I for one endorse this meta griefing of highsec griefers

Literally the only thing CCP Greyscale cares about is removing individual aggression flags. The resultant gameplay being good or making sense doesn't factor in to it.

Funniest thing I ever had happen to me was missioning, a ninja salvager came in, started his thing. This was a mission called "pot meet kettle" where you shoot mines that spawn rogue drones (but where it also does damage apparently to everyone/everything in the pocket).

He jumped in, I blew up like 4 to 6 mines and killed his ship, he warped out, came back in a Tengu, fired on me and got CONCORDED then started bitching in local about how I fired on him and was a cheating hacker.

CCP Greyscale:

Can you please explain to me what it is you're looking for in the Crimewatch system? I'm genuinely interested in providing you with input that I've talked through with other players and had a very positive reaction from. I helped out Sreegs in his quest for labeling botters and ex-convicts, and I received much better feedback from him in response to the player suggestions I compiled. I felt as though player input made an impact in how he's planning his "Scarlet Letter" approach. Inversely, I feel as though the comments players have made here have been shrugged off and disregarded. You seem defensive of your current plan of action, rather than open to suggestions and criticisms.

For example, your response to the Suspect/Vigilante system that was proposed and refined in the ideas and discussion forum section was very dismissive. You say that a system allowing suspects and vigilantes to fight one another "isn't the effect we're going for", but you don't state what that is. You also claimed that such a system would introduce transitive, individual kill rights, when in fact it would do just the opposite. Kill rights would no longer be convoluted because you would know EXACTLY who you could shoot, who could shoot you, and what the consequences of assisting would be. You'd be on one side or the other if you chose to participate. Simple.

As long as you continue to say "oh this is not what we want" and don't tell us what you want, we can't help you. Your current suggestions allowing for invulnerable logistics, and suspects who can't reasonably expect to retaliate are not effective in solving any of the problems of high-sec aggression, and are detrimental to high-sec PvP. By high-sec PvP, we most nearly mean fighting in high-sec that happens outside of war decs. In completely redesigning the aggression system, you have the opportunity to create robust, dynamic PvP situations that aren't based on suspects being easily killed because "you committed a crime, tough luck".

If you don't tell us what you want, we can't help you - unless of course, you don't want help or suggestions on how to create a kickass overhaul to get more people fighting each other.

Funniest thing I ever had happen to me was missioning, a ninja salvager came in, started his thing. This was a mission called "pot meet kettle" where you shoot mines that spawn rogue drones (but where it also does damage apparently to everyone/everything in the pocket).

He jumped in, I blew up like 4 to 6 mines and killed his ship, he warped out, came back in a Tengu, fired on me and got CONCORDED then started bitching in local about how I fired on him and was a cheating hacker.

. Your current suggestions allowing for invulnerable logistics, and suspects who can't reasonably expect to retaliate are not effective in solving any of the problems of high-sec aggression

In a future with no individual timers at all everyone can look forward to getting concorded without warning even more often.

He loses at eve. Every ninja salvager knows which missions not to salvage while live. That is one of the top ones.

Hilarious tears collected!

I guess they are still aiming for more "meaningful" PvP, the issue being that they seem to be going about it by nerfing can flipping and whatever they deem to be meaningless PvP. All the while not bothering to actually add anything to help generate meaningful PvP.

Either that or they're just trying to get rid of aggression maps, no matter the cost.

It should probably be noted that individual aggression flags are the only thing keeping you able to shoot someone once the original reason why you're able to shoot them expires. And in situations where you don't gain individual timers for attacking a person or object what happens when you're still shooting when the original reason you're able to shoot it stops being the case is that you get concorded instantly and without warning.

For example if you're shooting somebody who you're in corp with and that person is accepted into a different corp, or leaves their ship, docks up and quits corp while you're still shooting you get concorded without warning. Or if you're attacking a container like a GSC because you have aggression against its owner and the timer against the owner runs out then you get concorded without warning.

In a future with no individual timers at all everyone can look forward to getting concorded without warning even more often.

Except that it seems apparent that a system where suspects can flag themselves as such and vigilantes can do the same creates very meaningful PvP. You can get a group of friends and roam around high-sec as suspects trying to find fights from another group flagged as vigilantes.

That seems more meaningful to me than just flipping a can and hoping a miner shoots at you.

In fact, with such a system, a meaningful engagement might go like this:

1. Newbro in a Rifter flips a can, and becomes a suspect
2. The miner flips the can back (an action against a suspect) or shoots him, and becomes a Vigilante
3. Rifter begins shooting the miner, but the miner warps in a neutral logistic and begins to rep him. Repping the miner, who is a vigilante, turns the neutral RR into a vigilante
4. The Rifter tackles the logi instead, leaving the miner to warp off and come back in a combat ship.
5. A roaming suspect gang passes through and notices from the new icons next to the two vigilantes in local that they are nearby, and the Rifter upon seeing the local spike of friendlies tells them where he has the logi tackled at
6. The roaming gang comes in and begins killing the re-shipped miner and his logi, since all suspects and all vigilantes can shoot each other, regardless of where their flags came from.
7. The suspects hold the two vigilantes in the belt, trying to escalate the fight
8. The miner calls for his friends who come in, unflagged, and engage the suspects, automatically flagging themselves as vigilantes
9. The two groups fight until a winner comes out on top, or the fight continues to escalate with more people - nearby suspects/vigilantes seeing in their intel channel where the fight is taking place

That's somewhat of an unrealistic scenario, but I think it gives you an idea of how things could escalate and bring together groups of people to create a unique PvP experience in high-sec that normally would have been a Rifter getting out-repped by neutral RR that he can't deal with.

First part of the rework shipped in Escalation, so no, not vaporware. That stage was all behind-the-scenes (as detailed in the presentation at Fanfest, which is on Youtube somewhere); the next step is to start implementing the redesign.

Also, the current design explicitly allows you to return fire in all cases

I think any system where you flag for PVP would be largely denounced by the nonconsentuial PVP ppl. That would cause an outroar the Jedi would feel lol

Except that it seems apparent that a system where suspects can flag themselves as such and vigilantes can do the same creates very meaningful PvP. You can get a group of friends and roam around high-sec as suspects trying to find fights from another group flagged as vigilantes.

That seems more meaningful to me than just flipping a can and hoping a miner shoots at you.

In fact, with such a system, a meaningful engagement might go like this:

1. Newbro in a Rifter flips a can, and becomes a suspect
2. The miner flips the can back (an action against a suspect) or shoots him, and becomes a Vigilante
3. Rifter begins shooting the miner, but the miner warps in a neutral logistic and begins to rep him. Repping the miner, who is a vigilante, turns the neutral RR into a vigilante
4. The Rifter tackles the logi instead, leaving the miner to warp off and come back in a combat ship.
5. A roaming suspect gang passes through and notices from the new icons next to the two vigilantes in local that they are nearby, and the Rifter upon seeing the local spike of friendlies tells them where he has the logi tackled at
6. The roaming gang comes in and begins killing the re-shipped miner and his logi, since all suspects and all vigilantes can shoot each other, regardless of where their flags came from.
7. The suspects hold the two vigilantes in the belt, trying to escalate the fight
8. The miner calls for his friends who come in, unflagged, and engage the suspects, automatically flagging themselves as vigilantes
9. The two groups fight until a winner comes out on top, or the fight continues to escalate with more people - nearby suspects/vigilantes seeing in their intel channel where the fight is taking place

That's somewhat of an unrealistic scenario, but I think it gives you an idea of how things could escalate and bring together groups of people to create a unique PvP experience in high-sec that normally would have been a Rifter getting out-repped by neutral RR that he can't deal with.

I presume fighting would extend the length of the suspect flag, I'm also guessing you wouldn't be able to shoot a GSC because you wouldn't be able to pick up individual aggression against the owner/corp?

That is quite an idealistic scenario.

But anyway, I think you misunderstood what I meant by "meaningful". I meant to kill for financial gain, for power or to hurt a rival. As opposed to fighting for the sake of fighting, so for example killing people to stop them doing exploration sites in your area would be for a purpose. But that's currently impossible in Eve, because war decs are massively limited and easily avoidable.

Similarly currently there is almost never any point PvPing purely for profit, because almost everything expensive is moved via neutral alts. Neutral mining and the like is also just as bad, many corporations will essentially disband on a war coming in, only to rejoin ot afterward. In the meantime mining with no ill effect in NPC corps.

Cops and robbers...easy like faction warfare.

You make bounty hunters...We kill them alot

we get loyalty points and our bounties

We get LP and their frozen corpses

would be an interesting idea to have an npc corp you can sign on for to assit concord so that if u flag as a suspect these individuals that ally with concord can then take action insted of the entirity of local

Oh and this does 2 things it actually gives the bounty system a purpose other then to give us a seperate bank account...And you

could even take it a step further and concord could control our bounties..

Everytime we kill one of their Deputies they raise our bounties

So pretty much... log in alts, get them into remote sensor boosting logis, and sit by a gate in Jita with your main collecting free suspect bacon in your invincible insta lock bs?

OK.

We allow one-time mappings but we don't make them transitive, ie if you're a suspect and someone shoots you then you can always fire back, but if that person has a third party repping them, you can't shoot the logi because we don't allow aggression transfer like that (for obvious reasons).

We allow one-time mappings but we don't make them transitive, ie if you're a suspect and someone shoots you then you can always fire back, but if that person has a third party repping them, you can't shoot the logi because we don't allow aggression transfer like that (for obvious reasons).

Similarly currently there is almost never any point PvPing purely for profit, because almost everything expensive is moved via neutral alts. Neutral mining and the like is also just as bad, many corporations will essentially disband on a war coming in, only to rejoin ot afterward. In the meantime mining with no ill effect in NPC corps.

I find this extremely funny cause CCP says the (never enforced) griefing rules say that if you do it for a non-gain reason, its called griefing (but life I said, never enforced)