Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hornswaggle
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 10:34:00 -
[1]
This is hypothetical but a functioning ransom setup that is brought to you by Tequila and a mean streak. This scenario is set in empire space.
The players Player-A = Mission runner Player-B = Griefer corp/hijacker
The Scenario Player-A accepts a nice level 4 mission in Motsu. He warps out and begins. Life is as Player-A has known it for years. Player-B and corp gang are sitting in a random location in system launching scan probes and see Player-A on the scan, and warps off to jump in to his mission.
At this point you can go one of two ways with this scenario:
1. The hijackers let the mission runner tank the mission while they take the kills and flag the BS loot for themselves. While also flagging all hijackers on Player-As already pop'd RATS loot. I mean what is he going to do besides run... There are at least 2 or 3 hijackers
End result: A mission runner who does not have STABS setup; and IF he shoots at the hijackers who came in his mission, then you have 1 dead Player-A, in empire "safe space".
2. The second option: After these types of hijackings occur on a regular basis everyone will know that CORP (insert griefer corp name here) is hijacking Motsu missions. So you extort the mission runner. Player-A is in the mission, Player-B + corp gang warp in and start talking. Player-A pays Player-B to be left alone and to finish the mission. Now what happens if they do not pay you may ask?
End Results: IF Player-A pays up you leave him be. IF Player-A does not pay up then you finish the mission for him flagging the entire way and he runs off and is not able to complete the mission. Thus blowing his bonus, and possibly if this happens to him enough expiring the mission on him and causing him a great standing loss *they will pay*.
With all of this being said, YES you will get your corp war dec'd IF you do some buisness like this but then again who cares.. You can not really do gate camps anymore so CCP and poor game mechanics have invited the wolves into the lambs pen... Let the bloodshed begin.
Cya in your missions,
Hornswaggle
nullnullnullThe playersThe Scenario
|
Verone
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 10:41:00 -
[2]
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
VETO FOR HIRE
|
Victor Valka
Caldari Archon Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 10:47:00 -
[3]
CCP: Producing creative grievers since 2003.
Originally by: Diana Marc Notice that BoB is agreeing with RA's concern. That's like Elrond and Sauron agreeing to reduce carbon emissions.
|
NocturnalDeath
Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 10:47:00 -
[4]
Lambs should hangar up the CNR's, and them and their corps should fight the 'greifers' 'til they die.
Or hire some Mercs.
They SHOULD NOT come and WHINE on the forums
|
Kuolematon
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 10:47:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
People griefing other players in EVE? I would never ... "It's great being Amarr, ain't it?Ö"
"A world without pain" |
Hornswaggle
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 10:50:00 -
[6]
rofl I think you folks are too used to people whining... I am putting the ideas out there to encourage griefing tactics to close Motsu and other locations like it. I want the fighting and war dec'n
|
Geisha Girl
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 10:55:00 -
[7]
how about....
Player A. could careless. Player A. dont run missions coz they are boring. Player B (me) is rich.
|
Galk
Gallente Autumn Tactics All the things she said
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:04:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
This is exactly why they are changing it (reference the patch notes)
Unfortunately people such as yourself (by your own admittance) find it funny to antagonize other players by exploiting game mechanics to there advantage.. or if you will, referenced in the faq as 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others'
That ofcourse is classed as griefplay in the terms of service.
______
|
dinorryox
Sanguine Legion
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:09:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
That's got to be the best idea yet...
|
Aphotic Raven
Gallente Spectral Armada Eternal Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:10:00 -
[10]
ok WHAT IF... those filthy carebears band together and make... a player corp
DUN DUN DUN! they can mission run and have 15 guys in motsu with them for backup if anyone screws with them, gank 10 pirates and people will know to stay out of your missions...
Seriously carebears.. adapt... pvp'ers are.
(and ffs get out of the noob corp.. its just embarassing.)
Quote: Melicien Tetro: I tried to fight a shark with a pistol underwater once, and I'll be ****ed if he didn't laugh at me and eat me. Sharks need a ******* nerf. True story
|
|
NocturnalDeath
Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:10:00 -
[11]
Edited by: NocturnalDeath on 10/12/2006 11:10:38 Edited by: NocturnalDeath on 10/12/2006 11:10:05
Originally by: Galk
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
This is exactly why they are changing it (reference the patch notes)
Unfortunately people such as yourself (by your own admittance) find it funny to antagonize other players by exploiting game mechanics to there advantage.. or if you will, referenced in the faq as 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others'
That ofcourse is classed as griefplay in the terms of service.
Running missions and acquiring 'resources' without risk of PvP is an exploit. It is 'greifing' my playstyle which is to kill those acquiring resources that may or may not be used against me in the future.
Not at-risk Mission runners are 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others' including me when I can't kill them.
|
Andreas Kallesoee
Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:10:00 -
[12]
i am sorry to say that i can only compare mission grifers to second class schoolyard bullies, and if that is the furture of EVE then god help CCP
|
NocturnalDeath
Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:13:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Andreas Kallesoee i am sorry to say that i can only compare mission grifers to second class schoolyard bullies, and if that is the furture of EVE then god help CCP
I can only compare carrie bears that think they shouldn't have to compete, to japanese baseball teams that attempt to acheive a tie by the end of the game.
This is chess. This is tiddly winks. Some people are trying to compete and WIN!
|
Verone
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:13:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Galk This is exactly why they are changing it (reference the patch notes)
Unfortunately people such as yourself (by your own admittance) find it funny to antagonize other players by exploiting game mechanics to there advantage.. or if you will, referenced in the faq as 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others'
That ofcourse is classed as griefplay in the terms of service.
Assisting an NPC isn't aganist the game rules. Niether is trying to get a ransom out of someone by any means possible inside game mechanics. If these guys were boosting the npcs and then going afk and letting them boost for hours, then this would be griefing.
However they're not. They're using a game mechanic it takes DEVELOPED SKILLS to use, and making ISK from it by ransoming people.
I don't condone scamming, but it's a valid tactic for ISK making in Eve regardless, so long as it's done within game mechanics.
It's people like the OP who are complaining because they're not 100% safe in highsec.
Why should you be 100% safe in highsec? Why should you have everything handed to you on a plate?
VETO FOR HIRE
|
Ariel Stardust
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:15:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Galk
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
This is exactly why they are changing it (reference the patch notes)
Unfortunately people such as yourself (by your own admittance) find it funny to antagonize other players by exploiting game mechanics to there advantage.. or if you will, referenced in the faq as 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others'
That ofcourse is classed as griefplay in the terms of service.
Um, actually...
CCP doesn't care about the griefing, it's part of the game design, like it or not. What they DO care about, is that scanning is so unbalanced that anyone and their brother can pop into someone else's mission with extreme ease.
|
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:15:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Galk
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
This is exactly why they are changing it (reference the patch notes)
Unfortunately people such as yourself (by your own admittance) find it funny to antagonize other players by exploiting game mechanics to there advantage.. or if you will, referenced in the faq as 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others'
That ofcourse is classed as griefplay in the terms of service.
Uh, Verone plays fair.
There are others trying to bend the rules.
The use of logistics on npc is not rated griefing or at least it wasn't last time I heard a GM answer the question.. --*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing. by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Shiraz Merlot
Octavian Vanguard RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:16:00 -
[17]
Sorry carebears. It's just another form of non-consensual PvP. They don't have to be shooting at you to make it an interaction.
<3 CCP for making such things possible, even if I'm not actually taking advantage.
/sm
|
Drazys
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:20:00 -
[18]
Situations like this aren't about "pirates vs. carebears" but more like about "one species of carebear vs. another species of carebear". Mission running isn't exactly risky, but like it has been pointed out and proven several times, interfering with missions via use of scan probes isn't exactly risky either.
|
Zentarion
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:26:00 -
[19]
So..
What skills are requierd for this new mini-profession?
|
Verone
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:36:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Zentarion So..
What skills are requierd for this new mini-profession?
click me
VETO FOR HIRE
|
|
Roy Batty68
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:39:00 -
[21]
I really think terms like "greifing" only confuse the issues. Throw in the age old "pirate" versus "carebear" and it really gets vague.
Here's a hypothetical for you: Player A is running a mission in his raven. Players B and C are trying to ransom player A's ship via NPCs. Player B uses a logistics ship to heal up the NPC scramming player A. Player C agros all NPCs then warps out. Player A gets the agro and is now staring down the barrel of losing his raven if he doesn't pay up.
Now, while that might be a pretty tough situation for players B and C to create for player A, it is possible. They could, in theory, cause the destruction of player A's ship (and here's the real kicker) without player A being able to legally shoot back!
Carebears and Pirates and griefing or not arguements aside, that's pretty screwed up.
Flagging and CONCORD responses need to be reviewed imo.
Originally by: Big Al
Well, if there was a law against stupidity, the server would certainly lag less.
|
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:39:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Aphotic Raven
Seriously carebears.. adapt... pvp'ers are.
Lol, the people popping into missions are NOT pvp'ers... Common misconception my friend. They are more carebear than carebears themselves.
~~~~~~~~~ I wish my lawn was EMO so it would cut itself. I approve of this message. |
Dread Lord
Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 11:43:00 -
[23]
if this was me i woud agro all the npc in the room and warp out hehe lets see how the suport ship likes that
as far a ppl probing your mission and killing your rats
if the kill and take from a named rat something u need to finish the mission that is clasafied as grifing and u can petition it if they are just killing the rats well that woud be fine with me just meens i finsish the mission faster cos tbh mission bountys suck and the lp are the way to make isk doing missions
Please resize your signature to the limits specified in the forum rules, thanks. -wystler ([email protected]) |
Hotice
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 12:02:00 -
[24]
hmm... hijacker taking away mission objective item after steal the kill? I will just petition gm for unable to finish the mission since there is no tool in current game for me to deal with situation. If hijacker use support to heal npc? I will personally aggro every ship in the mission, fly close to that support ship and warp out. See how long that support ship can last. If I was scrambled? Well, that is not possible since I always kill all the ceptors first. I have done this twice so far, in both cases the hijacker didn't return. They are there to just ruin my fun and not to pvp. Both of them are in npc corps as well. Honestly, they cannot do anything too serious to me while I'm in zealot. Yes, they will make me warp out once or twice. However, they will and do have to worry about losing their ship. Sure it cost them next to nothing but means nothing to me either. I cannot speak for those who use battleships for missions though. Maybe it is time to train for HACs and Commandships.
As for many who said flag those who came in mission uninvited. I don't think that would work since mission runners will be under fire from multiple npc ships. It is very hard if not impossible to also start to fight players ships with pvp setup. So the only solution would be warp out after aggro from entire mission and pull them right next to the hijacker. Tables can be turned around easily. If a hijacker keeps pulling aggro then warp out, you should petition gm for harrassment since the person is not pvping but only causing trouble.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 12:12:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
That's... juse AWESOME. Finally a decent use for Logistics ships besides the Alliance Tourny.
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer. |
Ravenal
The Fated
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 13:46:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
That's... juse AWESOME. Finally a decent use for Logistics ships besides the Alliance Tourny.
Actually, this is a tactic people have been using vs macro miners... lovelly stuff . |
Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 15:29:00 -
[27]
Originally by: NocturnalDeath Running missions and acquiring 'resources' without risk of PvP is an exploit. It is 'greifing' my playstyle which is to kill those acquiring resources that may or may not be used against me in the future.
Not at-risk Mission runners are 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others' including me when I can't kill them.
Meh, let people try to ransom missions, it's not like you can't warp out to reset aggros, or just sit there and tank it all in certain ships (altho I can't imagine the lag of motsu plus the lag of 30+ ships throwing missiles at you).
Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
|
Rina Shanu
Computer-Aided General Exploitation
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 15:29:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Galk
Originally by: Verone
I've also heard of people scanning the mission spot down and going in with logistics ships, to boost the NPC's and ransom the mission.
It's hilarious tbh
This is exactly why they are changing it (reference the patch notes)
Unfortunately people such as yourself (by your own admittance) find it funny to antagonize other players by exploiting game mechanics to there advantage.. or if you will, referenced in the faq as 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others'
That ofcourse is classed as griefplay in the terms of service.
*snip*
If you are in a player corp than you ask for your corp to help. Thus the grievers can not do much damage cause theres enough backup for you.
The tools are there for you to use!
trolling is not allowed! - Deckard
JOIN CAGE
|
Audri Fisher
Caldari The Keep THE R0CK
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 18:29:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Verone
Originally by: Galk This is exactly why they are changing it (reference the patch notes)
Unfortunately people such as yourself (by your own admittance) find it funny to antagonize other players by exploiting game mechanics to there advantage.. or if you will, referenced in the faq as 'consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience of others'
That ofcourse is classed as griefplay in the terms of service.
Assisting an NPC isn't aganist the game rules. Niether is trying to get a ransom out of someone by any means possible inside game mechanics. If these guys were boosting the npcs and then going afk and letting them boost for hours, then this would be griefing.
However they're not. They're using a game mechanic it takes DEVELOPED SKILLS to use, and making ISK from it by ransoming people.
I don't condone scamming, but it's a valid tactic for ISK making in Eve regardless, so long as it's done within game mechanics.
It's people like the OP who are complaining because they're not 100% safe in highsec.
Why should you be 100% safe in highsec? Why should you have everything handed to you on a plate?
Assisting an NPC who is attacking a player is a de facto attack on the player and should be flagged. It is the same as remote repping a war target, technicaly legal, but cheese none the less. Gneneraly done, by peole who don't for whatever reason, can't operate in 0.0.
|
Ozzie Asrail
FATAL REVELATIONS Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.12.10 18:41:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Roy Batty68 I really think terms like "greifing" only confuse the issues. Throw in the age old "pirate" versus "carebear" and it really gets vague.
Here's a hypothetical for you: Player A is running a mission in his raven. Players B and C are trying to ransom player A's ship via NPCs. Player B uses a logistics ship to heal up the NPC scramming player A. Player C agros all NPCs then warps out. Player A gets the agro and is now staring down the barrel of losing his raven if he doesn't pay up.
Now, while that might be a pretty tough situation for players B and C to create for player A, it is possible. They could, in theory, cause the destruction of player A's ship (and here's the real kicker) without player A being able to legally shoot back!
Carebears and Pirates and griefing or not arguements aside, that's pretty screwed up.
Flagging and CONCORD responses need to be reviewed imo.
It seems fine to me. Safe space if supposed to be wher people can make isk without risk. Sounds like what players b and c are doing -----
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |