EVE Search - High-sec Incursion Loot Ninjas = Broken?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

High-sec Incursion Loot Ninjas = Broken?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.02.26 04:38:00 - [61] How about a 30km Warp disruption field where the mom is with a ton of HP?
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.02.26 06:28:00 - [62] Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 26/02/2011 06:34:03 We're going to create a separate group to deal with the ninjas. It'll get them off the grid right before the mom goes into 1/2 armor so they can't reship. The alts we use will get concorded, but it'll just be alts fighting the ninjas, so it doesn't matter.
tla s'hpyt	Posted - 2011.02.26 08:28:00 - [63] hehehe Whenever we get some broken mechanic like this we always see a bunch of pirates propose some foolproof and easy way to counteract the problem. It's god damn hilarious listening to some of the plans they come up with to counter these broken mechanics. It's like watching a bunch of miners try to make eft titan setups. Let's see all we need is a 2nd fleet of insta lock cepters and smartbomb bs's ready to get themselves concorded to stop 1 guy from stealing 100 mil..... oh and there's a chance it won't even work lol. Almost beats those guys suggesting we should intentionally not update our clones and keep hulk mining fleets at battle speed while mining in empire.
De Guantanamo	Posted - 2011.02.26 14:45:00 - [64] Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 26/02/2011 06:34:03 We're going to create a separate group to deal with the ninjas. It'll get them off the grid right before the mom goes into 1/2 armor so they can't reship. The alts we use will get concorded, but it'll just be alts fighting the ninjas, so it doesn't matter. Well look at that. You found a solution with current game mechanics. Bravo.
Frank Shitlitz	Posted - 2011.02.26 15:37:00 - [65] Edited by: Frank **litz on 26/02/2011 15:38:14 Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 26/02/2011 06:34:03 We're going to create a separate group to deal with the ninjas. It'll get them off the grid right before the mom goes into 1/2 armor so they can't reship. The alts we use will get concorded, but it'll just be alts fighting the ninjas, so it doesn't matter. Since you put it out here on the forums...make sure you get the sec up after concordokken since there will now be some people watching that you dont recycle alts.
Tom Peeping	Posted - 2011.02.27 01:41:00 - [66] Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 23/02/2011 03:04:05 I understand it was a loss of 2 mil per player in my fleet (the armor fleet wasn't with us), but that's not the point. The money is inconsequential. The point is a principle. I agree it should be possible for people to steal in high sec. It should also be possible to stop them. What I am saying is the latter is not possible, due to the amount of time it takes to steal, versus identifying, scramming, and asploding. And if you're wrong, you get Concorded. There's no way to see who is stealing until they warp. Pretty broken to me. Wait, I know! Let's just cover all the exit gates with interceptors and hope we can get them on the other side. Oh wait. They can just warp to a safe spot until they flag off. See what I mean? actually, those are the types of steps you might consider. If they log off while aggressed, you also have plenty of time to scan them, so that was just a bizarre response you gave. There's more that you can do to.... but if you don't already know what, then it's not worth talking with you, because you'll obviously just go nu-uhhh! the way you are already doing with others. HTFU dudette... seriously. Working as intended. Sorry to hear you had trouble handling a VERY common situation. Working as intended.
Shieko Chan	Posted - 2011.02.27 04:50:00 - [67] doesn't sound broken.
Kalia Masaer Amarr Border Defense Consortium	Posted - 2011.02.27 23:44:00 - [68] Obviously many people don't understand the for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Thief takes loot can't be tackled because they are already entering warp when they snatch the loot from the can. Players who were robbed want to react to the thief, but the thief has immediately docked with loot since there is no aggression timer stopping him. So they decide we will wardec this bastard, turns out he is in an NPC corp so no wardec. So well maybe we will just mark him red and have some people kill him next time before he strikes. Two options at this point, concord comes and blows up the ships that killed the thief or thief never comes back as the trial account lapses and they create a new one. Well those sec hits have made it so people assigned to stop the thief are having serious problems, so alt account but recycling those are against the EULA so there is the threat of the ban hammer. So we end up with another option ***** in the forums about a broken game. If you could identify who the thief gave their money to it is not broken because there can be a reaction, if the thief had an aggression timer that wouldn't let them dock for a time it would be less broken but they would just warping to a safe and cloak up. Please use your brains, if I use mine I can steal loot from anyone of you in high sec unless you want to get concorded and I can do it again and again. And if you start getting concorded killing my alt rookie ship the next thing that will happen is your sec status will drop so low you can't even be in high sec. And I suffer no consequences other than losing just a little bit of time and some rookie ships that cost me nothing. I play EVE because it is hard and it is ruthless, I don't want it to be a paradise I just don't want it to be possible for people to do things and escape any consequence. If there were not alt accounts we would not have almost all of these problems but since we do we they must be considered and the mechanics adjusted accordingly. So if anyone has the intelligence to put forth how doing that is the game working as intended in a way that would even give me pause, I would be very impressed. Mostly I suspect the people in this thread are just trolling or are the people abusing the activities bordering on exploits themselves.
Insane Randomness	Posted - 2011.02.28 01:35:00 - [69] Or, you know, you could just have someone sit on top of the MOM so that when it's destroyed they can grab it... And if you can't target an AF in an 80 man fleet, thats your own damn fault, so stop saying the systems broken. There are a lot of other people whom have a lot better reasons to complain than you...
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.02 15:03:00 - [70] Originally by: De Guantanamo Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 26/02/2011 06:34:03 We're going to create a separate group to deal with the ninjas. It'll get them off the grid right before the mom goes into 1/2 armor so they can't reship. The alts we use will get concorded, but it'll just be alts fighting the ninjas, so it doesn't matter. Well look at that. You found a solution with current game mechanics. Bravo. Condescending response aside, no it isn't a solution when the ninjas use scripts to autoloot. Wish I could autoloot. Might be fun to actually see the wreck once.

Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.02 15:06:00 - [71] Originally by: Tom Peeping Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 23/02/2011 03:04:05 I understand it was a loss of 2 mil per player in my fleet (the armor fleet wasn't with us), but that's not the point. The money is inconsequential. The point is a principle. I agree it should be possible for people to steal in high sec. It should also be possible to stop them. What I am saying is the latter is not possible, due to the amount of time it takes to steal, versus identifying, scramming, and asploding. And if you're wrong, you get Concorded. There's no way to see who is stealing until they warp. Pretty broken to me. Wait, I know! Let's just cover all the exit gates with interceptors and hope we can get them on the other side. Oh wait. They can just warp to a safe spot until they flag off. See what I mean? actually, those are the types of steps you might consider. If they log off while aggressed, you also have plenty of time to scan them, so that was just a bizarre response you gave. There's more that you can do to.... but if you don't already know what, then it's not worth talking with you, because you'll obviously just go nu-uhhh! the way you are already doing with others. HTFU dudette... seriously. Working as intended. Sorry to hear you had trouble handling a VERY common situation. Working as intended. why would they warp to a safe spot and log off? Who the hell would even do that? So no, you can't scan them down. They're going to be moving until the aggression wears off, then gg. Autoloot FTW.
Kalia Masaer Amarr Border Defense Consortium	Posted - 2011.03.02 15:31:00 - [72] Or warp to safe and cloak, until timer is up.
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.02 17:37:00 - [73] Kelnarn Shaelingrath just posted a Fleet Aggression thread for Incursion. That would work too.
Kelnarn Shaelingrath	Posted - 2011.03.03 23:49:00 - [74] Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Kelnarn Shaelingrath just posted a Fleet Aggression thread for Incursion. That would work too. Thanks for the mention, and while I saw many "options" posted in this thread, I didn't see many that actually addressed or touched on the actual problem with the mechanics of a "public" fleet in an incursion site... now n00ner posted a response that shows without a doubt that he has not read or understood CCP's premise and intent in the incursions.. (no offense intended n00ner, just like you were told in the other thread, your proposal is an invalid one in light of CCP's intent so I'm just saying what they said too... and dude?, what legit "incursion corp" has a tax rate over 0.0%?, but that's a topic for a different discussion i guess....) All CCP has to do is make it so that the thief gets aggression against "ALL" members of the public fleet and then that fleet has the ability to react within CCP's mechanics.. as it is, the current game mechanics do (as someone else stated) favor a single group of players in the game by making the thief turn red only to the player who gets the kill and to their corp and all most of us want is an even playing field, nothing more, nothing less. Also, again, no offense intended, but to those of you who keep saying "you do have a way", I call Bullhockey on that statement.. not a single one of you have described a viable option to counter this that both falls within the game's current mechanics, CCP's premise for incursions, and the "public" fleet composition aspect of it... Give us a reasonable opportunity to decide whether we want to send that player back to his home station for a new clone or not in the same manner as we are able to do in almost ANY other situation without retaliation from the popo... and we'll take it from there, but tell us "sucks to be you" and you will have skewed the game's balance in favor of a small group of players. +1 and a bump too... JMHO Bill
Desert Ice78 Gryphon River Industries R-I-P	Posted - 2011.03.04 02:44:00 - [75] What about where we have multiple fleets running the same incursion together? How do we know who is the legitimate fleet grunt and who is the opportunist ninja salvager? If I was a ninja salvager, I could think of at least one way in which I might be able to use such game mechanics to lay claim to the final drop (canÆt say right now if it would actually work though.) Considering the nature of the Incursions and their sites, I believe that CCP fully expected that this would happen, and so ôworking as intended.ö
Kelnarn Shaelingrath	Posted - 2011.03.04 04:17:00 - [76] Edited by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath on 04/03/2011 04:21:14 Originally by: Desert Ice78 What about where we have multiple fleets running the same incursion together? How do we know who is the legitimate fleet grunt and who is the opportunist ninja salvager? If I was a ninja salvager, I could think of at least one way in which I might be able to use such game mechanics to lay claim to the final drop (canÆt say right now if it would actually work though.) Considering the nature of the Incursions and their sites, I believe that CCP fully expected that this would happen, and so ôworking as intended.ö The biggest issue I see with this is not that someone "could" steal the loot, anything can be stolen in EVE given the right circumstances, it's that 99% of the people don't have the opportunity to do anything about it, or even "try" to do anything about it without Concord coming and touching their Butt.. outside of that, it's understood that whoever gets that cargo hold open first and drags the items out, gets it and should have to deal with the consequences of their actions... Granted, I would love to see the wreck locked to anyone but the winning fleet, (IE. most DPS and they got paid) but that's probably asking a bit too much, however, what I would like to see is the members of that fleet at least have the option to hunt the thief down as opposed to just one or two people (if they're lucky) having that opportunity, and not just the MOM fight either, I have an idea for "Public Fleet Aggression" mechanics in incursion systems with very specific rules involved that will afford the fleet members the ability to chose whether or not to do something.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.04 04:33:00 - [77] Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath I have an idea for "Public Fleet Aggression" mechanics in incursion systems with very specific rules involved that willà àmake them teach people all the wrong things and make them ripe with exploits. Bad idea. 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
Desert Ice78 Gryphon River Industries R-I-P	Posted - 2011.03.04 04:46:00 - [78] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath I have an idea for "Public Fleet Aggression" mechanics in incursion systems with very specific rules involved that willà àmake them teach people all the wrong things and make them ripe with exploits. Bad idea. No, no, no. The idea is still sound despite your denials. You steal from my can, I and my fleet gets to kill you. Where is the confusion with that? Of course, if you then have you logistic alt try to help you the can flipper, he will of course then inherit the agro, which you wouldn't want, would you Tippia? Would be much better if your logistic alt gets a nice little pop-up warning that he is about to inherit someone elses agro, wouldn't it? Might save you your ship.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.04 05:00:00 - [79] Edited by: Tippia on 04/03/2011 05:03:46 Originally by: Desert Ice78 The idea is still sound despite your denials. You steal from my can, I and my fleet gets to kill you. Where is the confusion with that? The confusion lies in the fact that either you make it a special case for incursions, or you open up for (essentially) the return of Lofty. In the former case, people will learn the wrong lessons and get themselves killed in new spectacular way when they expect the rules they have learned to apply elsewhere (and as others threads on the topic has shown, they already have problems understanding some very basic game mechanics ù burdening them with even more won't help). In the latter case, you (re)open up for a whole slew of ganking tactics that have long since been excised from the game, and which will only lead to these people getting themselves killed in new and spectacular ways (albeit different ones than in the previous case). àand that's we even begin to address the issues of actually assigning the ownership. As it is, the loot is just another part of the competition. Win it and youà wellà win. Lose it and you lose. If people can't prepare for it and snatch it up, maybe they don't deserve to get it and should try harder? Quote: Of course, if you then have you logistic alt try to help you the can flipper, he will of course then inherit the agro, which you wouldn't want, would you Tippia? Why wouldn't I want that? When did I say anything that suggested that I wanted to see the mechanics change? You do know that this already is the case, right? Like I said: why burden people who can't even learn the basics with even more rules and special casesà? 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
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.05 00:45:00 - [80] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 04/03/2011 05:03:46 Originally by: Desert Ice78 The idea is still sound despite your denials. You steal from my can, I and my fleet gets to kill you. Where is the confusion with that? The confusion lies in the fact that either you make it a special case for incursions, or you open up for (essentially) the return of Lofty. In the former case, people will learn the wrong lessons and get themselves killed in new spectacular way when they expect the rules they have learned to apply elsewhere (and as others threads on the topic has shown, they already have problems understanding some very basic game mechanics ù burdening them with even more won't help). In the latter case, you (re)open up for a whole slew of ganking tactics that have long since been excised from the game, and which will only lead to these people getting themselves killed in new and spectacular ways (albeit different ones than in the previous case). àand that's we even begin to address the issues of actually assigning the ownership. As it is, the loot is just another part of the competition. Win it and youà wellà win. Lose it and you lose. If people can't prepare for it and snatch it up, maybe they don't deserve to get it and should try harder? Quote: Of course, if you then have you logistic alt try to help you the can flipper, he will of course then inherit the agro, which you wouldn't want, would you Tippia? Why wouldn't I want that? When did I say anything that suggested that I wanted to see the mechanics change? You do know that this already is the case, right? Like I said: why burden people who can't even learn the basics with even more rules and special casesà? These toons use scripts. That much is clear, and CCP should be present at each MOM fight with GM's monitoring all players for EULA violations. The looting field should be equally available to all, not just to some day old characters with looting scripts. That is my stance on the issue.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.05 00:50:00 - [81] Originally by: Wtf Pwnage These toons use scripts. That much is clear How so? 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
Frank Shitlitz	Posted - 2011.03.05 02:49:00 - [82] Also: Tippia is obviously a can baiter based in a some L1 mission hub who ganks noobs. If he wasn't then he would not be against giving people in noob corps a fighting chance against this style of play.
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.06 08:32:00 - [83] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Wtf Pwnage These toons use scripts. That much is clear How so? I do not personally use scripts, so I do not know how they use them. Is that what you're asking with your impossibly ambiguous question?
Centri Sixx	Posted - 2011.03.06 13:49:00 - [84] Tippia, why are you so fixated on griefing incursions? You want to keep a change in place that makes it easy to kill logis due to no warning. You argue that giving the wrong message about mechanics is of higher priority than letting players who did all the work in clearing an incursion not lose their reward entirely to some random pre-aligned ship. I'm sorry, people doing incursions are not new and will not suffer if incursions have a few special mechanics that differ from the rest of EVE. We don't have system-wide chat channels that pop up in the rest of space, nor do we have debuffs in incursion space: new players aren't troubled by those differing mechanics much.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.06 14:18:00 - [85] Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Wtf Pwnage These toons use scripts. That much is clear How so? I do not personally use scripts, so I do not know how they use them. Is that what you're asking with your impossibly ambiguous question? No. I'm asking how you know. How is it clear? Originally by: Frank **litz Also: Tippia is obviously a can baiter based in a some L1 mission hub who ganks noobs. If he wasn't then he would not be against giving people in noob corps a fighting chance against this style of play. So you agree with me then, seeing as how you have no kind of argument and have to resort to ad hominems instead. Good. Also, you managed to be incorrect in every way conceivable in that post. That's quite an achievement. Originally by: Centri Sixx Tippia, why are you so fixated on griefing incursions? You want to keep a change in place that makes it easy to kill logis due to no warning. You argue that giving the wrong message about mechanics is of higher priority than letting players who did all the work in clearing an incursion not lose their reward entirely to some random pre-aligned ship. I'm not. I'm not arguing against a logi change ù I'm arguing against calling a mechanics change a "bugfix" and against mechanics changes that, due to the proponents unfamiliarity with said mechanics, will only make his situation worse. But yes, consistent mechanics is more important than solving laziness and unwillingness to compete. They don't lose "their reward" ù they lose one reward because they failed to prepare properly. It's a competitive environment. If they don't compete, they lose. How is that in any way odd or wrong? Quote: I'm sorry, people doing incursions are not new and will not suffer if incursions have a few special mechanics that differ from the rest of EVE. Apparently, they willà considering how confused they are by well-known, system-wide mechanics that have been in place for years. Quote: We don't have system-wide chat channels that pop up in the rest of space, nor do we have debuffs in incursion space. Uhmà yes we do. 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
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.06 18:19:00 - [86] Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 06/03/2011 18:21:21 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Wtf Pwnage Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Wtf Pwnage These toons use scripts. That much is clear How so? I do not personally use scripts, so I do not know how they use them. Is that what you're asking with your impossibly ambiguous question? No. I'm asking how you know. How is it clear? In a fleet of 120+ no one sees the wreckage 7/10 times and IF we do see it, it's salvaged instantly. Have you been reading this thread? There are people who have mentioned looting scripts, and it doesn't take much to figure out the cost benefit of disposable accounts compared to quick sells for billion isk ninja BPCs. Given the moral options Eve gives you in-game, why not bend the rules even further IRL? CCP has even banned script usage, thus indicating it is/has been used, and is an offense to the way they see their game being played, as it gives some players an unfair advantage. Are you seriously denying scripts are used in EVE?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.06 18:22:00 - [87] Originally by: Wtf Pwnage In a fleet of 120+ no one sees the wreckage 7/10 times and IF we do see it, it's salvaged instantly. Yes? So how do you know they're using looting scripts? That's no different from the good old days of Jita ganks, where people would do the same to the victim's wreck.
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.06 18:23:00 - [88] Quote: Quote: I'm sorry, people doing incursions are not new and will not suffer if incursions have a few special mechanics that differ from the rest of EVE. Apparently, they willà considering how confused they are by well-known, system-wide mechanics that have been in place for years. Quote: We don't have system-wide chat channels that pop up in the rest of space, nor do we have debuffs in incursion space. Uhmà yes we do. What parts of normal space have debuffs like Incursion?
Wtf Pwnage	Posted - 2011.03.06 18:28:00 - [89] Edited by: Wtf Pwnage on 06/03/2011 18:28:57 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Wtf Pwnage In a fleet of 120+ no one sees the wreckage 7/10 times and IF we do see it, it's salvaged instantly. Yes? So how do you know they're using looting scripts? That's no different from the good old days of Jita ganks, where people would do the same to the victim's wreck. Good old days? Are you implying it doesn't happen anymore? What in the world would make such a "fun" scripting EULA-violation go away? Just because you like scripting, doesn't mean CCP will. I think I agree with having everyone being afforded a chance to loot, just not with scripts. And if you loot, then there should be fleet-wide aggression, at a minimum. Or they can remove the loot. Or increase the rewards to the winning fleet AND remove the loot...lotsa options. That is the point of this thread.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.06 18:34:00 - [90] Edited by: Tippia on 06/03/2011 18:37:28 Originally by: Wtf Pwnage What parts of ~~normal~~ the rest of space have debuffs like Incursion? W-Space. àand if I wanted to be flippant, I'd point out that he said incursions didn't have debuffs. Quote: Good old days? Are you implying it doesn't happen anymore? Pretty much. Due to the incessant whining, ganks have been made pretty rare these days, so you can't make any good money sitting around and beating the attackers to the loot. You'd think they'd be anxious to get it, wouldn't you, yet quick fingers and being prepared would commonly beat themà Quote: What in the world would make such a "fun" scripting EULA-violation go away? No EULA violations there, just plain old legal ganks and plain old legal thefts. Quote: And you never answered my question, Tippia. Are you seriously denying scripts are used in EVE? Irrelevant. I'm asking you how you know they're using scripts. So far, it seems you don't ù you're just hoping they do. 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



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.