These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#181 - 2014-01-27 06:38:24 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
+1 for the OP. I fully support and endorse this proposal. It is well thought out and concise.


Those posting in opposition are failing miserably trying to come up with reasons not to implement a suspect flag for Mission Invasion. Hell, even the term sounds aggressive :

Quote:

INVASION :
An invasion is a military offensive in which large parts of the armed forces of one geopolitical entity aggressively enter territory controlled by another such entity, generally with the objective of either conquering, liberating or re-establishing control or authority over a territory, forcing the partition of a country, altering the established government or gaining concessions from said government, or a combination thereof. An invasion can be the cause of a war, be a part of a larger strategy to end a war, or it can constitute an entire war in itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion


As for ownership, the mission pocket actually belongs to the Agent who is offering it to the player. Once the player accepts the mission offer, that player is now held accountable for it. That, in all intents and purposes, makes the mission runner the owner regardless of the Sov listed in the top left corner of the screen. Usually the actual site itself doesn't spawn until the Mission Runner initiates warp.

There's only a couple of Cosmos Missions that actually spawn the site when accepted such as the 2nd mission of Cosmos Agent - Drone Mind. That mission spawned a site with a visible warp beacon on Overview which anyone could access. CCP has just recently programed that site to spawn multiple times in multiple systems all at the same time due to other players constantly completing the site causing Cosmos Mission Runners to either fail or pay exorbitant prices for the objective item. The same goes for a couple of other Cosmos Agent missions which have visible beacons in Overview.

Anyway back to topic, doesn't matter if it's a Ninja Salvager or Suicide Ganker who enters the site, it's still an invasion which is an aggressive act. Those who think Ninja Salvagers should be exempt or are trying to use that as a reason to dismiss the OP's proposal need to seriously do some research on the terms used :

Quote:
NINJA :
A ninja or shinobi was a covert agent or mercenary in feudal Japan. The functions of the ninja included espionage, sabotage, infiltration, and assassination, and open combat in certain situations. Their covert methods of waging war contrasted the ninja with the samurai, who observed and followed strict rules about honor and combat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninja


A true Ninja Salvager would never be seen by the Mission Runner. As such a Suspect Flag wouldn't matter. Most of the so called 'Ninja Salvagers' in this game now are nothing more than Mission Invaders. They obviously aren't very Ninja like at all and have no problem taking loot to get flagged in order to provoke PvP action. So the Suspect Flag is again not a problem.

As for new players, the safety system is set to full (green) right from the start. They wouldn't be able to warp to the site since that would be a suspect action, thus there wouldn't be any accidents happening. All players have the option to change their safety settings from Full (green) to allow suspect acts (yellow) or to perform criminal acts (red). If they do so, ignorance of consequences for those actions can not be used as an excuse.


DMC

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#182 - 2014-01-27 07:03:46 UTC
Kirkwood Ross wrote:
This opens up a new type of merc service for people who want to pop others in hi-sec. Go to a mission hub and cloak up in a mission, when a guy some sniffing around decloak and ambush.

How are they going to scan you down if you're cloaked?

DeMichael Crimson wrote:
As for ownership, the mission pocket actually belongs to the Agent who is offering it to the player. Once the player accepts the mission offer, that player is now held accountable for it. That, in all intents and purposes, makes the mission runner the owner regardless of the Sov listed in the top left corner of the screen.

It doesn't. It belongs to whoever wants it.

Quote:
it's still an invasion which is an aggressive act. Those who think Ninja Salvagers should be exempt or are trying to use that as a reason to dismiss the OP's proposal need to seriously do some research on the terms used :

It's not an invasion. Capsuleers have the right to travel freely in high security space.

Oh god.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#183 - 2014-01-27 07:17:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
Meyr wrote:
OH. MY. GOD.

Truly, there are no tears like pirate/griefer/ganker tears.

What we have here is someone trying to earn a living (let's face it, no one does missions because they're INTERESTING). Someone else plans on interrupting their work and stealing the results. In the process of that theft, they (a) conspire, and (b) trespass into something that, were it not for the mission-runner interacting with an agent, would not otherwise exist.

Points (a) and (b) certainly amount to what, in the real world, would result in your detention and questioning by the police, to say nothing of being arrested, tried, and convicted.

What's been proposed here is a possible method of leveling the playing field, by making an uninvited intrusion into a mission pocket an act that would mark you as a viable target for the mission-runner.

And you guys are crying up a storm! Isn't greater opportunity for PVP what damned near every one of you guys are constantly asking for in these very same forums? Now, you're hiding behind CONCORD because, "Don't make MY fun harder or riskier, CCP, just those lazy, weak, wimpy hisec carebears!"

Personally, I feel that missions like this should spawn in more than one location - meaning that Princess Whatsherbitch can't simply camp one system, looking for a certain type of ship, and easily warp to that target, nearly certain of an easy, fat payday. Have them actually spawn in a system like Poinen or Osmon - that way, if you want to steal the mission loot/reward, you have to EARN it - work your butt off, put in some skull sweat.

Hey, you want to camp the place where the mission is given, note the player and shipname, go to several other BUSY systems looking for that player in local, scan the system, use D-scan to help isolate a result with a proper name, warp to it, and steal the loot, you've EARNED IT, and the mission-runner will have learned to do simple things, like changing their ship name.

In the meantime, keep on crying, guys.

*Snip* Removed reply to a deleted post. ISD Ezwal.


So true... so true. lol

I would also support making mission sites spawn in random or semi-random systems. I think that this may be hell on the programmers, but definitely something else that would be good for the game.

Adding suspect flags for mission invasion and making the mission systems more random together is definitely an potent game-balancing combo.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
HK -56
Doomheim
#184 - 2014-01-27 07:20:19 UTC
I skimmed thru the OP and skipped the replies, but I wanted to say this:

You are flirting dangerously close with a "bound item" solution, and I will absolutely never support that.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#185 - 2014-01-27 07:24:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
HK -56 wrote:
I skimmed thru the OP and skipped the replies, but I wanted to say this:

You are flirting dangerously close with a "bound item" solution, and I will absolutely never support that.




You may want to re-read the original post because you clearly misunderstood it.


No there is no bound item in any way shape or form.

A suspect flag only makes the mission invader a legal target immediately when they choose to warp illegally into another player's mission site.


For others to not be confused, this is from the original post:

Abdul 'aleem wrote:


...

TLDR

Game balance is off. Add a suspect flag for trespassing that is triggered when the act of mission item theft is initiated (when the illegal warp into the mission owner's site begins) not only after the item is looted.

There is no reason that a mission thief should have Concord protection after they invade another player's mission space and while they are waiting to loot the mission item.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#186 - 2014-01-27 07:27:29 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:


DeMichael Crimson wrote:
As for ownership, the mission pocket actually belongs to the Agent who is offering it to the player. Once the player accepts the mission offer, that player is now held accountable for it. That, in all intents and purposes, makes the mission runner the owner regardless of the Sov listed in the top left corner of the screen.

It doesn't. It belongs to whoever wants it.

You keep stating this over and over perhaps you don't get the idea or it's too complicated, so let's simplify it. The mission does not exists until the character that accepted it 'The Mission' warps to it. This implies that the mission only exists for the one character, and is therefore not a public loot bin for anyone interested.

Riot Girl wrote:

Quote:
it's still an invasion which is an aggressive act. Those who think Ninja Salvagers should be exempt or are trying to use that as a reason to dismiss the OP's proposal need to seriously do some research on the terms used :

It's not an invasion. Capsuleers have the right to travel freely in high security space.

This is not impeding a capsuleers ability or right to fly anywhere they want, it is setting the mission space up as if it was a exploration site, and the mission runner is the owner. So to make the similarities clear imagine the site is an DED complex; You can warp to a site and as soon as you enter the faction that occupies the site treats you like a 'Suspect' they engage and concord does not come to defend you. Same thing here, except you actually go 'Suspect' to the site owner, and anyone else, unless you asked for and received a 'fleet invite' from the owner.

This is so simple that anyone could easily grasp it, I don't understand the continued defiance to the idea, it protects the mission runner only if he is willing to fight for what is his. It adds a suspect flag to the invader, as is deserved due to his intentions in failing to ask for an invite, but if you're a piratey type this is nothing new, since you were going to get a suspect tag anyways as soon as you got there and found something to do to earn it (shoot MTU, loot wreck, yada, yada).

Salvagers would be safe, all they need to do is ask if they can salvage and get a fleet invite, or trust the Mission Runner will not engage a salvager (A Noctis is not a real imposing threat). Of the two I would trust a Mission Runner before the aforementioned Piratey type.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#187 - 2014-01-27 07:32:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Riot Girl
Goldiiee wrote:
[quote=Riot Girl]You keep stating this over and over perhaps you don't get the idea or it's too complicated, so let's simplify it. The mission does not exists until the character that accepted it 'The Mission' warps to it. This implies that the mission only exists for the one character, and is therefore not a public loot bin for anyone interested.

No, it's you who doesn't get it. If I want your mission site, I will take it and there is nothing you can do about it. Go cry to your little NPC agent about ownership.

Oh god.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#188 - 2014-01-27 07:38:16 UTC
Lots of extra benefits that I didn't expect to the original suggestion.

Thanks to all who genuinely contributed.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#189 - 2014-01-27 07:38:17 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
[quote=Riot Girl]You keep stating this over and over perhaps you don't get the idea or it's too complicated, so let's simplify it. The mission does not exists until the character that accepted it 'The Mission' warps to it. This implies that the mission only exists for the one character, and is therefore not a public loot bin for anyone interested.

No, it's you who doesn't get it. If I want your mission site, I will take it and there is nothing you can do about it. Go cry to your little NPC agent about ownership.

And we are not suggesting you can't. I just want the ability to shove 3000dps and a full rack of webs, and jams up your sanctimonious MWD as soon you enter a site you have every intention of taking from me. Rather than waiting till you have your optimal plan in place, rendering me incapable of retaliating.

The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#190 - 2014-01-27 07:39:55 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:
This is not impeding a capsuleers ability or right to fly anywhere they want

So not being able to warp to a site in high sec unless you change your security lock to yellow isn't impeding people's ability to travel?

Quote:
it is setting the mission space up as if it was a exploration site

People fight over those sites all the time. You don't see people crying for suspect timers.

Quote:
it protects the mission runner only if he is willing to fight for what is his.

It doesn't and he isn't.

Quote:
as is deserved

Nope. He gets the suspect flag AFTER he commits the crime. That's how it works.

Oh god.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#191 - 2014-01-27 07:40:27 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:


The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.



This is exactly the point.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#192 - 2014-01-27 07:41:12 UTC
Quote:
And we are not suggesting you can't. I just want the ability to shove 3000dps and a full rack of webs, and jams up your sanctimonious MWD as soon you enter a site you have every intention of taking from me. Rather than waiting till you have your optimal plan in place, rendering me incapable of retaliating.

You already have that ability. The only thing preventing you from using it is yourself.

Oh god.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#193 - 2014-01-27 07:42:20 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:


The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.



This is exactly the point.

How do you prove their intentions before they commit the crime?

Oh god.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#194 - 2014-01-27 07:44:26 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:


The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.



This is exactly the point.

How do you prove their intentions before they commit the crime?



Read what you quoted... maybe a few times.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#195 - 2014-01-27 07:47:07 UTC
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
Abdul 'aleem wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:


The key here is intention, if you scanned down a site with the intention of committing a 'Suspect' worthy act, then you deserve a 'Suspect' flag, your intentions deserve the appropriate flag.



This is exactly the point.

How do you prove their intentions before they commit the crime?



Read what you quoted... maybe a few times.

No. Answer the question.

Oh god.
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#196 - 2014-01-27 07:48:22 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:


This is so simple that anyone could easily grasp it, I don't understand the continued defiance to the idea, it protects the mission runner only if he is willing to fight for what is his. It adds a suspect flag to the invader, as is deserved due to his intentions in failing to ask for an invite, but if you're a piratey type this is nothing new, since you were going to get a suspect tag anyways as soon as you got there and found something to do to earn it (shoot MTU, loot wreck, yada, yada).

Salvagers would be safe, all they need to do is ask if they can salvage and get a fleet invite, or trust the Mission Runner will not engage a salvager (A Noctis is not a real imposing threat). Of the two I would trust a Mission Runner before the aforementioned Piratey type.



Riot Girl needs to re-read this for clarity. Thanks for summarizing it so eloquently.

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#197 - 2014-01-27 07:52:19 UTC
Stop trying to make me read garbage I've already read to avoid answering questions. You've avoided pretty much every argument I've presented to you and you've resorted to immature tactics to stubbornly defend your horrible idea. Why don't you just drop it already?

Oh god.
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#198 - 2014-01-27 07:57:13 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Goldiiee wrote:
This is not impeding a capsuleers ability or right to fly anywhere they want

So not being able to warp to a site in high sec unless you change your security lock to yellow isn't impeding people's ability to travel?

Quote:
it is setting the mission space up as if it was a exploration site

People fight over those sites all the time. You don't see people crying for suspect timers.

Quote:
it protects the mission runner only if he is willing to fight for what is his.

It doesn't and he isn't.

Quote:
as is deserved

Nope. He gets the suspect flag AFTER he commits the crime. That's how it works.


To point #1
EVE is not a safe place (Seen this posted a few times before) having to change your safety to yellow merely confirms this rather than denies it. So no it's not impeding, and I am not sure why you would worry from he sounds of your arguments you have it set to yellow or red permanently.
To point #2
As a public spawn site you should know these (DED complexes)are supposed to be contested.
To point #3
Now you're just being obstinate, with no real argument you're tilting at windmills.
To point #4
Committing a crime is about Intent as well as the Act, Intent to kill is just as easy to prosecute as murder, you buy a gun, ammo, and black ski mask, show up at the guys house but are foiled by his yappy Chihuahua. Your still going to go to jail.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#199 - 2014-01-27 08:01:46 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Stop trying to make me read garbage I've already read to avoid answering questions. You've avoided pretty much every argument I've presented to you and you've resorted to immature tactics to stubbornly defend your horrible idea. Why don't you just drop it already?

This is because you haven't presented any argument other than, 'This screws my game play and I don't like it!'

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#200 - 2014-01-27 08:06:56 UTC
Riot Girl.
What I am getting is you don't like the idea because it flags suspects before they commit a crime; In your opinion.

But it is the opinion of everyone else that entering a site with the intent of 'taking it' (BTW; implies ownership other than your own) is in itself a criminal or 'Suspect' worthy act, we are only asking that the appropriate flag be applied to the appropriate action, nothing more.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.