EVE Search - Wrecks... I'm confused.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Wrecks... I'm confused.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Viggen Caldari The Lunatic Asylum Notorious Organization of Brothers	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:18:00 - [1] I understand CCP says wrecks dont belong to anyone, so can be salvaged by everyone. So, in high sec.... 1. You stumble across a wreck and salvage it = Wreck disappears and you get parts from it... nice :) 2. You stumble across a wreck and shoot it = Wreck disappears and you get concorded... not so nice lol So why the difference? Your effectively doing the same thing, making a wreck disappear. Sub notes:- Im not trolling, I didnt just get concorded, I didnt just get ninja salvaged during a mission. I understand "what" the rules are, I just dont understand "why" they are. Please can someone make sence of this for me :)
Argent Lansing	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:21:00 - [2] Originally by: Viggen I understand CCP says wrecks dont belong to anyone, so can be salvaged by everyone. So, in high sec.... 1. You stumble across a wreck and salvage it = Wreck disappears and you get parts from it... nice :) 2. You stumble across a wreck and shoot it = Wreck disappears and you get concorded... not so nice lol So why the difference? Your effectively doing the same thing, making a wreck disappear. Sub notes:- Im not trolling, I didnt just get concorded, I didnt just get ninja salvaged during a mission. I understand "what" the rules are, I just dont understand "why" they are. Please can someone make sence of this for me :) Not exactly Wrecks are not owned Loot is owned Salvaging converts wrecks to parts and leaves loot in a container Shooting wreck destroys wreck AND loot which is owned. Pretty simple when you think about it. Now getting concorded for shooting wrecks with no loot in it, thats a gray area and probably should be fine, but dont know how the game rules work for that.
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:22:00 - [3] You think that's bad? I once shot a can full of contraband. CONCORD doesn't like it when you dispose of their evidence.
Viggen Caldari The Lunatic Asylum Notorious Organization of Brothers	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:28:00 - [4] Originally by: Argent Lansing Not exactly Wrecks are not owned Loot is owned Salvaging converts wrecks to parts and leaves loot in a container Shooting wreck destroys wreck AND loot which is owned. Pretty simple when you think about it. Now getting concorded for shooting wrecks with no loot in it, thats a gray area and probably should be fine, but dont know how the game rules work for that. Good point on the wrecks with loot, I shouldve guessed that but yeah I'm confused as well on the "empty wrecks" rule.. guess I'll have to hop on sisi and find out what happens.
Erialor Godsent Gallente Federal Navy Support Divison	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:33:00 - [5] Originally by: Viggen Originally by: Argent Lansing Not exactly Wrecks are not owned Loot is owned Salvaging converts wrecks to parts and leaves loot in a container Shooting wreck destroys wreck AND loot which is owned. Pretty simple when you think about it. Now getting concorded for shooting wrecks with no loot in it, thats a gray area and probably should be fine, but dont know how the game rules work for that. Good point on the wrecks with loot, I shouldve guessed that but yeah I'm confused as well on the "empty wrecks" rule.. guess I'll have to hop on sisi and find out what happens. I'm pretty sure you could find out on Tranq, too -- Get Your Crumplecorn signature here.
Denny Haze Amarr Knights of Destiny	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:34:00 - [6] Actually, even if you shoot an empty wreck you get the concord. Also, if you look at a wreck's info there's an owner displayed, empty, or not. I LOVE BLOOD AND VIOLENCE! I'VE GOT A BONER FOR MURDER!
Hoo Is	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:42:00 - [7] Originally by: Denny Haze Also, if you look at a wreck's info there's an owner displayed, empty, or not. /This So where does the wrecks aren't owned come from?
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.07.07 16:44:00 - [8] Originally by: Hoo Is Originally by: Denny Haze Also, if you look at a wreck's info there's an owner displayed, empty, or not. /This So where does the wrecks aren't owned come from? Salvage. Salvage is not owned.
Viggen Caldari The Lunatic Asylum Notorious Organization of Brothers	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:00:00 - [9] ok, think I might be getting part of it lol. So... the WRECK is owned, and therefore has consequences when being shot at. But the SALVAGE contained within is free-for-all. The Salvager module is just a tool used to extract that free-for-all loot from the wreck. Am I right so far? So once you've salvaged the wreck, it pops.. Why should the result of the wreck popping be any different than if it was shot?
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:04:00 - [10] there is no logic behind it. I think it was implemented this way to protect mission runners from griefing, no other logics there available. I would like seeing this rule removed because it does not make any sense for me.

Some Advisor	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:05:00 - [11] many thinks CCP does make no sense. sometimes they make sense after a while some times they still make no sense shrugs
Viggen Caldari The Lunatic Asylum Notorious Organization of Brothers	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:19:00 - [12] I've never understood the reasons behind this, nice to see others cant make sense of it either. If a Dev is reading this could you explain please?
Flightcrow	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:27:00 - [13] It makes sense to people that regularly see the sun above the horizon at midnight and darkness at noon.
Sun Clausewitz	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:29:00 - [14] Originally by: Flightcrow It makes sense to people that regularly see the sun above the horizon at midnight and darkness at noon. So if I move to Alaska it will make sence? Pick Three: Caldari/PVP/Solo/Success
BenjaminBarker	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:42:00 - [15] If you shoot a wreck, you're destroying the can and the salvage, even if the 'can' would be empty. If you salvage a wreck, you're just taking the unclaimed salvage, and leaving the 'can' behind. Why waste code (and create the possibility for more bugs) allowing someone to shoot an empty wreck, but not a full one?
Robot Robot	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:47:00 - [16] A wreck is two things, a container for loot and an exploitable resource for salvage. The loot belongs to the person who made the wreck (excepting player wrecks), the salvage belongs to whoever harvests it first. If you salvage a wreck with stuff in it, then the wreck's only purpose is as a loot container and thus it turns into a loot container. If you salvage a wreck with nothing in it, then the wreck no longer serves a purpose so it disappears. If you shoot a wreck with stuff in it, then you are destroying someone else's property and can expect the appropriate consequences. It's only the shooting of an empty wreck that doesn't make sense. It brings concord because you are destroying someone else's loot container even though that container is empty. That's because CCP hasn't bothered to make it so that looting a wreck turns it into some sort of salvage-only object in the same way that salvaging it turns it into a loot-only object. IMO, shooting an empty wreck should probably have no consequences no matter who it belongs to, but people would probably cry about griefing if that change were ever made and, really, the situation is fine as it is, even if it doesn't make much sense, so why waste dev time on it in the first place?
Hoo Is	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:48:00 - [17] Originally by: BenjaminBarker If you shoot a wreck, you're destroying the can and the salvage, even if the 'can' would be empty. If you salvage a wreck, you're just taking the unclaimed salvage, and leaving the 'can' behind. Why waste code (and create the possibility for more bugs) allowing someone to shoot an empty wreck, but not a full one? Make the 'wreck' free for all, or belong to the owner... not both like it currently is. Come on CCP, either it belongs to the owner or not... let's not keep this BS in place. You want to support ninjas, make it so the WRECK is public domain and they can grab the loot too. Want to support the missioners, make it so the WRECK belongs to the owner, including salvage. Too much grey, needs to be black or white
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.07.07 17:50:00 - [18] Salvaging isn't flaggable. Just get over it ffs.
Spaceman Jack	Posted - 2009.07.07 18:00:00 - [19] I know man - it make NO SENSE whatsoever. Pick one already either all free or all owned. It come from the same source by the same means. Personally I think it all should be a free for all. Funny how when you say it makes no sense people reply - "thats the way it is"... LOL ohhh - that is the way it is... NOW it makes perfect sense!
Viggen Caldari The Lunatic Asylum Notorious Organization of Brothers	Posted - 2009.07.07 18:04:00 - [20] Some more interesting info coming through here, but it seems that several people would indeed like this to be sorted one way or another. Originally by: Malcanis Salvaging isn't flaggable. Just get over it ffs. Now c'mon, play nice, this is just a discussion on trying to clear this grey area up :)

Some Advisor	Posted - 2009.07.07 18:07:00 - [21] Originally by: Robot Robot It's only the shooting of an empty wreck that doesn't make sense. It brings concord because you are destroying someone else's loot container even though that container is empty. griefer potential ;) "that mission runner likes to salvage, but the other griefer there came in, shoot every wreck and went away, leaving me with "nothing" to salvage. FIX IT CCP" phew... :P
Gwendion Gallente Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.07.07 18:30:00 - [22] Originally by: Sun Clausewitz Originally by: Flightcrow It makes sense to people that regularly see the sun above the horizon at midnight and darkness at noon. So if I move to Alaska it will make sence? No, but it will apparently help with your Diplomacy skill.. -----------------------------------
Sir Muffoon Debitum Naturae	Posted - 2009.07.07 18:35:00 - [23] Just because you keep repeating the same question isn't going to give you a different answer. You can salvage the wreck because the salvage in that wreck isn't owned, you can't shoot the wreck because the loot in the wreck is owned. You can't shoot an empty wreck because CCP are notoriously bad at programming.
Tau Cabalander Caldari	Posted - 2009.07.07 18:54:00 - [24] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You think that's bad? I once shot a can full of contraband. CONCORD doesn't like it when you dispose of their evidence. I do this all the time, but I shoot at my own jetcan.
Tippia Raddick Explorations Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.07.07 20:11:00 - [25] Originally by: Viggen Originally by: Malcanis Salvaging isn't flaggable. Just get over it ffs. Now c'mon, play nice, this is just a discussion on trying to clear this grey area up :) Malcanis already cleared it up. There is no grey area. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Sloppy Podfarts	Posted - 2009.07.07 20:14:00 - [26] Interesting...since it's not confusing at all.
Krystal Vernet Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2009.07.07 20:24:00 - [27] Wreck = salvage = free for all Loot in wreck = loot = owned by someone = consequences if you mess with it in some manner Seems very clear to me.
Anaesthera Gallente Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.07.07 20:35:00 - [28] If someone comes in to salvage your wrecks, shoot your wrecks yourself. Griefer tears are more valuable than the crap loot you're going to find anyway
Tippia Raddick Explorations Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.07.07 20:35:00 - [29] Originally by: Viggen I understand "what" the rules are, I just dont understand "why" they are. Please can someone make sence of this for me :) Oh, and to answer the actual question: because mission runners wanted it that way and because salvage isn't an additional mission income, but something extra that you need to work for if you want it. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.07.07 20:36:00 - [30] Not this **** again.



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.