Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
30
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 13:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
A quote from a beloved GM
GM Homonoia wrote:Tl;dr We are extending our rookie griefing rules to the system of Arnon. See our wiki page on this subject: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Rookie_SystemsHistory lessonA long long time ago in a galaxy right here in the EVE universe we had a lot of new players who undocked for the very first time and were trying to figure out how to fly their ships. There was also a small group of players that wanted to pad their kill mails in the easiest way possible by preying upon those people who had not yet found the trigger to their civilian guns. This last group moved into the rookie starter systems and started killing our new recruits. This is not cool and so us game masters decided that messing with these newest and most helpless players was not allowed. A ban was put into place for griefing rookies in their starter systems. Of course, these predators decided that rules should be followed to the letter and the spirit behind these rules can be ignored at will and moved to the career agent systems to do the exact same thing. Unfortunately this forced us to extend the ban on griefing rookies to these systems as well. Present dayNow these scavengers of corpses have moved to the Sisters of EVE epic arc systems to do the exact same thing once again. This is forcing us to extend this ban to the Arnon system as well. Let me state very clearly that we do so with great reluctance. We do NOT like to impose rules and limitations like these upon the sandbox and we do not do so lightly. These measures are always debated hotly within our department and can often take multiple months of deliberation to make absolutely sure we are doing the right thing. Let me state this very clearly here. We do NOT want experienced players to mess with rookies barely a week in. We are sure that you have worthier targets than these players who are still learning the ropes. If this behavior does not stop we may extend this rule to all systems that are covered in the Sisters of EVE epic arc. These systems are: - Tar - Harerget - Hatakani - Hek - Lustrevik - Tanoo - Lisudeh - Sosh - Manarq - Chainelant
Now I don't have a problem with rookie protectionism in the rookie systems but when you extend it outside those systems I have a problem as it makes eve a less complete place and at the moment this is only going to be enforced in Arnon. But personally I don't want to see this outside of rookie systems [including Arnon]. In Hatakani there is an incursion atm, so shall we protect rookies from those too? The GM discretion has to play a part but a lot of GM discretion is ill advised. I don't kill rookies unless they are generally war targets or something similiar. In-game mechanics should be used to help rookies instead of artificially coddling them and its not as if they have much to lose anyway most of the time.
Would rookie alts be protected too in the future? New players who bought an old character. Stop spoiling the sandbox for the majority for the sake of the new. |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1754
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 14:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
How about we propose a new system: a rookie tag on characters that indicates they are not fair game. The specifics of this tag would need to be worked out (I'll get back to that). If you steal from a wreck or can owned by a rookie, you risk bannage. If you gank a rookie, you risk bannage. If you do anything to ruin the NPE, YOU RISK BANNAGE.
Ways to trigger the rookie flag being turned off: - the ACCOUNT reaches a certain age (alts would never be rookies) - the character joins a player corporation - the character engages in activities outside of the new player experience (tutorials, career agents, SOE arc) - other stuff I haven't though of
This would take some serious work to prevent it being abused, but I think it would solve the problem and prevent people from blundering into warnings and bans by not knowing "The List." It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
Arduemont
Malevolent Intentions Ineluctable.
208
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 15:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
I agree that protecting systems that are distant from the rookie systems is a bad idea. But I also agree completely with the GMs that greifing in those systems hampers CCPs growth, and is frankly not cool.
Move the Career agents to the systems next to the rookie systems. Then have it protected. Problems (both of them) solved. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
354
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 16:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
1.) I think clear labels on the system label, stating it's a rookie system is very appropriate. -- I'm under the impression it's hard to know what system is considered "rookie safe"!!
2.) I think any special rules that apply to rookie systems should be blatantly stated on one of the System's Information tabs!!! --- Personally, I think special rules for rookie systems (like no can baiting), is just a PITA to enforce, it's a PITA to keep track of, and having the rules extend to "other" systems is not ok!!! Move the SoE arc to Rookie systems, don't expand the rookie system limitations into SoE systems!!!
3.) Rather than deal with can baiting crap in rookie systems, it would probably be better to have all can's automatically set blue (abandoned) in rookie systems. This way the rookie will only get aggression when they steal from a wreck or shoot at someone for doing so!!!
Finally, it's pretty sad we need protections for rookies....
|
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
488
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 01:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Finally, it's pretty sad we need protections for rookies.... Agreed.
How lame.
You know there's something fundamentally wrong when the only way people can think of to promote the "best" part of the game is to make everything else suck more. |
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din Fatal Ascension
742
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 08:36:00 -
[6] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:How about we propose a new system: a rookie tag on characters that indicates they are not fair game. The specifics of this tag would need to be worked out (I'll get back to that). If you steal from a wreck or can owned by a rookie, you risk bannage. If you gank a rookie, you risk bannage. If you do anything to ruin the NPE, YOU RISK BANNAGE.
Ways to trigger the rookie flag being turned off: - the ACCOUNT reaches a certain age (alts would never be rookies) - the character joins a player corporation - the character engages in activities outside of the new player experience (tutorials, career agents, SOE arc) - other stuff I haven't though of
This would take some serious work to prevent it being abused, but I think it would solve the problem and prevent people from blundering into warnings and bans by not knowing "The List."
This is actually a good idea. Brand new players should not be the target of griefers, and yes it is griefers as ther are plenty of legitimate and capable targets out there.
Have the age limit be something sensible like 7 or 14 days, plenty of time for a new player to get used to teh game and finish tutorials even if they are a very casual player. New players should not be the target of pvp. Possibly though if it is capable have it IP linked to avoid abuse by making un-targetable alts. Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
752
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 11:18:00 -
[7] - Quote
And so the descent down the slippery slope begins. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Exhale.
50
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 11:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
Rookie protection wouldn't even be needed if some mechanics were properly explained to them right at the start |
tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 13:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
Haved you thought about growing a pair and stop moaning about how you cant kill noobs because you are too lame to kick it with the big boys? My god we might as well line them up liek a firing squad if you want a kill that easily!
Go learn to pvp properly, get in low sec and fight someone who can fight back, and just leave noobies alone |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
128
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 13:22:00 -
[10] - Quote
tiberiusric wrote:Haved you thought about growing a pair and stop moaning about how you cant kill noobs because you are too lame to kick it with the big boys? My god we might as well line them up liek a firing squad if you want a kill that easily!
Go learn to pvp properly, get in low sec and fight someone who can fight back, and just leave noobies alone
some of the rules concerning noobs are universally applied to the system and it makes certain actions a bannable offense regardless of pilot age.
Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Ships to goo calc - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=107898 |
|
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Exhale.
51
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 15:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
tiberiusric wrote:Haved you thought about growing a pair and stop moaning about how you cant kill noobs because you are too lame to kick it with the big boys? My god we might as well line them up liek a firing squad if you want a kill that easily!
Go learn to pvp properly, get in low sec and fight someone who can fight back, and just leave noobies alone
The issue is that things are based on *system* - and it keeps extending, with potential for hitting the likes of hek, lustrevik, etc. Enjoy getting banned for can flipping in a trade hub, or ninja-looting in a major mission hub, etc |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1765
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 19:45:00 -
[12] - Quote
For example, I had no idea Hatakani was on the list. I pass through there all the time and have on occasion stopped to mess with the locals. There is zero indication in-game that the system is under any sort of special protection.
edit: also creating safe-haven systems is bad because it provides a place for older players to go where it's against the rules for us less savory players to mess with them. That's not the PVP-free zones some of the carebears ask for, but it's a step closer, and is a bad thing. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
197
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 00:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:tiberiusric wrote:Haved you thought about growing a pair and stop moaning about how you cant kill noobs because you are too lame to kick it with the big boys? My god we might as well line them up liek a firing squad if you want a kill that easily!
Go learn to pvp properly, get in low sec and fight someone who can fight back, and just leave noobies alone some of the rules concerning noobs are universally applied to the system and it makes certain actions a bannable offense regardless of pilot age.
Yeah because you can tell who's a real rookie by their character age. Alt accounts of vets are definitely rookie, and casual players who aren't online for hours every day to learn pvp are no longer "rookie" on day 15, right? You turn 18 today, son, now go hang with the big boys, nevermind that you're rolled as an industrialist.
Extend it to all of the 7% of systems in Eve that is highsec and be done with it. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
30
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 18:35:00 -
[14] - Quote
They should either extend it to no systems or all systems. Not some grey area. EvE is supposed to be a harsh place, full of danger. This really isn't helping to convey such a thing as advertised by CCP.
New players could always test out their place on a seperate server [like SiSi for instance or a new server dedicated to rookies]. I like rookie pilots I really do, and most of the time they are not worth shooting because they have nothing of value [plus I usually have no reason to shoot them]. However if this kind of change is expected in future I might have to hire rookie pilots to shoot rookie pilots with a bonus reward for doing so. Then lets see the GM's start banning rookie pilots. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
206
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 21:10:00 -
[15] - Quote
Terranid Meester wrote:They should either extend it to no systems or all systems. Not some grey area. EvE is supposed to be a harsh place, full of danger. This really isn't helping to convey such a thing as advertised by CCP.
New players could always test out their place on a seperate server [like SiSi for instance or a new server dedicated to rookies]. I like rookie pilots I really do, and most of the time they are not worth shooting because they have nothing of value [plus I usually have no reason to shoot them]. However if this kind of change is expected in future I might have to hire rookie pilots to shoot rookie pilots with a bonus reward for doing so. Then lets see the GM's start banning rookie pilots.
Test server is for testing. The idea that SiSi exist for noobs to learn is ridiculous.
Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
30
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 18:28:00 -
[16] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:
Test server is for testing. The idea that SiSi exist for noobs to learn is ridiculous.
I didn't say for definite to use sisi. Just an idea. |
chopper14
Emo Rage Quit
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 03:18:00 -
[17] - Quote
Protectionism is a step back for sure, -áand it doesn't help noobs.
Most noobs click through the intro, -ácoast through the entry missions and disregard warnings as fast as possible to get outside and play for that first time. -á
I never read the intro or did entry missions. -áI vaguely remember a gate warning me I was wandering away from the playground. -áIt wasn't long after before I traversed low sec and took the pod express home. -á
You can continue to extend protection system to system. It won't work. What about all the noobs that travel through Hag? -áOr parts or several other low sec areas daily?
It's not Anyones fault for killing them there. -áThe gate lights up and you prepare to fire. By the time your done researching the targets age it may be gone with it's load of Riggs, drugs, or whatever. -á
Simply painting them pink won't save them from insta lock.
If you make them invincible -áyou create a reconisance exploit.
If you want to coddle noobs and treat them like children, you need to do this.
1. They are pink in space, -áon the HUD, and in local.
2. Whenever they jump into a system outside of their home system, -áthere should be a warning box for all to see that says. -á"Clubbing baby seals is wrong! -áSo is -árepeatedly killing disoriented noobs who are probably lost. -áIf we catch you clubbing baby seals or noobs you will be banned FOREVA!!!"
3. They are worthless. -áThere is nothing in the wreck and no salvage.
4. If there ship is destroyed it respawns at their home system mods and cargo intact. -áSame with there pods. -áIf they don't get podded. They can dock up and "Pod" jump to their home station.
5. They should be restricted to their home systems for at least 2 weeks. -á Give them some hyper gate's that leads to stuff like a consensual combat arena -áwhere they can blow eachother up for lulz withought fear of loosing their stuff.-á There can be different gates like the combat sites on the test server. -á Maybe one where they can fight older players if they wish.-á
But they have to stay in the incubator for two weeks that's the rule. -á Anything less is like leaving the front door of your house open in the middle of NewYork and taking a nap, -áAssuming your toddler won't -ágo outside and that if he does the nice homeless man down the street will bring him safely home.
Eve meet hello kitty IN SPACE!!! |
Chin Hakonen
United Evian Peace Corp
15
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 04:25:00 -
[18] - Quote
Such things don't happen everyday does it and not all rookies get shot at? So why the protection. Well this is space and there will be brutes and bullies. Peace is the way of my war. |
Laechyd Eldgorn
Molden Heath Angels
39
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 10:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
idea of having rookie systems is ridiculous i have no idea which systems are rookie systems
repeatedly messing around with noobies doing tutorials whatever should be of course banned but those aside they dont need any special treatment, especially because there's no way to tell if the pilot is a real noob or not
|
Plaude Pollard
Crimson Cartel
51
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 11:13:00 -
[20] - Quote
Rico Minali wrote:FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:How about we propose a new system: a rookie tag on characters that indicates they are not fair game. The specifics of this tag would need to be worked out (I'll get back to that). If you steal from a wreck or can owned by a rookie, you risk bannage. If you gank a rookie, you risk bannage. If you do anything to ruin the NPE, YOU RISK BANNAGE.
Ways to trigger the rookie flag being turned off: - the ACCOUNT reaches a certain age (alts would never be rookies) - the character joins a player corporation - the character engages in activities outside of the new player experience (tutorials, career agents, SOE arc) - other stuff I haven't though of
This would take some serious work to prevent it being abused, but I think it would solve the problem and prevent people from blundering into warnings and bans by not knowing "The List." This is actually a good idea. Brand new players should not be the target of griefers, and yes it is griefers as ther are plenty of legitimate and capable targets out there. Have the age limit be something sensible like 7 or 14 days, plenty of time for a new player to get used to teh game and finish tutorials even if they are a very casual player. New players should not be the target of pvp. Possibly though if it is capable have it IP linked to avoid abuse by making un-targetable alts. In regards to the age-thing, just make the rule "Trials are rookies, off-Trial are legal targets". And give all suchTrial-rookies a label so you can see clearly whether they're Trials or not. Also makes it easier for recruiters to know if an applicant is on Trial or not. |
|
Bree Okanata
Romex Inc. Dustm3n
29
|
Posted - 2012.07.02 07:27:00 -
[21] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:How about we propose a new system: a rookie tag on characters that indicates they are not fair game. The specifics of this tag would need to be worked out (I'll get back to that). If you steal from a wreck or can owned by a rookie, you risk bannage. If you gank a rookie, you risk bannage. If you do anything to ruin the NPE, YOU RISK BANNAGE.
Ways to trigger the rookie flag being turned off: - the ACCOUNT reaches a certain age (alts would never be rookies) - the character joins a player corporation - the character engages in activities outside of the new player experience (tutorials, career agents, SOE arc) - other stuff I haven't though of
This would take some serious work to prevent it being abused, but I think it would solve the problem and prevent people from blundering into warnings and bans by not knowing "The List." Also: -The character gains X amount of ISK. (Would prevent people from making a trial just to get by the bannage thing. |
Cyprus Black
Segmentum Solar Intrepid Crossing
235
|
Posted - 2012.07.02 13:04:00 -
[22] - Quote
Stop f**king with newbies. That's the reason why this change came about. Because you couldn't leave the newbies alone. You griefers brought this change on. You wouldn't complain about needles when you get a tattoo. So why would you complain about PvP when you play EVE? |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1859
|
Posted - 2012.07.02 13:46:00 -
[23] - Quote
Cyprus Black wrote:Stop f**king with newbies. That's the reason why this change came about. Because you couldn't leave the newbies alone. You griefers brought this change on.
Pretty much this. Remember that we were all noobs once and most of us WOULD have quit the game had we been the target of some of the behavior people seek to defend here.
It doesn't help that CCP has vague rules on who is and who is not fair game. They've resorted to restricting player behavior in a dozen systems in a list that is not directly provided in-game. We're expected to abide by arbitrary rules that are judged on a per-case basis to the point that no one really knows where the line is drawn. With all the effort that is apparently being put into CrimeWatch and making sure players understand exactly what's going on, I sincerely hope this isn't forgotten and people KNOW whether they are clear to respond to the theft of their property, regardless of the system they're in. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
chopper14
Emo Rage Quit
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.11 02:57:00 -
[24] - Quote
Meh.
I wasn't going to mention this but the first time I undocked, it was into a swarm of pirates with **** linked in their bio's. They repped me so I fired. Died. Grabbed a new velator undocked and fired on the closest yellow target, was concorded...several times in a row before one of the friendly **** smugglers was kind enough to let me in on the secret. The last 3 times I was actually firing on the station guns themselves.
Being the victim of some veteran players "cruel" joke was more than made up for by the pats on the back, PVP tips and the 3,000,000 ISK they gave me for being a good sport and for not giving up.
It sounds silly but it reminded me of a rite of passage. It set the tempo for my eve experience.
By the time I finally made it away from that station I knew 2 very important things about eve.
1. There is no safe place in eve.
2. I will play this uniqueley violent game until the server goes dark.
"This is my sandbox! Your just playing in it ;)"
|
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built
1008
|
Posted - 2012.07.11 13:57:00 -
[25] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Cyprus Black wrote:Stop f**king with newbies. That's the reason why this change came about. Because you couldn't leave the newbies alone. You griefers brought this change on. Pretty much this. Remember that we were all noobs once and most of us WOULD have quit the game had we been the target of some of the behavior people seek to defend here.. I was ganked, I was can baited, I was scammed, etc... all within the first 3 hours of play.
My response to each was: 1) ask why it happened (adn what happened) in Rookie help
2) move on with new knowledge
Some of these kids these days don't even know you can be attacked in HS, and then get ganked in something more expensive than a rookie ship, and then rage quit.
Yes, this noobie hassling is uncalled for (especially when done over and over by the same individual... I know a few). But there comes a time when they will encounter the bad acts of EVE. Better to happen earlier when it doesn't hurt as much.
Really though, CCP should make parts of the tutorial (that haven't been made yet) mandatory reading, with a little quiz afterwards. That way these new folks will know what might happen (because most do not read the forums or wiki until after something goes wrong). |
Horus V
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:17:00 -
[26] - Quote
Make 0.9 and 1.0 very painfull for gankers ! Youd losse all your sec status just after one try. -10 sec streight away.
Simple
Don't ban people for shooting other people - this is low CCP , very low |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks The Marmite Collective
2049
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 15:40:00 -
[27] - Quote
Horus V wrote:Make 0.9 and 1.0 very painfull for gankers ! Youd losse all your sec status just after one try. -10 sec streight away.
That's a harsh penalty for a new player who doesn't fully understand what they're doing. It also doesn't deal with canbaiting and canflipping in noob systems. The Skunkworks is recruiting. -áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1540711#post1540711 |
Horus V
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 16:20:00 -
[28] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Horus V wrote:Make 0.9 and 1.0 very painfull for gankers ! Youd losse all your sec status just after one try. -10 sec streight away.
That's a harsh penalty for a new player who doesn't fully understand what they're doing. It also doesn't deal with canbaiting and canflipping in noob systems.
|
Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
159
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 19:20:00 -
[29] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:How about we propose a new system: a rookie tag on characters that indicates they are not fair game. The specifics of this tag would need to be worked out (I'll get back to that). If you steal from a wreck or can owned by a rookie, you risk bannage. If you gank a rookie, you risk bannage. If you do anything to ruin the NPE, YOU RISK BANNAGE.
Ways to trigger the rookie flag being turned off: - the ACCOUNT reaches a certain age (alts would never be rookies) - the character joins a player corporation - the character engages in activities outside of the new player experience (tutorials, career agents, SOE arc) - other stuff I haven't though of
This would take some serious work to prevent it being abused, but I think it would solve the problem and prevent people from blundering into warnings and bans by not knowing "The List."
Here's another quote from the author of that list:
GM Homonoia wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Since nothing of much economic value happens in rookie systems, the only thing this really applies to is something like "are Hulks in rookie systems 'rookies'?"
Dear lord... Hulks are advanced T2 ships. I am not going to dignify this with a real answer.
Translation: You pop a real rookie, they'll nail your ass to the wall. You pop a vet, vet whines about it being in a rookie system - they'll tell the vet to plant it. Not an issue unless you are indiscriminate with who you go after...
|
Roki Romani
Rokirith Inc Genx 7
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 13:53:00 -
[30] - Quote
Give the rookies ships mini-reinforcement timers. If a rookie's shield tank breaks, they go into reinforced mode for 15 seconds. If they happen to be in a system where concord responds faster than that, then they get to live. :P |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |