alt-orca scooping it and insta-jumping to highsec, where it will be untouchable?
Good point. Darn.

…unless you want to go the evil route and somehow transfer the flags to the actual ship and then onto anyone who tries to scoop it. P
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#359 - 2012-10-04 20:02:59 UTC
Sulindra wrote:
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Re 15 minute NPC timer: there is a small adjustment I would suggest. Make it so that cloaking devices stay active when a person logs off.

Why? Imagine someone diving deep into 0.0 space with an intention to kill rats or do exploration sites. They don't have any stations or towers to hide in. With CW2 they can't save themselves by simply logging off - which is nice. However, to end a play session, they now have to wait 15 minutes while literally doing nothing. If they have a cloak and warp off to a safespot, they are virtually invulnerable for the duration of the timer anyway, so why not just let them warp off, cloak, and log out? Functionally it would be equivalent to them waiting out the timer cloaked, only it would save them 15 minutes of real life time.


Cloak up and go make a sandwich 15 minutes saved.


I'm thinking more of a "have to log off, need to go to work" scenario.

However I guess I could just stay around and AFK cloak. Twisted
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#360 - 2012-10-04 20:03:39 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Being a low sec outlaw isn't something you should be punished for, this is a game after all.

I'd think it would be enough that gate guns are never ever on our side rather than actively set it up so that outlaws roaming in small gangs are helpless against fast tackling neutrals..

I think there are quite enough cons against being an outlaw (with absolutely no benefits i might add,) being an outlaw is the least rewarding career choice in eve game mechanic wise. All it really does is stack the odds against you without giving you any benefit what so ever.

Being an outlaw should have an effect like gate guns not helping us for the sake of immersion and such and because it makes sense. A lot of the time however it seems like CCP are intentionally trying discourage people from going down the outlaw path instead of accepting it as a legit career path that should have its own perks/game content the same as FW or anything else instead of just having flaws and difficulties stacked upon them......

Gate guns will always be on the side of the innocent party. If a pair of -10s or suspects start fighting on a gate, the guns will happily ignore them, since neither is innocent.

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law