Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 47 post(s) |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1349
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 15:57:00 -
[271] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Gogela wrote:I would imagine that NOT allowing everyone in the area to attack the target (simply giving them a suspect flag, amiright?) would create a huge, tangled web of aggression dependencies, and that was a factor in the decision to do it this way. That's a cop-out and you know it. Seems to me giving the person or corp who activated the killright a limited engagement flag wouldn't constitute a "huge, tangled web of dependencies". Not to be argumentative, but I'm pretty sure that is exactly what would occur, just as it does under the current system. Do you have any evidence for this statement, or is it just speculation since you're not a CCP developer and don't have any access to the underlying code? |
Lord Azori
Team Pizza No Holes Barred
18
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 18:26:00 -
[272] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Quote:Salvage drones never loot, they only salvage. Also, there is no difference in the quality of the loot received GÇô salvage drones can salvage the same items as the salvage modules, the only difference being that because of lower chance they are much worse at salvaging difficult wrecks (and are incapable of salvaging the most difficult Sleeper wrecks). Me: yay, awesome new item that will be extremely useful in WHs, thanks guys! CCP: oh i'm sorry, it doesnt work in WHs. great.
I am with ya Jack. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
240
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 21:26:00 -
[273] - Quote
Gogela wrote:CCP SoniClover wrote: People have to be careful when activating a kill right about time and place. This is by design.
I would imagine that NOT allowing everyone in the area to attack the target (simply giving them a suspect flag, amiright?) would create a huge, tangled web of aggression dependencies, and that was a factor in the decision to do it this way.
also if you're the one activating the kill right, you're the one with the advantage of surprise so you're more likely to get the kill / have more time to deal damage etc.... to get the bounty. plus it helps lone mercs/bounty hunters as passing players can get involved and add to the downfall of the target.
at least as far as i can understand the system anyway. |
Lord Zim
2069
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 21:37:00 -
[274] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:Gogela wrote:CCP SoniClover wrote: People have to be careful when activating a kill right about time and place. This is by design.
I would imagine that NOT allowing everyone in the area to attack the target (simply giving them a suspect flag, amiright?) would create a huge, tangled web of aggression dependencies, and that was a factor in the decision to do it this way. also if you're the one activating the kill right, you're the one with the advantage of surprise so you're more likely to get the kill / have more time to deal damage etc.... to get the bounty. plus it helps lone mercs/bounty hunters as passing players can get involved and add to the downfall of the target. at least as far as i can understand the system anyway. It's still not a system which is "a boon for bountyhunters".
I mean, come on, it's a system where someone pays to let everyone else shoot at someone, and the only benefit to being the one to activate the killright is a few seconds headstart, with no guarantee of being the one imparting the killing blow, so no guarantee you'd get the bounty, and everyone can run off with the loot so you don't even know if you can get that. How can anyone even possibly try to fob this off as "a boon for bountyhunters"?
It's a joke compared to what it should've been to be "a boon to bountyhunters", is what it is. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1352
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 22:39:00 -
[275] - Quote
"We're not going to bother explaining why we did it this way even though we've been asked multiple times by multiple people. We're just going to ask you to trust us even though we've often demonstrated in the past that we screw new features up in ways players predict prior to launch." |
Some Rando
University of Caille Gallente Federation
130
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 22:40:00 -
[276] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:[It's a joke compared to what it should've been to be "a boon to bountyhunters", is what it is. Speaking of which, what the **** is up with "activating" a killright that you own (whether it was yours or assigned to yourself/organization)? I can understand having to activate public killrights, but it's downright ******** having to make an extra click and confirm for personal killrights. Treat them like a mini-wardec, or something else instead. |
Lord Zim
2070
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 22:45:00 -
[277] - Quote
Some Rando wrote:Lord Zim wrote:It's a joke compared to what it should've been to be "a boon to bountyhunters", is what it is. Speaking of which, what the **** is up with "activating" a killright that you own (whether it was yours or assigned to yourself/organization)? I can understand having to activate public killrights, but it's downright ******** having to make an extra click and confirm for personal killrights. Treat them like a mini-wardec, or something else instead. It's most likely so someone who has gotten shot at, webbed, pointed or had any other such killright-generating actions applied to them can stalk the guy and randomly activate the killright and hope all the other vigilantes on the gates will take the opportunity to kill him for you.
Remember the stereotypical little geek hiding behind the schoolyard bully, popping his head out from behind him, shaking his fist and going "yeah!"?
Yeah, the guy with the killright is going to end up being that guy. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. |
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
121
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 23:16:00 -
[278] - Quote
Mika Takahoshi wrote:Cordo Draken wrote:*Sigh* Wormholes that can intelligently choose not to let certain people through... Well, I see your point, but I would still argue that a Concord ship should be the result of being stopped (giving a slim chance of escaping) vs an impossible logic. This also applies to a Criminal just suddenly not being able to move or do anything as if his/her own ship caused a mutiny. Again, I'd rather see Concord doing this vs a "Magically Force" preventing any movement. I just prefer things to make sense, then get an answer of "Because we said so." Repeat to yourself, "It's just a game; I should really just relax." A good lore handwave is always nice, but a gameplay mechanic for gameplay reasons is always vastly more important, and if you argue against the mechanic for lore reasons, you've lost perspective. Repeat the mantra...
I would rather have concord ships enter the wormhole (without destabilizing it any) and blast the owner on the other side, then come back. That would make more sense than miraculously preventing the ship from entering the wormhole.
I know its too much hassle for the programmers but just saying. |
Vilnius Zar
Ordo Ardish
281
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 09:34:00 -
[279] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:"We're not going to bother explaining why we did it this way even though we've been asked multiple times by multiple people. We're just going to ask you to trust us even though we've often demonstrated in the past that we screw new features up in ways players predict prior to launch."
CCP: new feature! players: lol, that's gonna cause these and these problems, we'll bug report it BH: working as intended! players: CCP, honestly... that's just gonna go wrong because of A and B reasons CCP: nah looks good, lets do it!
:launch: :3 months later: tiny dev blog: it looks as if this new feature has gone slightly wrong because of A and B reasons and completely messes up players/market/balance (pick two). We didn't realise this, sorry guys players: NO **** Amat victoria curam. |
Alexander Renoir
State War Academy Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 11:04:00 -
[280] - Quote
It will not be possible to place bounties on NPC characters (like agents) or corporations [...], nor on CCP developers or ISD people.
Thats fair? You do not want to be harassed or griefed; but ALL your paying customers have to deal with it? WHY? Never done wrong thinks but will soon have bounty? If you want bounties, you will get bounties. I will spend bounties on EVERY LESS THAN A DAY player in my corp channel! Abandon this stupid idea that someone with positive sec state can have a bounty. Change it so that someone with a negative sec state is NOT ABLE to push them back into positive so fast!
Bad Idea in the beginning! |
|
Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
24
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 00:50:00 -
[281] - Quote
Vilnius Zar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:"We're not going to bother explaining why we did it this way even though we've been asked multiple times by multiple people. We're just going to ask you to trust us even though we've often demonstrated in the past that we screw new features up in ways players predict prior to launch." CCP: new feature! players: lol, that's gonna cause these and these problems, we'll bug report it BH: working as intended! players: CCP, honestly... that's just gonna go wrong because of A and B reasons CCP: nah looks good, lets do it! :launch: :3 months later: tiny dev blog: it looks as if this new feature has gone slightly wrong because of A and B reasons and completely messes up players/market/balance (pick two). We didn't realise this, sorry guys players: NO ****
A certain Dev a while back gave me crap because I suggested editing their OP to link an important update they posted which was buried within a 60 page plus thread, because I didn't have the time to wade through to find that post. Yet it's funny how they pick and choose what they'll somewhat answer here, blatantly ignoring major issues the we, the paying community, bring up in advance. They only answer the simple question while sidestepping what we know to be a broken mechanic. Is it Pride? I truly don't understand the neglegence... Especially when a issue is known far in advance. Any non-snide honest detailed answer to this Devs? eëÆWhomever said, "You only get one shot to make a good impression," was utterly wrong. I've made plenty of great impressions with my AutocannonseëÆ eÉà |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1368
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 07:53:00 -
[282] - Quote
Cordo Draken wrote:Vilnius Zar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:"We're not going to bother explaining why we did it this way even though we've been asked multiple times by multiple people. We're just going to ask you to trust us even though we've often demonstrated in the past that we screw new features up in ways players predict prior to launch." CCP: new feature! players: lol, that's gonna cause these and these problems, we'll bug report it BH: working as intended! players: CCP, honestly... that's just gonna go wrong because of A and B reasons CCP: nah looks good, lets do it! :launch: :3 months later: tiny dev blog: it looks as if this new feature has gone slightly wrong because of A and B reasons and completely messes up players/market/balance (pick two). We didn't realise this, sorry guys players: NO **** A certain Dev a while back gave me crap because I suggested editing their OP to link an important update they posted which was buried within a 60 page plus thread, because I didn't have the time to wade through to find that post. Yet it's funny how they pick and choose what they'll somewhat answer here, blatantly ignoring major issues that we, the paying community, bring up in advance. They only answer the simple question while sidestepping what we know to be a broken mechanic. Is it Pride? I truly don't understand the neglegence... Especially when a issue is known far in advance. Any non-snide honest detailed answer to the major issues slated in this thread Devs?
-áObjects in mirror are redder than they appear. |
Alexander Renoir
State War Academy Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 07:23:00 -
[283] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:It will not be possible to place bounties on NPC characters (like agents) or corporations [...], nor on CCP developers or ISD people.Thats fair? You do not want to be harassed or griefed; but ALL your paying customers have to deal with it? WHY? Never done wrong things but will soon have bounty? If you want bounties, you will get bounties. I will spend bounties on EVERY LESS THAN A DAY player in my corp channel! Abandon this stupid idea that someone with positive sec state can have a bounty. Change it so that someone with a negative sec state is NOT ABLE to push them back into positive so fast! I know that a bounty is not a kill right. But the bounty system is controlled by CONCORD! Why will CONCORD allow to place bounties on someone who never did criminal acts? A bounty gives someone a touch of a criminal. I never done criminal things in EVE. And I do not wish that someone other think that I have done something like that! Bad Idea in the beginning!
TO CCP: THIS IS AN OFFICIAL QUESTION!
Why do you exclude your own employee from this crappy bounty system?
I think that you know, that you have just created a daft, 100% grieving tool but you will not be involved in that crap. So please explain why your paying customer must deal with that? And please.. NO "CCP Punkturis" which was again not involved in the decision process and is not able to find a bad piece in this daft idea. |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1368
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 07:27:00 -
[284] - Quote
What is your problem? The hell is so important about being able to place a bounty on a dev? Please leave the thread to people with legitimate concerns, not pointless whining. -áObjects in mirror are redder than they appear. |
The Zerg Overmind
Rule Reversal Dec Shield
465
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 10:26:00 -
[285] - Quote
The patch as described will NOT allow any of my trapped victims to go free. Letting aggressors in mutual wars instantly retract is not enough to stop what I'm doing. Here's why:
The new trap: When a corp joins/leaves the alliance it makes a "copy" of that war which is "transferred" to the new entity. This "copy" isn't a copy, but a new war. It sets the start date of that war as the moment that the corp joined/left the alliance. That means all I have to do is set all the wars unmutual (so they can't instant retract them), and then cycle corps in/out of alliance constantly (thus renewing an inescapable 7 day war timer), and when the corp rejoins the alliance, the alliance's dropped wars will get restored by the new war copy. A completely inescapable non-mutual trap.
The Evidence: Dec Shield Non-Mutual Exploit
The above photo is taken from a corp that left Dec Shield on the 26th. It was with 250+ wars. Now 4 days later not a single war has ended (when 4/7ths of the wars should have ended by now by random distribution). You'll note the two wars that "started" on the 30th. Those are corps that dropped out of an alliance and have received fresh 7 day war timers against me as a result.
The Solution: The solution to this problem is pretty straight forward. Set the start time of each war to the start time of the original parent war it spawned from. Or allow all wars to be instantly retracted, not just mutual ones. Burn Highsec Griefers |
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 13:28:00 -
[286] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:CCP SoniClover wrote:Nalha Saldana wrote:Oh my god you can activate MJD and cloak instantly then you will remain cloak for the spool up time AND be cloaked when landing, just tried on bucky. This is a defect that will be fixed before Retribution. Sorry What about the defect where you can MJD out of a hundred long points, land on a hundred seboed interceptors and still warp away before any of them lock you, in your triple plate baddon?
Nvm i misread that thingy... |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3773
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 13:57:00 -
[287] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:Alexander Renoir wrote:It will not be possible to place bounties on NPC characters (like agents) or corporations [...], nor on CCP developers or ISD people.Thats fair? You do not want to be harassed or griefed; but ALL your paying customers have to deal with it? WHY? Never done wrong things but will soon have bounty? If you want bounties, you will get bounties. I will spend bounties on EVERY LESS THAN A DAY player in my corp channel! Abandon this stupid idea that someone with positive sec state can have a bounty. Change it so that someone with a negative sec state is NOT ABLE to push them back into positive so fast! I know that a bounty is not a kill right. But the bounty system is controlled by CONCORD! Why will CONCORD allow to place bounties on someone who never did criminal acts? A bounty gives someone a touch of a criminal. I never done criminal things in EVE. And I do not wish that someone other think that I have done something like that! Bad Idea in the beginning! TO CCP: THIS IS AN OFFICIAL QUESTION!Why do you exclude your own employees from this crappy bounty system?I think that you know, that you have just created a daft, 100% grieving tool but you will not be involved in that crap. So please explain why your paying customer, with positive Security Rating, must deal with that? And please.. NO "CCP Punkturis" which was again not involved in the decision process and is not able to find a bad piece in this daft idea.
okay
Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1368
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:09:00 -
[288] - Quote
Well I guess the dev team, despite the appearance they've tried to convey, have completely stopped taking any feedback on this atrocity and all that's left is the horrifying combination of prescience and a train crash. -áObjects in mirror are redder than they appear. |
Lord Zim
2074
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:11:00 -
[289] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Well I guess the dev team, despite the appearance they've tried to convey, have completely stopped taking any feedback on this atrocity and all that's left is the horrifying combination of prescience and a train crash. Again. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. |
|
CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
262
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:13:00 -
[290] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:
Why do you exclude your own employees from this crappy bounty system?
Because we want the Most Wanted list to reflect realistic targets for people to chase. This becomes especially more relevant if we implement increased payout percentage based on Most Wanted list placement. So we don't want to clutter this list with targets that players cannot interact with in-game on regular basis, like ISD or Dev characters.
As others have pointed out in this thread, security rating has very little to do with how 'good' or 'evil' a character is. For instance, someone could margin scam you or steal from your corporation, yet have very high security standing. |
|
|
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1369
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:16:00 -
[291] - Quote
And look at what we have here! Developers answering the easiest and least important questions. -áObjects in mirror are redder than they appear. |
|
CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
262
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:25:00 -
[292] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Well I guess the dev team, despite the appearance they've tried to convey, have completely stopped taking any feedback on this atrocity and all that's left is the horrifying combination of prescience and a train crash.
I have responded that activating a Suspect flag is by design and there is nothing in the feedback that has been given that shows that has to change. Yes, this system is different, and more harsh in many ways, yes, it will mean some people will have to adapt, yes, it means changes in some player behavior. None of these are a show-stopper. None of the arguments that have been made has convinced the team we need to change this. We do make changes based on feedback when we agree it needs to happen, allowing the owner of a kill right to be more specific in choosing whom to make the kill right available to is one example of this.
You may not agree to this decision, but there is a difference between listening to feedback and acting upon it and one does not exclude the other. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1369
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:29:00 -
[293] - Quote
I just don't see how it makes any sense that a kill right I pay for can be capitalized on by anyone, even if I'm the only one who's allowed to activate the kill right. Why would I pay for the ability for everyone to shoot my target?
It doesn't incentivize bounty hunting nearly as much as you think it does.
The only possible hope I could have is that I could eventually get the victim on their own and then activate the killright, but realistically that's pretty much never going to happen. -áObjects in mirror are redder than they appear. |
Lord Zim
2074
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:36:00 -
[294] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Well I guess the dev team, despite the appearance they've tried to convey, have completely stopped taking any feedback on this atrocity and all that's left is the horrifying combination of prescience and a train crash. I have responded that activating a Suspect flag is by design and there is nothing in the feedback that has been given that shows that has to change. Yes, this system is different, and more harsh in many ways, yes, it will mean some people will have to adapt, yes, it means changes in some player behavior. None of these are a show-stopper. None of the arguments that have been made has convinced the team we need to change this. We do make changes based on feedback when we agree it needs to happen, allowing the owner of a kill right to be more specific in choosing whom to make the kill right available to is one example of this. You may not agree to this decision, but there is a difference between listening to feedback and acting upon it and one does not exclude the other. So, since you're answering about killrights, bounties etc, is my understanding that even if a killright is set to a specific person, corp or alliance, they still have to pay the price the killright owner has set it at, which is anything from 0 to infinity?
Since I've assumed this before, and I haven't been corrected, I'm going to assume this is indeed how it will work in future. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. |
|
CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
262
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:39:00 -
[295] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I just don't see how it makes any sense that a kill right I pay for can be capitalized on by anyone, even if I'm the only one who's allowed to activate the kill right. Why would I pay for the ability for everyone to shoot my target?
It doesn't incentivize bounty hunting nearly as much as you think it does.
The only possible hope I could have is that I could eventually get the victim on their own and then activate the killright, but realistically that's pretty much never going to happen.
I agree it doesn't incentivize bounty hunting as much as some other solutions, but we felt it is better for the kill right system itself to be the way it is. Perhaps down the road we can combine the two if we can allow people to place bounty only available to certain entities. We're now looking into if/how to implement placing a bounty on a structure, which will require some fundamental changes to the bounty system, as it's more of a one-time contract kill than a general pool. Based on those changes, it might be possible to do something similar on character/corp/alliance level, but it's too early to tell.
Something like that might be ideal way to marry the new bounty system to the new kill right system, but for Retribution we felt it was better to focus on the individual needs of the two systems. |
|
|
CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
262
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:41:00 -
[296] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:CCP SoniClover wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Well I guess the dev team, despite the appearance they've tried to convey, have completely stopped taking any feedback on this atrocity and all that's left is the horrifying combination of prescience and a train crash. I have responded that activating a Suspect flag is by design and there is nothing in the feedback that has been given that shows that has to change. Yes, this system is different, and more harsh in many ways, yes, it will mean some people will have to adapt, yes, it means changes in some player behavior. None of these are a show-stopper. None of the arguments that have been made has convinced the team we need to change this. We do make changes based on feedback when we agree it needs to happen, allowing the owner of a kill right to be more specific in choosing whom to make the kill right available to is one example of this. You may not agree to this decision, but there is a difference between listening to feedback and acting upon it and one does not exclude the other. So, since you're answering about killrights, bounties etc, is my understanding that even if a killright is set to a specific person, corp or alliance, they still have to pay the price the killright owner has set it at, which is anything from 0 to infinity? Since I've assumed this before, and I haven't been corrected, I'm going to assume this is indeed how it will work in future.
Yes, this is true. We did have a design for allowing the owner of the kill right even more control over the availability, with multiple price points. For instance, he could make it available to everyone for X amount, to corp A for Y amount and his own corp for Z amount. But the UI complexity on this was something we decided to wait upon implementing. |
|
Lord Zim
2074
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:43:00 -
[297] - Quote
So, pray tell, why should I become a bountyhunter when I have to pay anything from 0 to x isk to activate a killright, so everyone else can try to shoot him for 15 minutes, get the bounty (if present) and loot (if present)? What's in it for me? Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. |
|
CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
262
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:48:00 -
[298] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:So, pray tell, why should I become a bountyhunter when I have to pay anything from 0 to x isk to activate a killright, so everyone else can try to shoot him for 15 minutes, get the bounty (if present) and loot (if present)? What's in it for me?
If you want to be a serous bounty hunter, then low sec is going to be your main hunting ground. I seriously doubt there will be enough players with high bounty, available kill right and flying an expensive ship in hi sec for anyone to make a career out of being a bounty hunter based on that alone. |
|
Lord Zim
2074
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 14:55:00 -
[299] - Quote
So instead of making the transferrable killright something which could be transferred to another person/corp/alliance with a specific bounty on it (you know, so bountyhunters could've actually been a viable profession even in hisec), it's made into a hisec vigilante tool, specifically designed to be the final counter against freighter/miner ganking.
I see. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. |
|
CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
262
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 15:05:00 -
[300] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:So instead of making the transferrable killright something which could be transferred to another person/corp/alliance with a specific bounty on it (you know, so bountyhunters could've actually been a viable profession even in hisec), it's made into a hisec vigilante tool, specifically designed to be the final counter against freighter/miner ganking.
I see.
The kill right system has been in the game since 2005, yet has never really worked as originally intended. Less than 1% of kill rights are actually used. The kill right system now has a higher chance of actually leading to retribution. So the intent here is to fix a system implemented in RMR to be more functional. |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |