|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 21:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GM Homonoia wrote:Alright, instead of arguing this any further. Here one for you guys. I am sure that most of you understand our goals, now assuming you had ZERO development time, how would YOU word a policy that achieves these goals? Go back to the way everyone (including some of you guys, going by old petition quotes) thought it worked: In the starter and carreer agent systems, all forms of aggression games and unprovoked attacks are prohibited. Outside of the starter systems, anything goes. That is the policy. It means the distinction between rookie and vet becomes completely irrelevant, and it removes the ability to use rookie-like characters to hide behind the fear of the banhammer while still giving the rookies a safe zone to play in. The game-design part is to punch the NPE team in the soul until they give rookie accounts a big stonking GÇ£Here There Be DragonsGÇ¥ popup the first time they try to activate the gate out of those systems and until they create a mission where the theft mechanics are explained. If certain forms of rookie-griefing are rampant (e.g. the SOE arc), then tell the PvE group to adjust those missions to no longer feature the kinds of content that might trick the rookies GÇö e.g. no required lootable items. This is not a policy GÇö it's more along the lines of entertainment (for you, not being on the receiving end of said soul-punching). The solution isn't arbitrary, opaque, unobtainable, and potentially harsh rules with a gillion different (equally arbitrary, opaque and unknowable) edge cases referring to (occasionally incorrectly named) specific tactics (that the newbies won't know about or understand, and which the griefers will modify to work in a different way). The solution is a education GÇö for everyone GÇö about an easily available and categorically true rule set.
On the money |
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 18:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ive read this threed over and over every post
And that fact is ive still got no idea what can and cant be done I still only know if i break the rules Its my ***
Fact is we need more CCP imput on this issue and i hope thay see that just as clearly as i do
|
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 18:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
GM Homonoia wrote:RubyPorto wrote: b) continue short list of Exceptions, like initiating a suicide gank, or whatever. Take these from the publicly viewable information used in your in house Newbie definition
That right there is the problem. We can probably write a list the size of a dictionary. So we will stick to case by case basis. The only issue left is the wording of the evelopedia page. I will see if I can raise the discussion on that internally, but a new wording may take a while.
But she also said this a few pages later |
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 18:39:00 -
[4] - Quote
this link deals with can fliping
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Can_Flipping
if you follow the wording all pvp in rookie systems expect for wardes is offlimits
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Rookie_Systems
This is the problem this is what need to be cleared up Because the Gm Clearly Said that it isnt True |
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 05:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:RubyPorto wrote:I don't frankly care how the GMs define a rookie internally, because we're discussing an externally facing rule. I can't think of any "externally facing" rule that wouldn't be gamed by people to get innocent gankers such as yourself banned. I can. Ban (and enforce the ban) on ALL "messing with" of ALL characters in Rookie systems. Quote:Here are a few ideas on what classifies as a rookie, using information we can determine by just looking at the character and the ship that they fly, without having to know account details or play history. Define a rookie as any character you encounter who satisfies 3 of the following conditions:
- Is flying a T1 frigate
- Is younger than three months
- Has fitting modules fitted (e.g.: coprocessor, MAPC, power diagnostic system)
- Is mining in a combat ship, or has weapons mounted on a mining ship (e.g.: someone trying to do the combat tutorials in a Navitas)
- Has civilian modules fitted
- Is carrying cargo only spawned in tutorial missions (encrypted codex or some such)
- Is a member of a starter NPC corporation
Of course, any definition that we as players come up with will necessarily conflict with whatever definition the GMs are using. At least this definition realistically allows any player to determine "rookie status" through in-game inspection of the other pilot. It can be gamed by having an older character flying a frigate with civilian modules and a PDS fitted: but then if you intentionally aggress a 4yo character flying a merlin with civilian modules fitted, you deserve what you get. That is a heck of a list of things, and while requiring both a ship scanner and a cargo scanner (and eidetic memory of the tutorial missions) is fairly onerous. That definition is a definition that works. It's clear, it's knowable by publicly viewable information, and it probably* covers the people we want to protect. As for conflicting with GMs definition, that's fine. So long as the public set of protected person entirely includes the private set of protected persons, it's fine. The point is to give fair warning that you're doing something that makes the GMs mad. The ideal is to simply protect all those in the public set so that people don't go ganking to probe out what the private set is. *The GMs would have to figure out if there are any people in need of protection that wouldn't fall under your definition. If there are, they'd need to alter your definition to cover them
Well i personaly dont belave the guy flying a faction fit bc or bs a few weeks or even days into the game should be concidered a rookie ... |
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Cutter Isaacson wrote:To your first point regarding rookie missions, I honestly see no reason for an older player to go back to do them, and thus no reason to not ban them from those systems. Well, aside from the reasons RubyPorto already mentioned (doing other factions' rookie missions, skipping them at first and then relenting and going back for them, rookie systems being school systems and thus a local source of skill books etc), there's also the other side of the fence: there's no actual harm in letting those older players in there. The protection they could get from this one dead-end system (which most of them are, iirc) is no different than what they'd get if they just stayed docked. Once you've run the tutorial missions in there, the system itself has nothing left to offer, so all there is in it is the one school station and that's it. You could conceivably mine a little, but the belts in there are rather tiny and only contain veldspar, and/or could just be outright removed if that's a problem (it wouldn't make any difference to the rookies if the belts are there or whether they get sucked dry 15 minutes after downtime by Hulks who want 15 minutes of protected mining). Sure, you could park your hideously expensive officer-fit pirate BS in there but to what end? You can't do anything with it without taking it out of the protected system where it would get ganked. For those players, the systems just become huge-ass stations with particularly nasty docking games (in a regular station, you can just redock when you pop out and notice the gank squad outsideGǪ popping outside a system means arriving 15km from the gate and having to make your way back). You can't hide from the game inside a rookie system as an older player, because the game is no longer there for you. So extending the security of the system to non-rookies has pretty much zero effect.
100% agree with this expect in the case of Arnon CCPs newist addition to the rookies systems list With the list expanding and threats of places like Hek being next its nolonger is just about a few deadends system that offer nothing to older players
Will allways be on the side of a clear deffnation in this, i feel its the right ever player to know exactly what is aganced the rules
|
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 05:59:00 -
[7] - Quote
Rhedea wrote:Cistuvaert ahh home sweet home such a dangerous place to be I left quickly. No hand holding back then. Seat of the pants learning. Noobs are those still on the rookie channel, and should have icon to show it. Like a round icon ( ) instead of the normal [ ] Like leaner plates (L) Anyway as long as they stay in High Sec they should be kinda safe. A sec hit of -10 for shooting a ( ) in High Sec. A Ban for shooting in a starting system. No if and or buts.
Or even just there own Corp
After a set amount of time thay would be booted form the corp or be able to leave bye choice Leaveing would move tham to there standered npc corp
This would be a easy way for ev1 to know there a rookie protected bye CCP
but may take some dev time =( |
Grinder2210
Kaotic Intentions Cold Hand of Shadow
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 08:24:00 -
[8] - Quote
GM Homonoia wrote:Alright, instead of arguing this any further. Here one for you guys. I am sure that most of you understand our goals, now assuming you had ZERO development time, how would YOU word a policy that achieves these goals?
I would give the players anything thay could use 1month 2 months 1 year
Dosnt matter the number what matters is have a clear line we shouldnt cross
Of corse gms would still need to work case to case Some people killed under said number may have more than one accout more than one toon on there account and while thay may be playing on a young toon there still not bye any means a rookie
That part would be for the gms to decide But at least with this number a player would be able to know without any dought if i attack this person i may have bad things happen to my account
Also ide like to ask about corp agro for instance ive gain corp aggrestion to a person in a player owned corp this person isnt a rookie but is doing a mission with or for a rookie there both fireing on me Not killing the rookie may keep me form being able to blow up the none rookie should i worry about a ban here ?
|
|
|
|