Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lord FunkyMunky
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 18:03:00 -
[1]
Come on every person almost that studied the hacking skill and saw a secure can instantly thought hey secure... hacking... i can hack it!
Here's my proposal, allow Hacking V to unlock a new Skill, Secure System Hacking skill that for each level reduces secure can hacking time by 10%.
At Secure System Hacking 1, you could lock onto and move within 2500m of a secure can, and begin to hack it, but as soon as you begin to hack it and for the duration of the hack, you become a Flashy Red, to the corp that owns the can itself for the duration + 15m, also the corp would be notified via eve notification of the hack.
The Hack will take i dont know 10m? At SSH1 and 5m at SSH5, after the hack is completed the hack will allow for the can to be accessed by the hacker for 15m
The flash red during hack, and the long duration should give people a chance in the offended corp to respond and defend the can if they so feel like it.
|
Magnus Orin
United Systems Navy Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 23:50:00 -
[2]
Hacking should be integrated into pvp.
Nothing in space should be safe, no matter how "secure"
Supported also, don't you hate those people that trick you into thinking their signature is part of their post? |
Anna Lifera
Domestic Disturbance
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 03:26:00 -
[3]
10 minutes sounds good since it allows the alert miner more than enough time to switch to a hauler and empty out the can if he's not able to fight back at all. and at the same time, it wouldn't be quick enough to force him to be glued to his screen at all times.
|
Tragu
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 03:35:00 -
[4]
Definatly supported. But i have a few additions.
- Make it so that it is a module that they use, preferably in the high slot so that they may have to sacrifice one of their weapons to hack cans.
- Make the module like a salvager, so that it has a cycle time, but has a random chance of suceeding, and make the cycle time 5min. and the chance of suceeding be 25% so at lev 5 SSH (discussed next poing) you would have a 50% chance of suceeding every cycle.
- Make the skills Hacking and SSH change this cycle time/% chance of sucess. For hacking you have a 5% better chance of sucess per cycle, and for SSH you have a 5% less cycle time per level
That's all i can bring to this idea.
|
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 16:19:00 -
[5]
Supported in general, I'll leave balance suggestions to the pros.
|
James Tritanius
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 16:33:00 -
[6]
yes.
|
Tason Hyena
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 19:34:00 -
[7]
Not supported.
It could be used just as another form of canflipping, and would destroy the GSC's usefulness, as the container's owner may be unable to or incapable of preventing the theft. Either due to the inability to field a force against the can hacker (nothing stopping a cruiser or bc from doing it, and jetcanning the stuff for an industrial) or not being online or in the area.
Mining already has plenty of ways to force loss of safety and risk. It doesn't really need more.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperium Technologies
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 19:52:00 -
[8]
when the skill is at lvl 5 it would allow you to hack and take over ownership of off line poses. So you could starve pos off fuel and hack it.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 20:29:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Magnus Orin Hacking should be integrated into pvp.
Nothing in space should be safe, no matter how "secure"
Supported
|
Tason Hyena
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 20:44:00 -
[10]
I get the feeling that is just another one of those posts designed to run solo or small group miners out of the business, and enrich the big 0.0 groups and larger mining consortiums.
|
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperium Technologies
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 20:55:00 -
[11]
i honestly fail to understand how hacking GSC's is gonna drive miners bancrupt, most of em use jetcans anyway+ you have to hack the container again for every portion of ore. ALthough it begs the question: how about these containers anhored in low-sec? It should also count as aggression so that if container is anchored next to a pos, anyone hacking it will be shot by the pos.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 21:01:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Tason Hyena Not supported.
It could be used just as another form of canflipping, and would destroy the GSC's usefulness, as the container's owner may be unable to or incapable of preventing the theft. Either due to the inability to field a force against the can hacker (nothing stopping a cruiser or bc from doing it, and jetcanning the stuff for an industrial) or not being online or in the area.
Mining already has plenty of ways to force loss of safety and risk. It doesn't really need more.
Surely you have to fight anyway in 0.0 and lowsec and you have the option for anchoring the can in a safespot, if you use it just for storage. It would mean, that you couldn't just leave them laying around all over the place.
In highsec you are still protected by concord. The hacker maybe flashy to you, but he can't freely initiate aggresion or access the can until the hacking is done. During that time you can just fly to the can and empty the contents. He can try to suicide you or just leave with nothing. He can't do a canflip, since he can't unanchor the can. He can just clean up unattended secure cans that he has managed to find.
It would change the nature of secure cans though. It would still give you limited protection even when you anchor it where others can find it, but you couldn't just leave them laying around or you will risk losing the content.
I'm not a secure can user, so I'm not going to support or bash this implementation, but I like the idea of deepening some of the current skills, and hacking is one of the more obvious skill to develop.
|
Xander XacXorien
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 22:37:00 -
[13]
Nope not suppoerted.
For many reasons: 1) A secure can is a secure can - notice the wording "secure". 2) Decrypting secure information takes days to years with todays technology based on 128 bit encoding. Quite frankly 10 minutes is stupidly insulting. 3) It's basically making a feature of the game redundant, it's a feature to be used not abused. If you are that way inclined just remove the feature. 4) The obvious defence would be to deploy hundreds of cans making the task of hacking worthless, creating more lag. 5) Why the continued knock on miners ? I'm not a miner but quite frankly I've had enough of this crap, it's time the we saw some reverse of the action in the capsuleer comunity. Given the long suffering of miners all mining activities should receive a boost and mining ships should gain some teeth. 6) There is no valid reason why things shouldnt be left as they are, this feature would only be used by a very small number of Eve players and the net result in secure cans no longer being used results in a complete waste of time in development.
|
Mielono
Caldari SWARTA
|
Posted - 2010.01.24 22:05:00 -
[14]
make secure cans larger so that they can be used effectively and in return I would not mind this coming into effect. But the current secure cans are only used because they cannot flipped otherwise they are practically useless.
|
Wyke Mossari
Gallente Staner Industries
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 14:14:00 -
[15]
Tentative support subject to sever restrictions.
It shouldn't be enriching enough to provide a career but should be a difficult possible as an instrument of war.
|
Perrigrene
|
Posted - 2010.01.31 12:32:00 -
[16]
Not supported.
Be a 'man' and declare war on the can's owners, if you really want the stuff they leave in it. If it is a NPC corp go declare war on a real corp, problem solved.
The 'problem' with hacking secure cans really isn't that stuff is left in them, people with a brain won't leave anything valuable in them for more than a few minutes, hours at most. It is the now added ability to can flip from a secure can, which defeats the purpose of a secure can.
There are plenty of noobs jetcanning and even not so noobs doing it you can go pick on them to pad your killmails.
|
Sedilis
Lead Farmers
|
Posted - 2010.02.03 12:55:00 -
[17]
Supported in principle but is there anything worthwhile in a GSC? Spending 5 min hacking for 5000m3 of Veld does not sound that great
|
Sepheir Sepheron
Caldari BAHRAM Military
|
Posted - 2010.02.03 13:47:00 -
[18]
Not supported, I smell 10 battleships remote repairing a tanked cov ops who is hacking the can.
|
Xonus Calimar
Terra Incognita Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.02.03 20:29:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Sedilis Supported in principle...
-Xonus ___________________________________ My opinions may not necessarily reflect the opinions of my Corporation or Alliance. |
Amy Garzan
Gallente The Warp Rats Veni Vidi Vici
|
Posted - 2010.02.04 16:21:00 -
[20]
not supported.
war dec them or can flip them in current system. that or go to low/null sec and just shoot them. -------------------------------------------------- 101010 The Answer to Life, The Universe, and Everything |
|
Bhattran
|
Posted - 2010.02.04 23:55:00 -
[21]
Not supported.
OP and supporters clearly are targeting miners because they can't mine themselves and need precious ore to sustain themselves but are not capable of training mining skills.
If you need to steal from miners so bad you need to try to introduce a change to play that makes items and their method of use moot you are a failure.
|
sella buya
|
Posted - 2010.02.05 02:02:00 -
[22]
...no |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |