Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Desirsar
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 03:02:00 -
[1]
Design theory question as much as a new suggestion. What possible reasons are there for scanning to not be an aggressive act that shouldn't be considered the exception that needs to be worked around? (That is, if scanning was made aggressive, scanning fleet members being a "problem" is minor compared to the benefits of the change.)
Question brought on by someone in my alliance being shot down in highsec while carrying two PLEXes - attacker has no concern for their security status or CONCORD response, corp mate moves in and loots the PLEXes with no repercussion. (An alternative fix would be making player wrecks in high security system not involved in a war belong to the pilot of the wreck rather than the killer.)
|
Snoodaard Thrasy
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 03:08:00 -
[2]
The same thing just happened to me. In 0.9 sec at a gate. What point is Concord police by the way, if you can just do this? Get shot down by the police while someone else just walks away with your stuff. Wouldn't real life police get you your stuff back?
|
Dian'h Might
Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 03:28:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Dian''h Might on 01/02/2011 03:32:20
Originally by: Desirsar Design theory question as much as a new suggestion. What possible reasons are there for scanning to not be an aggressive act
So that suicide gankers will tend to hit the ships that are worthwhile rather than every single ship that jumps through the gate. It was probably also originally intended as a mechanic to spy on people and find out their trade routes and what they trade, stuff like that.
Originally by: Desirsar Question brought on by someone in my alliance being shot down in highsec while carrying two PLEXes
There's not really any reason to move a plex, everything about them can be done remotely (unless he was taking advantage of some cross region price markup, but the difference is usually hardly worth the risk of transport). Also, tank your haulers. Every ~9k of ehp you can get adds another battleship to whats required to suicide gank you.
Originally by: Desirsar corp mate moves in and loots the PLEXes with no repercussion.
There is repercussion, corpmate is now flagged to the gankees corp and the suicide ganker has lost his ship, lost his sec status, and has a 15 minute GCC.
Originally by: Desirsar (An alternative fix would be making player wrecks in high security system not involved in a war belong to the pilot of the wreck rather than the killer.)
Pretty sure it already works this way. Also, the kind of people who get suicide ganked aren't normally the kind of people who are capable of taking advantage of 15 a minute agro timer.
edit:
Originally by: Snoodaard Thrasy Wouldn't real life police get you your stuff back?
Not necessarily, it can be very hard to get your stuff back IRL if it was stolen from you. A lot of times it'll be held over as evidence, stolen from the evidence locker, sold before the police catch up with the guy, or trashed to the point of being worthless to you anymore. Also, in real life spaceships don't have FTL drives or fly like submarines. - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac" |
Sem Nan
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 03:32:00 -
[4]
Well, i know it's a beaten dog.. but CONCORD's job is not to protect capsuleers, it's job is to punish those who break the law.
But yes.. although i do believe that scanning a ship should trigger an agression-timer is a logic concept, it would put those who scan you in danger of being shot, and i'm not sure how removing that card would affect the card castle that is EVE's mechanic.
|
Mike Voidstar
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 05:29:00 -
[5]
I don't know if just looking is worthy of the death penalty.
The problem is that EVE has only one punishment, and that one isn't very effective---death.
Is just looking at you a crime worthy of death? I would not think so.
Personally, I think there should be some form of mechanic that allows for monetary fining of someone for lesser crimes.
I also think that locking someone should be the crime, not the scanning. That way you fit a passive scanner and don't openly lock. Also, there should be some way of sheilding a bay or a can so they can't see everything they want too. Not a 100% chance, but some opportunity for smuggling should be possible.
|
Rek Seven
Gallente Guy Fawkes Trust Fund
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 11:24:00 -
[6]
Sounds like it's working as intended. Is it that hard to use a covert ops ship and avoiding flying on autopilot?
Scanning is not an aggressive act for the same reason that you are not arrested for shoplifting when you look in a shop window.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 11:33:00 -
[7]
losing valuables when you arent paying attention or taking any precaution steps prior transports is an intended game mechanic and is fine IMO.
Carrying PLEXs for about 600 mil in a 300k frigate and losing them due to that is your own fault.
Concord is not a police like we know it, it is only responsible for punishing the aggressor and they're effective at that.
High sec is, as it says just high sec, not safe sec.
|
Mashie Saldana
Minmatar Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 11:42:00 -
[8]
Why should it be an agressive act to just look?
Just stop flying afk in tin cans full of valuables and no one will have time to scan you in the first place. Or get an Orca and place the valuables in the corp hangar array where it can't be scanned at all.
Stop playing victim, play smart.
|
ITTigerClawIK
Amarr Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 14:21:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Desirsar ...Question brought on by someone in my alliance being shot down in highsec while carrying two PLEXes - ....
Wait.... Those PLEX containers were REAL!?!?!?!?!?! Dam it i thought it was bait
Sig space reclaimed in the name of me -courtesy of Tiggy ([email protected]) |
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar Cloakers
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 14:30:00 -
[10]
Basically cargo scanners and ship scanners were introduced on the release of EvE. At that time it was extremely difficult to suicide gank people.
As tech developed, it became much easier, concord was upgraded and hp was upgraded to restrict it again.
As more tech developed and extremely high alpha damage became possible, along with buffed insurance, its now become very easy again.
So basically, old modules + new weapons and mechanics which were not envisaged at time of EvE's deployment make them OP, they just haven't kept pace.
--------------------------------------------- I AM BETTER THAN YOU. |
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 15:47:00 -
[11]
in fact, the scanning only works for noobs.
Who doesnt want to be scanned/suicided, uses T2 hauler, coverts, mwd-cloak-warp-trick, orcas or just freighters, which allow much higher valued goods to be transported.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 15:49:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Infinity Ziona Basically cargo scanners and ship scanners were introduced on the release of EvE. At that time it was extremely difficult to suicide gank people.
As tech developed, it became much easier, concord was upgraded and hp was upgraded to restrict it again.
As more tech developed and extremely high alpha damage became possible, along with buffed insurance, its now become very easy again.
So basically, old modules + new weapons and mechanics which were not envisaged at time of EvE's deployment make them OP, they just haven't kept pace.
^This
Supported
|
Spirulina Laxissima
Minmatar TotalControl Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 06:57:00 -
[13]
Well, we've got this Neocom device that broadcasts our information to everyone in the system. That's how we get to see everyones name when we click their ship, and why we see them in local without them necessarily having said anything. And that's how faction customs-agents know you're transporting illegal goods.
So the cargo 'scanner' is basically just a module that makes your Neocom dump your freight-logs. The necessary infrastructure exists, and the cargo 'scanner' exploits it.
Disabling your Neocom would be disastrous, as then there would be no way to identify your status (friend/foe), and you would be principally flagged 'foe'. Just like anyone encountered in the uncharted regions on ancient maps (back when they were still scribbled on paper with animal blood or whatever): Here be bandits' 'Here be dragons' 'Here be lawless savages' -giving any law abiding member of society a right to kill them & take their stuff. (who were the real savages I wonder?)
So I'm afraid it's not as easy to solve this as you think. Maybe we could modify our Neocoms to notify us whenever it dumps our logs? (*+.,_,.#¦¦`*+.,_,.#¦¦`*+.,_,.#¦)
):
Incarna be dammed! |
Sakura Shiro
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 07:24:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Desirsar Question brought on by someone in my alliance being shot down in highsec while carrying two PLEXes - attacker has no concern for their security status or CONCORD response, corp mate moves in and loots the PLEXes with no repercussion. (An alternative fix would be making player wrecks in high security system not involved in a war belong to the pilot of the wreck rather than the killer.)
you are asking the wrong question....the more important question is why your alliance would allow an idiot to fly plex in anything short of a freighter or an orca and still be in your alliance. Unless ofc you are in space monkeys, explains it all.
have to ask...was this plex moved in something better than a kestrel?
Don't like scanning...like making an alt to put the crap in a can and double wrap it in a courier. Or fly an orca, corp hangar cannot be scanned...and for added pleasure does not drop when popped.
|
Hephaesteus
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 09:19:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Dian'h Might There is repercussion, corpmate is now flagged to the gankees corp and the suicide ganker has lost his ship, lost his sec status, and has a 15 minute GCC.
1. So he is flagged to the ganked players corp does he care? No of course he doesn't it means nothing to him job done.
2. Ganker just lost his ship, does he care? No of course not he just made 3-6 times its worth and probably insured it anyway. Insurance should be made invalid for aggressive acts.
3. Is he worried he lost some sec status. No, I have seen more than a few -5 players in high sec and as long as they are careful they can travel through empire without worry.
4. 15 minute GCC, big deal.
The ganked player is to blame though. Never ever transport valuable goods through empire in paper thin ships.
|
waltari
Caldari Midnight Sentinels Midnight Space Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 09:57:00 -
[16]
Eve is not supposed to be safe, its open world, everyone is prety much doin what hes best on ... someone is scamming, someone is decing newb corps and then ransoming, someone is ganking on undock, someone is tears, smacktalk and rage collector by shooting ships carrying valuable items ... THIS IS EVE! As someone wrote here already .. Concord is not there to protect anyone, but to punish renegades/pirates/agressors/u name it .... correct me if iam wrong.
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari Certified Household Sweeping Consulting
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 10:07:00 -
[17]
because ganking is intended game feature
|
HeadWar
The Executioners BOGLYFT
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 10:20:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Mike Voidstar Also, there should be some way of sheilding a bay or a can so they can't see everything they want too. Not a 100% chance, but some opportunity for smuggling should be possible.
Scanning is already random, not sure about the percentage, somewhere around 50% chance for each item in cargo/module fitted to ship --- Не поговорите русского. F1, F2, F3... |
Keras Authion
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 10:24:00 -
[19]
I don't know if scanning should be illegal, but it should be harder to do. A scan-countering module, longer scanner cycle time, flagging the scanner to the corp or some other way would be preferable imo.
Quote: There is repercussion, corpmate is now flagged to the gankees corp and the suicide ganker has lost his ship, lost his sec status, and has a 15 minute GCC.
The repercussions are a joke.
Being flagged means nothing if the hauler doesn't have corpmates escorting him. Even if there is a corpmate in-system, they will be unlikely to find the looting guy before he docks/leaves system for the 15 minutes. How many corps have people in every system along the way to the nearest trade hub in their prime time?
Suicide ganker lost an insured ship. That's what, 10 million for several times that in loot. Even when divided with the other gankers it's going to end up with more iskies for him. Otherwise the guy wouldn't have ganked the ship.
Sec status loss can be regained with some ratting/missioning or ignored altogether if you don't mind paying attention to the navy, in which case it's not a punishment at all.
The GCC isn't dangerous either. A random passerby is extremely unlikely to shoot you in hisec and if you have a safespot you can just sit there for the duration. Or dock.
Of course you shouldn't carry anything valuable with a ship made out of paper and with something really expensive getting an armed escort would be a good idea too but at the moment the penalties for ganking are more like a slap with a newspaper on the head.
|
AFK Master
AFK Chartered System Management
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 10:35:00 -
[20]
So let me get this straight, you want scanning to be made an aggressive act because some numpty in your alliance carried 2 plex in a ship that wasn't a Covert ops cloaker? He and others like him, are the reason this should remain as is.
CCP have given us the tools to avoid this, in fact hauling now in certain ships is almost 100% safe in Empire.
He wins the Darwin award this month.
|
|
Jokerface666
Amarr The Warp Squad
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 11:17:00 -
[21]
no point to change something,
Scanning is needed for spying out ppl,
For the haulers. 3 warp core stabs II, align rigs II, medium shield extenders II and a inertia mod II mixed with a Transport Ship + Cloak, and you should be fine most of the time. and if someone is fool enough to carry 2 PLEXes around.... damn i'd sucide gank him myself, just for the LOL effect and the killmail.
Br, Joker o7
|
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 11:50:00 -
[22]
The OP has a point.
Targeting isn't considered an agressive act; firing at someone, however, is. A cogent case could be made saying scanning is more than just targeting, and is, in fact, a form of electronic warfare. Having said that, making scanning an aggressive act would be overkill if you were to get Concorded for it. Simply giving killright to the one being scanned, without also getting Concord intervention, might be a good compromise.
The overall problem with suicide ganking -- much like botting -- lies not with the mechanism itself, but with CCP's lack of interest in enforcing the rules. I.e., in not allowing recycling of accounts, etc.
N.B. Carrying PLEX-es in an unescorted Kestrel remains an act of stupidity, though, warranting a different kind of scan: namely that of the brain. --
|
Jokerface666
Amarr The Warp Squad
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 11:54:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Ranka Mei The OP has a point.
Targeting isn't considered an agressive act; firing at someone, however, is. A cogent case could be made saying scanning is more than just targeting, and is, in fact, a form of electronic warfare. Having said that, making scanning an aggressive act would be overkill if you were to get Concorded for it. Simply giving killright to the one being scanned, without also getting Concord intervention, might be a good compromise.
The overall problem with suicide ganking -- much like botting -- lies not with the mechanism itself, but with CCP's lack of interest in enforcing the rules. I.e., in not allowing recycling of accounts, etc.
N.B. Carrying PLEX-es in an unescorted Kestrel remains an act of stupidity, though, warranting a different kind of scan: namely that of the brain.
EVE is based on the chaos theory, so there SHOULD not be ANY rules at all, we should be happy to have highsec and secstatus and stuff.
Scanning is not an agressive act, BECOUSE it does nothing to your ships, it couses no damage like guns, it does not change your Ship atributes like Targeting range, speed and so on.
So scanning is ok.
The only point in this thread is that someone lost 2 PLEXes and now hates are Suicide gankers, becouse it was his own fault....
This duscussion is pointless from my point of view.
BR, Joker o7
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 14:09:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Tippia on 02/02/2011 14:13:17
Originally by: Desirsar What possible reasons are there for scanning to not be an aggressive act that shouldn't be considered the exception that needs to be worked around?
Because it's not aggressive? It doesn't harm you in any way.
In fact, why should it be considered aggressive?
Originally by: Keras Authion The repercussions are a joke.
They're a joke because the victims make them a joke. They carry stuff that make them worth-while targets without any kind of protection. Being ganked in that situation is exactly how it should be, especially since there are numerous ways to avoid it altogether.
They could make the repercussions count, but they don't ù that's their choice and their problem and not something the game mechanics need to be adjusted to "fix". ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Jokerface666
Amarr The Warp Squad
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 14:33:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 02/02/2011 14:13:17
Originally by: Desirsar What possible reasons are there for scanning to not be an aggressive act that shouldn't be considered the exception that needs to be worked around?
Because it's not aggressive? It doesn't harm you in any way.
In fact, why should it be considered aggressive?
Originally by: Keras Authion The repercussions are a joke.
They're a joke because the victims make them a joke. They carry stuff that make them worth-while targets without any kind of protection. Being ganked in that situation is exactly how it should be, especially since there are numerous ways to avoid it altogether.
They could make the repercussions count, but they don't ù that's their choice and their problem and not something the game mechanics need to be adjusted to "fix".
EXACTLY.
you do not run around with a 5kg gold brick in reallife, are you? If you do so, please let me know where and i'll come and gank you in RL too...
Br, Joker
|
Desirsar
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:17:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Jokerface666 you do not run around with a 5kg gold brick in reallife, are you? If you do so, please let me know where and i'll come and gank you in RL too...
If I had that to do it with, I would. I'd probably intentionally go to bad neighborhoods and definitely always have it visible when carrying it. If they try, they'll likely find a gold bar is soft, but still good for crushing a skull. The important part - the police (CCP in the EVE example, not CONCORD) would not let the thief keep what they gained from it, though they would probably not have the CONCORD response of killing them.
Side issue/change that would solve the specific situation - PLEXes should not be an item, and should have their own universe wide market. The only reason I can imagine for the current implementation is hoping that accounts will somehow forget to use or manage to destroy PLEXes without them being redeemed. I'd be curious to hear the rate of chargebacks CCP receives for payments on PLEX that are lost, and how often the credit card companies side with the customer.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:25:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Desirsar Side issue/change that would solve the specific situation - PLEXes should not be an item, and should have their own universe wide market.
Better solution: don't transport PLEXes. There's no need to ever do that (and even if you absolutely have to, there are ways of doing it that are make ship scanning a non-issue).
This specific situation is best solved by people not being stupid. Unfortunately, CCP can't really fix that. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Mashie Saldana
Minmatar Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:26:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Mashie Saldana on 03/02/2011 14:26:12
Originally by: Keras Authion
Quote: There is repercussion, corpmate is now flagged to the gankees corp and the suicide ganker has lost his ship, lost his sec status, and has a 15 minute GCC.
The repercussions are a joke.
The victim will also have 30 days worth of kill rights on the suiciders. That is plenty of time to track down and kill the suiciders when they are busy running missions or similar.
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:32:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Desirsar I'd be curious to hear the rate of chargebacks CCP receives for payments on PLEX that are lost, and how often the credit card companies side with the customer.
None because when you change a GTC or ISK for a Plex, you are buying an in-game item. All the credit card company will be interested in, is whether the GTC worked or not. If it did, then a correct and proper purchase was made, end off.
You never have to leave the station with a Plex and if you do, then you take the risk. Greed can be a powerful motivator, but it can also be a massive downfall for many. The friend of the OP falls into the downfall category and as Master said, wins the Darwin award of the month.
Originally by: Allestin Villimar Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it.
Originally by: Torothanax Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive. |
GyokZoli
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:37:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Desirsar Design theory question as much as a new suggestion. What possible reasons are there for scanning to not be an aggressive act that shouldn't be considered the exception that needs to be worked around? (That is, if scanning was made aggressive, scanning fleet members being a "problem" is minor compared to the benefits of the change.)
Question brought on by someone in my alliance being shot down in highsec while carrying two PLEXes - attacker has no concern for their security status or CONCORD response, corp mate moves in and loots the PLEXes with no repercussion. (An alternative fix would be making player wrecks in high security system not involved in a war belong to the pilot of the wreck rather than the killer.)
Why did he carry PLEXes? I don't see any good reason which would justify this.
|
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:45:00 -
[31]
2 PLEXes are about 600mil and usual ingame items, whats makes them special in comparison to all other stuff?? People lose much higher valuable items all the time, this is fu**ing daily business.
|
NinjaSpud
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 15:56:00 -
[32]
STOP OP!!! STOP HIM NOW!!!
SUPPORT PIRACY YAAARRRR
|
Root'er
NeoCorteX Industry Shadow of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2011.02.03 15:57:00 -
[33]
i don see any problem in scanning, it's not a hostile action just by itself if u wanna keep ur stuff - u gotta defend it if u stupid nuff to carry 2 plexes in cargo and got blown up - it's ur own damn fault this eve mate,a dark cruel world, not happy carebear online
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |