These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fanfest: Crimewatch

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#421 - 2012-03-23 15:23:05 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Why should CCP make changes that cater to this specific player subset, instead of making changes that will bring in more pvper/griefer/sociopath subscriptions?


Short memory:

New high alpha tier 3 BC's anyone?
Improvements to dessies?

Seems there are significant tools balancing out other various features. So it seems there is a mixed element of support with features as a result. So no you can't say nothing goes in the favour of this mindset or playstyle.

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Kazacy
BACKFIRE Squad
#422 - 2012-03-23 15:27:20 UTC
Funny thing is not long time ago alot of carebears cried: remove insurance for suicide gankers, in this way we don't have anymore suicide kills and voila, after the removal of insurance my impression is we have more suicide kills than ever. What i mean to say is for every action a reaction will follow and crimewatch imo force alot of players to sucide gank more than ever because in the end this will be the last form of pvp in hisec.
After this i bet carebears will cry one more time and finally they will have something like no pvp in hisec and maybe eve will became something like the X series, a single player game and and everyone will say: hey why should i pay the sub for this MMO when i can buy a single player game and play without any monthly fee [:=d
When i signed for eve i was poded in my first or second day of eve in lowsec, oh boy i was angry on all pirates so i joined an antipirate corporation in lowsec (we was a bunch of carebears with some balls that's all). One day i read in a pirate bio something like this
Antipirates are pirates with messiah complex
It was eye opening for me and soon after this i became myself a pirate/griefer whatever you wanna call.
So in the end pls CCP MAKE HISEC A PERFECTLY SAFE ZONE AND ALSO PLEASE MOVE IT ON ANOTHER SERVER (a fluffy furry and pinky one if it's possible). No need anymore for stupid crimewatch and so on

Thx for reading my rant

P.S. i wanna thank you here for the guy who poded me first time in eve because in this way i was forced to learn alot about the game.
Adunh Slavy
#423 - 2012-03-23 15:38:38 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Well that's kind of their fault, isn't it? They have the tools, but don't utilize them. You can hardly blame the people taking advantage of that fact. Also, the MMO player and the "relax for an hour with some friends" demographics never really had any significant overlap.


The old "if you don't play it the way I do, you're wrong." gambit. They are taking advantage of things that you are not, so you're wrong too.

Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Why should CCP make changes that cater to this specific player subset, instead of making changes that will bring in more pvper/griefer/sociopath subscriptions?


How do you know it won't? You are concluding it won't - if random players can pop a suspect, they will, and this will deter pvpers, griefers and the odd sociopath.

Now those who will pop a suspect are engaging in PVP, so they are pvpers. One down. According to the loose use of the word grief on these forums, they are interrupting someone else's game play, so they are greifing the griefers. Two down. We already know that anyone playing this game is a little crazy to play internet space ships, though perhaps not a sociopath. Ok, so you get sociopath. You can have them. (I seriously doubt real sociopath will waste their time with internet spaceships when real people are closer at hand.)

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Ximen
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#424 - 2012-03-23 15:39:10 UTC
"back when i was playing"

Of all the awkward **** i just listened to in the gap fillers tonight.. you let slip that little gem.

Every dev I've seen on eve-tv ever was precisely the type of person I expected based on their posts. Instantly i was on their side, and understood their POV. They were people I unquestionably gave my approval to.

Greyscale, now I have personal experience in why noone thinks you have a clue what you're on about. You instilled absolutely zero confidence in what you are doing with this game.. and yet you're looking after a core component of the game mechanics.

Then you drop this little gem.. "i dont drink". Very respectable. Also nice way to distance yourself from the majority of the core players (and the other devs). It sure explains the inexusable awkwardness that was yourself in front of the camera.

Congrats, you've just managed to undo any confidence i built up from crucible.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#425 - 2012-03-23 15:48:00 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Liang Nuren wrote:

2. Why do you feel that there needs to be a penalty involved with being flagged as a suspect? Why is ships blowing up a bad thing? You implemented your "safety off" - they know what the consequences are. This is notably how other games handle PVP flagging. Its why its called "PVP flagging".


If you're doing something mildly "illegal" (as defined by the very loose and approximate code of morality that the mechanics are trying to suggest), my default position is that there should be some mild negative consequences for that action. If aggressing someone with a suspect flag is always a statistically dumb move, we may as well just make all those actions legal and be done with it.


The mild negative consequence is that ANYONE can shoot you (at the risk of becoming PVP flagged themselves). Do that on the Jita undock and get volleyed by 200 people. The escalation over the old mechanics would be both good and bad, and there should be no problem with high sec belts turning into mass graves over a flipped can.

I also find it amusing that you're willing to justify that being unable to defend yourself when PVP flagged is a "mild negative consequence".

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Tauren Tom
Order of the Silver Dragons
Silver Dragonz
#426 - 2012-03-23 16:13:29 UTC
VIGILANTISM!

Anywhere else this would get you arrested and thrown in jail...
In the grand scheme of things... You're all pubbies. So HTFU.   "It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses." - Elwood Blues
cadermerin
Royal Marines
#427 - 2012-03-23 16:31:21 UTC
prolix travail wrote:
Can you tell me, us (those who think this way) what you are doing with the sandbox of new eden, will the ability to pvp wherever and whenever be protected? or are you going to eventually dictate where it's allowed to happen?


+1

carebears have got the wrong idea about EvE, you should not be able to do anything peacfully. When you log in you're accepting that other people will try to kill you and take your stuff. If that isnt the game you want to play then find another.
Adunh Slavy
#428 - 2012-03-23 16:31:36 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:

The mild negative consequence is that ANYONE can shoot you (at the risk of becoming PVP flagged themselves). Do that on the Jita undock and get volleyed by 200 people. The escalation over the old mechanics would be both good and bad, and there should be no problem with high sec belts turning into mass graves over a flipped can.

I also find it amusing that you're willing to justify that being unable to defend yourself when PVP flagged is a "mild negative consequence".

-Liang



Grayscale wrote:

What we're actually considering right now, based on player suggestions, is to formalize the concept of a "limited engagement", which is effectively needed for both wardecs and some kind of duelling system, and carry that across to here too. To whit, anyone who engages a suspect becomes part of a "limited engagement" with the suspect on one side and all their aggressors on the other side, and any further interference by anyone else in that engagement gets a suspect flag.


Ref. Post #328

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#429 - 2012-03-23 16:33:28 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
Terminal Insanity wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Can-flipping as-is will be impossible once the safeties are added. People should be able to choose to do dumb things, but they should also have the information they need to figure out that the thing they're doing is dumb.

Duelling we're planning to support with an explicit mechanic rather than the current hacky workaround.


They do have that right to do stupid things. And in space, when you do something stupid, it gets you killed. That is how you learn.
How about you protect me when i approach a cyno dominix with my webbing loki and cant get away in time? i mean, if i was smart i'd have stayed out of point range, but hey i'm dumb and i need you to hold my hand through it.

Seriously though, carebear gets canflipped and gets a POPUP WARNING EXPLAINING EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN when he steals it back. If he chooses to ignore it the first time, that's his own fault and he receives his lesson. If he refuses to listen to it time and time again, that's his own stupidity getting him killed.


You are talking about carebears and consequences while crying that it will be more difficult for you to to pursue the risk and consequence free high sec griefing you currently enjoy. Roll


let me explain it for you since you're slow:

this creates risk-free PvP

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#430 - 2012-03-23 16:42:08 UTC
Tauren Tom wrote:
VIGILANTISM!

Anywhere else this would get you arrested and thrown in jail...


Are you advocating that criminals should be thrown in jail then? Roll

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#431 - 2012-03-23 17:00:43 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:

The mild negative consequence is that ANYONE can shoot you (at the risk of becoming PVP flagged themselves). Do that on the Jita undock and get volleyed by 200 people. The escalation over the old mechanics would be both good and bad, and there should be no problem with high sec belts turning into mass graves over a flipped can.

I also find it amusing that you're willing to justify that being unable to defend yourself when PVP flagged is a "mild negative consequence".

-Liang



Grayscale wrote:

What we're actually considering right now, based on player suggestions, is to formalize the concept of a "limited engagement", which is effectively needed for both wardecs and some kind of duelling system, and carry that across to here too. To whit, anyone who engages a suspect becomes part of a "limited engagement" with the suspect on one side and all their aggressors on the other side, and any further interference by anyone else in that engagement gets a suspect flag.


Ref. Post #328


I'm well aware of what they are considering now. I'm responding to his assertion that PVP flagging should carry a mild negative consequence and that one example of a mild negative consequence is being unable to defend yourself on the pain of being Concorded.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Harotak
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#432 - 2012-03-23 17:58:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Harotak
As someone who enjoys fighting can baiters and gaining aggression through remote repairing people, I'm not at all upset with this change if it cures the instant dock neutral remote repair plague and a robust dueling mechanic is implemented.

My thoughts on the dueling mechanic:

1. The duel partipants should be in the same fleet
2. Anyone who remote assists a duel participant should go straight to criminal flag instead of just getting flagged a suspect. Even this might not be strong enough since in a duel between high-value faction fit ships for instance, its nothing to lose something like a tech-1 basic support cruiser to quickly rep up your friend. It might be necessary to simply make it impossible to remote assist someone in a duel.
3. When in a duel you should "no-clip" through all ships that are not participating in the duel in order to avoid neutral bumping from machariels and such.
4. To avoid mid-fight re-supply, picking up any floating cargo, even something you or your corp mates dropped, should flag you as a suspect.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#433 - 2012-03-23 18:29:33 UTC
Kazacy wrote:
P.S. i wanna thank you here for the guy who poded me first time in eve because in this way i was forced to learn alot about the game.


Even those of us that joined to be bad guys (I joined EVE to be a pirate, scammer and corpthief) learned these hard lessons early on. I learned for example that it's bad to steal from just about everyone, if I don't have means to defend myself. Stealing from 200 angry russians might have you permacamped in a station.. oops. P

That kind of consequences was what I mentioned above. There should always be means for younger players to learn there is consequences, and that EVE is dangerous. Taking that away, will take away from the learning experience, and in fact in the long run those players might end up being very frustrated after X time that "all this time I played this game, and it turned out it's dangerous! How would I know?" etc.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Adunh Slavy
#434 - 2012-03-23 18:42:11 UTC
Misanth wrote:
That kind of consequences was what I mentioned above. There should always be means for younger players to learn there is consequences, and that EVE is dangerous. Taking that away, will take away from the learning experience, and in fact in the long run those players might end up being very frustrated after X time that "all this time I played this game, and it turned out it's dangerous! How would I know?" etc.



They'll know because sooner or later they're going to try and do something and get the saftey warning and wonder what the heck it is. They're going to ask someone in corp, on forums, in help, and they're going to get a lesson. The brave ones will try it, the bear like ones will shrug and go back to whatever they were doing.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Liam Mirren
#435 - 2012-03-23 19:19:32 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Misanth wrote:
That kind of consequences was what I mentioned above. There should always be means for younger players to learn there is consequences, and that EVE is dangerous. Taking that away, will take away from the learning experience, and in fact in the long run those players might end up being very frustrated after X time that "all this time I played this game, and it turned out it's dangerous! How would I know?" etc.



They'll know because sooner or later they're going to try and do something and get the saftey warning and wonder what the heck it is. They're going to ask someone in corp, on forums, in help, and they're going to get a lesson. The brave ones will try it, the bear like ones will shrug and go back to whatever they were doing.


They already get a warning message if they do something that gets you flagged, so what you're advocating is already in place.

Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.
Adunh Slavy
#436 - 2012-03-23 19:26:14 UTC
Liam Mirren wrote:

They already get a warning message if they do something that gets you flagged, so what you're advocating is already in place.


Not really, since they can click ignore/cancel and uncheck the box right then and there as things are now. Noobie presented with a dialog box they may not understand.

This new system means they can't do the action at all until they enable it deliberately. There is no "do it anyway" button on the message.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#437 - 2012-03-23 19:30:31 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Liam Mirren wrote:

They already get a warning message if they do something that gets you flagged, so what you're advocating is already in place.


Not really, since they can click ignore/cancel and uncheck the box right then and there as things are now. Noobie presented with a dialog box they may not understand.

This new system means they can't do the action at all until they enable it deliberately. There is no "do it anyway" button on the message.


What not to understand about the current message that pops up?
equincu ocha
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#438 - 2012-03-23 19:49:42 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Velicia Tuoro wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:

Any news on the return of Flashy Flashy


This was asked in the questions section. CCP Greyscale admitted it was his request to remove that. It was down to them not being a threat in high sec. (unless they are going to gank...) It didn't seem like they were going to add it back.


The exact reasoning was that flashy people are people who can legally kill you, and a -10 is probably a threat (and thus red background) but is not free to agress (therefore not flashy).


If flashy people are people that can kill me, then why isn't my overview permaflashy
Why can't you just reword it to 'flashy people are people who you can legally kill' and give us outlaws our flashy red status again

Flashy Red had been synonymous with pirate/outlaw for such long that it has been ingrained in the EVE vernacular, so much so that even players that weren't around before the great pirate nerf refer to us as flashy red
In lowsec gangs/fleets it's common to hear scouts and FC's calling targets flashy or nonflashy, not because of war target status but to inform us if we will be taking sentry fire or not

It may not seem like it's a big deal that us lowly pirates get back to our former glory, and you know what... it's not, it's just a little thing that a few of us would like back (some of us became a pirates so we could be flashy red)

Baby seal walked into a club
Adunh Slavy
#439 - 2012-03-23 19:52:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

What not to understand about the current message that pops up?



Ask someone new.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Liam Mirren
#440 - 2012-03-23 20:19:34 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Liam Mirren wrote:

They already get a warning message if they do something that gets you flagged, so what you're advocating is already in place.


Not really, since they can click ignore/cancel and uncheck the box right then and there as things are now. Noobie presented with a dialog box they may not understand.

This new system means they can't do the action at all until they enable it deliberately. There is no "do it anyway" button on the message.



"WARNING, IF YOU CLICK YES THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE YOU'LL BE ****** SIDEWAYS. DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE? YES/NO"

How fcking difficult is it?

Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.