|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 12:28:00 -
[1]
/signed
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 20:32:00 -
[2]
apprently the 2 people who claim "we are complaiing for no reason" do NOT understand the mechanics involved - so this will serve to do so.
a 40 man fleet is put together consisting of 30 damage dealing ships (snipe and short range) with 10 logistic ships (say 10 basilisks).
each basilisk shares cap with 2 others. that is what makes them cap stable.
person A sees a can (say 1 scourge missile droped for anchoring) and decides to take the missile. person A gets a "you are about to steal" warning message. if he agrees he takes the missile and goes on a yellow aggression timer for 15 mins (becomes flashy red to the person who dropped the can and all members of his corp).
person A now requests shield repair from the basilisks. the unknowing, and unsuspecting, basi pilot begins to send shields to person A. in so doing becomes flashy red too as he is now aiding a theif. because this basi pilot shares cap with 2 others - they in turn become flashy red. within 1 minute all 10 are flashy red.
ccp DOES NOT provide the 1st basi pilot who provides on-site repairs any warning that he is about to aid a theif. however, ccp will provide a warning if player A is a war target or has popped GCC.
there should be some warning provided to those whose sole intention is to HELP others. they do so by providing shileds to save ships (in the case of a guardian - armor). obviously, this mechanic puts any logistics pilot into a bad situation without warning or consent. therefore, ccp should add a warning .
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 21:49:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Gavascon on 01/03/2011 21:49:50 as with all things - if someone wants to steal they will.
i do NOT wish to stop anyone from doing so - if they feel that's the right thing to do - then go ahead.
however - a logistics pilot should be offered a CHOICE. that being to rep and accept the consequences or decline and walk away.
a choice is offered for war targets and for global criminals. if agreed the logistic pilot assumes full responsibility for being aggressed by opposing war targets or getting concorded.
no choice is offered for repping theives. therefore, a choice should be offered.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 00:14:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Gavascon on 02/03/2011 00:17:49 omg -
tippia - the only way any logistics pilot is going to know if someone stole from a can or wreck is to check the fleet loot history log. that is, if it's been enabled by the fc.
during battle - the logistic pilot's obiligation is to "heal" fleetmates as needed. no logi pilot is going to check the loot history BEFORE providing reps. to do so loses valuable time.
aside from the loot history - there is NO WAY for ANY logistics pilot to know who has been criminally flagged due to stealing until the agression timer appears. at which point, it's too late for the logi pilot and all his cap buddies.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.03 00:38:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Gavascon on 03/03/2011 00:38:18 fact: if a fleet member loots a wreck or steals a can he will NOT turn flashy red to any of his fleetmates.
he will recive a warning from ccp referencing crminal activity.
a logistics pilot now provides reps to the "flashy red" fleetmate (who isn't red to the logi pilot). now the logi pilot is flashy red to all the members of the corp who's wreck/can has been stolen from. but THE LOGI PILOT HAS NOT BEEN WARNED HE IS ABOUT TO REP SOMEONE WHO IS FLAGGED.
logi pilot now warps to a gate/station/planet - he's aggressed by people who now have the right to do so.
i'd say that is a set up
if this were NOT an incursion - then most fleets would contain 100% corpmates/alliancemates and no one would care about looting.
but since incursions are designed for people from all corps/alliances to band together to fight a common enemy this mechanic has surfaced as a problem.
this needs to be dealt with in the same maaner as was ending concord intervention when people received reps and then popped GCC to have logistics concorded.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.03 00:57:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Gavascon on 03/03/2011 01:03:43 Edited by: Gavascon on 03/03/2011 00:59:26 put another way:
my fleetmate steals from amarr battleship wreck belonging to person B from Corp B not in our fleet (the wreck was there when we arrived) he gets a warning.
my fleetmate isn't red to me because he didn't steal FROM ME or any of my corpmates. my fleetmate needs reps. i provide them.
I AM NOT WARNED HE HAS BEED FLAGGED!.
in local - person B sees a few "pink skulls" next to some names (as do all the members of Corp B). happens to be my fleetmate, myself and the entire logistics cap chain.
corp b agresses. they have that right. my fleet cannot engage - as Corp B isnn't red to them. if they do engage they get concorded. so - my fleetmate gets popped as does an entire (essentially defensless) logistics squad.
how to stop this? one can only tell fleetmates NOT to steal. but there is NO GUARANTEE people will listen.
the simple, logical solution is to protect the logistics with a simple pop up warning. agree? go flashy red and get what you deserve. decline? then my flettmate gets popped by sansha.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.03 18:38:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Gavascon on 03/03/2011 18:38:52 my hat is off to those of you who have taken time to devise simple methods to obtain cheap kills.
fact: incursions sites require logistics. the number of logistic ships will increase as fleet size increases.
tactic #1: become member of fleet - request reps from logistics - then shoot a drone or another ship. hmmm, said person now becomes global criminal. concord appears - destroys said criminal and all ships assisting him (the entire logistics squad).
result: people stop flying logistics because they don't want to lose ships to concord result 2: no logistics? no way to do an incursion. people stop doing incursions - ccp pulls them.
that's not cool. so - ccp protects the logistics. GOOD JOB CCP.
tactic #2: since we cannot pop GCC timer anymore let's use stealing as a means of getting logistic ships killed.
result: people won't rep others or fly logistic ships result 2: no logistics? no fleets to complete incursions. no incursion fleets? ccp pulls incursions.
am i crying? no - i see the "beauty" in it. is it the right thing to do? no, i don't think it is.
if the goal is get ccp to pull incursions from the game - then i think you're all wasting your time. incursions are here to stay.
as for tears? eve isn't safe after undocking. so - live with the risk. however, eve is full of choices. it's NOT a bad idea for ccp to provide a simple pop up warning to a logistics pilot. after all, pop up warnings do appear for stealing, aggression in the absence of a war dec (ganking) or repping a war target.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.04 14:54:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: Valari Nala Zena People are just asking for a notification for a crime they don't know are about to commit... It kinda sounds fair to me, just saying...
Taking away all the other warnings sounds equally fair to me.
you CAN take them all away - when they pop up click the box "don't show this again".
but - i expected this moronic comment from you
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.04 21:42:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Gavascon on 04/03/2011 21:44:11 wasn't going to say this - but now i am.
exploit is NOT the right word.
exploitation is.
wikipedia defines EXPLOITATION as:
Taking something off a person or a group that rightfully belongs to them Short-changing people in trade Directly or indirectly forcing somebody to work Using somebody against his will, or without his consent or knowledge Imposing an arbitrary differential treatment of people to the advantage of some and the disadvantage of others (as in ascriptive discrimination) Using somebody to buy/provide things for you and never paying them back.
so - stealing from a can to have logistics grab aggression timers IS AN EXPLOIT(ATION). since the logistics pilots do NOT receive a warning and are unaware until it's too late.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.05 16:30:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Valari Nala Zena Edited by: Valari Nala Zena on 05/03/2011 14:29:13 For using an exploit, you will get a warning or a ban.
You are not going to get warned or banned for using this technique.
Since well, it's not an exploit.
let me see if i understand this correctly -
it's not an exploitation because currently there isn't any mechanism in place to WARN any logistics pilot that he is about to rep someone who is criminally flagged for stealing?
hmmm, seems to me a similar circumstance existed for logistics pilots when they got concorded by repping people who AT FIRST hadn't done anything wrong. after receiving reps this person aggressed another ship and popped GCC (global criminal). CCP saw something wrong with that and did something about it. it was obviously a gross MISUSE of game mechanics.
stealing from cans and looting wrecks makes fleet members criminally flagged for that action. when said pilot requests reps the logistics pilots - are in essence - aiding a criminal and get flagged as well. this puts them in a bad position without their knowledge or consent- meaning logistic pilots can now be aggressed by the person who was stolen from and his entire corp. this appears to be a twist on the GCC event and is also a gross misuse of game mechanics.
just because an action isn't listed as an exploit doesn't mean it isn't an exploit. it just means that CCP hasn't taken any action to correct, or amend, the abuse.
CCP please do something in this area to protect logistics pilots!
|
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.05 18:47:00 -
[11]
1) i'm not crying or whining. 2) i'm certainly not dumb 3) what i quoted in prior posting is one of the most feeble lines of logic i've ever read. which basically says "well - if i don't get warned then it's ok" - which means the person has no sense of right or wrong. unless, he gets caught or is told what he is about to do is wrong.
as i stated - just because ccp hasn't classified the result to logi's as an exploit - or by providing a warning not to rep a fleet member who has been criminally flagged for stealing - doesn't mean the logistics pilot isn't being exploited.
instead of being a "letter of the law" person - meaning if it isn't in writing it doesn't exist (ignorance) or ok - maybe it's best to be a "spirit of the law" person who takes into consideration the possibility that something is being abused and needs to be put in writing.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.05 19:33:00 -
[12]
you know what? i'm going to change gears.
we don't need warnings. what we need is a change to the high sec fleet mechanics.
as it stands - if 1 person in fleet steals only that person becomes flashy red. logistics become flashy red when they rep him.
let the person and corp of the looted wreck/can aggress. when they do - ccp should remove the handcuffs from the other fleet members so they can defend their fleetmates without concord intervention.
then we'll see how fast you greifers vanish into the shadows like roaches when the lights are turned on. many of the people i fleet with are experienced FC's with an abundance of PvP experience. they'd love nothing more then begin shooting anyone that aggresses their fleet members.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.05 21:02:00 -
[13]
Originally by: De Guantanamo
Originally by: Gavascon Edited by: Gavascon on 05/03/2011 19:04:48 Edited by: Gavascon on 05/03/2011 19:01:42 Edited by: Gavascon on 05/03/2011 18:53:56 1) i'm not crying or whining. 2) i'm certainly not dumb 3) what i quoted in prior posting is one of the most feeble lines of logic i've ever read. which basically says "well - if i don't get warned then it's ok" - which means the person has no sense of right or wrong. unless, he gets caught or is told what he is about to do is wrong. better yet, it means the person cannot think for themselves and needs to be told "you are about to do something wrong" in the form of a warning.
as i stated - just because ccp hasn't classified the result to logi's as an exploit - or by providing a warning not to rep a fleet member who has been criminally flagged for stealing - doesn't mean the logistics pilot isn't being exploited.
instead of being a "letter of the law" person - meaning if it isn't in writing it doesn't exist (ignorance) or ok - maybe it's best to be a "spirit of the law" person who takes into consideration the possibility that something is being abused and needs to be put in writing.
that said - under normal pvp conditions - the losing fleet retreats (or is completely destroyed) the winning fleet loots the field then leaves. it's their right to do so as victors. if there is any additional fighting then ALL ARE RED. however - incursions aren't normal pvp situations. fleets are comprised of pilots from many different corps (that's what ccp intended and it's working). after sites are completed those that have left wrecks (which were left behind by a failed fleet attempt at the site) are looted while the owners of said wrecks still linger in the incursion area. thus putting logistics at risk unnecessarilty. in the case of incursions - only SOME OF THE FLEET becomes red. the rest are NOT and cannot engage to protect their aggressed fleetmates without concord intervention.
This is eve.
If its not written down as letter of law, its not wrong. Get over it or go back to WoW.
Seriously, you are really dumb. And a whiner.
is this supposed to be an insult? if so, you'll have to do much better.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.06 17:11:00 -
[14]
from Tippia
Quote: And the incursion channel is no different than having an alliance channel among different corps: you are there for the same thing and need to coordinate, even if you're in different corps. Once you're in those fleets, the competition is on, so if you want to argue that it serves no purpose between corps, it also serves no purpose between PUGs for exactly the same reasons. Conversely, if it serves a purpose for the PUGs, it serves the exact same purpose for the corps involved.
i just love the way you speak from both sides of your mouth.
the whole concept of incursion is for people to band together to fight a common enemy. this means FLEETING WITH PEOPLE YOU DON'T KNOW.
FC's take the a chance that whoever is picked up from the incursion channel are HONEST.
since SOME ARE NOT HONEST then we go full circle to the problem at hand.
Finally you are beginning to see the light - between running long posts and pontificating your ungodly knowledge of the game.
1 of 2 things MUST BE CHANGED.
1) a pop up warning added to maintain consistency with other warning pop ups. this way logistic pilots CAN MAKE A CHOICE or BE MADE AWARE they are about to rep someone who has been criminally flagged for stealing.
2) ccp removes the handcuffs from FC's and allows ENTIRE FLEETS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES against greifer attackers - not just some members within the fleet.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.06 18:15:00 -
[15]
Quote: the op was saying people using the existing mechanic were exploiting logistic pilots...exploiting...using a glitch, a bug
i am very well aware of the OP posting and his claims.
despite the use (or misuse) of terms (which everyone seems to want to pick apart to no end) his overall concept remains the same. so much so, that the vast majority of people who have posted agree with him.
i have NOT lost 1 basi during an incursion from grabbing an aggro timer because someone looted or stole. i think the last time i lost a basi during PvP was in null sec almost 1 year ago.
i have not whined about 1 god damned thing - i have consistently said a pop up needs to be added with a "yes/no" response. i have consistently stated that selecting "yes" means you get what comes to you.
maybe you should return to my prior postings and READ |
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 16:57:00 -
[16]
Quote: No it doesn't.
Whats to stop you from forming a corporation of like minded individuals to run these sites? Or even to band with friends you have outside of your corp.
Yes I am aware that CCP stated that Incursions are designed to encourage random people to band together, but lets be honest, the most effective fleets will be the ones that have worked together before, have team cohesion and a good leader
this is a GREAT posting!
1) there are a few corps which have been created for the purpose of doing incursions. 2) yes - the most effective fleets are the ones which have worked together.
however - as with many corps (or groups who have banded together to do incursions) there may NOT be enough people available to fulfill some of the sites' fleet number requirements. in which case, a source is needed to fill in the gaps.
to fill in the gaps - the incursion channel is used to find people. so a double-edged sword is created. a) if someone is taken from the incursion channel a chance is taken by the FC. 2) trust is implied - until proven otherwise (like he steals/loots).
for whatever this is worth - in order to meet new people one must take a chance. sometimes you get lucky and find a great pilot. other times you get unlucky and find a rotten apple. but one never knows what you get until the first step is taken.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 18:03:00 -
[17]
Quote: Quote: for whatever this is worth - in order to meet new people one must take a chance. Fair enough, but those chances are quite easy to take without inviting disaster. Give untried talents roles that give them little to no chance to screw you over.
give untried talents roles that give them little or no chance to screw you over?
come on man - think.
whatever role is provided doesn't assure a thing.
1) give them a damage dealing role - they can steal/loot. then logi's grab aggro. back to square one
2) give them logistics role - they can steal/loot. now only the logi's grab aggro. back to square one.
we actually had a "newcomer" join us in a basi. even when told NOT to steal they took 3 different types of t2 drones and 1x arbi cruise launcher from a wreck inside the site (was there when we arrived). we all docked for 15 minutes. booted the new basi pilot and he vanished.
one can only hope that someone doesn't loot/steal. but reality says there's no way to control someone else's actions. even when told.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 18:33:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Gavascon on 07/03/2011 18:43:15
Quote: Edited by: Tippia on 07/03/2011 18:24:51 Originally by: Gavascon give untried talents roles that give them little or no chance to screw you over? come on man - think. whatever role is provided doesn't assure a thing. 1) give them a damage dealing role - they can steal/loot. then logi's grab aggro. back to square one àin other words, don't give them a role that requires them to be supported by logis. Quote: 2) give them logistics role - they can steal/loot. now only the logi's grab aggro. back to square one. àin other words, don't use them in fleets where the logis can't support themselves.
Or, put another way: start small.
edit: The issue here doesn't seem to be PUGs, but rather impatience. Now, I'll grant you that this may indeed come with the territory: if you want to get the rewards, you have to get them now, before someone else nicks them ù not in a week when you've vetted your new talents. But again, start small ù they might not be able to help today, but get someone on it and test them in smaller sites, and in a week, you'll have more people at your disposalà
ummm, listen - uhhhhh - from this posting i can now see you HAVE NOT done 1 incursion site.
there are 4 levels for each incursion.
scout - requires no fleet. vanguard (the easiest) - requires fleet of 5 - 10 pilots assault (middle of the road) - requires fleet of 10 - 20 pilots headquarters (hardest) - requires fleet of 20 - 40 pilots headquarters - mom room - requires fleet of 50+
there is NO WAY to do any site - above Scout - without logistics.
therefore - there's no way to "insulate" the logi's from grabbing aggro from someone who loots/steals. back to square one.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 18:51:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Gavascon on 07/03/2011 18:56:28 Edited by: Gavascon on 07/03/2011 18:55:45 there aren't any roles without logistic support.
that's the whole point.
in order to have the incursion end the sites have to be completed. you can't have an incursion end by simply heading to a scout beacon.
for scouts - you get paid a piddly amount and earn 50 loyalty points. PROVIDED - you are the highest damage dealer. in other words - it's a waste of time (based on isk/hour). additionally, doing the scouts DOES NOT require a fleet. so there's no need to have them fleeted.
once you enter vanguards, assaults and hq's there's no way to give someone a role without logi support.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 19:20:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Gavascon on 07/03/2011 19:22:26
Quote: You could even assign people to run fleets with these new people
tippia - you are embarrassing yourself now.
go to the eve wiki - type incursions and read about the sites.
|
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 19:33:00 -
[21]
some good advice - up to you to take it.
next high sec incursion - get into a ship of your choosing. fit it pvp style.
try to get into a fleet (good luck, cause if people don't know you you'll have a tough tme).
see for yourself what it's all about.
then you won't be a paper tiger anymore.
you'll find the entire experience rewarding.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 19:45:00 -
[22]
Quote:
Originally by: Gavascon try to get into a fleet (good luck, cause if people don't know you you'll have a tough tme). see for yourself what it's all about. I don't need to because I've already done what I suggest you do. It works wonders and for that reason it wasn't even close to being a "tough time".
If you think it's a "tough time", it's because you're doing something wrong.
I have seen what it's all about. You haven't. If you had, you would long since have recognized what it is I'm talking about and how it will solve your problems.
gavascon checks loyalty point totals - hmmm currently close to 400,000 concord lp's and already owns 3x 5 run concord bpc's. yup - haven't done any incursions. maybe i'll check them out. thanks
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 22:29:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Gavascon on 07/03/2011 22:34:30 from tippia
Quote: Look. Just because you have no clue about what I'm talking about does not mean that I don't know. It is quite obvious that you do not recognize what it is I'm suggesting, and that's why I've asked you if you do. Since the answer is no, I don't particularly care about how embarrassed you are. Trust me, just read the article in the wiki and it will aaaaall become clear to you. I hope.
sir - i did not answer yes or no.
so here's my answer:
everything in eve is about isk/hour.
to form a 3 - 5 man fleet without logistics only trains those that will fulfill a damage dealing role.
the risk here is that if said 3 - 5 man fleet is NOT the highest damage dealing one they don't get paid. time wasted. plus those scout beacons aren't even close to what is contained in the vanguard, assault or hq sites.
if 2x basi pilots are added for training purposes - then logistics are at risk in the event one of the other 3 people in the fleet decide to loot a wreck contained at the beacons.
either way - there's no guarantee that any pilot "being trained" isn't going to loot a wreck once inside any of the other sites.
therefore - as time is money - it's best to take a chance on someone in 1 of the other styles (vanguard, assault or hq) where one gets handsomely rewarded for completing the site and "on the job" training.
i am a strong believer that everyone is innocent until proven otherwise. which means people deserve a chance. then, if they do something "stupid" (like looting a wreck) they get booted/banned.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 23:07:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Gavascon on 07/03/2011 23:08:00 bait taken.
last post (yay)
/signed - wanted 1x pop up warning logistics pilots they are about to rep someone who has been criminally flagged
as per original topic.
gavascon out. fly safe. o/
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 22:17:00 -
[25]
Quote: Originally by: Gavascon snip 2) ccp removes the handcuffs from FC's and allows ENTIRE FLEETS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES against greifer attackers - not just some members within the fleet.
So, is this a troll to get more chances to kill people unaware, or are you really underestimating the ingenuity of people whose only enjoyment in eve is to harvest tears?
Let me explain just one of the ways this can go horribly wrong.
Let's say there is a griefer alt, named griefer alt, that is the only member of Corp A. He wardecs corp B. Corp B finds and starts shooting griefer alt. The 50 man fleet that griefer alt is part of warps in and 'defends' griefer alt.
since you quoted and are trolling i will respond:
1) you totally misunderstood the nature of my statement. 2) my statement has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with a war dec.
to be clear:
if a member of my fleet loots a can/wreck he grabs an aggression timer. he can be aggressed by: the person who owned the can/wreck and all the members of that corp.
if my fleet member then requests reps he passes the same aggression timer to the logistics. within minutes all the logistic ships which cap share have the timer.
in warps the owner of the can/wreck with the members of his corp. they attack: 1) the dps ship my fleet member is flying and/or 2) any/all of the logistic ships.
the fc of my fleet - comprised of pilots from different corps than the looter (now flashy red theif) cannot engage. they must sit on the sidelines and watch. that is, under current rules.
the rule needs to be amended to allow the fc to engage the attackers (even though they have a right to engage) so the fleet that he is commanding can defend it's fleetmates.
your example is an orange and you are attempting to compare it to an apple.
|
Gavascon
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 00:45:00 -
[26]
in the example above:
greifer alt a decs corp b. corp b attacks greaifer alt greifer alt has 50 man fleet warp in.
the ONLY thing the 50 mand fleet can do is provide remote repping to make themselves war targets (for which they get a pop up warning ).
if corp b chooses not to engage any of the 50 man fleet - they cannot shoot. but they are aggressable.
the key here is: choice.
greifer alt has a choice to war dec or NOT. corp b has a choice to engage greifer alt or NOT 50 man fleet has a choice. corp b has a 2nd choice.
logistics do NOT have a choice.
|
|
|
|