Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
As noted by Jester/Garth in his recent blog http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2012/10/know-what-you-dont-know.html there has been alot of hand-wringing about what changes crimewatch is actually going to make. However, truth be told its all an academic exercise at this point as other changes made by ccp in recent time have rendered Crimewatch pointless on arrival.
In order for Crimewatch to have purpose there must first be actual crimes for it to impact. What are these crimes? Well in highsec it would be can flipping and ninja salvaging/wreck flipping. CCP, however, has largely eliminated both of these activities from the game. Specifically, the Noctis basically rendered ninja salvaging/wreck flipping obsolete, while the recent barge changes have put can flippers out of business due to the large ore holds of the retriever and mack. So the question becomes, at this point why implement crimewatch at all? Its not needed in low sec where everyone can shot everyone else anyway. While in highsec, CCP has eliminated most points of Player to Player conflicts on a ship to ship basis. Sure there is still suiciding - but concord already takes care of that, and war decing -but that is outside of crimewatch, but every other point of conflict is gone or rendered so marginal as to be effectively the same thing. In fact, IMO the only place where you see the opportunity for crimewatch to have an impact is outside of hubs like jita where there are cans strewn left and right. But these cans are left around solely for the purpose of either gaining consensual fights or ganking newbes who dont know to leave them alone. Hence the implementation of crimewatch will have counter-intuitive effects - it will not add consequences to crime since crime has largely been eliminated through ship design but it will suppress consensual pvp (unless of course ccp adds a flagging system making this even more wow like ) while hurting new players who touch cans and suddenly find themselves aggro to everyone outside of jita.
Of course if crimewatch is to have meaning, ccp could make can mining and ninja salvaging viable again by nerfing ore holds and making it possible to tractor other people wrecks, but these changes would probably cause too much whining so its probably better if CCP simply scraps crimewatch before it causes a decrease in whatever little pvp highsec has left. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1265
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Eve is dying too, right?
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
So you say there is no crime to be watched. Let's see how it goes after crimewatch is active. Until then: speculation. |
Alice Saki
8695
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ack He does kinda have a point xD Scottish Interweb Spaceshippy Person, Very Easily Confused. I like to show my Love by Smashing people in the face with a big Hammer.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1590
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. |
|
Cat Troll
Systems Federation Coalition of Galactic Unity
12
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
Have fun surviving 5 minutes without any kind of police in high sec. The main changes with crimewatch are under the hood, it became too complex and reliant on other parts of itself to the point where CCP are worried about changing anything about it, because it might affect other things. Lolwut: "Yes, you kids don't know how lucky you have it. These days noobs get given free tackle ships for PvP but back in the old days the only tackle ships we were given were our pods. We had to use them to bump their rookie ships out of alignment to stop them warping off." |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
717
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:52:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so.
You're doing this on purpose, no? Why not just write: dev blog incoming somewhere next week you'll be pleasantly surprised, instead of the thing people from now on will focus on: CCP will remove "attack if aggressed" from our POS, red alert! Panic all!! Dogs & cats will be living together etc.
/shakes head. Hi, I'm CCP Arrow, I screwed up the.. ummm... |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2484
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
I believe the overall goal is to reduce combat opportunities that arise due to confusing rules or lack of game mechanic knowledge, while others steps (not as heavily talked about) are being taken to introduce mechanics that make it easier to instigate combat in a very up front and easy to understand manner (crimewatch, bounty system, war dec tweaks, etc.).
I'll wait until I see the total package before I complain overly much. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2484
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 13:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. You're doing this on purpose, no? Why not just write: dev blog incoming somewhere next week you'll be pleasantly surprised, instead of the thing people from now on will focus on: CCP will remove "attack if aggressed" from our POS, red alert! Panic all!! Dogs & cats will be living together etc. /shakes head.
That option was removed quite some time ago. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
717
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Pak Narhoo wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. You're doing this on purpose, no? Why not just write: dev blog incoming somewhere next week you'll be pleasantly surprised, instead of the thing people from now on will focus on: CCP will remove "attack if aggressed" from our POS, red alert! Panic all!! Dogs & cats will be living together etc. /shakes head. The "attack if aggression" option was removed quite some time ago. Note this is not the same as "attack if aggressed".
/me goes back under his rock.... Hi, I'm CCP Arrow, I screwed up the.. ummm... |
|
John Ratcliffe
Sausy Sausages
50
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:06:00 -
[11] - Quote
The idea that the Noctis stops ninja looting is ret@rded. It doesn't and it continues to this day.
What would stop ninja looting would be to prevent any ship not in fleet from warping into a mission room. I'm talking stricctly about Lvl 1-4 missions here. The men waved their hats, the ladies their umbrellas. One felt they would have liked to touch the steel muscles of the most courageous champions since antiquity. Who will carry off the first prize, entering the pantheon where only supermen may go? |
Gorn Arming
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:06:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. It's dependent on the day of the week, right? I always thought POS mechanics were basically Fizzbin. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
907
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:10:00 -
[13] - Quote
I agree with the OP's sentiments.
I think this only justifies further the need for a simpler crime watch though. However, I think the simpler crime watch is going to cause an age where it isn't in the interests of the petty criminal in EVE (hi sec criminal, vs low sec criminals) to be criminals anymore.
The Low Sec criminals need some love under the new crime watch. And I am watching very carefully what they do there.
There are also some very serious concerns about the state of grabbing loot from an enemy wreck at the moment. How is that being addressed? Because taking someones wreck will set you red to everyone, which is clearly stupid.
Also, it was mentioned _possibly_ that suspect flags would earn you gate aggression in low sec. Which would be freakin even more profoundly horrible, because that means anyone grabbing anyones wreck in low sec, including Faction warfare pilots, including grabbing the wreck of the person whom just tried to kill you and lost, would set you off to have GCC.
There are many things that have been thrown around about the Crimewatch 2.0 that are needing severe examination of why they are acting the way they are.
Anyways, I wait for the devblog.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Myxx
Minmatar Death Squad Broken Chains Alliance
604
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. How do you respond to the accusation you specifically want to make Highsec completely safe with no risk whatsoever? |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1603
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
Myxx wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. How do you respond to the accusation you specifically want to make Highsec completely safe with no risk whatsoever?
If we wanted to do that then we would've spent a month putting in code that stopped you from committing crimes in the first place, rather than a year overhauling the system that gives interesting consequences for committing crimes. |
|
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
100
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:31:00 -
[16] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If we wanted to do that then we would've spent a month putting in code that stopped you from committing crimes in the first place, rather than a year overhauling the system that gives interesting consequences for committing crimes.
CCP Greyscale: 'Hmm, what should the message be for preventing shooting other players...'
*types* "Concord has jammed your guns, you cannot fire on this hulk when in high security space."
Seems legit O_o
but seriously, I don't get how the faction police can jam a cloaking device while you are warping around high sec at 8 AU/second |
Idris Helion
University of Caille Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:32:00 -
[17] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:However, truth be told its all an academic exercise at this point as other changes made by ccp in recent time have rendered Crimewatch pointless on arrival.
A bunch of freighter pilots in Uedama would probably disagree with you.
|
Idris Helion
University of Caille Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:The "attack if aggression" option was removed quite some time ago. Note this is not the same as "attack if aggressed".
I think the only two POS defense options now are "Attack if at war" and "Attack if security level < x". I think all POS's will defend themselves if aggressed, regardless of the settings on the defense tab of the Management screen.
|
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1489
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:42:00 -
[19] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. "Attack if aggression"
...does this mean you fixed your own POS shooting at you when you have a fight outside the POS bubble? TK is recruiting |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
32
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:49:00 -
[20] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so.
Honestly, I dont know what you mean by this question - if you are talking about a station then its guns will shoot at somebody in highsec if they get gcc which is pointless in highsec as you get killed by concord anyway. If you are talking about a pos - well then it will shoot at somebody where the player is aggro to the corp (I think) - but i didnt understand crimewatch to be about pos mechanics - but lets say crimewatch is somehow related to pos mechanics - the true issue is how a person acquires aggro and there simply are very few opportunities to acquire aggro against another player without concord blowing up your ship. As it stands now there is: war decing, can flipinging, ninja wreck flipping, suiciding and awocking. Of these war dec and awocking are outside of crimewatch, suiciding results in a visit by concord and wreck and can flipping no longer exist since the opportunity to do them has been marginalized. So changing pos mechanics is kinda pointless since there is no really opportunity for a person to acquire aggro.
Of course if you are playing with the station guns - then crimewatch is really a change to low sec mechanics - which is not something that was ever mentioned in any of the crimewatch presentations as far as i know. |
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
33
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:51:00 -
[21] - Quote
John Ratcliffe wrote:The idea that the Noctis stops ninja looting is ret@rded. It doesn't and it continues to this day.
What would stop ninja looting would be to prevent any ship not in fleet from warping into a mission room. I'm talking stricctly about Lvl 1-4 missions here.
Doh - of course it didnt stop it entirely - there is some amount going on, just as there is still some fool out there can mining - but the changes marginalized the activity to the point of irrelevance just the way buggy whips, while still being made are not much of a factor in modern society. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
33
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:53:00 -
[22] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Myxx wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. How do you respond to the accusation you specifically want to make Highsec completely safe with no risk whatsoever? If we wanted to do that then we would've spent a month putting in code that stopped you from committing crimes in the first place, rather than a year overhauling the system that gives interesting consequences for committing crimes.
Again - what crimes are there to be committed? Putting aside scamming, market games and stealing from corps - which are outside of crimewatch - where is the potential criminal interaction between players that you feel needs consequences? |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1603
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 14:59:00 -
[23] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:
If we wanted to do that then we would've spent a month putting in code that stopped you from committing crimes in the first place, rather than a year overhauling the system that gives interesting consequences for committing crimes.
CCP Greyscale: 'Hmm, what should the message be for preventing shooting other players...' *types* "Concord has jammed your guns, you cannot fire on this hulk when in high security space." Seems legit O_obut seriously, I don't get how the faction police can jam a cloaking device while you are warping around high sec at 8 AU/second
Jove tech
Skippermonkey wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so explain to me under what conditions a starbase with just "attack if aggression" set would fire on a player under the current implementation of Crimewatch, and how you as a player would go about predicting its likely behavior (before we removed that option, of course).
PS For anyone concerned about whether or not we've done any design work for this, I recommend waiting for the blog to come out some time in the next week or so. "Attack if aggression" ...does this mean you fixed your own POS shooting at you when you have a fight outside the POS bubble?
If by "fixed" you mean "removed that stupid 'skynet' tickbox" then yes
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Honestly, I dont know what you mean by this question - if you are talking about a station then its guns will shoot at somebody in highsec if they get gcc which is pointless in highsec as you get killed by concord anyway. If you are talking about a pos - well then it will shoot at somebody where the player is aggro to the corp (I think) - but i didnt understand crimewatch to be about pos mechanics - but lets say crimewatch is somehow related to pos mechanics - the true issue is how a person acquires aggro and there simply are very few opportunities to acquire aggro against another player without concord blowing up your ship. As it stands now there is: war decing, can flipinging, ninja wreck flipping, suiciding and awocking. Of these war dec and awocking are outside of crimewatch, suiciding results in a visit by concord and wreck and can flipping no longer exist since the opportunity to do them has been marginalized. So changing pos mechanics is kinda pointless since there is no really opportunity for a person to acquire aggro.
Of course if you are playing with the station guns - then crimewatch is really a change to low sec mechanics - which is not something that was ever mentioned in any of the crimewatch presentations as far as i know.
Starbases going crazy and shooting random people is part of Crimewatch. War decs are (partly) part of Crimewatch. Sec hits are part of Crimewatch. Sentry guns are part of Crimewatch. Killmails are part of Crimewatch. Whether or not you're allowed to jump through a gate is part of Crimewatch. When you can safely log off is part of Crimewatch. GCCs are part of Crimewatch. Can theft is part of Crimewatch.
It's a big system. Not all of it's changing this release, but a lot of it is. It's not just GCCs
Also, when I said the devblog would be some time in the next week, I actually meant in about an hour but I didn't want to give the game away
[edit] For questions about what crimes we're tracking, see devblog. |
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2484
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:00:00 -
[24] - Quote
Idris Helion wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:The "attack if aggression" option was removed quite some time ago. Note this is not the same as "attack if aggressed". I think the only two POS defense options now are "Attack if at war" and "Attack if security level < x". I think all POS's will defend themselves if aggressed, regardless of the settings on the defense tab of the Management screen.
Exactly. I should probably have worded that better, as in:
The "attack if aggression" option was removed quite some time ago. Note this is not the same thing as a POS defending itself if fired upon. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4975
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:04:00 -
[25] - Quote
Wait, does this mean that dudes won't be able to park their T3s in neutral Orcas which they immediately jump into hisec when a fight goes south?
Finally. please leave |
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
881
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:19:00 -
[26] - Quote
Andski wrote:Wait, does this mean that dudes won't be able to park their T3s in neutral Orcas which they immediately jump into hisec when a fight goes south?
Finally.
ROFL! pretty much this ^^ The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
lanyaie
640
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:20:00 -
[27] - Quote
How about t3's? no more saving your SP upon destruction? Hay |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9711
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:21:00 -
[28] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Again - what crimes are there to be committed? Putting aside scamming, market games and stealing from corps - which are outside of crimewatch - where is the potential criminal interaction between players that you feel needs consequences? The same ones as now: theft, unlawful aggression, aiding and abetting. Depending on whether they keep that idea, they might add interfering with lawful aggression to that list. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
33
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:25:00 -
[29] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Also, when I said the devblog would be some time in the next week, I actually meant in about an hour but I didn't want to give the game away [edit] For questions about what crimes we're tracking, see devblog.
Ok so I read the blog - and my initial opinion is that it is way more complicated then what we got already -- but maybe that is because I am familiar with the old stuff -- but none of it addresses the question of where are the opportunities to obtain aggro? Sure there is a section about taking from cans - but where are these cans anymore? And sure you've tinkered with war dec mechanics, docking rights etc. . ., but so what? How does changing the wardec mechanics, or for that matter, gate gun and pos mechanics and everything else deal with the issue of the diminishing role of the criminal? |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
784
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:33:00 -
[30] - Quote
I thought that it was fairly apparent that the purpose of all of the changes CCP has made over the last year to the mechanics affecting PVP in highsec was to disincentivize it. The inferno wardec changes were a laundry list of reasons not to start wars in highsec. There are no new conflict drivers, costs have gone up, declaring war on someone you have a legitimate grievance against is now just an invitation for someone like me to come and beat your face in at no cost and the mutual war and cost scaling system is hideously broken and full of exploits that can leave people permanently locked into wars or paying outlandish fees for no sane reason.
And here we have CCP Greyscale saying "Don't worry crimewatch will totally be good for PVP". You're going to have to forgive me for not believing a word of it because neither recent events or Greyscale's track record for game design indicate that crimewatch will be anything other than a poorly designed, bug filled mess that will serve the sole purpose of making hghsec even safer. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |