These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Log-in traps: Something to address?

Author
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#81 - 2013-08-17 17:11:22 UTC
ExookiZ wrote:
I think a improtant factor in the issue many of you are overlooking is the risk VS reward.

A fleet logged off in a system is completely invulnerable, they cans it there with a claoked eye and wait to jump and gank a target with absolutely no chance of any real PVP unless they screw up. Any good attacker has intel on when they want to perform their gank, and since the flag changes they wait until their target is completely vulnerable. They log on, warp to X, kill everything, warp out, cloak up, then log. This isnt an issue of gate camps, or hot drops, its a method of completely safely ganking pve fleets and then running for the hills rather than actual PVP.

There is no PVP generated in this case, only a gank on some targets that had little to no chance of retaliating. The only possibly viable tactic to fight back is your own log on trap, which is about as dumb as saying the best way to counter titans is more titans.

I dont think that any of the suggested "NO PVP" timers are the right way to go so I can't say I have the solution but I do agree it is a problem. I think allowing you some form of rudimentary intel as to what is/how much is logged off in a system is much closer to the way to go, but not perfect either. In regards to system sieges it is very rare when the defender doesnt already know someone is seeding capitals in their system, it isnt usually a surprise as much as a " you know its coming just not when" situation, So i dont think this additional intel will have a significant impact on this.

If you want to gank someone, at least having to be logged in prior to the gank allows the people to see you and maybe be ready/able to fight back. Even if your fleets at a deep safe combat scanners are likely to pick it out and so your not completely surprised when a blob lands on your pve fleet.

If I want to hide a large capital fleet, force them to pay for their covertness, having to fit a cloak into their entire fleet is the price one should have to pay if i want my fleet to be cloaked, logging off makes it too simple


Being logged in for PvP in general is not a requirement for this game. Example, people engaged in the markets may often be AFK or not even logged in and are making isk, influencing the game, and yes...engaged in PvP.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Malikai Larios
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#82 - 2013-08-17 17:51:18 UTC
easiest solution, remove auto-warp to last location.

you can still logoff and not show in local, but when you login your not sent directly to where your dictor/hic is already sitting, or directly back into the middle of an anom.
Zakeus Djinn
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#83 - 2013-08-18 01:18:14 UTC
I don't see why the game has to ewarp you back to where you logged off. What if you simply reappear where you end up after the log off warp, with no automatic warping after logging in? It doesn't do anything that couldn't have already been achieved by warping to a safe spot before logging off, and it somewhat prevents log-in traps. Personally while I don't think log-in traps are much of a problem (no experience here however), they are a rather absurd mechanic to begin with, and I wouldn't mind if they changed it.
Doddy
Excidium.
#84 - 2013-08-18 01:23:24 UTC
Nothing wrong with login traps tbh, complaining about them when bridges are in the game is a bit lol.
Doddy
Excidium.
#85 - 2013-08-18 01:24:25 UTC
ShadowandLight wrote:
Vexed Nova wrote:

Someone mentioned Titan Bridges and blopsing. You can't lump the two [lo on/off & blops/titan bridge] together. They are fundamentally different even though their use and outcome are similar. Blopsing and Titan bridges are valid "tactics" while log on/off traps are a creative use of "game mechanics".


Logging out to avoid PVP was just as creative as well then?

If Logging in to trap someone is acceptable, why was logging out to avoid PVP not?


Because pvp is the point of the game?
plexjunky Inkura
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#86 - 2013-08-18 12:48:03 UTC
Correct me if I am wrong but this issue is focused on Whs, where bridging and hot drops dont exist. It is rare in WH space for the fleet to actually be logged out at the gank location, they are usually logged off at a deep safe.

A fleet cautiously looks everywhere, finding no one starts to run sites, gankers log on a fleet, warp to site. kill everyone. Cloaks exist for this purpose, at least make that fleet work for their black ops style play.

Fleet hiding cloaked at a safe spot can be found if they forget to cloak, and can be fought. Requires effort on the ganking fleet's part. Has potential to generate pvp if the attackers screw up.

Fleet logged off at deep safe cant be scanned, found or fought. Requires no effort, just lounge around playing whatever till scout says hey guys log in. Has no potential for pvp.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#87 - 2013-08-18 16:25:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Alundil
ExookiZ wrote:
I think a improtant factor in the issue many of you are overlooking is the risk VS reward.

A fleet logged off in a system is completely invulnerable, they cans it there with a claoked eye and wait to jump and gank a target with absolutely no chance of any real PVP unless they screw up. Any good attacker has intel on when they want to perform their gank, and since the flag changes they wait until their target is completely vulnerable. They log on, warp to X, kill everything, warp out, cloak up, then log. This isnt an issue of gate camps, or hot drops, its a method of completely safely ganking pve fleets and then running for the hills rather than actual PVP.

There is no PVP generated in this case, only a gank on some targets that had little to no chance of retaliating. The only possibly viable tactic to fight back is your own log on trap, which is about as dumb as saying the best way to counter titans is more titans.

I dont think that any of the suggested "NO PVP" timers are the right way to go so I can't say I have the solution but I do agree it is a problem. I think allowing you some form of rudimentary intel as to what is/how much is logged off in a system is much closer to the way to go, but not perfect either. In regards to system sieges it is very rare when the defender doesnt already know someone is seeding capitals in their system, it isnt usually a surprise as much as a " you know its coming just not when" situation, So i dont think this additional intel will have a significant impact on this.

If you want to gank someone, at least having to be logged in prior to the gank allows the people to see you and maybe be ready/able to fight back. Even if your fleets at a deep safe combat scanners are likely to pick it out and so your not completely surprised when a blob lands on your pve fleet.

If I want to hide a large capital fleet, force them to pay for their covertness, having to fit a cloak into their entire fleet is the price one should have to pay if i want my fleet to be cloaked, logging off makes it too simple



First off I'm laughing that people are splitting ganking out from PVP as if the two are completely different things.

The log off/on PVP timer mechanics being suggested will negatively impact EVERYONE not just the OP's intended target.

Fitting cloaks to capitals won't save you either since they are..... Capitals..... After all an will simply de-cloak and refit when ready.

There is PVP, market-PVP and I guess this would have to be deemed Dev-PVP. bravo.

I'm right behind you

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#88 - 2013-08-18 19:14:46 UTC
Alundil wrote:
The log off/on PVP timer mechanics being suggested will negatively impact EVERYONE not just the OP's intended target.
elaborate more on that please
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#89 - 2013-08-18 19:28:04 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Alundil wrote:
The log off/on PVP timer mechanics being suggested will negatively impact EVERYONE not just the OP's intended target.
elaborate more on that please



'Oh no, I have crashed. I'd better log back in.'

'Oh, bugger. That anti-logon trap feature they've put in isn't letting me log in. **** it, I'll go play tanks.'
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#90 - 2013-08-18 19:30:45 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Alundil wrote:
The log off/on PVP timer mechanics being suggested will negatively impact EVERYONE not just the OP's intended target.
elaborate more on that please



'Oh no, I have crashed. I'd better log back in.'

'Oh, bugger. That anti-logon trap feature they've put in isn't letting me log in. **** it, I'll go play tanks.'

that depends who's suggestion you are basing that on too. whoever suggested some sort of "forced wait to log-in" was wrong
Alundil
Rolled Out
#91 - 2013-08-18 19:32:34 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Alundil wrote:
The log off/on PVP timer mechanics being suggested will negatively impact EVERYONE not just the OP's intended target.
elaborate more on that please

I didn't think this was that challenging of a concept.

If everyone has a delay to engaging in PvP regardless of their intent (ie: not a login trap) then everyone logging in to engage in PvP is being negatively impacted by a mechanic designed, allegedly, to address a specific action, namely login traps. Since the devs cannot ascertain a player's intent when logging in to Eve, this would be a terribly inaccurate mechanic in the first case.

It is a bad idea right out of the gate.

As a player who has spent most of my Eve time in wormholes and have been involved as the evictor a few times and luckily as an evictee only once I can say that failure to know who is doing things in your hole is always going to give you trouble (Any doctor could tell you that).

OP needs to expend more effort maintaining hole control and sound intel gathering techniques.

I'm right behind you

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#92 - 2013-08-18 19:57:44 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Alundil wrote:
The log off/on PVP timer mechanics being suggested will negatively impact EVERYONE not just the OP's intended target.
elaborate more on that please



'Oh no, I have crashed. I'd better log back in.'

'Oh, bugger. That anti-logon trap feature they've put in isn't letting me log in. **** it, I'll go play tanks.'

that depends who's suggestion you are basing that on too. whoever suggested some sort of "forced wait to log-in" was wrong



Absolutely any suggestion that in any way inhibits PVP immediately after log on would have this exact same effect.
Evanga
DoctorOzz
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#93 - 2013-08-21 11:04:53 UTC
when i log back in, i wanna see a giant pink pony with yellow hair instead of my ship.
Galen Silas
Digital assassins
#94 - 2013-08-21 11:30:54 UTC
Being a fairly older player I have seen a lot of of crap moves pulled by different people here and there in EVE, and the log off trick has got to be one of the most rediculous and unaddressed "PVP" strategies in the game, IF you can call it a genuine strategy that's working as you think CCP designed it to do.

In order for something to be "working as intended" it needs to be something that is intended for use INSIDE of the game, which wouldn't make any sense for this considering you have to disconnect from the game waiting for someone to be tackled. Your outside of the game, It's a broken "mechanic" that as stated, needs to have some kind of a timer preventing people from doing this, because in doing this you have eliminated intel itself, Local chat is not an issue, these people are bypassing ALL means of being discovered simply by showing as offline.

I would even go as far to say that anyone who thinks otherwise on this either 1. Uses this tactic regularly and loves the thrill of cheap and easy kills involving minimal or no actual player intended skill or 2. They are not aware of the fact that something that is outside of being online in the game, and not directly part of the combat aspect cannot "work as intended" when applied to aid or assist said combat, i.e. using the onlining process used ONLY to enter the game as a tactic that was supposedly designed that way to get the jump on people.

Make a timer at least for those who log off in outer space to where they cannot openly aggress someone, unless someone aggress's them first, People in stations should not have a timer as they have to undock, and warp to the location desired. That's my two cents anyways and coming from engaging in and observing PVP experience's since 2005.
seany1212
Drunkendis Order
#95 - 2013-08-21 11:42:15 UTC
Galen Silas wrote:
Being a fairly older player I have seen a lot of of crap moves pulled by different people here and there in EVE, and the log off trick has got to be one of the most rediculous and unaddressed "PVP" strategies in the game, IF you can call it a genuine strategy that's working as you think CCP designed it to do.

In order for something to be "working as intended" it needs to be something that is intended for use INSIDE of the game, which wouldn't make any sense for this considering you have to disconnect from the game waiting for someone to be tackled. Your outside of the game, It's a broken "mechanic" that as stated, needs to have some kind of a timer preventing people from doing this, because in doing this you have eliminated intel itself, Local chat is not an issue, these people are bypassing ALL means of being discovered simply by showing as offline.

I would even go as far to say that anyone who thinks otherwise on this either 1. Uses this tactic regularly and loves the thrill of cheap and easy kills involving minimal or no actual player intended skill or 2. They are not aware of the fact that something that is outside of being online in the game, and not directly part of the combat aspect cannot "work as intended" when applied to aid or assist said combat, i.e. using the onlining process used ONLY to enter the game as a tactic that was supposedly designed that way to get the jump on people.

Make a timer at least for those who log off in outer space to where they cannot openly aggress someone, unless someone aggress's them first, People in stations should not have a timer as they have to undock, and warp to the location desired. That's my two cents anyways and coming from engaging in and observing PVP experience's since 2005.


You can hardly call dropping on frigates in 10 man gang's 'PVP'.

You stated local chat as not being the issue yet how would you know the aggressors had logged in if it was not for local chat? The only issue these topics come up in is in null sec, I've still yet to see someone in low, high or wormholes creating endless threads about log-on traps, afk cloakers and keeping/removing local. Null sec is supposed to be hard mode, the 'Happy Tree Friends' version of 'My Little Pony' and yet people constantly complain about how they died, IN NULL OF ALL PLACES Shocked
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#96 - 2013-08-21 11:49:57 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Alundil wrote:
The log off/on PVP timer mechanics being suggested will negatively impact EVERYONE not just the OP's intended target.
elaborate more on that please



'Oh no, I have crashed. I'd better log back in.'

'Oh, bugger. That anti-logon trap feature they've put in isn't letting me log in. **** it, I'll go play tanks.'


Simply adding a 1-2 minute timer that starts when you last logged off. If you are still in the window, you don't get the PVP **** block mechanic.


Hentes Zsemle wrote:
Btw if you think this is a riskless way of pvp, you are stupid.


Explain to me then how your ship is at risk when you are logged off, waiting for something to come along that you know you will gank?

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.

Evanga
DoctorOzz
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#97 - 2013-08-21 11:57:24 UTC
we are still discussing something that aint an issue to start with...
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#98 - 2013-08-21 12:57:25 UTC
plexjunky Inkura wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong but this issue is focused on Whs, where bridging and hot drops dont exist. It is rare in WH space for the fleet to actually be logged out at the gank location, they are usually logged off at a deep safe.

A fleet cautiously looks everywhere, finding no one starts to run sites, gankers log on a fleet, warp to site. kill everyone. Cloaks exist for this purpose, at least make that fleet work for their black ops style play.

Fleet hiding cloaked at a safe spot can be found if they forget to cloak, and can be fought. Requires effort on the ganking fleet's part. Has potential to generate pvp if the attackers screw up.

Fleet logged off at deep safe cant be scanned, found or fought. Requires no effort, just lounge around playing whatever till scout says hey guys log in. Has no potential for pvp.


Tell me more about how it requires "no effort" to seed numerous capital ships into enemy wormholes and watch them for weeks for an opportune moment, mr noob corp.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#99 - 2013-08-21 13:24:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Logoffski's are a neccessary evil, because local chat giving players free real-time intel on who is in system, up to the second, breaks game balance and gives them too much information on when an enemy enters system.

I cover this in more detail here.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#100 - 2013-08-21 13:26:44 UTC  |  Edited by: seth Hendar
Doddy wrote:
Nothing wrong with login traps tbh, complaining about them when bridges are in the game is a bit lol.

agreed on this, if we adress the login trap, let's adress the drops too.

no more warp on login back in? ok, but when exiting a jump bridge to a cyno, you appear in a random part of the destination system, individually.


i like to see how ppl from various alliances, who spend muchof their time waiting on a titan to hotdrop a few cuisers, are whining when it comes to actually do something similar to them: being able to get them without advertising our presence.... this by itself tells it all i think...