Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Domoso
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 15:30:00 -
[1]
The role of confiscation and penalty should be a player role, not Concord. By making those players wanting to enforce such rules and removing that role from Concord, it would make hi.sec a little more seedy and player interactive while maintaining hi.sec's relative safe haven status.
For instance, players could 'apply' to become enforcers. Once a smuggler is scanned, an automatic period and notice can be sent demanding the jetting of contraband. If the period lapses the enforcers could attack the smuggler without being aggro'ed and without intervention from Concord. Perhaps, players would have to submit to scans: The enforcer notifies the player they are to stop and submit to scan. If they're clean they are allowed to go. If they have not submitted to scanning in a period of time the enforcer could 'chase' them, scan them then attack them if the player does not jet their cargo.
This could be expanded to other contraband for which there may be player demand but which would be banned in hi.sec. Certain categories of equipment could be made part of this. That is to say that while certain types of equipment would be legal in low.sec/0.0, they are disallowed in hi.sec.
Enforcers, while in their role, would be allowed certain leeway for stronger ships, more powerful weaponry provided to them by concord for this specific purpose with limitations imposed, such as not being allowed to leave a specific system and/or it's adjacent systems. Perhaps, in this way the player would have to have certain security status and apply to system and/or regional "authorities" before being allowed to participate in such a role.
Where there are no players "registered" or present for enforcement roles, Concord could assume its usual enforcement role or not.
While I do not intend this suggestion to be a blue print or specific enough to implement, I put it out as an idea for others to expound upon. However, I believe, though I don't know, that it would fit well into the framework of the program through a conglomeration of already available features that I have seen in-game. And I believe it would add an interesting aspect to the game that is sorely missing.
|
Saint Lazarus
Spiorad ag fanaiocht
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 15:37:00 -
[2]
Allowing players to attack players holding contraband = Ace idea
But the whole scanning system etc no. Someone asked me if they could scan my ship my immediate answer would be
Turn on MWD, approach gate, jump
in a fast ship that takes seconds. It just wouldnt work.
In fact if you werent AFK smuggling you would be warping to zero on every gate, where exactly would an "enforcer" catch one such player?
Enforcer camps on busy trading spots? then smugglers use recons or cov ops.
Cool system in theory but probably be totally mehhh in practice -----------------
My EvE Comic
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 15:40:00 -
[3]
Features and Ideas forum is your friend
As per the op, the overall idea of players enforcing instead of Faction navies is much better than current mechanics. More player control is nearly always a good thing.
|
Domoso
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 15:52:00 -
[4]
Then lets close this thread here. I'll repost in Features and Ideas forum.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 17:53:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Domoso
For instance, players could 'apply' to become enforcers. Once a smuggler is scanned, an automatic period and notice can be sent demanding the jetting of contraband. If the period lapses the enforcers could attack the smuggler without being aggro'ed and without intervention from Concord. Perhaps, players would have to submit to scans: The enforcer notifies the player they are to stop and submit to scan. If they're clean they are allowed to go. If they have not submitted to scanning in a period of time the enforcer could 'chase' them, scan them then attack them if the player does not jet their cargo.
So essentially:
"I want to be able to stop a player ship and scan his cargo, so that my ganker friends at my side can freely target it and open fire if there is a interesting cargo"
Nice.
You want them to disable the modules to get a better result?
|
|
CCP Zymurgist
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 17:55:00 -
[6]
Moved to Features and Ideas discussion.
Zymurgist Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us |
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 17:56:00 -
[7]
Originally by: XXSketchxx Features and Ideas forum is your friend
As per the op, the overall idea of players enforcing instead of Faction navies is much better than current mechanics. More player control is nearly always a good thing.
It is horrible as it is full of loopholes that will help ganking in high sec.
|
Keenan 2
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 19:27:00 -
[8]
one problem with the gate scanners is they can't see inside of containers, effectively making them useless (at least I think they can't. I AFK hauled some contraband that was in a can 27 jumps through highsec)
|
Domoso
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 19:48:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Domoso on 30/08/2009 19:49:31
Originally by: Venkul Mul
So essentially:
"I want to be able to stop a player ship and scan his cargo, so that my ganker friends at my side can freely target it and open fire if there is a interesting cargo"
Nice.
You want them to disable the modules to get a better result?
Perhaps the enforcer could have a way to drop a shield bubble around the ship to be scanned?
Granted there is room for abuse of authority. However, we face that in life, day in day out. Why not here? Penalties for abuse would have to be quite severe obviously, such as loss of security status, effectively booting the player out of hi.sec effectively jailing the jailer with the inmates in lowsec, something to serve as a deterent.
In order to become an enforcer, perhaps require a uber high sec. standing with Concord. This would certainly weed out those just looking for a joy ride. And conversely, the rewards for successfully serving as enforcer equally high. Perhaps have a term of service or quota, once successfully fulfilled the now ex-enforcer is granted certain monetary or material or sec. status compensation sort of like a pension for good service.
Perhaps, there is a means to ensure more honesty but, I don't think we should work to eliminate the possibility of corruption. It just needs to be tempered in a way to make the system workable.
Criticism is good, but lets also try to come up with ideas. I'm not that experienced with this game. I don't pretend to know well how it works but, this is a concept I'd like to see eventually in the game. On the surface it seems very doable.
|
Domoso
|
Posted - 2009.08.30 19:53:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Domoso on 30/08/2009 19:54:57
Originally by: Keenan 2 one problem with the gate scanners is they can't see inside of containers, effectively making them useless (at least I think they can't. I AFK hauled some contraband that was in a can 27 jumps through highsec)
I can't speak about how the scanners work. But, the enforcers may require a specialized ship with specialized modules that only work in those ships allowing them a fool-proof scanner. Concord could allow the enforcer the use of the ship while the player is in the enforcer role. This way the modules and ships would not be useful for anything else. Or, in the same way the gate scanners know there is contraband, then that could be used to notify the enforcers.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |