Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Kalicor Lightwind
Vigihan Zombie Ninja Space Bears
18
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 23:38:00 -
[301] - Quote
I think the main thing they are considering is grieving potential in high sec group activities like incursions. I could easily see people using the vigilante/suspect flag to flag logi for pvp combat and then come gank them.
Maybe only flag logi if their target is actively engaged in pvp combat, as in being actively shot at or actively shooting at someone? Might need a short "Defender Aggro" flag, that's maybe only a minute long and happens if the logi pilot helps the suspect actively in a fight. Like the gate aggro mechanic: If the vigilante/suspect can't jump a gate because of their recent aggression, then the logis would inherit their pvp flag. Same should happen to logi that rep a wartarget: only flagged for pvp/suspect if they are actively engaged with their war targets.
I mean because really: if they haven't been shot at or shot someone for a minute, how does repping the target hurt anyone? They've obviously escaped any immediate pvp combat threat, and inheriting aggression from long timers is less about "killing the logi that helped your war target/enemy" and more about "let's see how we can abuse these mechanics to gank unsuspecting lemmings.
Plus it's kind of annoying to be banned from public incursions in faction war, even in high (.7, .8+) security friendly space. Same deal with one man war decs against large alliances/corps, most of the time this ostracizes them from any sort of high sec group activity because of the aggression mechanics. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 23:39:00 -
[302] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Tippia wrote:Ziranda Hakuli wrote:Crime Watch from my understanding and a few others was to be ONE of the big highlights for Escalation. Big frackin let down. WeeeellGǪ they gave us some advance warning that it wouldn't be ready at that time. As for your ideas about RR, the first one will already happen (just like now), and the latter one is a bit OTT GÇö instead, the RR will get a suspect flag and be free-for-all so you (and everyone else) can just blow him up. Also, he won't be able to play docking games. Except that you gain the exact same aggression flag when you do something expressly legal like shooting at Outlaws or Rats. How will outlaws be handled? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 23:42:00 -
[303] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Since engaging a suspect causes that suspect to be able to engage you in return it would appear that 1 to 1 flagging is still a part of crimewatch 2.0. Is it not possible for logistics and other forms of RR aiding the person attacking the suspect to simply inherit the same personal aggressions the person they are helping has? It's exactly that kind of 1-to-1 flagging transfer that they want to get away from because it's what has caused the mess that is the current CrimeWatch system. The only reason they're (re)implementing it for defensive purposes is because it would be hugely imbalanced if they didn't. The flagging is only there to let the criminal defend himself. While I understand the need for simplicity, making a tactic a stupid thing to do to the point of all but explicitly removing it seems bad. That seems to be what's happening for suspect aggressing neutral RR. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8585
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 23:46:00 -
[304] - Quote
Rara Yariza wrote:Under the new mechanics you steal and get suspect flag = everyone can shoot you without consequences and without you doing something to them that causes an aggression flag, this is just like null. If it were like null, I'd be able to take on all comers as would my team mates. I would also expect to have an SC or two dropped on me. None of that will happen.
Quote:This situation is only possible as they are changing the mechanic so you get an aggression flag to everyone, whether you did something that affected them or not. Sure, but the flipside of that is that if I manage to get a proper canflip in, my associates (and anyone else who'd like to join in) can come and blow the target up without repercussions. In addition, as existing criminal and outlaw flagging shows, people are in general rather apathetic about pursuing free legitimate targets GÇö corp mates will most likely still be the larger threat.
Quote:CCP are saying it is ok to do this as they will consider stealing as 'bad'. GǪwhich is no different than now since they are already saying that stealing is GÇ£badGÇ¥. The moral judgement was made back when theft flagging was introduced GÇö it is not something they suddenly add in or change with CW2.0.
Pipa Porto wrote:Except that you gain the exact same aggression flag when you do something expressly legal like shooting at Outlaws or Rats. ? What are you referring to? You don't get (nor will you get) any suspect flags for doing those. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Antisocial Malkavian
Aliastra Gallente Federation
202
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 23:48:00 -
[305] - Quote
sorry, Im not reading 10+ pages from when the CCP last spoke that I know of, but what HE said was to the effect that neutral repping would be good to go, did that change? http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Antisocial Malkavian
Aliastra Gallente Federation
202
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 23:50:00 -
[306] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[quote=Rara Yariza]I would also expect to have an SC or two dropped on me. None of that will happen.
Splittin them hairs mighty thin when youre saying the only difference is you cant bring cap ships lol
cause you WILL be able to "take on all comers" once youre flagged unless theyre dropping the idea that anyone can shoot you when flagged. http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 23:57:00 -
[307] - Quote
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:sorry, Im not reading 10+ pages from when the CCP last spoke that I know of, but what HE said was to the effect that neutral repping would be good to go, did that change? Last I saw in this thread from Greyscale was the idea that RR helping someone aggressing a suspect would get a suspect flag. And while I'm thinking about it, what happens with spider tanking or similar strategies where those fighting the suspect give remote assistance to each other? Do all involved wind up as suspects? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8585
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:00:00 -
[308] - Quote
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:cause you WILL be able to "take on all comers" once youre flagged unless theyre dropping the idea that anyone can shoot you when flagged. GǪbut only after they've chosen to do so, not because I want to get rid of them, and I can't go after all their support (only some, depending on what they do with the remote-support flagging), and I can get far better support while doing so.
Tyberius Franklin wrote:And while I'm thinking about it, what happens with spider tanking or similar strategies where those fighting the suspect give remote assistance to each other. Do all involved wind up as suspects? Yes, but that's where the GÇ£safetyGÇ¥ system is supposed to kick in and keep you from triggering flags you don't want to trigger. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Rara Yariza
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:01:00 -
[309] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Rara Yariza wrote:Under the new mechanics you steal and get suspect flag = everyone can shoot you without consequences and without you doing something to them that causes an aggression flag, this is just like null. If it were like null, I'd be able to take on all comers as would my team mates. I would also expect to have an SC or two dropped on me. None of that will happen. Quote:This situation is only possible as they are changing the mechanic so you get an aggression flag to everyone, whether you did something that affected them or not. Sure, but the flipside of that is that if I manage to get a proper canflip in, my associates (and anyone else who'd like to join in) can come and blow the target up without repercussions. In addition, as existing criminal and outlaw flagging shows, people are in general rather apathetic about pursuing free legitimate targets GÇö corp mates will most likely still be the larger threat. Quote:CCP are saying it is ok to do this as they will consider stealing as 'bad'. GǪwhich is no different than now since they are already saying that stealing is GÇ£badGÇ¥. The moral judgement was made back when theft flagging was introduced GÇö it is not something they suddenly add in or change with CW2.0. Pipa Porto wrote:Except that you gain the exact same aggression flag when you do something expressly legal like shooting at Outlaws or Rats. ? What are you referring to? You don't get (nor will you get) any suspect flags for doing those.
In the case of aggression mechanics though it will be like null for a person with a suspect flag and not for the other guy.
I understand you can do this and that, but these changes still provide a vastly more imbalanced outcome that helps defenders. My original point and question to CCP was basically 'are introducing these changes that cause a larger imbalance part of how you want EvE to be?' If CCP sticks their head in here I'd love it if they could take the time to say.
We can keep going over this but as it is now the aggression flag doesn't denote a 'bad' thing. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:03:00 -
[310] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:And while I'm thinking about it, what happens with spider tanking or similar strategies where those fighting the suspect give remote assistance to each other. Do all involved wind up as suspects? Yes, but that's where the GÇ£safetyGÇ¥ system is supposed to kick in and keep you from triggering flags you don't want to trigger. Forgot about that, but that means any remote assistance is out of the picture for those with safeties enabled, even between pilots that have chosen to aggress the suspect. This seems less than optimal. |
|
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
427
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:04:00 -
[311] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Except that you gain the exact same aggression flag when you do something expressly legal like shooting at Outlaws or Rats. ? What are you referring to? You don't get (nor will you get) any suspect flags for doing those.
Sorry, I quoted the wrong part of your post.
Right now, there are 2 flags, the GCC (red) and the Agression Flag (Yellow). The aggression flag isn't a criminal one, because there are ways to get it without committing any crime, like shooting an Outlaw or helping someone who's doing the same. Shooting someone who's gone GCC also gives you an Aggression Flag, though it's not currently particularly important, as it won't last more than 20-30s longer than that pilot's GCC. All of these aggression flags are identical to the one you get from flipping a can.
Now, with this new "2 flag" system, the GCC (felon) looks like it will stay roughly the same. Now, with only the Suspect flag left, what flag do you give someone who shoots an outlaw to indicate that the Outlaw can shoot them back? It's now a 3 flag system when it used to be a two flag one. Now, aiding someone who's shooting an outlaw will give you the suspect flag, because there's no individual flagging (well, except for the new "X can shoot me, because I shot him legally" flag) making you a criminal (what?).
One way to get rid of the necessity of the third, individual aggression flag would be to make everyone who shoots someone else a suspect (I think that's silly), another would be to not flag the person shooting the outlaw with anything (so an outlaw defending themselves gets CONCORDed, also silly). -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8585
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:12:00 -
[312] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:All of these aggression flags are identical to the one you get from flipping a can. Not quite. The one you get for stealing is still something you get in response to an actual crime (which is the same reason you get one for stealing under CW2.0). It differs from the others in that it's a group flagging rather than just a player-to-player flag as with attacking outlaws and an utterly irrelevant and mechanically functionless relic that you get for shooting rats.
Quote:One way to get rid of the necessity of the third, individual aggression flag would be to make everyone who shoots someone else a suspect (I think that's silly), another would be to not flag the person shooting the outlaw with anything (so an outlaw defending themselves gets CONCORDed, also silly). I was always partial to the idea of them implementing GÇ£limited engagementsGÇ¥ GÇö ad hoc groups that had temporary wardec mechanics tied to them.
It would still be a three-flag system, but that third flag would let you dynamically add participants as they got involved without it spreading to everyone in the galaxy (and could double as a base mechanic for formal duels). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Antisocial Malkavian
Aliastra Gallente Federation
202
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:22:00 -
[313] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote:sorry, Im not reading 10+ pages from when the CCP last spoke that I know of, but what HE said was to the effect that neutral repping would be good to go, did that change? Last I saw in this thread from Greyscale was the idea that RR helping someone aggressing a suspect would get a suspect flag. And while I'm thinking about it, what happens with spider tanking or similar strategies where those fighting the suspect give remote assistance to each other? Do all involved wind up as suspects?
See last I saw was the quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: As to "invicible logis", in the current design yes, that is the case, but only in the scenario where you've already done something to become a suspect. There's a point at which we have to say "look, you've done something 'illegal', this fight isn't going to be fair, sorry" if we want to avoid the complexity of the current system.
came out of
http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Antisocial Malkavian
Aliastra Gallente Federation
202
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:23:00 -
[314] - Quote
bah http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Rara Yariza
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:27:00 -
[315] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: As to "invicible logis", in the current design yes, that is the case, but only in the scenario where you've already done something to become a suspect. There's a point at which we have to say "look, you've done something 'illegal', this fight isn't going to be fair, sorry" if we want to avoid the complexity of the current system.
Well bummer, so it looks like CCP do want imbalanced gameplay |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8585
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:28:00 -
[316] - Quote
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:See last I saw was the quote [GǪ] came out of The GÇ£current designGÇ¥ he's talking about there is the idea presented at page 1 GÇö that they have a single, non-transferable flag between suspects and attackers. The idea Tyberius is talking about was the one mentioned later, where all kinds of neutral support would flag you suspect.
Quote:so after they trigger this (what used to be) "everyone kill this guy" flag ISNT that anymore? That part is still intact GÇö what (might) have changed is how others might interact with the suspect and his attackers. What I'm referring to, though, is the difference between being a free-for-all target that can shoot back and being in null, where you don't have to wait to shoot back since you can just shoot first (and get ample support in doing so). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:28:00 -
[317] - Quote
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:See last I saw was the quote CCP Greyscale wrote: As to "invicible logis", in the current design yes, that is the case, but only in the scenario where you've already done something to become a suspect. There's a point at which we have to say "look, you've done something 'illegal', this fight isn't going to be fair, sorry" if we want to avoid the complexity of the current system.
See here
CCP Greyscale wrote: We had a discussion this morning about the specific case of people RRing vigilantes. We're currently considering treating it like all other "neutral RR" situations under the new system, ie suspect-flagging you if you RR a vigilante, as this seems to iron out a lot of the wrinkles here and makes it more consistent with the rest of the design.
|
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
427
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 00:32:00 -
[318] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:All of these aggression flags are identical to the one you get from flipping a can. Not quite. The one you get for stealing is still something you get in response to an actual crime (which is the same reason you get one for stealing under CW2.0). It differs from the others in that it's a group flagging rather than just a player-to-player flag as with attacking outlaws and an utterly irrelevant and mechanically functionless relic that you get for shooting rats. Quote:One way to get rid of the necessity of the third, individual aggression flag would be to make everyone who shoots someone else a suspect (I think that's silly), another would be to not flag the person shooting the outlaw with anything (so an outlaw defending themselves gets CONCORDed, also silly). I was always partial to the idea of them implementing GÇ£limited engagementsGÇ¥ GÇö ad hoc groups that had temporary wardec mechanics tied to them. It would still be a three-flag system, but that third flag would let you dynamically add participants as they got involved without it spreading to everyone in the galaxy (and could double as a base mechanic for formal duels).
The current aggression flag for can flipping is a flag to the affected party (the corp owns the can, as it owns just about everything floating in space), just like the aggression flag for shooting outlaws is, as is the aggression flag for repping WTs.
That would be fine with me. I just have a problem with petty theft making you a de facto outlaw, as the Suspect flag does.
It's similar to the difference between Civil tort and Criminal law. Some wrongs are considered to be private wrongs, where the wronged party must take action to gain redress, while some are considered to be public wrongs, where the state takes over to punish the offender. Where each wrong gets sorted is up to the individual legal system (Rome included Murder in the private wrong category, the US includes theft in the public wrong category, for example), but I can't think of a legal system anywhere or anytime that allowed anyone to take action against someone for a private wrong against an unaffiliated third party. Current aggression mechanics have CONCORD punishing Public Wrongs and allowing players to deal with Private wrongs privately. The suspect flag allows third parties to butt into the resolution of a Private wrong even though they are unaffiliated with the wronged party.
I think some sort of limited engagement system would be a good thing, though I'm at a loss for a way to fairly implement it. But the aggression mechanics we have now are closer to that then the proposed suspect (everyone in local, let's whomp on the can-flipper) flag mechanics. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Antisocial Malkavian
Aliastra Gallente Federation
202
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 01:09:00 -
[319] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote:See last I saw was the quote [GǪ] came out of The GÇ£current designGÇ¥ he's talking about there is the idea presented at page 1 GÇö that they have a single, non-transferable flag between suspects and attackers. The idea Tyberius is talking about was the one mentioned later, where all kinds of neutral support would flag you suspect. Quote:so after they trigger this (what used to be) "everyone kill this guy" flag ISNT that anymore? That part is still intact GÇö what (might) have changed is how others might interact with the suspect and his attackers. What I'm referring to, though, is the difference between being a free-for-all target that can shoot back and being in null, where you don't have to wait to shoot back since you can just shoot first (and get ample support in doing so).
well yea, what Im hoping theyll do is what every other friggin MMO I know of does. If you heal someone in PVP you BECOME PART OF THE FIGHT http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Ohh Yeah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
165
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 01:16:00 -
[320] - Quote
Tippia wrote:It's bad now and will still be be after the change. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Why do you think the act triggers any flags? What do you think the act will do after the change but trigger a flag?
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or just stupid anymore.
Before the new system, stealing triggers a flag.
After the new system, stealing triggers a flag.
Before the new system, only your victim and his corp mates can shoot you.
After the new system, every single pilot in EVE can shoot you.
Tell me how that isn't an arbitrary change in morality - before the new system, stealing from someone gave the victim and their corporation the opportunity to deal with you personally. After the new system, stealing from someone makes you a criminal such that everyone in EVE can shoot at you. That is a change in morality. Before, it was bad in the sense that you were harming a single individual, and they had the opportunity to retaliate. Now, you're committing a crime that warrants all of EVE shooting you. |
|
Gogela
Direct Action LLC.
881
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 03:01:00 -
[321] - Quote
You know... it may just be the case that this is an indirect way of getting more people into lowsec. I mean, by making it harder to perform asshattery in highsec wouldn't that compel asshats to move to low? Personally I'm pretty uninterested in highsec on the whole.
|
Evelyn Meiyi
Meiyi Family Holdings
14
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 03:13:00 -
[322] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote: So your saying that your eliminating one of the four pillars of empire pvp and are replacing it with nothing? Or are you saying that pvp in empire is simply not allowed outside of suciding and war decs - which of course means that if i choose to stay in an npc corp I am completely safe from all non-consensual pvp except for suiciding? Why not just introduce flagging and put the final nail in the coffin of eve being a hardcore game?
When a system is left without balance or control, that system will inevitably fall into anarchy and self-destruct.
Think about it for a moment: every single new player starts out in high-security empire space. They're looking forward to a unique game experience, but before they can even get started, some jerk with a remote repper gathers up four or five of his friends and they sit outside the starter systems blowing the snot out of anyone who flies by.
An experienced player with a remote repper is nigh-indestructible to a new pilot. They don't have the skills, the ship or the modules to fight back. After the sixth time they have to buy a brand-new ship within their first fifteen minutes of play, they're more than likely reconsidering their choice of game.
Facing that kind of obstacle, I certainly would. |
Betrinna Cantis
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 03:16:00 -
[323] - Quote
Ohh Yeah wrote:Tippia wrote:It's bad now and will still be be after the change. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Why do you think the act triggers any flags? What do you think the act will do after the change but trigger a flag?
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or just stupid anymore. Before the new system, stealing triggers a flag. After the new system, stealing triggers a flag. Before the new system, only your victim and his corp mates can shoot you. After the new system, every single pilot in EVE can shoot you. Tell me how that isn't an arbitrary change in morality - before the new system, stealing from someone gave the victim and their corporation the opportunity to deal with you personally. After the new system, stealing from someone makes you a criminal such that everyone in EVE can shoot at you. That is a change in morality. Before, it was bad in the sense that you were harming a single individual, and they had the opportunity to retaliate. Now, you're committing a crime that warrants all of EVE shooting you. Think of it as a "Neighborhood Watch" thing. If someone broke into your house and started to run away with your things, would you not yell at the people closest by to stop the thief? The thief knew what they were doing when they stole,so they should know that all the "neighborhood" is gonna beat you to death with a stick. Sends a message to the rest of the thieves not to screw with you, doesn't it? Alts have been changed to protect the Innocent. You may have mistaken me for someone who cares..... |
Ohh Yeah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
165
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 04:00:00 -
[324] - Quote
Real life examples work poorly in a game where often one person effectively taunts another into throwing the first punch so they can murder them without consequences. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
429
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 04:35:00 -
[325] - Quote
Betrinna Cantis wrote:Ohh Yeah wrote:Tippia wrote:It's bad now and will still be be after the change. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Why do you think the act triggers any flags? What do you think the act will do after the change but trigger a flag?
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or just stupid anymore. Before the new system, stealing triggers a flag. After the new system, stealing triggers a flag. Before the new system, only your victim and his corp mates can shoot you. After the new system, every single pilot in EVE can shoot you. Tell me how that isn't an arbitrary change in morality - before the new system, stealing from someone gave the victim and their corporation the opportunity to deal with you personally. After the new system, stealing from someone makes you a criminal such that everyone in EVE can shoot at you. That is a change in morality. Before, it was bad in the sense that you were harming a single individual, and they had the opportunity to retaliate. Now, you're committing a crime that warrants all of EVE shooting you. Think of it as a "Neighborhood Watch" thing. If someone broke into your house and started to run away with your things, would you not yell at the people closest by to stop the thief? The thief knew what they were doing when they stole,so they should know that all the "neighborhood" is gonna beat you to death with a stick. Sends a message to the rest of the thieves not to screw with you, doesn't it?
If you want to make a real life comparison, do you know what happens to those neighbors after they murder the thief? They go to prison.
In EVE, similarly, they get CONCORDed. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Antisocial Malkavian
Aliastra Gallente Federation
203
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 04:39:00 -
[326] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Betrinna Cantis wrote:Ohh Yeah wrote:Tippia wrote:It's bad now and will still be be after the change. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Why do you think the act triggers any flags? What do you think the act will do after the change but trigger a flag?
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or just stupid anymore. Before the new system, stealing triggers a flag. After the new system, stealing triggers a flag. Before the new system, only your victim and his corp mates can shoot you. After the new system, every single pilot in EVE can shoot you. Tell me how that isn't an arbitrary change in morality - before the new system, stealing from someone gave the victim and their corporation the opportunity to deal with you personally. After the new system, stealing from someone makes you a criminal such that everyone in EVE can shoot at you. That is a change in morality. Before, it was bad in the sense that you were harming a single individual, and they had the opportunity to retaliate. Now, you're committing a crime that warrants all of EVE shooting you. Think of it as a "Neighborhood Watch" thing. If someone broke into your house and started to run away with your things, would you not yell at the people closest by to stop the thief? The thief knew what they were doing when they stole,so they should know that all the "neighborhood" is gonna beat you to death with a stick. Sends a message to the rest of the thieves not to screw with you, doesn't it? If you want to make a real life comparison, do you know what happens to those neighbors after they murder the thief? They go to prison. In EVE, similarly, they get CONCORDed.
Hence why it needs to go http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
429
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 04:51:00 -
[327] - Quote
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Betrinna Cantis wrote:Ohh Yeah wrote:Tippia wrote:It's bad now and will still be be after the change. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Why do you think the act triggers any flags? What do you think the act will do after the change but trigger a flag?
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or just stupid anymore. Before the new system, stealing triggers a flag. After the new system, stealing triggers a flag. Before the new system, only your victim and his corp mates can shoot you. After the new system, every single pilot in EVE can shoot you. Tell me how that isn't an arbitrary change in morality - before the new system, stealing from someone gave the victim and their corporation the opportunity to deal with you personally. After the new system, stealing from someone makes you a criminal such that everyone in EVE can shoot at you. That is a change in morality. Before, it was bad in the sense that you were harming a single individual, and they had the opportunity to retaliate. Now, you're committing a crime that warrants all of EVE shooting you. Think of it as a "Neighborhood Watch" thing. If someone broke into your house and started to run away with your things, would you not yell at the people closest by to stop the thief? The thief knew what they were doing when they stole,so they should know that all the "neighborhood" is gonna beat you to death with a stick. Sends a message to the rest of the thieves not to screw with you, doesn't it? If you want to make a real life comparison, do you know what happens to those neighbors after they murder the thief? They go to prison. In EVE, similarly, they get CONCORDed. Hence why it needs to go
At one point, EVE didn't have an effective CONCORD. It was a bad idea. The Zombies in Yulai proved that. HS without CONCORD means that you cannot effectively do logistical work in HS, so all Logistics would happen via JF (or Titan bridged Freighter) in lowsec, knocking everyone who can't afford a JF out of the hauling game, leading to nobody moving anything anywhere except for large groups with logistical wings organized well enough to handle it.
Removing CONCORD is a stupid idea. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Ohh Yeah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
166
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 05:12:00 -
[328] - Quote
I don't think he meant that CONCORD needed to go. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
430
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 05:14:00 -
[329] - Quote
Ohh Yeah wrote:I don't think he meant that CONCORD needed to go.
He's advocated it elsewhere, and plain reading only allows CONCORD to be the antecedent of his pronoun. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Antisocial Malkavian
Aliastra Gallente Federation
203
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 05:14:00 -
[330] - Quote
Ohh Yeah wrote:I don't think he meant that CONCORD needed to go.
Yeah I actually do.
Its a stupid, kneejerk response to a problem and CCP didnt think it out when they implimented it (like usual) http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |