EVE Search - CCP - Pirating, RRing and Militia really needs fixing!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP - Pirating, RRing and Militia really needs fixing!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.03.27 17:42:00 - [1] Edited by: Endless Subversion on 27/03/2009 17:44:13 My corp is a pirate corp in the Amarr Militia. The vast majority of us are -5.0 or lower security status. If one of my corp mates GCC flags (for whatever reason) and I remote repair him, I lose faction standing with the Amarr faction. This loss is in addition to also GCC flagging me and the standard security status loss for aiding a criminal. What this means is that we cannot use RR gangs at all, and this is unfairly (and I assume unintentionally) limiting! Example Highlighting Problem: Assume there are 3 of us using RR ships and fighting wartargets only. None of us are GCC flagged to begin with. Player B and Player C in my corp begin repairing Player A in my corp. Both Player B and Player C become GCC flagged. Everything is fine so far. Now the hostiles switch primary to Player B. Player A and Player C switch their reps to him. Player A and Player C each lose .75% standing with Amarr Faction! Player A also becomes GCC flagged. The war targets then switch targets back to A. Player C and Player B start repping him again. Player B loses .75% Amarr Faction standing!. The net result is our corp loses a ton of PITA to get Faction Standing for RRing each other. It would be really helpful to have this addressed!
Sun Clausewitz	Posted - 2009.03.27 17:51:00 - [2] Originally by: Endless Subversion Edited by: Endless Subversion on 27/03/2009 17:44:13 My corp is a pirate corp in the Amarr Militia. The vast majority of us are -5.0 or lower security status. -5.0 or lower.... working as intended
Cat o'Ninetails Rancer Defence League	Posted - 2009.03.27 17:54:00 - [3] so being a pirate is not all fun and games lol visit my blog for my adventures
F90OEX F9X	Posted - 2009.03.27 17:57:00 - [4] LOL
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:04:00 - [5] This will be dealt with. The flagging and remote assistance mechanic really needs some looking in to tbh.
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:07:00 - [6] Originally by: Sun Clausewitz Originally by: Endless Subversion Edited by: Endless Subversion on 27/03/2009 17:44:13 My corp is a pirate corp in the Amarr Militia. The vast majority of us are -5.0 or lower security status. -5.0 or lower.... working as intended Not a reader? I'll spell it out for you. This faction loss is in addition to the standard security status loss you get for aiding outlaws.
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:12:00 - [7] Its stupid. Then again seeing how i remember that one of the ~~quaterly~~ annual econ blogs detailed that there are like under 10k outlaw players in the game i hardly think ccp gives a damn. -- Originally by: Jasper Dark I agree! Lets go back into caves and lick rocks!
Sun Clausewitz	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:16:00 - [8] Originally by: Endless Subversion Originally by: Sun Clausewitz Originally by: Endless Subversion Edited by: Endless Subversion on 27/03/2009 17:44:13 My corp is a pirate corp in the Amarr Militia. The vast majority of us are -5.0 or lower security status. -5.0 or lower.... working as intended Not a reader? I'll spell it out for you. This faction loss is in addition to the standard security status loss you get for aiding outlaws. Me canz reed purrty gud fer me edukashun level You are a criminal, you really think that empire factions don't have a problem with -5.0 ? The get away drver gets in just as much trouble as the bank robber.
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:19:00 - [9] Originally by: Sun Clausewitz You are a criminal, you really think that empire factions don't have a problem with -5.0 ? The get away drver gets in just as much trouble as the bank robber. So why did they recruit pirates and criminals into their own ranks in the first place? Maybe they really don't give a damn who **s and pillages matari soutside of protected empire space? -- Originally by:** Jasper Dark I agree! Lets go back into caves and lick rocks!
R4d1o4ct1v3 MySQL Real Escape String	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:24:00 - [10] So you expect people to feel sorry for a pirate corp because it is losing security/faction standings? If you choose to be an outlaw, or work with outlaws, you lose standings. It's just that simple. Deal with it, or choose another profession. ---- "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:30:00 - [11] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 27/03/2009 18:31:07 Heh, amazing how reading impaired most people seem to be. Its not about security status loss (outlaws generally like that FYI), but about faction standing loss for no apparent reason. Besides, if you think that you'll never have to take the first shot at the enemy (outlaw or not), you should probably stay in highsec and away from PVP. In other words, look at how most 'anti-pirates' that are worth their salt have negative security status, or are even outlaws themselves.
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:39:00 - [12] Originally by: R4d1o4ct1v3 So you expect people to feel sorry for a pirate corp because it is losing security/faction standings? If you choose to be an outlaw, or work with outlaws, you lose standings. It's just that simple. Deal with it, or choose another profession. Security loss is fine, that's the intentional mechanic in place (though gcc flagging for RRing a non-gcc outlaw ought to be looked at too, but that's neither here nor there). FACTION loss isn't. That means we can't RR, be in a militia and be pirate. I'm not able to remote rep my corpmates without rapidly being kicked out of the militia. This is dumb. And despite some of the postings in this thread (already!), Pirating is a LEGITIMATE profession in Eve and deserves to be supported as such.
Morlar	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:46:00 - [13] It's the Obama code. The Amarr are throwing you under the bus for making them look bad, even though you're supposed to be friends. It's part of that whole "Eve is realistic" thing.
Letava Gallente Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2009.03.27 18:58:00 - [14] Edited by: Letava on 27/03/2009 18:58:07 For the zero good it will do, I'll append my own complaint about how assisting a non-flagged outlaw gives you GCC and sec loss. For those who have trouble understanding, that's harsher penalties for helping an outlaw than for being an outlaw.
Ancy Denaries Caldari Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.03.27 19:00:00 - [15] Sec loss is fine as is the GCC inheritance. The faction loss is however totally moronic. ----- Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting? EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die.
TimMc Gallente The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates	Posted - 2009.03.27 19:12:00 - [16] Originally by: Ancy Denaries Sec loss is fine as is the GCC inheritance. The faction loss is however totally moronic. This it ****es me off.
R4d1o4ct1v3 MySQL Real Escape String	Posted - 2009.03.27 19:27:00 - [17] Originally by: Endless Subversion Originally by: R4d1o4ct1v3 So you expect people to feel sorry for a pirate corp because it is losing security/faction standings? If you choose to be an outlaw, or work with outlaws, you lose standings. It's just that simple. Deal with it, or choose another profession. Security loss is fine, that's the intentional mechanic in place (though gcc flagging for RRing a non-gcc outlaw ought to be looked at too, but that's neither here nor there). FACTION loss isn't. That means we can't RR, be in a militia and be pirate. I'm not able to remote rep my corpmates without rapidly being kicked out of the militia. This is dumb. And despite some of the postings in this thread (already!), Pirating is a LEGITIMATE profession in Eve and deserves to be supported as such. Actually, on second thought... if they allow an outlaw to join the militia, they shouldn't really be bothered by other members of the militia helping him do whatever he does for that militia faction. So sure, I can support that. ---- "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
R4d1o4ct1v3 MySQL Real Escape String	Posted - 2009.03.27 19:37:00 - [18] Originally by: Letava Edited by: Letava on 27/03/2009 18:58:07 For the zero good it will do, I'll append my own complaint about how assisting a non-flagged outlaw gives you GCC and sec loss. For those who have trouble understanding, that's harsher penalties for helping an outlaw than for being an outlaw. No, the penalty for being an outlaw is to be an outlaw. You should be penalized for helping an outlaw, regardless of where he is or what he is doing. /me runs around yelling: "Traitor! TRAITOR!" ---- "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Letava Gallente Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2009.03.27 20:01:00 - [19] Originally by: R4d1o4ct1v3 Originally by: Letava Edited by: Letava on 27/03/2009 18:58:07 For the zero good it will do, I'll append my own complaint about how assisting a non-flagged outlaw gives you GCC and sec loss. For those who have trouble understanding, that's harsher penalties for helping an outlaw than for being an outlaw. No, the penalty for being an outlaw is to be an outlaw. You should be penalized for helping an outlaw, regardless of where he is or what he is doing. /me runs around yelling: "Traitor! TRAITOR!" So the following situations are ok with you? 1) An outlaw is sitting outside a station. He doesn't have GCC, so the sentry guns don't fire on him. You remote repair the outlaw, sentry guns then attack you, and you get sec loss. 2) Your corp is in a milita. You remote repair an outlaw corp mate and get GCC for it. Another corp mate then remote repairs you and not only gets GCC but also loses faction standing. The penalty for assisting an outlaw should be flagging you for anyone to attack, same as being an outlaw. I don't see why it should carry additional penalties on top of this, at odds to the way you inherit the same flags as the person you are helping in any other situation.
R4d1o4ct1v3 MySQL Real Escape String	Posted - 2009.03.27 20:58:00 - [20] Originally by: Letava So the following situations are ok with you? 1) No. You should simply inherit his status. If the sentries don't shoot him, they shouldn't shoot you. (Which they should, imo) 2) No. See my previous post. ---- "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Letava Gallente Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2009.03.27 21:06:00 - [21] Originally by: R4d1o4ct1v3 Originally by: Letava So the following situations are ok with you? 1) No. You should simply inherit his status. If the sentries don't shoot him, they shouldn't shoot you. (Which they should, imo) 2) No. See my previous post. So you actually agree with me. Did you just misunderstand my previous post?
Ironnight Caldari x13 X13 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.27 21:29:00 - [22] Working as intended, the factions build on law and order and if you aid a criminal then they think less off you. They're like 'oh **** son, its a trap Doomsday
Kelron Queldine Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.03.27 21:30:00 - [23] Originally by: Ironnight Working as intended, the factions build on law and order and if you aid a criminal then they think less off you. They're happy enough to have criminals come fight for them, as long as they don't help each other?
Khlitouris RegusII	Posted - 2009.03.27 21:32:00 - [24] Originally by: Endless Subversion Originally by: Sun Clausewitz Originally by: Endless Subversion Edited by: Endless Subversion on 27/03/2009 17:44:13 My corp is a pirate corp in the Amarr Militia. The vast majority of us are -5.0 or lower security status. -5.0 or lower.... working as intended Not a reader? I'll spell it out for you. This faction loss is in addition to the standard security status loss you get for aiding outlaws. Yes they should definately lose the faction loss but keep the gcc and sec loss as it is.
Tellenta Gallente Invicta. Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.03.27 21:50:00 - [25] Originally by: Myra2007 Originally by: Sun Clausewitz You are a criminal, you really think that empire factions don't have a problem with -5.0 ? The get away drver gets in just as much trouble as the bank robber. So why did they recruit pirates and criminals into their own ranks in the first place? Maybe they really don't give a damn who **s and pillages matari s**outside of protected empire space? You are a PIRATE, not a Privateer. Look them up you'll find the distinct difference between the two. You want your cake and eat it to, welp I guess you better keep up with your mission running you'll need it.
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.03.27 22:55:00 - [26] Originally by: Tellenta Originally by: Myra2007 Originally by: Sun Clausewitz You are a criminal, you really think that empire factions don't have a problem with -5.0 ? The get away drver gets in just as much trouble as the bank robber. So why did they recruit pirates and criminals into their own ranks in the first place? Maybe they really don't give a damn who **s and pillages matari s**outside of protected empire space? You are a PIRATE, not a Privateer. Look them up you'll find the distinct difference between the two. You want your cake and eat it to, welp I guess you better keep up with your mission running you'll need it. Using roleplaying and 'logic' to balance pvp issues is a joke. This totally removes my corp's ability to RR.
R4d1o4ct1v3 MySQL Real Escape String	Posted - 2009.03.28 03:13:00 - [27] Edited by: R4d1o4ct1v3 on 28/03/2009 03:14:42 Originally by: Letava So you actually agree with me. Did you just misunderstand my previous post? I don't disagree with you. It's just, you are complaining that assisting outlaws (flagged or not) is flagging you and losing you sec-status. This, in my opinion, is as it should be. (Aiding a criminal is a criminal act.) However, I do not understand why an outlaw can be not flagged. Outlaws should be considered kill-on-sight by all law enforcement mechanisms, including sentries. They should, effectively, be permanently flagged. If, for some reason, low-sec sentries do not enforce the law by ignoring outlaws, then they should also disregard those who are helping them. It's not really the GCC flag that needs to be fixed, but rather the low-sec sentry's response to the GCC. Edit: spelling. ---- "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Letava Gallente Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2009.03.28 13:02:00 - [28] Originally by: R4d1o4ct1v3 Edited by: R4d1o4ct1v3 on 28/03/2009 03:14:42 Originally by: Letava So you actually agree with me. Did you just misunderstand my previous post? I don't disagree with you. It's just, you are complaining that assisting outlaws (flagged or not) is flagging you and losing you sec-status. This, in my opinion, is as it should be. (Aiding a criminal is a criminal act.) However, I do not understand why an outlaw can be not flagged. Outlaws should be considered kill-on-sight by all law enforcement mechanisms, including sentries. They should, effectively, be permanently flagged. If, for some reason, low-sec sentries do not enforce the law by ignoring outlaws, then they should also disregard those who are helping them. It's not really the GCC flag that needs to be fixed, but rather the low-sec sentry's response to the GCC. Edit: spelling. Going a little off topic here, but it's a case of game mechanics taking precedence over what some would consider common sense. I don't think CCP want to force all outlaws into flying big ships, which is what would happen if low sec sentries automatically shot on sight. Being outlaw restricts what you can do in high sec, and I think that's how it should be. Restricting what outlaws can do in low sec too would only be detrimental to the game. As far as assistance goes, I want to see the flags and penalties incurred for assisting another player being the same as that player has, regardless of other game mechanics.
Malthros Zenobia	Posted - 2009.03.28 15:10:00 - [29] Originally by: Endless Subversion Using roleplaying and 'real life ancedotes' to balance pvp issues is a joke. This totally removes my corp's ability to RR and needs to be fixed! Sounds more like a game mechanic that people are using the simplest way to describe, but you don't like. Personally I think it'd make more sense if a corp of outlaws weren't able to join the militias in the first place. Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.03.28 15:23:00 - [30] Sounds more like a game mechanic that people are using the simplest way to describe, but you don't like. Personally I think it'd make more sense if a corp of outlaws weren't able to join the militias in the first place. You're doing it again. Stop allowing morality into this. This is a game. Pirate is a supported player profession. You're stuck on "pirates are bad, everything bad that happens to them is good". This is a balance issue for a 'class' of player that totally prevents them from using one of the most powerful pvp strategies in the game.
R4d1o4ct1v3 MySQL Real Escape String	Posted - 2009.03.29 03:43:00 - [31] Originally by: Letava Going a little off topic here, but it's a case of game mechanics taking precedence over what some would consider common sense. I don't think CCP want to force all outlaws into flying big ships, which is what would happen if low sec sentries automatically shot on sight. Being outlaw restricts what you can do in high sec, and I think that's how it should be. Restricting what outlaws can do in low sec too would only be detrimental to the game. As far as assistance goes, I want to see the flags and penalties incurred for assisting another player being the same as that player has, regardless of other game mechanics. Yea it would kind of suck being an outlaw if you couldn't even fly around low-sec I think we are basically arguing over semantics. The bottom line is: since sentries don't shoot outlaws, they shouldn't shoot people helping them. I don't even think that is the problem, tho. The problem is that remote repairing is incorrectly interpreted as an act of aggression. (As far as I can see) POSs that are set to kill on aggression, as I understand it, even consider two corp members repairing each other as being aggressive and kill them. (Correct me if I am wrong) The sec-status loss is as it should be tho, in my opinion. (sec-status, not faction status.) ---- "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
R4d1o4ct1v3 MySQL Real Escape String	Posted - 2009.03.29 04:09:00 - [32] Originally by: Endless Subversion You're doing it again. Stop allowing morality into this. This is a game. Pirate is a supported player profession. You're stuck on "pirates are bad, everything bad that happens to them is good". This is a balance issue for a 'class' of player that totally prevents them from using one of the most powerful pvp strategies in the game. But this is all about morality. You chose a profession that is essentially all about being "bad" and doing "bad" things. For those whom you would normally pray on, seeing bad things happen to you is in fact a good thing. It is true that pirating is a supported profession, but it also comes with certain drawbacks that you, on choosing to pirate, accepted. I actually don't think the problem here is that outlaw militia members can not be a part of a spider-tank, but rather that the NPC factions allow outlaws to join their militia in the first place. It makes no sense that they would invite people that are effectively their enemies to join them in factional warfare. But, since they do, it doesn't really make sense that other members of the militia are penalized for fighting with them... So the problem you are complaining about is essentially a side-effect of a larger problem, which, if fixed, would pretty much nullify your problem ---- "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Dreamwalker	Posted - 2009.03.29 05:36:00 - [33] Originally by: R4d1o4ct1v3 I don't even think that is the problem, tho. The problem is that remote repairing is incorrectly interpreted as an act of aggression. (As far as I can see) POSs that are set to kill on aggression, as I understand it, even consider two corp members repairing each other as being aggressive and kill them. (Correct me if I am wrong) The sec-status loss is as it should be tho, in my opinion. (sec-status, not faction status.) When repairing your corp mate at a POS, if that member has been in combat and you are repairing there is a chance based off if the POS owner checked the little box or not, that you the repairer will be attacked. Just repairing hasn't popped my ship at the moment but I'm sure that if I had a flag or was blinky red that I would get popped by my POS if I had the box checked. Originally by: CCP Whisper Local chat in known 0.0, low sec and empire space will remain as it is today, in all it's insta-intel giving, afk cloaker panic inducing, jita trade spamming glory.
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.03.30 22:10:00 - [34] After about a month of talking to different GMs, I finally got one who understood what was happening. As it stands atm, faction losses are apparently an intended feature of RRing GCC flagged militia members. They are going to add a warning message (as currently there isn't one) and otherwise this mechanic will remain untouched.... All I'm left with is asking, FFS WHY?!
Concorduck Gallente	Posted - 2009.03.30 22:18:00 - [35] drop militia, keep rocking. ----------------------------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
Karrade Krise Mid Knights	Posted - 2009.03.30 22:26:00 - [36] I find the ammount of stupidity in this thread astounding. Security Status loss for RRing Outlaw is fine. Working as intended. Faction Loss when you're working for that particular faction for remote repping someone they hired is stupid. Terianna Eri > :( i wish i were as good a forum ***** as karrade
Schalac Caldari Apocalypse Reign	Posted - 2009.03.30 22:57:00 - [37] I believe that this is the reason that my corp was kicked out of the Caldari militia. Faction losses due to RR criminals and acts of piracy against pirate pilots that weren't already flashy red. It kinda irked me at the time that it happened that a pirate corp that I knew that was hunting Caldari militia members couldn't be legally fired upon until they fired first. Guess I am just not a good soldier what with shooting first at targets that I know are out to destroy me and ilk. SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.