These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#441 - 2012-10-04 21:06:14 UTC
steave435 wrote:
If I understand the system correctly, this would have pretty serious consequences for suicide ganking, especially against larger targets that already require you to have use larger and slower ships to loot them. High sec is very active with constant traffic on most gates (and if a certain gate is an exception, that also means that there won't be any targets to gank there), so if I'm correct in assuming that having your alt hauler scoop up the loot after you kill someone will get that hauler flagged to EVERYONE, it will effectively be impossible to loot since you're almost guaranteed to have that hauler tackled and killed by a random passers by before it can get off the gate. You can try to use frigates or something to allow you to warp out in time, but larger items and courier contracts take too much to fit in them.
That's an especially big problem when it comes to freighter ganking since the only viable ship to use for looting them is an another freighter, a ship that will take ages to get off the gate and has absolutely no defenses, and freighter ganking is something that actually requires quite a bit of coordination to get a suicide ganking fleet large enough to pull it off.

Is that a change that you're comfortable with? It won't kill suicide ganking completely, it will still be possible to do it just to grief the target and for profit if you find someone running a mission with an expensive fit, but it would be a major nerf.


You can still pull it off, if your ship is aligned towards something as it passes the wreck. Then you just loot and immediately hit warp. Since it's quite difficult to pull off, there will be little if any competition so you have the time to set up.
Claire Raynor
NovaGear
#442 - 2012-10-04 21:06:16 UTC
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?



This will be MASSIVLY exploited by griefers. So I'm in a fleet - we all open fire on someone because they are a legal target. One of the fleet members gets damaged during the fight so I rep them because we are a Typhoon Spider gang. "Assisting someone who is engaged in an LE will cause the assistor to receive a Suspect flag." And bingo - I get shot at by everyone because now I'm suspect flagged - So is every other member of the spider tank - because we all assisted someone engaged in LE?

Or did I get this wrong?
Treya Neverette
HR Liability
Mildy Unprofessional
#443 - 2012-10-04 21:06:20 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Treya Neverette wrote:
There is a couple line items that should be addressed here...

After reading the new Crime Watch bulletin, I was actually pleased with the new changes on the horizon. It is going to open a new dynamic to the game that might intrigue old players into combat in high-sec, and provide a level of balance to new players when they are flying with a team of people learning the ropes of the EVE universe.

Of course not all patches/updates can be perfect the first run through, and with proper discussion and brainstorming we can mitigate some of the most apparent issues in the preface.

In your screenshot spreadsheets, which you said weren't final, I noticed couple items that need to be addressed immediately.

1. "Criminal Flag 15 Minute Timer - Criminal cannot initiate warp." : Warping off grid is a valid defense in combat against an aggressor, good or bad. If they don't have you pointed, you are free to leave grid. Forcing people to stay on grid, with a global warp scram button is something that should be avoided at all cost.

2. "Criminal Flag 15 Minute Timer - Criminal cannot enter a Wormhole" : This to me a common sense issue here. Wormholes are a rift in space, and concord has no control over their entrances. To keep with the spirit of logic in space, I believe this will remove a realism feel to the game.

*Side Thought* - Think about criminal incursions that happen in high sec.
1. A wormhole opens in high-sec.
2. Criminals spill out to wreak havoc.
3. A battle ensues within system between high-sec corps and criminals.
4. High-sec corps push the criminals back to their void in space.

This could be a very cool dynamic, that is severely lacking in the actual incursion patch from months back. It will give high-sec corp scouts a purpose to keep an eye on wormholes in system, and at the same time give the criminals "PvP'ers" an opportunity to impose their will on the unsuspecting. And the best part, it's all driven by player motives. Win Win i think...

Thank you for your time.


This only happens in highsec, and the mechanics are the same as they were for years now - simply put, NO way to escape Concord. Keep in mind that C flag in CW2 == GCC in CW1.


So if the criminal flag is issued to a player in high-sec, then there will be concord intervention?

If so, then that makes perfect sense.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#444 - 2012-10-04 21:06:20 UTC
Jarin Arenos wrote:
Come on, somebody has to give a crap about the massive headache that is getting handed to mission runners with the NPC flag's introduction...


I illustrated a scenario where with the new drone-killing AI that BS gunboats are trapped in mission sites.
The vast majority of people that inhabit threads like this were gloating over the probability.

Bottom line, this winter release is a further devastation of high sec income, and the vast majority of players in high sec don't read these forums and have no clue about the ISK steamroller bearing down on them.

The only way anything will change is if the subs drop dramatically, and by then, it will be too late for high sec.
This NPC timer plus the drone killing AI, plus the 20% across the board damage nerf to heavy missiles is just another nail in the coffin for high sec income.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#445 - 2012-10-04 21:09:15 UTC
Claire Raynor 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?



This will be MASSIVLY exploited by griefers. So I'm in a fleet - we all open fire on someone because they are a legal target. One of the fleet members gets damaged during the fight so I rep them because we are a Typhoon Spider gang. "Assisting someone who is engaged in an LE will cause the assistor to receive a Suspect flag." And bingo - I get shot at by everyone because now I'm suspect flagged - So is every other member of the spider tank - because we all assisted someone engaged in LE?

Or did I get this wrong?


Yes and no. If you all open fire on one target, only that one person will be able to shoot back without consequences. Most likely he alone will not do enough damage to neccessitate logistics before he dies. Then you can move on to the next target and this way eliminate the fleet one by one.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#446 - 2012-10-04 21:09:40 UTC
Treya Neverette wrote:
So if the criminal flag is issued to a player in high-sec, then there will be concord intervention?

If so, then that makes perfect sense.


A criminal flag is what causes CONCORD intervention.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#447 - 2012-10-04 21:09:44 UTC
I love the freighter ganking pilots crying that now they can't gank in peace. You do realize the irony here right? You want to to gank someone, but then not have someone interfere in your business while you do it? Welcome to eve, where there are repercussions, gank away but don't expect people to not try and take advantage of the situation and the consequences of your actions.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#448 - 2012-10-04 21:10:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdiel Kavash
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Jarin Arenos wrote:
Come on, somebody has to give a crap about the massive headache that is getting handed to mission runners with the NPC flag's introduction...


I illustrated a scenario where with the new drone-killing AI that BS gunboats are trapped in mission sites.
The vast majority of people that inhabit threads like this were gloating over the probability.

Bottom line, this winter release is a further devastation of high sec income, and the vast majority of players in high sec don't read these forums and have no clue about the ISK steamroller bearing down on them.

The only way anything will change is if the subs drop dramatically, and by then, it will be too late for high sec.
This NPC timer plus the drone killing AI, plus the 20% across the board damage nerf to heavy missiles is just another nail in the coffin for high sec income.


If 90% of people who voluntarily confine themselves in highsec quit, and 10% decide to also participate in other more profitable parts of the game, EVE will be better off.

CCP doesn't chain you into being a "highsec player". You do it yourself. In fact, CCP is trying to encourage you to open your eyes and look for other things to do than grind NPCs 23/7.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#449 - 2012-10-04 21:11:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
This NPC timer plus the drone killing AI, plus the 20% across the board damage nerf to heavy missiles is just another nail in the coffin for high sec income.
Good thing, then, that the income will be largely untouched. Heavy missiles aren't particularly important to highsec income and the problem of making the “drone-killing AI” not kill drones was solved three years ago.

Claire Raynor wrote:
This will be MASSIVLY exploited by griefers. So I'm in a fleet - we all open fire on someone because they are a legal target. One of the fleet members gets damaged during the fight so I rep them because we are a Typhoon Spider gang. "Assisting someone who is engaged in an LE will cause the assistor to receive a Suspect flag." And bingo - I get shot at by everyone because now I'm suspect flagged - So is every other member of the spider tank - because we all assisted someone engaged in LE?

Or did I get this wrong?
The new safety system will keep you safe.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#450 - 2012-10-04 21:11:15 UTC
Salpad wrote:
I just want to know how long those flags last. You seem to want some types to last 15 minutes. That's fine, but what about the rest?

potato

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#451 - 2012-10-04 21:12:12 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Jeas Imerius wrote:
I like how this sounds so far! I have an idea of how the new 1v1 system could work though..

Call it Dueling:

  • Right click players portrait or ship and click 'Challenge player to Duel' (must be in a ship and in space).
  • A window pops up were both parties either accept or decline. 'Insert Name has challenged you to a Duel, do you wish to defend your honor?'
  • If both accept, a 10 second timer begins during which time both players assume their positions (take 10 paces).
  • After the countdown they are free to fire on each other without incurring any flags.
  • Once a ship is destroyed the duel is over.

  • Big smile

    Stop reading my email!


    Call it a Mutual Fire Contract, not something WOW'y like a duel.


    You can call it what ever you want, but it's dueling and every motherF is going to call it dueling. If your only reason for calling it something convoluted is because other games also call dueling what it is, then the problem is you and not the name.


    bit harsh on the response there, just said that the technical name in the context menu shouldnt be "request duel", it should be "request contract of mutual fire" or something. people can call it duels if they want

    TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

    Marcus Gideon
    Triglavian Assembly
    #452 - 2012-10-04 21:13:10 UTC
    CCP Masterplan wrote:
    Kel hound wrote:

    One thing that immediately caught my eye in this was that it looks like you will no longer be able to eject from a T3 just before death in-order to avoid skill loss. This seem's oddly intentional; will this fact be taken into consideration when tericide passes over Teir 3 cruisers? Is this the proverbial lambs blood on the door posts to ward off the angel of nerfs when she passes over the land of EVE?

    Sun Win wrote:
    Quote:
    It is possible to be prevented from switching ships or ejecting (whilst in space) by your actions


    So does this mean that we can no longer strategically eject to prevent skill loss from our Tech 3 cruisers blowing up?

    This is not just oddly intentional, it is very intentional. If we didn't want to penalise T3 death, we simply wouldn't have the skillpoint-loss mechanic in the first place

    Found this clear back on Page 4...

    Not sure if it's been addressed much since then, still got a lot of pages to read...

    But I also dug this up, from a February '09 Dev Blog...

    http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=1711

    Seems the authors meant for you to be able to eject from a T3 "giving players an incentive to abandon ship from time to time."
    Gizznitt Malikite
    Agony Unleashed
    Agony Empire
    #453 - 2012-10-04 21:16:11 UTC
    Treya Neverette wrote:
    There is a couple line items that should be addressed here...

    After reading the new Crime Watch bulletin, I was actually pleased with the new changes on the horizon. It is going to open a new dynamic to the game that might intrigue old players into combat in high-sec, and provide a level of balance to new players when they are flying with a team of people learning the ropes of the EVE universe.

    Of course not all patches/updates can be perfect the first run through, and with proper discussion and brainstorming we can mitigate some of the most apparent issues in the preface.

    In your screenshot spreadsheets, which you said weren't final, I noticed couple items that need to be addressed immediately.

    1. "Criminal Flag 15 Minute Timer - Criminal cannot initiate warp." : Warping off grid is a valid defense in combat against an aggressor, good or bad. If they don't have you pointed, you are free to leave grid. Forcing people to stay on grid, with a global warp scram button is something that should be avoided at all cost.

    2. "Criminal Flag 15 Minute Timer - Criminal cannot enter a Wormhole" : This to me a common sense issue here. Wormholes are a rift in space, and concord has no control over their entrances. To keep with the spirit of logic in space, I believe this will remove a realism feel to the game.

    *Side Thought* - Think about criminal incursions that happen in high sec.
    1. A wormhole opens in high-sec.
    2. Criminals spill out to wreak havoc.
    3. A battle ensues within system between high-sec corps and criminals.
    4. High-sec corps push the criminals back to their void in space.

    This could be a very cool dynamic, that is severely lacking in the actual incursion patch from months back. It will give high-sec corp scouts a purpose to keep an eye on wormholes in system, and at the same time give the criminals "PvP'ers" an opportunity to impose their will on the unsuspecting. And the best part, it's all driven by player motives. Win Win i think...

    Thank you for your time.


    1.) The only way you gain a criminal flag is if you shoot a POD in lowsec, illegally shoot a player in highsec, or assist a criminal. A.) Pods can warp, even when criminally flagged, so your pod can get safe. In lowsec, the "cannot warp" limitation doesn't exist... it's a highsec feature only, where you're going to be concordoken anyway... so whats the problem???

    B.) If the criminal timer reduced from 15 minutes to say.... 5 minutes: Imagine if you attempt to gank a hulk... and the hulk's buddy jams you and then your concordoken. The act of jamming you creates an LE with the jammer for 15 minutes. So, after 5 minutes, you could then return and legally shoot that jammer. Essentially, if you reduce the C timer, you need to reduce the LE timer to the same length of time or less. Truthfully, I don't particularly see the need to adjust this timer, as its pretty much the same timer people cope with today, and pirating is fine!

    2.) You want to create a method to escape concord by entering a WH.... This isn't necessarily a bad thing... but I'm not sure it really adds all that much to the game other than provide you a tool to mess with WH logistics to/from highsec.
    l0rd carlos
    the king asked me to guard the mountain
    #454 - 2012-10-04 21:16:33 UTC
    Tippia wrote:
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    This NPC timer plus the drone killing AI, plus the 20% across the board damage nerf to heavy missiles is just another nail in the coffin for high sec income.
    Good thing, then, that the income will be largely untouched. Heavy missiles aren't particularly important to highsec income and the problem of making the “drone-killing AI” not kill drones was solved three years ago.


    Some Pilots are just afraid of change.

    Youtube Channel about Micro and Small scale PvP with commentary: Fleet Commentary by l0rd carlos

    Sulindra
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #455 - 2012-10-04 21:21:06 UTC
    Claire Raynor 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?



    This will be MASSIVLY exploited by griefers. So I'm in a fleet - we all open fire on someone because they are a legal target. One of the fleet members gets damaged during the fight so I rep them because we are a Typhoon Spider gang. "Assisting someone who is engaged in an LE will cause the assistor to receive a Suspect flag." And bingo - I get shot at by everyone because now I'm suspect flagged - So is every other member of the spider tank - because we all assisted someone engaged in LE?

    Or did I get this wrong?


    If they are a legal target to the all members of the fleet then there will be no LE. If you have an alt corp that reps a war corp, then the alt corp gets LE flagged.
    Albert Spear
    Non scholae sed vitae
    #456 - 2012-10-04 21:21:22 UTC
    [quote=VonKolroth][quote=Sentient Blade]


    1.) Learn 2 cloak/dock/POS | Short of being awoxed, you really have to just not pay attention to get caught ratting or missioning. On the off chance a gang that actually has a good prober comes into a ratting system or a missioning hub full of ships, you should have a plan prepared for how you're going to deal with those circumstances. It's not anywhere near difficult, unless you feel entitled to not pay attention to what you're doing in the game at the time.

    [quote]



    1. This if fine if you have the skills to cloak and you belong to a group that has a POS. If you are a newbie - it is yet another penalty that reduces the ability for newbies to make isk and continue in the game.

    When you are new in the game rat'ing is one of the few ways to make isk in high sec while skills grow. Make rat'ing too dangerous and more newbies will decide that after the 21 day trial - or sooner - that the game is not for them.

    Right now rat'ing in high sec while gaining skills is a primary activity for newbies who want to own better ships. Missioning is the second way, and again this makes it more difficult and dangerous to mission.
    ihcn
    Life. Universe. Everything.
    Clockwork Pineapple
    #457 - 2012-10-04 21:21:24 UTC
    PinkKnife wrote:
    I love the freighter ganking pilots crying that now they can't gank in peace. You do realize the irony here right? You want to to gank someone, but then not have someone interfere in your business while you do it? Welcome to eve, where there are repercussions, gank away but don't expect people to not try and take advantage of the situation and the consequences of your actions.

    You've missed the point by a mile. Suicide ganking is no longer viable when it's being done for profit (as opposed to griefing). Which makes hisec a safer place.
    Jarin Arenos
    Card Shark Industries
    #458 - 2012-10-04 21:22:14 UTC
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    Jarin Arenos wrote:
    Come on, somebody has to give a crap about the massive headache that is getting handed to mission runners with the NPC flag's introduction...


    I illustrated a scenario where with the new drone-killing AI that BS gunboats are trapped in mission sites.
    The vast majority of people that inhabit threads like this were gloating over the probability.

    Bottom line, this winter release is a further devastation of high sec income, and the vast majority of players in high sec don't read these forums and have no clue about the ISK steamroller bearing down on them.

    The only way anything will change is if the subs drop dramatically, and by then, it will be too late for high sec.
    This NPC timer plus the drone killing AI, plus the 20% across the board damage nerf to heavy missiles is just another nail in the coffin for high sec income.

    And the vast majority of people in these threads are gloating over griefer tears. I think the forums are just a massive pile of schadenfreude.

    But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?

    Udonor
    Doomheim
    #459 - 2012-10-04 21:23:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Udonor
    I have real problems with WARP DISABLE for Criminal flag. Its a sloppy GOD power in an otherwise great SciFI universe.

    I know its rooted in reducing CONCORD CPU use but at this point....
    WHY does CONCORD even SHOW UP??? Just BLOW ME UP REMOTELY instead of turning my warp off!!!!

    Front-end loading of criminal flags should solve a lot of CONCORD goose chase issues. Hell CONCORD should actually stop me before I have a chance to finish blowing up some ships in hi sec.

    Idea I suggest instead adding criminals in overview or local chat menu as a warp to point instead (like fleet warp).
    In busy high sec systems someone (player or CONCORD) will eventually catch me and scramble me within the 15 minute period. It doesn't stretch the storyline too far to make such a feature part of cooperative hi sec system infrastructure in conjunction with CONCORD facilities.

    One other thing I would give CONCORD is predictive warp -- that is they can warp to my endpoint while I am still in warp. Proactive instead of reactive after I arrive. One warp scrambler and I am done running. And yet I can still warp until CONCORD gets a ship within realistic storyline range.

    I can't see much chance of problems if CONCORD priorities are
    (1) first response to new attacks (including successive victims)...fastest warp first if list is "long"
    (2) current criminal flags that got away the first time but are not currently attacking anyone new (shortest timer first)
    (3) current criminal flags blown up X times before - shortest timer first
    (4) outlaw secstatus - special quick react range then lowest secstatus first
    Note its no tragedy if queues 3 and 4 don't always get serviced within CONCORD CPU budget.
    Lower queue ships only delay higher queue service if they are found in same grid during pursuit of a higher queue ship.
    CONCORD should always clear grids of criminals before next service call (& outlaws if working queue 3-4).
    Queue #1 entries are considered serviced once CONCORD warps to location and clears grid of criminal flags.
    So Queue #2 contains only players actively evading "arrest" by CONCORD and player volunteers.


    Warping is essential to self-defense especially against a potential huge number of opponents.

    (1) Without it I cannot even go get more ammo.

    (2) Disabling warp makes no sense at all in terms of storyline. Unlimited range scramble weapon? BS not even CONCORD
    Some criminals would find ways to disable that. And if not, then same control mechanism should prevent criminal actions in the first place.

    (3) A big chase is more exciting. Allows more players involvement.
    Claire Raynor
    NovaGear
    #460 - 2012-10-04 21:24:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Claire Raynor
    Tippia wrote:
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    This NPC timer plus the drone killing AI, plus the 20% across the board damage nerf to heavy missiles is just another nail in the coffin for high sec income.
    Good thing, then, that the income will be largely untouched. Heavy missiles aren't particularly important to highsec income and the problem of making the “drone-killing AI” not kill drones was solved three years ago.

    Claire Raynor wrote:
    This will be MASSIVLY exploited by griefers. So I'm in a fleet - we all open fire on someone because they are a legal target. One of the fleet members gets damaged during the fight so I rep them because we are a Typhoon Spider gang. "Assisting someone who is engaged in an LE will cause the assistor to receive a Suspect flag." And bingo - I get shot at by everyone because now I'm suspect flagged - So is every other member of the spider tank - because we all assisted someone engaged in LE?

    Or did I get this wrong?
    The new safety system will keep you safe.



    Sorry?? New Safety system? I didn't know about that - thanks for clarification

    No - my question was - attacking a legal target who is Suspect, Criminal or Suspect with a spider tank type setup sounds like it will cause almost every member of the spider tank to themselves become a Suspect?

    Also - what if the legal target is a war target and not Suspect, Criminal or Suspect flagged - there will not be an LE - so neutral reppers will just get PvP flagged and not Criminal flagged?