EVE Search - Thief Salvaging

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Thief Salvaging

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Amarraz	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:37:00 - [1] So I'm running a level 4 mission in high-sec, and a thief (Andromeda555) comes in and starts salvaging all my wrecks. Since this is high-sec, I can't do anything about it, without losing standing. When I submit a help petition, I'm told this is a feature of the game. Now I would expect this kind of thing in low sec, but high sec where I can't blow the thief out of the sky? This is no feature, but just plain bad game design.
John Aubrey Caldari Varangian Sentinels	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:38:00 - [2] Emergent gameplay.
Reyold Bengali Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:42:00 - [3] Salvaging isn't stealing. If, on the other hand, they remove loot from the wrecks then you will be allowed to shoot at them without Concord intervention. ------- Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Amarraz	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:44:00 - [4] If they're salvaging wrecks in mission, the wrecks I created, then that should be stealing, I should be allowed to respond.
Apollo Gabriel Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels Etherium Cartel	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:44:00 - [5] Edited by: Apollo Gabriel on 23/04/2011 18:45:09 Amarraz, Salvage is NOT owned, the loot within the wrecks is however. It is a part of the game many don't like, but is not a bug, it is not a mistake. If you'd like to suggest something different, head to Features and Ideas, and propose something there. Eve is not an instanced game, players can and do interact all over the place. One option is to leave the mission and come back later, another is to try and spread the wrecks as far away as you can, as they can't be tractor beamed except by you. As to the bad game design, I disagree with you, while I don't like Ninja salvaging, it was intended and have made missions less of a free lunch. Best AG PS You can respond, you can 1) leave, 2) ignore them, 3) shoot them. There is NO private space in eve except the station. *** Signature may appear without warning! *** Please do not feed the trolls, it builds dependency.
Feligast Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:45:00 - [6] Hooray, this thread again!!
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:45:00 - [7] He can't be a thief since the SALVAGE is not yours yet. You have to do extra work to obtain the salvage, and you haven't done it yet. He does become a thief and you can shoot him if he LOOTS the wreck though. But I would strongly encourage against doing that. People that loot wrecks too actually WANT to get shot. If the reason is not obvious, think about it a bit (hint : aggro mechanics). _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Reyold Bengali Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:47:00 - [8] Originally by: Feligast Hooray, this thread again!! I was just thinking that it'd been some time since I'd seen a ninja-salvage thread.... ------- Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:48:00 - [9] Originally by: Amarraz If they're salvaging wrecks in mission, the wrecks I created, then that should be stealing, I should be allowed to respond. What rewards are you willing to give up to be the default owner of the salvage? 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
Amarraz	Posted - 2011.04.23 18:57:00 - [10] Apollo says this feature was intended that it is not bad game design and that it creates less of a "free lunch" with missions. But, I would argue, it's doing precisely that--creating a free lunch for ninja salvagers. If I'm the one taking all the risk--I've lost ships in combat missions before as has everyone--then why should a thief get the rewards (we all know salvaging is where the real mission money is) without any consequences. That's the free lunch.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:00:00 - [11] Edited by: Tippia on 23/04/2011 19:02:29 Originally by: Amarraz But, I would argue, it's doing precisely that--creating a free lunch for ninja salvagers. They have to do more work than you do to get that salvage. Quote: If I'm the one taking all the risk What risk? The risk you encounter in the actual mission is already being compensated for through the mission rewards, time bonuses, bounties, loot, LP, and standings increases. Salvage is not part of those rewards ù it's something you have to do additional work to earn, and the amount of work you have to do is far less than the work the ninja has to do. So if anything, they've earned it more than you have. If you want to add salvage to that list if mission rewards, the risk has to go up as well (and tbh, it should go up regardless because missions are essentially risk-free as it is). If you want to have the right to the salve without increasing the risk, we're back to the question: what reward are you willing to give up to get those salvage rights? Quote: we all know salvaging is where the real mission money is No. Salvaging generally drastically reduces your mission income. 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
Feligast Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:00:00 - [12] Originally by: Amarraz (we all know salvaging is where the real mission money is) Oh, you're trolling. Sorry, I missed that. Carry on then.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:04:00 - [13] Per CCP Mitnal: Originally by: CCP Mitnal "Our policy on this is extremely clear... Salvaging is a mini-profession within EVE and does not constitute stealing." Per GM Faolchu : Originally by: GM Faolchu Salvaging other peoples wrecks.... This is an intended game mechanic and is in no way an exploit. People salvaging your missions npcs or the player you just blew up are doing nothing wrong. The players are salvaging what is effectively floating rubbish in space and Concord places no value on this wreckage. Eve is a harsh place you won't always have everything go your way, its a do or die world and people do what they can to get along. If salvaging some wreckage gets them a few more ISK someone will do it, it doesn't matter who just blew it up. Per Senior GM Ytterbium : Originally by: GM Ytterbium Players are still completely free to salvage other pilot wrecks at will ... and doing so is not considered as an exploit. Per CCP Prism X : Originally by: CCP Prism X Why is stealing salvage OK? It's not. It shouldn't even be possible to move an item from your cargo-hold / hanger to another persons cargo-hold / hanger without opening a trade window. Before the salvage enters those containers it is not considered your stuff by the server code. Hence it's not stealing. Per CCP Incognito : Originally by: CCP Incognito Had a chat with some designers this evening. Ninja salvaging is intended game play. It was always intended that the wrecks are public, the loot is private. They do not see it as a problem if others salvage your wrecks. (These quotes are kept handy for your convenience at Ironfleet.com.) _______________________ "Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
Emperor Salazar Caldari Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:16:00 - [14] Originally by: Amarraz If they're salvaging wrecks in mission, the wrecks I created, then that should be stealing, I should be allowed to respond. As dumb as you and the other salvage whiners are (thinking that you know what should be, as opposed to the devs), I'd love to see this changed. The lolkillmails that will emerge will be highly entertaining.
Hieronimus Rex Minmatar Infinitus Sapientia New Eden Research.	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:25:00 - [15] Originally by: Amarraz So I'm running a level 4 mission in high-sec, and a thief (Andromeda555) comes in and starts salvaging all my wrecks. Since this is high-sec, I can't do anything about it, without losing standing. When I submit a help petition, I'm told this is a feature of the game. Now I would expect this kind of thing in low sec, but high sec where I can't blow the thief out of the sky? This is no feature, but just plain bad game design. It's a game design choice. Why is it a bad one?
Amarraz	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:26:00 - [16] Missions are not risk free. That's spoken from the perspective, I'm guessing, of someone who's played the game for well over a year. In fact, this game is quite brutal for beginners. I've lost more than a dozen ships in missions. You can blame this on a lack of skill, and perhaps that's the case, but asserting that missions carry no risk is simply untrue. Perhaps low risk, but risk nevertheless. And, in my estimation, time alone does not outweigh risk. If it takes a ninja salvager 30 minutes to locate my mission wrecks (it took him considerably less), does that really outweigh even a 2% chance that I will lose a 500 million ship? I don't think so, and that's been my point from the beginning: with ninja salvaging, there is absolutely zero risk. Now the designers of EVE can state all they want that this is an intentional feature of the game, and a function of non-instanced missions, but that doesn't make it good game design.
RiskyFrisky Under the Table Inc. Intergalactic Exports Group	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:30:00 - [17] It's called Ninjas Salvaging - They use scanning ships to find your ship in space, then they warp to it, ending up iny oru mission, where they take loot and salvage your mission. It's not stealing, you didn't have it in your ship, so it doesn't belong to you. I heard shooting at them fixes the problem though.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:32:00 - [18] Originally by: Amarraz Missions are not risk free. That's spoken from the perspective, I'm guessing, of someone who's played the game for well over a year. They were risk-free for me when I was 6 months old and few L4s in a (not even T2-fitted) battlecruiser. Quote: I've lost more than a dozen ships in missions. You can blame this on a lack of skill I think I willà Quote: If it takes a ninja salvager 30 minutes to locate my mission wrecks (it took him considerably less), does that really outweigh even a 2% chance that I will lose a 500 million ship? But here's the thing: you're not going to lose a 500M ship because of the salvage (wellà unless you shoot the salvager, that is). The 2% chance of losing that ship comes from the mission and that very small risk is already compensated for. The salvage is not part of the compensation package. If you want that salvage, you will have to earn it just like everyone else. You have a far easier time to earn it than anyone else, so if we look at the actual effort involved, you're less entitled to it than the ninja. Quote: with ninja salvaging, there is absolutely zero risk. That's fine, seeing as how there's absolutely zero risk with any (NPC) salvaging. Or, rather, it's a competition and the risk both sides face is that they'll not be fast enough to get the prize. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:37:00 - [19] It is bad game design...period. If it wasn't the wreck they are salvaging shouldnt be yellow with or without cargo. If it wasn't you should be able to scan and warp to the wreck..not the player running the mission. If it wasn't it wouldn't have the mission runners name on it. If that isn't bad game design I don't know what is.It's there for the little abused griefers in eve that get their kicks from **ing people off. Just start shooting the wrecks out from in front of them starting with the large ones.Its funny to see them scatter from wreck to wreck and get nothing lol. Originally by:** Tippia What rewards are you willing to give up to be the default owner of the salvage? You stop posting and I'll salvage it and even bring it to the ninja salvagerAlways want to be so smart but can't see that this is bad game design at its best.0/10 for you..like always.
Amarraz	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:40:00 - [20] Emperor Salazar uses abusive language suggesting I am both dumb and a whiner. A.) I do not see how it's whining to point out what I view as a glaring game flaw; B.) I have a Ph.D. and am a professor, so I'm not especially dumb. I will say, however, that blindly accepting what the developers decree as gospel requires a level of faith I simply do not have--in anything. I do not believe I know more than the developers of EVE, but are you actually claiming that they're infallible, and that every decision they make is beyond criticism? If so, then we live in different worlds.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:43:00 - [21] Edited by: Tippia on 23/04/2011 19:44:42 Originally by: HeIIfire11 It is bad game design...period. Why? Quote: If it wasn't the wreck they are salvaging shouldnt be yellow with or without cargo. Wreck abandonment wasn't in the game when salvaging was introduced ù it's not bad game design that a function that appeared four years later wasn't being employed. But yes, that should happen automatically if the wreck is empty. Quote: If it wasn't you should be able to scan and warp to the wreck..not the player running the mission. That's a problem with the scanning system, not with salvaging. Quote: If it wasn't it wouldn't have the mission runners name on it. See above. Quote: If that isn't bad game design I don't know what is. Not really. It creates competition over resources ù PvP. That's not really bad game design in a PvP-centric game. Quote: You stop posting and I'll salvage it and even bring it to the ninja salvager Why should I stop posting? Quote: Always want to be so smart but can't see that this is bad game design at its best. Why? Originally by: Amarraz I do not see how it's whining to point out what I view as a glaring game flaw Because you don't explain why it's a flaw. Quote: I have a Ph.D. and am a professor Then you should know that you need to provide arguments to support your claim. 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
Kahega Amielden Rifterlings	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:43:00 - [22] Hey OP, let me tell you a story. Waay back in 2008, few people had ever heard of ninjasalvaging, myself included. Then, I was reading the forums one day, and I heard someone complaining about someone in his mission, "Stealing" his salvage. I thought this was cool. So, I started doing it, learned how it works, and then wrote up this in response, thus causing the population of ninjasalvagers to explode. TLDR: It was complaining on the forums like this that caused ninjasalvaging to be so prevalent. Quote: ...bad game design, etc... No, actually. The whole point of EVE is that you are not alone and invincible, that other people CAN affect your gameplay, which is the whole point of an MMO. CCP actually seems to think this is great game design.
Kranwe Sentai Gallente METR0P0LIS	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:51:00 - [23] If you shoot someone driving a car in the head, and the car crashes into a bridge, does that automatically mean the car wreck is yours? No. If a tow truck comes along and takes the wreck away, did he do something wrong to you? No. If you wanted the wreck yourself, you would have salvaged it before the tow truck came along. Yes? Say you wallet was in the wrecked car, you could go an get it before the tow truck came along. However, if the tow truck driver takes your wallet from the car, that is stealing from you, so you can shoot him too. PhD that, professor. -------------------------------------------- Intercorporation Diplomat Auditor, Sales Manager Distribution Agent / Providence
I'thari Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.23 19:59:00 - [24] Originally by: Amarraz I'm not especially dumb Then do few calculations - shouldn't be too hard for a professor. After playing for a year you should have enough skills not to lose a battleship in a mission, not to mention do missions fast enough to make whole salvaging process nearly worthless (unless you like it more than shooting NPCs for some reason). Originally by: Amarraz are you actually claiming that they're infallible, and that every decision they make is beyond criticism? If so, then we live in different worlds. What? You mean those guys who seriously think that changing ship spinning to boobs spinning instead of making more intuitive UI will actually lessen learning curve? YES, I'm pretty sure they do live in a different world. Originally by: Kahega Amielden ...Waay back in 2008, few people had ever heard of ninjasalvaging, myself included.... Only because salvaging was introduced no too long before that.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:03:00 - [25] Originally by: I'thari Originally by: Kahega Amielden ...Waay back in 2008, few people had ever heard of ninjasalvaging, myself included.... Only because salvaging was introduced no too long before that. Two years earlier, to be exactà 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
I'thari Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:09:00 - [26] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: I'thari Originally by: Kahega Amielden ...Waay back in 2008, few people had ever heard of ninjasalvaging, myself included.... Only because salvaging was introduced no too long before that. Two years earlier, to be exactà My mistake, just remember that not too much people knew about salvaging in general in nebie corp back then. Guess, add old (rahter confusing) scanning mechannics and rather poor game documantation in general and that's what you get as a result.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:16:00 - [27] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 It is bad game design...period. Why? See above. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 If it wasn't the wreck they are salvaging shouldnt be yellow with or without cargo. Wreck abandonment wasn't in the game when salvaging was introduced ù it's not bad game design that a function that appeared four years later wasn't being employed. But yes, that should happen automatically if the wreck is empty. But it doesn't...bad game design. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 If it wasn't you should be able to scan and warp to the wreck..not the player running the mission. That's a problem with the scanning system, not with salvaging. Problem none the less and....bad game design. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 If that isn't bad game design I don't know what is. Not really. It creates competition over resources ù PvP. That's not really bad game design in a PvP-centric game. No,it's a sandbox.If it was a "pvp-centric" game there would be no single player content. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 You stop posting and I'll salvage it and even bring it to the ninja salvager Why should I stop posting? Because you're a ccp fanboy and will come up with all kind of bull** to try and convince people that this is a perfect game and everything is working as intended when the forum is full of complaints about bad game design. Originally by:** Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Always want to be so smart but can't see that this is bad game design at its best Why? Because you weren't breastfed long enough. That's why fanboy.
Amarraz	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:18:00 - [28] Well, there are a number of flaws in your logic here. Let's take your third item: "If you wanted the wreck yourself, you would have salvaged it before the tow truck came along." Ignoring the comparison of a ninja salvager to a tow truck that nobody has sent for, you're forgetting one essential issue here: would you really have salvaged the wreck before the unsummoned tow truck came if you were under fire by a hundred mercenaries, who, because you arrived there first, decide only to shoot at you, and not the tow truck? Sorry, but your argument just doesn't work. Just because I wait to salvage the wreck doesn't mean I should forfeit my rights to it, a fact recognized by the designers of EVE when they introduced the Noctis. And whatever the designers of EVE intend, allowing game mechanics that essentially state I do not own a wreck I have created is simply nonsense. Again, if it were limited to low sec, I would be an ardent defender of ninja salvaging. But in high sec? If the EVE developers are really saying that the wreck doesn't belong to the person who created it, then why make a distinction between the loot it carries and the logic boards, etc? If you shoot someone driving a car in the head, and the car crashes into a bridge, does that automatically mean the car wreck is yours? No. If a tow truck comes along and takes the wreck away, did he do something wrong to you? No. If you wanted the wreck yourself, you would have salvaged it before the tow truck came along. Yes? Say you wallet was in the wrecked car, you could go an get it before the tow truck came along. However, if the tow truck driver takes your wallet from the car, that is stealing from you, so you can shoot him too. PhD that, professor.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:25:00 - [29] Originally by: HeIIfire11 But it doesn't...bad game design. So, you're saying that, given that torpedoes in the future will also confer an ECM blast, it's bad game design that today's Golems are torpedo shipsà right. No, it's not bad game design because the design did not exist at the time. It is not a problem with salvaging. Quote: Problem none the less and....bad game design. No. Technical limitations. It's not a problem with salvaging. Quote: No,it's a sandbox. In other words: a PvP-centric game. Quote: If it was a "pvp-centric" game there would be no single player content. Sure there would be. Just look at the game now: there's plenty of single-player content, but it's subject to competition. Quote: Because you're a ccp fanboy You haven't read anything I've written have you? Quote: Because you weren't breastfed long enough. That's why fanboy. So you agree, then, seeing as you have no argument and have to resort to ad hominems instead. Good. Now, answer the questions: why should I stop posting? Why is ninja salvaging bad game design? 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
Kranwe Sentai Gallente METR0P0LIS	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:33:00 - [30] Ok point three. Lets refrase that one. Say you go to the parking lot of the opera house and put sugar in everone's vehicles. Then you drive down the road and wait for the cars to leave the parking lot. You have one thing in mind: Get the cars imobilized so you can kill the driver and passengers so you can get rich on all their fancy jewelry they had on at the opera, and their wallets too. Here come the cars. They start to stall like clock work. You start shooting at the first car, destroying most of the car while you are at it. You manage to kill the people inside so theoretically you could run to the car and take the good stuff. But then the drivers of the other stalled cars start shooting at you so you shoot back, wrecking their cars, killing the people inside, and at the same time you are at risk yourself. But then some other bad guys sneak up and start taking the rims of the cars and other good stuff which they can sell later. Those bad guys don't have anything of value and aren't taking anything from inside of the car, which is what you are after. The car wrecks are just the extra crap that is left over from the shootout. Now if they took your loot from inside the car, that would be stealing from you, since your original plan (plan A) was to get the drivers killed and rob them of their belongings. Your plan B was to eventually clean up the salvage from the cars with your tools. You mentioned the Noctis. It has cool magnates which you can pull the car wrecks up close and salvage the wrecks real quick like. That is an added bonus of the massacre. You need to understand that every action has a reaction. Early bird gets the worm. The quick survive. Etc. If the junk left over really means that much to you, then either salvage as you go along (using a Marauder) or use a second account to fly a Noctis behind you and clean up as you go. Your argument that the salvage is yours simply has no bearing, no reasoning and absolute nonsence. I suppose I could go about it like this: You shoot down an airplane, since it is full of bad guys. The plane doesn't belong to you, it fell down and crashed and a bunch of people heard it and ran up to it collecting souverniers etc. The bad guys inside are dead and you can go take out their gold fillings what not. Anyone else messing with your bad guys is stealing what you wanted. I suppose if you bought the plane just to shoot it down, then the wreck would be yours. -------------------------------------------- Intercorporation Diplomat Auditor, Sales Manager Distribution Agent / Providence

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:34:00 - [31] Originally by: Amarraz Just because I wait to salvage the wreck doesn't mean I should forfeit my rights to it Yes you do. You gain the rights to the salvage when you activate the salvager. If you let someone else do that before you, you've forfeited the rights to that salvage. Quote: allowing game mechanics that essentially state I do not own a wreck I have created is simply nonsense. Why? You're already getting compensated for creating that wreck. Why should you suddenly get even more without any additional effort? Quote: Again, if it were limited to low sec, I would be an ardent defender of ninja salvaging. But in high sec? What difference does it make if it's highsec? Highsec doesn't mean you're exempt from PvP, you knowà Quote: If the EVE developers are really saying that the wreck doesn't belong to the person who created it, then why make a distinction between the loot it carries and the logic boards, etc? Because it's that distinction that lets them say that. The carrier and the mechanics for obtaining loot and salvage are completely different. Because the two are part of different reward mechanics for different activities and different professions. Just because you can do both at once doesn't mean they're one and the same. 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
Nika Dekaia	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:35:00 - [32] Originally by: Amarraz Well, there are a number of flaws in your logic here. Let's take your third item: "If you wanted the wreck yourself, you would have salvaged it before the tow truck came along." You claim it's bad game design, yet you bring RL comparisons. Stop doing that. It's about game risk vs. reward balance Originally by: Amarraz Just because I wait to salvage the wreck doesn't mean I should forfeit my rights to it, a fact recognized by the designers of EVE when they introduced the Noctis. And whatever the designers of EVE intend, allowing game mechanics that essentially state I do not own a wreck I have created is simply nonsense. Tippia said it before, but since you can't seem to get it in your head: wrecks and salvage were introduced later than the actual lvl 4 missions. So instead of giving missions runners even more reward on top of the already inflated rewards, CCP created a mini profession, which you (and anyone else) can do during or after the mission: salvaging wrecks. And to make the profession viable, salvaging does not give the salvager an agression timer. Just TRY to get it in your head: salvage = not part of your mission reward. You can use a marauder during the mission ir a noctis afterwards. And don't forget: you already have ahuge advantage over other salvagers. You can tractor all those wrecks. They can't.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:36:00 - [33] Originally by: Tippia Herp derp I just explained it to you.You read what I wrote and think it over and don't give me that technical limitation crap lol.This topic comes up every few months and creates pages of discussion but no,it's not bad game design right? And pvp-centric does not mean sandbox,google is your friend. As far as me having read anything you said..it's not worth it because you're not out for a discussion but instead to beat your one sided opinion into someones head with lame excuses which always seem to favor ccp.Hence you're a fanboy and a complete waste of time.
Paija	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:38:00 - [34] Originally by: Kranwe Sentai I suppose if you bought the plane just to shoot it down, then the wreck would be yours. This.
I'thari Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:40:00 - [35] Originally by: Kranwe Sentai I suppose I could go about it like this: You shoot down an airplane, since it is full of bad guys. The plane doesn't belong to you, it fell down and crashed and a bunch of people heard it and ran up to it collecting souverniers etc. The bad guys inside are dead and you can go take out their gold fillings what not. Anyone else messing with your bad guys is stealing what you wanted. Well, technicly it should still be a property of bad guys so even if you shot down the plane you still stealing from organisation they belonged to... but that's the "correct" logic OP was referring to, I suppose.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:40:00 - [36] Edited by: Tippia on 23/04/2011 20:43:05 Originally by: HeIIfire11 don't give me that technical limitation crap Why not? The scanning mechanics are causing them technical headaches as it is. Quote: This topic comes up every few months and creates pages of discussion but no,it's not bad game design right? No. People making baseless assumptions about reward structures because they haven't taken the time to educate themselves is not bad game design. In fact, I'd rather say it would be bad game design if people were given rewards without doing anything to earn themà and yet, that's exactly what the OP is asking for. Why should that happen? Quote: And pvp-centric does not mean sandbox No, but multiplayer sandbox means PvP (or a very limited sandboxà but fortunately, EVE doesn't have that huge restriction). Quote: As far as me having read anything you said..it's not worth it Then you have no basis for anything you say about me. So not only are you using ad hominems, you're also making an argument from ignorance. Guess what? Neither improves your caseà 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
Triskie Caldari Dead Cat Explorations	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:53:00 - [37] Edited by: Triskie on 23/04/2011 20:53:56 After these couple years these threads are still popping up. I started out in eve salvaging when it was in its hay day and the wrecks and loot were actually worth something. Now a year and a bit later i mission a few level 4's myself and ignore the wrecks. That and the loot are just junk to be ignored in the pursuit of fast LP. Yet despite the wrecks lack of value, the logical augments from all the other posts in all of the threads of this kind over the years, and the developer comments in favour of the salvager's there still seems to be a few that just cant come to terms with it. Do an eve-search and you will see this is one debate that has been done to death many times before and all coming to the same conclusion. The wreck is not yours and no amount of forum tantrums will changes that fact.
Renarla	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:54:00 - [38] Originally by: Feligast Hooray, this thread again!! My thoughts exactly.
Khanya Trace	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:57:00 - [39] if they change it you people will just cry that you lost your shiny mission ship to the salvager you just shot at because his ship looked small.
Nika Dekaia	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:00:00 - [40] Originally by: HeIIfire11 I just explained it to you.You read what I wrote and think it over and don't give me that technical limitation crap lol.This topic comes up every few months and creates pages of discussion but no,it's not bad game design right? Confirming that: pages of discussion about a certain topic = bad game design. And on that topic: the mechanic does exactly what was intended by the developers. It may be a game design descission some people do not agree with, but certainly not "bad game design". Originally by: HeIIfire11 And pvp-centric does not mean sandbox,google is your friend. "pvp-centric" does not mean no single player content, either, as you claimed. You're just noweher safe from (maybe) malicious player interaction. Originally by: HeIIfire11 As far as me having read anything you said..it's not worth it because you're not out for a discussion but instead to beat your one sided opinion into someones head with lame excuses which always seem to favor ccp.Hence you're a fanboy and a complete waste of time. Bold words for a troll.

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:06:00 - [41] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 don't give me that technical limitation crap Why not? The scanning mechanics are causing them technical headaches as it is. That's not the players problem..just the cause of bad game design. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 This topic comes up every few months and creates pages of discussion but no,it's not bad game design right? No. People making baseless assumptions about reward structures because they haven't taken the time to educate themselves is not bad game design. In fact, I'd rather say it would be bad game design if people were given rewards without doing anything to earn themà and yet, that's exactly what the OP is asking for. Why should that happen? You are making baseless assumptions about reward structures by saying people are given rewards without doing anything to earn them.Others might say doing the mission which creates the wreck is enough to earn them.Opinions are like *****s..everyone has one and thats all you're bringing to the table..your opinion.Doesn't make it a fact.Why should they do even more to earn the salvage? Originally by:** Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 And pvp-centric does not mean sandbox No, but multiplayer sandbox means PvP (or a very limited sandboxà but fortunately, EVE doesn't have that huge restriction). Who said anything about "multiplayer sandbox"?Eve calls itself a sandbox..not multiplayer sandbox.A sandbox that includes pvp but is not limited to only pvp.Again your opinion based on what aspect of the game you choose to accept. In my opinion my case looks pretty good because you have nothing more than I do at this point..an opinon.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:19:00 - [42] Originally by: HeIIfire11 That's not the players problem..just the cause of bad game design. So you're saying that not being able to cram 30,000 people into Jita is bad game design? And speaking of which: what bad game design does this technical limitation cause? Quote: You are making baseless assumptions about reward structures by saying people are given rewards without doing anything to earn them. No. I'm simply restating what has been said about the reward structure of missions. There is no assumption there. Quote: Others might say doing the mission which creates the wreck is enough to earn them. àand they contradict the stated design purpose. Quote: Why should they do even more to earn the salvage? Because otherwise it might as well be removed from the game. If they don't want to engage in the activity that earns them salvage, that activity serves no purpose. Salvage was added for a reason. Padding mission-runners wallets is not it. Quote: Who said anything about "multiplayer sandbox"?Eve calls itself a sandbox..not multiplayer sandbox. CCP did. They were the ones who classified the game as an MMO. You might want to look up what that second "M" stands forà Quote: A sandbox that includes pvp but is not limited to only pvp. Actually, there's only two things you can do that isn't subject to PvP. So yes, it's pretty much limited to only PvP. 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
Keylah Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:19:00 - [43] This topic has been discussed to death before. I don't care for the ninjas either, CCP won't do anything about it, so there's no point in griping about it here. Ninjas are like real life tax evaders, disgusting bottom-feeders. Solution: Shoot the wrecks if you see a ninja, preferably the wrecks he is going for. Problem solved. If you won't shoot the wrecks for some reason(and don't say: But ammo costs isk!) then you have no right to complain. Eventually, most of them will stop entering your missions as it's a waste of time. Though some will come just in spite to annoy you. Worked well for me while I still did missions(can't be arsed to do them now days). If this solution doesn't work for you, I respectfully suggest another line of income or another game. If you are waiting for CCP to take action against the ninjas, I'm afraid you'll be waiting until the sun explodes -Key
Kiandoshia	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:26:00 - [44] Originally by: Amarraz (we all know salvaging is where the real mission money is) No.
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:29:00 - [45] I can't be alone in being utterly indifferent to salvaging wrecks can I. Whenever I used to mission run I'd pretty much just blitz missions and leave the loot/wrecks behind. I only once had a ninja trying to goad me about stealing my stuffs and when I said feel free to take what you like apparently that was me crying sweet sweet tears. Heh.
Kerfira Kerfira Corp	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:30:00 - [46] It is always funny when people complain over the rules of a game because they happen to go against them once in a while... Imagine this was a football match, and one of the players start throwing a hissy fit because the goalkeeper is allowed to use his hands, but he is not. He'd be laughed off the field This is EXACTLY the same situation as here, where people like the OP and HeIIfire11 (etc.) simply can't comprehend that the game they're playing has rules that go against them... It can't be THEM there's something wrong with, so naturally it must be the game In a way it is pretty sad that some people are so limited and unable to accept that sometimes everything is not like they want it to be... Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
Nika Dekaia	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:42:00 - [47] Originally by: Kerfira It is always funny when people complain over the rules of a game because they happen to go against them once in a while... Imagine this was a football match, and one of the players start throwing a hissy fit because the goalkeeper is allowed to use his hands, but he is not. He'd be laughed off the field This is EXACTLY the same situation as here, where people like the OP and HeIIfire11 (etc.) simply can't comprehend that the game they're playing has rules that go against them... It can't be THEM there's something wrong with, so naturally it must be the game In a way it is pretty sad that some people are so limited and unable to accept that sometimes everything is not like they want it to be... Yeah, if it was a soccer game, they would be sent off with a red card for complaining about the rules/referee descission. But since it's a internet forum, we'll just have some fun arguing (on that topic again) and they'll have some fun trolling. And even if there is someone really not getting it without beeing a troll: the mechanic won't change. Ever.
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:44:00 - [48] Let's say for the sake of argument, salvaging is stealing. Now what changes that? You could shoot the salvager now, so would you actually do that? You would really engage another player in your probably expensive PvE fit? Now here is the thing, it would change nothing, except you would loose some of your ships to those "salvagers". Now in eve there are no instances, there is no save space and it is an MMO where people will try to annoy you. You can't just ignore the MMO part of the game you have no right for not getting annoyed by other players. There is only one way, adopt to it! It's worth it! Instead of petitions and forum whining use the power of the sandbox to wipe the floor with some ninja-salvager asses! There are ways to do that but i have to warn you, it's not boring like lvl4 missions -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:45:00 - [49] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 That's not the players problem..just the cause of bad game design. So you're saying that not being able to cram 30,000 people into Jita is bad game design? And speaking of which: what bad game design does this technical limitation cause? What are you talking about?Stay on the topic please and don't compare this to something it has nothing at all to do with.Cramming 30,000 people in one system and changing a color and status of a wreck when looted is two complete different things. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 You are making baseless assumptions about reward structures by saying people are given rewards without doing anything to earn them. No. I'm simply restating what has been said about the reward structure of missions. There is no assumption there. Without a quote what you say is worthless..a lot has been said.Show me where ccp explains exactly this.If you do pull that one from somewhere it will just prove my point about it being bad game design because the wreck is still yellow to the person salvaging it.Also that player gets concorded when he shoots my yellow empty wreck that "isn't mine". Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Others might say doing the mission which creates the wreck is enough to earn them. àand they contradict the stated design purpose. Again without quote your statement is worthless.Stated where?Quote or it didn't happen. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Why should they do even more to earn the salvage? Because otherwise it might as well be removed from the game. If they don't want to engage in the activity that earns them salvage, that activity serves no purpose. What you don't understand is that the problem people have with this is that its risk free for the salvager.All that's being asked is that he is flagged so that we can do what you say this game is all about..pvp.If a mission runner wants the salvage he has to kill the rat,what risk does the salvager have?None.No risk..no danger.Bad game design. Originally by: Tippia Salvage was added for a reason. Padding mission-runners wallets is not it. Again..quote what reason.I doubt it's padding a risk free griefers wallet either.
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:56:00 - [50] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Karak Terrel Let's say for the sake of argument, salvaging is stealing. Now what changes that? You could shoot the salvager now, so would you actually do that? You would really engage another player in your probably expensive PvE fit? Now here is the thing, it would change nothing, except you would loose some of your ships to those "salvagers". Your opinion..just because you fail at the game doesn't mean everyone does. That Teenrage.. -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:58:00 - [51] Originally by: Karak Terrel That Teenrage.. No it's a fact.If I choose to cloak an alt or two in t3 cruisers to wait for the scum it wont be my expensive ship that dies now will it.Sadly we will never know due to bad game design.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 21:58:00 - [52] Originally by: HeIIfire11 What are you talking about? You're claiming that technical limitations are bad game design. I'm asking you how. Quote: Without a quote what you say is worthless. The quote has already been posted CCP Prism X ôit's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage, not to further increase the revenue from mission grinding.. I doubt anyone with a perspective thinks we need to high-sec increase mission grinding [sic] any further.ö Quote: If you do pull that one from somewhere it will just prove my point about it being bad game design Why is it bad game design that you have to earn your rewards? Quote: What you don't understand is that the problem people have with this is that its risk free for the salvager. Yes? It's risk free for both parties aside from the fact that it's a competition. You risk being too slow. You stand to gain some salvage. Quote: All that's being asked is that he is flagged so that we can do what you say this game is all about..pvp. It's already about PvP. And again, if it's flagged, the mission runner has been given ownership over stuff without having earned it yet. Why should that happen? Quote: If a mission runner wants the salvage he has to kill the rat No. If the mission runner wants the salvage, he has to scoot over to the wreck and/or pull it closer with tractor beams, and then he has to activate his salvager. In short, he has to do something completely different than be a mission runner: he has to be a salvager. Quote: what risk does the salvager have? None. It's the same risk for both competitors, yes: that they might not be fast enough to win the prize. Quote: I doubt it's padding a risk free griefers wallet either. Who's griefing? It's there to pad salvagers' wallets. And guess what: it does exactly 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
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:06:00 - [53] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Karak Terrel That Teenrage.. No it's a fact.If I choose to cloak an alt or two in t3 cruisers to wait for the scum it wont be my expensive ship that dies now will it.Sadly we will never know due to bad game design. Good for you, maybe that works two times and then they come only to bait and kill this t3.. very smart.. and it's still Teenrage -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.
Keylah Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:18:00 - [54] Originally by: Karak Terrel Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Karak Terrel That Teenrage.. No it's a fact.If I choose to cloak an alt or two in t3 cruisers to wait for the scum it wont be my expensive ship that dies now will it.Sadly we will never know due to bad game design. Good for you, maybe that works two times and then they come only to bait and kill this t3.. very smart.. and it's still Teenrage Heh, well at least no one would complain about ninja salvaging then, but I'm sure the forums would be ablaze with ninja gank threads. Anyways, it's pointless to discuss this further, the mission runners already have the tool to stop ninjas, ie blow up the wrecks. If they can't do that, they should keep quiet. If looting a wreck would flag one as criminal, most mission runners wouldn't take a shot at a ninja anyways. And Admiral "It's a trap!" Ackbar's words will have a whole new meaning for many
Kiandoshia	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:20:00 - [55] Yeah, I guess if salvaging flagged people as "criminals" and make them a fair game for the people "owning" the wrecks, we'd have a whole different level of whining :/
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:28:00 - [56] Edited by: Corina''s Bodyguard on 23/04/2011 22:31:12 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Tippia Herp derp I just explained it to you.You read what I wrote and think it over and don't give me that technical limitation crap lol.This topic comes up every few months and creates pages of discussion but no,it's not bad game design right? Salvaging itself isn't bad game design. Whats bad game design was CCP not going and fixing all those things you mentioned (scanning wrecks specifically, which supposedly was going to be added at some point...). Anyway, the current reason the wreck stays yellow is because the can inside it (which belongs tot he player who killed the ship, usually) is yellow. The actual wreck has no color, no ownership.
Jamaican Herbsman I Love You Mary Jane	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:28:00 - [57] Originally by: Amarraz my wrecks No
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:33:00 - [58] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:35:46 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 What are you talking about? You're claiming that technical limitations are bad game design. I'm asking you how. Where is the technical limitation first of all?Quote where ccp states that this is the case.It can't be so technaly limited to change the status of the wreck when this mechanic already exists.By abandoning the wreck and when looting it,it changes status from full to empty..from yellow to blue.I don't see the limitation,only lazy coding and/or bad game design. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Without a quote what you say is worthless. The quote has already been posted. Originally by: CCP Prism x CCP Prism X ôit's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage, not to further increase the revenue from mission grinding.. I doubt anyone with a perspective thinks we need to high-sec increase mission grinding [sic] any further.ö Like I said,It's designed for "people who want to roam and look for salvage" but you dont look for salvage now do you?No..you look for the player.Bad game design.If it wasn't bad game design you could scan and warp to the abandoned wreck..not the player.Quote is nothing more than proof of bad game design and lazy unfinished "mini professions". Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 If you do pull that one from somewhere it will just prove my point about it being bad game design Why is it bad game design that you have to earn your rewards? It's bad game design because the salvager doesn't do anything or take any risks to earn it.Its a free give away for him protected by concord. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 What you don't understand is that the problem people have with this is that its risk free for the salvager. Yes? It's risk free for both parties aside from the fact that it's a competition. You risk being too slow. You stand to gain some salvage. It's not risk free to the mission runner who has to fit his ship right,tank the dps and risk a ship that costs 20 more than the salvagers ship which has no risk at all. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 All that's being asked is that he is flagged so that we can do what you say this game is all about..pvp. It's already about PvP. And again, if it's flagged, the mission runner has been given ownership over stuff without having earned it yet. Why should that happen?. Again..we are going in circles.The mission runner has earned it by killing it and having earned the ship and tools to do so in a lvl 4 mission.The ninja does nothing but risk free scanning. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 what risk does the salvager have? None. It's the same risk for both competitors, yes: that they might not be fast enough to win the prize. It's the same risk?really?Last I checked a t2 bs costs a bit more than some cheap destroyer.Not to mention the mission runner has to tank it all at the same time.Sry you're talking out your ass and pushing your completely pointless opinion here again.Doesn't make your case any stronger. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I doubt it's padding a risk free griefers wallet either. Who's griefing? It's there to pad salvagers' wallets. And guess what: it does exactly that. I guess you started playing a day or two ago and missed the part where 90% of the time the goal of the salvager is to get into a fight with the mission runner or ** him off.Its no secret that eve is known and loved for the ability to grief people.But let you tell it it's all about the poor savager trying to make a living lol. Origina...**
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:42:00 - [59] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:44:49 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:42:20 Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Anyway, the current reason the wreck stays yellow is because the can inside it (which belongs tot he player who killed the ship, usually) is yellow. The actual wreck has no color, no ownership. Empty or full..the wreck stays yellow...bad game design. Not only that but my corp name is on it empty or full.Something has my name on it ßnd concord protects it when anyone but me touches it..it's mine.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:43:00 - [60] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:42:20 Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Anyway, the current reason the wreck stays yellow is because the can inside it (which belongs tot he player who killed the ship, usually) is yellow. The actual wreck has no color, no ownership. Empty or full..the wreck stays yellow...bad game design. The wreck isn't yellow. The cargo container that must be inside the wreck so that the server doesn't boom is yellow.

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:49:00 - [61] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:50:28 Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard The wreck isn't yellow. The cargo container that must be inside the wreck so that the server doesn't boom is yellow. If you want to look at it from a role playing point of view be my guest but fact is that its a yellow pixel wreck with my name on it.I can role play and say it's yellow because sleepers ****ed on it..doesn't make it so. And if the server goes boom it's not my fault but due to bad game design lol. There is no can inside that wreck..it's spawned when you salvage it.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:52:00 - [62] Edited by: Tippia on 23/04/2011 22:53:49 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Where is the technical limitation first of all? From what I understood, grouping together a cloud of items into one scannable object. Quote: Quote where ccp states that this is the case. Fanfest 2009 roundtable. Quote: Like I said,It's designed for "people who want to roam and look for salvage" but you dont look for salvage now do you? Sure you do. You look for it where you think you might find it. Quote: It's bad game design because the salvager doesn't do anything or take any risks to earn it. So in other words, you want NPCs to not create any wrecks, or at least limit mission runners from being able to salvage the rats they kill. After all, ninjas certainly have to do things to get to those wrecks (far more than the mission runners at least), and as mentioned, both parties have to win the competition in the endà Ok, I have to rephrase my question it seems: why do you want to buff ninja salvagers so much? What have they done to deserve that? Quote: Its a free give away for him protected by concord. It's not protected by CONCORD until after you've earned it. Quote: It's not risk free to the mission runner who has to fit his ship right,tank the dps and risk a ship that costs 20 more than the salvagers ship And again: those risks are already compensated for through bounties, loot, mission rewards, time bonuses, LP, and standings. For the mission runner, the salvaging part has exactly the same risks as for the ninja (wellà perhaps not exactly ù they're lower for the MR since he has to do a hell of a lot less work to earn the salvage as well, and is starting out ahead in the competition). Quote: Again..we are going in circles.The mission runner has earned it by killing it and having earned the ship and tools to do so in a lvl 4 mission. No. That's how he earns the mission rewards. Salvage is not part of those rewards. If he wants to earn the salvage, he has to do what everyone else does: he has to be a salvager, with all the risks and rewards that entail (but you claim that there are no risks, so you can't really claim the mission runner has any more rights to the salvage for that reason). Quote: The ninja does nothing but risk free scanning. àwhich a lot more than the mission runner does. Quote: It's the same risk? Yes. Or wellà no: MR: Decides where and when a wreck appears. Is already on the scene. Can use tractors. Ninja: None of the above. He has to do the work of finding the wrecks and travelling between each and every one of them. So there's a higher risk for him that he won't get there in time. Quote: I guess you started playing a day or two ago and missed the part where 90% of the time the goal of the salvager is to get into a fight with the mission runner or ** him off. So now you're saying that there's a pretty darn huge risk of the salvager losing his ship, if he succeeds with his job. So not only does the ninja have to work harder for the salvage, he also faces a much larger chance of losing his ship, and the mission runner has the advantage in every wayà and yet, the ninja isn't more entitled to the rewards? Quote: Something has my name on it ßnd concord protects it when anyone but me touches it..it's mine. àand seeing as how they don't protect it, it's obviously not yours. Quote:** There is no can inside that wreck. Have you ever gone up to a wreck and tried to open it? Yes, there is a can inside that wreck. 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
Myshella Drake Caldari Omega Exploration And Reclaimation	Posted - 2011.04.23 22:53:00 - [63] "Thief Salvaging" Thieves can be salvaged?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:01:00 - [64] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 23:05:54 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 23:05:34 I was about to break down your last post Tippia but I had to stop as I noticed you're losing ground.Your answers are nonsense and you are running out of arguments and resorting to confusing your opinions with facts again. Your using things that you claim were said at fanfest 2009 which are documented nowhere and can't be proven.Looks like you hit a dead end what? As fun as it was I'll leave you to your opinion.Better luck next time I'd say. My arguments on the other hand are facts. 1.Wrecks are and stay yellow. 2.The player is scanned and not the wrecks which rules out roaming for wrecks lol. 3.Scanning down a mr and freely picking off his wrecks includes no risk at all. 4.Concord will still pwn you if you shoot my emty wreck proving that it is mine or bad game design.CCP Prism x's quote proves that it is the later..and like I stated in my original post.Bad game design.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:05:00 - [65] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:50:28 Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard The wreck isn't yellow. The cargo container that must be inside the wreck so that the server doesn't boom is yellow. If you want to look at it from a role playing point of view be my guest but fact is that its a yellow pixel wreck with my name on it.I can role play and say it's yellow because sleepers ****ed on it..doesn't make it so. And if the server goes boom it's not my fault but due to bad game design lol. There is no can inside that wreck..it's spawned when you salvage it. There is a can inside the wreck, otherwise you could not open it. As for your giving up, its very lame to stop making arguments and continuing to claim you are right.
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:08:00 - [66] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your using things that you claim were said at fanfest 2009 which are documented nowhere and can't be proven. Hurf blurf furf. You're not even trying anymore are you? -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:10:00 - [67] Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:50:28 Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard The wreck isn't yellow. The cargo container that must be inside the wreck so that the server doesn't boom is yellow. If you want to look at it from a role playing point of view be my guest but fact is that its a yellow pixel wreck with my name on it.I can role play and say it's yellow because sleepers ****ed on it..doesn't make it so. And if the server goes boom it's not my fault but due to bad game design lol. There is no can inside that wreck..it's spawned when you salvage it. There is a can inside the wreck, otherwise you could not open it. As for your giving up, its very lame to stop making arguments and continuing to claim you are right. No one said anything about giving up.If he's too hard headed to accept when hes wrong thats not my problem. I'm sorry you can't come up with anything better than "there's a can inside and that's what makes it yellow lol.Now thats just plain stupid if you ask me.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:14:00 - [68] Edited by: Tippia on 23/04/2011 23:15:43 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your answers are nonsense Prove it. You have yet to even explain why it's poor game designà Quote: you are running out of arguments and resorting to confusing your opinions with facts again. You are confusing me with you. You have yet to post a single fact, and have only ever thrown out opinions about how things should be without explaining why. Quote: Your using things that you claim were said at fanfest 2009 which are documented nowhere and can't be proven.Looks like you hit a dead end what? Not really, no. You're just moving the goal posts to the point where they're now sitting in the parking lot in the next town over. The problem is still the same: you have yet to provide a single shred of argument as to why things should be the way you want them to be. So the dead end is this: there is nothing wrong with ninja salvaging and you can't state a single reason why it should change. You are stating opinions that are contrary to facts. You make truth-claims based on these contrafactual opinions. You cannot keep your story straight ù one minute you want to see mission runners protected against ninjas, the other you want to buff ninjas and nerf mission runners. You are judging past features based on present and future mechanics that were not available at the time. At any point when you feel like you want to back out of that dead end, you're free to do so. Of course, seeing as how you always fall back on ad hominems and arguments from ignorance, which ruins any argument you would have had, backing up might not be available to you any longerà 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:15:00 - [69] Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your using things that you claim were said at fanfest 2009 which are documented nowhere and can't be proven. Hurf blurf furf. You're not even trying anymore are you? No because his last post put him on the same lvl as a troll and his answers are no longer productive.They have the purpose of just being there to have answered something but have no real ground.At that point it really becomes a whaste of my time.If anyone els has a reasonable argument to add to this discussion I will be glad to answer.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:17:00 - [70] Originally by: HeIIfire11 If anyone els has a reasonable argument to add to this discussion I will be glad to answer. How about you start? Provide a reasonable argument why mission runners should get rewards they haven't earned. 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

Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:19:00 - [71] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your using things that you claim were said at fanfest 2009 which are documented nowhere and can't be proven. Hurf blurf furf. You're not even trying anymore are you? No because his last post put him on the same lvl as a troll and his answers are no longer productive.They have the purpose of just being there to have answered something but have no real ground.At that point it really becomes a whaste of my time.If anyone els has a reasonable argument to add to this discussion I will be glad to answer. Clearly you missed the point while feverishly mistyping your response. Fanfest roundtables are on youtube. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:21:00 - [72] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 23:21:46 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 23:21:16 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your using things that you claim were said at fanfest 2009 which are documented nowhere and can't be proven. Hurf blurf furf. You're not even trying anymore are you? No because his last post put him on the same lvl as a troll and his answers are no longer productive.They have the purpose of just being there to have answered something but have no real ground.At that point it really becomes a whaste of my time.If anyone els has a reasonable argument to add to this discussion I will be glad to answer. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your answers are nonsense Prove it. You have yet to even explain why it's poor game designà This is what I'm talking about.All my proof is stated in the post above and can be seen in game. Troll on fanboy...troll on.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:24:00 - [73] Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your using things that you claim were said at fanfest 2009 which are documented nowhere and can't be proven. Hurf blurf furf. You're not even trying anymore are you? No because his last post put him on the same lvl as a troll and his answers are no longer productive.They have the purpose of just being there to have answered something but have no real ground.At that point it really becomes a whaste of my time.If anyone els has a reasonable argument to add to this discussion I will be glad to answer. Clearly you missed the point while feverishly mistyping your response. Fanfest roundtables are on youtube. It's not my place to prove his point,let him do it and link.Where are your arguments other than hanging on his ****?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:27:00 - [74] Edited by: Tippia on 23/04/2011 23:36:38 Originally by: HeIIfire11 This is what I'm talking about. How is explaining basic facts not productive? How is asking you to provide some kind of argument for change not productive? How is asking you to provide some explanation and reasoning for your claims not productive? Quote: All my proof is stated in the post above and can be seen in game. Then it should be very simple for you to provide all of the above. How about you go on and do that? Quote: It's not my place to prove his point It's your place to explain why the change you want to see is needed. How about you go on and do that? Oh, and as for your edit: Originally by: HeIIfire11 My arguments on the other hand are facts. Your arguments for what exactly? Quote: 1.Wrecks are and stay yellow. àbecause they contain a cargo can that has an owner, like all cargo cans. Quote: 2.The player is scanned and not the wrecks which rules out roaming for wrecks lol. àexcept that roaming for wrecks is still entirely possible, and that looking for wrecks where you stand a good chance of finding them doesn't mean it's not "roaming". Quote: 3.Scanning down a mr and freely picking off his wrecks includes no risk at all. So what? The risk is the same for all salvagers ù at least ninjas have to work for their wrecks. Quote: 4.Concord will still pwn you if you shoot my emty wreck àbecause they contain a cargo can that has an owner, like all cargo cans. Quote: Bad game design. What is? 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
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:29:00 - [75] I make no arguments. Just pointing out someone making a provably false assertion. Continue sputtering on. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
I Love Boobies	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:34:00 - [76] Get a second account with a Noctis. If someone comes in, warp in the Noctis with your other account. The ninja salvagers usually leave shortly afterwards. That has been my experience anyway.
Jennifer Starling Imperial Navy Forum Patrol	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:38:00 - [77] Edited by: Jennifer Starling on 23/04/2011 23:38:48 Originally by: Amarraz So I'm running a level 4 mission in high-sec, and a thief (Andromeda555) comes in and starts salvaging all my wrecks. Since this is high-sec, I can't do anything about it, without losing standing. When I submit a help petition, I'm told this is a feature of the game. Now I would expect this kind of thing in low sec, but high sec where I can't blow the thief out of the sky? This is no feature, but just plain bad game design. Well if it's bad or good or questionable or just what it is - that's personal taste. CCP decided that it's allowed so until further notice it's "legal". On the positive side: it gives new players a chance to practice their scanning skills and make some more money than the poor rewards L1 or L2s or mining in a frigate give them. Now that's can't be bad can it? Next to that, how much exactly can they "steal" from you at all? A few armor plates, tritanium alloys, perhaps a few million if they're lucky enough to catch you in a Sansha/Angel/Blood mission? And really, how often does this happen? I had 2-3 ninja salvagers in my missions the past year and I mission a lot. Is it really worth it to get this upset about it? Why bother?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:40:00 - [78] Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki I make no arguments. Just pointing out someone making a provably false assertion. Continue sputtering on. Good then I'm glad we agree that you are of no importance. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 All my proof is stated in the post above and can be seen in game. Then it should be very simple for you to provide all of the above. How about you go on and do that? Originally by: HeIIfire11 My arguments on the other hand are facts. 1.Wrecks are and stay yellow. 2.The player is scanned and not the wrecks which rules out roaming for wrecks lol. 3.Scanning down a mr and freely picking off his wrecks includes no risk at all. 4.Concord will still pwn you if you shoot my emty wreck proving that it is mine or bad game design.CCP Prism x's quote proves that it is the later..and like I stated in my original post.Bad game design. This... Originally by: CCP Prism X it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage. Plus this = bad game design. Those are my facts.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:41:00 - [79] Originally by: HeIIfire11 This... Plus this = bad game design. Why is that? Bad in what way? And why does it matter? Quote: Those are my facts. And what's your argument? What do you want changed? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:46:00 - [80] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 This... Plus this = bad game design. Why is that? Bad in what way? And why does it matter? Quote: Those are my facts. And what's your argument? What do you want changed? I want the salvager flagged.I want him to risk losing his ship just like the mission runner does even though you can't compare the prise of the two losses. Simple easy change that brings forth what you say this game is all about..pvp.Nothing more ,nothing less.

Zora'e Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:50:00 - [81] This entire topic can be remedied in one fell swoop. CCP... Flag Ninja Salvagers as thieves. Let the carnage begin! Oh I forgot, if they did that, then these threads would become filled with the screams and threats of a hundred thousand mission runners crying about they lost their 2 billion isk mission ship to a ninja gank setup. Idiots will never be happy with the rules, even when they get what they whine for because they don't THINK of the consequences that could come from their demands. ~Z -
Sader Rykane Amarr Midnight Sentinels Midnight Space Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:51:00 - [82] Originally by: Kranwe Sentai If you shoot someone driving a car in the head, and the car crashes into a bridge, does that automatically mean the car wreck is yours? No. If a tow truck comes along and takes the wreck away, did he do something wrong to you? No. If you wanted the wreck yourself, you would have salvaged it before the tow truck came along. Yes? Say you wallet was in the wrecked car, you could go an get it before the tow truck came along. However, if the tow truck driver takes your wallet from the car, that is stealing from you, so you can shoot him too. PhD that, professor. I could care less about this topic, that being said. Real world analogies are bad, and you should feel bad for using them.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.23 23:52:00 - [83] Originally by: HeIIfire11 I want the salvager flagged. Why? Quote: Simple easy change that brings forth what you say this game is all about..pvp. Is this the reason why? At any rate, there is already PvP: you compete against other players for the salvage. Quote: I want him to risk losing his ship just like the mission runner does The mission runner does not risk his ship any more than the salvager does for one simple reason: they're both salvagers at that point. If there is any risk to the mission runner, there is risk for the ninja as well; if there is no risk for the ninja, there is no risk for the mission runner either. The mission runner may (and I stress that due to how very unlikely it is) lose his ship in the mission, but that's what the mission rewards are for: to compensate for that risk. Now, if you want salvaging to be risky (beyond the risk of the competition between the two), how do you want to make it equally risky for both parties? Spawn in NPCs? Flag everyone on grid against each other? How will this be handled when it's not NPC wrecks we're talking about? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:04:00 - [84] Originally by: Tippia The mission runner may (and I stress that due to how very unlikely it is) lose his ship in the mission, but that's what the mission rewards are for: to compensate for that risk. Right because 20 million isk compensates for losing a mission battleship,t3 cruiser etc.Sorry I see no compensation there. It's a risk for the mission runner because he has to tank the mission with his ******ed pve fitting and at the same time defend his salvage while the salvager is in a fast frig.The mission runner is webbed and scrammed in most cases which gives the salvager a clear advantage.The risk of competeing for the salvage is hardly fair.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:08:00 - [85] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 00:09:48 Originally by: Tippia How will this be handled when it's not NPC wrecks we're talking about? This..is the reason for the unfinished miniprofession and bad game design.They don't take the time to figure this out so they just threw in sloppy content without thinking it through.Hence bad game design like I said. Edit:And unfinished content which they are very known for.I'm sure you're not going to argue there
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:14:00 - [86] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 00:16:49 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Right because 20 million isk compensates for losing a mission battleship,t3 cruiser etc.Sorry I see no compensation there. No, but you won't lose a ship for every mission, will you? Quote: It's a risk for the mission runner because he has to tank the mission with his ****ed pve fitting and at the same time defend his salvage while the salvager is in a fast frig. The mission runner is webbed and scrammed in most cases which gives the salvager a clear advantage. The risk of competeing for the salvage is hardly fair. The mission runner is still the one who decides where and when the wrecks appear and can deny the salvagers wrecks in more ways than one, and in some missions, he will be able to spawn new ships at will to threaten that frigate. He also has more tools at his disposal to get to those wrecks than the ninja has. Moreover, the mission-runner can choose to delegate the task of collecting the salvage and basically transfer all his advantages to this second party. Most importantly, though, why should the mission-runner get a break because he brought the wrong tool for the job and the ninja did not? Quote:** This..is the reason for the unfinished miniprofession and bad game design.They don't take the time to figure this out But there's nothing to figure out. The problem only exists if they make the change you want. As it is, with current mechanics, there is no bad game design ù the problem simply isn't there. So, if anything, they avoided bad game design in this case. Here, you are the one who didn't figure out the issue or its solutionà 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
Glyken Touchon Independent Alchemists	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:17:00 - [87] Originally by: HeIIfire11 It's the same risk?really?Last I checked a t2 bs costs a bit more than some cheap destroyer.Not to mention the mission runner has to tank it all at the same time.Sry you're talking out your ass and pushing your completely pointless opinion here again.Doesn't make your case any stronger. If you are already in a maurauder, aren't you even further ahead in the race to salvage the wrecks? Originally by: HeIIfire11 No it's a fact.If I choose to cloak an alt or two in t3 cruisers to wait for the scum it wont be my expensive ship that dies now will it.Sadly we will never know due to bad game design. If you are willing to have a couple of t3 alts hanging around just in case a ninja arrives, why don't you have them hanging around now salvaging? That way there are no wrecks to be "stolen" Originally by: HeIIfire11 I guess you started playing a day or two ago and missed the part where 90% of the time the goal of the salvager is to get into a fight with the mission runner or **** him off. The people who only salvage are probably in it for the ISK. If they start looting as well, then they are either chancers or after a fight.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:28:00 - [88] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 00:36:23 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 00:29:39 Originally by: Glyken Touchon Originally by: HeIIfire11 It's the same risk?really?Last I checked a t2 bs costs a bit more than some cheap destroyer.Not to mention the mission runner has to tank it all at the same time.Sry you're talking out your ass and pushing your completely pointless opinion here again.Doesn't make your case any stronger. If you are already in a maurauder, aren't you even further ahead in the race to salvage the wrecks? Originally by: HeIIfire11 No it's a fact.If I choose to cloak an alt or two in t3 cruisers to wait for the scum it wont be my expensive ship that dies now will it.Sadly we will never know due to bad game design. If you are willing to have a couple of t3 alts hanging around just in case a ninja arrives, why don't you have them hanging around now salvaging? That way there are no wrecks to be "stolen" Originally by: HeIIfire11 I guess you started playing a day or two ago and missed the part where 90% of the time the goal of the salvager is to get into a fight with the mission runner or **** him off. The people who only salvage are probably in it for the ISK. If they start looting as well, then they are either chancers or after a fight. I have maurauders maxed just like all the weapons I use including the support skills.My certificates are public.Might need an update but for the most part they are public.I don't salvage either.1 or 2 missions at most if they are worth it and I feel like it.I hardly get a ninja in my mission at all because I complete them too fast for the fail ninja to scan me down.I'm not trying to say change this for me,but just stating that its unfair that a ninja risks nothing and its due to lazy coding and unfinished game content. Edit:Thats like me going into a wormhole with a two week old character and happily salvaging sleeper salvage risk free under the protection of concord.I did not earn access to that type of salvage anymore than a ninja earned access to lvl 4 salvage which a mission runner works months just to be able to get at.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:32:00 - [89] Originally by: HeIIfire11 just stating that its unfair that a ninja risks nothing and its due to lazy coding and unfinished game content. And the counter-question is: why should he risk something when the competitor doesn't risk anything either? 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
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:38:00 - [90] Edited by: Corina''s Bodyguard on 24/04/2011 00:40:56 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 23/04/2011 22:50:28 Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard The wreck isn't yellow. The cargo container that must be inside the wreck so that the server doesn't boom is yellow. If you want to look at it from a role playing point of view be my guest but fact is that its a yellow pixel wreck with my name on it.I can role play and say it's yellow because sleepers ****ed on it..doesn't make it so. When you try to add something to the wreck, a popup says you cannot add to this container. It also happens to have the exact space of a jet can. Also, the server recognizes the existence of the can contained in the wreck. At one point, there were no wrecks. Just loot cans. Then CCP added wrecks. The loot cans are still there (allowing for aggro mechanics and ownership of the loot), but the wrecks are separate entities from the cans. its very lame to stop making arguments and continuing to claim you are right. No one said anything about giving up.If he's too hard headed to accept when hes wrong thats not my problem. I'm sorry you can't come up with anything better than "there's a can inside and that's what makes it yellow lol.Now thats just plain stupid if you ask me. There is a can. If you try to add tot he wreck, a popup will say you cannot add to this container. Also, the size of the "wreck" is the same as the size of a jet can. At one point, there were no wrecks. Only loot cans. CCP decided to make wrecks over those cans. The cans still exist, allowing for loot ownership. But the wrecks are separate, and require a unique tool to get stuff from them. Also, salvaging has risk. You risk not making any money at all, and wasting time. The mission runner will make money whether they salvage or not.

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:38:00 - [91] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 just stating that its unfair that a ninja risks nothing and its due to lazy coding and unfinished game content. And the counter-question is: why should he risk something when the competitor doesn't risk anything either? God you're ignorant..reread the thread I'm not repeating myself for you.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:43:00 - [92] Originally by: HeIIfire11 God you're ignorant..reread the thread I'm not repeating myself for you. àexcept that you haven't explained what risk there is to the mission runner as far as the salvaging of the wreck goes. Yes, if he tries to do it in a suboptimal ship, he runs the risk of not getting the stuff. But why is that a bad thing? If the ninja tried the same, he'd run the same risk. The MR already gets special benefits as the owner of the loot cans; why does he need more? Shouldn't there be any benefits to picking the right tools for the job? 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
Titus Phook	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:50:00 - [93] God, it's not hard to understand, the loot is the mission runners, the wrecks are basically space trash. If a ninja salvager salvages the wreck and leaves the loot then there is no crime, if they take the loot then feel free to shoot at them, just don't be surprised when you need a new clone shortly thereafter. A lot of the salvagers are just waiting for you to shoot at them so they can change into a pvp ship and add you as a notch on the headboard. I heartily suggest heading on over to My loot your tears for an understanding of how this works. If you really don't want them salvaging "your" wrecks, either shoot the wrecks or shoot the trigger for the next wave and warp out, let the ninja in his frigate deal with the spawn. Alternatively ignore them or suggest in local that they're welcome to have the crumbs from your table, a lot of them hate this as you're ruining their idea of fun... which is baiting you into doing something incredibly stupid. I don't like the game mechanic either but I live with it and tbh 90% of the time the salvage is utter faeces anyway. ---------------------------------------------
Herrring Amarr National Quality Breaker	Posted - 2011.04.24 00:55:00 - [94] FFS, just make the ninja salvagers get flagged already. So when they ninja salvage,the mission runners will shoot them and they can blow their shiny marauders.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 01:30:00 - [95] I don't really care about the fuzzy logic CCP uses to justify ownership of wrecks, but ninja salvaging them is theft plain and simple (and should flag the thief). CCP is government of this game, what they say is the law, but that doesn't mean it's what the population likes or accepts. We see this kind of thread all the time because CCP didn't think mechanics surrounding ninja salvaging through very well.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 01:36:00 - [96] Originally by: Neoexecutor ninja salvaging them is theft plain and simple (and should flag the thief) Why? 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 01:38:00 - [97] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor ninja salvaging them is theft plain and simple (and should flag the thief) Why? Why not?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 01:39:00 - [98] Originally by: Neoexecutor Why not? Doesn't work that way. You made the claim that it's "theft plain and simple". You explain why that's so. So, again, why? 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 01:44:00 - [99] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor Why not? Doesn't work that way. You made the claim that it's "theft plain and simple". You explain why that's so. So, again, why? Ok how about, i created the wreck and it is only logical it should belong to me thus taking it is theft. CCP says it doesn't belong to me, but i don't agree.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 01:54:00 - [100] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor ninja salvaging them is theft plain and simple (and should flag the thief) Why? Because.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 01:57:00 - [101] Originally by: Neoexecutor Ok how about, i created the wreck and it is only logical it should belong to me thus taking it is theft. But you didn't create the salvage. As it happens, the salvage does belong to whomever creates it. And as mentioned numerous times already, you are already being rewarded for the creation of that wreck ù why do you need more? 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:03:00 - [102] Quote: But you didn't create the salvage. Yea sorry, thieves got to it first. Quote: As it happens, the salvage does belong to whomever creates it. It also happens it's the CCP that passes this absurd law. You choose to conform, i choose to protest. Quote: And as mentioned numerous times already, you are already being rewarded for the creation of that wreck ù why do you need more? Well i just happen to enjoy the fruits of my work. Some people are altruistic and i admire them, but i like to reap what i work for.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:07:00 - [103] Originally by: Neoexecutor Yea sorry, thieves got to it first. What did they steal? Quote: It also happens it's the CCP that passes this absurd law. Why is it absurd? They made the effort ù they got the rewards. Why should you get it if you didn't? Quote: but i like to reap what i work for. But you didn't work for the salvage, did you? If you did, you'd have it. 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:24:00 - [104] Quote: What did they steal? Wrecks that i created. Quote: Why is it absurd? They made the effort ù they got the rewards. Why should you get it if you didn't? It's absurd because you get told that this wreck you created is only partially yours. I made the effort creating the wreck why should they get it? Quote: But you didn't work for the salvage, did you? If you did, you'd have it. Oh i was willing to work for it, but somebody stole the wrecks so i couldn't.
Feligast Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:30:00 - [105] Originally by: Feligast Oh, you're trolling. Sorry, I missed that. Carry on then. I didn't mean quite this much. But well done getting the timing right to elicit this kind of response. I'll give you 7/10.. taking points for lack of originality, but giving for a spirited troll. Well played, sir.
Christopher AET Segmentum Solar Intergalactic Exports Group	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:30:00 - [106] Edited by: Christopher AET on 24/04/2011 02:30:41 Lets make it simple. Shoot gun make wreck. Shoot salvager make salvage. Easy no? In any case even if they did make this change wouldn't effect me. you see me in your mission I don't want either the loot or the salvage. I want you to pad out my killboard a bit. So works for me either way. Edited for spelling.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:34:00 - [107] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 02:36:20 Originally by: Neoexecutor Wrecks that i created. You have many wrecks in your hangar, then, I take it? No. What did they "steal"? Do you consider it stealing if someone runs across the finishing line faster than you do? Quote: It's absurd because you get told that this wreck you created is only partially yours. I made the effort creating the wreck why should they get it? You get compensated for creating the wreck. Why should you also be compensated for work they do? Why should you get the rewards for their effort? And no, you're not told that the wreck is only partially yours ù you're told that the wreck isn't yours. The only wreck that's even remotely "yours" is the one you leave behind after your ship explodesà Quote: Oh i was willing to work for it, but somebody stole the wrecks so i couldn't. You were willing to, but you didn't because you were too slow. You "couldn't" in the same sense that you can't come first when you're second. If you could, you wouldn't be second ù you'd be first, and you'd have the salvage. It's a race. You lost it. Why should the gold medal be yours? Originally by: Christopher AET Lets make it simple. Shoot gun make wreck. Shoot salvager make salvage. Easy no? Close. It's more like: shoot gun, make bounty and loot; shoot salvager, make salvage. 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
Teranul	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:50:00 - [108] I love the guys that show up in cruisers and BCs and wait for me to aggress them. Just because it takes the most hilariously stupid person to actually do that, and the fact that they're trying it on me (in a faction-fit Vindi, no less) means SOMEONE was stupid enough to do it before. Humanity. Always full of entertainment!
Kewso	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:55:00 - [109] I wish they'd make salvage owned, but with a timer. say, owner of the wrecks also own salvage rights for 10 minutes then they expire, they can have the wrecks change color when they expire like when you abandon wrecks, and add to the right click menu abandon salvage. that would give ya 10 minutes or whatever timer is set to salvage your wrecks, then when timer expires they are auto abandoned for anyone until wreck auto disappears after it's hour or 2 hour main timer whatever that timer is I forget.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.24 02:59:00 - [110] Originally by: Kewso I wish they'd make salvage owned, but with a timer. say, owner of the wrecks also own salvage rights for 10 minutes then they expire, they can have the wrecks change color when they expire like when you abandon wrecks, and add to the right click menu abandon salvage. that would give ya 10 minutes or whatever timer is set to salvage your wrecks, then when timer expires they are auto abandoned for anyone until wreck auto disappears after it's hour or 2 hour main timer whatever that timer is I forget. This is a nice middle ground. While it does make it difficult for those who make their living off of salvaging (I'm not talking about the mission runners haha), its at least reasonable. However, when would the aggro happen? Activation of salvage modules or successful salvage?

Reyold Bengali Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.24 03:01:00 - [111] Originally by: Teranul I love the guys that show up in cruisers and BCs and wait for me to aggress them. Just because it takes the most hilariously stupid person to actually do that, and the fact that they're trying it on me (in a faction-fit Vindi, no less) means SOMEONE was stupid enough to do it before. Humanity. Always full of entertainment! As Einstein said, "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.". ------- Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 03:01:00 - [112] Quote: Do you consider it stealing if someone runs across the finishing line faster than you do? Since you bring rl analogies to this then i guess everything's fair game. Do you consider somebody taking your paycheck before you could, a race? Quote: You get compensated for creating the wreck. Why should you also be compensated for work they do? Why should you get the rewards for their effort? And no, you're not told that the wreck is only partially yours ù you're told that the wreck isn't yours. The only wreck that's even remotely "yours" is the one you leave behind after your ship explodesà Loot and bounty are part of compensation (and to be technical some don't have either so salvage is the only compensation). Why shouldn't salvage be? I shouldn't be compensated for the work they do, i'm saying their work efforts are misplaced, they are working with materials that belong to me. By partially i meant that CCP tells you that loot is yours and the wreck is nobody's till it's claimed. To me that's illogical. Like getting paid for 100 hours of work, only you get paid for 80 and the rest 20 hours worth of money gets raced for by the rest of employees. Quote: You were willing to, but you didn't because you were too slow. You "couldn't" in the same sense that you can't come first when you're second. If you could, you wouldn't be second ù you'd be first, and you'd have the salvage. It's a race. You lost it. Why should the gold medal be yours? A race to claim something that isn't yours doesn't make it non theft.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 03:14:00 - [113] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 03:16:19 Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: Do you consider it stealing if someone runs across the finishing line faster than you do? Since you bring rl analogies to this then i guess everything's fair game. Do you consider somebody taking your paycheck before you could, a race? Or your income tax.I'll give you the paycheck because thats your reward.But why should you get your taxes as well when I make the effort to file for them first?Your already being compensated for your work with the paychecks you get.Christmas bonus is fair game too then amirite? Don't forget that if you try to take it from me the cops come and arrest you!
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 03:18:00 - [114] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 03:18:27 Originally by: Neoexecutor Do you consider somebody taking your paycheck before you could, a race? Since it's actually my paycheck and I get to ~~dump them over a railing over a busy freeway~~ block the payment, sic the cops at them, and suffer no ill consequencesà no. I wouldn't call that a race. That's not what's happening here, though. What's happening here is that losing a race and claiming that the gold medal is yours for no particular reason (what you're doing) is drastically different from winning the race and then having the medal stolen from you (how the game actually works). Quote: Loot and bounty are part of compensation (and to be technical some don't have either so salvage is the only compensation). Are we talking about NPCs, player ships, or in general? In the first case, salvage is never the compensation; in the second case, none of it is compensation; and in the general case, salvage is the compensation for being a salvager and the source of the wreck is entirely irrelevant. Quote: Why shouldn't salvage be? Because there are already compensation schemes in place that cover normal kills. Salvage is the compensation for the salvager profession. Quote: I shouldn't be compensated for the work they do So why are you arguing exactly that? You want to have the right to salvage that someone else has created ù that someone else has earned by doing the things you do to earn salvage (i.e. they salvaged the wreck). Quote: they are working with materials that belong to me. Why do they belong to you? You haven't done the work required to earn them, after all (viz. scoot up to the wreck and activate the salvager). Quote: By partially i meant that CCP tells you that loot is yours and the wreck is nobody's till it's claimed. To me that's illogical. Like getting paid for 100 hours of work, only you get paid for 80 and the rest 20 hours worth of money gets raced for by the rest of employees. Yes. The loot is yours. The loot is not the wreck. The wreck isn't yours ù it's no-one's. The salvage belongs to whomever creates it. It's like working for 100 hours and getting paid for 100 hours, and then someone else buys the winning lottery ticket at "your" lottery vending place. Again: you get fully compensated for your work. The salvage is not part of that compensation ù it's something extra that you have to do extra work for, and which you have to compete with other players to win. Quote: A race to claim something that isn't yours doesn't make it non theft. So who's stealing from whom since it's a race between two people, neither of which own anything yet? 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 04:07:00 - [115] Quote: Since it's actually my paycheck and I get to ~~dump them over a railing over a busy freeway~~ block the payment, sic the cops at them, and suffer no ill consequencesà no. I wouldn't call that a race. That's not what's happening here, though. What's happening here is that losing a race and claiming that the gold medal is yours for no particular reason (what you're doing) is drastically different from winning the race and then having the medal stolen from you (how the game actually works). You start loosing me man, your logic is getting fuzzy like that of CCP's. It's really simple. I planted an apple tree, cared for it and it grew. This apple tree is mine. One spring this apple tree gave bunch of apples, and while i was at work somebody came and collected them. I guess they just won a race to the apples that a tree belonging to me gave. Well at least according to your logic. I call it a theft. You somehow believe that creating a wreck is effortless and thus no ownership should be expected. But really if it wasn't my effort to get standing with an agent to be able to run the mission, buy and fit the ship to run it and actually do the mission and kill the ships then that ninja salvager wouldn't even have anything to salvage. Quote: Are we talking about NPCs, player ships, or in general? In the first case, salvage is never the compensation; in the second case, none of it is compensation; and in the general case, salvage is the compensation for being a salvager and the source of the wreck is entirely irrelevant. This whole thread is about ninja salvaging, which mostly takes place in hi-sec mission sites ran by mission runners. And thank you for reminding me what current game mechanics are, i think i mentioned already i don't agree with them. Quote: Because there are already compensation schemes in place that cover normal kills. Salvage is the compensation for the salvager profession. In order to be a salvager you need to have wrecks. You can choose to create wrecks yourself or you can work on wrecks other people created. I'm ok with that, but i'm saying there should be repercussions for trying to make a living of an opportunity that others created. Quote: Why do they belong to you? You haven't done the work required to earn them, after all (viz. scoot up to the wreck and activate the salvager). Because i shot the ship and created the opportunity for salvage to be had. Quote: Yes. The loot is yours. The loot is not the wreck. The wreck isn't yours ù it's no-one's. The salvage belongs to whomever creates it. It's like working for 100 hours and getting paid for 100 hours, and then someone else buys the winning lottery ticket at "your" lottery vending place. Again: you get fully compensated for your work. The salvage is not part of that compensation ù it's something extra that you have to do extra work for, and which you have to compete with other players to win. Oh another friendly reminder of the current game mechanics, thanks! Quote: So who's stealing from whom since it's a race between two people, neither of which own anything yet? Lol are you trying to imply that i (mission runner who created the wrecks) am stealing from ninja salvagers if i salvage while i kill ships?
Brit Green	Posted - 2011.04.24 04:09:00 - [116] People still getting worked up over salvaging. Let the ninjas take it for crying out loud! Salvage is near worthless. I can think of about ten thousand things to do with your time that will make you more than salvaging. If you are going to rage, at least do it over something worthwhile.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 04:51:00 - [117] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 04:53:03 Originally by: Neoexecutor You start loosing me man Then pay attention. The salvage isn't yours until you've earned it. You earn it by salvaging the wreck. Creating the wreck means you've earned the bounty & loot that comes with the wreck. Quote: You somehow believe that creating a wreck is effortless No. I believe that the creation of the wreck is already compensated for through the bounty and the loot. I also believe you need to argue the case that you somehow need to be paid more. Quote: if it wasn't my effort to get standing with an agent to be able to run the mission, buy and fit the ship to run it and actually do the mission and kill the ships then that ninja salvager wouldn't even have anything to salvage. And that effort is already compensated for through the bounty, loot, mission rewards, time bonuses, LP, and standings, with all the benefits they confer. Moreover, none of that effort actually lets you salvage any wrecks. To do so, you have to put different effort into it (and as someone who creates wrecks, this effort is much less than the effort a ninja has to put into it). Two distinctly different sets of effort. Two distinctly different sets of rewards. Why is this so hard to understand? Quote: This whole thread is about ninja salvaging, which mostly takes place in hi-sec mission sites ran by mission runners. Then it's case 1: the salvage isn't part of the compensation. Quote: In order to be a salvager you need to have wrecks. You can choose to create wrecks yourself or you can work on wrecks other people created. I'm ok with that, but i'm saying there should be repercussions for trying to make a living of an opportunity that others created. I hope you do realise that this would basically mean that you want to remove the market (which basically means removing EVE altogether), and that your precious salvage will have no value? You are only two years old ù you are undoubtedly doing the exact same thing: you're making a living on the opportunities others have created for you. Unfortunately, the whole game is about taking advantage of opportunities that others create. It's built into every last fibre of the game. If you don't want to compete for (or make use of) these opportunities, this is not the game for you. Quote: Because i shot the ship and created the opportunity for salvage to be had. Then you should be in the optimal position to take advantage of that opportunity. Oh, and while you're at it, you should also look into the concept of opportunity cost and realise that ninjas actually make you earn more ISKà Quote: Lol are you trying to imply that i (mission runner who created the wrecks) am stealing from ninja salvagers if i salvage while i kill ships? No. I'm saying that that's basically what you were saying. The wreck belongs to no-one; two people are racing to claim something they do not (yet) own; apparently, this is not non-theftà So who steals from whom in that situation? You seem to imply that the winner always steals from the loser. 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
Apollo Gabriel Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels Etherium Cartel	Posted - 2011.04.24 05:03:00 - [118] Edited by: Apollo Gabriel on 24/04/2011 05:06:18 This whole thread is really moot anyways, as the worst game design is clearly missions. They are perhaps the laziest and most poorly designed aspect of the game, second only maybe to the corp management interface. To the OP, I think I've reviewed some of your papers, your ability to sidestep the discussion and see what you want, rather than the point is memorable. No one claimed the designers were infallible, simply that it works as they intended it to work. Is it a bad design? perhaps. My personal opinion is that when considering how to flag which wrecks were public and which were private, they decided that missions were already pretty damn private, so why waste the time, I could be wrong, but it doesn't really matter, they are clearly happy with the system as is currently. You don't like it, fine, I don't like that once you get a mission ship properly fit, that there is 0% actual risk short of falling asleep at the keys when doing missions. So who's dislike wins? If they want to make missions hard and allow warp scrambling, then hey I'd say that a mission pocket is private and that you can "sell a license" in a moment, but the fact is you do these horrible missions with 100 ships shooting you and you KNOW you will win. PS if you want to be "safe" figure out how to be "unprobable" and don't use drones except to kill frigs, then "your" salvage will be safer. *** Signature may appear without warning! *** Please do not feed the trolls, it builds dependency.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 05:34:00 - [119] Point is just because ccp says so doen't make it good.The whole logic about omg lvl 4 missions earn too much is wrong.The only thing that earns less is mining and I feel for those poor sobs.In null they earn loads for not much more risk than a mission runner has in high sec if not less.Wormholes make a killing and so does working the market. On top of the constant nerfing that lvl4 missions get you now have this flawed "miniprofession" where any noob two weeks old can come and help himself to your earnings.And all that risk free under the protection of concord. And because they are too lazy to figure out how to adjust the game mechanics to work out which wreck flags you and which doean't it just gets left as is like many other half done content they throw at us. On top of all that you have some almighty-all knowing oracle(Tippia)that will stop at nothing to try and justify their actions. Why not just remove high sec and see how long the game lasts?
Apollo Gabriel Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels Etherium Cartel	Posted - 2011.04.24 05:39:00 - [120] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Point is just because ccp says so doen't make it good.The whole logic about omg lvl 4 missions earn too much is wrong. I agree with the first sentence, as CCP thinks Hybrids are balanced ... As to the second, I disagree with you wholeheartedly. You CAN make more doing other things, but it is hard to do them as continuously as you can missions. No limit, just go go go till you fall asleep at the keys. It is basically single player eve, and that in my opinion is a major problem and WHY it is too much isk. Mining depletes, exploration depletes, sleepers deplete, and on and on, BUT missions never die. *** Signature may appear without warning! *** Please do not feed the trolls, it builds dependency.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 05:44:00 - [121] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 05:46:32 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Point is just because ccp says so doen't make it good. And the counter-point is that just saying it's not good doesn't make it so either. You need to be a bit more specific than thatà Quote: The only thing that earns less is mining àand salvaging, funnily enough. Oh, and highsec exploration. And courier running. Probably L1ûL3 running as well. T1 manufacturing has pretty thing margins too. Quote: On top of the constant nerfing that lvl4 missions get you now have this flawed "miniprofession" where any noob two weeks old can come and help himself to your earnings.And all that risk free under the protection of concord. àand yet, L4 mission runners seem so protective of that risk-free n00b profession. Why is that (especially considering how much more they could earn if they ignored it)? Also, seeing as how the mini profession was put in place quite some time ago, I wouldn't really call it "on top of" either. Quote: On top of all that you have some almighty-all knowing oracle(Tippia)that will stop at nothing to try and justify their actions. No. I'm simply asking why it needs to be changed. I'm telling you why it is the way it is right now, and you need to explain why it's bad that it works that way and why (and how) it would be improved by doing things differently. Quote: Why not just remove high sec and see how long the game lasts? What does that have to do with anything? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 05:46:00 - [122] Originally by: Apollo Gabriel Originally by: HeIIfire11 Point is just because ccp says so doen't make it good.The whole logic about omg lvl 4 missions earn too much is wrong. I agree with the first sentence, as CCP thinks Hybrids are balanced ... As to the second, I disagree with you wholeheartedly. You CAN make more doing other things, but it is hard to do them as continuously as you can missions. No limit, just go go go till you fall asleep at the keys. It is basically single player eve, and that in my opinion is a major problem and WHY it is too much isk. Mining depletes, exploration depletes, sleepers deplete, and on and on, BUT missions never die. I see your point but you said it yourself,missions are the most boring way to make isk;other than mining maybe.But in a wormhole you can earn well over 500 mill,in exploration you can find an item worth over a billion isk.At the end of the day you cant make that much running missions.The market as well,you can earn a billion in a day if you put your mind to it and have the time and isk.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 05:57:00 - [123] Originally by: Tippia No. I'm simply asking why it needs to be changed. I'm telling you why it is the way it is right now, and you need to explain why it's bad that it works that way and why (and how) it would be improved by doing things differently. And I have told you over and ove again in this thread why it needs to be changed.You know better though just like in every other thread you post in. I also explained how it would improve things by flagging the salvager.Again your all knowing attitude wont allow you to see any other point of view other than your own.You can't seem to fathom that ccp threw out some sloppy "miniprofession" that if changed could offer some good pvp combat situations which you say you value so highly. Keep your opinion its not that I'm trying to convince you of anything.I'm just stating my opinion and that of many others which is why these threads keep popping up.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 05:57:00 - [124] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 06:03:42 Originally by: HeIIfire11 missions are the most boring way to make isk It's boring because it's consistent. You earn a good amount of money at a steady pace. This trumps earning very large amounts of money very occasionally. Quote: But in a wormhole you can earn well over 500 mill In a wormhole, you are subject to actual risk, so the rewards are meant to match that. Quote: in exploration you can find an item worth over a billion isk àat which point we're no longer talking highsec (so again, the rewards match the risk). Quote: At the end of the day you cant make that much running missions. Yes you can, because of that consistency: you may only earn 20û30M a pop, but you earn it consistently, at will and on demand. And you do it with zero risk. You may only be able to bring in a couple of hundred mill a day, but you can do it any time you like. In exploration, you might earn more, but chances are you'll earn less, and on average, it doesn't come close because you cannot maintain that consistency and because you have to compete with other players for the goodiesà Oh, and you can find items worth a quarter-billion ISK in missions too (but that's subject to the same randomness as in exploration)à Quote: The market as well,you can earn a billion in a day if you put your mind to it and have the time and isk. àand if you're willing to subject yourself to the inherent PvP and risks that comes with it. Quote: I have told you over and ove again in this thread why it needs to be changed. Not really. You've pointed to a couple of things you consider design flaws, but fixing those would only buff ninja salvaging, and you seem to want it to go in the other directionà The question remains: why should mission runners earn more? Quote: I also explained how it would improve things by flagging the salvager. Yes, you claim it will create PvP. The problem is that there is already PvP, so where's the improvement? Quote: ccp threw out some sloppy "miniprofession" that if changed could offer some good pvp combat situations which you say you value so highly. Don't put words in my mouth, please. Quote: I'm just stating my opinion and that of many others which is why these threads keep popping up. And I'm just stating the facts of why the game works the way it does. Hopefullly, someone will be able to explain why it shouldn't work that wayà 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
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:00:00 - [125] Originally by: Tippia No. I'm simply asking why it needs to be changed. I'm telling you why it is the way it is right now, and you need to explain why it's bad that it works that way and why (and how) it would be improved by doing things differently. TBH I'm all for letting people shoot ninja-salvagers. It has nothing to do with the risk in missions (and loot/salvage thieves would still be there) but the lack of risk for the ninja. Oh and it would encourage more pewpew without actually forcing it, which is rarely a bad thing.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:03:00 - [126] Quote: The salvage isn't yours until you've earned it. You earn it by salvaging the wreck. Creating the wreck means you've earned the bounty & loot that comes with the wreck. Same way you can argue that if i don't take my loot in time it's ok to ninja that too without a flag. Loot isn't mine till i took it into my cargohold. But stealing loot does flag you, while salvaging a wreck doesn't. Running a salvage module on a wreck is as much formality as opening cargo hold of a wreck and pulling the loot into your ship's cargo hold. But no no no, CCP says that this wreck doesn't belong to me, so it must be right. I don't think so. Quote: No. I believe that the creation of the wreck is already compensated for through the bounty and the loot. I also believe you need to argue the case that you somehow need to be paid more. Oh i'm sorry i missed the memo that says "don't you dare to desire that salvage from the wrecks you'll be creating". It goes without saying man, i shoot ships down, put effort into it, and i feel entitled to that salvage as long as i am willing to do the actual salvaging. Problem is that, it's hard to do while i'm busy shooting ships and this dude here salvaging with impunity. Quote: And that effort is already compensated for through the bounty, loot, mission rewards, time bonuses, LP, and standings, with all the benefits they confer. Moreover, none of that effort actually lets you salvage any wrecks. To do so, you have to put different effort into it (and as someone who creates wrecks, this effort is much less than the effort a ninja has to put into it). I already mentioned few times, i am willing to put effort into salvaging. And since these wrecks are created by me, i feel that someone else salvaging them while i'm still finishing the shooting part is in fact stealing. Stealing in this game is ok and fine with me, but like other forms of stealing this one should too have repercussions (aggression flag). Quote: Two distinctly different sets of effort. Two distinctly different sets of rewards. Why is this so hard to understand? If wrecks were created by server like exploration sites are then sure it would all be a fair game. Quote: Then it's case 1: the salvage isn't part of the compensation. Well i don't really agree with case 1 so... Quote: I hope you do realise that this would basically mean that you want to remove the market (which basically means removing EVE altogether), and that your precious salvage will have no value? You are only two years old ù you are undoubtedly doing the exact same thing: you're making a living on the opportunities others have created for you. I don't call for removing anything. Try take advantage from the opportunities i create as much as you want, just give me countermeasures to be able to deal with you. Quote: Unfortunately, the whole game is about taking advantage of opportunities that others create. It's built into every last fibre of the game. If you don't want to compete for (or make use of) these opportunities, this is not the game for you. Well this case is unique, because there is no way to deal with ninja salvager without hurting yourself even more (shooting wrecks). Quote: Then you should be in the optimal position to take advantage of that opportunity. No i should have the right to claim the fruits of this opportunity. Since i created it and all. It can be stolen, sure. But should be punishable. Quote: Oh, and while you're at it, you should also look into the concept of opportunity cost and realise that ninjas actually make you earn more ISKà Oooh you pulled economy 101 card. Wtf you doing on forums man, you are wasting billions. BILLIONS! character limit ftl
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:07:00 - [127] Originally by: Tippia Yes you can, because of that consistency: you may only earn 20û30M a pop, but you earn it consistently, at will and on demand. And you do it with zero risk. You may only be able to bring in a couple of hundred mill a day, but you can do it any time you like.. Funny you should say this but its not true.Missions have been nerfed so that you can earn as little as 5 mill or less sometimes per mission.And on those that you do earn 20-30 mill its including salvage which isn't mine remember? Originally by: Tippia Oh, and you can find items worth a quarter-billion ISK in missions too (but that's subject to the same randomness as in exploration)à This too I have yet too see.In 4 years of running missions as a source of income I have found one....one faction item and it was a small afterburner in the bonus room of ae.Many faction drops have been removed like in worlds collide which I never got any way in 4 years running missions.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:14:00 - [128] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I also explained how it would improve things by flagging the salvager. Yes, you claim it will create PvP. The problem is that there is already PvP, so where's the improvement? Now you're putting words in my mouth and if you don't want me to do it then show me the same respect.I said pvp combat situations. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I'm just stating my opinion and that of many others which is why these threads keep popping up. And I'm just stating the facts of why the game works the way it does. Hopefullly, someone will be able to explain why it shouldn't work that wayà Why does everything you say have to be facts?Oh yeah I forgot you're the all-knowing oracle thats right.Thank you for proving my point.Do you work for ccp?No,until then your "facts" will remain your opinion to me.And as such..as worthless as a fart in the wind.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:16:00 - [129] Originally by: Neoexecutor Same way you can argue that if i don't take my loot in time it's ok to ninja that too without a flag. No. The loot is yours because you've earned it. You earned it by killing the ship in question. Quote: Running a salvage module on a wreck is as much formality as opening cargo hold of a wreck No. Running a salvage module on a wreck is as much formality as running a weapon module on a ship. Quote: Oh i'm sorry i missed the memo that says "don't you dare to desire that salvage from the wrecks you'll be creating". Don't be silly. Of course you can desire it. You just have to earn it in order to actually own it. If you didn't desire it, you wouldn't make the effort to earn it, now would you, so it would be rather stupid of them to post that kind of memo. Quote: It goes without saying man, i shoot ships down, put effort into it, and i feel entitled to that salvage as long as i am willing to do the actual salvaging. And you feeling entitled to it is entirely irrelevant as far as the compensation mechanics for various professions go. I may feel entitled to this nice moon right next to the corp HQ where I could place a POS, but that doesn't mean that the moon must therefore be mine. Quote: Problem is that, it's hard to do while i'm busy shooting ships No it's not. Just scoot over there and start salvaging. Quote: I already mentioned few times, i am willing to put effort into salvaging. And since these wrecks are created by me, i feel that someone else salvaging them while i'm still finishing the shooting part is in fact stealing. So don't wait. It's hardly the game's fault if you willingly give the competitors a head start. Quote: I don't call for removing anything. You want there to be ôrepercussions for trying to make a living of an opportunity that others createdö. This would make the market a very harsh place (and it's already really nasty as it is) to the point where it really couldn't be used any moreà Quote: Well this case is unique, because there is no way to deal with ninja salvager without hurting yourself even more (shooting wrecks). It's not unique in any way. It's standard competition over the same resource ù you see that everywhere in EVE. Of course, you do have ways of dealing with the ninja, so that part isn't really true to begin with. Quote: No i should have the right to claim the fruits of this opportunity. You already have. 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
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:21:00 - [130] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 06:26:21 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Funny you should say this but its not true.Missions have been nerfed so that you can earn as little as 5 mill or less sometimes per mission. àand those missions are disposed with in 5 minutes. So you're still making 60M an hour. Quote: And on those that you do earn 20-30 mill its including salvage No, that's if you ignore the salvage (and loot) and go for what actually makes you any money. Of course, you could salvage (and loot) them as well, and it would rise to maybe 30û40 million, but why would you waste your time on such a small bump in income? Quote: This too I have yet too see. Run more Worlds Collide. And no, it hasn't been removed. Quote: Now you're putting words in my mouth and if you don't want me to do it then show me the same respect.I said pvp combat situations. Yes. And I said that there is already PvP. Why would this be an improvement? Why is it a good thing that more mission runners get killed? Quote: Why does everything you say have to be facts? It doesn't. But that doesn't change the fact that I'm stating facts about how (any why) the game works the way it does and that it's up to you to explain why it shouldn't work that wayà 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

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:27:00 - [131] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 06:34:25 Originally by: Tippia Why is it a good thing that more mission runners get killed? Again the all-knowing oracle has spoken!You just know the outcome don't you.Don't try to put everyone in the same fail boat you're sitting in okay?It is like everything else..your opinion.At 30-80 km any ship smaller than a cruiser will snap even with my fail guns.And a single cruiser wont make it to me in that time to get into orbit. But like I said well never know unless ccp changes it so its not worth talking about..yet.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:33:00 - [132] Originally by: HeIIfire11 You just know the outcome don't you. What other outcome would there be? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:36:00 - [133] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 You just know the outcome don't you. What other outcome would there be? I'll leave it to someone else to teach you how to play.I'm am no fortune teller like you but in my mission space it wouldn't be that easy I can tell you that now.
limbus Big Shadows Initiative Mercenaries	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:37:00 - [134] Wow! 5 pages now of this useless thread... Keep up the good work
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:41:00 - [135] Originally by: HeIIfire11 I'll leave it to someone else to teach you how to play. What does that have to do with anything? Quote: I'm am no fortune teller like you but in my mission space it wouldn't be that easy I can tell you that now. Good for you. But it doesn't really answer the question: what other outcome would there be? àbecause you are considering the potential, possible and probable side-effects of your proposed change, aren't you? 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
Leetha Layne	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:43:00 - [136] I ninja salvage for a living. If a mission runner wants his salvage, they can rig tractors which only the runner can use on the wrecks. I am a bit surprised someone able to run level 4 missions did not know the rules of salvage.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:45:00 - [137] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I'll leave it to someone else to teach you how to play. What does that have to do with anything? Quote: I'm am no fortune teller like you but in my mission space it wouldn't be that easy I can tell you that now. Good for you. But it doesn't really answer the question: what other outcome would there be? àbecause you are considering the potential, possible and probable side-effects of your proposed change, aren't you? Ok now you're being really dumb.The other outcome is that the ninja dies because it would be a lot of fun to sit there and wait for him.And with enough backup to face **** what ever else he warps in.That would be a possible outcome...sounded out for those who rode the small yellow bus to school.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:47:00 - [138] Quote: No. The loot is yours because you've earned it. You earned it by killing the ship in question. And the right to salvage should be mine for the same reason. Quote: No. Running a salvage module on a wreck is as much formality as running a weapon module on a ship. I'm glad we agree that it's merely a formality for owner to deal with. Quote: Don't be silly. Of course you can desire it. You just have to earn it in order to actually own it. If you didn't desire it, you wouldn't make the effort to earn it, now would you, so it would be rather stupid of them to post that kind of memo. I think we've been through the earning part already. It's getting redundant. Quote: And you feeling entitled to it is entirely irrelevant as far as the compensation mechanics for various professions go. I may feel entitled to this nice moon right next to the corp HQ where I could place a POS, but that doesn't mean that the moon must therefore be mine. Did you put some effort into creating that moon? No? Because you see i created those wrecks, not for Jon Doe to have, but for myself. Quote: No it's not. Just scoot over there and start salvaging. Yea sure i'll tell those 40 npc's to put aggro on hold. Quote: So don't wait. It's hardly the game's fault if you willingly give the competitors a head start. I wish i could be cool like you and fly a ship that can kill lvl4 mission rats and salvage faster than a ninja in a speedy small salvaging ship at the same time. Quote: You want there to be ôrepercussions for trying to make a living of an opportunity that others createdö. This would make the market a very harsh place (and it's already really nasty as it is) to the point where it really couldn't be used any moreà Try not wonder into areas irrelevant to subject at hand. We are discussing ninja salvaging here. Making ninjas flag won't break the market i promise. Quote: It's not unique in any way. It's standard competition over the same resource ù you see that everywhere in EVE. Of course, you do have ways of dealing with the ninja, so that part isn't really true to begin with. Competition in this case is rather padded in ninja's favor i'm afraid. Quote: You already have. Then if i have the right to it, it's pretty clear that somebody else claiming MY right is a thief.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:49:00 - [139] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Ok now you're being really dumb.The other outcome is that the ninja dies because it would be a lot of fun to sit there and wait for him. àbut you claim that they are griefers ù don't you think they'll take this into account and actually plan their attacks to match the fine new opportunities the increased aggression rules allow for? Quote: And with enough backup to face **** what ever else he warps in. Good for you. So why doesn't this already happen? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:54:00 - [140] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Ok now you're being really dumb.The other outcome is that the ninja dies because it would be a lot of fun to sit there and wait for him. àbut you claim that they are griefers ù don't you think they'll take this into account and actually plan their attacks to match the fine new opportunities the increased aggression rules allow for? And?May the best man/corp win.Plain and simple just like any other pvp combat encounter. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 And with enough backup to face **** what ever else he warps in. Good for you. So why doesn't this already happen? Because they are protected by concord thats why.And no one will make the effort to set up something like that for tha slight chance that the salvager has the balls to loot something.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:57:00 - [141] Originally by: Neoexecutor And the right to salvage should be mine for the same reason. Why? Quote: I'm glad we agree that it's merely a formality for owner to deal with. So why is it such a chore for him to do that and actually earn the salvage? Quote: I think we've been through the earning part already. Yes. It's kind of the key issue, you knowà Quote: Did you put some effort into creating that moon? I put some effort into finding the great spot yes. Quote: Yea sure i'll tell those 40 npc's to put aggro on hold. Why would you have to put them on hold? Quote: I wish i could be cool like you and fly a ship that can kill lvl4 mission rats and salvage faster than a ninja in a speedy small salvaging ship at the same time. Pretty much all of them can. Quote: Try not wonder into areas irrelevant to subject at hand. So don't bring up irrelevant points. Quote: Making ninjas flag won't break the market i promise. If the reason for doing so is because there must be ôrepercussions for trying to make a living of an opportunity that others createdö then yes. Yes it would. Quote: Competition in this case is rather padded in ninja's favor i'm afraid. Not really, no. It's merely a formality to do so, after all, and you have plenty of advantages as it is. It's not the game's fault if you choose to give up those advantages. Quote: Then if i have the right to it, it's pretty clear that somebody else claiming MY right is a thief. No. It's just that he has the rights to it as well. 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
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:59:00 - [142] Originally by: HeIIfire11 And? And that will increase the number of killed mission runners. Is that really what you want to accomplish? Quote: Because they are protected by concord thats why. I mean, why does this not already happen in all the cases where it already can happen? Quote: And no one will make the effort to set up something like that for tha slight chance that the salvager has the balls to loot something. How large a chance will it be with your change in place? 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
Lissian	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:07:00 - [143] Couple of weeks ago I was running the drone missions in the SOE epic arc when I had to warp out of a mission area to repair my Cat. When I came back someone was tootling around salvaging my wrecks and dropping the loot in cans. I thought "Hey, you can do that? Cool". I assumed the cans were for me, but I was short on time, so I left my enterprising fellow player to his business and took the acceleration gate to the next room. Did I have a problem with it? Not at all. The wrecks are white - fair game to anyone. I might blow up the ship, but that is a prerequisite of the mission, not salvaging the wrecks afterwards. I hadn't trained up Salvaging at that point anyway, so I wasn't in a position to complain. Needless to say, my shiny new Vexor has a Salvager I fitted.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:11:00 - [144] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 And? And that will increase the number of killed mission runners. Is that really what you want to accomplish? It will also increase the death rate of ninja salvagers.But you just forgot that part right?Like I said..may the best man/corp win.You don't know who will win so stop bringing it up.I've told you what I want to accomplish.Again,reread the thread lol. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Because they are protected by concord thats why. I mean, why does this not already happen in all the cases where it already can happen? Wut? Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 And no one will make the effort to set up something like that for tha slight chance that the salvager has the balls to loot something. How large a chance will it be with your change in place? Quite a bit higher as im sure many mission runners have wanted to blast one knowing the alpha would melt the salvager at that range.I would go to the large mission hubs and setup the flytrap for one or two kills a day.If I die gf.Its better than sitting there watching the risk free salvager clean out the salvage.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:11:00 - [145] Quote: Why? Because. Quote: So why is it such a chore for him to do that and actually earn the salvage? Because Quote: Yes. It's kind of the key issue, you knowà I know... Quote: I put some effort into finding the great spot yes. I found a rat and killed it, you found a moon and didn't do **. Quote: Why would you have to put them on hold? Because Quote: Pretty much all of them can. Why? Quote: So don't bring up irrelevant points. Why? You do. Quote: Not really, no. It's merely a formality to do so, after all, and you have plenty of advantages as it is. It's not the game's fault if you choose to give up those advantages. Yes, really, yes. Quote:** No. It's just that he has the rights to it as well. Why?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:15:00 - [146] Originally by: HeIIfire11 It will also increase the death rate of ninja salvagers.But you just forgot that part right? No. I just don't think it will happenà Quote: I've told you what I want to accomplish. Yes, and I'm saying I don't see that happening. Quote: Wut? Why are people not raping faces of loot theives and can flippers already? Quote: Quite a bit higher as im sure many mission runners have wanted to blast one knowing the alpha would melt the salvager at that range. àand with your changes in place, why would the salvagers use those ships? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:15:00 - [147] Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: Why? Because. Quote: So why is it such a chore for him to do that and actually earn the salvage? Because Quote: Yes. It's kind of the key issue, you knowà I know... Quote: I put some effort into finding the great spot yes. I found a rat and killed it, you found a moon and didn't do **. Quote: Why would you have to put them on hold? Because Quote: Pretty much all of them can. Why? Quote: So don't bring up irrelevant points. Why? You do. Quote: Not really, no. It's merely a formality to do so, after all, and you have plenty of advantages as it is. It's not the game's fault if you choose to give up those advantages. Yes, really, yes. Quote:** No. It's just that he has the rights to it as well. Why? Lol thats tippia alright..pointless isn't it?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:18:00 - [148] Originally by: Neoexecutor Because. Not good enough. Why? Quote: I found a rat and killed it, àand got the compensation that comes with this act. Why do you need more? Quote: Quote: Pretty much all of them can. Why? Because they're built that way. Quote: Yes, really, yes. The game isn't responsible for the choices you make. Quote: Quote: No. It's just that he has the rights to it as well. Why? Because its subject to competition. 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:19:00 - [149] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor Because. Not good enough. Why? Quote: I found a rat and killed it, àand got the compensation that comes with this act. Why do you need more? Quote: Quote: Pretty much all of them can. Why? Because they're built that way. Quote: Yes, really, yes. The game isn't responsible for the choices you make. Quote: Quote: No. It's just that he has the rights to it as well. Why? Because its subject to competition. WHY?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:22:00 - [150] Originally by: Neoexecutor WHY? See the CCP Prism X quote earlier in the thread. 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

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:24:00 - [151] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor WHY? See the CCP Prism X quote earlier in the thread. You mean the one that confirms that it's a fail game design?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:27:00 - [152] Originally by: HeIIfire11 You mean the one that confirms that it's a fail game design? No, the one that confirms that salvage isn't part of the mission rewards. 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:28:00 - [153] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor WHY? See the CCP Prism X quote earlier in the thread. Just did. Made as much sense as the last time. Close to none.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:29:00 - [154] Originally by: Neoexecutor Just did. Made as much sense as the last time. Close to none. Which part did you have problems understanding? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:35:00 - [155] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor Just did. Made as much sense as the last time. Close to none. Which part did you have problems understanding? The part where he says "because it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage" yet you cant scan down wrecks.Theres a lot more wrecks out there with noplayers near them,learn to use your scanner.I hear theres a good tutorial on youtube made by ccp.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:37:00 - [156] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor Just did. Made as much sense as the last time. Close to none. Which part did you have problems understanding? Oh snap, not my reading comprehension! Now you've done it. I must counter insult. Same part you conformed (like all good sheep do) to.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:38:00 - [157] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 07:40:14 Originally by: HeIIfire11 The part where he says "because it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage" yet you cant scan down wrecks. Why doesn't that make sense to you? Not being able to scan down wreck doesn't keep you from roaming around looking for them, or from hunting down locations where wrecks are likely to be found. Originally by: Neoexecutor Same part you conformed to. Which isà? And why do you have problems understanding it? 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 07:50:00 - [158] Quote: Which isà? The part where CCP tells us that wrecks don't belong to people that made them. Quote: And why do you have problems understanding it? Because it defies logic. In before "Why does it defy logic?".
Ivorr Bigun	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:00:00 - [159] it was my ammo, my time, my standings and my acceptance of that mission that caused the salvage to exist in the first place. As such its not too much to ask that stealing my salvage should flag the ninja. Originally by: CCP Shadow bodily fluid
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:06:00 - [160] Originally by: Neoexecutor In before "Why does it defy logic?". So if you can predict the question, why not simply answer it? Wrecks are there to provide salvagers with something to salvage from. Why should the salvage belong to you, rather to a salvager, without any effort on your behalf? Originally by: Ivorr Bigun it was my ammo, my time, my standings and my acceptance of that mission that caused the salvage to exist in the first place. No it was not. None of that created any salvage whatsoever. It was someone's salvaging module that did. Quote: As such its not too much to ask that stealing my salvage should flag the ninja. Stealing your salvage already flags the thief. 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

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:11:00 - [161] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor In before "Why does it defy logic?". So if you can predict the question, why not simply answer it? Already been answered..reread the thread. Originally by: Tippia Wrecks are there to provide salvagers with something to salvage from. Why should the salvage belong to you, rather to a salvager, without any effort on your behalf? Why not? Originally by: Tippia Stealing your salvage already flags the thief. Nope.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:13:00 - [162] Looting and salvaging should give aggro. Wrecks should be freely tractorable, but tractoring a wreck you dont own should also give aggro. But on the other hand FW agents should also sell short-duration (say 1-2 days) "Letters of Marque And Reprise" allowing FW players to engage without CONCORD interference (but of course still very much with faction navy interference) players with a modified standing of -5.00 or less to their faction. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:14:00 - [163] Quote: In before "Why does it defy logic?". So if you can predict the question, why not simply answer it? Well if i did you couldn't ask "why" and since that's about all you're doing tonight it would be rude of me to leave you without a comeback. Quote: Wrecks are there to provide salvagers with something to salvage from. Why should the salvage belong to you, rather to a salvager, without any effort on your behalf? Wreck wouldn't exist if i didn't create it. If i created the wreck then it's mine to salvage, leave to rot or destroy it. Someone else can salvage it sure, but like any other act of thievery should be labeled as one.
Marlenus Ironfleet Towing And Salvage	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:20:00 - [164] Tippia, I am in awe of your ability to continue trying to explain the obvious to the intransigently stupid. I love these threads, and I love them all the more when my infoblock of pertinent dev quotes lands on page one, the way it did here. As far as I'm concerned, those quotes should be a thread-killer ... but they never are. As somebody who was looting mission-runner cans all the way back in the days when missions were on the stargates and mission rats didn't even drop wrecks, I'd like to join the chorus of people who think it would be amusing to give these fools what they demand. Another aggression flag? I guarantee the folks who enjoy busting into missions will have more fun with that than the mission runners will! ------------------ Ironfleet.com
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:28:00 - [165] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Already been answered..reread the thread. àand that answer was answered in turn. Time to respond to that. Quote: Why not? Not a sufficient reason. So again: Why should the salvage belong to you, rather to a salvager, without any effort on your behalf? Quote: Nope. Yes it does. Learn the mechanics before commenting. Originally by: Neoexecutor Well if i did you couldn't ask "why" and since that's about all you're doing tonight it would be rude of me to leave you without a comeback. Do you know why I keep asking that question? Because you keep not answering it. Why should you get the salvage without any effort on your behalf? Why do you need to be paid more than you already are? Quote: Wreck wouldn't exist if i didn't create it. So what? The purpose of the wreck is to create something for salvagers to hunt down and salvage. What makes your participation relevant in those proceedings? Wreck wouldn't exist if the miners didn't create the minerals in your ship. Are you saying that the salvage should belong to them? Why are you stealing from the poor miners ù unlike you, they could really need the buff. Quote: If i created the wreck then it's mine to salvage, leave to rot or destroy it. Why should it belong to you and not to the salvager for whom it actually serves a purpose? What have you done to deserve it? Why should you get the salvage without any effort on your behalf? Why do you need to be paid more than you already are? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:28:00 - [166] Originally by: Marlenus Tippia, I am in awe of your ability to continue trying to explain the obvious to the intransigently stupid. I love these threads, and I love them all the more when my infoblock of pertinent dev quotes lands on page one, the way it did here. As far as I'm concerned, those quotes should be a thread-killer ... but they never are. As somebody who was looting mission-runner cans all the way back in the days when missions were on the stargates and mission rats didn't even drop wrecks, I'd like to join the chorus of people who think it would be amusing to give these fools what they demand. Another aggression flag? I guarantee the folks who enjoy busting into missions will have more fun with that than the mission runners will! Your "infoblock of pertinent dev quotes" is worthless because it doesn't address any of the topics mentioned in this thread.That you even refer to those quotes shows that you are infact the stupid one and a fanboy aswell. 0/10
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:29:00 - [167] Originally by: Marlenus stuff Man where did you get a horse that high?
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 08:53:00 - [168] Quote: Do you know why I keep asking that question? Because you keep not answering it. Why should you get the salvage without any effort on your behalf? Why do you need to be paid more than you already are? I don't want to salvage effortlessly and i don't want to be paid more. You keep putting words in people's mouth. What i want is that things i create would belong to me. Quote: So what? The purpose of the wreck is to create something for salvagers to hunt down and salvage. What makes your participation relevant in those proceedings? I created the wreck, that's what makes my participation relevant. When you manufacture a batch of ships using your own blueprint and your own minerals, do you expect said batch of ships to belong to you? No? Quote: Wreck wouldn't exist if the miners didn't create the minerals in your ship. Are you saying that the salvage should belong to them? Why are you stealing from the poor miners ù unlike you, they could really need the buff. I paid for my ship with ISK. As in ownership rights were given to me for an exchange of certain amount of ISK. I don't see ninja salvagers offering me any isk for my wrecks.
Raiykjab	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:03:00 - [169] I so agree with the OP, the ninja salvager should get flagged so there won't be any concord intervention, hell OP isn't even asking for an instant self-destruct nuke like I would. Seems also to be leading more toward this important part of the game, you know... PVP
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:04:00 - [170] On a side note, our little conversation tonight reminded me of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnq7N6X4x84, especially the part where Jesus tries to explain why killing people is wrong.

Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:07:00 - [171] I personally, would love to see ninja salvagers getting flagged. The flood of MR tears on these forums, would explode. (Pardon the pun) 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.
Nika Dekaia	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:09:00 - [172] This is still going? Originally by: HeIIfire11 Your "infoblock of pertinent dev quotes" is worthless because it doesn't address any of the topics mentioned in this thread.That you even refer to those quotes shows that you are infact the stupid one and a fanboy aswell. 0/10 That quotes from CCP SHOULD have ended the thread. You just keep ignoring them. CCP said numerous times: This is intended game design. Although you may not like that descission made by the developer, it therefore is not "bad game design". In an MMO, encouraging player interaction is actually a good game design descission. Just answer this question: Why should high sec players have even more guaranteed ISK when running lvl 4 missions. Don't give us any RL or "logical" reasons. This is simply about game balance. Keep in mind that mission salvagers are rather uncommon outside of larger mission hubs. It's easy to avoid them. I personally have in the past and am now making my living doing lvl 4s and have only had mission salvagers in my missions twice in the past years.
Zaqar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:11:00 - [173] Happy Easter, Eve forums. -- Originally by: Brian Ballsack please learn to use english if your gonna post
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:12:00 - [174] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 09:15:20 Originally by: Neoexecutor I don't want to salvage effortlessly and i don't want to be paid more. Then you need to stop claiming that they're stealing from you. Quote: What i want is that things i create would belong to me. But that's just it: the rewards you create already belong to you. You didn't create the salvage (which, as mentioned so many times now, are the rewards for a completely different and separate activity), but you still want to claim it as yours. In other words, you want to get paid more, and you want the salvage to belong to you without any additional effort. Quote: I created the wreck, that's what makes my participation relevant. Yes, you created something that exist for salvagers to make use of, much like the ship manufacturer created ships for you to make use of. Why does creating that resource give you any say in how it is used? Should the ship manufacturers have any say in how you use the ships they created, or is it none of their business seeing as how the resource is actually there for you and you're the one who's actually making use of it? And more to the point: you didn't participate in the creation of the salvage ù if you did, it would be yours. So why should you have any say as to whom it belongs to? Quote: I paid for my ship with ISK. As in ownership rights were given to me for an exchange of certain amount of ISK. I don't see ninja salvagers offering me any isk for my wrecks. Why should they? The wrecks aren't yours after all ù they were created for any salvager to come and use. If you don't want any salvager to come and use them, don't create them; don't let salvagers find you; don't let salvagers get the wrecks; etc etc etc. Originally by: Raiykjab Seems also to be leading more toward this important part of the game, you know... PVP Not really, no, since the whole problem is that there's already PvP, which apparently drives people nutsà v0v 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
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:13:00 - [175] Originally by: Neoexecutor I don't want to salvage effortlessly and i don't want to be paid more. You keep putting words in people's mouth. What i want is that things i create would belong to me. I created the wreck, that's what makes my participation relevant. When you manufacture a batch of ships using your own blueprint and your own minerals, do you expect said batch of ships to belong to you? No? I understand your argument. The answer that CCP has been trying to put forward while being nice about it is "So!". So what if you created the wreck. Do you cry this much when someone kills your ship when you wonder into lo/nullsec? How, you created that ship, you earned the isk to buy it and then someone took it from you? Same concept.
Nika Dekaia	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:15:00 - [176] Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: Do you know why I keep asking that question? Because you keep not answering it. Why should you get the salvage without any effort on your behalf? Why do you need to be paid more than you already are? I don't want to salvage effortlessly and i don't want to be paid more. You keep putting words in people's mouth. What i want is that things i create would belong to me. So this is your main, I guess? Maybe not effortless, but without any competition. Having salvagers flagged for salvaging would only remove the salvager mini profession from the game. You would still have a bunch of people scanning your mission and salvaging/looting your wrecks just to have you shoot them.
Iceman10117	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:22:00 - [177] Originally by: Amarraz Missions are not risk free. That's spoken from the perspective, I'm guessing, of someone who's played the game for well over a year. I've lost more than a dozen ships in missions. I think you're doing something wrong... I know i've done all kind of missions (1-5) and NEVER lost a ship... Originally by: Amarraz If it takes a ninja salvager 30 minutes to locate my mission wrecks (it took him considerably less), does that really outweigh even a 2% chance that I will lose a 500 million ship? If you loose a 500 million ship, because of the rats shooting you, you're doing something wrong. But it's not ninja salvager's fault. It's yours! And you're doing a lot more ISK, than the ninja salvager. Enough so you can pay a 500 million ship. Originally by: Amarraz I don't think so, and that's been my point from the beginning: with ninja salvaging, there is absolutely zero risk. What happens if the ninja warps in and gets aggro from the rats? Originally by: Amarraz Now the designers of EVE can state all they want that this is an intentional feature of the game, and a function of non-instanced missions, but that doesn't make it good game design. No comments... ----------------------------------------------- If someone finds spelling mistakes, you can keep them.
Captain Megadeath	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:22:00 - [178] Edited by: Captain Megadeath on 24/04/2011 09:24:23 Originally by: Mag's I personally, would love to see ninja salvagers getting flagged. The flood of MR tears on these forums, would explode. (Pardon the pun) Indeed........ lol Not only that, but when the missionrunner loses said faction BS/Maruder with officer/faction fittings we can direct their vitrol towards HeIIfire11 and proudly say "Blame him. This change is all his fault because he couldnt grasp the fact that the wreck "you make" is NOT yours BY DESIGN, only the loot dropped is." We will be up to our necks in delicious carebear tears..... Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails my name actually is short for catherine Yeah, Katie Door perhaps...... lol
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:27:00 - [179] Quote: Then you need to stop claiming that they're stealing from you. Is this some kind of lame threat over the internet. I believe what i believe in and i make claims based on those beliefs. Quote: But that's just it: what you create already belongs to you. You didn't create the salvage, but you still want to claim it as yours. In other words, you want to get paid more, and you want the salvage to belong to you without any additional effort. I created the material that makes the salvage. I should be the owner of this material. What i decide to do with it is irrelevant. Are you dense? Quote: Yes, you created something that exist for salvagers to make use of, much like the ship manufacturer created ships for you to make use of. Why does creating that resource give you any say in how it is used? Should the ship manufacturers have any say in how you use the ships they created, or is it none of their business seeing as how the resource is actually there for you and you're the one who's actually making use of it? Right because manufacturer just hands out his ships for free right? Quote: Why should they? The wrecks aren't yours after all Aaaaaand we're back to CCP SAYS SO AND IT'S THE TRUTH
Lissian	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:32:00 - [180] Originally by: Ivorr Bigun it was my ammo, my time, my standings and my acceptance of that mission that caused the salvage to exist in the first place. As such its not too much to ask that stealing my salvage should flag the ninja. To be fair, you created the wreck, and your loot inside it. It's only your salvage if you have trained the Salvaging skill, have a Salvager fitted to your ship and salvage the wreck you've made. There is a very similar mechanic in WoW, if you'll forgive the analogy. With the Skinning profession, you could skin the corpses of beasts that other players killed. If you learned the profession, you could skin your own corpses. Of course, Skinning was not suitable for every class, and you were limited in WoW to only two professions, unlike EVE. Skinning a corpse of a beast another player killed did not flag you as a thief; salvaging a wreck of a ship another player destroyed should have the same outcome.

Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:35:00 - [181] Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: Then you need to stop claiming that they're stealing from you. Is this some kind of lame threat over the internet. Oh my. 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.
Captain Megadeath	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:35:00 - [182] Originally by: Neoexecutor I created the wreck, that's what makes my participation relevant. [RolePlay] For your participation, CONCORD pays you a bounty and allows you to take loot from the wreck, they also let you kill anyone without their interference if they steal said loot from you, they also help you by allowing only you/corp to be able to tractor said wreck. That wreck is fair game, for both you AND salvagers alike. Why? Because you were paid a bounty for "making" the wreck. You have been paid for it, time and ammo expenses covered. That wreck is now the posession of CONCORD who paid you for it. Now as said, CONCORD give you an advantage to taking this scrap by allowing only you/corp to be able to tractor it. They also allow anyone else the ability of salvaging the wreck and thereby keeping space clear. [/RolePlay] Has this sunk in yet?............... Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails my name actually is short for catherine Yeah, Katie Door perhaps...... lol
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:35:00 - [183] Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: Then you need to stop claiming that they're stealing from you. Is this some kind of lame threat over the internet. I believe what i believe in and i make claims based on those beliefs. Quote: Why should they? The wrecks aren't yours after all Aaaaaand we're back to CCP SAYS SO AND IT'S THE TRUTH Feel free to stamp your feet because you don't like something. Meanwhile back in reality, wrecks have no ownership. I think it's funny you murder endless NPC's and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. Carebears sure are greedy mofos. End of troll-feeding time.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:36:00 - [184] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 09:40:38 Originally by: Captain Megadeath Edited by: Captain Megadeath on 24/04/2011 09:24:23 Originally by: Mag's I personally, would love to see ninja salvagers getting flagged. The flood of MR tears on these forums, would explode. (Pardon the pun) Indeed........ lol Not only that, but when the missionrunner loses said faction BS/Maruder with officer/faction fittings we can direct their vitrol towards HeIIfire11 and proudly say "Blame him. This change is all his fault because he couldnt grasp the fact that the wreck "you make" is NOT yours BY DESIGN, only the loot dropped is." We will be up to our necks in delicious carebear tears..... Why do you just assume that all ninjas are superior?And why do you assume that every mission runner has this officer fit ship? Stereotype much? Besides that it would still be up to the mission runner if he shoots or not.Ninja tears are better by the way and Im sure there would be plenty of those too. But go ahead and blame me..no shame in blameJust throw some credit my way when you see a ninja warp in at like 50 km and you one shot him for putting his sticky paws on your wreck. Originally by: Lady Spank stuff Who let you out of c&p?Isn't that where all the ninjas live?I bet they want it changed my way as well.More fights and (maybe)more tears.Everyone wins!
Thrash Back	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:39:00 - [185] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Captain Megadeath Edited by: Captain Megadeath on 24/04/2011 09:24:23 Originally by: Mag's I personally, would love to see ninja salvagers getting flagged. The flood of MR tears on these forums, would explode. (Pardon the pun) Indeed........ lol Not only that, but when the missionrunner loses said faction BS/Maruder with officer/faction fittings we can direct their vitrol towards HeIIfire11 and proudly say "Blame him. This change is all his fault because he couldnt grasp the fact that the wreck "you make" is NOT yours BY DESIGN, only the loot dropped is." We will be up to our necks in delicious carebear tears..... Why do you just assume that all ninjas are superior?And why do you assume that every mission runner has this officer fit ship? Stereotype much? Besides that it would still be up to the mission runner if he shoots or not.Ninja tears are better by the way and Im sure there would be plenty of those too. But go ahead and blame me..no shame in blameJust throw some credit my way when you see a ninja warp in at like 50 km and you one shot him for putting his sticky paws on your wreck. After reading your previous posts complaining about bad game design, my suggestion is that you stop paying CCP if their game design is so bad, and go and play Habbo Hotel or something. No one's forcing you to play :)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:39:00 - [186] Originally by: Neoexecutor Is this some kind of lame threat over the internet. No, it's a simple dichotomy: either you say that they're stealing, in which case you're claiming stuff is yours (without any additional effort on your part) ù it wouldn't be stealing otherwise, after all ù which means your income is suddenly higher than before, or you say that you're not interested in free hand-outs and increased income, in which case no-one is stealing anything because the stuff isn't yours, so they can't steal it from you. The two cannot be combined. Quote: I created the material that makes the salvage. I should be the owner of this material. àexcept that it was created for the salvagers to make use of, so there is no more ownership than over any other base resource. It's entirely possible to cultivate rocks in this game ù this doesn't mean they belong to the minerà Quote: What i decide to do with it is irrelevant. Congratulations: yes it is irrelevant what you decide. Well, it's irrelevant so far as how it limits what anyone else can do with said material unless your decision is to salvage it right this minute before they get the chance. Quote: Right because manufacturer just hands out his ships for free right? What they decide to do with it is irrelevantà Quote: Aaaaaand we're back to CCP SAYS SO AND IT'S THE TRUTH And that's the terrible truth: it is the truth because CCP says so. And you still need to provide an explanation for why it should be otherwise. Why should you own the wrecks just because you made them spawn? Why should you own the salvage just because you made the wrecks spawn? Why shouldn't it instead belong to the person who made the effort to actually create the salvage? 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
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:41:00 - [187] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Why do you just assume that all ninjas are superior?And why do you assume that every mission runner has this officer fit ship? Because previous experimentations in the area has proven this to generally be true. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:43:00 - [188] Originally by: Thrash Back Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Captain Megadeath Edited by: Captain Megadeath on 24/04/2011 09:24:23 Originally by: Mag's I personally, would love to see ninja salvagers getting flagged. The flood of MR tears on these forums, would explode. (Pardon the pun) Indeed........ lol Not only that, but when the missionrunner loses said faction BS/Maruder with officer/faction fittings we can direct their vitrol towards HeIIfire11 and proudly say "Blame him. This change is all his fault because he couldnt grasp the fact that the wreck "you make" is NOT yours BY DESIGN, only the loot dropped is." We will be up to our necks in delicious carebear tears..... Why do you just assume that all ninjas are superior?And why do you assume that every mission runner has this officer fit ship? Stereotype much? Besides that it would still be up to the mission runner if he shoots or not.Ninja tears are better by the way and Im sure there would be plenty of those too. But go ahead and blame me..no shame in blameJust throw some credit my way when you see a ninja warp in at like 50 km and you one shot him for putting his sticky paws on your wreck. After reading your previous posts complaining about bad game design, my suggestion is that you stop paying CCP if their game design is so bad, and go and play Habbo Hotel or something. No one's forcing you to play :) No one force you to read my post either.As for Habbo Hotel..you first.Ill be right behind ya..promise.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:44:00 - [189] Originally by: Lady Spank I think it's funny you murder endless NPC's and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. Carebears sure are greedy mofos. I think it's funny you murder endless PC's and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. PVPer's sure are greedy mofos. I think it's funny you manufacture endless trade goods and expect to have exclusive rights to them afterwards. Manufacturer's sure are greedy mofos. I think it's funny you scam endless noobs and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. Scammer's sure are greedy mofos. I think it's funny you colonize endless planet's and expect to have exclusive rights to their products afterwards. PIers sure are greedy mofos. I think it's funny you trade endless trade goods and expect to have exclusive rights to profits afterwards. Traders sure are greedy mofos. I think your face is funny.
Lugaedh	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:44:00 - [190] There are guys doing the hunt, there are guys who steal the remains (and cut salvage is no theft). Get used to it, you do not get kill rights as long as they do not take loot or attack you. There are lions hunting and vultures gnawing the bones. Ignore them. Use less populated mission systems. Use a marauder. Shoot wrecks - but wait till they nearly are in salvage range (this is quite funny to ask: where's the bone, doggy?) And do not let them griee you. Never shoot back in a mission ship. If you want to buzz them, get a pvp ship and a repair buddy in a logi. THEN have fun. Laugh at those idiots, salvage stealing is for losers... no money in it. kind regards

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:50:00 - [191] Originally by: Neoexecutor I think it's funny you murder endless PC's and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. No they don't expect that for the simple reason that they don't have it. Quote: I think it's funny you manufacture endless trade goods and expect to have exclusive rights to them afterwards. They expect that because they do in fact have those rights. Quote: I think it's funny you scam endless noobs and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. They don't expect that because it's not actually the noob's stuff afterwards ù instead, they expect to have exclusive rights to their own stuff, which they do have. Quote: I think it's funny you colonize endless planet's and expect to have exclusive rights to their products afterwards. Again, they expect it because they do have it. Quote: I think it's funny you trade endless trade goods and expect to have exclusive rights to profits afterwards. If there are any profits, then they do indeed have the rights to those and the expectation is entirely reasonable. 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
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 09:59:00 - [192] There is a bit of confusion in this thread. The wreck spawns as a result of your actions, but you don't create it. Hence you have no rights to it that are exclusive, outside of being able to tractor it. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:03:00 - [193] Originally by: Tippia No, it's a simple dichotomy: either you say that they're stealing, in which case you're claiming stuff is yours (without any additional effort on your part) ù it wouldn't be stealing otherwise, after all ù which means your income is suddenly higher than before, or you say that you're not interested in free hand-outs and increased income, in which case no-one is stealing anything because the stuff isn't yours, so they can't steal it from you. The two cannot be combined. Pretty sure it was a request by you to me to stop making claims about things i believe in. Feel free to continue using long combinations of big words to switch subjects and arguments. I'm getting used to it by now. Quote: It's entirely possible to cultivate rocks in this game ù this doesn't mean they belong to the minerà Yeah well see the rock is created by the server for anyone to take, miner came processed the rock into ore and voila ore is his. Much like mission runner processing an npc ship into a wreck. Quote: Congratulations: yes it is irrelevant what you decide. Well, it's irrelevant so far as how it limits what anyone else can do with said material unless your decision is to salvage it right this minute before they get the chance. I already said it's fine with me that they salvage it. But pretending like they're claiming some natural resource is not. Quote: What they decide to do with it is irrelevantà Yea, what's relevant tho is that those ships do belong to him. Quote: And that's the terrible truth: it is the truth because CCP says so. And you still need to provide an explanation for why it should be otherwise. Why should you own the wrecks just because you made them spawn? Why should you own the salvage just because you made the wrecks spawn? Dude i already drew like 5 analogies (in and out of game) on why i think it's wrong, but you seem to skip them. Quote: Why shouldn't it instead belong to the person who made the effort to actually create the salvage? Because he's producing salvage from wrecks that should not (IN MY OPINION) belong to him.
GoGo Rens	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:04:00 - [194] Edited by: GoGo Rens on 24/04/2011 10:05:26 Solution to this = empty wrecks should turn blue. Stating that they belong to nobody/anybody. Would stop any confusion as to who owns them.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:07:00 - [195] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium There is a bit of confusion in this thread. The wreck spawns as a result of your actions, but you don't create it. Hence you have no rights to it that are exclusive, outside of being able to tractor it. So is mining ore. Ore is the result of your actions, but you don't create it. Anything can be labeled as a result of your actions and not the fruit of your work using this logic.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:07:00 - [196] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 10:10:54 Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium There is a bit of confusion in this thread. The wreck spawns as a result of your actions, but you don't create it. Hence you have no rights to it that are exclusive, outside of being able to tractor it. You have a point since ccp said they wanted it like that.My point is that is that theres nothing free in eve.Some may say ore is free but it costs you time as well.Why should a ninja salvager be able to zip in without risk and help himself to the salvage? Not only that but think about what Im asking for a second.Wouldn't it be a lot more fun if the chance to fight for it existed? Missionrunner creates wreck..ninja comes to claim it..missionrunner has the choice to defend it.9 times out of 10 thats what the ninja wants anyway.Wheres the problem?CCP said so and fanboys follow.Nothing speaks against it really. Everyone wants the carebears to pvp well heres another small step to get them to do so.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:10:00 - [197] Originally by: GoGo Rens Edited by: GoGo Rens on 24/04/2011 10:05:26 Solution to this = empty wrecks should turn blue. Stating that they belong to nobody/anybody. Would stop any confusion as to who owns them. Thank you.This would be one way to solve it.Why dont they? Bad game design like I said from the start.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:11:00 - [198] Originally by: Neoexecutor Pretty sure it was a request by you to me to stop making claims about things i believe in. "Pretty sure" doesn't make you right, unfortunately. No it wasn't. Quote: Yeah well see the rock is created by the server for anyone to take, miner came processed the rock into ore and voila ore is his. So you don't know about rock cultivation I take it? Quote: I already said it's fine with me that they salvage it. But pretending like they're claiming some natural resource is not. Why not? That's what it is, after allà Quote: Yea, what's relevant tho is that those ships do belong to him. You mean like how the salvage belongs to those who create it? Viz. the victorious salvager? Quote: Dude i already drew like 5 analogies (in and out of game) on why i think it's wrong, but you seem to skip them. No, they just don't answer the question: why should it be yours just because you made it spawn? Why should you be handed additional assets without any additional effort? Quote: Because he's producing salvage from wrecks that should not (IN MY OPINION) belong to him. And guess what: the wrecks don't belong to him. 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:11:00 - [199] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Neoexecutor I think it's funny you murder endless PC's and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. No they don't expect that for the simple reason that they don't have it. Quote: I think it's funny you manufacture endless trade goods and expect to have exclusive rights to them afterwards. They expect that because they do in fact have those rights. Quote: I think it's funny you scam endless noobs and expect to have exclusive rights to their stuff afterwards. They don't expect that because it's not actually the noob's stuff afterwards ù instead, they expect to have exclusive rights to their own stuff, which they do have. Quote: I think it's funny you colonize endless planet's and expect to have exclusive rights to their products afterwards. Again, they expect it because they do have it. Quote: I think it's funny you trade endless trade goods and expect to have exclusive rights to profits afterwards. If there are any profits, then they do indeed have the rights to those and the expectation is entirely reasonable. So you don't find it funny at all that all those activities produce ownership rights, but killing an npc doesn't?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:14:00 - [200] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 10:16:12 Originally by: HeIIfire11 My point is that is that theres nothing free in eve.Some may say ore is free but it costs you time as well.Why should a ninja salvager be able to zip in without risk and help himself to the salvage? Because he put the required effort into it. Quote: Missionrunner creates wreck..ninja comes to claim it. àexcept that that's not really what happens. And the question remains: if PvP is the answer to the perceived problem, why is it that people hate the PvP that ninja salvaging already creates? Originally by: Neoexecutor So you don't find it funny at all that all those activities produce ownership rights, but killing an npc doesn't? There's just two problems: not all of those do, and killing NPCs does. 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

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:16:00 - [201] It's just like PI.When you send it to the customs office it isn't in your cargo yet.But I cant wait at the customs office and intercept it either. But according to the post from ccp you quoted until its in your cargo its not yours.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:18:00 - [202] Originally by: HeIIfire11 But according to the post from ccp you quoted until its in your cargo its not yours. Don't be silly. There are plenty of locations where stuff is yours (hangars, cans, cargo holds, delivery holds, etc). Sitting unrealised in a wreck is just not one of them. 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
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:19:00 - [203] Originally by: Neoexecutor Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium There is a bit of confusion in this thread. The wreck spawns as a result of your actions, but you don't create it. Hence you have no rights to it that are exclusive, outside of being able to tractor it. So is mining ore. Ore is the result of your actions, but you don't create it. Anything can be labeled as a result of your actions and not the fruit of your work using this logic. If you owned the asteroid you would have an appropriate counter argument. But this only shows that what I've said applies as a general case. Asteroid is to wreck as salvage is to ore. It doesn't belong to you until you cycle the mining laser or salvager, which creates the ore or salvage, which belongs to you after you take this action, and is deposited in your cargo hold. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:20:00 - [204] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 10:23:01 Originally by: Tippia And the question remains: if PvP is the answer to the perceived problem, why is it that people hate the PvP that ninja salvaging already creates? Because people aren't ready for it due to unclear game mechanics.Like I said they still have the option to shoot or not just like they do now. And because people dislike them for the fact that there is no defense against it other than to shoot yourself in the foot.
Avon Caldari Versatech Co. RED.OverLord	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:21:00 - [205] Edited by: Avon on 24/04/2011 10:23:40 This thread makes me want to go can flipping with my salvage character - see how many of the people who complain about ninja salvagers really would like it to be PvP flaggable. I could make a nice graph. Retro sig
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:23:00 - [206] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 10:23:27 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Because people aren't ready for it due to unclear game mechanics. First of all, aren't ready for what? What are you referring to? Also, what's unclear about the game mechanics? First to finish a salvaging cycle on the wreck owns the salvage. It's far more simple and clear than the loot mechanicsà 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
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:26:00 - [207] Quote: "Pretty sure" doesn't make you right, unfortunately. No it wasn't. Quote: Then you need to stop claiming that they're stealing from you. Sorry, but i'm still "pretty sure". Quote: So you don't know about rock cultivation I take it? I know they weren't created by other players and when i cultivate them i don't steal. Quote: Why not? That's what it is, after allà http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resource "occur naturally" is important part. I think closest that we can get to a natural resource in EvE is something that is spawned by a server. Wrecks are not. Quote: You mean like how the salvage belongs to those who create it? Viz. the victorious salvager? No i mean like material that produces salvage belongs to someone who created the material in the first place. Quote: No, they just don't answer the question: why should it be yours just because you made it spawn? Why should you be handed additional assets without any additional effort? Yes, just because. Like ore belongs to a miner "just because" he activated miner module on a rock. He created a material to produce minerals, is it ok for anyone to come and and steal this material? Quote: And guess what: the wrecks don't belong to him. NO WAI!
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:26:00 - [208] Originally by: Avon Edited by: Avon on 24/04/2011 10:21:23 This thread makes me want to go can flipping with my salvage character - see how many of the people who complaining about ninja salvagers really would like it to be PvP flaggable. I could make a nice graph. Go ahead I can agree with you that not many will.But should this be changed there will be many who will go looking for this situation with their corps. I've run missions with corps where there were like 7 of us and one ninja comes in and starts salvaging.The fleet we had together would have face****d anyone who took aggro.We had no choice but to let him be.He didnt get much though because we had two salvagers in there as well.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:28:00 - [209] Originally by: HeIIfire11 You have a point since ccp said they wanted it like that.My point is that is that theres nothing free in eve.Some may say ore is free but it costs you time as well.Why should a ninja salvager be able to zip in without risk and help himself to the salvage? He doesn't just zip in, he must spend time finding the mission, by scanning you down (and not knowing if your doing a mission until he gets there, thereby risking wasting his time), he must then spend time approaching the wreck, he then must cycle the salvager. This is all a risk in possible time wasted, possibly too slow. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Not only that but think about what Im asking for a second.Wouldn't it be a lot more fun if the chance to fight for it existed? Only fun for some, which would effectively change nothing. How it is now is only fun for some, and how it would be if your changes were implemented would only be fun for some. Ergo, no reason to expend resources coding a change to a system that was intentional in the first place. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Missionrunner creates wreck No, wreck spawns as a result of mission runner activity. Originally by: HeIIfire11 ..ninja comes to claim it..missionrunner has the choice to defend it. You have the choice to defend it now, that choice has consequences Originally by: HeIIfire11 9 times out of 10 thats what the ninja wants anyway. I wish I was omniscient. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Wheres the problem?CCP said so and fanboys follow.Nothing speaks against it really. CCP said so and all players follow. If you play their game you literally have no choice but to play by their rules. This is not opinion, it is fact. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Everyone wants the carebears to pvp well heres another small step to get them to do so. I think you mean everyone who isn't a carebear wants the carebears to pvp. But CCP is better served by catering, or at least attempting to, to all their customers. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
Avon Caldari Versatech Co. RED.OverLord	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:30:00 - [210] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Go ahead I can agree with you that not many will.But should this be changed there will be many who will go looking for this situation with their corps. I've run missions with corps where there were like 7 of us and one ninja comes in and starts salvaging.The fleet we had together would have face****d anyone who took aggro.We had no choice but to let him be.He didnt get much though because we had two salvagers in there as well. Yeah, except you don't know how many friends the salvager has just waiting for you to attack .. same as can flippers. Even if you factor in the odd group who would be ready and willing to PvP, the overall effect would be a new flood of tears from the majority. Retro sig

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:35:00 - [211] Originally by: Avon Originally by: HeIIfire11 Go ahead I can agree with you that not many will.But should this be changed there will be many who will go looking for this situation with their corps. I've run missions with corps where there were like 7 of us and one ninja comes in and starts salvaging.The fleet we had together would have face****d anyone who took aggro.We had no choice but to let him be.He didnt get much though because we had two salvagers in there as well. Yeah, except you don't know how many friends the salvager has just waiting for you to attack .. same as can flippers. Even if you factor in the odd group who would be ready and willing to PvP, the overall effect would be a new flood of tears from the majority. Like I also said before this is possible yes but do you want to predict every outcome of every encounter? May the best man/corp win like everything else in eve. Also the missionrunner still has the choice to shoot or not.Everyone can get what they want,only downside is for the salvager who's risk increases a bit because he might" get attacked.The missionrunners risk then increases too because the salvager might have a fleet waiting.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:35:00 - [212] Originally by: Avon ...snip... the overall effect would be a new flood of tears from the majority. This and it would be wonderful. 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.
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:36:00 - [213] Quote: Asteroid is to wreck as salvage is to ore. Except that one is effortlessly created by the server and another one is spawned by the efforts of players.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:37:00 - [214] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 10:40:47 Originally by: Neoexecutor Sorry, but i'm still "pretty sure". Ok, that just makes you wrong then. Good we cleared that up. Quote: I know they weren't created by other players and when i cultivate them i don't steal. Of course you don't, but neither do you steal when you drill away at the rocks someone else has been cultivating, and that's the whole point. Just because you made sure something that's worth-while to harvest existed in the game doesn't automatically make it yours. Quote: I think closest that we can get to a natural resource in EvE is something that is spawned by a server. Wrecks are not. Wrecks are most certainly spawned by the server, otherwise they wouldn't show up, now would they? àand as HI explains: they are to salvage what rocks are to ore ù they're on the natural resource level from which a base material is extracted. Quote: No i mean like material that produces salvage belongs to someone who created the material in the first place. àexcept that it's meant to be a free-for-all resource from which salvagers can extract their salvage. So why should it belong to you? And why should the salvage that is extracted from it belong to you? Quote: Yes, just because. Not good enough. Quote: Like ore belongs to a miner "just because" he activated miner module on a rock. It's not "just because" ù it's the reward structure for shooting lasers at rocks. The reward structure for shooting ships does not include the wreck, and most certainly not the salvage (you get bounties and loot instead). So no, it's not the same thing. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:39:00 - [215] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 10:42:35 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 10:40:03 Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium stuff I've addressed almost everything you said in this thread already.Dont jump to the last page and get all in my koolaid because you're to lazy to read it.Sorry there is no TL;DR version. Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Avon ...snip... the overall effect would be a new flood of tears from the majority. This and it would be wonderful. Yes we heard you the first time.Vote for my fix and you might get it.Your flood of tears that is. You should be on my side then wtf?Or do you just want to sound hard?
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:43:00 - [216] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Avon ...snip... the overall effect would be a new flood of tears from the majority. This and it would be wonderful. Yes we heard you the first time.Vote for my fix and you might get it. Did I say how wonderful it would be? 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.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:47:00 - [217] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Avon ...snip... the overall effect would be a new flood of tears from the majority. This and it would be wonderful. Yes we heard you the first time.Vote for my fix and you might get it. Did I say how wonderful it would be? Yes!! See my edit above
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:53:00 - [218] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Mag's Did I say how wonderful it would be? Yes!! See my edit above IIRC I voted yes to aggression flagging, in the Assembly Hall. 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.
Nea Star	Posted - 2011.04.24 10:56:00 - [219] Lols, mission running carebears in this thread are hillarious! They got noctis and still want moar.."all mine, mine, FU ninja, mine, cry, stuff" This is the kind of people I am glad there's wardec mechanic in hisec. Delicious tears..keep 'em coming!
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:00:00 - [220] You must be a champion of selective quoting. Let's see if i can do it too. Quote: cleared that up. No we didn't. Quote: neither you steal when you drill away at the rocks ... and that's the whole point. ... you made sure something that's worth-while to harvest existed in the game ... automatically make it yours. Glad we agree. Quote: Wrecks are most certainly spawned by the server, otherwise they wouldn't show up, now would they? Well with the powers of persuasion (guns) i told the server to spawn them, so credit is mine. Quote: àexcept that it's meant to be a free-for-all resource from which salvagers can extract their salvage. So why should it belong to you? And why should the salvage that is extracted from it belong to you? You keep hiding behind CCP's policies without giving any reasoning yourself why it shouldn't? And no i don't want free salvage. And no i don't want to be paid more for no effort. Quote: It's not "just because" ù it's the reward structure for shooting lasers at rocks. So why make wrecks an exception? Quote: The reward structure for shooting ships does not include the wreck, and most certainly not the salvage (you get bounties and loot instead). So no, it's not the same thing. So says CCP. For instance slavery for a very long time was legal and justified by governments in many countries. Let me ask, if you were to live in those times, would you be saying slavery is ok, because government allows it?

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:00:00 - [221] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Mag's Did I say how wonderful it would be? Yes!! See my edit above IIRC I voted yes to aggression flagging, in the Assembly Hall. There wasn't one open but there is now
Neoexecutor Minmatar Skynet Technologies	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:06:00 - [222] Time to hit the bed, i'll be back to this thread tomorrow if it's still goin.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:06:00 - [223] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Mag's IIRC I voted yes to aggression flagging, in the Assembly Hall. There wasn't one open but there is now It was some time ago, but I have voted in yours. 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.
Lugaedh	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:06:00 - [224] Originally by: Nea Star Lols, mission running carebears in this thread are hillarious! They got noctis and still want moar.."all mine, mine, FU ninja, mine, cry, stuff" This is the kind of people I am glad there's wardec mechanic in hisec. Delicious tears..keep 'em coming! pathetic wannabe pvp-er. ninja salvagers are the carebears of the carebears. what a moron one must be the get off on this crap you wrote. as i said: pathetic. go trolling elsewhere
Keylah Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:07:00 - [225] Edited by: Keylah on 24/04/2011 11:09:42 Dayum! this thread was at 2 or 3 pages last time I was in here. Anyways, if salvage was flag able, a lot of mission runners would loose their shiny ships and go emo on this forum. In addition to that, a lot of them would rage quit eve. Some might thing that is a good thing, how ever I'm sure CCP won't be too happy about loosing that many subscriptions. After all, the primary reason for a mission runner to run lvl4s is to make isk to buy a expensive faction BS or Marauder to pimp out. If they are afraid it might get blown to space dust, they won't use it, which kinda defeats that point of doing boring missions over and over again for them. So some people would get their Eve paradise free of hi-sec mission runners, but that won't increase populations in low sec or null sec. Most of the carebears care nothing for pvp, CCP has been trying with little or no success to get them out of hi-sec for years. I don't see that changing anytime soon. Hence my original recommendation stands: Shoot the wrecks and be done with it. The ninja is sad. The Carebear is alive and should be happy about that(this is for their own good after all). CCP keeps that carebear subscriptions. Everybody wins :) -K
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:09:00 - [226] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 11:15:26 Originally by: Neoexecutor Well with the powers of persuasion (guns) i told the server to spawn them, so credit is mine. And the question remains: so what? Quote: You keep hiding behind CCP's policies without giving any reasoning yourself why it shouldn't? Because I'm not the one who is asking for a change of those policies. You are. So you are the one who needs to provide the reasons why such a change is needed and why it would be a good thing. Quote: And no i don't want free salvage. And no i don't want to be paid more for no effort. Then you need to stop claiming that they're stealing your stuff. Quote: So why make wrecks an exception? They're not an exception ù they follow the pattern of rocks to a t: the reward structure for shooting wrecks with salvagers is salvage. Quote: So says CCP. Yes. Provide some reasoning why it shouldn't be that way. Why should the wreck be yours just because you made it spawn? Why should you be handed additional assets without any additional effort? Why should the salvage other people create belong to you? 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
DJWiggles Gallente Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:15:00 - [227] Here is my two pence on the issue: You either salvage first or you don't, if someone else gets there first then they get it. Woot for them if they get it and woot for you if you do. IMHO if you don't like the fact that someone else can come in to your mission (with a fair bit of work on their part) and try and get some salvage, then you have a few options: Get a salvage alt trained up and fly them behind you Train yourself up to fly a Marauder class Battleship Move to a less populated Mission Hub (upcoming changes will help this Agent quality etc.) Realise that CCP make this game and if you think its bad go make a game yourself and have it that you cant "steal" salvage Stop playing Eve-Online and forget about it Tippia you can have many many cookies from me as I do love the way you reply with valid points and then people try to take you down. Now with added extra Wigglyness and a big white fluffy bunny suit with a BLUE BOW TIE on Mondays 19:00 - 22:00 GMT on EVE-Radio.
OracleClone	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:17:00 - [228] Per CCP Mitnal: Originally by: CCP Mitnal "Our policy on this is extremely clear... Salvaging is a mini-profession within EVE and does not constitute stealing." Per GM Faolchu : Originally by: GM Faolchu Salvaging other peoples wrecks.... This is an intended game mechanic and is in no way an exploit. People salvaging your missions npcs or the player you just blew up are doing nothing wrong. The players are salvaging what is effectively floating rubbish in space and Concord places no value on this wreckage. Eve is a harsh place you won't always have everything go your way, its a do or die world and people do what they can to get along. If salvaging some wreckage gets them a few more ISK someone will do it, it doesn't matter who just blew it up. Per Senior GM Ytterbium : Originally by: GM Ytterbium Players are still completely free to salvage other pilot wrecks at will ... and doing so is not considered as an exploit. Per CCP Prism X : Originally by: CCP Prism X Why is stealing salvage OK? It's not. It shouldn't even be possible to move an item from your cargo-hold / hanger to another persons cargo-hold / hanger without opening a trade window. Before the salvage enters those containers it is not considered your stuff by the server code. Hence it's not stealing. Per CCP Incognito : Originally by: CCP Incognito Had a chat with some designers this evening. Ninja salvaging is intended game play. It was always intended that the wrecks are public, the loot is private. They do not see it as a problem if others salvage your wrecks. (These quotes are kept handy for your convenience at Ironfleet.com.)
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:17:00 - [229] Originally by: Keylah Dayum! this thread was at 2 or 3 pages last time I was in here. Anyways, if salvage was flag able, a lot of mission runners would loose their shiny ships and go emo on this forum. In addition to that, a lot of them would rage quit eve. Some might thing that is a good thing, how ever I'm sure CCP won't be too happy about loosing that many subscriptions. Not really,don't forget the missionrunner still has to shoot first. Originally by: Keylah So some people would get their Eve paradise free of hi-sec mission runners, but that won't increase populations in low sec or null sec. In null and low you can just shoot them.There is no concord hence no problem. Originally by: Keylah Most of the carebears care nothing for pvp, CCP has been trying with little or no success to get them out of hi-sec for years. I don't see that changing anytime soon.. Maybe they will feel better about it in the safety of their own nest.
Krud Rurssel	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:20:00 - [230] New players, who have little or no clue about the way Eve works, always come up with the best ideas and I think the OP should apply for a job at CCP.

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:21:00 - [231] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 24/04/2011 11:22:23 Originally by: DJWiggles Here is my two pence on the issue: You either salvage first or you don't, if someone else gets there first then they get it. Woot for them if they get it and woot for you if you do. IMHO if you don't like the fact that someone else can come in to your mission (with a fair bit of work on their part) and try and get some salvage, then you have a few options: Get a salvage alt trained up and fly them behind you Train yourself up to fly a Marauder class Battleship Move to a less populated Mission Hub (upcoming changes will help this Agent quality etc.) Realise that CCP make this game and if you think its bad go make a game yourself and have it that you cant "steal" salvage Stop playing Eve-Online and forget about it Tippia you can have many many cookies from me as I do love the way you !!!!reply with valid points !!!!!!and then people try to take you down. I'd respond negative to your post for being a Tippia lover but since your character is so cute I'll let you off the hook this time.
DJWiggles Gallente Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:21:00 - [232] Originally by: Krud Rurssel New players, who have little or no clue about the way Eve works, always come up with the best ideas and I think the OP should apply for a job at CCP. Are that what the tutorials are for ... teaching people about Eve-Online and how it works? Now with added extra Wigglyness and a big white fluffy bunny suit with a BLUE BOW TIE on Mondays 19:00 - 22:00 GMT on EVE-Radio.
Mandos2k Gallente Divinity Within	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:22:00 - [233] The only thing that should be changed is to be able to use the tractor beam on all wrecks. Let the Noctis rise to fulfill its true destiny!
Dossie Kielle Clan Kielle	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:25:00 - [234] Oh noes, people are stealin' mai shizz~ Well, ha~! Get a life you poor, pathetic little children and grow a spine. They aggress? Take them out. Is it not that simple an idea? Poor, little pathetic carebears whining about the loss of your salvage. Tell me, how many of you actually salvage all that flotsm you leave floating around making a mess of my cluster? I thought not. Go forth and fornicate, but do not multiply. Remove your foolish selves from the New Eden cluster in the most spectacular fashion so as to not pollute our gene pool. Have a nice day, Dos Tu Mai 'Dossie' Kielle. CEO of the Clan Kielle.
Keylah Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:25:00 - [235] Edited by: Keylah on 24/04/2011 11:26:44 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Not really,don't forget the missionrunner still has to shoot first. You're right, how ever many would take the bait and pay for it dearly. Originally by: Keylah So some people would get their Eve paradise free of hi-sec mission runners, but that won't increase populations in low sec or null sec. In null and low you can just shoot them.There is no concord hence no problem. No Concord there is why they won't go there in the first place. Originally by: Keylah Most of the carebears care nothing for pvp, CCP has been trying with little or no success to get them out of hi-sec for years. I don't see that changing anytime soon.. Maybe they will feel better about it in the safety of their own nest. You wish, after the initial surge of MR's getting pwnd there will be a sharp decrease in mission running activities, and they will quit as they have nothing else to do in eve. -K
Maorio	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:26:00 - [236] what's stopping you from ninja salvaging other peoples wrecks?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:31:00 - [237] Originally by: Maorio what's stopping you from ninja salvaging other peoples wrecks? Who me? I don't care for salvage mine or anyone elses.I'm just trying to spice up mission running.That and stating the fact that the current game design causes confusion and offers a risk free ticket to isk.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:42:00 - [238] Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: Asteroid is to wreck as salvage is to ore. Except that one is effortlessly created by the server and another one is spawned by the efforts of players. No, one is spawned as the result of player activity, both are created by the server. Both are resources to be harvested by anyone in range with the appropriate harvesting tool. In fact, there are objects not spawned as a result of player activity which produce salvage and are accessed by a salvager. So wrecks are actually a subsumed case of a much larger category of harvestable objects accessed by the salvager. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:45:00 - [239] Originally by: HeIIfire11 I've addressed almost everything you said in this thread already.Dont jump to the last page and get all in my koolaid because you're to lazy to read it.Sorry there is no TL;DR version. You addressed nothing, you provided lame insults and tautologies. It has nothing to do with laziness, no one wants to read crap churned out by an inferior mind. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
Zifrian Deep Space Innovations	Posted - 2011.04.24 11:53:00 - [240] This has to be a troll post. Anywho, I don't know why people get so bent out of shape about this. I have a buddy that has his blood boil when it happens to him. I just shoot the wrecks. Ninja salvagers get pleasure of seeing people rant and complain on the boards ("carebear tears"). So just deny them of that pleasure. It makes me happy as a clam to destroy a wreck when I see some ninja looter trying to salvage it. Also, If people just calculated out how long it takes to salvage and the amount of time to screw with all the stuff to get your isk out of it, you would probably find it's just easier to blitz the mission and leave the wrecks anyway. It's sad to see so many people think that the "best way" to make isk is to kill everything and then salvage all the wrecks, and repeat. These are probably the same people using their lp's to buy and sell implants. Oh well

Keylah Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:03:00 - [241] Originally by: Zifrian This has to be a troll post. Anywho, I don't know why people get so bent out of shape about this. I have a buddy that has his blood boil when it happens to him. I just shoot the wrecks. Ninja salvagers get pleasure of seeing people rant and complain on the boards ("carebear tears"). So just deny them of that pleasure. It makes me happy as a clam to destroy a wreck when I see some ninja looter trying to salvage it. Also, If people just calculated out how long it takes to salvage and the amount of time to screw with all the stuff to get your isk out of it, you would probably find it's just easier to blitz the mission and leave the wrecks anyway. It's sad to see so many people think that the "best way" to make isk is to kill everything and then salvage all the wrecks, and repeat. These are probably the same people using their lp's to buy and sell implants. Oh well I agree on all counts. -K
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:05:00 - [242] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Originally by: HeIIfire11 I've addressed almost everything you said in this thread already.Dont jump to the last page and get all in my koolaid because you're to lazy to read it.Sorry there is no TL;DR version. You addressed nothing, you provided lame insults and tautologies. It has nothing to do with laziness, no one wants to read crap churned out by an inferior mind. Wrong,I addressed everything like I said before and I don't believe you read more than the first page.The first page in which I did get a bit annoyed by Tippia because he always wants to know everything better evreywhere he posts. As far as no one wanting to read it wrong again..3,075 people wanted to read it.Cut that in half because of all the frequent posters and its still a lot for one night.So it seems that the topic does interest people. Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium no one wants to read crap churned out by an inferior mind. Then stop posting.Saves you the time trying to google up all those big words
Chopper Rollins Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:06:00 - [243] Edited by: Chopper Rollins on 24/04/2011 12:09:05 AW SWEET IT'S THIS THREAD AGAIN. Any of you know much about the laws around maritime salvage? It is NOT illegal to fail to come to the aid of a ship in distress. It is NOT illegal to salvage a ship that has foundered to the point that all hands have abandoned ship or died. This sets up a situation where, if you know the local craft, you can listen to a distress call all night on the radio, with your feet up as the exact location of the treasure is repeated into the air. Then, when you're sure the craft has sunk or been abandoned, you can fire up your rustbucketty salvage rig and get out there and take anything you want.(EXCEPT cargo, property of craft's owner) It is NOT legal for the captain or crew to get in your way or attack you over it. That would be piracy, as you are a legitimate businessman. These winches? $2500 each. Get all those brass fittings. Two forty foot pine masts? Great, we can upgrade the scuba gear and buy a new boat so Baz can run back to shore for specialised equipment or more beers. Makes me feel like a spot of ninja salvaging right now, this thread. Thanks for the inspiration, pity about the lack of insight, except into how belligerent people can get when they don't know what's going on.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:07:00 - [244] Originally by: HeIIfire11 As far as no one wanting to read it wrong again..3,075 people wanted to read it.Cut that in half because of all the frequent posters and its still a lot for one night.So it seems that the topic does interest people. 3,075 people read the thread. Idiot. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:11:00 - [245] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Originally by: HeIIfire11 As far as no one wanting to read it wrong again..3,075 people wanted to read it.Cut that in half because of all the frequent posters and its still a lot for one night.So it seems that the topic does interest people. 3,075 people read the thread. Idiot. Who's insulting now? You mad bro? You forgot the rest though....here,I'll fix it for you. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Cut that in half because of all the frequent posters and its still a lot for one night.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:11:00 - [246] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Wrong,I addressed everything like I said before and I don't believe you read more than the first page.The first page in which àyou didn't say anything about salvaging and just blathered on about bad game design. You also didn't in any way address the point HI made. 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
Maddox Yung Rising Ashes Inc. Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:11:00 - [247] most impressive these ninjas are. oh, cept one problem: these *******s dont know anything about missions, hence why i keep killing them, without even shooting them. i do believe i was doing a lv 4 when four of these lazy sods mysteriously appeared and started salvaging. i warped out, came back and two hjad been popped by the rats that were still there. the other two warped out, they came back and started again. one of them stole something, and poof* one shot, gone. my my it was so fun watching him die, followed by a salvager emorage attack. the other one ran for it, but he died unexpectadly in front of the astation when i caught up with him.... ninjas are good for something. pretty explosions, and guaranteed emorage when they fail. *********************** A Warrior Of The Collective We Are The Machine
Mikel Laurentson	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:17:00 - [248] Originally by: Mandos2k The only thing that should be changed is to be able to use the tractor beam on all wrecks. Let the Noctis rise to fulfill its true destiny! Stick a sensor booster on a noctis, and troll the gankers in Jita. 2km/sec tractor beams hauling out 80km = hilarity. As to ninja salvagers, just abandon the wrecks. Either they're struggling n00bs who'll appreciate it, or they were hoping for ganks and they'll leave disappointed. Alternatively, go to a busy hub and run L2s in an Tengu. You won't make much money, but anyone scanning you down is going to be incredibly ****ed off when they realise. All that effort, for a pile of frigate wrecks. tl;dr: OP just doesn't troll hard enough.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:18:00 - [249] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Wrong,I addressed everything like I said before and I don't believe you read more than the first page.The first page in which àyou didn't say anything about salvaging and just blathered on about bad game design. You also didn't in any way address the point HI made. For the fith time..reread the thread.And it is bad game design. Originally by: Tippia You also didn't in any way address the point HI made. Who is HI? Originally by: Tippia anything about salvaging. Really?I must have been talking about sunshine and lollipops then..my bad.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:22:00 - [250] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 12:22:45 Originally by: HeIIfire11 For the fith time..reread the thread. Yes, please do. You'll quickly notice that, contrary to what you claimed, you didn't address any of HI's points on page 1. Quote: Really? You were talking about the lack of automatic flagging of wrecks and about scanning wrecks. So yes, really. The closest you got was to say that shooting wrecks was a good way to counter ninja salvagers. 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

Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:25:00 - [251] Edited by: Halcyon Ingenium on 24/04/2011 12:27:23 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Originally by: HeIIfire11 As far as no one wanting to read it wrong again..3,075 people wanted to read it.Cut that in half because of all the frequent posters and its still a lot for one night.So it seems that the topic does interest people. 3,075 people read the thread. Idiot. Who's insulting now? You mad bro? About your stupidity? No. I am never mad that others are inferior. The only thing that bothered me in this whole thread is when you lied about being a PhD and a professor. My friends who do have such positions would never stoop to being insolent and are literally incapable of showing the level of wanton stupidity you have shown. But the nine and possibly more pages of you proving yourself to be a liar have made it better. Edit: Woops, that was Amarraz, thought I had got that wrong, and turns out I did. I am not wrong about you being insolent or wantonly stupid though. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:25:00 - [252] Originally by: Mikel Laurentson Stick a sensor booster on a noctis, and troll the gankers in Jita. 2km/sec tractor beams hauling out 80km = hilarity. Yes this would be pretty funny but you cant tractor beam anyone elses wreck because its theirs..which Tippia says it isn't.Thats the point I'm trying to make. And you couldn't have killed 3 salvagers because the oracle (tippia) says the salvager would always win if attacked.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:27:00 - [253] Originally by: HeIIfire11 you cant tractor beam anyone elses wreck because its theirs..which Tippia says it isn't. The wreck isn't; the can is. You can't move one without moving the other, which means the wreck stays put as well. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:32:00 - [254] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium About your stupidity? No. I am never mad that others are inferior. The only thing that bothered me in this whole thread is when you lied about being a PhD and a professor. My friends who do have such positions would never stoop to being insolent and are literally incapable of showing the level of wanton stupidity you have shown. But the nine and possibly more pages of you proving yourself to be a liar have made it better. Lol you go with your bad self Only one problem..I know reading is hard but if you sound it out and try again you will find that I said no such thing.That was Amarraz. Again..read the flippin thread before trying to look smart.Here I'll quote it for you. Originally by: Amarraz I have a Ph.D. and am a professor, so I'm not especially dumb.
Barghiest	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:33:00 - [255] Edited by: Barghiest on 24/04/2011 12:35:27 Edited by: Barghiest on 24/04/2011 12:34:37 I thought about reading the whole thread, but got to lazy, so I'll just throw this out there. Real-worls perspective on salvage on the high seas; typically, you tow them in and you get some finders fees (which means that some corporation or entity still has rights to the wreck, not the pirates (missions runner) who shot the pilots. (in reference to the whole car bit) How about if the car was leased, the bank owns it. Or the decendents of the family, perhaps the driver had a Will to what is still concidered the dead driver's property. What about in the game; the faction owns the ships and the loot. Your stealing from them. Mission running is in essense taking a side in EvE and doing sactioned piracy from that corporation against proposed war crimianls, pirates, etc. of that given corporation. The corporation grants you the rights to any loot and rewards you for the success (also bounty from concord in some cases - just think of the meaning of the word bounty). If you create a wreck by committing murder (some percieved saction from a corporation you have decided is right in the greater struggle), that property is really, theoretically and sociologically, not yours to begin with. Ninja Salvers are opportunistic thieves, stealing from mercenary style bounty hunters of a mind set who think they are doing the right thing and have the psycological belief that they own what they take by force. Isn't there a mental word for that? Interesting.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:36:00 - [256] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium About your stupidity? No. I am never mad that others are inferior. The only thing that bothered me in this whole thread is when you lied about being a PhD and a professor. My friends who do have such positions would never stoop to being insolent and are literally incapable of showing the level of wanton stupidity you have shown. But the nine and possibly more pages of you proving yourself to be a liar have made it better. Lol you go with your bad self Only one problem..I know reading is hard but if you sound it out and try again you will find that I said no such thing.That was Amarraz. Again..read the flippin thread before trying to look smart.Here I'll quote it for you. Originally by: Amarraz I have a Ph.D. and am a professor, so I'm not especially dumb. Corrected it minutes before you posted. So yawn. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:36:00 - [257] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 12:22:45 Originally by: HeIIfire11 For the fith time..reread the thread. Yes, please do. You'll quickly notice that, contrary to what you claimed, you didn't address any of HI's points on page 1. Quote: Reread my post again I didn't say I addressed his issues on page one.I said I addressed them in this thread. The rest is troll food and you can keep it.Its all been said.And the whole topic is about ninja salvaging so don't start being stupider than you look.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:38:00 - [258] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium About your stupidity? No. I am never mad that others are inferior. The only thing that bothered me in this whole thread is when you lied about being a PhD and a professor. My friends who do have such positions would never stoop to being insolent and are literally incapable of showing the level of wanton stupidity you have shown. But the nine and possibly more pages of you proving yourself to be a liar have made it better. Lol you go with your bad self Only one problem..I know reading is hard but if you sound it out and try again you will find that I said no such thing.That was Amarraz. Again..read the flippin thread before trying to look smart.Here I'll quote it for you. Originally by: Amarraz I have a Ph.D. and am a professor, so I'm not especially dumb. Corrected it minutes before you posted. So yawn. Too bad that I was faster and quoted it.So keep yawning
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:58:00 - [259] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 13:02:26 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Reread my post again I didn't say I addressed his issues on page one.I said I addressed them in this thread. àwhich you haven't done. Your points in the thread up to that point: Empty wrecks should turn blue. You should be able to scan wrecks. Ninjas are griefers. Shoot the wrecks to counter-grief. EVE is a sandbox, not a PvP game. CCP's stated reward structures are not the actual reward structures. Technical limitations are design flaws. Salvaging is risk-free. You can't roam for salvage. Mission-running is risky. Ninjas should be flagged. Mission rewards do not cover the risk of ship loss. Salvaging is really risky for mission runners, but not for salvagers. L4s pay too little. Missions are boring. Riskier activities pay more. Flagging ninjas would create combat opportunities. Ninjas are easy to kill. Dev statements on salvaging are not relevant in a salvaging discussion. HI's points that were somehow addressed by all of that: Ninja salvaging isn't effortless. Fun is subjective. Players don't create wrecks. Players can defend wrecks. CCP's game ù CCP's rules. àehhhmmmà So yeah, you've not really addressed any of those points. The closest match is that you say salvaging is risk-free (but also very risky) and HI saying that salvaging isn't effortless. However, I do see quite a few of those tautologies and insults HI mentioned, in addition to pure inaccuracies, contradictions and ignorance of basic game mechanics. 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
Rad Lalaxen Death Incarnate INC	Posted - 2011.04.24 13:47:00 - [260] Wow, nice summing up, Tippia. I was going to take over that job. Well, here goes anyway. A TL;DR for the thread: Entitled Missioner: WAHHH! Patient Non-idiot: Um, you're wrong logical arguments why Entitled Missioner: BUT WAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!! Patient Non-idiot: You're still wrong, here's why again, in detail, just so you can see my point. Entitled Missioner: FRCKYOUUUUFRCKING EVERYTHING SHOUD BE MYWAY OR ITSWRONG QWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Patient Non-idiot: If you wish to have a logical argument, I will remain patiently not an idiot. Have a nice day. Entitled Missioner: gun barrel in mouth And there was much rejoicing....

Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.24 14:33:00 - [261] Coming late to the party, and ignoring some ad hominem attacks... Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: The salvage isn't yours until you've earned it. You earn it by salvaging the wreck. Creating the wreck means you've earned the bounty & loot that comes with the wreck. Same way you can argue that if i don't take my loot in time it's ok to ninja that too without a flag. Loot isn't mine till i took it into my cargohold. But stealing loot does flag you, while salvaging a wreck doesn't. Running a salvage module on a wreck is as much formality as opening cargo hold of a wreck and pulling the loot into your ship's cargo hold. But no no no, CCP says that this wreck doesn't belong to me, so it must be right. I don't think so. So, umm, there are two ways to look at this. There's the RP question, which is where the sense of entitlement probably comes from. Then there's the meta-game issue. On the latter front, at the end of the day what you think about this game mechanic is fairly unimportant. The only vote that counts is CCP's vote, and CCP likes EVE Online to be a player versus player sandbox kind of game. They make some rules, and we live within them. If they find a rule is broken, they fix it. They have, however, said repeatedly that this rule is not broken, that all game mechanics are working as CCP intends. (If I had to bet, I'd say that someone at CCP harvests these carebear tears and treasures them. ) If you don't like that, Hello Kitty Online is that way... (No, seriously. If this is a deal-breaker for you, the deal is broken, because CCP is clearly not going to change the game mechanic. These complaints have been around for years with no action on their part. One more carebear complaining about the unfairness of it all isn't going to make a difference. 100 more carebears complaining won't, either...) Originally by: Neoexecutor Quote: No. I believe that the creation of the wreck is already compensated for through the bounty and the loot. I also believe you need to argue the case that you somehow need to be paid more. Oh i'm sorry i missed the memo that says "don't you dare to desire that salvage from the wrecks you'll be creating". It goes without saying man, i shoot ships down, put effort into it, and i feel entitled to that salvage as long as i am willing to do the actual salvaging. Problem is that, it's hard to do while i'm busy shooting ships and this dude here salvaging with impunity. Regarding you getting the salvage while you're running a mission: skill up for a marauder. (You're Caldari, so you'll probably want a Golem.) Then you can run tractors and salvagers while you shoot stuff. Just bear in mind that nothing screams "carebear with a sense of entitlement" like a marauder, and they're (intentionally? I wonder...) really easy to probe down. Could be you'll see more ninjas, not less. As for the earnings question that some have raised, I think when my main was doing some ninja salvaging he was earning around 10M isk/hr. He can easily earn several times that running L4 missions. Recently I took another look at this question from the mission runner's point of view, and salvaging has dropped in price to the point that it's no longer worth doing for a mission runner, as it really does decrease isk/hr. To maximize his isk/hr, blitzing missions (pop triggers, kill the boss rat, scoop the mission item if any, and go home) in a gankfit BS with a loltank is now the way to go. In re your final crack regarding opportunity cost, do you understand how it works? If activity A nets you X isk per hour, and activity B nets Y isk per hour, and your goal at the end of the day is to maximize isk per hour, you pick the activity with the highest isk per hour. Simple, no?
Leeluvv The Black Ops	Posted - 2011.04.24 14:40:00 - [262] Posting in another 'I don't agree with CCP's stated game mechanics thread'. I want to fit Artillery ammo into my Pulse lasers and I'm sure I could make lots of opinionated comments on why I believe it should be allowed; however, it is my opinion and conflicts with CCP's stated game mechanics, so anything I post is a waste of my time and a waste of everyone else's time reading or replying. Originally by: Doctor Mabuse A wife is just a T2 GF. They're more expensive and their resists are higher
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 15:38:00 - [263] Originally by: Tippia Your points in the thread up to that point:. One last time I will address all your arguments. Empty wrecks should turn blue. This was not my suggestion but I did agree that it would be one way to solve the confusion. You should be able to scan wrecks. Yes you should since CCP said it's a mini profession where people can roam and salvage wrecks.The salvagers are not roaming but scanning down mission runners to grief them,since according to you and a few others salvage is worth as good as nothing,this must be the goal.Griefing mission runners. Ninjas are griefers. See above. Shoot the wrecks to counter-grief. Smacktalk and a work-around to counter bad game design. EVE is a sandbox, not a PvP game. Again if you're going to quote me,quote me correctly.I didn't say it wasn't a PVP game.I said it was a sandbox which does not limit it to PVP.There's more to eve than just PVP,combat or non combat PVP. CCP's stated reward structures are not the actual reward structures. Stated reward structures are poorly balanced,which is my opinion. Technical limitations are design flaws. Technical limitations which you cant prove exist,until then they remain design flaws in my opinion. Salvaging is risk-free. Salvaging is risk free because the salvager is protected by concord if I choose to try and stop him. You can't roam for salvage. I didn't say that,I said that I don't see scanning down mission runners as roaming for salvage.The intended goal is not the "worthless" salvage but to annoy the mission runner in most cases. Mission-running is risky. More risky than sitting outside a station in a cheap ship and scanning down mission runners to salvage wrecks under the protection of concord.Even should the salvager lose his ship,the costs are minimal compared to what a mission runner risks when he goes into a lvl 4 mission. Ninjas should be flagged. Again my opinion yes.This would split the risk between the two parties even though the cost of whats at stake is far greater for the mission runner. Mission rewards do not cover the risk of ship loss. They don't.Depending on how much time you have what you earn in a week is not enough to replace a ca. 700 million isk t2 battleship.The salvager on the other hand can replace his ship with one mission that he salvaged. Salvaging is really risky for mission runners, but not for salvagers. This you'll have to show me.I said its risk free for the salvager yes,but I never said it was risky for the mission runner. L4s pay too little. In my opinion yes they do.Not every one has all day to run missions.Missions have been nerfed so that you get the crappy ones more often.If I have three or four hours in the day after work(and thats a lot)I can come out with less than 5o million on some days. Missions are boring. They are in my opinion. Riskier activities pay more. Don't they? Flagging ninjas would create combat opportunities. It would.Opportunities that a mission runner wouldn't be forced to take,but opportunities none the less. Ninjas are easy to kill. Depending on the ship and the distance they warp in at yes they can be one shot killed if the mission runner has his skills sorted and his ship fit right. Dev statements on salvaging are not relevant in a salvaging discussion. They don't address the issue with the wrecks being yellow and having the mission runners corp name on it which causes the disagreement.They also don't address why you can't warp to wrecks instead of players when the system is most likely full with blue wrecks that will be wasted in two hours time.If the wreck is no ones then anyone should be able to shoot the empty wreck.The salvager cant,nor can he tractor beam "my" wreck.Empty or not. Continued below...
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 15:42:00 - [264] Continued... This is where you lost me.You say the following are points of his (HI) which were somehow addressed,yet below that you say they were not.I'll sum it up anyway. Originally by: Tippia HI's points that were somehow addressed by all of that: Ninja salvaging isn't effortless. I agree to a cirtain degree.It is a lot effortless than aquiring a 700 million isk mission ship,standing to access lvl 4 missions,looking the mission up online and last but not least,getting the mission done which produces the wrecks in the first place. The salvager can start a new character and in a week or two have all he needs to go salvage it.Compare that to the above and it is effortless yes. Fun is subjective. I agree. Players don't create wrecks. No player..no wreck.Its black and white and simple as that. Players can defend wrecks. How? By shooting them? Thats not defending them,thats destroying them so no one gets them.No we can't defend them. CCP's game ù CCP's rules. I agree.Doesn't mean I have to like them.This forum is to discuss eve and thats what I am doing. Originally by: Tippia However, I do see quite a few of those tautologies and insults HI mentioned, in addition to pure inaccuracies, contradictions and ignorance of basic game mechanics. I agree on the tautologies and insults but disagree on the inaccuracies, contradictions and ignorance of basic game mechanics.Those are your opinion because until you develope the game or work for ccp you have no more facts than I do.Just opinions which you try to beat into peoples head by repeating them over and over in ten different ways.Just like you do in every other thread in which you post.Sometimes you're right,but others you're wrong.But never...do you admit to being wrong or seeing another point of view.If Im lieing find a post and quote it. The tautologies and insults are for those who post without thinking or are limited to their one sided point of view or those who fail to troll properly.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 15:46:00 - [265] Originally by: Leeluvv Posting in another 'I don't agree with CCP's stated game mechanics thread'. I want to fit Artillery ammo into my Pulse lasers and I'm sure I could make lots of opinionated comments on why I believe it should be allowed; however, it is my opinion and conflicts with CCP's stated game mechanics, so anything I post is a waste of my time and a waste of everyone else's time reading or replying. Yet you read it and you did reply.Or maybe you didn't read it..I'm not sure which makes you look worse.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.24 16:21:00 - [266] Edited by: Tippia on 24/04/2011 16:24:52 Originally by: HeIIfire11 You say the following are points of his (HI) which were somehow addressed,yet below that you say they were not. No. You claimed that you had somehow addressed them; the list shows that, in fact, you had not. Thus: lie. And the list goes onà Quote: I agree on the tautologies and insults but disagree on the inaccuracies, contradictions and ignorance of basic game mechanics.Those are your opinion because until you develope the game or work for ccp you have no more facts than I do. It's not so much that I have more fact as that you blatantly contradict facts that both of us are fully aware of. Quote: I didn't say it wasn't a PVP game. Yes you did: In response to me calling it a PvP-centric game, you said ôNo,it's a sandbox.ö Quote: I didn't say that [you can't roam for salvage] Yes you did: ôThe player is scanned and not the wrecks which rules out roaming for wrecks lol.ö Quote: Mission rewards do not cover the risk of ship loss. Yes they do. The risk of ship loss in missions is nil. The income from missions is large. You'd have to lose a ship at least as often as every second storyline mission for them not to cover that minuscule risk, and guess what? No-one loses ships at that rate to such an simple and risk-free activity. If you do, it's not that the missions are risky ù it's that you're not ready for them or running them correctly. This whole claim is trivially disproven by the fact that people are earning tons of money from L4s without going into the red through constant ship loss. Quote: Salvaging is really risky for mission runners, but not for salvagers. You said that by saying that it was unfair that there was no risk for the salvager ù an unfairness I questioned by asking ôwhy should he risk something when the competitor doesn't risk anything either?ö, to which you answered ôGod you're ignorantöà which can only mean that there is some immense risk for the mission runner (otherwise it wouldn't be unfair, nor would asking where the unfairness lies be ignorant). àgranted, when asked, you chose not to specify what this huge risk was. Perhaps because no such risk actually exists? Quote: [Dev statements on salvaging] don't address the issue with the wrecks being yellow and having the mission runners corp name on it which causes the disagreement.They also don't address why you can't warp to wrecks instead of players when the system is most likely full with blue wrecks that will be wasted in two hours time. The problem is that you claim the quotes are worthless and that they don't ôaddress any of the topics mentioned in this thread.ö This is blatantly false. They address the the core topic of the thread ù just not your particular points. 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
liquidsteal	Posted - 2011.04.24 16:36:00 - [267] You know what is sad about a post like this? [and there are many many many]Its the Loosers with a capitol L that have nothing better to do in less than 1 day than flame the op with 9 pages of bull$hit,get a life.
Baaldor Igneus Auctorita Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.24 16:38:00 - [268] Originally by: liquidsteal You know what is sad about a post like this? [and there are many many many]Its the Loosers with a capitol L that have nothing better to do in less than 1 day than flame the op with 9 pages of bull$hit,get a life. NO U!
Mister Rocknrolla	Posted - 2011.04.24 16:41:00 - [269] Quickest fix in my opinion is to remove wreck/loot "ownership" altogether. All wrecks "blue.". That simple fix would cure all supposed issues. The concept that somehow a can or a wreck knows who created is irrational on it's face.
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.24 16:53:00 - [270] Originally by: Mister Rocknrolla Quickest fix in my opinion is to remove wreck/loot "ownership" altogether. All wrecks "blue.". That simple fix would cure all supposed issues. The concept that somehow a can or a wreck knows who created is irrational on it's face. This is how it was originally and carebears cried that people were able to steal their loot with no repercussions. Look what happened when they introduced can ownership and flipping aggression

Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.24 17:18:00 - [271] Originally by: Mister Rocknrolla Quickest fix in my opinion is to remove wreck/loot "ownership" altogether. All wrecks "blue.". That simple fix would cure all supposed issues. The concept that somehow a can or a wreck knows who created is irrational on it's face. This is how it was originally and carebears cried that people were able to steal their loot with no repercussions. Look what happened when they introduced can ownership and flipping aggression
Bienator II	Posted - 2011.04.24 19:43:00 - [272] lets do it this way: - mission(!) wrecks have no ownership - all ships entering the mission are outlaws to the missioners since concord sees them as collateral damage in context of the mission objective
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.24 20:09:00 - [273] Originally by: Bienator II lets do it this way: - mission(!) wrecks have no ownership - all ships entering the mission are outlaws to the missioners since concord sees them as collateral damage in context of the mission objective Personally, I'd prefer it if ninja salvagers were flagged for aggression, just like people stealing from cans. Then mission runners could shoot at them without the wrath of CONCORD descending upon them. Lots of dyed in the wool carebears seem to want that, so it would be humorous (and just) if CCP were to give it to them.
Jon Taggart State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.24 20:29:00 - [274] Rather amusing that the OP basically dropped out of this thread after page 1. Kudos to Tippia for keeping it going though. Should teach Arguing 101 or something. School some of these kids. IB4 - 0/10, troll, yadda yadda. I'm not an alt
Mortania Minmatar Sebiestor Tribe	Posted - 2011.04.24 20:52:00 - [275] Hmm, I was just going to come in and give it a 10/10 for 10 pages. But, apparently I'm too late.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 21:16:00 - [276] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I didn't say it wasn't a PVP game. Yes you did: In response to me calling it a PvP-centric game, you said ôNo,it's a sandbox.ö. Exactly a sandbox..which includes but doesn't limit it to pvp just like I said. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I didn't say that [you can't roam for salvage] Yes you did: ôThe player is scanned and not the wrecks which rules out roaming for wrecks lol.ö. Yea I said the player is scanned and not the wrecks.Why would that rule out anything?Stop putting words in my mouth.You can roam by flying from belt to belt or roam by checking out ded plexes but what we are currently talking about has nothing to do with roaming in my opinion. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Salvaging is really risky for mission runners, but not for salvagers. You said that by saying that it was unfair that there was no risk for the salvager ù an unfairness I questioned by asking ôwhy should he risk something when the competitor doesn't risk anything either?ö, to which you answered ôGod you're ignorantöà which can only mean that there is some immense risk for the mission runner (otherwise it wouldn't be unfair, nor would asking where the unfairness lies be ignorant). It's ignorant because I explained it to you already and you chose not to accept it.What I explained to you once and didn't want to explain again is that the mission runner has enough risk doing the mission,more than the salvager has getting the salvage.So "what it could only mean"is your opinion in that case.And who is it thats getting shot at when the salvager flies in?The mission runner.Hence the riisk.The salvager isn't touched by an npc or by the mission runner because he's protected by concord. Originally by: Tippia àgranted, when asked, you chose not to specify what this huge risk was. Perhaps because no such risk actually exists?) I just did specify.Above. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 [Dev statements on salvaging] don't address the issue with the wrecks being yellow and having the mission runners corp name on it which causes the disagreement.They also don't address why you can't warp to wrecks instead of players when the system is most likely full with blue wrecks that will be wasted in two hours time. The problem is that you claim the quotes are worthless and that they don't ôaddress any of the topics mentioned in this thread.ö This is blatantly false. They address the the core topic of the thread ù just not your particular points. Which again is exactly what I said lol.Nice try turning the words around in my mouth.This is what you always start when you hit a dead end in a thread.You go back and see if you turn what people said to your advantage because you have no arguments left. I'll tell you what,I'm not going to give you that chance this time because unlike you I don't always need to be right.Look at all your lame responses like "why" or "not good enough" or "why not" that you posted just for the sake of answering the post and having the last word on the matter.I'm not even going to start on those which are the same reasons why I called you ignorant.You don't accept what is being said but continue to ask the same questions over and over again.When people then try to explain it to you in different ways you start on how they are contradicting themselves lol.Pointless as I said before.You are not here to discuss the topic but to beat your opinion into someones head by turning everything how you like it.Not one statement on how to make it better but just how its perfect because ccp says so.Even though it's perfectly clear that it's not perfect,nor do you have a clue as to what technical limitations ccp has.You're just defending the line of bull**** they feed the public.That..to me is a fanboy.period.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.24 21:21:00 - [277] Originally by: Jon Taggart Rather amusing that the OP basically dropped out of this thread after page 1. Kudos to Tippia for keeping it going though. Should teach Arguing 101 or something. School some of these kids. IB4 - 0/10, troll, yadda yadda. He didn't keep anything going.It's funny though how many fanboys he has that don't have enough brains to have their own opinion.What was the point of your post?To come in here and show everyone that you can't write more than three lines of random crap?Good job.
Jon Taggart State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.24 22:07:00 - [278] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Jon Taggart Rather amusing that the OP basically dropped out of this thread after page 1. Kudos to Tippia for keeping it going though. Should teach Arguing 101 or something. School some of these kids. IB4 - 0/10, troll, yadda yadda. He didn't keep anything going.It's funny though how many fanboys he has that don't have enough brains to have their own opinion.What was the point of your post?To come in here and show everyone that you can't write more than three lines of random crap?Good job. Hey if you want to attack random people who post I should be afforded the same luxury. I'm not an alt
Katra Novac	Posted - 2011.04.24 22:16:00 - [279] Originally by: Amarraz If they're salvaging wrecks in mission, the wrecks I created, then that should be stealing, I should be allowed to respond. Totally agree, might make it more entertaining too.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.25 03:01:00 - [280] The problem with making wrecks salvaged flaggable is that it kills the salvaging profession (as it is currently not possible to scan wrecks). It however makes the griefer profession (is that even a legit one haha) get a major buff. IF CCP found out a way to group wrecks so that when we scanned a system like Motsu we wouldn't get over 500 signatures, then I would not be strongly opposed to making wrecks owned (though CCP would never do this because their opinion is clear on wreck ownership...).

Emperor Salazar Caldari Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.04.25 03:56:00 - [281] Why is this thread on 10 pages
Adacia Calla Minmatar Firebird Squadron Terra-Incognita	Posted - 2011.04.25 04:26:00 - [282] Don't run missions in Dodixie. Problem solved.
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.25 04:28:00 - [283] Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard The problem with making wrecks salvaged flaggable is that it kills the salvaging profession (as it is currently not possible to scan wrecks). It however makes the griefer profession (is that even a legit one haha) get a major buff. I doubt that it would have much of an effect, tbh. Sure, occasionally a mission runner might take a shot at a "ninja" (which would add a certain je ne sais quoi to that initial warp-in), but for the most part, they'll be just as afraid of someone who's flashy red for salvaging as they are today of someone who's flashy red for stealing from a wreck. After all, if a mission runner takes a shot at a ninja, that ninja might just have a big scary gankship right over there in the next station, waiting for opportunity to knock. And some friends with logistics ships, probably.
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.25 04:34:00 - [284] Originally by: Emperor Salazar Why is this thread on 10 pages This thread pops up all the time and reaches multiple pages every time. Good number of people must be unhappy with ninja salvaging mechanics or it wouldn't.
Renarla	Posted - 2011.04.25 04:44:00 - [285] I like how the carebears don't realize that the salvagers would actually love it if they got what they wanted here.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2011.04.25 06:38:00 - [286] Edited by: ShahFluffers on 25/04/2011 06:41:51 Jesus... gone for 2 days and this is already a 10 page thread. Hellfire... let me make this clear... you are bringing an idea to us. This means you must convince us that the mechanics need to change. If you can't convince us (as you haven't so far) then the idea falls flat and should die (as every other thread like this has). I personally don't see an issue with ninja-salvaging (and the quotes I posted on the first page show CCP doesn't have an issue with it either). And skimming through this thread I think it's safe to say that many others here do not see it as a problem. Just because you CLAIM it's bad game design doesn't make it so. Now convince us. _______________________ "Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
Ziaxi	Posted - 2011.04.25 06:41:00 - [287] Originally by: HeIIfire11 He didn't keep anything going.It's funny though how many fanboys he has that don't have enough brains to have their own opinion.What was the point of your post?To come in here and show everyone that you can't write more than three lines of random crap?Good job. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_(punctuation)#Spaces_between_sentences
Zagdul Gallente Shadowed Command Fatal Ascension	Posted - 2011.04.25 07:10:00 - [288] Originally by: Kranwe Sentai Ok point three. Lets refrase that one. Say you go to the parking lot of the opera house and put sugar in everone's vehicles. Then you drive down the road and wait for the cars to leave the parking lot. You have one thing in mind: Get the cars imobilized so you can kill the driver and passengers so you can get rich on all their fancy jewelry they had on at the opera, and their wallets too. Here come the cars. They start to stall like clock work. You start shooting at the first car, destroying most of the car while you are at it. You manage to kill the people inside so theoretically you could run to the car and take the good stuff. But then the drivers of the other stalled cars start shooting at you so you shoot back, wrecking their cars, killing the people inside, and at the same time you are at risk yourself. But then some other bad guys sneak up and start taking the rims of the cars and other good stuff which they can sell later. Those bad guys don't have anything of value and aren't taking anything from inside of the car, which is what you are after. The car wrecks are just the extra crap that is left over from the shootout. Now if they took your loot from inside the car, that would be stealing from you, since your original plan (plan A) was to get the drivers killed and rob them of their belongings. Your plan B was to eventually clean up the salvage from the cars with your tools. You mentioned the Noctis. It has cool magnates which you can pull the car wrecks up close and salvage the wrecks real quick like. That is an added bonus of the massacre. You need to understand that every action has a reaction. Early bird gets the worm. The quick survive. Etc. If the junk left over really means that much to you, then either salvage as you go along (using a Marauder) or use a second account to fly a Noctis behind you and clean up as you go. Your argument that the salvage is yours simply has no bearing, no reasoning and absolute nonsence. I suppose I could go about it like this: You shoot down an airplane, since it is full of bad guys. The plane doesn't belong to you, it fell down and crashed and a bunch of people heard it and ran up to it collecting souverniers etc. The bad guys inside are dead and you can go take out their gold fillings what not. Anyone else messing with your bad guys is stealing what you wanted. I suppose if you bought the plane just to shoot it down, then the wreck would be yours. Some cars have really nice rims dude. just sayn'
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 10:59:00 - [289] Originally by: ShahFluffers Hellfire... let me make this clear... you are bringing an idea to us. This means you must convince us that the mechanics need to change. If you can't convince us (as you haven't so far) then the idea falls flat and should die (as every other thread like this has). Okay I'll start here. As much as I would love the Idea that convincing you guys would be enough to change something in eve,it sadly wont. If the ideas that are brought to the csm and passed up to ccp don't get acknowledged then neither will mine. And to an extent I agree that this change would most likely be too much work for ccp for the small change that it would bring forth. That said my main goal in this thread was not to change anything but to simply state my opinion. Apart from that the people who would have to vote on my behalf would be the mission runner crowd which for the most part have no interest in pvp what so ever. Because while being a solution to much confusion it would do just that,offer a new opportunity for pvp in high sec while eliminating a risk free way to earn isk. Originally by: ShahFluffers I personally don't see an issue with ninja-salvaging (and the quotes I posted on the first page show CCP doesn't have an issue with it either). And skimming through this thread I think it's safe to say that many others here do not see it as a problem. First off I have to say I disagree that ninja salvaging doesn't cause a problem. So being a topic that has been beaten to death I'm not too sure where to start. I think I'll start with your quotes on page one that everyone values so highly.Lets break them down and see what they actually bring to the table. Keep in mind that I will treat what ccp says as gods word just for the sake of argument. After all it is their game. 1. CCP Mitnal: Originally by: CCP Mitnal "Our policy on this is extremely clear... Salvaging is a mini-profession within EVE and does not constitute stealing." In quote one the link doesn't work so all I have to go on is the quote itself and not what was said in the thread. And the quote says nothing other than that ccp wants it to be a mini profession and doesn't consider salvaging as theft. 2. GM Faolchu : Originally by: GM Faolchu Salvaging other peoples wrecks.... This is an intended game mechanic and is in no way an exploit. People salvaging your missions npcs or the player you just blew up are doing nothing wrong. The players are salvaging what is effectively floating rubbish in space and Concord places no value on this wreckage. Eve is a harsh place you won't always have everything go your way, its a do or die world and people do what they can to get along. If salvaging some wreckage gets them a few more ISK someone will do it, it doesn't matter who just blew it up. In quote two say the same thing basically,that its an intended game mechanic and not an exploit. I for one never said it was an exploit but that it was a bad game design. But I'll get to that later on in this post. The key part of this quote is the bottom half. Originally by: GM Faolchu Eve is a harsh place you won't always have everything go your way, its a do or die world and people do what they can to get along. "Eve is a harsh place....it's a do or die world". What is harsh about scanning down a player who cant shoot you,and salvaging his wrecks while he tanks the mission? Nothing at all. Its free isk. Not only that but it takes nothing to train an alt which can do this,I estimate two weeks if not less. Even faster now that we have the 100% training time bonus on new characters. Continued below...
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:02:00 - [290] 3. Senior GM Ytterbium : Originally by: GM Ytterbium Players are still completely free to salvage other pilot wrecks at will ... and doing so is not considered as an exploit. This one is very very interesting and a major key in my argument. You quoted the part that you wanted to see but not the relevant part. One of the most used arguments are "it's not your wreck and only the loot inside is yours". I am going to kill this argument once and for all. Now again,keep I'm mind that we are taking the word of CCP as the word of god. The part you should have quoted is this... Originally by: GM Ytterbium The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission. Wow..now this brings a whole new light on the subject now doesn't it? This is a senior GM who states that the wreck does in fact belong to the pilot who accepted the mission. This along with the fact that the wreck has my corp name on it,can not be shot or tractor beamed by anyone but myself and my corp clearly proves that the wreck is in fact...mine. He doesn't say It belongs to me as long as my loot is in there,but that it is plain and simple..mine. 4. CCP Prism X : Originally by: CCP Prism X Why is stealing salvage OK? It's not. It shouldn't even be possible to move an item from your cargo-hold / hanger to another persons cargo-hold / hanger without opening a trade window. Before the salvage enters those containers it is not considered your stuff by the server code. Hence it's not stealing. In this quote CCP Prism x took it upon himself to get a little sarcastic. Originally by: CCP Prism X Why is stealing salvage OK? It's not. It shouldn't even be possible to move an item from your cargo-hold / hanger to another persons cargo-hold / hanger without opening a trade window. No ** Sherlock. But he doesn't address any of the key points players bring up in this or any other thread on this subject. All he says is that "It's not stealing" which clearly contradicts what Senior GM Ytterbium stated in the quote above. As far as I know taking anything from a wreck that is mine (which we have proven to be mine) is stealing. So either they need to talk it over what it is exactly that they want,or to fix the game mechanic to reflect this choice. Like change the ownership of the wreck when looted. So until they decide what it is they want,I will call it bad game design. Simple as that. Why? Because the game mechanic doesn't reflect what they say it is intended to be. 5. CCP Incognito : Originally by:** CCP Incognito Had a chat with some designers this evening. Ninja salvaging is intended game play. It was always intended that the wrecks are public, the loot is private. They do not see it as a problem if others salvage your wrecks. This quote confirms my statement from above and again contradicts what Senior GM Ytterbium stated in his post. It confirms my statement that the game mechanic doesn't reflect what the designers intend it to be hence its bad game design as I have said many times in this thread. Bad game design which causes confusion and these threads that keep arising on this subject. He has spoken with the designers and they have concluded that the wreck is not mine but the loot is. Why then after the wreck is looted,does it remain unchanged? I still can't shoot it or tractor beam it as a salvager or someone not in that corp. This again confirms a problem and a contradiction in the game design as far as salvaging goes. Continued below...

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:04:00 - [291] Originally by: ShahFluffers Just because you CLAIM it's bad game design doesn't make it so. No it doesn't but the facts above prove that it is and I hope I helped clear you nicely prepaired quote bible up a bit and maybe even convince you that there is infact a problem at hand that causes this confusion. What it is and how to fix it I will leave up to the developers to solve. In my opinion flagging the salvager at least in missions,would solve the problem while opening new doors to pvp in high sec,and spice up mission running a bit.
Illwill Bill Nifelhem	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:12:00 - [292] I find it to be GOOD game design. Concord, on the other hand, isn't. Originally by: CCP Zymurgist Revenge is a dish best served with auto-cannons.
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:25:00 - [293] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: ShahFluffers Just because you CLAIM it's bad game design doesn't make it so. No it doesn't but the facts above prove that it is and I hope I helped clear you nicely prepaired quote bible up a bit and maybe even convince you that there is infact a problem at hand that causes this confusion. What it is and how to fix it I will leave up to the developers to solve. In my opinion flagging the salvager at least in missions,would solve the problem while opening new doors to pvp in high sec,and spice up mission running a bit. No; you are simply expecting something to change that doesn't need changing.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:29:00 - [294] Originally by: Lady Spank Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: ShahFluffers Just because you CLAIM it's bad game design doesn't make it so. No it doesn't but the facts above prove that it is and I hope I helped clear you nicely prepaired quote bible up a bit and maybe even convince you that there is infact a problem at hand that causes this confusion. What it is and how to fix it I will leave up to the developers to solve. In my opinion flagging the salvager at least in missions,would solve the problem while opening new doors to pvp in high sec,and spice up mission running a bit. No; you are simply expecting something to change that doesn't need changing. If you wouuld have read the two posts above you would have seen that I expect no change but that I was simply stating my opinion. Read before spitting your crap on the forum.Until then you get a nice fat 0/10 from me that you can share with all the other trolls that post after this.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:32:00 - [295] Originally by: HeIIfire11 This one is very very interesting and a major key in my argument. You quoted the part that you wanted to see but not the relevant part. One of the most used arguments are "it's not your wreck and only the loot inside is yours". I am going to kill this argument once and for all [à] Wow..now this brings a whole new light on the subject now doesn't it? No it doesn't. Quote: This along with the fact that the wreck has my corp name on it,can not be shot or tractor beamed by anyone but myself and my corp clearly proves that the wreck is in fact... àno-one's. Where else would the ownership of the loot be communicated except on the wreck? On the can, of course, but the can is contained inside the wreck. Why can't I tractor the wreck? Because it contains a loot can that belongs to someone else. What happens when the wreck is removed? The ownership display is transferred to the loot can. What else happens when the wreck is removed? Nothing. Most notably, no theft flags are issued. Why is salvaging not stealing? Because nothing that you own is removed. Let's repeat that: removing the wreck through salvaging does not remove anything you own ù if it did, there would be aggression flags flaring up all over the place. Removing the wreck removes nothing you own because you do not own the wreck. Quote: But he doesn't address any of the key points players bring up in this or any other thread on this subject. Yes he does, mainly because you didn't quote the full post: Originally by: CCP Prism X If you're surprised as to why the server does not consider it your stuff, it's because it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage, not to further increase the revenue from mission grinding.. I doubt anyone with a perspective thinks we need to high-sec increase mission grinding any further. àand thus your confusion about Ytterbium's quote is explained: the wreck ownership changes came about because the loot ù the stuff contained by the wreck ù is part of the mission reward mechanism, and being able to redirect those rewards by shooting more than the mission owner broke that mechanism. Salvaging is not part of that mechanism. Salvage is not part of the mission rewards. You have to earn the salvage, and doing the mission and "creating the wrecks" is not how you do that ù salvaging is. So the fact remains: the salvage is not yours. Regardless of what semantic spins you want to take on the matter of wreck ownership, salvaging wrecks is never stealing. Nothing of yours is removed (again: removing the wreck ≠ removing your stuff ù the wreck is not yours). You are deprived of nothing. The only thing that is yours is the loot. Therefore, instead of going through aaaaall of that every time, it is far easier to make that distinction: the loot is yours, the wreck is not. The ownership flag on the wreck says who owns the loot can contained by the wreck ù a can that is released if the wreck is removed through salvaging. Originally by: HeIIfire11 What is harsh about scanning down a player who cant shoot you,and salvaging his wrecks while he tanks the mission? You know full well what he's talking about: it's harsh for the mission-runner. He cannot live in a nice peaceful bubble of his own, and will have to live with people coming in and doing things that he might not like. Things like competing for available salvage. Quote: there is infact a problem at hand that causes this confusion Yes, but the solution to that problem is the exact opposite of what all mission runners want: make it crystal clear that they only own the loot by not marking the wreck with their names and by somehow still marking the loot contained inside. So the question is: if you see the confusion as the issue that needs solving, how do you propose to fix that issue? How do you propose to communicate the ownership of the loot without displaying it on the wreck? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:35:00 - [296] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Read before spitting your crap on the forum.Until then you get a nice fat 0/10 from me that you can share with all the other trolls that post after this. This includes you fanboy..to which I will no longer respond. Take your fan club and have fun trolling. Your opinion is no longer worth even reading.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 11:43:00 - [297] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 11:44:52 Oh and (since I managed to squeeze that post through with 0 characters left)à Originally by: HeIIfire11 He has spoken with the designers and they have concluded that the wreck is not mine but the loot is. Why then after the wreck is looted,does it remain unchanged? I still can't shoot it or tractor beam it as a salvager or someone not in that corp. Because the can is still there and it still belongs to you. Yes, since a little while ago, this could be fixed by automatically turning empty wrecks blue, but that option has only been available for a very short timeà Quote: This again confirms a problem and a contradiction in the game design as far as salvaging goes. No it doesn't because the game design as far as salvaging goes was put into place five years ago and (again) the option to turn wrecks blue has only been available for a very short time. Not incorporating or making use of features that would not be in the game for another four years is not bad game design in the salvaging system. If you want to call it anything, say it's a failure to iterate, but that is something completely different. 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
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.25 12:06:00 - [298] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Lady Spank Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: ShahFluffers Just because you CLAIM it's bad game design doesn't make it so. No it doesn't but the facts above prove that it is and I hope I helped clear you nicely prepaired quote bible up a bit and maybe even convince you that there is infact a problem at hand that causes this confusion. What it is and how to fix it I will leave up to the developers to solve. In my opinion flagging the salvager at least in missions,would solve the problem while opening new doors to pvp in high sec,and spice up mission running a bit. No; you are simply expecting something to change that doesn't need changing. If you wouuld have read the two posts above you would have seen that I expect no change but that I was simply stating my opinion. Read before spitting your crap on the forum.Until then you get a nice fat 0/10 from me that you can share with all the other trolls that post after this. You contradict yourself so much it's hard to keep up with whatever brainfart you are currently spewing.
Ania Hyperthron	Posted - 2011.04.25 12:09:00 - [299] Ninja salvaging is wrong and should be redesigned. You pop a target. And then wrecks is yours. There is 2 ways to make it good. Totally remove ownership, or give PROPER ownership of a wreck. Why FFS loot inside is yours and salvage not ?. Anyway what is the diffrence between salvage and loot, on both you have to spent some time and skill so why WE missioners are giving our JOB just like that for free to ninja salvager.Someone said "becuase its a floating garbage" ...NO ITS NOT its my JOB my kill and WRECK should be MINE or should be accesible for everyone. Dont you get it ?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 12:09:00 - [300] Oh, and I forgot this one. Quote: Exactly a sandbox..which includes but doesn't limit it to pvp just like I said. Except that, as a sandbox, there is always PvP unless it's a limited sandbox. EVE doesn't have those limits. Sandbox means you are given a set of tools and are then free to do what you like. This also means that, without that no-PvP limit, people are also allowed to do what they likeà to you. This automatically turns the sandbox into a full-PvP game. Everything you do is PvP in one way or another. Calling a game "not a PvP game", when everything you do in it is PvP, is somewhat disingenuousà Quote: Yea I said the player is scanned and not the wrecks.Why would that rule out anything? I don't know. You are the ones who said it rules out roaming for wrecks. Quote: Stop putting words in my mouth. I'm not. That is a copy-paste quote. Quote: You can roam by flying from belt to belt or roam by checking out ded plexes but what we are currently talking about has nothing to do with roaming in my opinion. Scanning down likely locations for wrecks is not roaming? Riiiightà Quote: What I explained to you once and didn't want to explain again is that the mission runner has enough risk doing the mission,more than the salvager has getting the salvage. In other words, there is zero risk for the mission runner in getting the salvage, just like for the ninja. Again: the (non)risks inherent in mission running is paid for by the mission rewards. Salvage is not part of those rewards. Quote: Which again is exactly what I said lol No, what you originally said was ôYour "infoblock of pertinent dev quotes" is worthless because it doesn't address any of the topics mentioned in this thread.ö, which is false. Quote: Look at all your lame responses like "why" or "not good enough" or "why not" that you posted Asking you to clarify your position ù asking you to explain why you give a particular unqualified answer (or dismiss something out of hand) is not really lame. It's about making you argue your case. If you think that arguing your case is "lame", then we are getting close to understanding why your ideas have such problems gaining tractionà Quote: You don't accept what is being said but continue to ask the same questions over and over again. àbecause you don't qualify your statements or argue for your proposals. If you don't, that "why" is what you get. 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

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 12:18:00 - [301] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 12:19:26 Originally by: Ania Hyperthron You pop a target. And then wrecks is yours. There is 2 ways to make it good. Totally remove ownership, or give PROPER ownership of a wreck. àand of course, the third way: communicate the ownership properly ù you own the loot, not the wreck. So far, no-one has come up with a good suggestion for how to do this. (Well, except for the fourth way of course, which is what we have now: ownership of the loot is first displayed on the wreck and is then transferred to the can when the wreck is removed. Personally, I think it works well enough, but apparently some find it confusingà) The problem with your two ways is that they change the reward structures for killing ships. Totally removing ownership reduces the rewards; complete ownership increases them. Both of those would require arguments for why you need to either nerf or buff NPC-killing. Quote: Why FFS loot inside is yours and salvage not ? Because the loot is your reward for killing the ship whereas the salvage is not ù the salvage is the reward for salvaging the wreck. Quote: Anyway what is the diffrence between salvage and loot, on both you have to spent some time and skill so why WE missioners are giving our JOB just like that for free to ninja salvager. The difference is that they're not the same activity: you don't need to be a salvager to be a mission runner and you don't need to be a mission runner to be a salvager. They have completely different skill sets. They utilise completely different sets of ships and equipment. And they give completely different sets of rewards. The problem here is that you think both are the same just because you're doing both at once. That's a bit like saying that ship manufacturing and mission-running is the same because you can do both at once, or like saying that trade and piracy is the same becauseà wait, that one's a bad example. Quote: Someone said "becuase its a floating garbage" ...NO ITS NOT its my JOB my kill and WRECK should be MINE or should be accesible for everyone. Dont you get it ? Yes, it's your job to kill. For that job you get bounties and the spoils (loot). But as a killer, it is not your job to clean up the mess ù that's the job of salvagers. If you want to do that job as well you have to compete with other salvagers, because that's part of the salvaging business. 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
Uncle Alf	Posted - 2011.04.25 12:26:00 - [302] Edited by: Uncle Alf on 25/04/2011 12:27:34 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Read before spitting your crap on the forum.Until then you get a nice fat 0/10 from me that you can share with all the other trolls that post after this. ** Off back to wow you whiney little ***, your opinion never was worth reading you stupid bastard.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 13:06:00 - [303] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 13:06:44 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 13:06:26 Originally by: Uncle Alf Edited by: Uncle Alf on 25/04/2011 12:27:34 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Read before spitting your crap on the forum.Until then you get a nice fat 0/10 from me that you can share with all the other trolls that post after this. ** Off back to wow you whiney little ***, your opinion never was worth reading you stupid bastard. U mad bro? If so...good! Troll on. Troll tears = best tears.
Shawnm339	Posted - 2011.04.25 13:16:00 - [304] it is the way it is and tbh it works perfect stop yer whining....some people make a living off others peoples trash its the way of the world
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 13:45:00 - [305] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 13:46:29 Originally by: Shawnm339 it is the way it is and tbh it works perfect stop yer whining....some people make a living off others peoples trash its the way of the world Sure is the way of the world but then the wreck should be labled as such..not yellow to others with my corp name on it. And no one would care if you tractor beam trash would they? Go ahead and try then tell me what you got. Tippia should go try this as well and since he's so good at quoting things maybe he can share with us what message the game gives him lol.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 13:50:00 - [306] Originally by: HeIIfire11 And no one would care if you tractor beam trash would they? Go ahead and try then tell me what you got. Tippia should go try this as well I have already answered this. 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
Ingvar Angst Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United	Posted - 2011.04.25 13:50:00 - [307] Salvaging is a skill which requires training. Wrecks aren't salvage until salvaged. There are no salvage rights... like the rules of the, first come first served. It's really that simple. A wreck is just a wreck, not salvage. You may have earned the rights to the cargo by making the kill, but you've done nothing to earn the newly created wreck.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:35:00 - [308] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 14:38:35 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 And no one would care if you tractor beam trash would they? Go ahead and try then tell me what you got. Tippia should go try this as well I have already answered this. Yet you didn't quote where. Fear not..I will help you since you seem to have fallen on your mouth. "The small tractor beam cannot engage a tractor beam on that object as it is not owned by you,a fellow fleet member or anothermember of a player corp you belong to". Means that the wreck belongs to the killer and his corp.Or it doesn't and its just unfinished content/bad game design which causes confusion like I have already said. But go ahead and keep denying it..you're good at it. Hell you can sell someone a tree in the middle of the woods I'll give you that. But you don't convince me,only your weak minded fanclub will fall for your troll attempt.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:36:00 - [309] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 14:38:41 Originally by: HeIIfire11 "The small tractor beam cannot engage a tractor beam on that object as it is not owned by you,a fellow fleet member or anothermember of a player corp you belong to". Yes, because you're trying to tractor an object (a loot can) that doesn't belong to you. So the question remains: if you see the confusion as the issue that needs solving, how do you propose to fix that issue? How do you propose to communicate the ownership of the loot without displaying it on the wreck? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:40:00 - [310] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 14:43:53 Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 14:38:41 Originally by: HeIIfire11 "The small tractor beam cannot engage a tractor beam on that object as it is not owned by you,a fellow fleet member or anothermember of a player corp you belong to". Yes, because you're trying to tractor an object (a loot can) that doesn't belong to you. So the question remains: if you see the confusion as the issue that needs solving, how do you propose to fix that issue? How do you propose to communicate the ownership of the loot without displaying it on the wreck? No,it was an empty wreck. If there is a make pretend can in there or not is up to everyone to decide for themselves.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:43:00 - [311] Originally by: HeIIfire11 No,it was an empty wreck. àwhich still contains a can that doesn't belong to you. So the question remains: if you see the confusion as the issue that needs solving, how do you propose to fix that issue? How do you propose to communicate the ownership of the loot without displaying it on the wreck? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:45:00 - [312] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 No,it was an empty wreck. àwhich still contains a can that doesn't belong to you. So the question remains: if you see the confusion as the issue that needs solving, how do you propose to fix that issue? How do you propose to communicate the ownership of the loot without displaying it on the wreck? Either turn the wreck blue when looted or flag the salvager like I said one hundred times in this thread already.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:47:00 - [313] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Either turn the wreck blue That works for empty wrecks. How do you handle it with non-empty ones? Quote: flag the salvager like I said one hundred times in this thread already. Why should mission-runners have their income increased and have stuff given to them without any additional effort? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:54:00 - [314] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 14:55:25 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Either turn the wreck blue That works for empty wrecks. How do you handle it with non-empty ones? I don't even know why I continue arguing with you but here it goes. There is already a mechanic that turnes an empty wreck dark and empty. Can't be too hard to turn it blue when looted and change the status. Unlooted wreck remains the same. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 flag the salvager like I said one hundred times in this thread already. Why should mission-runners have their income increased and have stuff given to them without any additional effort? 0/10 Been there...done that
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 14:59:00 - [315] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 15:02:08 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Unlooted wreck remains the same. àand you don't think that the (supposed) confusion will remain exactly the same then, or even increase? After all, the wreck still has a name on it, even though it's free for all. It will just keep the same confusion we have now and add the confused notion that while there's loot left, the wreck is theirs and that anyone salvaging it is "stealing". So that doesn't really solve the confusion because the source of the confusion remains, as does the question: how do you handle non-empty wrecks to remove the confusion? Quote: Been there...done that You never answered it, though. So why should mission-runners have their income increased and have stuff given to them without any additional effort? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:05:00 - [316] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Unlooted wreck remains the same. àand you don't think that the (supposed) confusion will remain exactly the same then, or even increase? After all, the wreck still has a name on it, even though it's free for all. It will just keep the same confusion we have now and add the confused notion that while there's loot left, the wreck is theirs and that anyone salvaging it is "stealing". So that doesn't really solve the confusion because the source of the confusion remains. Change the name or make yellow wrecks so that you cant salvage them unless you belong to the corp. That would justify the statement that its garbage. Garbage to me is stuff people trow away. Not stuff I plan to use but havn't gotten to it yet. In any case I'm not a dev and don't know the code anymore than you do. Let them figure it out. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Been there...done that You never answered it, though. So why should mission-runners have their income increased and have stuff given to them without any additional effort? Why not?
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:09:00 - [317] Is this thread still alive? This thread: proof that arguing on the internets is stupid. p.s. I support the salvaging mechanics just the way they are, for what it's worth. Although I'm not entirely against changing it a bit so that there's more risk for the ninja salvager's. ~Gnosis~
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:10:00 - [318] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 15:13:52 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Change the name or make yellow wrecks so that you cant salvage them unless you belong to the corp. Could you elaborate on the name-changing? What do you mean? As for making them non-salvageable, that just turns them into an even stronger version of owned objects, which means we're back to the question of why mission-runners should have their income increased. Quote: Garbage to me is stuff people trow away. Not stuff I plan to use but havn't gotten to it yet. The problem is that salvage is something that salvagers collect in competition with other salvagers. By making it owned (or even worse, unretrievable by competitors), you've removed that competitive element. If you haven't gotten to it yet, then maybe you should get on with it right nowà it's a race to get it first, after all. Quote: Why not? àis not a reason why and is trivially dismissed by "Because there's no reason for it." 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:14:00 - [319] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 15:14:30 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Why not? àis not a reason why and is trivially dismissed by "Because there's no reason for it." Why do they do anything in eve? Mission running isn't the cream of the crop. It's boring and time consuming and it isn't by far the best way to earn is in eve so why not let them earn the extra 5-10 million extra change? It wont make or break anything.Thats not the topic of this thread anyway nor is it that much isk to even use as a point in this discussion. Question remains..why not?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:17:00 - [320] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Question remains..why not? Because there's no reason for it. 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

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:25:00 - [321] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Question remains..why not? Because there's no reason for it. It's a game there's no reason for a lot of things. This is what I mean..you're full of **** and I really have better things to do than to entertain some Arrogant, egotistical and delusional know it all on some forum. Sorry if you're offended but this is my opinion. Either that or you're a troll in which case for this session I'll give you a 1/10. I will no longer discuss this with you because you know it all better anyways no matter what evidence is brought to the table. I'll give you a tip though. CCP is known for sloppy unfinished content and it's ok because it's not an easy game to stay on top of.For that I give them credit. But to defend their mistakes no matter what just makes you look stupid.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:31:00 - [322] Originally by: HeIIfire11 It's a game there's no reason for a lot of things. Maybe. But you're the one who wants to see a change to the game, so you're the one who has to provide a reason for why it should change. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:46:00 - [323] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 It's a game there's no reason for a lot of things. Maybe. But you're the one who wants to see a change to the game, so you're the one who has to provide a reason for why it should change. I never said I want to change a thing. It's perfectly clear that even if 10,000 people agreed with me on this matter it wouldn't change. I was stating my opinion and presented evidence that what they intend salvaging to be and what it is are two different things.You choose not to accept anyof it and counter with questions having nothing to do with the matter at hand. Like I said before,I can call you a lot of things but not stupid.Don't act it. I can't change the game because I don't work for CCP,but what I can change is that the character called Tippia never sees the outside of a station again.And that with minimal effort.Don't tempt me.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:47:00 - [324] Edited by: Corina''s Bodyguard on 25/04/2011 15:47:55 CCP PrismX beats any GM. If there is a contradiction of terms, GM loses. Also, CCP has been clear, the salvage which does not exist until it is in someone's cargo hold is not owned by anyone (until such time that it comes into existence of course). You can't own what doesn't exist. CCP has also been clear, that owning the wreck (or for those knowledgeable of server mechanics, the loot can inside the wreck) does not effect salvage, as Concord doesn't care about what they consider garbage. Just like there is no law about taking something out of a dumpster (at least where I live), there is no law against salvaging from space junk. Quote: I can't change the game because I don't work for CCP,but what I can change is that the character called Tippia never sees the outside of a station again.And that with minimal effort.Don't tempt me. Lamest threat ever.
Dirael Papier	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:47:00 - [325] Originally by: Tippia So that doesn't really solve the confusion because the source of the confusion remains, as does the question: how do you handle non-empty wrecks to remove the confusion? Always send out a jetcan for loot. So wrecks are always empty, if there's loot it'll be in a can by the wreck. I have no idea if this would get rid of confusion for people though since wrecks would still need to be color-coded for tractor rights (Unless they changed tractor rights so that tractor rights for wrecks are affected the same for everyone regardless of who made the wreck, in which case wrecks could all be blue), but at least the labeling could be different. I'm still pretty new though and have absolutely 0 experience ninja-salvaging, so I don't really know the extent to which this would muck things up for people.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:50:00 - [326] Originally by: Dirael Papier Originally by: Tippia So that doesn't really solve the confusion because the source of the confusion remains, as does the question: how do you handle non-empty wrecks to remove the confusion? Always send out a jetcan for loot. So wrecks are always empty, if there's loot it'll be in a can by the wreck. I have no idea if this would get rid of confusion for people though since wrecks would still need to be color-coded for tractor rights (Unless they changed tractor rights so that tractor rights for wrecks are affected the same for everyone regardless of who made the wreck, in which case wrecks could all be blue), but at least the labeling could be different. I'm still pretty new though and have absolutely 0 experience ninja-salvaging, so I don't really know the extent to which this would muck things up for people. New or not this is a really good idea to be honest.
Komen Gallente The Night Crew	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:51:00 - [327] The salvaging rules (that no-one 'owns' salvage, so that anyone may salvage without a thief flag) are right on par with what Eve is supposed to be at a basic level - a cold, brutal, me-first world. I don't ninja, and never have, but I am fully in support of the rules regarding this activity remaining as-is. Hell, I even had a ninja warp into a mission I was in. I just smiled, abandoned all nearby wrecks, and invited him to help himself, while I moved on to the next mission. I think he was a bit taken a-back, as he was probably more used to steaming heaps of nerd rage that someone had the audacity to scan them down and salvage the wrecks they caused. Seriously it's a bunch of pixels, and chill out, and rejoice that there's a game out there that doesn't hold your hand. Also remember that EVEN THE STUFF YOU OWN, you don't own - it all belongs to our (mostly) benevolent overlords.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:52:00 - [328] Originally by: HeIIfire11 I can't change the game because I don't work for CCP,but what I can change is that the character called Tippia never sees the outside of a station again.And that with minimal effort.Don't tempt me. I was actually enjoying the banter and found it quite funny at times. But that was really lame, still funny, but lame all the same. 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.
Ingvar Angst Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:54:00 - [329] Someone needs to create an alt named William of Ockham just to have him come in here and /facepalm this thread.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:55:00 - [330] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: HeIIfire11 I can't change the game because I don't work for CCP,but what I can change is that the character called Tippia never sees the outside of a station again.And that with minimal effort.Don't tempt me. I was actually enjoying the banter and found it quite funny at times. But that was really lame, still funny, but lame all the same. Lame or not he gets on my nerves.You can't win with him and it's pointless to discuss anything with him. It's his way or none and I can't believe after all the fuss made over this topic that he can say there's nothing wrong.

Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.25 15:57:00 - [331] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Lame or not he gets on my nerves.You can't win with him and it's pointless to discuss anything with him. It's his way or none and I can't believe after all the fuss made over this topic that he can say there's nothing wrong. He may get on your nerves, but he's logical and correct with all of his conclusions. Maybe your too emotionally involved in this topic now and need to step back for a time. Just an idea. 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.
PuncherDavis	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:00:00 - [332] Wow what a read. Starting to wonder if Tippia and Hell are married cause man.. talk about going back and forth over a topic. Here ill sum it up after many many pages. Ccp thinks that the Tougher it is in eve the more it is in line with the harsh mentality they want to potray in the game. So in essence CCP likes to promote your the ability to be an ASS whenever you can be. This being said CCP acts like an ASS at times even when they know that in concept and logic you the player may be correct. They feel they should act the same way toward the common body of players in order to maintain the order of the Eve universe. This being to promote PVP in any form possible thus keeping in line with a universe of chaos and control constantly at each other in all things. Also all that being said I dont think they have figured out yet.. The more times you flash red in front of an angry bull. ( or players in this case) The more ****ed people get about the illogical game play or perceived wrongs that do take place. That and many broken things in Eve which are shiny at first but dull fast add even more to the frustration of your common eve player. As far as this topic goes well. (1) If you have the capability loot as you go. EG: Second account that comes in while first has aggro and tractors cans in and loots as you go. (2) If you don't care about the loot then set it to all blue so anybody can have it. (3) Blow up the cans as the Ninja gets to them and watch the tears? (4) Believe it or not some Ninja folk do have a sense of honor. Make a deal and get them involved in a mission for a cut. Overall I do not think CCP will ever change this as it goes hand in hand with the ( LETS give the player the ability to add chaos to the game) mentality. I do missions as well but i choose areas that have low population and thus a lower chance of Ninja folks to show up and never have an issue. Perhaps you may want to try the same.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:06:00 - [333] Originally by: PuncherDavis Wow what a read. Starting to wonder if Tippia and Hell are married cause man.. talk about going back and forth over a topic. Here ill sum it up after many many pages. Ccp thinks that the Tougher it is in eve the more it is in line with the harsh mentality they want to potray in the game. So in essence CCP likes to promote your the ability to be an ASS whenever you can be. This being said CCP acts like an ASS at times even when they know that in concept and logic you the player may be correct. They feel they should act the same way toward the common body of players in order to maintain the order of the Eve universe. This being to promote PVP in any form possible thus keeping in line with a universe of chaos and control constantly at each other in all things. Also all that being said I dont think they have figured out yet.. The more times you flash red in front of an angry bull. ( or players in this case) The more ****ed people get about the illogical game play or perceived wrongs that do take place. That and many broken things in Eve which are shiny at first but dull fast add even more to the frustration of your common eve player. As far as this topic goes well. (1) If you have the capability loot as you go. EG: Second account that comes in while first has aggro and tractors cans in and loots as you go. (2) If you don't care about the loot then set it to all blue so anybody can have it. (3) Blow up the cans as the Ninja gets to them and watch the tears? (4) Believe it or not some Ninja folk do have a sense of honor. Make a deal and get them involved in a mission for a cut. Overall I do not think CCP will ever change this as it goes hand in hand with the ( LETS give the player the ability to add chaos to the game) mentality. I do missions as well but i choose areas that have low population and thus a lower chance of Ninja folks to show up and never have an issue. Perhaps you may want to try the same. I'm not after the salvage as I leave it where it lands lol. I jumped into this because I agree with the op,it is flawed and causes confusion. I agree with you that CP likes to cause chaos and I think flagging salvagers would do just that. It should be in their interest. As far as being married to him..I would have thrown his ass out the window a long time ago
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:09:00 - [334] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 16:09:41 Originally by: Mag's He may get on your nerves, but he's logical and correct with all of his conclusions. logical and correct with some of his conclusions. He's not dumb by far and I keep trying to figure out if he's just hard headed as a bull or a troll. Still not sure to be honest.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:11:00 - [335] Originally by: HeIIfire11 I never said I want to change a thing. Yes you did. Most notablyà Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Tippia What do you want changed? I want the salvager flagged.I want him to risk losing his ship just like the mission runner does As it happens, what this change boils down to is an increase in mission-runner income, which means you want to change that as well. Also, you keep banging on about this supposed bad game design. One would hope that you'd want to see it fixedà Quote: I was stating my opinion and presented evidence that what they intend salvaging to be and what it is are two different things. Your evidence is lacking. They intended salvage to be a mini-profession where you find wrecks and extract salvage from them. That's what it is. It could certainly be buffed to provide easier access to those wrecks, but at the same time, you're arguing that the opposite should happen. Quote: Like I said before,I can call you a lot of things but not stupid. You've called me stupid plenty of time in this thread. Ad hominems only hurt your argument though. so you're free to keep doing it. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Lame or not he gets on my nerves. Yes. Do you want to know why? Because I push you to actually elaborate on your thoughts, state your case, present arguments for your case, explain what it is you want and why you want it, and explain why it would be beneficial to do it that way. I'm dragging you, kicking and screaming, along the process of creating a fully featured, presentable suggestion for the betterment of the game. It requires a lot of thought and is a tough process, but in the end, it actually generates results. This is a good thing. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:16:00 - [336] Originally by: Tippia I'm dragging you, kicking and screaming, along the process of creating a fully featured, presentable suggestion for the betterment of the game. It requires a lot of thought and is a tough process, but in the end, it actually generates results. This is a good thing. You're dragging me kicking and screaming until I say the all mighty ccp is perfect and until I turn into a fanboy like you. NO thanks you do that job very well. News flash!! Eve is far from perfect and this is one of those things that cause that.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:17:00 - [337] Originally by: HeIIfire11 News flash!! Eve is far from perfect and this is one of those things that cause that. So let's figure out a good way of fixing that thenà 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:20:00 - [338] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 News flash!! Eve is far from perfect and this is one of those things that cause that. So let's figure out a good way of fixing that thenà This is what I have been trying from the start and have since then proposed a number of fixes all of which you have declined. I am also open to any discussion having to do with this,not that it matters but it's not like I've been saying it's my way or no way.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:21:00 - [339] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 16:22:54 Originally by: HeIIfire11 This is what I have been trying from the start and have since then proposed a number of fixes all of which you have declined. àbecause you haven't considered the consequences and/or failed to argue why they are good (or needed). You are also arguing for two diametrically opposed things at once. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:26:00 - [340] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 16:27:00 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 This is what I have been trying from the start and have since then proposed a number of fixes all of which you have declined. àbecause you haven't considered the consequences and/or argued why they are good. You are also arguing for two diametrically opposed things at once. Yes because of the "lvl 4 mission buff" if you can even call it that because I think everyone agrees that salvage is worth as good as nothing now a days. So this shouldn't be the thing to put a halt to the discussion of this topic. I know of two missions or so where the salvage is worth it and earns you like 10 million if you're lucky and get the right parts.Other than that is more like 5 million and in most cases even less to none.So where is the huge buff?

Ingvar Angst Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:27:00 - [341] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 News flash!! Eve is far from perfect and this is one of those things that cause that. So let's figure out a good way of fixing that thenà This is what I have been trying from the start and have since then proposed a number of fixes all of which you have declined. I am also open to any discussion having to do with this,not that it matters but it's not like I've been saying it's my way or no way. You ever think that Eve isn't "perfect" by design? Or perhaps, in the eyes of many, this is a "perfect" system already that opens up the opportunity for a certain niche of players to utilize to generate extra isk in their own way? There are those that ninja salvage for isk, there are those that do it for a chance at PvP. Both are fully valid aspects of the game. There's no need to remove these aspects of play because you find it unsettling.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:30:00 - [342] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 16:31:05 Originally by: Ingvar Angst Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 News flash!! Eve is far from perfect and this is one of those things that cause that. So let's figure out a good way of fixing that thenà This is what I have been trying from the start and have since then proposed a number of fixes all of which you have declined. I am also open to any discussion having to do with this,not that it matters but it's not like I've been saying it's my way or no way. You ever think that Eve isn't "perfect" by design? Or perhaps, in the eyes of many, this is a "perfect" system already that opens up the opportunity for a certain niche of players to utilize to generate extra isk in their own way? There are those that ninja salvage for isk, there are those that do it for a chance at PvP. Both are fully valid aspects of the game. There's no need to remove these aspects of play because you find it unsettling. And just what would flagging the salvager change? The mission runner would still have the choice to shoot or not. And the salvager would still have the choice to salvage a mission or a ded space complex where it wont get him aggro. Game remains the same with new found opportunity to pvp for those salvagers who want it. Edit: Okay the very minor mission buff would change too but there are other ways to balance that out if it's such a big deal.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:40:00 - [343] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 16:42:00 Originally by: HeIIfire11 everyone agrees that salvage is worth as good as nothing now a days. So this shouldn't be the thing to put a halt to the discussion of this topic. Maybe, but it still represents an increase in mission rewards. Why is that needed? It also completely gut-shots an entire (mini)profession. Why is that needed (or, indeed, even remotely a good thing)? Also, claiming that salvage isn't worth much raises the question of, if it isn't, why are mission-runners so adamant that it absolutely must be theirs? Quote: where is the huge buff? It doesn't have to be all that huge, but it's there none the less. Moreover, it goes against the pattern of what you consider a series of (effectively) nerfs ù does it really make sense to counter-act those (and sacrificing a completely different profession in the process)? Quote: And just what would flagging the salvager change? As mentioned, it would increase mission rewards and kill the salvaging profession. It would also most likely create a lot more dead mission-runners. It also wouldn't really fix what you see as design flaws in the salvaging profession ù the reason you apparently got into this thread to begin with. To fix that, you'd have to make wrecks scannable, whether in missions or not; you'd have to auto-blue empty wrecks; and you'd have to somehow mark loot separately from the wreck (the idea of dropping a separate loot cans creates a lot more junk for the server to track, so I doubt they'll like that 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
Ingvar Angst Amarr Omni Industrial Coalition Talocan United	Posted - 2011.04.25 16:48:00 - [344] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 25/04/2011 16:31:05 And just what would flagging the salvager change? The mission runner would still have the choice to shoot or not. And the salvager would still have the choice to salvage a mission or a ded space complex where it wont get him aggro. Game remains the same with new found opportunity to pvp for those salvagers who want it. Edit: Okay the very minor mission buff would change too but there are other ways to balance that out if it's such a big deal. Um... well hell, you got me there. I was thinking of the other ideas that would prevent anyone from being able to salvage. Flagging... I like that idea with the caveat that you only get flagged if the wreck has cargo in it (the appearance of stealing). This does add something to the game in a good way. It allows the potential for the one that had a wreck salvaged out from under them to be the one initiating combat.
Emperor Salazar Caldari Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.04.25 17:08:00 - [345] I have a solution. No Concord in mission pockets. There, now you can shoot the ninja salvagers.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 17:25:00 - [346] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 16:42:00 Originally by: HeIIfire11 everyone agrees that salvage is worth as good as nothing now a days. So this shouldn't be the thing to put a halt to the discussion of this topic. Maybe, but it still represents an increase in mission rewards. Why is that needed? It also completely gut-shots an entire (mini)profession. Why is that needed (or, indeed, even remotely a good thing)? It isn't needed but nor does it gut-shot an entire profession. The mission runner would still be faced with the problem if he should shoot or not. There's no way of telling if that salvager has an alt or fleet waiting for just that. It would however give those who want to risk it a shot. Originally by: Tippia Also, claiming that salvage isn't worth much raises the question of, if it isn't, why are mission-runners so adamant that it absolutely must be theirs? I don't know. Maybe because they belong to the "lvl 4 earns too little" crowd. I am not one of those mission runners. I belong to the bunch that doesn't like the grief attempt and would like to blast the salvager and take my chances. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 where is the huge buff? It doesn't have to be all that huge, but it's there none the less. Moreover, it goes against the pattern of what you consider a series of (effectively) nerfs ù does it really make sense to counter-act those (and sacrificing a completely different profession in the process)? This belongs to that other topic as far as agreeing with lvl 4 being nerfed.We would have to solve that first in order for me to give you that answer. And you wouldn't be sacrificing another profession because like i said the risk of being setup wouldn't change. So the salvagers would be able to continue salvaging with a slightly higher risk. As it stands now the salvager has as good as no risk. The only risk he has is getting aggro if the missioner warps out. That isn't much because in a destroyer you can be out in a few seconds. And even if he loses the ship it costs nothing and is worth no more than one mission salvaged.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 17:39:00 - [347] Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 17:39:52 Originally by: HeIIfire11 It isn't needed but nor does it gut-shot an entire profession. Well if it's not neededà And I do believe it nukes the salvager profession ù it already has its competitive component built in. The problem is rather that mission-runners try to engage in that competition in sub-optimal ships and fits (hence the "how am I supposed to beat a small frigate?" complaint) because they try to combine it with mission-running. Quote: It would however give those who want to risk it a shot. But that would also mean drastically changing the equipment and skill requirements for the salvagers. If mission-runners want to "risk it", they can already do so by going to lowsec. Or they can do it by flying more salvaging-friendly ships (but that would rather increase the risk of the mission than of the salvaging bit). Quote: I belong to the bunch that doesn't like the grief attempt and would like to blast the salvager and take my chances. Salvaging isn't griefing, though. It's a legitimate profession, and you might as well argue that the salvagers should be given the choice to attack the mission runners because they are the griefers trying to "steal" the salvager's rewards. Quote: And you wouldn't be sacrificing another profession because like i said the risk of being setup wouldn't change. Giving the other party a right to kill you ù a right they currently do not have ù doesn't change the risk?! Eeehhhrrmmà right. I'm going to have to vehemently disagree with that one. Quote: So the salvagers would be able to continue salvaging with a slightly higher risk. As it stands now the salvager has as good as no risk. He has the same risk as his competition: he risks having wasted the time to find those wrecks by being beaten to the punch. Why does the risk have to be higher than that, especially considering how small the rewards are? Compare this to the (almost equally) negligible risks of mission-running and the much higher rewards that activity hasà 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
Johnathan Walker Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.25 18:10:00 - [348] A few solutions: A) Declare war and blow them up B) Hire salvage buddies, whether corpmates, real life friends, or one of the groups advertising said services BII) Form fleet, enable loot logging BIII) Split the salvage received C) Salvage it yourself with an alternate character D) Thank the person salvaging, since if there is loot it will drop a nice little container. Now you know what has loot in it, in case you didn't want to just look at the wreck icons themselves to start with. :P Warmly, "The Bear" JW
Kyra Felann Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.04.25 18:48:00 - [349] Originally by: Lady Spank I can't be alone in being utterly indifferent to salvaging wrecks can I. Whenever I used to mission run I'd pretty much just blitz missions and leave the loot/wrecks behind. I only once had a ninja trying to goad me about stealing my stuffs and when I said feel free to take what you like apparently that was me crying sweet sweet tears. Heh. Yup, on the rare occasion when someone shows up in my mission, I abandon all the wrecks because I usually can't be bothered to loot and salvage them. It's not as much of a pain now with the Noctis, but still, it's boredom following more boredom (the mission itself). -----WARNING SIGNATURE BELOW----- Bring back the NeoNeoCom!
Barghiest	Posted - 2011.04.25 19:46:00 - [350] Edited by: Barghiest on 25/04/2011 19:50:29 Edited by: Barghiest on 25/04/2011 19:46:29 Since there is a lot of talk about flagging the wrecks, etc.. It should be flagged to their true owner. THE FACTION you just murdered a pilot of... The contents should belong to that faction, since you are just a merc of another faction, upholding the ideals and beliefs that a pilot of said faction is the enemy. Thus, any action against said property will result in further loss of standing (salvage or otherwise). Spoils go to the victor (but that Faction doesn't have to like it as your standing plumits, yet your notoriety increases upon completion of the mission). Ninja Salvagers? There's no such thing; it's just another pilot taking advantage of another pilot (NPC or PC); wlecome to EvE. And any pilot who takes advantage of another should reap the rewards and consequences of those actions (you don't have to like it; note their profile and move on or seek revenge); it should be no different with NPC, and this would be one way of measuring it since standing is already a game mechanic. Keep it simple. First come first served.

Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:03:00 - [351] Ninja Salvaging is a legitmate mechanic because the devs like to make life easy on griefers in the game because if people had to actually take some risks and put a little work into being asshats the game might lose some of it's "dark harsh universe" feel It's a stupid rational that should be done away with but won't be because the devs are the biggest griefers in the game. Salvage is spoils of war, The capsuleer who goes out and kills the pirates are not criminals operating lawlessly killing random people they are licensed privateers operating under a legitimate charter that is sanctioned by the legitimate legal authorities (Concord). The Pirates are legitmate targets because they are criminals and the faction navies are legal combatants as such they are not offered protection by Concord and you can blow them up and they can blow you up with impunity. However Ninja Salvaging is theft I don't give a crap what CCP says or how many rationalizations Tippia wants to make. The wrecks generated by the mission runner are spoils of war just like the modules and ammo left inside the wreck. Now whether one should be able to claim those spoils should be based upon whether you can defend them. Unfortunately rather than doing the rational thing and having salvage flag for aggression like any other theft CCP has chosen to leave that protection intact allowing the Ninja to operate with impunity and the full weight of Concord protection. And don't give me that nonsense about Concord protecting the mission runners making it reasonable. Concord only protects (if you can call it that) mission runners from unsanctioned attacks. If salvaging flagged for aggression it would be much more consistent with the rest of EVE's mechanics. Because at least then the mission runner could chose whether to assert their claim over the salvage by attacking the salvager (which would grant the salvager the right to self defense) Oh and if you think it isn't simply a mechanic to facilitate "grief play" explain to me why you can't probe down wrecks? That said I don't see the mechanic being changed so you're only real choice it to quit or deal with it.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:12:00 - [352] Originally by: Skex Relbore Ninja Salvaging is a legitmate mechanic because the devs like to make life easy on griefers in the game because if people had to actually take some risks and put a little work into being asshats the game might lose some of it's "dark harsh universe" feel It's a stupid rational that should be done away with but won't be because the devs are the biggest griefers in the game. Salvage is spoils of war, The capsuleer who goes out and kills the pirates are not criminals operating lawlessly killing random people they are licensed privateers operating under a legitimate charter that is sanctioned by the legitimate legal authorities (Concord). The Pirates are legitmate targets because they are criminals and the faction navies are legal combatants as such they are not offered protection by Concord and you can blow them up and they can blow you up with impunity. However Ninja Salvaging is theft I don't give a crap what CCP says or how many rationalizations Tippia wants to make. The wrecks generated by the mission runner are spoils of war just like the modules and ammo left inside the wreck. Now whether one should be able to claim those spoils should be based upon whether you can defend them. Unfortunately rather than doing the rational thing and having salvage flag for aggression like any other theft CCP has chosen to leave that protection intact allowing the Ninja to operate with impunity and the full weight of Concord protection. And don't give me that nonsense about Concord protecting the mission runners making it reasonable. Concord only protects (if you can call it that) mission runners from unsanctioned attacks. If salvaging flagged for aggression it would be much more consistent with the rest of EVE's mechanics. Because at least then the mission runner could chose whether to assert their claim over the salvage by attacking the salvager (which would grant the salvager the right to self defense) Oh and if you think it isn't simply a mechanic to facilitate "grief play" explain to me why you can't probe down wrecks? That said I don't see the mechanic being changed so you're only real choice it to quit or deal with it. Pretty much this. CCP eventually changed jet can theft and everyone rejoiced. Carebears felt more protected (though they weren't) and people who wanted to blow up carebears were able to do so much more easily. The only people who whinged were the greifers who didn't actually want conflict just lulz. Same thing only forward by a number of years.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:15:00 - [353] Theres a difference between the two. Jet cans were added to increase mission rewards / allow for some reward for killing another player. Wrecks were added to create a new profession, not to increase mission rewards.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:18:00 - [354] Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Theres a difference between the two. Jet cans were added to increase mission rewards / allow for some reward for killing another player. Wrecks were added to create a new profession, not to increase mission rewards. Maybe. But they went and got the peanut butter in the chocolate when the wrecks contained what the jetcans used to. The wrecks are acting as jet cans, also as salvage material containers.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:24:00 - [355] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Theres a difference between the two. Jet cans were added to increase mission rewards / allow for some reward for killing another player. Wrecks were added to create a new profession, not to increase mission rewards. Maybe. But they went and got the peanut butter in the chocolate when the wrecks contained what the jetcans used to. The wrecks are acting as jet cans, also as salvage material containers. Technically, the wrecks contain the jet can, not the loot. The jet can is still there.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:26:00 - [356] Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Theres a difference between the two. Jet cans were added to increase mission rewards / allow for some reward for killing another player. Wrecks were added to create a new profession, not to increase mission rewards. Maybe. But they went and got the peanut butter in the chocolate when the wrecks contained what the jetcans used to. The wrecks are acting as jet cans, also as salvage material containers. Technically, the wrecks contain the jet can, not the loot. The jet can is still there. In what techinical sense? Not in any that any player sees. If a wreck is salvaged then a jetcan is ejected, sure. But the wreck contains the loot. It's what you click on and click OPEN on and get the loot out of. It's like saying a Large Collidable Object contains the jet can, which is false. You have to destroy the object and a jet can with contents is created. In a wreck, you open it and there's the loot. The jetcan is just there in case the wreck gets destroyed.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:31:00 - [357] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard Theres a difference between the two. Jet cans were added to increase mission rewards / allow for some reward for killing another player. Wrecks were added to create a new profession, not to increase mission rewards. Maybe. But they went and got the peanut butter in the chocolate when the wrecks contained what the jetcans used to. The wrecks are acting as jet cans, also as salvage material containers. Technically, the wrecks contain the jet can, not the loot. The jet can is still there. In what techinical sense? Not in any that any player sees. If a wreck is salvaged then a jetcan is ejected, sure. But the wreck contains the loot. It's what you click on and click OPEN on and get the loot out of. It's like saying a Large Collidable Object contains the jet can, which is false. You have to destroy the object and a jet can with contents is created. In a wreck, you open it and there's the loot. The jetcan is just there in case the wreck gets destroyed. The jet can is inside the wreck. You open the can to get the loot. When you salvage the wreck, the can is left behind. If however you destroy the wreck, you also destroy the can.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:35:00 - [358] Edited by: Corina''s Bodyguard on 25/04/2011 21:35:04 Gah, double post...
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:35:00 - [359] Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard The jet can is inside the wreck. You open the can to get the loot. When you salvage the wreck, the can is left behind. If however you destroy the wreck, you also destroy the can. That's your own creation. Here's mine: The wreck IS the can, not a container for it like other objects. If you loot the can, the loot is yours. If you shoot the can, the loot is destroyed. If the wreck contained the can, when you destroyed it, the can would eject like it does with other jet can containing objects, it doesn't. It's obviously a mix of the two.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:39:00 - [360] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard The jet can is inside the wreck. You open the can to get the loot. When you salvage the wreck, the can is left behind. If however you destroy the wreck, you also destroy the can. That's your own creation. Here's mine: The wreck IS the can, not a container for it like other objects. If you loot the can, the loot is yours. If you shoot the can, the loot is destroyed. If the wreck contained the can, when you destroyed it, the can would eject like it does with other jet can containing objects, it doesn't. It's obviously a mix of the two. Fair point.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.25 21:39:00 - [361] Originally by: Skex Relbore Salvage is spoils of war No. If you want to go the RP route, the loot (or "prize") is the spoils of war, and guess what: the loot is yours. Savage, on the other hand, is the left-overs (in this case some kind of space-flotsam or lagan), and they actually belong to the original owner (in this case the rats)à but since we have no NPC market orders for salvaged parts ù i.e. they are not interested in recovering the stuff ù ownership falls on the salvager, who can be anyone who passes buy to pick the stuff up. Moreover, if you want to go the RP route, CONCORD has authorised a charter where they will pay a bounty for criminals destroyed and as part of that charter, you are given the rights to the prize ù the loot ù which you are then authorized to defend with deadly force. This carter does not include the salvage (which, again, is a different category of property). Quote: However Ninja Salvaging is theft I don't give a crap what CCP says Ok. You are a griefer, a RMTer and hacker, and I don't give a crap what CCP says on those topics either ù you should be banned. Deal? Quote: The wrecks generated by the mission runner are spoils of war just like the modules and ammo left inside the wreck. That actually goes contrary to the definition of both those terms, so no. Quote: Unfortunately rather than doing the rational thing and having salvage flag for aggression like any other theft Why would that be rational, seeing as, by very definition, salvage only ever belongs to the original owner of the ship or to the person who recovered the salvage, should the original owner say so? Quote: CCP has chosen to leave that protection intact allowing the Ninja to operate with impunity and the full weight of Concord protection. Fortunately, all salvagers operate under the same protection (because no NPC faction is actually interested in reclaiming salvage that is rightfully theirs), so it becomes a race as to who gets it first. Quote: If salvaging flagged for aggression it would be much more consistent with the rest of EVE's mechanics. How so? You can't claim asteroids. You can't claim archaeology or hacking cans. You can kind of claim moons, but it's not illegal to take them away from the kind-of-owners. You certainly can't claim planets. You can't claim complexes. You can't really claim any source of basic materials in this gameà so how would claiming the right to salvage be consistent with that? You assert you claim over salvage by creating it ù by salvaging the wreck. It is then yours, and people who steal your salvage get flagged. In fact, people stealing your salvage will most likely give you kill rights on them. 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
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2011.04.25 22:22:00 - [362] Edited by: ShahFluffers on 25/04/2011 22:22:31 Tippa... I need to buy you a drink. Seriously. For this thread you deserve one. _______________________ "Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 22:36:00 - [363] Originally by: ShahFluffers Edited by: ShahFluffers on 25/04/2011 22:22:31 Tippa... I need to buy you a drink. Seriously. For this thread you deserve one. Really? You had to edit one sentence? Looks like you've had one too many already How about answering to what I wrote about your last post.
Khanya Trace	Posted - 2011.04.25 22:37:00 - [364] lets meet in the middle! Wrecks have ownership, but only player ownership and not corporation ownership. So the missioner and the salvager can fight for the right of salvaging as demanded in this thread. And then, for consistency purpose as demanded, loot in wrecks are not corp ownership either.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.25 22:39:00 - [365] Originally by: Khanya Trace lets meet in the middle! Wrecks have ownership, but only player ownership and not corporation ownership. So the missioner and the salvager can fight for the right of salvaging as demanded in this thread. And then, for consistency purpose as demanded, loot in wrecks are not corp ownership either. I would have no problem with this at all. Now get CCP to do it and you're my hero.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.25 22:42:00 - [366] Yeah, that'd be fine by me as well.
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2011.04.27 02:10:00 - [367] Originally by: Tippia more nonsense rationalization of stupid game design. Until the mission runner/ratter kills the NPC there is no opportunity for there to even be salvage this is the difference between salvage and all the other crap you mentioned. Roids do not require player activity to come into existence, Hacking cans and Archeology cans exist independently of player actions as do ICE fields and moons. Now while the actual result of the salvage attempt isn't determined by the server until the actual act of salvaging takes place that doesn't change the fact that the salvage comes from a wreck that was created by the actions of the person who destroyed the ship. Conceptually that salvage exists the minute the ship is reduced to wreckage. After all the salvager doesn't magic those items out of the ether (not conceptually at least) salvage is the result of stripping useful circuitry and other materials out of the wreck itself. Conceptually this is no different than stripping the intact artillery piece or shield extender. I mean you don't really think the idea is that the crew of the vessel gathers up all the functional modules and stick them in the cargo hold the instant prior to their ship being shot out from under them do you? There is no difference outside this poorly thought out game mechanic between salvaging a intact module from a wreck or a damaged armored plate. This is why the subject creates so many endless threadnaughts. No one argues about the ownership of the loot or the consequence of taking it because that makes sense at a basic level. Salvage on the other hand runs completely counter to what is logical and rational. The developers insistence that this unintuitive nonsense was intended sounds more like lazy post facto rationalization from programers who couldn't figure out an easy way to make it consistent with the rest of the games mechanics. There is a reason "It's not a bug, it's a feature" is a long standing joke. That's all this whole argument boils down to. The devs couldn't admit that they made a mistake and didn't think through all the unintended effects of a design change and rather than spending the man hours to fix that mistake they simply claim that it's what they intended all along. It's not a bug, It's a feature. Yeah right like I've never heard that one before.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 02:27:00 - [368] Originally by: Skex Relbore No one argues about the ownership of the loot or the consequence of taking it because that makes sense at a basic level. Actually, there's nothing particularly logical about loot ownership either. Why should it be yours? The reason it's yours is simply because it's part of the reward for killing the ship. Quote: Salvage on the other hand runs completely counter to what is logical and rational. Salvage follows the exact same kind of logic: it's yours because it's the reward for salvaging the ship. If you find it unintuitive that you get rewarded for what you do, then maybe the loot should be free for all as wellà 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
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2011.04.27 03:12:00 - [369] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Skex Relbore No one argues about the ownership of the loot or the consequence of taking it because that makes sense at a basic level. Actually, there's nothing particularly logical about loot ownership either. Why should it be yours? The reason it's yours is simply because it's part of the reward for killing the ship. Quote: Salvage on the other hand runs completely counter to what is logical and rational. Salvage follows the exact same kind of logic: it's yours because it's the reward for salvaging the ship. If you find it unintuitive that you get rewarded for what you do, then maybe the loot should be free for all as wellà You continue to ignore the fact that salvage can only exist as a result of a player destroying a ship. Until that ship is reduced to wreckage through the actions of a player it can not be salvaged. You can't salvage an active ship. and there are no spontaneously spawned wrecks. This is where your logic breaks down. If the loot is considered the property of the person who destroyed the rat by the authorities as a part of their compensation then there is no logical reason why the salvage shouldn't be considered part of that compensation as well. There is no actual rational argument in favor of the existing game mechanic all you have is appeals to authority (the devs said it) and weak rationalizations based on that appeal.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 03:17:00 - [370] Originally by: Skex Relbore You continue to ignore the fact that salvage can only exist as a result of a player destroying a ship. No, I just find it 100% irrelevant. The wreck wouldn't be there if it wasn't intended for salvagers to come and retrieve ù otherwise you'd still just have the can popping out like in the olden days. Quote: If the loot is considered the property of the person who destroyed the rat by the authorities as a part of their compensation then there is no logical reason why the salvage shouldn't be considered part of that compensation as well. Sure there is. Same authorities don't put any value into the salvage, and the compensation package only includes the prize portion, not the flotsam. Quote: There is no actual rational argument in favor of the existing game mechanic So you want salvage to be removed completely? Who benefits from 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

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:23:00 - [371] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 04:26:25 Originally by: GM Ytterbium]The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission. As far as the wreck ownership goes I believe this says it all. This was the blog on the original change. I don't think the gm just threw it out there for his health. This is what it was intended to be. If at some later point they decided to change this they should have changed the game design to reflect this choice. Then we wouldn't be having this argument. The wreck at the time of the change belonged to the mission runner.If that changed at some point the game mechanic should have changed with it. If nothing else,this is at least very poor game design on their side to just leave it like that.
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:26:00 - [372] Originally by: Skex Relbore If the loot is considered the property of the person who destroyed the rat by the authorities Actually the loot is considered property of the ship that was destroyed. Since rats aren't pod pilots and aren't immortal, ownership is transferred. In a mission it is transferred to the mission runner, not the destroyer of the ship. Free space rat loot ownership is transferred to whoever aggressed the rat first, not who destroyed it, nor who did the most damage to it (like bounties). Wrecks themselves belong to NO ONE. It does not matter what twisted logic you come up with for why it should belong to you. It belongs to no one because CCP said so and it makes the game more fun. ....oh and yes, there are plenty of missions with spontaneously spawned wrecks. ♥
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:30:00 - [373] Originally by: Awesome Possum Wrecks themselves belong to NO ONE. Wrong it belongs to the mission runner. I think its safe to believe that a GM knows it better than you. Originally by: GM Ytterbium The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:31:00 - [374] Edited by: Tippia on 27/04/2011 04:33:44 Originally by: HeIIfire11 As far as the wreck ownership goes I believe this says it all. àand that doesn't in the slightest change the fact that the salvage is meant for the salvager and that it's entirely legal ù not theft ù to salvage any wreck you can find.. Rather, that statement means that that the loot in the wreck is indeed intended for the mission-runner (because that loot is part of the mission rewards that he earns by doing the mission). What that change did was remove a way to "legally" gain ownership of stuff ù the loot ù that was intended for the MR. Quote: If at some later point they decided to change this they should have changed the game design to reflect this choice. Which again comes back to the question: how should they communicate the ownership of the loot without marking it on the wreck? Killing the ship earns you the loot. Salvaging the wreck earns you the salvage. Very simple. Quote: I think its safe to believe that a GM knows it better than you. And it's safe to say that actual game mechanics knows better than the GM: you can't remove stuff that anyone owns without triggering some kind of aggression; removing wrecks triggers nothing. 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
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:35:00 - [375] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Awesome Possum Wrecks themselves belong to NO ONE. Wrong it belongs to the mission runner. I think its safe to believe that a GM knows it better than you. Originally by: GM Ytterbium The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission. And you're an idiot talking about loot, we're talking about salvage. The wrecks can only be tractored by the mission runner too, all that means is the GMs have given the MR a leg up over ninjas when it comes to salvaging and MRs still want more coddling. The wreck belongs to no one, anyone can salvage it free from aggression. CCP said so, get over it because we all know you won't do jack **** if its ever changed. ♥
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:38:00 - [376] Originally by: Awesome Possum Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Awesome Possum Wrecks themselves belong to NO ONE. Wrong it belongs to the mission runner. I think its safe to believe that a GM knows it better than you. Originally by: GM Ytterbium The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission. And you're an idiot talking about loot, we're talking about salvage. The wrecks can only be tractored by the mission runner too, all that means is the GMs have given the MR a leg up over ninjas when it comes to salvaging and MRs still want more coddling. The wreck belongs to no one, anyone can salvage it free from aggression. CCP said so, get over it because we all know you won't do jack **** if its ever changed. No,you're and idiot putting words in my mouth. I said nothing about loot nor did the gm in that quote. And if I won't do nothing I hope you are the first to come and try if it changes bad ass.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:38:00 - [377] Edited by: Tippia on 27/04/2011 04:38:52 Originally by: HeIIfire11 I said nothing about loot nor did the gm in that quote. àactually, that's exactly what the GM was talking about because that's what the ownership flag on the wreck signifies. 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
Hells Girl	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:42:00 - [378] Edited by: Hells Girl on 27/04/2011 04:43:09 Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 27/04/2011 04:38:52 Originally by: HeIIfire11 I said nothing about loot nor did the gm in that quote. àactually, that's exactly what the GM was talking about because that's what the ownership flag on the wreck signifies. I'm not going to argue about what you think he meant. I'm going to read the words and accept the meaning they have...word for word. Simple as that. Unless you can read minds now too. Oops wrong char but you know who it is anyway
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:45:00 - [379] Originally by: Hells Girl I'm going to read the words and accept the meaning they have...word for word. Simple as that. And the simple meaning here is that the ownership flag on the wreck signifies who owns the loot. They changed that so that the mission-owner always owns the loot, rather than some nasty ebil mission gate-crasher. No mind-reading needed: stealing loot = timer, because you actually take something someone else owns. Taking salvage = no timer, because you're not taking (or removing) something someone else owns. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:47:00 - [380] Either way there's a contradiction there which causes this confusion. If they want it like this then they should turn the wreck blue when looted and let the salvager tractor beam it and shoot it as well. Unfair both ways to be honest hence why I say it's bad game mechanics. If I was on the side of the salvager I'd be complaining about why I cant tractor beam it if it belongs to "nobody".

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:49:00 - [381] Originally by: HeIIfire11 If they want it like this then they should turn the wreck blue when looted and let the salvager tractor beam it and shoot it as well. àwhich still leaves the question of how to handle non-empty wrecks. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:54:00 - [382] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 If they want it like this then they should turn the wreck blue when looted and let the salvager tractor beam it and shoot it as well. àwhich still leaves the question of how to handle non-empty wrecks. leave them yellow. Like one of those CCP quotes says..it's floating garbage. Gargage is something you no longer want and throw away. Yellow wrecks cant be salvaged. Put a timer on them or whatever. This wouldn't be what I would want but a solution none the less.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 04:56:00 - [383] Originally by: HeIIfire11 leave them yellow. But then the confusion remains the same as it is now. Unlessà Quote: Yellow wrecks cant be salvaged. àbut then you buff mission rewards, which won't happen because that's not the purpose of wrecks. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:00:00 - [384] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 05:00:25 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 leave them yellow. But then the confusion remains the same as it is now. Unlessà Quote: Yellow wrecks cant be salvaged. àbut then you buff mission rewards, which won't happen because that's not the purpose of wrecks. For the sake of argument lets say we want to avoid buffing missions at all costs,which I think is dumb but thats my opinion,simply reduce the bounty on the rats to balance it out. Or the pay and lp. Theres other ways to do balance it. Its not that big of a buff.
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:03:00 - [385] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 05:00:25 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 leave them yellow. But then the confusion remains the same as it is now. Unlessà Quote: Yellow wrecks cant be salvaged. àbut then you buff mission rewards, which won't happen because that's not the purpose of wrecks. For the sake of argument lets say we want to avoid buffing missions at all costs,which I think is dumb but thats my opinion,simply reduce the bounty on the rats to balance it out. Or the pay and lp. Theres other ways to do balance it. Its not that big of a buff. or... just leave it the way it is, because it works fine. ♥
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:07:00 - [386] Originally by: Awesome Possum Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 05:00:25 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 leave them yellow. But then the confusion remains the same as it is now. Unlessà Quote: Yellow wrecks cant be salvaged. àbut then you buff mission rewards, which won't happen because that's not the purpose of wrecks. For the sake of argument lets say we want to avoid buffing missions at all costs,which I think is dumb but thats my opinion,simply reduce the bounty on the rats to balance it out. Or the pay and lp. Theres other ways to do balance it. Its not that big of a buff. or... just leave it the way it is, because it works fine. It doesn't work fine..even for the salvager. Why shouldn't he be able to tractor beam an empty wreck that belongs to no one?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:07:00 - [387] Originally by: HeIIfire11 For the sake of argument lets say we want to avoid buffing missions at all costs,which I think is dumb but thats my opinion,simply reduce the bounty on the rats to balance it out. Or, why not leave salvage alone since there's nothing wrong with the salvaging profession¦, and simply add back some loot and/or increase the bounties or LP if mission-runners (for no good reason) feel they're falling behind the income curveà Why is it so hard to accept the fact that wrecks were introduced for salvagers, not for mission-runners? Quote: Or the pay and lp. Theres other ways to do balance it. Reducing the LP is probably the last thing you'd want to do since it's a decent and functional ISK sink ù if anything, a larger part of the rewards should be shifted towards LP (regardless of any other changes). ¦ àor, if you absolutely want to go on about the "design flaws", fix those flaws so that the salvaging profession actually works in its entirety: mark wrecks properly (somehow) so it's clear the wrecks are free for all; auto-blue empty wrecks; invent a way to scan down wrecks. But realise that everything that fixes those supposed design flaws will be buffs to the free-roaming salvagers. 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
Xzar Fyrarr Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:13:00 - [388] Ohshtz. What is this??? ------------------------------------------------ One Cannot Fully Appreciate Peace Until They Have Experienced True Pain. ------------------------------------------------- - Xzar Fyrarr ;
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:14:00 - [389] Originally by: Xzar Fyrarr Ohshtz. What is this??? All your fault is what it is! 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:14:00 - [390] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 For the sake of argument lets say we want to avoid buffing missions at all costs,which I think is dumb but thats my opinion,simply reduce the bounty on the rats to balance it out. Or, why not leave salvage alone since there's nothing wrong with the salvaging profession¦, and simply add back some loot and/or increase the bounties or LP if mission-runners (for no good reason) feel they're falling behind the income curveà Why is it so hard to accept the fact that wrecks were introduced for salvagers, not for mission-runners? Quote: Or the pay and lp. Theres other ways to do balance it. Reducing the LP is probably the last thing you'd want to do since it's a decent and functional ISK sink ù if anything, a larger part of the rewards should be shifted towards LP (regardless of any other changes). ¦ àor, if you absolutely want to go on about the "design flaws", fix those flaws so that the salvaging profession actually works in its entirety: mark wrecks properly (somehow) so it's clear the wrecks are free for all; auto-blue empty wrecks; invent a way to scan down wrecks. But realise that everything that fixes those supposed design flaws will be buffs to the free-roaming salvagers. It was never about the mission pay for me as I don't salvage anyway. The point the op was making is that its bad game design that also causes confusion. That much I think should be clear. And I have nothing against salvagers..yes,fix it (somehow)and let them do their thing. If it was up to me I would say flag them but it's not. Either way it's unfinished content and bad game design which was my point from the start.

Kara Sharalien Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:16:00 - [391] Originally by: Skex Relbore You continue to ignore the fact that salvage can only exist as a result of a player destroying a ship. Well that's nonsense. You've clearly never been to a magnetometric site. Who owns the stuff in the mag sites?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:17:00 - [392] Originally by: Xzar Fyrarr Ohshtz. What is this??? Look it's a ninja...kill it quick!!!!
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:19:00 - [393] Originally by: HeIIfire11 It was never about the mission pay for me as I don't salvage anyway. The point the op was making is that its bad game design that also causes confusion. That much I think should be clear. And I have nothing against salvagers..yes,fix it (somehow)and let them do their thing. Tbh, I think you're giving the OP too much credit when it comes to the cause and effect of that design and confusionà àbut that's just me being mean and surly. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:20:00 - [394] Originally by: Kara Sharalien Originally by: Skex Relbore You continue to ignore the fact that salvage can only exist as a result of a player destroying a ship. Well that's nonsense. You've clearly never been to a magnetometric site. Who owns the stuff in the mag sites? Good question,I've never been in one. What color is the wreck? I would tip on white.
Xzar Fyrarr Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:20:00 - [395] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Xzar Fyrarr Ohshtz. What is this??? Look it's a ninja...kill it quick!!!! Wheres the ninja!? ------------------------------------------------ One Cannot Fully Appreciate Peace Until They Have Experienced True Pain. ------------------------------------------------- - Xzar Fyrarr ;
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:24:00 - [396] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Kara Sharalien Well that's nonsense. You've clearly never been to a magnetometric site. Who owns the stuff in the mag sites? Good question,I've never been in one. What color is the wreck? There is no wreckà (well, not in the normal sense anyway ù some of them have wreck models in the form of LCOs). 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:25:00 - [397] Originally by: Xzar Fyrarr Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Xzar Fyrarr Ohshtz. What is this??? Look it's a ninja...kill it quick!!!! Wheres the ninja!? Running with his tail between his legs because he got flagged for stealing my stuffz if I had it my way
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:26:00 - [398] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Running with his tail between his legs because he got flagged for stealing my stuffz if I had it my way You haven't come across TEARS I take it? 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
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:26:00 - [399] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Awesome Possum or... just leave it the way it is, because it works fine. It doesn't work fine..even for the salvager. Why shouldn't he be able to tractor beam an empty wreck that belongs to no one? Because CCP said so, I thought we already covered this? ♥
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:29:00 - [400] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 05:30:50 Originally by: Awesome Possum Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Awesome Possum or... just leave it the way it is, because it works fine. It doesn't work fine..even for the salvager. Why shouldn't he be able to tractor beam an empty wreck that belongs to no one? Because CCP said so, I thought we already covered this? Who are you and when did you pop in again? We didn't cover anything.Read the thread how about that. CCP says a lot when the day is long but if the game mechanic alows you to do otherwise its bad game design which was somewhat the point of the op. So start on page one and try reading the op at least. Edit:I don't have images enabled but I'm sure I didn't miss much

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:35:00 - [401] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Running with his tail between his legs because he got flagged for stealing my stuffz if I had it my way You haven't come across TEARS I take it? I've come accros two ninjas in my time. One was while I was with a corp doing missions..he lived. Another was in my mission and I called a corp mate who warped in with a tempest and broke his neck with one shot.
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:37:00 - [402] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Awesome Possum Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Awesome Possum or... just leave it the way it is, because it works fine. It doesn't work fine..even for the salvager. Why shouldn't he be able to tractor beam an empty wreck that belongs to no one? Because CCP said so, I thought we already covered this? Who are you and when did you pop in again? We didn't cover anything.Read the thread how about that. CCP says a lot when the day is long but if the game mechanic alows you to do otherwise its bad game design which was somewhat the point of the op. So start on page one and try reading the op at least. Except for the part where the game mechanic does NOT allow you to do otherwise. CCP says salvage is free for all, CCP says salvage does not exist until a salvage module successfully cycles, CCP says for the purpose of SALVAGE (i.e. activating a salvage module [not tractor beam or any other module] on a wreck) wrecks belong to no one. We are not talking about loot, we are not talking about bounties, we are not talking about player wrecks vs mission runner wrecks vs every other kind of rat wrecks. Its about salvaging and the actual wreck they come from. ♥
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 05:41:00 - [403] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 05:42:48 Originally by: Awesome Possum Except for the part where the game mechanic does NOT allow you to do otherwise. CCP says the wreck belongs to no one but yet you cant tractor beam it. If you shoot same wreck you get concorded. This looks to me as if what ccp says and what you can do are two different things. Edit: I meant tractor beam it...
AntiSocial	Posted - 2011.04.27 09:45:00 - [404] why not add a time that salvage is locked after the missions say 15 minutes like the agression. and locked until the mission is over. ,y theroy in this is your on a mission that was given to you to you should have a bit of time b4 any one else knows about the mission so wreks should be locked for only that person for at least 15 minutes. after the 15 minutes my theroy for this is agents talk amongst them selves and shoot thier mouths off at some point about the days work... a pod pilot overhears and see's it as an opertunity. thought this wont stop what happens now...your in the middle of a mission some punk starts salvaging while your in the middle of the mission.. this is unfair to the person doing the mission... how ever belt rats and miners that have wreks strewn about things should stay the same for... just my 2 cents.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2011.04.27 10:18:00 - [405] Originally by: AntiSocial why not add a time that salvage is locked after the missions say 15 minutes like the agression. and locked until the mission is over. ,y theroy in this is your on a mission that was given to you to you should have a bit of time b4 any one else knows about the mission so wreks should be locked for only that person for at least 15 minutes. after the 15 minutes my theroy for this is agents talk amongst them selves and shoot thier mouths off at some point about the days work... a pod pilot overhears and see's it as an opertunity. thought this wont stop what happens now...your in the middle of a mission some punk starts salvaging while your in the middle of the mission.. this is unfair to the person doing the mission... how ever belt rats and miners that have wreks strewn about things should stay the same for... just my 2 cents. Why add any kind of timer to it? Currently salvaging is free for all, is working just fine and is perfectly in line with the intended design. You are just basicly proposing a nerf to salvaging and a boost to mission running for no apparent reason other than your own feelings of entitlement. If you want to to boost the rewards for missioning, please provide good reasoning for it, instead of just relying on your personal feelings to justify it. I'd also like to point out two things. If you want to include salvaging to mission rewards by the way of denying it for anyone else by the way of game mechanics, other mission rewards will likely be nerfed to keep the guaranteed rewards for missioning at the current level. It's also very un-EVE like, so it has almost 0 chance of ever happening. The other point you need to consider is, that if the salvager just gets flagged when salvaging "your wrecks", almost nothing will change for organized salvagers. All that is going to change is that you can shoot them and if you do, you will get killed in your expensive missioning ship soon after and make a I quit ragepost about it on the forums. Getting aggression flagged never stops people from doing those deeds, it more often than not just gets the people who react with strong emotions to the act killed.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 10:33:00 - [406] Originally by: Destination SkillQueue Why add any kind of timer to it? Currently salvaging is free for all, is working just fine and is perfectly in line with the intended design. Tippia is this your alt? No it's not in line with anything. If it was the salvager would be able to tractor beam it like I said. And it's not working just fine because no other profession in eve is protected by concord making it risk free. Originally by: Destination SkillQueue You are just basicly proposing a nerf to salvaging and a boost to mission running for no apparent reason other than your own feelings of entitlement. If you want to to boost the rewards for missioning, please provide good reasoning for it, instead of just relying on your personal feelings to justify it. No one is talking about buffing missions and should this be such an undesired side effect to the fix, as mentioned before there are other ways to balance that out. Originally by: Destination SkillQueue I'd also like to point out two things. If you want to include salvaging to mission rewards by the way of denying it for anyone else by the way of game mechanics, other mission rewards will likely be nerfed to keep the guaranteed rewards for missioning at the current level. It's also very un-EVE like, so it has almost 0 chance of ever happening. Again..a risk free profession is not very eve like either Originally by: Destination SkillQueue All that is going to change is that you can shoot them and if yoyou will get killed in your expensive missioning ship soon afteru do, and make a I quit ragepost about it on the forums. Getting aggression flagged never stops people from doing those deeds, it more often than not just gets the people who react with strong emotions to the act killed. Another fortune teller Why don't you give me the lottery numbers for next week? There are endless ways such a situation could turn out. Being a ninja salvager does not by far mean you will automaticly win.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.27 10:34:00 - [407] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 05:42:48 Originally by: Awesome Possum Except for the part where the game mechanic does NOT allow you to do otherwise. CCP says the wreck belongs to no one but yet you cant tractor beam it. If you shoot same wreck you get concorded. This looks to me as if what ccp says and what you can do are two different things. Edit: I meant tractor beam it... Wasn't the reason for this already covered? 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.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 10:40:00 - [408] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 10:46:09 Originally by: Mag's Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 05:42:48 Originally by: Awesome Possum Except for the part where the game mechanic does NOT allow you to do otherwise. CCP says the wreck belongs to no one but yet you cant tractor beam it. If you shoot same wreck you get concorded. This looks to me as if what ccp says and what you can do are two different things. Edit: I meant tractor beam it... Wasn't the reason for this already covered? Mag's damnit! Weren't you supposed to be on my side? Where was this covered and what exactly is it that you are talking about? Oh you mean because theres a make pretend can inside of it? I wouldn't call that covered. I would call that role playing because I can see no can nor does the wreck say anything about one. If you salvage the wreck before I loot it then yes,a can spawns which you can even hear spawn. Not only that but when you salvage an empty wreck there's no sign of a can anywhere.
Hana Steelethorne	Posted - 2011.04.27 10:46:00 - [409] Originally by: Akita T He can't be a thief since the SALVAGE is not yours yet. You have to do extra work to obtain the salvage, and you haven't done it yet. He does become a thief and you can shoot him if he LOOTS the wreck though. But I would strongly encourage against doing that. People that loot wrecks too actually WANT to get shot. If the reason is not obvious, think about it a bit (hint : aggro mechanics). Of course, there are those ninja salvagers who specialize in baiting mission runners into firing on them only to come back with their mates and kill the missioners. No, when one has expended the effort and expense of running a mission,ALL the fruits of that labor belong to them. But CCP is more interested in fostering pointless and needless conflict between players, so this game mechanic will not change.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 10:50:00 - [410] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 10:51:36 Originally by: Hana Steelethorne Of course, there are those ninja salvagers who specialize in baiting mission runners into firing on them only to come back with their mates and kill the missioners. No, when one has expended the effort and expense of running a mission,ALL the fruits of that labor belong to them. But CCP is more interested in fostering pointless and needless conflict between players, so this game mechanic will not change. He can't come back with anything because as far as I know when he steals from my corp and I shoot him only he has aggro and the right to shoot back. Not only that but my corp/fleet can shoot him too so the odds are against him really.

Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.27 11:27:00 - [411] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Mag's Wasn't the reason for this already covered? Mag's damnit! Weren't you supposed to be on my side? I'm all for hunting wabbits, I just want you to be honest in your replies. 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.
Rashmika Clavain Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.27 11:48:00 - [412] I'd love for them to change this so that you'd be flagged for salvaging. The "free lunch" people are whining about would then become a free banquet. Hell I'd even probing people's missions to get my slice of cake and I loathe probing!
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.04.27 12:19:00 - [413] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Again..a risk free profession is not very eve like either [/quote Ninja salvaging isn't risk free. Recon 3 is all that needs to be said. But, somehow insta-death probably isn't going to satisfy you. So how about the ninja when he's aggro'd by npc in the mission? Right that's not good enough for you either. What you want is the ability to shoot the ninja "risk free". You want the ninja to be marked with aggression so that you don't get concordokkened. You want exactly what you perceive, wrongly, the ninja to have....a risk free existence while you get the excitement of shooting a ship with at most 1200ehp with your ship that's doling out +500dps and +50,000ehp with a defensive rating of +300hp/s. I'll tell you what.....you tell me when and where you typically mission. I'll come to your mission and ninja it in my old ninja ship, a Tristan. But, I won't just ninja salvage, I'll ninja loot it so you can have exactly what you're asking for. I won't even bring friends. It'll be just you and me. Hmm? Frankly, I'm tired of these never ending whine threads about ninjas. So, I'm going to give you what you want. Care to take me up on it?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 12:56:00 - [414] Originally by: Mr Kidd Ninja salvaging isn't risk free. Recon 3 is all that needs to be said. But, somehow insta-death probably isn't going to satisfy you. So how about the ninja when he's aggro'd by npc in the mission? Right that's not good enough for you either. Recon 3 is one of a kind so good example there Not only that but I can solo most lvl 4 missions in my daredevil. A frig is hardly in danger in a lvl 4 mission. He can easily warp out at any given time. Originally by: Mr Kidd What you want is the ability to shoot the ninja "risk free". You want the ninja to be marked with aggression so that you don't get concordokkened. You want exactly what you perceive, wrongly, the ninja to have....a risk free existence while you get the excitement of shooting a ship with at most 1200ehp with your ship that's doling out +500dps and +50,000ehp with a defensive rating of +300hp/s. No one is forcing you to do it in a frig either. But I'll teach you something for the future. If you would take a cruiser you would have a very good chance to kill the mission runner since they 90% of the time are tanking two ways which leaves a huge hole somewhere. So much for your 50k ehp. Take said cruiser and load em or exp drones in there and if you manage to get in orbit the mission runner is **ed. Originally by:** Mr Kidd I'll tell you what.....you tell me when and where you typically mission. I'll come to your mission and ninja it in my old ninja ship, a Tristan. But, I won't just ninja salvage, I'll ninja loot it so you can have exactly what you're asking for. I won't even bring friends. It'll be just you and me. Hmm? I mission in isinokka as any locator agent would be able to tell you. As far as when..add me to the buddy list and you know that too. If you manage to scan me out by all means try me. But be aware that I wont play fair as I dont see risking a billion isk ship against your 300k ship fair when I'm tanking a mission and that two ways. So don't be surprised when a corp mate/fleet member comes in and takes you out. Good luck
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 12:58:00 - [415] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Tippia is this your alt? Don't be silly. Quote: No it's not in line with anything. Yes it is. Wrecks are free for all, which is in line with the design. Whether you can tractor them or not isn't really a factor ù partly because the design was made at a time when you wouldn't expect them to be tractorable, and partly because no other resource harvesting profession can tractor their sources either. Quote: And it's not working just fine because no other profession in eve is protected by concord making it risk free. Incorrect. All other professions are afforded the exact same protection. Quote: No one is talking about buffing missions Yes they are. They want to make salvage theirs without having to earn it in competition with other players. This means that, like loot, it becomes part of the mission rewards. This means that what they're asking for is a mission buff. Quote: Again..a risk free profession is not very eve like either It's not risk free, and it's not unique in the level of risk it has. So no. 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
Aeronwen Carys Empire of Dust	Posted - 2011.04.27 13:05:00 - [416] I'm stunned at how few people seem to understand the concept of salvage not belonging to you just because you shot the ship. As far as I can see there are only a few changes that need to be made. First up if a Salvager steals your loot, the only person who should be able to shoot him is you. No-one else need be involved. Secondly there needs to be some clarification as to exactly how wrecks, cans and cans within wrecks actually work from a technical standpoint as there seems to be some understandable confusion over it. Other than that its just mission runners whining and wanting a boost to their earnings and a nerf to another profession. Oh and as a side note to hellfire, high sec ninja salvaging is not the only concord protected profession at all. If someone comes in to your belt and shoots at you then concord will kill them, if someone warps into your mission and shoots you, they get concorded and if someone blows up your cans they get concorded. Your assertion that salvaging is risk free due to lack of concord stems from the simple fact that you don't understand that salvage doesn't belong to you.
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.04.27 13:19:00 - [417] Edited by: Mr Kidd on 27/04/2011 13:19:55 Originally by: HeIIfire11 I mission in isinokka We're on! ;)
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 13:35:00 - [418] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 13:37:02 Originally by: Aeronwen Carys I'm stunned at how few people seem to understand the concept of salvage not belonging to you just because you shot the ship. As far as I can see there are only a few changes that need to be made. First up if a Salvager steals your loot, the only person who should be able to shoot him is you. No-one else need be involved. Secondly there needs to be some clarification as to exactly how wrecks, cans and cans within wrecks actually work from a technical standpoint as there seems to be some understandable confusion over it. Other than that its just mission runners whining and wanting a boost to their earnings and a nerf to another profession. Oh and as a side note to hellfire, high sec ninja salvaging is not the only concord protected profession at all. If someone comes in to your belt and shoots at you then concord will kill them, if someone warps into your mission and shoots you, they get concorded and if someone blows up your cans they get concorded. Your assertion that salvaging is risk free due to lack of concord stems from the simple fact that you don't understand that salvage doesn't belong to you. First of all cool looking avatar..me likes Second,you have a few good points as far as concord goes I guess. It depends how you look at things and what belongs to you or doesn't. But I never asked for a mission buff although most in these threads do.I was stating my opinion about this whole thing being bad game design and I'm sticking to it. I also stated my opinion on how I would fix it if it were up to me,which it isn't. I also know this wont change anytime soon as I am still waiting on a blaster buff along with many other things that bug the hell out of me and others. Same reasons I hardly play anymore on this account much less my main. I'm going to put down my sword on this subject because it's been fun but it's also been beaten to death and we obviously have a lot more salvagers than I thought. No one seems to see that this mini profession is bugged but skex who understands exactly what I'm talking about. One thing became clear is that so many people hate mission runners and I can't understand why. Because they wont play with you lol? I run mission now but I'm not what you can call a "mission runner".I have had my share in pvp and used to use this character as a source of second income when I didn't feel like putting up with the crap going on elsewhere. And I could care less about the salvage really so I'm not out for the buff either. Anyone who knows me will tell you If you ask me I'll give that and the loot to you anyday. Also anyone who says mission running is the cream of the crop needs to go out to 0.0 or even low sec and you will see that mission running is more work than it is pay. You have to grind twice as hard to get ahead and it takes time. The only thing it has to offer is that it's pretty low risk if you know what you're doing. But the risk is no greater in 0.0 where everything you see is blue and you can rat and mission or whatever in peace. And get paid way more for doing so. So I don't even blame the mission runners for wanting their salvage tbh. Originally by: Mr Kidd We're on! ;) Bring it fat face
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 13:51:00 - [419] Originally by: HeIIfire11 No one seems to see that this mini profession is bugged but skex who understands exactly what I'm talking about. No, I can certainly see that there are irregularities in the system, but the difference is rather that as I see it, fixing them will only ever work in the salvagers' favour ù otherwise they wouldn't really be fixes (and would just further contradict what CCP has stated). Also, I don't see much reason to fix it because these irregularities are so small and insignificant and because it's working just fine as it is. Quote: One thing became clear is that so many people hate mission runners and I can't understand why. People don't hate mission runners (wellà I don't hate myself, at least, if a sample of one is good enough for you). What people hate is greedy and overentitled mission runners who want to increase the rewards for what is already one of the most rewarding activities in highsec, and who want to do it for no good reason. Hence all the "why:s" and "prove it" and "argue your case": because there is this vain hope that someone might have a good reason that doesn't boil down "I feel entitled to more stuff ù gimme!" And history has shown that starting out by calling salvaging "theft" is already a huge neon sign that this is what the poster actually meansà 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
Skippermonkey Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.04.27 13:58:00 - [420] Went though an accel gate that was at a beacon, and saw a red container... that was new to me, had been looted though. Somebody tell me what that container was? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OLD FORUM I ♥ YOU, NEVER LEAVE ME AGAIN!

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 13:59:00 - [421] Originally by: Skippermonkey Went though an accel gate that was at a beacon, and saw a red container... that was new to me, had been looted though. Somebody tell me what that container was? :CCP: I love that bug. 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
Doddy Excidium.	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:02:00 - [422] Originally by: Amarraz Missions are not risk free. That's spoken from the perspective, I'm guessing, of someone who's played the game for well over a year. In fact, this game is quite brutal for beginners. I've lost more than a dozen ships in missions. You can blame this on a lack of skill, and perhaps that's the case, but asserting that missions carry no risk is simply untrue. Perhaps low risk, but risk nevertheless. And, in my estimation, time alone does not outweigh risk. If it takes a ninja salvager 30 minutes to locate my mission wrecks (it took him considerably less), does that really outweigh even a 2% chance that I will lose a 500 million ship? I don't think so, and that's been my point from the beginning: with ninja salvaging, there is absolutely zero risk. Now the designers of EVE can state all they want that this is an intentional feature of the game, and a function of non-instanced missions, but that doesn't make it good game design. No one bad/new enough at this game to die regularly in missions should be flying a 500 mil ship in the first place. Also the ninja salvager is taking the risk that someone will be stupid and shoot at him, almost certainly more likely than dying to a mission in a 500 mil ship. Most mission runners don't even bother salvaging anyway as it drastically reduces income. You also miss the point that salvaging was added to the game as a mini-proffession specifically to let people search for wrecks to salvage. It was not added just to give mission runners more free loot.
Skippermonkey Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:10:00 - [423] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Skippermonkey Went though an accel gate that was at a beacon, and saw a red container... that was new to me, had been looted though. Somebody tell me what that container was? :CCP: I love that bug. SRSLY THOUGH what was it? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OLD FORUM I ♥ YOU, NEVER LEAVE ME AGAIN!
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:10:00 - [424] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 27/04/2011 14:14:05 Originally by: Doddy Originally by: Amarraz Missions are not risk free. That's spoken from the perspective, I'm guessing, of someone who's played the game for well over a year. In fact, this game is quite brutal for beginners. I've lost more than a dozen ships in missions. You can blame this on a lack of skill, and perhaps that's the case, but asserting that missions carry no risk is simply untrue. Perhaps low risk, but risk nevertheless. And, in my estimation, time alone does not outweigh risk. If it takes a ninja salvager 30 minutes to locate my mission wrecks (it took him considerably less), does that really outweigh even a 2% chance that I will lose a 500 million ship? I don't think so, and that's been my point from the beginning: with ninja salvaging, there is absolutely zero risk. Now the designers of EVE can state all they want that this is an intentional feature of the game, and a function of non-instanced missions, but that doesn't make it good game design. No one bad/new enough at this game to die regularly in missions should be flying a 500 mil ship in the first place. Also the ninja salvager is taking the risk that someone will be stupid and shoot at him, almost certainly more likely than dying to a mission in a 500 mil ship. Most mission runners don't even bother salvaging anyway as it drastically reduces income. You also miss the point that salvaging was added to the game as a mini-proffession specifically to let people search for wrecks to salvage. It was not added just to give mission runners more free loot. No it was added to conflict with the mission runners which it is doing a good job of. It ticks them off. If this wasn't the case it would be scanning wrecks down and not the players. Which would be a lot better because then they could salvage loads and clean up the server. Not only that but then they wouldn't be limited to scanning fast enough to catch the player. But noI didn't want to argue anymore....must ....resist Originally by: Skippermonkey Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Skippermonkey Went though an accel gate that was at a beacon, and saw a red container... that was new to me, had been looted though. Somebody tell me what that container was? :CCP: I love that bug. SRSLY THOUGH what was it? Good question I've only seen this in ded space complexes and that maybe once or twice.
Skippermonkey Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:16:00 - [425] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Good question I've only seen this in ded space complexes and that maybe once or twice. Maybe the cargo container became self-aware! /me cowers behind sofa - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OLD FORUM I ♥ YOU, NEVER LEAVE ME AGAIN!
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:20:00 - [426] Originally by: Skippermonkey Originally by: HeIIfire11 Good question I've only seen this in ded space complexes and that maybe once or twice. Maybe the cargo container became self-aware! /me cowers behind sofa You found one of these. 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.
Ana Vyr	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:25:00 - [427] The mechanic is all part of CCP's "you aren't really safe in highsec" thing. I understand why they allow this to occur, but I really despise the people who do it, which is the entire point, in CCP's eyes. I might get so annoyed that I'll go off and shoot something I shouldn't, and somebody gets a kill mail out of it. I typically just leave the system and mission elsewhere. Shrug. I'm not a big fan of loopholes in game mechanics that allow folks to grief/annoy you in order to bait you into playing into their hands. Not because I think it's unfair, but the kind of folks who get off on that sort of gameplay usually won't just leave it at that. I don't like being put in that position. If I want to mess around and get into some fights, lowsec is only a few jumps away. If I want to do some mindless ISK grinding in missions, I don't want to become somebody's toy to mess with. Not a game breaking issue to me, just annoying.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:28:00 - [428] Originally by: Skippermonkey SRSLY THOUGH what was it? Standard overview bug: the row that contains the wreck hasn't been properly cleared/initialised or some such, and still carries the flag that says "this is a hostile ship"à except that the hostile ship isn't there any more and a wreck (not even necessarily the wreck of the hostile ship) has taken its place. 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
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:30:00 - [429] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Skippermonkey SRSLY THOUGH what was it? Standard overview bug: the row that contains the wreck hasn't been properly cleared/initialised or some such, and still carries the flag that says "this is a hostile ship"à except that the hostile ship isn't there any more and a wreck (not even necessarily the wreck of the hostile ship) has taken its place. My answer was better. 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.
Skippermonkey Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:38:00 - [430] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Skippermonkey SRSLY THOUGH what was it? Standard overview bug: the row that contains the wreck hasn't been properly cleared/initialised or some such, and still carries the flag that says "this is a hostile ship"à except that the hostile ship isn't there any more and a wreck (not even necessarily the wreck of the hostile ship) has taken its place. You sure? Because i tried firing at it, and it was resisting all my damage, thus making it clearly a superior wreck. In beacon sites that you warp to, are there ever 'special' red cans with loot in that unlock when all teh rats are gone or something. I dont know, hacking? archaeology stuff? things that i havent realyl paid any attention to in eve - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OLD FORUM I ♥ YOU, NEVER LEAVE ME AGAIN!

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 14:49:00 - [431] Originally by: Skippermonkey In beacon sites that you warp to, are there ever 'special' red cans with loot in that unlock when all teh rats are gone or something. I dont know, hacking? archaeology stuff? things that i havent realyl paid any attention to in eve Ah yesà those. They're just standard cans that respawn their loot every now and then, which by the looks of it also happen to be marked as hostile for no apparent reason. 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
Doddy Excidium.	Posted - 2011.04.27 15:59:00 - [432] Originally by: HeIIfire11 If this wasn't the case it would be scanning wrecks down and not the players. Which would be a lot better because then they could salvage loads and clean up the server. Not only that but then they wouldn't be limited to scanning fast enough to catch the player. You mean like how it originally was but it was changed because mission runners cried as they were getting scanned down too easily by people scanning for wrecks? can't have it both ways ...
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.27 17:45:00 - [433] Probing and Salvaging are two different acts, lets stay on topic. ♥
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 17:51:00 - [434] Originally by: Awesome Possum Probing and Salvaging are two different acts, lets stay on topic. Topic is salvagers in peoples missions. Without probing there are no salvagers in other peoples missions. Probing is on topic. Besides topic is dead..didn't you get the memo? There's only so much you can say about something that wont change anyway. I'm right ..you're wrong.
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.27 17:55:00 - [435] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Awesome Possum Probing and Salvaging are two different acts, lets stay on topic. Topic is salvagers in peoples missions. Without probing there are no salvagers in other peoples missions. Probing is on topic. Besides topic is dead..didn't you get the memo? There's only so much you can say about something that wont change anyway. I'm right ..you're wrong. The topic was the act of salvaging a wreck. Whether in a mission, sleeper site, belt, or on a gate.. its all the same mechanic. The only difference is ownership of the loot and who is allowed to tractor the can/wreck. ♥
Ania Hyperthron	Posted - 2011.04.27 18:10:00 - [436] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 25/04/2011 12:19:26 Originally by: Ania Hyperthron You pop a target. And then wrecks is yours. There is 2 ways to make it good. Totally remove ownership, or give PROPER ownership of a wreck. àand of course, the third way: communicate the ownership properly ù you own the loot, not the wreck. So far, no-one has come up with a good suggestion for how to do this. (Well, except for the fourth way of course, which is what we have now: ownership of the loot is first displayed on the wreck and is then transferred to the can when the wreck is removed. Personally, I think it works well enough, but apparently some find it confusingà) The problem with your two ways is that they change the reward structures for killing ships. Totally removing ownership reduces the rewards; complete ownership increases them. Both of those would require arguments for why you need to either nerf or buff NPC-killing. Quote: Why FFS loot inside is yours and salvage not ? Because the loot is your reward for killing the ship whereas the salvage is not ù the salvage is the reward for salvaging the wreck. Quote: Anyway what is the diffrence between salvage and loot, on both you have to spent some time and skill so why WE missioners are giving our JOB just like that for free to ninja salvager. The difference is that they're not the same activity: you don't need to be a salvager to be a mission runner and you don't need to be a mission runner to be a salvager. They have completely different skill sets. They utilise completely different sets of ships and equipment. And they give completely different sets of rewards. The problem here is that you think both are the same just because you're doing both at once. That's a bit like saying that ship manufacturing and mission-running is the same because you can do both at once, or like saying that trade and piracy is the same becauseà wait, that one's a bad example. Quote: Someone said "becuase its a floating garbage" ...NO ITS NOT its my JOB my kill and WRECK should be MINE or should be accesible for everyone. Dont you get it ? Yes, it's your job to kill. For that job you get bounties and the spoils (loot). But as a killer, it is not your job to clean up the mess ù that's the job of salvagers. If you want to do that job as well you have to compete with other salvagers, because that's part of the salvaging business. Wreck is mine, without my standings and MY mission and MY kill this wreck will never exist. Got that ? No missioner=no wreck to salvage.
Tosser Galore	Posted - 2011.04.27 18:13:00 - [437] @OP Well as far as analogy goes, it's the same as if someone barges in on you while you are hunting deer and skins your prey, sawing off the antlers etc. The thief (as this would indeed be a theft irl) is protected by a instant response team. Now who is the carebear? Of course since this is make belief and scifi there aren't any real life analogies to be had. However this is EvE and in that context people expect game mechanics that streamlines their experience, for one thing that is one of the main thing with empire that your are basically under the protection of various aggro mechanics and npc protection. Of course carebears will look to extend this to everything that pose a threat to their income. There is no point in creating a a logical rationale, and comparing real life issues to a virtual game world ,by using game fluff rp bull**. People are looking to make high sec a isolated bubble where no one can use mechanics to exploit you and pvp your ass. That is not EvE. As far as the ninjaing goes. Fit a tractor beam/salvager and salvage each kill while you are going. Use a dedicated salvage alt that simply outsalvages the typical ninja fit/. Use an alt for suicide ganking if someone is dumb enough to warp in a Noctis in your pocket. Learn to shoot wrecks, warp out. Dock up "AFK" in your pocket wasting peoples time etc. If someone decides to flip you. Embrace the opportunity to pvp. brake the tedious bs of shooting NPCs. Have a quick switch combat kill ship docked in station (that you don't mind to loose to some occasional pew pew). Tailor it to deal with the things you are met with. Bookmark cans as tactical warp ins, (this only works when you have turned the mission in) Not in deadspace. Set up Safes, and tacs in system. Don't pod in high sec. Notice where you enter the dead space pocket or "proper" space warp in and be aware of positioning and ranges. ONLY engage thieves. Learn to D-scan. and do not engage other ships that drop in. Use drones and l2 overheat. don't respond to convos or local. AVOID station games (only h0m0s do that). learn the ins and out of high sec pvp *gotry. Notice ninja salvage alts, corps etc. Gather intel, put on watch list. Infiltrate their corps with an alt and countergrief. Relocate. Go alt. Ignore salvage l2 blitz. Profit. 2. Make a ninja salvage of your own and exploit others missioning. Learn the ins and out of that trade. RP a griefer and "harvest other peoples tears". 3. Make a suicide ganking alt and go after miners. EvE is all big chess game, where crying over lost pieces quickly becomes pointless. If you have to sacrifice a queen or a rook to "0win the game0" DO EET! Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.04.27 18:23:00 - [438] Originally by: Ania Hyperthron Wreck is mine, without my standings and MY mission and MY kill this wreck will never exist. Got that ? No missioner=no wreck to salvage. CCP created wrecks to enable the salvage mechanic. They also decided at the same time it was to be a mini profession within the game, so therefore no one owns the wreck. Got that? 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.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 18:33:00 - [439] Edited by: Tippia on 27/04/2011 18:35:37 Originally by: Ania Hyperthron Wreck is mine, without my standings and MY mission and MY kill this wreck will never exist. Incorrect. Without salvagers there would be no wreck ù they would never have been put into the game, and they certainly weren't created for your benefit. What you're saying is that it's not your mission, your standing, your kill ù it belongs to the miner who created the minerals. The wreck is not yours. The salvage isn't yours. You are just another part of the chain. Live with it, because that's EVE. Want the salvage? Then you have to earn it, just like the ninja did. 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
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.27 19:37:00 - [440] I've been reading this thread with interest the last couple of days, and both sides have good points. The way I see it I think the wrecks should belong to the one who created it, and by default the salvage is thiers too. Now technically CCP has made this a non-issue by claiming its working as intended, but things can change and I am on the side that thinks this is not what CCP had in mind and they simply dont want to put the effort into changing it. The idea that CCP intended to creat a mini profession rings hollow to me. Things may have changed since I have been gone, but at the time, wasnt the only thing added for a salvager, was the salvage laser and skill? What kind of profession has 1 mod and 1 skill associated with it? I mean we just got a true salvage ship not long ago. If CCP wanted to create a salvager profession, shouldnt there be more skills, more mods, and a ship released with this profession? Also, none of the current mechanics work towards the wreck as being fair game. This has been beat to death already so I wont go into right now, but if CCP wanted to make salvagers a true profession why didnt they make the wrecks seperate from the loot can? If CCP wants salvagers to be a true profession they need to do a few things. 1. Remove wrecks and loot cans. Make it clear that the wrecks belong to everyone. 2. Let salvagers scan down wrecks, not players 3. If they havent already add more skills/mods to make salvagers more effcient. 4. Add risk, either allow players to engage them, or make salvage deadspace zones that players can scan down to find salvage. These would contain a few rats and traps to give minimal risk to salvagers. Personally I think the easiest thing to do is remove wrecks from missions and just make them objects that can be scanned down. This prevents the so called buff to MR by removing salvage from missions, but gives people who want the ability to track down wrecks for salvage.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.27 19:48:00 - [441] Originally by: Jayson Lee The idea that CCP intended to creat a mini profession rings hollow to me. Things may have changed since I have been gone, but at the time, wasnt the only thing added for a salvager, was the salvage laser and skill? No. they added wrecks for them as well. And the idea that CCP intended to create a mini-profession comes from CCP themselves ù it doesn't really get more non-hollow than that. Quote: I mean we just got a true salvage ship not long ago. If CCP wanted to create a salvager profession, shouldnt there be more skills, more mods, and a ship released with this profession? Not really, no. It's no different from the other mini-professions (archaeology and hacking). Quote: I am on the side that thinks this is not what CCP had in mind and they simply dont want to put the effort into changing it. The historical record does not agree with you. 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
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.27 20:24:00 - [442] Thanks for the links, I hadnt seen those. I guess CCP did consider this a mini profession. I stand corrected. I am still left with nagging suspicion that CCP didnt forsee the ninja looting though. If they did, why is this the only profession that requires action by someone else? Why do the wrecks appear to belong to the person that shot them? Why does CCP make a distinction bewteen loot and salvage? I read throught the comments of the link you gave and came across this comment from Dev Hammer "Tractor beams will work on wrecks. I'd have to kick people in the face if they stopped working." Why would he say that? Clearly if they meant for others to be able to steal wrecks tractor beams should work, but Im under the impression that they dont, unless you made the wreck which is probably what CCP had in mind all along. I misspoke earlier about CCP's intention on creating a salvaging profession, but I dont think that I am wrong when they did not intend for others to ninja loot someone else's mission. I will go back and read some of the quotes people have linked, but I wonder if they came after the fact, which could suggest that CCP just doesnt want to fix it. Easier to leave it as is, even though Hammer's quote suggests that it was not CCP's thinking that people would be "stealing wrecks" Who knows, I was wrong once, could be again.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.27 21:15:00 - [443] Originally by: Jayson Lee Now technically CCP has made this a non-issue by claiming its working as intended, but things can change and I am on the side that thinks this is not what CCP had in mind and they simply dont want to put the effort into changing it. This is my opinion exactly..well said.
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.28 15:29:00 - [444] What would be your ideal fix? Allow the theft to occure and let the mission runner have the chance to respond? Or just not allow anyone to loot the wrecks other than the owner? I think something needs to be done to allow players the chance at this profession, and maybe CCP needs to add some more options. What if you can sell salvage rights to missions? Allow players to sell the rights for a fee, and then people who want to can buy the contracts and the location? Should wrecks be taken out of missions completely? Make them a scanable deadspace?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.28 15:43:00 - [445] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 28/04/2011 15:47:09 Originally by: Jayson Lee What would be your ideal fix? Allow the theft to occure and let the mission runner have the chance to respond? Or just not allow anyone to loot the wrecks other than the owner? I think something needs to be done to allow players the chance at this profession, and maybe CCP needs to add some more options. What if you can sell salvage rights to missions? Allow players to sell the rights for a fee, and then people who want to can buy the contracts and the location? Should wrecks be taken out of missions completely? Make them a scanable deadspace? This is a really good question to be honest. I'm going to be fair to ccp. To flag salvagers in missions only sounds like a tricky fix. I would love that fix but I'm not sure if thats doable without re-doing the whole wreck system. So the best thing I can think of at the moment is that when the wreck is looted it becomes free for all. But then there's still the question of what happens before the wreck is looted? Here is where it becomes more complicated because I think salvage in missions should belong to the mission runner which opens a whole new topic about what lvl 4 missions earn. I also dont think a two week old noob in a T1 frigate should be earning 10-15 million per hour.It's hard to say just what the fix should be because I don't know ccp's technical limitations if there are any. This would be something I would have to give some more thought if I'm going to be completely fair to all including the salvagers and CCP. Any ideas? Edit: My flag the salvager idea would include wrecks being turned blue at least after the mission so that people could scan wrecks down and gather everything left behind. To do this you would have to be able to scan down wrecks. I don't care much for the griefer aspect of the whole thing..they have enough ways to grief people in eve if you ask me. So this would be mainly for new players who want to really salvage.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.28 15:57:00 - [446] Edited by: Tippia on 28/04/2011 16:04:49 Originally by: HeIIfire11 So no...there is no can inside the wreck that belongs to the player...it's the wreck itself thats owned by the mission runner. You know what? Fine. Let's say that it belongs to the mission runner (in spite of the fact that the game mechanics prove otherwise). So what? It doesn't matter in the slightest. It's still free for anyone to salvage and the salvage still doesn't belong to the mission runner, and calling it "theft" is idiotic because nothing is actually stolen. Saying that the wreck isn't owned, but that the can is, explains the game mechanics in full; trying to skew it any other way is inconsistent with game behaviour. If nothing else, it's a very handy short-form for an evolutionary history of the mechanics that lets the MR explain what's his and what isn't. So why are you trying to confuse the poor players? Quote: The current game mechanics do not reflect the intended design. You mean apart from the indisputable fact that the wreck is obvious free for all to salvage, which reflects the intended design? Quote: I also dont think a two week old noob in a T1 frigate should be earning 10-15 million per hour. Good news: he won't. He will not have the skills or the skillz or the equipment to do 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
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.28 18:08:00 - [447] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 28/04/2011 16:04:49 Originally by: HeIIfire11 So no...there is no can inside the wreck that belongs to the player...it's the wreck itself thats owned by the mission runner. You know what? Fine. Let's say that it belongs to the mission runner (in spite of the fact that the game mechanics prove otherwise). So what? It doesn't matter in the slightest. It's still free for anyone to salvage and the salvage still doesn't belong to the mission runner, and calling it "theft" is idiotic because nothing is actually stolen. Saying that the wreck isn't owned, but that the can is, explains the game mechanics in full; trying to skew it any other way is inconsistent with game behaviour. If nothing else, it's a very handy short-form for an evolutionary history of the mechanics that lets the MR explain what's his and what isn't. So why are you trying to confuse the poor players? Quote: The current game mechanics do not reflect the intended design. You mean apart from the indisputable fact that the wreck is obvious free for all to salvage, which reflects the intended design? Quote: I also dont think a two week old noob in a T1 frigate should be earning 10-15 million per hour. Good news: he won't. He will not have the skills or the skillz or the equipment to do so. Im curious as to your take on why the loot is seperate from salvage components? To me they both fit the bill as salvage, why is one the owner of the MR and not the rig components? We all get that currently CCP says wrecks belong to everyone, but they have enough inconsistancies to raise some questions as to if this was their true intentions. Why not seperate the loot can from the wreck? Why not allowing towing of the wreck by anyone? I guess it just doesnt make any sense to me why the guns and other mods are yours, but the salvage isnt. As for balance, I think you need to remove wrecks from the missions. Make it a seperate scanable item, kinda like exploration.
Zyress	Posted - 2011.04.28 18:21:00 - [448] Originally by: Amarraz If they're salvaging wrecks in mission, the wrecks I created, then that should be stealing, I should be allowed to respond. Believe me I know where you are coming from on this, I've been there and I agree you should be able to defend your salvage as well as your loot, in some missions its the largest source of isk. That said the rules of the game are in favor of the worthless lazy slime on this.
Zyress	Posted - 2011.04.28 18:37:00 - [449] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 23/04/2011 19:02:29 The risk you encounter in the actual mission is already being compensated for through the mission rewards, time bonuses, bounties, loot, LP, and standings increases. Salvage is not part of those rewards ù it's something you have to do additional work to earn, and the amount of work you have to do is far less than the work the ninja has to do. So if anything, they've earned it more than you have. I haven't gone into peoples missions salvaging but I have occassionally gone from asteroid belt to asteroid belt thru multiple systems filling up my cargo hold several times over with valuable salvage and it was not a lot of work and almost risk free. Surviving a good lvl 4 is much more of a challenge to me so I really don't get where you are coming from here. Quote: If you want to add salvage to that list if mission rewards, the risk has to go up as well (and tbh, it should go up regardless because missions are essentially risk-free as it is). If you want to have the right to the salve without increasing the risk, we're back to the question: what reward are you willing to give up to get those salvage rights? Quote: we all know salvaging is where the real mission money is No. Salvaging generally drastically reduces your mission income. If you really want an answer to that I'd sure give up the LP's I hardly ever use them anyway, mostly I don't want that crap and when I do I don't feel like finding the right LP store where I have points and they have the merchandise.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.28 18:52:00 - [450] Originally by: Jayson Lee Im curious as to your take on why the loot is seperate from salvage components? To me they both fit the bill as salvage, why is one the owner of the MR and not the rig components? Depends on what you mean by "why?" I'm talking about it from the perspective of professions and activity rewards. The loot belongs to the mission runner because back when they designed the concept of missions and what they'd do, gameplay-wise, it came down to this: you (don't really) risk your ship and expend some ammo to blow up rats and occasionally collect some trigger item, and in exchange, you get a set of rewards ù ISK, time bonuses, status increases, LP, bounties, loot. The loot part caused some problems because it was possible for other people to come in and shoot the rats and thus gain ownership of loot that was intended to be part of the MR's reward package. Then they added a different and separate activity: salvaging. The design concept was that you'd spend time to hunt down wrecks and salvage them in competition with other players who'd presumably be after the same thing, in exchange one specific kind of reward: salvage. The two are separate because the activities, skill set, equipment, interactivity, andà wellà pretty much everything is different. Loot is different from salvage in the same way that ore is different from PI. You do different things, and it yields different stuff as rewards. Just because you can do both at once doesn't mean they're the same (otherwise, trading would be the same thing as invention because you can do both at once, and traders would be rightfully upset when you booked up all the invention slots in the regionà never mind that there isn't a single skill that connects those two activities and that traders don't use invention slots for anything). Quote: Why not seperate the loot can from the wreck? More junk in space for the server to handle; requires multiple spawns for each dead ship; it seemed logical that the the loot would be in/attached to the wreck? Quote: Why not allowing towing of the wreck by anyone? Because they chose to contain the loot inside the wreck, and they didn't want others to deal with the problem of ninja tractoring? Quote: I guess it just doesnt make any sense to me why the guns and other mods are yours, but the salvage isnt. You've earned one, but not the other, because they're rewards for completely different activities. Quote: As for balance, I think you need to remove wrecks from the missions. Make it a seperate scanable item, kinda like exploration. Sure, they could massively buff mag sites, I supposeà 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

Zyress	Posted - 2011.04.28 18:58:00 - [451] Originally by: Karak Terrel Let's say for the sake of argument, salvaging is stealing. Now what changes that? You could shoot the salvager now, so would you actually do that? You would really engage another player in your probably expensive PvE fit? Now here is the thing, it would change nothing, except you would loose some of your ships to those "salvagers". Now in eve there are no instances, there is no save space and it is an MMO where people will try to annoy you. You can't just ignore the MMO part of the game you have no right for not getting annoyed by other players. There is only one way, adopt to it! It's worth it! Instead of petitions and forum whining use the power of the sandbox to wipe the floor with some ninja-salvager asses! There are ways to do that but i have to warn you, it's not boring like lvl4 missions Actually if it were ok to shoot ninja salvagers I'd add some pvp mods to my ship and enjoy the extra pvp in the middle of all the boring missions I do for isk. So yeah, I'd shoot them, I don't fly ships I'm not willing to loose in a fight if it comes to that.
Zyress	Posted - 2011.04.28 19:22:00 - [452] Edited by: Zyress on 28/04/2011 19:24:01 Originally by: Zyress Surviving a good lvl 4 is much more of a challenge to me so I really don't get where you are coming from here. I'm coming from the position that the risks of L4 missions are compensated by the rewards of L4 missions (which are numerous); whereas the risks of salvaging (which largely come in the form of competition) are compensated by the rewards of salvaging (i.e. salvage). There's something wrong with a destroyer that can't beat a Battleship or a Battlecruiser to a wreck because they weren't fast enough Quote: If you really want an answer to that I'd sure give up the LP's I hardly ever use them anyway You should look into what LP can do for your walletà Salvage is not nearly worth giving up for what LP can give you. Contracts are typically a much better deal than the LP store
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.28 19:28:00 - [453] Originally by: Zyress Contracts are typically a much better deal than the LP store Depends what you're selling (and see the edit I did above ù I managed to mangle that sentence completelyà ). It requires a tiny amount of research, but I have yet to come across a mission where the LP wasn't worth more than the salvage on top of the fact that you didn't have to expend a single extra second to acquire them. Once you get your mission speeds up, the time it takes to salvage (unless you do it on the go, and only pick the most opportune wrecks) can easily be worth at least twice that if you simply move on to the next mission and earn more LP, more rewards and bonuses and more bounty. 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
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.28 19:31:00 - [454] Quote: The design concept was that you'd spend time to hunt down wrecks and salvage them in competition with other players who'd presumably be after the same thing, in exchange one specific kind of reward: salvage. If this was the desing concept why not seperate them out from MR? I read the posts you linked and I never got the impression that they intended to make this a compitition bewteen players to salvage someone elses mission. Quote: Loot is different from salvage in the same way that ore is different from PI Really? Ore and PI are found in completely different areas arent they? I havent done PI, can you get veld from PI? Plus the wrecks require a player to create them, is this the same in PI or mining? Does a seperate player come along and make the veld for others to mine? They dont appear to be the same at all. Quote: More junk in space for the server to handle; requires multiple spawns for each dead ship; it seemed logical that the the loot would be in/attached to the wreck? It seems more logical that they had intended for the MR to be the one to salvage the wrecks, not a 3rd party. Quote: Because they chose to contain the loot inside the wreck, and they didn't want others to deal with the problem of ninja tractoring? Or they never intended to have ninja salvagers, that seems more likely. Quote: You've earned one, but not the other, because they're rewards for completely different activities Why havent I earned the right to all salvage? Just becuase it requires a seperate module to get 100% of salvage, I see no difference between loot and salvage. Can you explain why we earn one and not the other? Besides sighting the current game mechanics, because right now it appears to be a bug CCP doesnt want to fix.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.28 19:47:00 - [455] Originally by: Jayson Lee If this was the desing concept why not seperate them out from MR? I read the posts you linked and I never got the impression that they intended to make this a compitition bewteen players to salvage someone elses mission. The competition part comes inherent with it being a resource extraction kind of activity (and, I'd argue, inherent with being EVE). As for separating it from missionsà well, they wanted it to be ship wrecks for some reason, and missions just so happen to involve the destructions of lots of ships. Yes, there are also mag sites, but those aren't really about going after wrecks. Quote: Really? Ore and PI are found in completely different areas arent they? Yes, but the point is: you use completely different skill sets (and skillz sets) and different equipment to gain access to completely different resources. This mirrors how you use completely different skills (and skillz) and equipment to gain access to the different rewards that missions and salvaging provide. Quote: It seems more logical that they had intended for the MR to be the one to salvage the wrecks, not a 3rd party. It's logical in the sense that mission runners could also be salvagers, but they're still engaging in a separate activity that is subject to its own rules and reward structures (most notably being open to competition). Quote: Or they never intended to have ninja salvagers, that seems more likely. Not really, since the whole point was to go around and search for wrecks, not create them yourself. The default way would be to "ninja" wrecks, but being a "self-sustaining" salvager is something that the system allows for as well as a direct result of the salvaging profession not caring one whit where the wrecks actually come from. Quote: Why havent I earned the right to all salvage? Because you earn your right to salvage by engaging in the Salvager (mini)profession: by beating the competition and being the first person to salvage the wreck. Simply spawning the wreck isn't enough because that's not part of the profession (and already comes with its own reward structure anyway). Quote: Can you explain why we earn one and not the other? Because they're separate activities with separate reward structures: killing rat → earn bounty and/or loot. Salvage wreck → earn salvage. One requires guns; the other requires a salvaging module. There are no cross-over requirements. 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
Tosser Galore	Posted - 2011.04.28 19:47:00 - [456] Edited by: Tosser Galore on 28/04/2011 19:52:44 Edited by: Tosser Galore on 28/04/2011 19:51:27 Suffice to say that property is a very lucid concept in eve. (If it's in your station it is yours) Game mechanics doesn't say anything about the rights to said property, it's just people trying to extrapolate fluff and human interaction, into a game.(everyone who kills a helpless shuttle hunt a helpless pod (albeit fast warping pod), is a psychopath) Obviously people like to construe the world of eve and model it after the real world, "Eve is real" but not THAT real. The core question here is if CCP should flag wrecks, (which will indeed induce a very strange divide in eve, aswell as lag). Should ccp flag wrecks being salvaged in the carebear pockets created by a player in npc space, shooting npc wrecks ? Of course not. This is not bad game design. in fact it leaves an open world with great possibility for different kinds of game play. The being flagged as thief when looting a wreck is however bad design, and does go against the concept of sandboxed game play, but the concept of high sec hinges on these kindergarten rules, which both hinders game play in order to create a "safe haven for isk printing", and uphold the illusion of a policed boundary that is the empire. The "right" to salvage wrecks is not defined by the game mechanics it is left for the players to negotiate within boundaries of common decency (or theft) to claim that (now nerfed) value of salvaged parts. Also. Remove local. It's makes for a crappy gameplay when you instantly can tell if there is a "neut" or target in system. Its **in, space people should be able to sneak up on you. Sure we need some kind of proximity alarm, but playing the game since the domi actually looked like a space potato, watching local gets REALLY old. Remove flagging of theft (who the ** cares if someone lifts a meta 4?, if someone grabs your 4 mil xxx-navy/fleet tag you deserve to loose it) Leave the flagging to a "button" so you can consent to duels, without the interference crap from the concord. Let everyone stay neutral on the overview, without being auto flagged in empire. Now everyone who wants to salvage and loot, will have to get a marauder, and tractor, tractor or simply develop other ways to solve the ninja problem... People who are not aligned/afk will get jumped and wrecked. High sec pvp will only occur between WT and suicide gankers and consented dueling, a small price to pay to get rid of the kindergarten rules. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Barghiest	Posted - 2011.04.28 19:55:00 - [457] I have always been curious about the sociological disposition of people when it comes to defining something. Is it bad game design to name the act or appeal to an oppinion of a definition from a another's perspective? Question: why does one feel that one particular act over another constitutes a sense of ownership? Sticking with the topic as expressed by the OP both in title and body, let us define 3 things. Salvage, Property and Theft. Salvage: noun 1. the act of saving a ship or its cargo (interesting?) from perils of the seas (space). 2. the property so saved. 3. compensation given (Agent?) to those who voluntarily save (murder an NPC pilot?) a ship or its cargo. Property: ûnoun, plural -ties. 1. that which a person owns. 2. goods considered as possessions. 4. something at the disposal of a person. Theft: ûnoun 1. the act of stealing (who is the judge?); the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny. Are such things in EvE named without thought to meaning? I propose that Game Mechanics aside, it is the attitude and education of the defining act of salvaging versus theft as it pertains to self imposed ideals of property that need to be evaluated...within, and not place blame elsewhere. Docter Barghiest. Adendum: once again, and to be ignored I am sure, I profess that neither missioner or the so-called Ninja Salvager own anything until they take possession of said property.
Dirael Papier	Posted - 2011.04.28 20:19:00 - [458] Another suggestion then that won't cause extra clutter. Every NPC ship that's destroyed will drop 1 of 2 things. 1: Loot in a jet can. 2: A salvageable wreck. A ship can't drop both when it's destroyed, but it will always drop something (Either loot or a wreck.) I have no idea how much of a pain that would be to program though or if it would even be possible. Also one obvious drawback would be less salvage (or on missions where pretty much every ship drops loot, less loot). If necessary that could be handled by increasing the amount of salvage/loot gained from any single ship though.
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.28 20:30:00 - [459] I see where you are coming from, but I havent seen anything that suggests that this is what CCP had intended. True, salvage needs an additional module, but where does that suddenly mean that it no longer belongs to the person who created the wreck. And, once again, why treat loot seperate from salvage? If you own the loot, why not the salvage? The only answer is because it takes a seperate module to get? Im sorry but when you look at everything as a whole, the most simple and logical solution is that CCP intended for people to salvage their own wrecks. It looks to me to be a bigger stretch to assume that CCP thought it would be a free for all. Most every thing you say makes sense when you look at them individually, but when you step back and look at the whole picture, I just dont see it. If your view of things was correct, wouldnt be easier to seed systems with wrecks that people can scan down, kinda like grav sites, rather than trying to find a MR in his deadspace? If competition is what you want, I think having it as a deadspace you can use your ship scanner for, or a basic probe that most players can use would promote more competition than the current method.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.28 20:50:00 - [460] Edited by: Tippia on 28/04/2011 20:51:18 Originally by: Jayson Lee I see where you are coming from, but I havent seen anything that suggests that this is what CCP had intended. You mean apart from them saying exactly that from day one? Quote: True, salvage needs an additional module, but where does that suddenly mean that it no longer belongs to the person who created the wreck. Because creating the wreck has nothing to do with creating the salvage. Quote: And, once again, why treat loot seperate from salvage? Because they're different things ù they do different things; you get them in different ways; they have different professions attached to them. Quote: Im sorry but when you look at everything as a whole, the most simple and logical solution is that CCP intended for people to salvage their own wrecks. àexcept that they've quite clearly stated that this is not the case. Originally by: Dirael Papier A ship can't drop both when it's destroyed, but it will always drop something (Either loot or a wreck.) This will quite significantly nerf the salvaging profession and would require a complete rebalancing of rigs. 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

Dirael Papier	Posted - 2011.04.28 21:07:00 - [461] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 28/04/2011 20:51:18 Originally by: Dirael Papier A ship can't drop both when it's destroyed, but it will always drop something (Either loot or a wreck.) This will quite significantly nerf the salvaging profession and would require a complete rebalancing of rigs. That's why I also suggested that increasing the amount of salvage gained per-wreck (possibly increase the amount of loot per-wreck too depending on the mission) might be necessary if the loot and wrecks were separated like that.
Xzar Fyrarr Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2011.04.28 21:08:00 - [462] I still don't understand the problem. If Salvaging Flagged the aggressor either 4 things would happen: 1. He'd cry on the forums. 2. He'd dock up and then cry on the forums. 3. He'd shoot, dock up, then cry on the forums. 4. He'd shoot, get killed, dock up, then cry on the forums. I don't see how anything would change... ------------------------------------------------ One Cannot Fully Appreciate Peace Until They Have Experienced True Pain. ------------------------------------------------- - Xzar Fyrarr ;
Jennifer Starling Imperial Navy Forum Patrol	Posted - 2011.04.28 21:22:00 - [463] This thread still going? It's fairly simple: CCP makes the rules and they ruled that wrecks aren't anyones possession. Logic or not is not relevant. EVE is full of illogical stuff. Case closed.
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.28 21:40:00 - [464] I guess you are right. While I still have my doubts that CCP thought it would end up like this, thats one of the things that makes the game great, players having control over the sandbox. It was a pleasure discussing this with you Tippia.
Arctavian Miromme	Posted - 2011.04.28 21:48:00 - [465] I normally don't care when people do that to my wrecks but I had one particularly difficult mission that I had a tough time with so when someone came in and started salvaging my wrecks I just couldn't take it. I started a conversation with said person said "Could you please not salvage these? I do intend on salvaging them myself." The person involved replied "Sure thing" and just left. I myself often run my Coercer through systems I know are widely mined but wrecks are left behind because miners tend to just leave wrecks and often abandon them when they see what I'm doing so I can also loot it. But on the rare occasion someone wants them then I'll leave it. These other ships "stealing" your wrecks aren't NPCs so opening a petition is pointless. They're people so just ask them to stop.
5econdary Target Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.28 21:59:00 - [466]
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.28 22:04:00 - [467] Originally by: HeIIfire11 ... Come to think of it I have a really good idea. Lock all mission gates to people who aren't in a fleet or corp and make wrecks probeable. This would include the lvl 4 mission buff but would be good because then people couldn't steal the mission objective either and would still get the wrecks after a mission is done. This would please the mission runners and the salvagers who are in it for the salvage. Griefers would cry ofcourse. But not every profession in eve needs to be griefable. While this sounds good at first blush, the ability for someone else to steal your mission completion item (or shoot your rats, or loot your wrecks) is an intended game mechanic. I know this because, early in my EVE career, someone stole my Damsel and offered to ransom her back for (I think) a million isk. I petitioned it, and was told by a GM that this was intended game play. I could buy the Damsel back, I could find another on contracts, I could shoot the thief, or I could fail the mission. I have since come to see the wisdom of this. BTW, anyone want to buy a Damsel cheap?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.28 22:28:00 - [468] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 28/04/2011 22:36:02 Originally by: Tippia Quote: Im sorry but when you look at everything as a whole, the most simple and logical solution is that CCP intended for people to salvage their own wrecks. àexcept that they've quite clearly stated that this is not the case. And on the fourth day ccp said let ther be marauders... ccp saw people salvaging their wrecks and said this was good. A tool used to mission and salvage at the same time. With this tool salvaging and missioning can be seen as the same profession. Edit:You know..looking at all this one could think that missions are there to be griefed. It is perfectly clear that mission runners don't want these people in their stuff so all this "player interaction" in missions is there to entertain griefers. Show me one mission runner that says I want ninjas in my mission. A wise man names skex once said ccp is the biggest bunch of griefers and the more I think about it I think he's completely right.
Dirael Papier	Posted - 2011.04.28 22:32:00 - [469] Edited by: Dirael Papier on 28/04/2011 22:32:28 Originally by: Dirael Papier That's why I also suggested that increasing the amount of salvage gained per-wreck (possibly increase the amount of loot per-wreck too depending on the mission) might be necessary if the loot and wrecks were separated like that. Another option that occurred to me. Instead of increasing the salvage per-wreck, just make every wreck contain salvage. (Currently your salvager can be successful but you don't get any salvage. Unless there are skills that can be trained to improve this so you always get salvage anyways, in which case back to the increase per-wreck I guess.)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.28 22:36:00 - [470] Originally by: HeIIfire11 And on the fourth day ccp said let ther be marauders... àwhich are excellent for collecting loot ù one of the mission rewards. It's pretty poor for salvage work. 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

Karontin Maysubile	Posted - 2011.04.29 00:01:00 - [471] This entire thread is moot. Once they get rid of quality ratings for agents you'll have less than 1% chance of getting a ninja's attention.
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.29 03:21:00 - [472] Funny how you never hear about ninja salvaging going on in low/null sec. This must've been intended too by CCP as a part of this "mini profession".
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.29 05:22:00 - [473] Originally by: 3up*ia Funny how you never hear about ninja salvaging going on in low/null sec. This must've been intended too by CCP as a part of this "mini profession". because the moment you try to scan out a MR in low/null, they cloak/dock/POS/log. Believe me, its not the salvagers hiding from the mission runners. ♥
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.04.29 12:14:00 - [474] Originally by: CCP Prism X"If you're surprised as to why the server does not consider it your stuff, it's because it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage, not to further increase the revenue from mission grinding.. I doubt anyone with a perspective thinks we need to high-sec increase mission grinding any further. "EVE is a really hostile game. We love how hostile it is.. we never meant for it to be a breeze." http://www.eve-search.com/thread/971872/page/1 There you go. The CCP Dev who designed salvaging specifically stated that it was intended to support a new profession, and NOT to increase mission rewards. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.04.29 12:16:00 - [475] Originally by: Awesome Possum Originally by: 3up*ia Funny how you never hear about ninja salvaging going on in low/null sec. This must've been intended too by CCP as a part of this "mini profession". because the moment you try to scan out a MR in low/null, they cloak/dock/POS/log. Believe me, its not the salvagers hiding from the mission runners. Impossible - the mission runners in high-sec are simply bursting with impatience and frustration to be able to PvP people who enter their missions. How savage and vicious must the ones in lo-sec be? I shudder to think of it. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
BetsyAnn Tractorfarmer	Posted - 2011.04.29 12:24:00 - [476] If I get a ninja salvager in my mission, i usually try to talk to him and see if he wants to share loot and salvage..most of the time ninja salvagers are new chars and I believe that they might need some cash, and this way we both profit. It has worked out well so far in most cases. In the rest of the cases, when the ninja doesn't talk and continues..i dock, get my trusty t1 cheap thrasher find him in my mission salvaging and/or looting, lock him, and suicide him and THEN get back to the station in my pod. I find it highly satisactory seeing most of the times their cans have a lot of stuff.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 13:16:00 - [477] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 13:19:10 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: CCP Prism X"If you're surprised as to why the server does not consider it your stuff, it's because it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage, not to further increase the revenue from mission grinding.. I doubt anyone with a perspective thinks we need to high-sec increase mission grinding any further. "EVE is a really hostile game. We love how hostile it is.. we never meant for it to be a breeze." http://www.eve-search.com/thread/971872/page/1 There you go. The CCP Dev who designed salvaging specifically stated that it was intended to support a new profession, and NOT to increase mission rewards. Old quote is old. And yes lvl 4 could use a buff seeing as to how in null sec you fly titans instead of shuttles. But yeah the lvl 4 mission runners are responible for the isk printing. Who ever thinks this needs to get a clue..really. God forbid the mission runner gets 5-10 mill more per mission. And 10 million is only in one or two of the best missions which you hardly get. More like 5 million per mission.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 13:26:00 - [478] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Old quote is old. And still as valid until someone comes up with a good reason why L4s need to be buffed, and why they should be buffed at the expense of a different profession, rather than having their actual rewards boosted. Quote: And yes lvl 4 could use a buff seeing as to how in null sec you fly titans instead of shuttles. So there's not much reason to buff them then. Quote: God forbid the mission runner gets 5-10 mill more per mission. Why is that needed and why can't it be done by buffing the actual mission rewards? 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
Jennifer Starling Imperial Navy Forum Patrol	Posted - 2011.04.29 13:29:00 - [479] Ninja salvagers at least give me an excuse not to do it myself!
MaiLina KaTar	Posted - 2011.04.29 14:23:00 - [480] Originally by: Jayson Lee I guess you are right. While I still have my doubts that CCP thought it would end up like this, thats one of the things that makes the game great, players having control over the sandbox. That sorta stuff happens all the time. CCP also acknowledged many times over that by design they can't always predict what the kids are gonna do with the sand once you hand them their toys. And it's all good as long as they keep the exploits in check.

Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 15:02:00 - [481] Kinda off topic, but based on what we have, should the Noctis get a bonus to probes? It would seem to make sense if CCP wants this ships to be used to salvage other players missions.
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.29 15:34:00 - [482] Originally by: Jayson Lee Kinda off topic, but based on what we have, should the Noctis get a bonus to probes? It would seem to make sense if CCP wants this ships to be used to salvage other players missions. there are already ships that get probe bonuses. there should never be a ship that can do it all. though god knows I'd love a ship with codebreaker/analyzer bonuses.... I sat on a can for 5mins once before it finished. ♥
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.29 15:37:00 - [483] Originally by: Jayson Lee Kinda off topic, but based on what we have, should the Noctis get a bonus to probes? It would seem to make sense if CCP wants this ships to be used to salvage other players missions. Because it has a large cargo hold, the Noctis is useful for looting your own mission or another mission you have permission to loot. For ninja salvaging, it's huge and slow. Who cares if it can fit a ton of salvagers, because a ninja can't tractor random wrecks closer he can't make use of it's bonus to tractor range and speed, so he'd have to slowboat over to the wrecks. And who cares about the size of the cargo hold, since salvage is small anyway. It's better to ninja salvage in something small and quick, with several high slots. So no, the Noctis doesn't need a bonus to probes.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.04.29 16:31:00 - [484] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 13:19:10 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: CCP Prism X"If you're surprised as to why the server does not consider it your stuff, it's because it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage, not to further increase the revenue from mission grinding.. I doubt anyone with a perspective thinks we need to high-sec increase mission grinding any further. "EVE is a really hostile game. We love how hostile it is.. we never meant for it to be a breeze." http://www.eve-search.com/thread/971872/page/1 There you go. The CCP Dev who designed salvaging specifically stated that it was intended to support a new profession, and NOT to increase mission rewards. Old quote is old. What difference does that make? You asked for proof that salvaging was not intended to be part of the mission reward, and I provided it. There it is in white on black: CCP did not intend salvage to be part of the mission reward, along with the comment that "no-one with any perspective" thinks that mission running needs to be extended I'm not arguing with you, since no matter what anyone says you just wave it away, or ignore it, or apply some arbitrary excuse to discount it. It's impossible to argue with a person who has no respect for facts or logic. It's only possible to embarrass them. PrismX's comment is wholly applicable to you: you don't have any perspective. All you think about is the narrow viewpoint of the hi-sec mission-runner. You're incapable of think about the wider interest of the game, or any other profession. Still, having worked through at least two dozen of these threads, I'm no longer worried or upset by these discussions, as CCP show absolutely no inclination to reverse these decisions. Allow me to counter with an even more egalitarian proposal: make mission deadspaces into lo-sec pockets (which would explain why CONCORD wont go in and blast those naughty Guristas themselves). Then you can freely engage salvagers at the cost of nothing more than a minor sec-hit hit. Anyone who does illegally attack anyone else in such a deadspace pocket will of course be trapped in there for 15 minutes until their GCC runs out. Plenty of opportunity for consequences to apply there, and you'll get your stated wish of more PvP in hi-sec. Since this proposal gives you everything you say you want, I trust it will have your full support? Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 17:24:00 - [485] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 13:19:10 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: CCP Prism X"If you're surprised as to why the server does not consider it your stuff, it's because it's a mini profession designed for people who want to roam and look for salvage, not to further increase the revenue from mission grinding.. I doubt anyone with a perspective thinks we need to high-sec increase mission grinding any further. "EVE is a really hostile game. We love how hostile it is.. we never meant for it to be a breeze." http://www.eve-search.com/thread/971872/page/1 There you go. The CCP Dev who designed salvaging specifically stated that it was intended to support a new profession, and NOT to increase mission rewards. Old quote is old. What difference does that make? You asked for proof that salvaging was not intended to be part of the mission reward, and I provided it. There it is in white on black: CCP did not intend salvage to be part of the mission reward, along with the comment that "no-one with any perspective" thinks that mission running needs to be extended I'm not arguing with you, since no matter what anyone says you just wave it away, or ignore it, or apply some arbitrary excuse to discount it. It's impossible to argue with a person who has no respect for facts or logic. It's only possible to embarrass them. PrismX's comment is wholly applicable to you: you don't have any perspective. All you think about is the narrow viewpoint of the hi-sec mission-runner. You're incapable of think about the wider interest of the game, or any other profession. Still, having worked through at least two dozen of these threads, I'm no longer worried or upset by these discussions, as CCP show absolutely no inclination to reverse these decisions. Allow me to counter with an even more egalitarian proposal: make mission deadspaces into lo-sec pockets (which would explain why CONCORD wont go in and blast those naughty Guristas themselves). Then you can freely engage salvagers at the cost of nothing more than a minor sec-hit hit. Anyone who does illegally attack anyone else in such a deadspace pocket will of course be trapped in there for 15 minutes until their GCC runs out. Plenty of opportunity for consequences to apply there, and you'll get your stated wish of more PvP in hi-sec. Since this proposal gives you everything you say you want, I trust it will have your full support? Sure you have my support only I wont come in with my mission ship Then it's all good to me. As far as thje quote goes..I know what ccp wants and it's all good but then the game mechanics should reflect that choice. My corp name on the wreck,the protection of concord on "my" wreck and the fact that no one can tractor beam it leads me to believe that it is in fact my wreck. Quotes like this help a bit too. Originally by: GM Ytterbium The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission. So they should finish something before throwing it out there which is the cause of this confusion. And I know they have been reading this thread but hell will freeze before they try to comment because I'm right. So think what you will and I agree..they wont change it. I could care less because ninja's are not a problem for me. I've had two in god knows how many years and I still leave the cheap salvage where it lands. My point was that its bad game design to throw out unfinished content. No one has proven me wrong but everyone wants to make excuses for ccp. Go ahead I couldn't care less really. Anyone with any brains can see it's not well thought out.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 17:29:00 - [486] Edited by: Tippia on 29/04/2011 17:30:09 Originally by: HeIIfire11 I know what ccp wants and it's all good but then the game mechanics should reflect that choice. They do. Quote: the protection of concord on "my" wreck For instance, I can remove your wreck without any kind of response from CONCORD ù they don't really protect it. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 17:29:00 - [487] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 17:32:31 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 17:30:49 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I know what ccp wants and it's all good but then the game mechanics should reflect that choice. They do. They do not. Tippia you are a trip..really Originally by: Tippia Quote: the protection of concord on "my" wreck For instance, I can remove your wreck without any kind of response from CONCORD ù they don't really protect it. I bet you wont shoot at it though.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 17:37:00 - [488] Originally by: HeIIfire11 I bet you wont shoot at it though. Of course not. That would destroy the loot can, which is yours. Look, the only real confusion is that some people seem the believe that just because you do two things at they same time, they're the same thing, even though the mechanics quite clearly show that this is not the case. Education would solve that quite nicely. The rest of it is just greed and baseless entitlement. 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
Mister Rocknrolla	Posted - 2011.04.29 17:51:00 - [489] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 17:32:31 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 17:30:49 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I know what ccp wants and it's all good but then the game mechanics should reflect that choice. They do. They do not. Tippia you are a trip..really CCP wants conflict between players. This thread is testament to their success. The more it's argued, the more successful the current mechanic is proven to be.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 17:51:00 - [490] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 I bet you wont shoot at it though. Of course not. That would destroy the loot can, which is yours. Look, the only real confusion is that some people seem the believe that just because you do two things at they same time, they're the same thing, even though the mechanics quite clearly show that this is not the case. Education would solve that quite nicely. The rest of it is just greed and baseless entitlement. There is no loot can it was REPLACED by wrecks..remember? "In Kali all ships (player and NPC) will spawn wrecks upon destruction. This will replace the loot can."

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:15:00 - [491] Originally by: HeIIfire11 There is no loot can Sure there is. It's the container that holds your loot. Remove the wreck and the can is exposed. Go up to the wreck, and it lets you access the can. Have you ever seen loot float around freely in space? Quote: "This will replace the loot can" àas the primary way of containing your loot, and moving or destroying that loot (which belongs to you) isn't allowed. The wreck, on the other hand, doesn't belong to you, which is why I can remove it (and expose the raw can) without any kind of CONCORD response. You see, you're actively trying to confuse yourself by not admitting the very simple explanation ù one that is 100% consistent with the game mechanics ù that the wreck isn't owned, whereas the loot can contained in it is. The game isn't confusing. You are. And you can't really accuse the game for confusion you create for yourself. The fact remains: the wreck isn't yours. The game mechanics are consistent with this fact. 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
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:23:00 - [492] There is no loot can contained within. The wreck IS the loot can. A cargo container is generated if the wreck is salvaged before the loot is removed from the wreck. But there is no "loot can contained in it". You're creating a model that fits your definition of what is occurring. But, as evidenced from the quote, there is no loot can separate from the wreck. They are one in the same.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:23:00 - [493] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 18:24:18 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 There is no loot can Sure there is. It's the container that holds your loot. Remove the wreck and the can is exposed. Go up to the wreck, and it lets you access the can. Have you ever seen loot float around freely in space? Quote: "This will replace the loot can" àas the primary way of containing your loot, and moving or destroying that loot (which belongs to you) isn't allowed. The wreck, on the other hand, doesn't belong to you, which is why I can remove it (and expose the raw can) without any kind of CONCORD response. You see, you're actively trying to confuse yourself by not admitting the very simple explanation ù one that is 100% consistent with the game mechanics ù that the wreck isn't owned, whereas the loot can contained in it is. The game isn't confusing. You are. And you can't really accuse the game for confusion you create for yourself. The fact remains: the wreck isn't yours. The game mechanics are consistent with this fact. So you're just gonna ignore the quotes from ccp? How many empty cans have you seen? When you empty a can it goes poof and is gone. The wreck however stays. Even an empty wreck that stays there after looting it has my corp name and appears to be mine.It is also protected by concord should you want to shoot it. Despite the fact that ccp says cans were replaced by wrecks.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:41:00 - [494] Edited by: Tippia on 29/04/2011 18:46:05 Originally by: Mortania You're creating a model that fits your definition of what is occurring. It's not really my definition ù it's a model of what's occurring that is in line with how the mechanics handle the different parts: a wreck that anyone can remove without ill effects; a can that can be stolen from because its contents are owned, and which is laid bare when the wreck is removed; and finally, the can is contained by the wreck, which is why you see your name on the wreck and why outright destroying it (which also destroys the owned can) generates a response. While it may not happen like this in the code, the model explains the rules and the mechanics just fine ù any confusion that might arise is caused by disregarding the model. Originally by: HeIIfire11 So you're just gonna ignore the quotes from ccp? Well, you are, so why can't I? The wreck isn't yours, or you wouldn't be able to remove it without consequence. The salvage isn't yours because you haven't earned it. Salvage isn't meant to be a reward for the mission-runner. Salvaging isn't theft. As a result of all of that, there is exactly zero reason to flag the salvager. Oh, and you'll also note that I didn't ignore the quoteà Quote: When you empty a can it goes poof and is gone. The wreck however stays. So the wreck and the can are obviously not the same thingà Quote: Even an empty wreck that stays there after looting it has my corp name and appears to be mine. It "appears to be" yours because it has your name on ità It appears not to be yours because I can remove it without CONCORD interferenceà Which appearance wins? 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
Emperor Salazar Caldari Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:43:00 - [495] Originally by: HeIIfire11 appears to be mine. Yeah... See this is your problem. CCP is definitely confusing you with the whole wreck looking like its yours. But they have flat out said its not (despite their ****ty ability to portray this in-game). Why are you trying to contest a point that CCP has already manifested a firm stance on?
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:44:00 - [496] Question about wrecks. It my mission, the wreck is empty, can I shoot the wreck? Can anyone else shoot the wreck? Will either person be flagged for aggression?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:49:00 - [497] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 18:53:43 Originally by: Jayson Lee Question about wrecks. It my mission, the wreck is empty, can I shoot the wreck? Can anyone else shoot the wreck? Will either person be flagged for aggression? You can shoot it...others can't. They will get concorded. Originally by: Emperor Salazar (despite their ****ty ability to portray this in-game). This is all I'm trying to prove or should I say have proven.
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:54:00 - [498] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 18:50:01 Originally by: Jayson Lee Question about wrecks. It my mission, the wreck is empty, can I shoot the wreck? Can anyone else shoot the wreck? Will either person be flagged for aggression? You can shoot it...others can't. They will get concorded. Any empty wreck? Why doesnt this game mechanic suggest more than anything else who owns the wreck. Is there another situation like this in EVE?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 18:55:00 - [499] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 18:56:03 Originally by: Jayson Lee Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 18:50:01 Originally by: Jayson Lee Question about wrecks. It my mission, the wreck is empty, can I shoot the wreck? Can anyone else shoot the wreck? Will either person be flagged for aggression? You can shoot it...others can't. They will get concorded. Any empty wreck? Why doesnt this game mechanic suggest more than anything else who owns the wreck. Is there another situation like this in EVE? You can only shoot wrecks that belong to you,your corp or your fleet I think. Shooting anyone elses wreck empty or not will get you concorded. Not exactly sure about the fleet part.
Kyra Felann Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:01:00 - [500] Edited by: Kyra Felann on 29/04/2011 19:01:04 My summary of the anti-ninja-salvagers in this thread: "I choose to ignore the voluminous evidence to the contrary and to believe that my own made-up rules regarding wrecks and salvage should apply to everyone else." or put another way, puts fingers in ears and closes eyes "LA LA LA LA! I can't hear you! Ninja salvaging is stealing! THHHHHHHHHPTH!" The game works the way it does. There are pages full of quotes from CCP proving beyond any doubt that it's working as intended. Just accept it and move on already. -----WARNING SIGNATURE BELOW----- Bring back the NeoNeoCom!

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:04:00 - [501] Originally by: Kyra Felann There are pages full of quotes from CCP proving beyond any doubt that it's working as intended. Just accept it and move on already. And there are contradictions in these quotes which I posted on page 10. They dont reflect the game mechanics which is the point I'm making.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:04:00 - [502] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 29/04/2011 18:46:05 Originally by: Mortania You're creating a model that fits your definition of what is occurring. It's not really my definition ù it's a model of what's occurring that is in line with how the mechanics handle the different parts: a wreck that anyone can remove without ill effects; a can that can be stolen from because its contents are owned, and which is laid bare when the wreck is removed; and finally, the can is contained by the wreck, which is why you see your name on the wreck and why outright destroying it (which also destroys the owned can) generates a response. But it doesn't have to contain loot for the response, right? Your model doesn't explain the entire situation. Additionally, there's the name on the empty wreck that isn't explained by your model either. What I'm saying is that no simple model (the wreck is everyone's, there's a can in the wrecks) that has been put forth that explains what's happening. Which if you go back and read the OP, is what started the whole thing. And what Hellfire seems to be arguing as well. It's not GREED that is driving an ask for a change, but CLARITY. Make the model work in a simple consistent fashion that doesn't create confusion. The current system fails that test.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:09:00 - [503] Edited by: Tippia on 29/04/2011 19:16:32 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Emperor Salazar (despite their **ty ability to portray this in-game). This is all I'm trying to prove or should I say have proven. No, you're trying to prove more than that: that the wreck and the products made out of that wreck (the salvage) is owned by whomever made the wreck spawn. Originally by:** Jayson Lee Why doesnt this game mechanic suggest more than anything else who owns the wreck. Because it is also possible to remove the wreck without getting CONCORDed and because the mechanic that would fix that little issue (which is easily explained anyway) wasn't put into the game until four years after wrecks had been introduced. Originally by: Mortania But it doesn't have to contain loot for the response, right? Your model doesn't explain the entire situation. Yes it does. The wreck still contains the (owned) can. Quote: Additionally, there's the name on the empty wreck that isn't explained by your model either. Yes: the wreck contains the (owned) can. Quote: What I'm saying is that no simple model (the wreck is everyone's, there's a can in the wrecks) that has been put forth that explains what's happening. Sure it does: the wreck contains the can. You can remove the wreck without issue, and that reveals the raw can (if it's empty, it implodes at this point). You cannot shoot or tractor the wreck because you'd destroy or move the (owned) can. Quote: It's not GREED that is driving an ask for a change, but CLARITY. Greed has motivated every salvaging thread so far, and if you look at what they're suggesting it seems to motivate them as well: they do not want clarity (which would mean that salvagers have an even easier time) but rather that the mission-runner gets his rewards increased. If it was clarity they were after, the words "stealing", "theft" and "flagging" would never appearà 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
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:25:00 - [504] Quote: Because it is also possible to remove the wreck without getting CONCORDed and because the mechanic that would fix that little issue (which is easily explained anyway) wasn't put into the game until four years after wrecks had been introduced. You can do alot of things to avoid concord. Doenst change anything. To clairfy though, if I create the wreck I, my corp, or my group can destroy it? No one else can do this, correct? Quote: Greed has motivated every salvaging thread so far, and if you look at what they're suggesting it seems to motivate them as well: they do not want clarity (which would mean that salvagers have an even easier time) but rather that the mission-runner gets his rewards increased. I take issue with this, if its greed that drove everyone they would ignore salvage. You make more money quicker if you dont salvage.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:31:00 - [505] Originally by: Jayson Lee You can do alot of things to avoid concord. Not really. You can do things to not trigger CONCORD; avoiding them is bannable. Quote: To clairfy though, if I create the wreck I, my corp, or my group can destroy it? No one else can do this, correct? Not destroy it, no. But anyone can remove it. Quote: I take issue with this, if its greed that drove everyone they would ignore salvage. You'd think so, yes, but what else would you call the motivation to further increase the already large rewards of one of the easiest, most risk-free ways of earning ISK and removing the extra effort required for those rewards? 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
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:40:00 - [506] Edited by: Mortania on 29/04/2011 19:40:53 Edited by: Mortania on 29/04/2011 19:40:39 Originally by: Tippia If it was clarity they were after, the words "stealing", "theft" and "flagging" would never appearà Nah, that's just as easily explained by a lack of understanding. People believe that they are being stolen from because they believe that the wreck is theirs. Which it is. It is only the salvage contained in the wreck which isn't. I haven't tested it in a while, but I believe even a "looted" empty wreck will still create a concord response when exploded, yes?
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 19:45:00 - [507] Quote: Not really. You can do things to not trigger CONCORD; avoiding them is bannable. Not really, I avoid concord all the time, I chose not to ** them off. Quote: Not destroy it, no. But anyone can remove it. Is there anything else like this in eve. It has my name, I can tow it, I can shot it, and no else has these abilities? Quote:** You'd think so, yes, but what else would you call the motivation to further increase the already large rewards of one of the easiest, most risk-free ways of earning ISK and removing the extra effort required for those rewards? This would only make sense if the MR got the rewards automatically after the mission. He doesnt. You still have to change ships and do the work, so its not an extra reward. As for the reasons for these threads, its fairly clear that CCPs words do not match the game mechanics they have in place. Its easy to see how someone gets confused. The game tells you one thing, CCP says something else.
Utremi Fasolasi Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.29 20:31:00 - [508] Originally by: Skex Relbore Ninja Salvaging is a legitmate mechanic because the devs like to make life easy on griefers in the game because if people had to actually take some risks and put a little work into being asshats the game might lose some of it's "dark harsh universe" feel Scanning down ships in order to salvage wrecks that might be nearby is definitely work. And the risk that the pilot in the pocket might not be done killing all the pirates is risk too. The salvager could get NPC aggro and be blown up. It's a shame you can't scan down abandoned wrecks if I understand the mechanic properly, you can only locate them if there is still a player in the pocket.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 20:34:00 - [509] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 20:35:26 Originally by: Tippia the wreck contains the (owned) can. You keep going on about this can when the blog on the introduction of wrecks which you brought into this discussion clearly states that said cans were REPLACED by wrecks. So ccp is wrong and you're right? If so...bad game design. "In Kali all ships (player and NPC) will spawn wrecks upon destruction. This will replace the loot can." Your can argument is no longer valid,please refrain from using it.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 21:17:00 - [510] Originally by: Jayson Lee Not really, I avoid concord all the time, I chose not to ** them off. You're not avoiding them, then. Quote: Is there anything else like this in eve. Nope. Quote: This would only make sense if the MR got the rewards automatically after the mission. It makes sense regardless: the loot is very specifically his, which is why taking it counts as "stealing" and why they changed it so that all NPC loot in a mission belongs to the mission-runner, rather than follow the normal rules for loot ownership. If he chooses to leave it behind, that's his problem. Quote: You still have to change ships and do the work Changing ships isn't really necessary, no, but yes, you have to collect the loot. It's still yours, though, and you don't have to do any extra work to own it since it's part of the mission reward structure. Quote:** so its not an extra reward. The loot isn't, no. The salvage isn't really an extra reward either ù it's the standard (and only) reward for salvaging, and in relation to running the mission, it's neither "extra" nor "a reward." Quote: Its easy to see how someone gets confused. The only part that is remotely confusing is the name on the wrecks, but again: how else are they going to communicate the ownership of the loot? Originally by: HeIIfire11 You keep going on about this can when the blog on the introduction of wrecks which you brought into this discussion clearly states that said cans were REPLACED by wrecks. So ccp is wrong and you're right? No. The model is right and CCP is right. That's the whole point of the model. As for the bad game design: how else would they communicate the ownership of the loot? Quote: And to clear things up I'm not after a mission buff Funny that, seeing as how you're arguing for one. 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

Zyress	Posted - 2011.04.29 21:26:00 - [511] I would point out that after I loot the wreck which has my corp name on it and cannot be shot or tractored by you without Concord involvement, the wreck still has my name on it and still cannot be tractored or shot by you without Concorde involvement. This tells me that despite what you say, I still have some ownership of the wreck you do not have after the loot is removed.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 21:28:00 - [512] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 21:33:14 Originally by: Tippia Quote: And to clear things up I'm not after a mission buff Funny that, seeing as how you're arguing for one. No I'm not. Why would I argue to get something I already have? Nothing's stopping me from salvaging I just choose to leave it. Why should I care who it belongs to? No my point is just what I said it was..nothing more nothing less. And about the can..you say there is one and ccp says there isn't. Which is it? Who is right you or ccp? Can only be one since the two statements contradict each other. "In Kali all ships (player and NPC) will spawn wrecks upon destruction. This will replace the loot can."
Karash Amerius Sutoka	Posted - 2011.04.29 21:35:00 - [513] Haven't seen a troll thread go 17 pages in quite awhile. Grats to the OP. ========================= Karash Amerius - Operative - Sutoka Fighting Broke - A Eve Online Blog =========================
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 21:36:00 - [514] Originally by: HeIIfire11 No I'm not. Yes you are ù you want to make the salvage owned by the mission runner and flag any competing salvager. This means you're asking them to increase the scope of the rewards of missions. Quote: And about the can..you say there is one and ccp says there isn't. No. The model says there is, which is consistent with the mechanics and the way CCP describes who owns what. 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
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.29 21:38:00 - [515] People are currently way too focussed on the mechanics of who owns what. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what those mechanics are, except insofar as they could potentially be less confusing. CCP's intent is clearly stated in various dev blogs, forum posts, and the like: Loot belongs to the mission runner, and may only be taken if the taker is willing to commit a minor act of aggression against said mission runner. Salvage belongs to whoever gets to a wreck first with a successful salvager cycle. That's the design, and that's what's implemented. Now, as for those mechanics... As far as i'm concerned, they make sufficient sense. You shoot a ship until it esplodes and you get a wreck. (We all like the pretty 'splosions, right?) In that wreck is (maybe) some loot, which belongs to you, per CONCORD. "You shot the ship and made the wreck, you get the usable contents." The game mechanic that enables this ownership is that all containers in space are owned, and an object may not be floating in space separate from a container. (Ignoring planets and other celestials, plus some other stuff, here). Whether a wreck contains a can, or is a can, doesn't matter, though, except to worse pedants than me. Where carebears feel this breaks down is around salvage. Problem for a carebear: it looks like the salvage logically exists in the wreck (which is owned) from the moment of the wreck's creation. As far as game mechanics are concerned, though, it doesn't. It's created by operating a particular type of scanner on the wreck, a Salvager I or Salvager II, which are listed in the item database under "Data and composition scanners". A salvager effectively creates the salvage it finds when it succeeds in accessing the container. And CONCORD has said very clearly that salvage is free for the finding. Anyone can salvage any wreck at any time, and it isn't considered an aggressive act. Changing this so that the salvage belongs to the carebear mission runner will buff mission rewards, creating an entitlement where none presently exists. Not in a useful way, because it's not worth salvaging if you're running L4 missions for your bread and butter, but nevertheless, it's a buff. And speaking as an L4 mission runner, L4 missions are already quite lucrative enough, thankyouverymuch. Changing the ownership mechanism will also nerf salvaging as a mini-profession. Currently, salvaging is something you can skill up to much faster than running L4 missions efficiently. It doesn't pay nearly as well, but that's fine for something less skill-intensive. Worst of all, other existing game mechanics are likely to have to change to accommodate salvage-as-mission-reward. the simple solution is to make activating a salvager on a wreck that isn't yours an aggressive act. Problem is that doing that (activating a module aggressively) in high security space calls in CONCORD. Concording a salvager seems just a tad harsh, now doesn't it? So you'd have to change aggression mechanics around modules to include "minor aggression" where today you have only "passive" and "aggressive". This is likely to have a large and ugly ripple effect on combat... The final nail in the coffin of the whole discussion should be that CCP wants EVE Online to be a cold, hard game, one where people do what they have to do to get by. That means conflict at every step of your career as a capsuleer. The conflict between mission runner and ninja salvager is intentional. If you don't like it but can live with it, fine. Don't expect it to change, though, because CCP has said they do like it. If you can't live with it (the ninja salvaging issue is a deal-breaker) all I can say is don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way to Hello Kitty Online.
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 21:51:00 - [516] Quote: You're not avoiding them, then. I guess its how you use the word I avoid concord by not doing anything to bring them about. I know eluding them is a bannable offense. Its trivial I know, I dont know why its brought up. Quote: Nope. And that doesnt raise any questions in your mind? Even can flipping at least gets flagged, and im pretty sure CCP stance on that is you jettisoned, you must not want it. Why do they flag something you purposely give up, but you have wrecks, that show ownership, is protected by concord and cant be towed by anyone but you? Quote: The loot isn't, no. The salvage isn't really an extra reward either ù it's the standard (and only) reward for salvaging, and in relation to running the mission, it's neither "extra" nor "a reward." If its not a reward, why do you claim if things are changed its a boost to MR? The MR gets no extra reward, he basically changes his hat and becomes a salvager. Salvaging doenst get nerfed at all. It just limits who can salvage where, the profession has no change. Quote: The only part that is remotely confusing is the name on the wrecks, but again: how else are they going to communicate the ownership of the loot? That is not the only thing. Why does concord care if you blow up a wreck in my mission but i dont?
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:03:00 - [517] I'd be fine with any system which made ownership clearer. I think the easiest solution is to treat them as the jet cans they replaced. But I'd be equally fine with any other system which makes their mildly convoluted ownership clearer.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:05:00 - [518] Originally by: Jayson Lee And that doesnt raise any questions in your mind? Nah. It's one of the few occasions where two professions are linked by the same resource: one has a by-product that the other uses as the source for its activities, that's all. Quote: Even can flipping at least gets flagged, and im pretty sure CCP stance on that is you jettisoned, you must not want it. Apparently not seeing as how you still own it after it's jettisoned. Maybe you're just sorting and house-cleaning. Quote: Why do they flag something you purposely give up, but you have wrecks, that show ownership, is protected by concord and cant be towed by anyone but you? Because it's not at all certain that you're giving it up, whereas you haven't even caimed the wrecks yet (so you haven't even had the chance to give them up). Quote: If its not a reward, why do you claim if things are changed its a boost to MR? It's not a reward for mission runners ù making it one means you've now given the mission runners an additional reward. This constitutes a boost. Quote: The MR gets no extra reward, he basically changes his hat and becomes a salvager. Exactly. And as a salvager, he has to compete with other salvagers ù it's part of the profession ù and has no special ownership over stuff he hasn't earned yet. Quote: Salvaging doenst get nerfed at all. It just limits who can salvage where Nice contradiction there. Limiting salvaging nerfs it. Quote: That is not the only thing. Why does concord care if you blow up a wreck in my mission but i dont? Because the wreck contains an owned object. 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
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:09:00 - [519] Originally by: Tippia Because the wreck contains an owned object. I thought looted wrecks still caused response, no?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:12:00 - [520] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Tippia Because the wreck contains an owned object. I thought looted wrecks still caused response, no? Because, while empty, they still obviously have a container in them, and nuking this container is apparently a no-no. (Also, mechanics-wise, wrecks were introduced four years before we got the ability to turn them blue, so while the obvious solution to that one would be to automatically blue any empty wreck, it's only obvious now, not when the wreck mechanic was originally implemented.) 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

Aeronwen Carys Empire of Dust	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:29:00 - [521] Are you lot still banging on about this? Really? Loot belongs to the mission runner, the wreck is salvageable by anyone. That seems really clear to me. What have I missed?
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:37:00 - [522] Originally by: Aeronwen Carys Are you lot still banging on about this? Really? Loot belongs to the mission runner, the wreck is salvageable by anyone. That seems really clear to me. What have I missed? 18 pages of trolling and denial of the recorded facts. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:42:00 - [523] Originally by: Aeronwen Carys Are you lot still banging on about this? Really? Loot belongs to the mission runner, the wreck is salvageable by anyone. That seems really clear to me. What have I missed? Reading comprehension classes? Your ADHD drugs? There's a more nuanced discussion going on. But, 8/10 for the witty one liner.
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:45:00 - [524] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Aeronwen Carys Are you lot still banging on about this? Really? Loot belongs to the mission runner, the wreck is salvageable by anyone. That seems really clear to me. What have I missed? 18 pages of trolling and denial of the recorded facts. Lets be fair, im trying to figure out a few things. Like the quote that says wrecks will replace, not contain, loot cans. The fact that only the MR can shoot the wrecks, anyone else is flagged. Wrecks have player name attached to them. Only MR can tractor the wrecks. There might be others, but these arent just trivial things. There is no doubt that CCP is fine with things as is, but it doesnt hurt to discuss some of the features that might need adjusting. I havnt seen a salvager entire my missions, cant say it would bother me if they did. I more focused on the mechanics that appear to contradict themselves. CCP has changed their minds before and the forums seem to be a good place to voice those concerns.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:50:00 - [525] Originally by: Jayson Lee I more focused on the mechanics that appear to contradict themselves. Not much to focus on, then. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 22:59:00 - [526] Well since Tippia is in a state of denial I can rest my case. Without your make pretend can you have nothing else to bring to the table. Same can that ccp says was replaced by wrecks. And this is where the argument goes in my favor. Because without the can (which ccp says no longer exists)there is no reason for a wreck to have my name on it. This is also where my point is proven and the bad game design in this mini profession comes in..thus causing the confusion. I'm sorry but as much as you love to be right Tippia this time you'll have to do without. A quote from the devs you hold so highly is above what you want to believe and how you would like to imagine it. So again..there is no can nor is there a reason for an empty wreck to appear as if it belongs to the mission runner.It either does belong to the mission runner or its bad designed mini profession which was my point from page one. You'll have to pick one but you can't have it all your way I'll just leave this here for reference... "In Kali all ships (player and NPC) will spawn wrecks upon destruction. This will replace the loot can."
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:07:00 - [527] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Without your make pretend can you have nothing else to bring to the table. Read what I wrote: it's a model. It explains why things work the way they work, and why this is in line with what CCP claims. Quote: And this is where the argument goes in my favor. In favour of what? Quote: This is also where my point is proven and the bad game design in this mini profession comes in..thus causing the confusion. What is the bad game design? The confusion is very easily dispelled by looking at the model. Quote: So again..there is no can nor is there a reason for an empty wreck to appear as if it belongs to the mission runner. Yes there is: the mechanic to work around this did not exist at the time. You are judging a five year old implementation in the light of something that was put into the game one year ago. This does not make it bad game design, no matter how much you wish it did. Quote: It either does belong to the mission runner or its bad designed mini profession which was my point from page one. àso how do you communicate the ownership of the loot, if not on the wreck? 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
Doctor Mabuse	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:13:00 - [528] It's really very simple. When an NPC is popped an object is created, for the sake of argument we'll call it a 'wreck'. This 'wreck' consists of a can wrapped up in space junk, bits of the original ship, scrap metal. It belongs to the mission runner that popped the NPC; only he can tractor it, and only he can legitimately open the can buried inside and retrieve the intact mods that dropped from the NPC. If anyone else retrieves these mods it is considered stealing and they will be flagged. if anyone elese dstroys the mission runners wreck they will be destroyed by CONCORD. However, the space junk that surrounds the can can be stripped off by using a salvager, this will turn the space junk into broken salvage parts inside the hold of whatever ship is doing the salvaging, leaving the can at the core of the wreck intact and on its own. This salvaging activity is available for anyone to complete, no-one has any rights over the space junk surrounding the can that makes up the wreck. Not bad game design, just badly explained. ------------------------------------ Who's trip-trapping on my bridge?
Jayson Lee Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:15:00 - [529] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Jayson Lee I more focused on the mechanics that appear to contradict themselves. Not much to focus on, then. Nothing? Why can I blow up wrecks and the ninja salvager cant? Maybe this was cleared up, but loot or not, can anyone else shoot a wreck without concord responding?
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:20:00 - [530] Originally by: Tippia àso how do you communicate the ownership of the loot, if not on the wreck? If this were true, when the loot is removed, or there is none, then there should be no ownership placed on the wreck. Easy, requires no blue application, could have been implemented 5 years ago. Etc. The bottom line is CCP changed things a little bit, but didn't clean up their work. Does this come as a major surprise to anyone?

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:23:00 - [531] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 23:23:54 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Without your make pretend can you have nothing else to bring to the table. Read what I wrote: it's a model. It explains why things work the way they work, and why this is in line with what CCP claims. What model and what does it explain where other than in your mind? Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 And this is where the argument goes in my favor. In favour of what? In favor of it being unfinished content,bad designed mini profession and the cause of confusion which leads to these countless threads over and over again. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 ]This is also where my point is proven and the bad game design in this mini profession comes in..thus causing the confusion. What is the bad game design? The confusion is very easily dispelled by looking at the model. Again..what model? All I see is a wreck with my name on it restricted to me for all but salvage in my mission. As well as a dev blog where the introduction of wrecks says that they will replace said cans. Meaning they no longer exist. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 So again..there is no can nor is there a reason for an empty wreck to appear as if it belongs to the mission runner. Yes there is: the mechanic to work around this did not exist at the time. You are judging a five year old implementation in the light of something that was put into the game one year ago. This does not make it bad game design, no matter how much you wish it did. Exactly what is it that was introduced a year ago? Salvage is a good bit older than a year. Not only that it isn't an excuse for the confusion but a proof of unfinished content just thrown out without changing the older content to accomidate the new profession. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 It either does belong to the mission runner or its bad designed mini profession which was my point from page one. àso how do you communicate the ownership of the loot, if not on the wreck? Sorry I don't get paid to figure that out..infact I pay ccp to do so. Not to mention this is not relevant to the argument. The op made a point stating that it's bbad game design and I agree.This much has been proven by misleading quotes and misleading game mechanics to go along with it. Fixing it..even if I knew how,wont happen anyways.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:25:00 - [532] Originally by: Jayson Lee Why can I blow up wrecks and the ninja salvager cant? Because the wreck contains an owned object. Quote: loot or not, can anyone else shoot a wreck without concord responding? No, because, loot or not, the wreck always contains an owned object. Originally by: Mortania If this were true, when the loot is removed, or there is none, then there should be no ownership placed on the wreck. Easy, requires no blue application 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:31:00 - [533] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 29/04/2011 23:31:48 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Jayson Lee Why can I blow up wrecks and the ninja salvager cant? Because the wreck contains an owned object. Quote: loot or not, can anyone else shoot a wreck without concord responding? No, because, loot or not, the wreck always contains an owned object. Originally by: Mortania If this were true, when the loot is removed, or there is none, then there should be no ownership placed on the wreck. Easy, requires no blue application How so? So now we went from a can to an "owned object" ....I see You're not helping the confusion any buddy
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:37:00 - [534] Edited by: Mortania on 29/04/2011 23:39:55 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Jayson Lee Why can I blow up wrecks and the ninja salvager cant? Because the wreck contains an owned object. Quote: loot or not, can anyone else shoot a wreck without concord responding? No, because, loot or not, the wreck always contains an owned object. Originally by: Mortania If this were true, when the loot is removed, or there is none, then there should be no ownership placed on the wreck. Easy, requires no blue application How so? Removal of tags on an object. EDIT: And concord response.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.29 23:41:00 - [535] Edited by: Tippia on 29/04/2011 23:44:37 Originally by: HeIIfire11 What model and what does it explain where other than in your mind? This model, and it explains the mechanics and how/why they are in line with CCP's statements. Quote: In favor of it being unfinished content,bad designed mini profession and the cause of confusion which leads to these countless threads over and over again. How does replacing cans with wrecks make salvaging unfinished? How is it badly designed? And again: how would you communicate the ownership of the loot if not on the wreck? Quote: All I see is a wreck with my name on it restricted to me for all but salvage in my mission. As well as a dev blog where the introduction of wrecks says that they will replace said cans. Meaning they no longer exist. àexcept that cans still exist and still contain the loot. They just don't appear in free space until you've removed the wreck (which you can do without a CONCORD response, which kind of speaks against the notion that you'd own the wreck ù CONCORD usually doesn't respond well to the removal of other people's stuff). Quote: Exactly what is it that was introduced a year ago? Wreck abandonment. This could have solved the problem of empty wrecks showing up with an ownership flag, but that solution wasn't available at the time (salvaging was introduced five years ago). so you can't claim that salvaging was unfinished just because that didn't happen. Quote: proof of unfinished content just thrown out without changing the older content to accomidate the new profession. And exactly what was thrown out, and what wasn't changed? Quote: Sorry I don't get paid to figure that out. No, but you can be constructive and think about how to actually solve the problems you perceive. I've offered one solution that can be "implemented" (although that's not really the right wordà "taught" is perhaps better), but you've rejected it. Quote: Not to mention this is not relevant to the argument. So potential solutions to the problems you see are not relevant to the discussion about those problemsà Riiightà But perhaps most importantly: Quote: Not to mention this quote clearly stating that the wreck belongs to the mission runner. So what? The ownership of the wreck is, in fact, 100% irrelevant. Quote: You're not helping the confusion any buddy No, you are not helping because you automatically reject the much more understandable word "can". Originally by: Mortania Removal of tags on an object. Was that possible at the time? 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:07:00 - [536] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 00:11:12 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 What model and what does it explain where other than in your mind? This model, and it explains the mechanics and how/why they are in line with CCP's statements. Okay..page 17. Alot was said there and you expect me to pull something out of there? Don't be lazy..quote and explain what model you're talking about that explains what exactly? Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 In favor of it being unfinished content,bad designed mini profession and the cause of confusion which leads to these countless threads over and over again. How does replacing cans with wrecks make salvaging unfinished? How is it badly designed? So at least you are admitting that cans were replaced..we are going places. What makes it unfinished is that the game does not show that the wreck belongs to no one as intended by ccp. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 All I see is a wreck with my name on it restricted to me for all but salvage in my mission. As well as a dev blog where the introduction of wrecks says that they will replace said cans. Meaning they no longer exist. àexcept that cans still exist and still contain the loot. An empty can contains no loot. Apart fromm the fact that they were replaced and no longer exist to begin with. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Exactly what is it that was introduced a year ago? Wreck abandonment. This could have solved the problem of empty wrecks showing up with an ownership flag, but that solution wasn't available at the time (salvaging was introduced five years ago). so you can't claim that salvaging was unfinished just because that didn't happen. I can and do because they could have changed the old content while bringing in the new. It has been a year after all. And that is only a fix if the mission runner chooses to abandon the wreck and does so. Giving it up in free will not because the game design dictates it like it should to reflect the intended design. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 proof of unfinished content just thrown out without changing the older content to accomidate the new profession. And exactly what was thrown out, and what wasn't changed? The sloppy unfinished content was thrown out there without changing the wrecks tag to reflect the intended game design. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Sorry I don't get paid to figure that out. No, but you can be constructive and think about how to actually solve the problems you perceive. I've offered one solution that can be "implemented" (although that's not really the right wordà "taught" is perhaps better), but you've rejected it. I can teach you that the sky is green doesn't make it so. Would help if the sky was green though. And the only one rejecting something here is you rejecting the fact that salvaging is unfinished content. And that the "can" no longer exists as an excuse for it. Originally by: Tippia But perhaps most importantly: Quote: Not to mention this quote clearly stating that the wreck belongs to the mission runner. So what? The ownership of the wreck is, in fact, 100% irrelevant. Sorry no..thats what weve been arguing about for 18 pages. What belongs or appears to belong to who.
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:15:00 - [537] i'm right, you're all wrong... even the ones that agreed with me. ♥
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:17:00 - [538] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 00:17:45 The almighty possum has spoken..nothing left to see here. Move along..move along.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:21:00 - [539] Originally by: Lissian Originally by: Ivorr Bigun it was my ammo, my time, my standings and my acceptance of that mission that caused the salvage to exist in the first place. As such its not too much to ask that stealing my salvage should flag the ninja. To be fair, you created the wreck, and your loot inside it. It's only your salvage if you have trained the Salvaging skill, have a Salvager fitted to your ship and salvage the wreck you've made. There is a very similar mechanic in WoW, if you'll forgive the analogy. With the Skinning profession, you could skin the corpses of beasts that other players killed. If you learned the profession, you could skin your own corpses. Of course, Skinning was not suitable for every class, and you were limited in WoW to only two professions, unlike EVE. Skinning a corpse of a beast another player killed did not flag you as a thief; salvaging a wreck of a ship another player destroyed should have the same outcome. Skinning a corpse of a beast another player killed did not flag you as a thief because you could not skin a beast that had not been looted already by the owner. Which meant they had already finished with it and a beast could not be skinned if the owner did not remove the loot. Unlike in Eve they can skin the beast leaving the loot before the owner has a chance to do anything about it. But where the Eve mechanic is really crappy, is most ninjas turn up whilst you're in combat with the NPCs so if it's a tough mission for you that you are doing you can't loot as you go. So only choice is blow up the wreaks, jump out and hope the rats get them or just forget it. There's no real risk for a ninja salvager they're even protected by Concord. So imo they should get flagged so at least you can defend your wreaks. You could say that's good because they can ninja salvage so as to force a conflict, but on the other hand you could do a mission in order to set up a ninja salvager.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:27:00 - [540] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 00:28:24 Originally by: Mintala Arana The conflict between mission runner and ninja salvager is intentional. Then why not flag the salvager and let the two go at it? Edit:Or leave it be and fix the tag on the wrecks to reflect the desired effect.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:41:00 - [541] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Alot was said there and you expect me to pull something out of there? It was a very short post where it all gets started, and it's quite clear what I mean if you look for the word "model" in the responses to that one, actually, so yes, I kind of expected you to. But ok, you've all heard it before: You don't actually own the wreck ù it's free for all to use and abuse. The wreck contains an (owned) can that holds the loot. If the wreck is empty, the (owned) can is still there. You can't shoot the wreck because you damage the owned can. You can't tractor the wreck, because you'd also move the owned can. You can salvage the wreck because it's free for all. Quote: So at least you are admitting that cans were replaced..we are going places. Not really, no, for the simple reason that I never disputed it. If by "going places" you mean "we stay where we already are", then yesà Quote: What makes it unfinished is that the game does not show that the wreck belongs to no one as intended by ccp. Which once again raises the question of how they should have done that? An empty can contains no loot. Apart fromm the fact that they were replaced and no longer exist to begin with. Quote: I can and do because they could have changed the old content while bringing in the new. What is the old and new content you're referring to here? Quote: And that is only a fix if the mission runner chooses to abandon the wreck and does so. It's a fix if it happens automatically to empty wrecks. Quote: Giving it up in free will not because the game design dictates it like it should to reflect the intended design. I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you're saying here so you'll have to correct me. I read this as ôauto-abandoning empty wrecks will not fix the ownership confusion because that would reflect the intended game designö (which obviously isn't the right interpretation since it doesn't make sense). Quote: The sloppy unfinished content was thrown out there without changing the wrecks tag to reflect the intended game design. Which again comes back to the question of: how should they have communicated loot ownership then? And how should they have handled empty wrecks? Quote: I can teach you that the sky is green doesn't make it so. Fortunately, that's not what I'm doing. I'm giving a model that explains why you can do the things you can do and can't do the things you can't do, and I'm trying to do it without going into the game design questions of who earns what from which profession because that just ends up confusing peopleà Quote: Sorry no..thats what weve been arguing about for 18 pages. What belongs or appears to belong to who. And in the end, the fact of the matter is that the flagging of the wreck is of exactly zero relevance to salvaging. Quote: Originally by: Mintala Arana The conflict between mission runner and ninja salvager is intentional. Then why not flag the salvager and let the two go at it? Because that's not the conflict they're going for and because that would boost the rewards of missions, which is definitely not what they're going for. 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:50:00 - [542] Originally by: Tippia You don't actually own the wreck ù it's free for all to use and abuse. The wreck contains an (owned) can that holds the loot. If the wreck is empty, the (owned) can is still there. You can't shoot the wreck because you damage the owned can. You can't tractor the wreck, because you'd also move the owned can. You can salvage the wreck because it's free for all. Which is a pretty useless game mechanic, designed to create conflict but also inhibits conflict at the same time. Flag ninja salvagers as targets then conflict can actually commence rather than giving ninja salvagers a free ride.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 00:54:00 - [543] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Which is a pretty useless game mechanic, designed to create conflict but also inhibits conflict at the same time. Nah. It's quite aptly designed to create a certain kind of conflict: competition over resources in the form of a "who gets it first" race. It's much like mining, only with very small asteroinds. Quote: Flag ninja salvagers as targets then conflict can actually commence rather than giving ninja salvagers a free ride. The conflict is already there ù it's inherent in the design of the race. And considering the work the ninja has to do, to qualify for the race, it's hardly a free ride. 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:04:00 - [544] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Which is a pretty useless game mechanic, designed to create conflict but also inhibits conflict at the same time. Nah. It's quite aptly designed to create a certain kind of conflict: competition over resources in the form of a "who gets it first" race. It's much like mining, only with very small asteroinds. That's crap nothing like mining, ninja salvagers tend to get to work whilst you're busy in combat with the rats. It's not even a race, it's just free goods to the ninja if they happen to turn up, unless you blow the wreaks up and waste yours and their time. Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Flag ninja salvagers as targets then conflict can actually commence rather than giving ninja salvagers a free ride. The conflict is already there ù it's inherent in the design of the race. And considering the work the ninja has to do, to qualify for the race, it's hardly a free ride. That's also crap, the conflict is somebody getting p***ed off because there's not too much they can do about it. So, simple answer is to flag the ninja so that actual combat can take place.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:12:00 - [545] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 01:12:36 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka That's crap nothing like mining, Sure it is. It's just that you've chosen to mine in a Raven, whereas the other guy has a Covetorà you've not really picked the right tool for the job (which is a rather unsurprising problem that comes with trying to do two things at once). Quote: That's also crap, the conflict is somebody getting p*ed off because there's not too much they can do about it. If they get that ed off, they can dec the guy or just blow him up regardless. Just because it's not a "pew-pew" conflict doesn't mean there's no conflict. Quote:** So, simple answer is to flag the ninja so that actual combat can take place. It's not that simple, because that would increase the reward set for missions, and that wouldn't be goodà 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:22:00 - [546] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 01:12:36 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka That's crap nothing like mining, Sure it is. It's just that you've chosen to mine in a Raven, whereas the other guy has a Covetorà you've not really picked the right tool for the job (which is a rather unsurprising problem that comes with trying to do two things at once). Quote: That's also crap, the conflict is somebody getting p*ed off because there's not too much they can do about it. If they get that ed off, they can dec the guy or just blow him up regardless. Just because it's not a "pew-pew" conflict doesn't mean there's no conflict. Quote:** So, simple answer is to flag the ninja so that actual combat can take place. It's not that simple, because that would increase the reward set for missions, and that wouldn't be goodà Seems to me you you like it the way it is because you get a free meal ticket. And until ninja salvagers are flagged they will always get a free meal ticket.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:24:00 - [547] Originally by: Tippia It's not that simple, because that would increase the reward set for missions, and that wouldn't be goodà Says you..but we'll save that for next weeks discussion.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:27:00 - [548] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Seems to me you you like it the way it is because you get a free meal ticket. I do. Missions are about as "free meal ticket" as it gets, which is why I do them rather than (say) salvaging. àok, not true: I salvage my missions as well to fill out the time and keep the books in order. Quote: And until ninja salvagers are flagged they will always get a free meal ticket. Seeing as how they have to work harder for the salvage than the mission-runner do, it's not really free. Nor is it really a meal ticket. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Says you. Says CCP. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:32:00 - [549] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 01:34:53 Originally by: Tippia Seeing as how they have to work harder for the salvage than the mission-runner do Right...two weeks of skill training and a 1 million isk ship (fit) and a few days learning to scan. Mission running takes way more until you get to where we are. I don't know if you fly a golem but my kronos damn sure took a lot more to get. Refitting and killing all the rats is still more effort than a ninja will ever do I don't see it. Not to mention the required standing.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:40:00 - [550] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Seems to me you you like it the way it is because you get a free meal ticket. I do. Missions are about as "free meal ticket" as it gets, which is why I do them rather than (say) salvaging. àok, not true: I salvage my missions as well to fill out the time and keep the books in order. Quote: And until ninja salvagers are flagged they will always get a free meal ticket. Seeing as how they have to work harder for the salvage than the mission-runner do, it's not really free. Nor is it really a meal ticket. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Says you. Says CCP. The fact you're saying how hard it is suggests you either do it or have done it or you're not talking from experience. Never tried it myself, but it does not seem that hard to me. Sit outside a station that has a lvl 4 agent, then wait for example a battleship that does not go towards a gate or station. Then send your probes off after it. If the feed back from the probes gives a character name it would be even easier.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:44:00 - [551] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 01:45:38 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Right...two weeks of skill training and a 1 million isk ship (fit) and a few days learning to scan. Yes. That's a few days more than the mission-runner needs. Then there's the actual probing process, which is more work than rclick→warp to mission bookmark; dscanning the area and evaluating the hits (in relation to the ship(s) doing the mission), which is more work than sitting in the pocket and looking at the overview; travelling to each wreck and salvaging them, which is more work than sitting still and using tractorsà Quote: Mission running takes way mor until you get to where we are. Yes, mission-running requires a bit more than salvaging, but that's not what we're talking about ù this is about the work required to earn the salvage. Quote: Refitting and killing all the rats is still more effort than a ninja will ever do I don't see it. The mission-runner's effort to run the mission is compensated by the mission rewards. His effort to salvage the wrecks is compensated by the salvage, and that effort is much less than the ninja has to put in. Quote: Not to mention the required standing. Neither party needs any standing (beyond not being chased by the faction police) to salvage. 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
Dolm De'Mourne	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:46:00 - [552] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Seems to me you you like it the way it is because you get a free meal ticket. I do. Missions are about as "free meal ticket" as it gets, which is why I do them rather than (say) salvaging. àok, not true: I salvage my missions as well to fill out the time and keep the books in order. Quote: And until ninja salvagers are flagged they will always get a free meal ticket. Seeing as how they have to work harder for the salvage than the mission-runner do, it's not really free. Nor is it really a meal ticket. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Says you. Says CCP. The fact you're saying how hard it is suggests you either do it or have done it or you're not talking from experience. Never tried it myself, but it does not seem that hard to me. Sit outside a station that has a lvl 4 agent, then wait for example a battleship that does not go towards a gate or station. Then send your probes off after it. If the feed back from the probes gives a character name it would be even easier. As opposed to already having the bookmark because you created the wreck and having 80km tractor beams instead of having to fly to each wreck, yeah comparatively it's much easier for the mission runner. NO scanning and minimal travel.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:58:00 - [553] Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 30/04/2011 02:03:02 Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 30/04/2011 02:02:48 Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 30/04/2011 02:00:28 Originally by: Dolm De'Mourne As opposed to already having the bookmark because you created the wreck and having 80km tractor beams instead of having to fly to each wreck, yeah comparatively it's much easier for the mission runner. NO scanning and minimal travel. Put the important part in bold from your quote here. 80km tractor beams? now I feel short changed using 20km ones myself. And those 20km ones take awhile to pull the wreak to you. I've had a ninja on one of my missions use an mwd, not something I'd fit normally for a mission anyway, but it did him no good as I just blew the wreaks just before he got to them. Edit: And back to that important point you made, don't you think that someone who creates a wreak has a right to defend it. Then it's simple just flag ninja salvagers.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 01:58:00 - [554] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 01:59:48 Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 01:47:03 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Right...two weeks of skill training and a 1 million isk ship (fit) and a few days learning to scan. Yes. That's a few days more than the mission-runner needs. Then there's the actual probing process, which is more work than rclick→warp to mission bookmark; dscanning the area and evaluating the hits (in relation to the ship(s) doing the mission), which is more work than sitting in the pocket and looking at the overview; travelling to each wreck and salvaging them, which is more work than sitting still and using tractorsà Quote: Mission running takes way mor until you get to where we are. Yes, mission-running requires a bit more than salvaging, but that's not what we're talking about ù this is about the work required to earn the salvage. Quote: Refitting and killing all the rats is still more effort than a ninja will ever do I don't see it. The mission-runner's effort to run the mission is compensated by the mission rewards. His effort to salvage the wrecks is compensated by the salvage, and that effort is much less than the ninja has to put in. Quote: Not to mention the required standing. Neither party needs any standing (beyond not being chased by the faction police) to salvage. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Never tried it myself Maybe you shouldà I can't understand the way you think really.It's posts like this that make me think "does this guy really believe what he's saying?". Because this whole post is way off and just not right in so many ways. Make two alts..one to run all lvl 4 missions and one to ninja salvage and then come back and tell me who gets going first.Not only that but tell me the costs of both professions and the end payout that isn't that far apart. Until then I'm going to stamp that post of yours as ******ed. And yes lvl 4 agents require quite a bit of standing.
Soma Parias Azaph	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:04:00 - [555] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Originally by: Dolm De'Mourne As opposed to already having the bookmark because you created the wreck and having 80km tractor beams instead of having to fly to each wreck, yeah comparatively it's much easier for the mission runner. NO scanning and minimal travel. Put the important part in bold from your quote here. 80km tractor beams? now I feel short changed using 20km ones myself. And those 20km ones take awhile to pull the wreak to you. I've had a ninja on one of my missions use an mwd, not something I'd fit normally for a mission anyway, but it did him no good as I just blew the wreaks just before he got to them. Invest in a noctis. If you do a lot of salvaging it's worth it. You'll feel better about those tractor beams in no time As far as the salvage, it not in my hold or in my can, so it's not mine. You can't own [/b]potential[/b] resources since they do not exist.
Dolm De'Mourne	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:06:00 - [556] Whoops, posted from the wrong character
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:10:00 - [557] Originally by: Soma Parias Azaph Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Originally by: Dolm De'Mourne As opposed to already having the bookmark because you created the wreck and having 80km tractor beams instead of having to fly to each wreck, yeah comparatively it's much easier for the mission runner. NO scanning and minimal travel. Put the important part in bold from your quote here. 80km tractor beams? now I feel short changed using 20km ones myself. And those 20km ones take awhile to pull the wreak to you. I've had a ninja on one of my missions use an mwd, not something I'd fit normally for a mission anyway, but it did him no good as I just blew the wreaks just before he got to them. Invest in a noctis. If you do a lot of salvaging it's worth it. You'll feel better about those tractor beams in no time As far as the salvage, it not in my hold or in my can, so it's not mine. You can't own [/b]potential[/b] resources since they do not exist. If I'm able to tank the mission I tend to salvage whilst killing the rats, saves time in the long run.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:14:00 - [558] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 02:15:42 Ill break it down for you. In order to even get the chance to profit from a lvl 4 including its salvage you need... 1.Start at lvl 1. Tools needed...a frig fully fit around 5 million isk. 2.move on to lvl 2. Tools needed...a destroyer fully fit around 10 million isk. 3.move on to lvl 3. Tools needed...a battlecruiser fully fit around 60 million isk. 4.move on to lvl 4. Tools needed...a fully fit and well skilled battleship costing around 200 million isk. And to do them fast and easy including tractor beaming and being able to salvage you need a marauder costing almost a billion isk fully fit.And a lot of skills in weapons and tank. Now lets look at the salvagers career..lol do I even need to start?!? Now who has it easier to get to that lvl salvage? Oh right it was the salvager
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:22:00 - [559] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 02:25:31 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Put the important part in bold from your quote here. The bolded part is spectacularly unimportant. Quote: 80km tractor beams? It's called the Noctis. It's quite neat. Quote: And back to that important point you made, don't you think that someone who creates a wreak has a right to defend it. Nah. They've already been paid for creating it, after allà Originally by: HeIIfire11 I can't understand the way you think really. It's very simple: Mission-running is mission-running, and it gets rewarded with mission-running rewards (base ISK, time bonus, LP, standing, bounties, loot ownership). Salvaging is salvaging, and it gets rewarded with salvaging rewards (salvage). A mission-runner who wants to earn the rewards of salvaging has to engage in salvaging. To do this, he has to train the skill, equip the module, trundle over to the wreck(s) (or a distance away, if he also trained for and equipped a tractor beam), and activate the Salvager module. A ninja who wants to earn the rewards of salvaging also has to engage in salvaging. To do this, he has to train the skill, train the probing skills (multiple), learn how to probe (and dscan, to be effective), equip both salvager and probe launcher, probe out and evaluate a likely spot for good wrecks, travel there, trundle over to the wreck, and activate the Salvager module. Comparing mission-running and salvaging is rather pointless, and if you want to argue the effort-vs-reward of various professions, that's a whole other topic. Comparing a mission-runner and a ninja doing the same thing is something else, though, and as you can see from the lists above, the ninja is the one who has to do more work to earn the same stuff. Quote: Make two alts..one to run all lvl 4 missions and one to ninja salvage and then come back and tell me who gets going first. The salvager, obviously. But again: that's not the point ù the point is who has to work harder pursuing the same set of rewards, the mission-runner or the ninja. Obviously, it's the ninja. Quote: And yes lvl 4 agents require quite a bit of standing. àbut salvaging does not. For either party. Quote: In order to even get the chance to profit from a lvl 4 including its salvage you need... àand it's in the underlined word that you go astray. Just because the mission-runner needs more to run the mission (an effort he's rewarded for through the mission rewards, btw) doesn't mean he needs more to earn the salvage. So let's remove that part since it has nothing to do with the salvaging process, and then revisit your list: Quote: 1.Start at lvl 1. Tools needed...a frig fully fit around 5 million isk. 2.move on to lvl 2. Tools needed...~~a destroyer fully fit around 10 million isk~~ a frig fully fit around 5 million isk. 3.move on to lvl 3. Tools needed...~~a battlecruiser fully fit around 60 million isk~~ a frig fully fit around 5 million isk. 4.move on to lvl 4. Tools needed...~~a fully fit and well skilled battleship costing around 200 million isk~~ a frig fully fit around 5 million isk. Fancy thatà Quote: Now lets look at the salvagers career..lol do I even need to start?! Let me: a frig fully fit around 5 million isk and salvaging skills (and skillz) and gear. That's more than the mission-runner needs for the same task. Quote: Now who has it easier to get to that lvl salvage? The mission-runner, because he already knows the location, because he knows the value of the site, and because he can tractor the wrecks. 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
Dolm De'Mourne	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:26:00 - [560] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 02:19:52 Ill break it down for you. In order to even get the chance to profit from a lvl 4 including its salvage you need... 1.Start at lvl 1. Tools needed...a frig fully fit around 5 million isk. 2.move on to lvl 2. Tools needed...a destroyer fully fit around 10 million isk. 3.move on to lvl 3. Tools needed...a battlecruiser fully fit around 60 million isk. 4.move on to lvl 4. Tools needed...a fully fit and well skilled battleship costing around 200 million isk. And to do them fast and easy including tractor beaming and being able to salvage you need a marauder costing almost a billion isk fully fit.And a lot of skills in weapons and tank. Now lets look at the salvagers career..lol do I even need to start?!? Now who has it easier to get to that lvl salvage? Oh right it was the salvager And if you'#re going for the marauder route battleship 5 alone takes like 30 days skill training. I'll make you 3 ninjas in that time. Personally I use a 2 ship method, but that aside, I can salvage anywhere. It doesn't have to be in a lvl 4.Why should lvl 4's be any different? Someone can ninja an overseer from me in a DED plex. They can ninja the cans in a radar site. They can also mine the ore out from around me in a grav site. What makes lvl 4's so special that they should be immune to intrusion unlike everything else in the game?

The Forum Twins	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:30:00 - [561] Ninja lifestyle is fun, but too predictable. Piracy and griefing big lazy alliances are where it's at.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:38:00 - [562] You're full of it lol. I think I gave you too much credit. Okay lets "race for the salvage". Oh wait ..without the mission runner there is no lvl 4 salvage. Lets roam the belts and scrap for two years in order to afford a cruiser
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:39:00 - [563] Originally by: Tippia stuff.. You called it a race earlier, but a battleship can not compete against a destroyer for speed. The ninja shows up when you're in the middle of a mission, the 5 mill(ish) salvaging destroyer that belongs to the person doing the mission is useless to them at this point. So the person finishes the section and rushes off to get his salvager by the time he gets back the ninja has already salvaged (looted too if indeed the mission person did leave the site). So this race of yours in a bit one sided in favour of the ninja. Best course of action if a ninja shows up is just blow all the wreaks. At least the person doing the mission still gets the bounties.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:47:00 - [564] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka You called it a race earlier, but a battleship can not compete against a destroyer for speed. Well, that's what you get for picking the wrong tool for the job (which is hard to avoid if you try to do two things at once). Fortunately, you can transfer your advantages to another person who did bring the right tools and get the upper hand that way. Quote: So this race of yours in a bit one sided in favour of the ninja. It's one-sided for the person who has picked the right toolsà and rightfully so. Originally by: HeIIfire11 Oh wait ..without the mission runner there is no lvl 4 salvage. àand he gets paid for the service as well. 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
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:49:00 - [565] So for the last week I've tested both professions (lvl 4 mission running and ninjaing peoples wrecks). In 3 days (average of 4 hours each day) of level 4 mission running, I made 115 million (looting all wrecks, salvaging none). Lost one ship because I made a foolish mistake forgetting a flight of light drones. Took every mission offered. EVE survival made running them easy. In 3 days of ninja salvaging in some popular mission hubs, I made about 50 million (only salvaging, no looting), though I might have made more if I looked around for the best prices instead of only in the one region. Lost one ship (insta popped by a very angry carebear who did not care about the cost of his BS). Most of my time was spent scanning, or flying through acceleration gates just to find that the player was already salvaging their wrecks and had only a few left. Honestly, I now hate salvaging as a profession. Too much work, not enough goodies. Might have been an off week. But I'd much rather just sit outside Amarr EFA and Jita 4:4 and steal war target loot. Less work, more pay.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 02:54:00 - [566] Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 30/04/2011 02:54:47 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Oh wait ..without the mission runner there is no lvl 4 salvage. àand he gets paid for the service as well. At least the mission runner earned his keep, where as the ninja salvagers are nothing but scavengers, protected scavengers at that. You should pay Concord a percentage of that isk from ninja scavaging, as a form of protection money.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:06:00 - [567] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka At least the mission runner earned his keep, where as the ninja salvagers are nothing but scavengers, protected scavengers at that. Mehà the ninja still puts more effort into this salvaging than the mission-runner does, and provides just as useful a service to the game at large. Quote: You should pay Concord a percentage of that isk from ninja scavenging, as a form of protection money. They do, in a wayà 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:08:00 - [568] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka At least the mission runner earned his keep, where as the ninja salvagers are nothing but scavengers, protected scavengers at that. Mehà the ninja still puts more effort into this salvaging than the mission-runner does, and provides just as useful a service to the game at large. Quote: You should pay Concord a percentage of that isk from ninja scavenging, as a form of protection money. They do, in a wayà Ninja salvagers would do even a better service to the game if they could be legally shot at.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:11:00 - [569] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Ninja salvagers would do even a better service to the game if they could be legally shot at. So you also think that mission deadspace should be locally downgraded to lowsec, I take it? 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
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:11:00 - [570] Originally by: Tippia Mehà the ninja still puts more effort into this salvaging than the mission-runner does, and provides just as useful a service to the game at large. You can't honestly believe this. Yes, missioning can become pretty trivial, but it takes a LONG time to build up to that ability. 3 months at a minimum, and likely much longer before it becomes near autopilot. Ninja salvagers can be salvaging in days, weeks at the outside. I'll grant you the payoff for the salvage is not that great. But the risk is near trivial. Lose a 5 million ISK frigate. boo-hoo. Make a mistake as a level 4 missioner and you're out what? 80 million minimum (drake) and upwards of a billion or more? You can't honestly believe what you're saying. Not genuinely.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:16:00 - [571] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 03:16:21 Originally by: Mortania You can't honestly believe this. Yes I can. See above for a comparison of what the two have to do. Quote: Ninja salvagers can be salvaging in days, weeks at the outside. àand mission runners can be salvaging in (much) less than 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:21:00 - [572] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Ninja salvagers would do even a better service to the game if they could be legally shot at. So you also think that mission deadspace should be locally downgraded to lowsec, I take it? No, especially as we have a gate system that's restrictive. But, I do think ninja salvagers have got it too easy, with the backing of Concord (CCP). Because at the moment you have ninja salvagers profitting from others peoples work and there's no real risk to them. Which makes them even more carebearish than so called carebear missioners.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:25:00 - [573] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka But, I do think ninja salvagers have got it too easy, with the backing of Concord (CCP). àand yet they have it harder than MR-salvagers (who also have the backing of CCP, not to mention perks that the ninjas don't get). Quote: Because at the moment you have ninja salvagers profitting from others peoples work and there's no real risk to them. There's the same risk for them as there is for the MR-salvagers. So I take it you want to make it harder for them as well? Any suggestion as to how? 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:36:00 - [574] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka But, I do think ninja salvagers have got it too easy, with the backing of Concord (CCP). àand yet they have it harder than MR-salvagers (who also have the backing of CCP, not to mention perks that the ninjas don't get). Quote: Because at the moment you have ninja salvagers profitting from others peoples work and there's no real risk to them. There's the same risk for them as there is for the MR-salvagers. So I take it you want to make it harder for them as well? Any suggestion as to how? lol, perks. Well if they got off their butts and trained their characters up so they could mission run, then they too could have the so called perks. Only risk a ninja salvager has is if the mission runner has not cleared the section and they leave hoping the rats will target them. But that's a small risk.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:40:00 - [575] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 03:17:18 Originally by: Mortania You can't honestly believe this. Yes I can. See above for a comparison of what the two have to do. Quote: Ninja salvagers can be salvaging in days, weeks at the outside. àand mission runners can be salvaging in (much) less than that. I think I see the problem. You believe that just because a wreck CAN be salvaged by someone else that it must be equally easy for someone else to salvage. I believe that's a logical fallacy. Just because something is possible for more than one party it doesn't necessarily follow (especially in EVE) that it must be equally possible for all parties.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:49:00 - [576] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Only risk a ninja salvager has is if the mission runner has not cleared the section and they leave hoping the rats will target them. That's one of the risks. A more important one is that there might be competition over the goods, and that the competition is properly equipped. Originally by: Mortania I think I see the problem. You believe that just because a wreck CAN be salvaged by someone else that it must be equally easy for someone else to salvage. No, I have quite clearly described how I do not believe this. You have probably just misinterpreted my description of how there is a difference in the effort as a veiled suggestion that there shouldn't be one. 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 03:59:00 - [577] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Only risk a ninja salvager has is if the mission runner has not cleared the section and they leave hoping the rats will target them. That's one of the risks. A more important one is that there might be competition over the goods, and that the competition is properly equipped. Competition over the goods, 2 vultures instead of 1. So you might end up with less goods, well I'm sure that's a risk that would have you shaking in your boots. Still you made me laugh, on that note I'm off to get some sleep as it's not long before I'll be getting up.
Dirael Papier	Posted - 2011.04.30 04:00:00 - [578] Someone that trains the skills to be able to run a level 4 mission is compensated with: ---Mission reward + bounties + loot + salvage. Someone that trains the skills to be able to ninja salvage a level 4 mission is compensated with: ---Salvage. If a ninja salvager is successful and gets all of the salvage while the mission runner is still shooting NPCs then the mission runner is left with: ---Mission reward + bounties + loot. If the ninja salvager is unsuccessful then the ninja salvager gets: ---Wasted time. As far as the ninja salvager having an easier time salvaging, the mission runner could always have a friend/alt salvaging as they run the mission. On top of that the friend/alt can tractor the wrecks, while the ninja salvager has to fly from wreck to wreck. The skills and money invested in running level 4 missions is compensated by Mission rewards + bounties + loot. The skills and money invested in salvaging is compensated by salvage. This goes for both the mission runner and the ninja salvager. (Although the ninja salvager has extra skills to train in order to find the mission runner in the first place. As for the quote about loot cans being replaced with wrecks. It's exactly as it says. Loot cans have been replaced with wrecks. (I wasn't around when this change was made, but I'm running under the assumption that before, loot cans popped out of dead ships instead of wrecks.) In your overview you might see a loot can if you blow up a ship with a mission item or destroy a structure, but most of the time ships will leave behind wrecks. From the realities of the game, and what the game displays to the player, loot cans previously dropped by NPCs have been replaced by wrecks dropped by NPCs. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a loot can is contained inside the wrecks, because that is just a means to explain the game-rules imposed on the wrecks. I imagine that quote was talking about the actual, visible way the game handles the rewards left behind by NPCs, and not the logistics behind how those rewards are actually contained within the wrecks. I don't think it's much of a stretch to imagine that the loot can is contained inside the wreck, especially given that the can of loot pops out when the wreck disappears. As for suggestions on how to fix the confusion of wrecks being tagged for the player when they're really free for all (to an extent), I've provided two possible suggestions so far. First suggestion: Loot is dropped as a loot can separate from the wreck (so if there is loot then the NPc would drop both an untagged wreck, and a tagged loot can.) The issue Tippia provided for this suggestion is that it would create more clutter for the server to handle. However at most it would be double the number of objects as there were NPCs originally present in the mission, and you'd be replacing an active, moving, targeting NPC with two inactive objects that would be the equivalent of asteroids. Not being with CCP it's difficult to say how much extra strain, if any, this would place on the server. What can be said for certain however is that it WOULD clutter up the overview, and provide up to double the amount of objects for the mission runner to tractor at the end. Second suggestion: An NPC will only ever drop a tagged can full of loot, OR an untagged wreck, but never both. The issue Tippia provided for this is that it would nerf salvage. Suggestions to prevent this nerf included increasing the amount of salvage gained per wreck, or making every wreck have a 100% chance to contain salvage (Instead of being told that your salvager successfully completed its cycle but there was no salvage.) Other people are welcome to make more suggestions, or discuss these suggestions and the issue inherent with their implementation. I imagine discussing HOW to fix the issue of unclear salvage ownership would be more fruitful than the circles the topic is currently going in.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 04:02:00 - [579] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Competition over the goods, 2 vultures instead of 1. So you might end up with less goods. Yes. That's how pretty much all the resource competition in the game works. 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
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.30 04:04:00 - [580] Originally by: Aeronwen Carys Are you lot still banging on about this? Really? Loot belongs to the mission runner, the wreck is salvageable by anyone. That seems really clear to me. What have I missed? Nothing, other than bunch of people periodically showing their disagreement with CCP on this subject and Tippia "proving" them all wrong using CCP's views as some kind of constants of the universe that automatically invalidate any opinion regarding this matter.

Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.30 04:11:00 - [581] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Mortania I think I see the problem. You believe that just because a wreck CAN be salvaged by someone else that it must be equally easy for someone else to salvage. No, I have quite clearly described how I do not believe this. You have probably just misinterpreted my description of how there is a difference in the effort as a veiled suggestion that there shouldn't be one. Who gives a damn if a MR can salvager faster/easier than a ninja salvager? That's not the discussion at hand. The germane point is the risk/reward equation for a MR runner equivalent to the benefit they get for first possible dibs on salvage compared to a ninja salvager? You seem to be trying to conflate ninja salvage, a well described mini-profession, to equal status to a Level 4 mission runner, a full fledged profession. Mini, as in small or not-main, in other words, side profession. Add-on. Let me clearly state my position: - The current system, despite your attempts to model them, are unclear. - CCP should endeavor to make wreck ownership clearer. - Effort for ninja-salvage is pretty low, although more dynamic than mission running, I would equate the efforts as fairly equal, overall. - Risk of ninja salvage, though, is fairly trivial. Reward to the dedicated ninja-salvager can be reasonably high. Let's use the 1/3x-1/2x as rewarding as MR figure from the earlier post. - Risk of missioning is likely higher, solely because a mistake at high level missioning is usually very costly. Let's call it easily 40x and reasonably closer to 100-200x more costly for MR, for 3x the reward. The missing variable is how often MR's lose a ship vs. NS's do. - Like with Jetcan theft, effectively free and protected griefing irritates the fire out of many people. This is why 6 years ago (or whatever it was) they changed the jetcan rules so that ore thieves had some skin in the game. Thus, it seems a trivial way to solve this issue and create more dynamic interactions with players is to give wreck ownership to the creator of the wreck and then let ninja-salvage take place and let the chips fall where they may. Alternatively, they could clearly communicate the lack of rights to empty wrecks to all involved parties, which seems messier and still leaves concord protected griefing still alive and irritating many people to satisfy very few.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 04:41:00 - [582] Originally by: Mortania Who gives a damn if a MR can salvager faster/easier than a ninja salvager? Lots of people apparently, since one of the most common complaints is that ninja salvaging requires no work, which raises the question of how little work the MR has to do for the same rewards when engaged in the same activityà Quote: The germane point is the risk/reward equation for a MR runner equivalent to the benefit they get for first possible dibs on salvage compared to a ninja salvager? And seeing as how the risk for the mission-runner is nil (the risks of running the missions are counterbalanced by the mission rewards leaving him with a blank slate for the salvaging), the kind answer would be yes. The less kind answer would be "no, they get too many benefits", but without splitting the can and the wreck into two entities, it'll be hard to do anything about that (and they seem to be somewhat disinclined towards adding more stuff into space right now). I suppose you could argue that these benefits are a good counter for the likely event that the MR will have to salvage using less than optimal equipment, but that only means that both the MR and the ninja face roughly the same risk. Quote: You seem to be trying to conflate ninja salvage, a well described mini-profession, to equal status to a Level 4 mission runner, a full fledged profession. Again, no. Quite the opposite: I'm being very clear about the fact that the two are separate activities with separate requirements and separate reward structures. I am most certainly not saying that the two are equal ù I'm saying that they are not the same, in almost every way. That is why mission-running has higher requirements than salvaging and, consequently, why missions carry higher rewards than salvaging. The discussion of how different professions are balanced against each other is a different topic altogether (one where we'd have to discuss a lot of other professions, such as mining or trading or plexing or S&I or ratting orà well, all of them, really). What I am doing is comparing mission runners who salvage with ninjas who salvage: two people engaged in the exact same activity and who are competing with each other for the available resources. Quote: Alternatively, they could clearly communicate the lack of rights to empty wrecks to all involved parties, which seems messier and still leaves concord protected griefing still alive and irritating many people to satisfy very few. Apart from the fact that it's not griefing, but a legitimate profession (mini or otherwise), yes, that would be the best way. The question remains, though: how. Most notably, how do you communicate the ownership of loot without marking it on the wreck (or how do you mark it on the wreck and still make it clear it only covers the loot). 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
DaalBaak	Posted - 2011.04.30 04:48:00 - [583] Wasn't it stated some pages ago that the wreck is owned, but the salvage materials contained therein are not? It's always been that way. Did something change to trigger this discussion? I'm not sure where the misunderstanding/debate lies?
Dirael Papier	Posted - 2011.04.30 05:00:00 - [584] Another suggestion for clarity of ownership. Change the icons for wrecks slightly. A wreck with no loot is the blue outline of a triangle with no owner name on it. (Just the name of the wreck in blue.) A wreck with loot inside is the blue outline of a triangle, with a white triangle inside it. (Or yellow if you're looking at someone else's loot.) The object is named in white (or yellow) with the owner name included. However, instead of for instance "Gurista Wreck" it could be "Gurista Loot" or something. When it's looted then the white triangle goes away but the blue outline stays, and the name changes so that it's called a wreck and any indication of player ownership disappears. Does this make everything sunshine and rainbows? No, it'd still leave room for confusion, but perhaps it could help players to kind of figure out what's what on their own as they see more and more wrecks? And this doesn't change any of the mechanics of the salvage/loot nor does it create extra objects to clutter the area.
The Grudge	Posted - 2011.04.30 05:14:00 - [585] Debate over can in a wreck got me wondering. If it's indeed intended that a wreck is a separate entity from a can inside the wreck that holds loot (a rule that prevents tractor beaming if the loot can is not your own), why aren't they generated separately upon ship's demise. I mean why would you introduce a profession that uses salvager and tractor beam modules to gather resources from ship wrecks, but at the same time trouble the eager salvagers with some nuisance inside the wreck that prevents beaming upon it. Now my first thought was that it's probably because it would take too much coding to make such changes, but then i remembered that it's already in the code - some npcs in certain missions already leave a wreck upon demise and drop a can at the same time. So if it's in the code how hard would it be to make all wrecks behave like that. Ship dies leaves a wreck with no ownership tags and a can with said tags. So this is my 2 cents on this particular issue.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.30 05:23:00 - [586] Originally by: Tippia And seeing as how the risk for the mission-runner is nil (the risks of running the missions are counterbalanced by the mission rewards leaving him with a blank slate for the salvaging), the kind answer would be yes. The less kind answer would be "no, they get too many benefits", but without splitting the can and the wreck into two entities, it'll be hard to do anything about that (and they seem to be somewhat disinclined towards adding more stuff into space right now). I suppose you could argue that these benefits are a good counter for the likely event that the MR will have to salvage using less than optimal equipment, but that only means that both the MR and the ninja face roughly the same risk. Quote: You seem to be trying to conflate ninja salvage, a well described mini-profession, to equal status to a Level 4 mission runner, a full fledged profession. Again, no. Quite the opposite: I'm being very clear about the fact that the two are separate activities with separate requirements and separate reward structures. I am most certainly not saying that the two are equal ù I'm saying that they are not the same, in almost every way. That is why mission-running has higher requirements than salvaging and, consequently, why missions carry higher rewards than salvaging. The discussion of how different professions are balanced against each other is a different topic altogether (one where we'd have to discuss a lot of other professions, such as mining or trading or plexing or S&I or ratting orà well, all of them, really). You say the opposite, but I think you're not seeing how your words come across. Let me see if I can try and tell you what I'm hearing you say: - Mission running has risk/rewards that are balanced by the rewards of the missions/loot themselves. - Salvage lies completely outside of that loop. - Everyone has equal rights to wrecks. - Creation of the wreck should provide no benefit other than potentially a first bite at the apple assuming the ship configuration of the allows for such a thing for the wreck creator. - Thus, when it comes to salvage, everyone should have equal risk/reward/rights. If I'm putting words in your mouth, please let me know.
Mister Rocknrolla	Posted - 2011.04.30 05:36:00 - [587] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Tippia And seeing as how the risk for the mission-runner is nil (the risks of running the missions are counterbalanced by the mission rewards leaving him with a blank slate for the salvaging), the kind answer would be yes. The less kind answer would be "no, they get too many benefits", but without splitting the can and the wreck into two entities, it'll be hard to do anything about that (and they seem to be somewhat disinclined towards adding more stuff into space right now). I suppose you could argue that these benefits are a good counter for the likely event that the MR will have to salvage using less than optimal equipment, but that only means that both the MR and the ninja face roughly the same risk. Quote: You seem to be trying to conflate ninja salvage, a well described mini-profession, to equal status to a Level 4 mission runner, a full fledged profession. Again, no. Quite the opposite: I'm being very clear about the fact that the two are separate activities with separate requirements and separate reward structures. I am most certainly not saying that the two are equal ù I'm saying that they are not the same, in almost every way. That is why mission-running has higher requirements than salvaging and, consequently, why missions carry higher rewards than salvaging. The discussion of how different professions are balanced against each other is a different topic altogether (one where we'd have to discuss a lot of other professions, such as mining or trading or plexing or S&I or ratting orà well, all of them, really). You say the opposite, but I think you're not seeing how your words come across. Let me see if I can try and tell you what I'm hearing you say: - Mission running has risk/rewards that are balanced by the rewards of the missions/loot themselves. - Salvage lies completely outside of that loop. - Everyone has equal rights to ~~wrecks~~ salvage materials. - Creation of the wreck should provide no benefit other than potentially a first bite at the apple assuming the ship configuration of the allows for such a thing for the wreck creator. - Thus, when it comes to salvage, everyone should have equal risk/reward/rights. If I'm putting words in your mouth, please let me know. A "wreck" is a container. "Salvage materials" are items. A "wreck" is ownable. "Salvage materials" inside wrecks are not owned. Contrary to some posts, loot cans and wrecks are two different types of containers. Contents of wreck containers are not ownable. Contents of lootcan containers are ownable. You can add items to lootcan containers. You cannot add items to wreck containers.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 05:38:00 - [588] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 05:40:52 Originally by: Mortania - Mission running has risks~~/rewards~~ that are balanced by the rewards of the missions~~/loot~~ themselves. - Salvage lies completely outside of that loop. - Everyone has equal rights to wrecks. - Creation of the wreck ~~should~~ provides no benefit other than potentially a first bite at the apple as well as more options for hunting down the wreck, assuming the ship configuration of the allows for such a thing for the wreck creator. - Thus, when it comes to salvage, everyone ~~should have~~ has equal risk/reward/rights. Yes. The only "should" about it is that I think this is a good setup. 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
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 08:46:00 - [589] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 05:40:52 Originally by: Mortania - Mission running has risks~~/rewards~~ that are balanced by the rewards of the missions~~/loot~~ themselves. - Salvage lies completely outside of that loop. - Everyone has equal rights to wrecks. - Creation of the wreck ~~should~~ provides no benefit other than potentially a first bite at the apple as well as more options for hunting down the wreck, assuming the ship configuration of the allows for such a thing for the wreck creator. - Thus, when it comes to salvage, everyone ~~should have~~ has equal risk/reward/rights. Yes. The only "should" about it is that I think this is a good setup. Problem is when it comes to the reality of point 5, not everyone has the same advantage when it comes to salvage. The ninja salvager has the advantage by far. There's nothing equal about it. The ninja salvager will start salvaging whilst the mission runner is still busy taking the aggro from the rats, the MR has a choice to leave the area and hope that the rats aggro the ninja or as I've done in the past, stop killing rats and just tank for awhile whilst destroying wreaks before the ninja gets to them. The only thing equal about it is in your head, it's far from equal in reality once a ninja turns up. Can't imagine in the real world anyone having salvage rights when the owner is still there. It's a poor game mechanic, CCPs attempt at creating controversy, but it tends to do it outside of the game. Which is why I say make the wreak owned as is the items looted (loot being salvage anyway) so that if someone does ninja salvage a wreak that you created then you have kill rights on them. Best thing to do if a ninja shows up is just blow up the wreaks, if everyone that missions blows up the wreaks then the ninja won't get any income from it. If you decide to let someone salvage your wreaks, someone you don't know (ninja salvager), don't turn your back on them as they'll most likely have your loot too, seen this happen in a friends level 4 before.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.04.30 10:07:00 - [590] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 05:40:52 Originally by: Mortania - Mission running has risks~~/rewards~~ that are balanced by the rewards of the missions~~/loot~~ themselves. - Salvage lies completely outside of that loop. - Everyone has equal rights to wrecks. - Creation of the wreck ~~should~~ provides no benefit other than potentially a first bite at the apple as well as more options for hunting down the wreck, assuming the ship configuration of the allows for such a thing for the wreck creator. - Thus, when it comes to salvage, everyone ~~should have~~ has equal risk/reward/rights. Yes. The only "should" about it is that I think this is a good setup. Problem is when it comes to the reality of point 5, not everyone has the same advantage when it comes to salvage. The ninja salvager has the advantage by far. There's nothing equal about it. The ninja salvager will start salvaging whilst the mission runner is still busy taking the aggro from the rats, the MR has a choice to leave the area and hope that the rats aggro the ninja or as I've done in the past, stop killing rats and just tank for awhile whilst destroying wreaks before the ninja gets to them. The only thing equal about it is in your head, it's far from equal in reality once a ninja turns up. Can't imagine in the real world anyone having salvage rights when the owner is still there. It's a poor game mechanic, CCPs attempt at creating controversy, but it tends to do it outside of the game. Which is why I say make the wreak owned as is the items looted (loot being salvage anyway) so that if someone does ninja salvage a wreak that you created then you have kill rights on them. Best thing to do if a ninja shows up is just blow up the wreaks, if everyone that missions blows up the wreaks then the ninja won't get any income from it. If you decide to let someone salvage your wreaks, someone you don't know (ninja salvager), don't turn your back on them as they'll most likely have your loot too, seen this happen in a friends level 4 before. Let's say for the sake of argument that you are correct that the salvager has "all the advantages". Why should this not be so, given the CCP explicitly stated that they created salvaging as a specific seperate profession, and also explicitly said that they didn't intend for salvage to be part of the mission reward? Your whole post is predicated on the false assumption that you're entitled to the salvage in the first place, despite the fact that you've been incontrovertibly shown that there's no RL basis for such an assumption, nor is there a game design basis for such an assumption, nor is there a game balance basis for such an assumption. All this guff about trying to draw inferences from the tag on the wreck, an anomaly caused mostly by the way EVE handles things like tractoring, is meaningless. You're looking for a level of consistency that doesn't exist anywhere else in the game, and then elevating those trivial inconsistencies above the explicit statements made by the designers of the game. Your whole argument boils down to nothing more than: "I want it all so I should get to have it all!" Well tough: CCP say you have to share, and they've been very clear and consistent about this ever since salvage was introduced. Go read any of the dozens of threads that are basically identical to this posted over the years - in not one single thread does any CCP Dev or GM deviate even slightly from this principle. They always, without exception, say that the current situation is exactly what they intended, what they want to see, and the way it will continue to be. It's not going to change. Deal with it. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.

HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 11:18:00 - [591] And it's still bad game design. You deal with that. Bad game design which causes these countless threads over the years. Enough proof has been given to show that this is the case and where the confusion originates.
Aeronwen Carys Empire of Dust	Posted - 2011.04.30 12:08:00 - [592] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Aeronwen Carys Are you lot still banging on about this? Really? Loot belongs to the mission runner, the wreck is salvageable by anyone. That seems really clear to me. What have I missed? Reading comprehension classes? Your ADHD drugs? There's a more nuanced discussion going on. But, 8/10 for the witty one liner. I think you have missed more than I. There are 20 pages of people arguing back and forth about a subject that really doesn't deserve it. This is all just about one mans inability to understand a plain and simple fact about salvaging. Maybe the jibe about reading comprehension and Ritalin should be directed towards him?
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 12:28:00 - [593] Originally by: Amarraz So I'm running a level 4 mission in high-sec, and a thief (Andromeda555) comes in and starts salvaging all my wrecks. Since this is high-sec, I can't do anything about it, without losing standing. When I submit a help petition, I'm told this is a feature of the game. Now I would expect this kind of thing in low sec, but high sec where I can't blow the thief out of the sky? This is no feature, but just plain bad game design. Agree with you it's bad game design, but it's not the only one in game and I'm sure it won't be the last. As for some people calling ninja salvaging a mini-game, that's bull. I know of people that have made it a full time profession, they made so much isk from it that one guy even started ninja salvaging level 4's in a Paladin (when Paladins were not cheap).
Bergon Darek	Posted - 2011.04.30 14:07:00 - [594] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka ... Problem is when it comes to the reality of point 5, not everyone has the same advantage when it comes to salvage. The ninja salvager has the advantage by far. There's nothing equal about it. The ninja salvager will start salvaging whilst the mission runner is still busy taking the aggro from the rats, the MR has a choice to leave the area and hope that the rats aggro the ninja or as I've done in the past, stop killing rats and just tank for awhile whilst destroying wreaks before the ninja gets to them. ... If a mission runner wants to be able to loot and salvage as they go, and they fly solo, there is a ship class which seems tailor made for the job: the marauder class. If they fly in a fleet, they can simply have one member of the fleet in a Noctis. (For even more win, both marauders and the Noctis even have a significant bonus to tractor range and velocity...) Either of these solutions makes it easier for the mission runner to collect loot and salvage, because either will allow the use of a tractor. A ninja salvager doesn't have the ability to use a tractor, so is at a disadvantage fro the start: the ninja must physically approach the wreck they wish to salvage, where the mission runner can simply give it a tug to get it in range. So as far as I can see, the mission runner already has the advantage over ninjas. If a mission runner chooses not to use tactics which facilitate their salvaging operation, that's fine. But in that case, they've already made a choice, so they can just STFU and stop whining about ninja salvagers. They're voluntarily giving up the inherent resource competition.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 14:45:00 - [595] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 14:48:48 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Problem is when it comes to the reality of point 5, not everyone has the same advantage when it comes to salvage. The ninja salvager has the advantage by far. There's nothing equal about it. Any advantage the ninja salvager has is due to the mission runner giving them that advantage: they are trying to engage in the salvager profession with subpar equipment, whereas the ninja is not. In such a situation, not only is it natural that the ninja will have an upper hand, it's good design that he has it. The inequality shows that it is working and that it's a reasonably even fight. Again, it's a competition ù a race for the resources ù and one of the competitors has chosen to run the race in wellies, whereas the other has actual running shoes. Why shouldn't that better choice give him an edge? Our wellies-man has a handy head start, but his equipment choice means he has squandered that advantage. Quote: I know of people that have made it a full time profession, they made so much isk from it that one guy even started ninja salvaging level 4's in a Paladin (when Paladins were not cheap). You should be happy, since he has chose to also run the race in wellies. The Palladin (indeed any battleship) is a horribly inefficient choice for ninja salvaging. Wellà maybe the Mach can see some use, but that only elevates it from "horrible" to "poor". 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 14:57:00 - [596] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 14:48:48 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Problem is when it comes to the reality of point 5, not everyone has the same advantage when it comes to salvage. The ninja salvager has the advantage by far. There's nothing equal about it. Any advantage the ninja salvager has is due to the mission runner giving them that advantage: they are trying to engage in the salvager profession with subpar equipment, whereas the ninja is not. In such a situation, not only is it natural that the ninja will have an upper hand, it's good design that he has it. The inequality shows that it is working and that it's a reasonably even fight. Again, it's a competition ù a race for the resources ù and one of the competitors has chosen to run the race in wellies, whereas the other has actual running shoes. Why shouldn't that better choice give him an edge? Our wellies-man has a handy head start, but his equipment choice means he has squandered that advantage. Quote: I know of people that have made it a full time profession, they made so much isk from it that one guy even started ninja salvaging level 4's in a Paladin (when Paladins were not cheap). You should be happy, since he has chose to also run the race in wellies. The Palladin (indeed any battleship) is a horribly inefficient choice for ninja salvaging. Wellà maybe the Mach can see some use, but that only elevates it from "horrible" to "poor". Cool story bro. Why don't you share some of that good stuff you're on? Be honest..those aren't normal lollipops are they No matter how much you try to convince yourself there still is no can and because of that there is no reason for empty wrecks to have the mission runners name on them. So it is and will remain bad game design. Not only do you try to make excuses there but now you're saying that it's good game design? CCP should hire you as their excuse maker..a sort of damage control. You should apply really.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 15:05:00 - [597] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Not only do you try to make excuses there but now you're saying that it's good game design? No, I'm not. Largely because I'm not talking about "it", by which you mean the wreck flagging, when I say that it's good design. But nice try twisting it. I'm talking about the competitive element between salvagers ù it is well-designed and the inequalities that appear if you enter that competition with poor equipment is a testament to 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 15:08:00 - [598] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 15:09:32 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Not only do you try to make excuses there but now you're saying that it's good game design? No, I'm not. Largely because I'm not talking about "it", by which you mean the wreck flagging, when I say that it's good design. But nice try twisting it. I'm talking about the competitive element between salvagers ù it is well-designed and the inequalities that appear if you enter that competition with poor equipment is a testament to that. Well "it" was the topic and nice try to you for trying to change that. I'll humor you for a while but when you start calling anything having to do with salvaging "good design" thats where I draw the line. Still want one of those lollipops that come straight out of the seventies.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 15:10:00 - [599] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Well "it" was the topic and nice try to you for trying to change that. No, I'm not. Are you even trying any more? I'm responding to Tanya Tarajaka's post, and both of them are on topic. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 15:16:00 - [600] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 Well "it" was the topic and nice try to you for trying to change that. No, I'm not. Are you even trying any more? I'm responding to Tanya Tarajaka's post, and both of them are on topic. There isn't really much more to say.As far as I see it the case is clear. And who has more risk or does more isn't the topic. It's the confusion the wreck mechanics cause,and if it's bad game design or not.This has been proven for all but those who are in the state of denial and swear on the perfection of ccp.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 15:19:00 - [601] Originally by: HeIIfire11 As far as I see it the case is clear. Yes it is: salvaging is not stealing, and considering the amount of communication to that effect, there is almost no room for confusion. Quote: And who has more risk or does more isn't the topic. Sure it is. The OP himself brought it up. Just because you have chosen to pick up on the design part of the the larger discussion doesn't mean that it's the only part of the discussion. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 15:25:00 - [602] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 As far as I see it the case is clear. Yes it is: salvaging is not stealing, and considering the amount of communication to that effect, there is almost no room for confusion. Quote: And who has more risk or does more isn't the topic. Sure it is. The OP himself brought it up. Just because you have chosen to pick up on the design part of the the larger discussion doesn't mean that it's the only part of the discussion. Yes I'll give you the it's not stealing part but the bad game mechanics failing to make that clear are bad game design and this has also been proven.
Pete 0 Bear	Posted - 2011.04.30 16:04:00 - [603] OMFG. 20 pages of WorldOfFailcraft twits crying that everything is theirs even when the developers say that it isn't..... It may work like that in WOF (who knowns, I won't touch that poop with a 10ft barge pole) but here in EvE it doesnt. The salvager is NOT a thief until he steals the loot out of the can. If he does you can kill him. The wreck is not yours, what is yours when you kill the NPC is the ISK and LP awarded to you. ISK and LP is all that you are entitled to. The salvage from said wreck can be yours WHEN and IF you salvage it with a salvage module. CCP have deemed it that ANYONE can salvage ANY wreck because, as stated before, NO-ONE owns the wreck. Want the salvage? Salvage it before anyone else does. CCP have made it easy with the invention of the noctis with its 80km tractor range and boosted salvage module times. These forums are used only by a small percentage of the EvE population and it speaks volumes that only 2-3 vocal WoW'ers want EvE mechanics changed to be like WoW. That won't happen. If you want WoW mechanics, WoW is over thar ------->
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 16:19:00 - [604] Originally by: Pete 0 Bear OMFG. 20 pages of WorldOfFailcraft twits crying that everything is theirs even when the developers say that it isn't..... It may work like that in WOF (who knowns, I won't touch that poop with a 10ft barge pole) but here in EvE it doesnt. The salvager is NOT a thief until he steals the loot out of the can. If he does you can kill him. The wreck is not yours, what is yours when you kill the NPC is the ISK and LP awarded to you. ISK and LP is all that you are entitled to. The salvage from said wreck can be yours WHEN and IF you salvage it with a salvage module. CCP have deemed it that ANYONE can salvage ANY wreck because, as stated before, NO-ONE owns the wreck. Want the salvage? Salvage it before anyone else does. CCP have made it easy with the invention of the noctis with its 80km tractor range and boosted salvage module times. These forums are used only by a small percentage of the EvE population and it speaks volumes that only 2-3 vocal WoW'ers want EvE mechanics changed to be like WoW. That won't happen. If you want WoW mechanics, WoW is over thar -------> So who are these WoWers you talk about? I'd love to see you complete a level 4 mission solo in a Noctis, even I would think you're something special if you managed that feat.
Pete 0 Bear	Posted - 2011.04.30 16:41:00 - [605] Edited by: Pete 0 Bear on 30/04/2011 16:41:48 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka So who are these WoWers you talk about? I'd love to see you complete a level 4 mission solo in a Noctis, even I would think you're something special if you managed that feat. Level 4 missions aren't that hard, Hell domi users can even AFK lvl 4s, its just a fact of press button - recieve bacon. As for the Noctis comment, you're just being an ass......
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 16:45:00 - [606] Originally by: Pete 0 Bear Edited by: Pete 0 Bear on 30/04/2011 16:41:48 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka So who are these WoWers you talk about? I'd love to see you complete a level 4 mission solo in a Noctis, even I would think you're something special if you managed that feat. Level 4 missions aren't that hard, Hell domi users can even AFK lvl 4s, its just a fact of press button - recieve bacon. As for the Noctis comment, you're just being an ass...... Not at all, if your killing rats in a level 4 and a ninja salvager shows up, you won't have time to run off to pick up your Noctis. So unless the Noctis can do level 4s which it can't it's useless to a level 4 missioner if they have a ninja salvager in their midst.
Pete 0 Bear	Posted - 2011.04.30 16:53:00 - [607] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Not at all, if your killing rats in a level 4 mission hub and a ninja salvager shows up, you won't have time to run off to pick up your Noctis. So unless the Noctis can do level 4s which it can't it's useless to a level 4 missioner if they have a ninja salvager in their midst. Fixed. Want the salvage without someone else getting it? Either have a friend in a Noctis salvage for you, roll an alt account with said Noctis or move your lazy ass out of Motsu or whatever the mission hub you are camped in and so somewhere quiet. As Alexander says..... "Simples"
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 16:58:00 - [608] Originally by: Pete 0 Bear Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Not at all, if your killing rats in a level 4 mission hub and a ninja salvager shows up, you won't have time to run off to pick up your Noctis. So unless the Noctis can do level 4s which it can't it's useless to a level 4 missioner if they have a ninja salvager in their midst. Fixed. Want the salvage without someone else getting it? Either have a friend in a Noctis salvage for you, roll an alt account with said Noctis or move your lazy ass out of Motsu or whatever the mission hub you are camped in and so somewhere quiet. As Alexander says..... "Simples" Lol, I always go for the quieter systems, you get less trouble but you still get some. As for a second account I've got 4 others but only this one active atm. So are you really telling people they can't play this game solo?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 17:01:00 - [609] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 17:02:05 Originally by: Pete 0 Bear OMFG. 20 pages of WorldOfFailcraft twits crying that everything is theirs even when the developers say that it isn't..... It may work like that in WOF (who knowns, I won't touch that poop with a 10ft barge pole) but here in EvE it doesnt. The salvager is NOT a thief until he steals the loot out of the can. If he does you can kill him. The wreck is not yours, what is yours when you kill the NPC is the ISK and LP awarded to you. ISK and LP is all that you are entitled to. The salvage from said wreck can be yours WHEN and IF you salvage it with a salvage module. CCP have deemed it that ANYONE can salvage ANY wreck because, as stated before, NO-ONE owns the wreck. Want the salvage? Salvage it before anyone else does. CCP have made it easy with the invention of the noctis with its 80km tractor range and boosted salvage module times. These forums are used only by a small percentage of the EvE population and it speaks volumes that only 2-3 vocal WoW'ers want EvE mechanics changed to be like WoW. That won't happen. If you want WoW mechanics, WoW is over thar -------> Lots of "wow" in this post..maybe you need to go back there since you know so much about it. And its 21 pages thank you Name says it all really
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 17:03:00 - [610] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Not at all, if you're killing rats in a level 4 and a ninja salvager shows up, you won't have time to run off to pick up your Noctis. àand that's no-one's problem but yours: if you want to compete for the salvage, you need to pick your equipment better or you're just crippling yourself. If you can't pick better equipment, then it's only fair that the ninja gets the salvage. 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

Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 17:10:00 - [611] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Not at all, if you're killing rats in a level 4 and a ninja salvager shows up, you won't have time to run off to pick up your Noctis. àand that's no-one's problem but yours: if you want to compete for the salvage, you need to pick your equipment better or you're just crippling yourself. If you can't pick better equipment, then it's only fair that the ninja gets the salvage. Interesting to note how you take bits out of quotes so as to take them out of context for your own purpose.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 17:12:00 - [612] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 17:12:28 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Interesting to note how you take bits out of quotes so as to take them out of context for your own purpose. Interesting how the context didn't change in the subsequent sentence and how it would have made no difference for the answer: If you have the wrong equipment, it's good and proper that competitors with the right equipment beat you. 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
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.30 17:51:00 - [613] One also has to wonder why do they call it ninja salvaging. If it's not a theft and merely a harmless legitimate gathering of resources why the hell is it called ninja salvaging? Hmmm.
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.30 18:08:00 - [614] Originally by: 3up*ia One also has to wonder why do they call it ninja salvaging. If it's not a theft and merely a harmless legitimate gathering of resources why the hell is it called ninja salvaging? Hmmm. Two words: Suddenly Ninjas.
sarah mcjimmy	Posted - 2011.04.30 18:49:00 - [615] CCP make game mechanics so that two players are likely to conflict shocker
John Caesse Caldari Navy of Xoc Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2011.04.30 19:52:00 - [616] CCP has said its peace on the issue many, many times. Creating new threads and launching into the same old arguments is going to change absolutely nothing.
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.30 20:07:00 - [617] Originally by: John Caesse CCP has said its peace on the issue many, many times. Creating new threads and launching into the same old arguments is going to change absolutely nothing. CCP may be game developers that stick to their own game design/direction vision more that any other company (for which i do respect them), but continuously sticking to game mechanics that tend to **** off large chunks of their playerbase doesn't give them any cool points either. Threads like these are a reminder to CCP that many people didn't like ninja salvaging mechanics back then and still don't.
5econdary Target Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.30 20:10:00 - [618] This thread still going ? Time for my sig...
Captain Megadeath	Posted - 2011.04.30 20:53:00 - [619] Originally by: 3up*ia but continuously sticking to game mechanics that tend to ** off large chunks** of their playerbase doesn't give them any cool points either. Proofs? Rageposts from 1 or 2 people with comprehension problems don't count as "large chunks"
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.30 20:59:00 - [620] Originally by: 3up*ia CCP may be game developers that stick to their own game design/direction vision more that any other company (for which i do respect them), but continuously sticking to game mechanics that tend to ** off large chunks of their playerbase doesn't give them any cool points either. Threads like these are a reminder to CCP that many people didn't like ninja salvaging mechanics back then and still don't. CCP has a vision for New Eden and EVE Online. That vision includes New Eden as a cold, not particularly welcoming place, and EVE Online game mechanics tend to support that. In the case in point, it would be a serious compromise of the game design, which makes it clear that salvage is a resource for which players are expected to compete, to make a significant change to the salvage mechanics. The mission runners who whine loudest about the current state of affairs are the ones who run missions solo (EVE Online encourages team play, so strike one), and who don't want to be bothered to compete for resources when EVE Online is all about the competition for resources ("I made the wreck, so the salvage should be mine!" and strike two). I don't see CCP ever changing this mechanic just so these players (who don't want to play the game CCP created, since they don't want the pvp, and they don't want the competition for resources) won't be able to whine about this any more. Worse, if CCP were to suffer a mass cranio-rectal inversion and actually make the obvious change, which is that running a salvager on someone else's wreck flags you for minor aggression and lets him shoot at you, mission runners would almost certainly whine louder: "But now the salvage ninjas turn flashy red! if I shoot them they'll come back in big scary gank ships and kill my pimp mission boat! It's not fair!" Disclaimer: I used to get most of my isk from running missions. (This was when salvage was worth something.) I didn't like it much when someone warped in and started salvaging my wrecks. I didn't whine about it, though. Mostly I figured out ways to compete "smarter" for those resources: move out of the mission hub I was in, use a different ship, dual accounts, fleet up with my corpmates, etc. "Shoot the flashy red" is even a viable option, as long as you can deal with the consequences (the big scary gank ship and his RR buddies). It was all fun when I did it; the PVP was entertaining and I even won a fight once (solo ninja, screwed up something** by the numbers, I shouldn't have won considering I was in a mission boat). I've also ninja salvaged, and even stolen loot once or twice. Never been shot at though, just lots of whining in local. My response was "Man up and fight back or STFU."

Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:01:00 - [621] I love the drive by's. Good job failing to read the OP and understand the deeper issue. The game mechanic is poorly communicated, thus the confusion about ownership. Yes, some people are saying MINE! but that's not why this thread is 21 pages long. If you want to u mad? COAD is right over there.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:12:00 - [622] Originally by: Captain Megadeath Originally by: 3up*ia but continuously sticking to game mechanics that tend to ** off large chunks of their playerbase doesn't give them any cool points either. Proofs? Rageposts from 1 or 2 people with comprehension problems don't count as "large chunks" The only one with comprehension problems is you,and the fanboy bandwagon you rode in on. If you would have taken the time too read the thread and not just stamp it as another ninja salvager thread you would know that it has infact been stated and proven that the current game mechanics involving wreck ownership is the cause of this problem. CCP saying so means jack honestly. I am aware of their intentions on the game mechanic and as they are the developers of eve online it is their right. But if they want to patch sloppy game content with the excuse "because we say so" they shouldn't brag about "excellence". They also shouldn't complain when people get **ed about game mechanics that reflect the exact opposite of what they say their intentions are,nor should their fanboys.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:17:00 - [623] Originally by: HeIIfire11 They also shouldn't complain when people get ***ed about game mechanics that reflect the exact opposite of what they say their intentions are àexcept that the mechanics reflact exactly what their intentions are: salvaging doesn't cause flagging. 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*
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:21:00 - [624] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 21:23:45 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 They also shouldn't complain when people get ****ed about game mechanics that reflect the exact opposite of what they say their intentions are àexcept that the mechanics reflact exactly what their intentions are: salvaging doesn't cause flagging. What ever fanboy if you don't understand yet you never will.There is no can nor is there a reason for an empty wreck to have the mission runners name on it. No reason other than we don't feel like fixing it. Period. Like it or not that's the way it is. The contradicting posts and dev blogs don't help either. There are blogs saying the wreck belongs to the mission runner which is enough proof in itself. Don't like the truth move on and quit banging your head against it. You are wrong. And no one ever said salvaging caused flagging...nice try.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:25:00 - [625] Originally by: HeIIfire11 There is no can nor is there a reason for an empty wrech to have the mission runners name on it. Sure there is: technical limitations. Quote: The contradicting posts and dev blogs don't help either. àexcept that they don't contradict each other either. The (supposed) ownership of the wreck (which you know full well signifies the ownership of any loot that might be inside it) is 100% inconsequential to the fact that anyone can salvage those wrecks. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:31:00 - [626] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 21:35:41 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: HeIIfire11 There is no can nor is there a reason for an empty wrech to have the mission runners name on it. Sure there is: technical limitations. Quote: The contradicting posts and dev blogs don't help either. àexcept that they don't contradict each other either. The (supposed) ownership of the wreck (which you know full well signifies the ownership of any loot that might be inside it) is 100% inconsequential to the fact that anyone can salvage those wrecks. Just because you say so isn't good enough. Show proof of these technical limitations or get a "ccp" next to your name. Until then your opinion is nothing more than a lucky guess and couldn't be any further from the fact. Argument is worthless. And I know nothing full and well..I know what I read and this states... Originally by: GM Ytterbium The wreck ownership mechanism has recently been changed, and as such will not belong to the character doing most damage to the NPC anymore, but to the pilot who first accepted the mission. So there is your contradiction in black and white..but it's ok,continue to deny the truth. Not to mention the fact that the wreck is limited to the mission runner for all but to salvage,can not be tractor beamed or shot by anyone else. The game mechanics all show that this is my wreck and the only thing speaking against it is that ccp says so. I can very well understand where the confusion comes from and I'm truly sorry that your mind is technically too limited to do the same.
Tosser Galore	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:32:00 - [627] Game mechanics does nothing to protect MR from NS. The NS problem is perceived as griefing. The solution is simple. Blow up the loot, every time a ninja enters your pocket. Every time a wreck is blown up, the value of salvage goes up 0.0001 isk..This can lead to inflated prices on salvage. The cost for making rigs will increase. This however will work towards killing the market for the NS. Houses gets burgled, and owners work within the community to secure boundaries and put in systems that kills the opportunities for theft. They also turn towards the government and demands increased punishment. It's not an issue of ownership. It's all about resources and making sure that you have access and control of those resources. The whole "debate" revolves around. a) The MR trying to lobby in flagged salvaging in high sec. And b) the NS who are using neutralization techniques you often find around people who elicit criminal behavior. e.g "it was just sitting there so I liberated it to my house" Indeed the term "lifting" is a euphemism for theft often used to elude the self stigmatization and the cognitive dissonance, when you do something that you yourself would not like to be done to you. You can also use alcohol and other drugs to dampen your conscience if you don't happen to been born a psychopath,or get a hit by a steel bar through your forehead. Why the neutralization behaviors? Humans are inherently equipped with concern and indeed care for the next of kind, since that behavior was so successful in protecting your family/blood it procreated through evolution. Of course a thief is a socially constructed entity as well as "crime" is "created" by criminalization, from the state. NO I'm not saying that the state induces crimes. But without criminal "flagging" from governmental bodies there is no crime. You can not expect (as the OP does), that CCP will hand over free game mechanics to protect high sec mission runners. Internet spaceships; very serious. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:34:00 - [628] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 21:35:44 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Just because you say so isn't good enough. Show proof of these technical limitations or get a "ccp" next to your name. No. You prove it. You're the one making the assertion that there is no reason for leaving the name there. Prove it. Until then, your opinion is nothing more and couldn't be any further from the fact. Quote: So there is your contradiction in black and white. Where is the contradiction? He doesn't even mention salvaging, much less that the supposed wreck ownership is of any relevance as far as who can salvage the wreck. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:42:00 - [629] Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 21:45:31 Edited by: HeIIfire11 on 30/04/2011 21:43:33 Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 21:35:44 Originally by: HeIIfire11 Just because you say so isn't good enough. Show proof of these technical limitations or get a "ccp" next to your name. No. You prove it. You're the one making the assertion that there is no reason for leaving the name there. Prove it. Until then, your opinion is nothing more and couldn't be any further from the fact. Quote: So there is your contradiction in black and white. Where is the contradiction? He doesn't even mention salvaging, much less that the supposed wreck ownership is of any relevance as far as who can salvage the wreck. No you made the assumption they are technically limited so show us how you think you know anything about their code. Or any code for that matter. You have no idea what their technically limited to...none what so ever. Nor did they state this anywhere. You just assume this and hold on to it as a fact. Wrong..plain and simply wrong. And the gm may have not mentioned salvaging but he mentioned who the wrecks belong to which the game mechanics show. Thus causing the confusion.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:46:00 - [630] Originally by: sarah mcjimmy CCP make game mechanics so that two players are likely to conflict shocker Except ninja salvaging does not create ingame conflict in terms of game play.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:47:00 - [631] Originally by: HeIIfire11 No you made the assumption they are technically limited No, this is your assumption. I'm saying that this is a possible reason for leaving the name there. The first on your list of things to prove. You made the assertion that there are none; you have to prove that assertion; you go off and find proof that the off-the-top-of-my-head suggestion that technical limitations is one possible reason is, in fact, not possible. Originally by: Tosser Galore Of course a thief is a socially constructed entity as well as "crime" is "created" by criminalization, from the state. NO I'm not saying that the state induces crimes. But without criminal "flagging" from governmental bodies there is no crime. It's a bit more than that though. It's not just that "the authorities" see ninja salvaging as a non-crime (i.e. it's not just an omission of criminalisation), but that they have very clearly legalised the activity. The act is as criminal as buying toothpaste with your honestly earned and properly taxed money from a legitimate toothpaste vendor. 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
Kyra Felann Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:49:00 - [632] I admire Tippia for staying at this so long. This thread seems a lot like arguing with a brick wall--ultimately pointless. Two points: In some missions, there are mineable asteroids that appear. Do you consider those "yours" also, since they wouldn't exist if you didn't accept the mission? Would you get mad if someone came in and started mining them? Mining those asteroids has as much to do with mission-running as salvaging does. Both give completely different resources from loot, neither actually exist until you activate a module on them, and they require completely different skill sets--different from each other and from mission-running--to exploit them. I have run missions whenever I can be bothered to (which is rare lately, because they're almost the most boring activity in the game), and have since 2007. I have perfect armor, drone, hybrid gun, and fitting skills. I can fly all battleships and all Gallente non-capital ships. I have, in other words, more than sufficient skills for easy-mode level 4 missions. I'm not bragging here--I'm refuting "you only defend ninja salvaging because you can't run missions" preemptively. I also have very good probing skills. I've explored normal space, wormholes, and I've probed down war targets and mission runners. All that said, I think probing requires more actual player skill than mission running. Mission running requires little more than time and a website that spells out in explicit detail exactly what to expect in every mission in the game. I spend most of my time running missions not thinking about tactics or planning, but thinking "sigh Why did I accept this mission" or playing other games on my DS or PSP or reading a book or watching TV. Probing requires some level of real-life skill and spatial thinking, and the skill required scales up the quicker you want to find what you're looking for. I'm not saying it's hard, per se, but that it requires thinking, deductive logic, and planning to some extent. Even when I'm waiting the few seconds for a probe scan to complete, I'm planning what to do next. -----WARNING SIGNATURE BELOW----- Bring back the NeoNeoCom!
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:49:00 - [633] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 21:49:42 wowà double-post-snipe 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:49:00 - [634] Originally by: Tosser Galore . You can not expect (as the OP does), that CCP will hand over free game mechanics to protect high sec mission runners. Yet ninja salvagers are given the free right and protection by concord Why should we expect anything less than them? The example has been set.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:52:00 - [635] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Tosser Galore . You can not expect (as the OP does), that CCP will hand over free game mechanics to protect high sec mission runners. Yet ninja salvagers are given the free right and protection by concord àand the mission runners are given the exact same right and protection. 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
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:55:00 - [636] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 21:50:09 Originally by: HeIIfire11 No you made the assumption they are technically limited No, this is your assumption. I'm saying that this is a possible reason for leaving the name there. The first on your list of things to prove. You made the assertion that there are none; you have to prove that assertion; you go off and find proof that the off-the-top-of-my-head suggestion that technical limitations is one possible reason is, in fact, actually not a possible explanation. Chop-chop. If this came from ccp yes I would see it in my interest to prove it being false. But since it is nothing more than your ******ed logic I don't need to prove anything. I simply take it as false. You are in no position to speak or make assumptions on the behalf of ccp. Chop chop my ass
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:58:00 - [637] Originally by: HeIIfire11 If this came from ccp yes I would see it in my interest to prove it being false. But since it is nothing more than your *****ed logic I don't need to prove anything. Then your claim is nothing but a worthless fantasy that you've dreamed up, and you need to stop spouting it as fact. There are plenty of plausible reasons why empty wrecks must have player names on them. Your unfounded assumptions do not change this. 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*
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.30 21:59:00 - [638] Originally by: Captain Megadeath Originally by: 3up*ia but continuously sticking to game mechanics that tend to ** off large chunks** of their playerbase doesn't give them any cool points either. Proofs? Rageposts from 1 or 2 people with comprehension problems don't count as "large chunks" Forum history is my proofs, this thread pops up constantly, spawns huge discussion every time. 1 or 2 people? Ignorant much?
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.04.30 22:03:00 - [639] I have said all I have to say on this topic. Those that are capable of thinking for themselves will see the point and the fanboys/trolls will stay just that. So go ahead and have your last word and keep your ignorant opinion. It will do nothing but show your "technical limitations"
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.04.30 22:07:00 - [640] Originally by: Kyra Felann In some missions, there are mineable asteroids that appear. Do you consider those "yours" also, since they wouldn't exist if you didn't accept the mission? Would you get mad if someone came in and started mining them? Mining those asteroids has as much to do with mission-running as salvaging does. Both give completely different resources from loot, neither actually exist until you activate a module on them, and they require completely different skill sets--different from each other and from mission-running--to exploit them. There's one big difference between roids and wreaks in missions. And that is if you've not noticed, a mission runner has to kill a rat for a wreak to exist whereas the mission runner does nothing for a roid to exist other than accepting the mission. So you can't really compare the two.

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 22:08:00 - [641] Edited by: Tippia on 30/04/2011 22:13:25 Originally by: HeIIfire11 I have said all I have to say on this topic. Those that are capable of thinking for themselves àwill have no problems deducing how things work and rid themselves of any supposed confusion about a very simple and straight-forward game mechanic. àunless they're further confused by greed, which happens quite often as well. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka There's one big difference between roids and wreaks in missions. And that is if you've not noticed, a mission runner has to kill a rat for a wreak to exist whereas the mission runner does nothing for a roid to exist other than accepting the mission. There is another big difference: the mission-runner gets paid to make that wreck appear; he does not get paid to make the asteroid appear (in fact, he gets paid to make it disappear). So if it's the difference in effort you're alluding to, that effort is compensated for as part of the system. Beyond that, though, just everything else about the two entities makes them eminently comparable in terms of what function they serve. 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
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.30 22:16:00 - [642] Originally by: Tippia ... and you need to stop spouting it as fact. Ain't freedom of speech a *****? Unless you're a figure of authority (CCP forum admins in this case), you don't get to tell people to shut up, sorry.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.04.30 22:36:00 - [643] Originally by: 3up*ia Unless you're a figure of authority (CCP forum admins in this case), you don't get to tell people to shut up, sorry. No, but I get to call him out on trying to make his fantasies appear as being even closely related to any kind of reality. 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
3uph0ria	Posted - 2011.04.30 22:57:00 - [644] Originally by: Kyra Felann I admire Tippia for staying at this so long. This thread seems a lot like arguing with a brick wall--ultimately pointless. I have to agree. Not many brick walls are that dense. Gotta admire that. Quote: In some missions, there are mineable asteroids that appear. Do you consider those "yours" also, since they wouldn't exist if you didn't accept the mission? Would you get mad if someone came in and started mining them? Mining those asteroids has as much to do with mission-running as salvaging does. People don't have sense of entitlement to said roids because: a) other than one click to accept the mission, no further effort needs to be put into spawning them b) asteroid belts are abundant and available to everyone, making scanning mission runners for roids stupid to say the least (aka mining profession, unlike "mini-profession" of ninja salvaging, has it's target resource implemented properly) c) majority of people run missions for npc bounties/loot/salvage and isk/lp. If one goes after asteroids, there's already a lot easier way via asteroid belts. I'm sure i'm missing more points, but this is basically why you never hear of people thinking that they are entitled to roids in missions sites, or ever see them being **ed off if somebody is actually mining roids in their missions (i'd personally lol hard if i ever saw such a ninja miner). Quote:** All that said, I think probing requires more actual player skill than mission running. Mission running requires little more than time and a website that spells out in explicit detail exactly what to expect in every mission in the game. I spend most of my time running missions not thinking about tactics or planning, but thinking "sigh Why did I accept this mission" or playing other games on my DS or PSP or reading a book or watching TV. Probing requires some level of real-life skill and spatial thinking, and the skill required scales up the quicker you want to find what you're looking for. I'm not saying it's hard, per se, but that it requires thinking, deductive logic, and planning to some extent. Even when I'm waiting the few seconds for a probe scan to complete, I'm planning what to do next. Oh look what's this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heYfTA00Idg Looks like "website that spells out in explicit detail exactly what to expect" to me. Released by CCP themselves, nonetheless. Don't fool yourself thinking that making mouse clicks to scan something down is somehow harder than making mouse clicks to kill hordes of npcs. In learning stages both activities can be challenging and hard. Once you learn, train and use proper equipment they are both as hard as checking your e-mail.
Kyra Felann Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.05.01 06:20:00 - [645] Originally by: 3up*ia I have to agree. Not many brick walls are that dense. Gotta admire that. I was referring to the people pointlessly arguing that salvage belongs to them as the brick wall. No matter how much evidence is shown that it's working as intended and no matter how many arguments are made to explain why, they choose to ignore it. -----WARNING SIGNATURE BELOW----- Bring back the NeoNeoCom!
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.01 08:29:00 - [646] Originally by: Kyra Felann Originally by: 3up*ia I have to agree. Not many brick walls are that dense. Gotta admire that. I was referring to the people pointlessly arguing that salvage belongs to them as the brick wall. No matter how much evidence is shown that it's working as intended and no matter how many arguments are made to explain why, they choose to ignore it. She knows what you were refering to, but I tend to agree her.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.05.01 09:04:00 - [647] Personal jibes, are the retort of the losing side. 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.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.01 09:21:00 - [648] Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 01/05/2011 09:23:50 Originally by: Kyra Felann I was referring to the people pointlessly arguing that salvage belongs to them as the brick wall. No matter how much evidence is shown that it's working as intended and no matter how many arguments are made to explain why, they choose to ignore it. It's not pointless arguing and as for CCP saying it's working as intended does not make it any less a poor game design. There's basically 3 camps to this argument: 1 - Those that ninja salvage, they will defend CCPs decision because they are making good amounts of isk (huge amounts of isk when the salvage prices used to be higher) from CCPs decision on this. They have it easy, there's no risk to them, it does not cost them anything other than time once they have there rig set up. As far as they are concerned they're onto any easy thing, so why change it is their argument. 2 - Those that don't ninja salvage or mission run. This group more than likely won't careless what the outcome is. 3 - Mission runners, that see the wreak as part of the kill because after all they killed it. This group tends to have little time for ninja salvagers because they seem the as nothing but vermin that have been given a free ride by CCP and CCPs decision on this matter. Making the wreak part of the kill so that if someone salvages one of your wreaks then they are then flagged for PvP can only be a good thing. Someone salvaging someone elses wreak would flash red but in many cases I doubt the mission runner would do much about it, certainly not much different to what they do already. But some would do something about it, which means the ninja salvager could no longer be certain that they would not suffer loses, which is a very good thing. I here so much about risk and reward on these forums. With ninja salvaging as it is at the moment it's all reward and no risk. Now that does not sound very Eve like. So like I said at the beginning of this post it is worth discussing this subject and this subject won't go away because there's a lot of people that just see it as another broken system.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.01 09:33:00 - [649] You're still not dealing with the proven fact that salvage was explicitly never intended to be part of the mission reward in the first place. It belongs to whoever picks it up. You can wail about "bad game design" all you like (and by all means continue not to demonstrate why it is such a bad design) The very simplest way for CCP to "solve" the mission salvage problem would be to make deadspace rats yield no salvage at all. Limiting salvage to belt rats would solve a number of problems and do more to promote player interaction than any other solution. It would be nice to see actual people in lo-sec and nullsec belts again, chasing after suddenly immensely valuable salvage rather than mindlessly chaining hi-sec L4s Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.01 09:42:00 - [650] Originally by: Malcanis The very simplest way for CCP to "solve" the mission salvage problem would be to make deadspace rats yield no salvage at all. Limiting salvage to belt rats would solve a number of problems and do more to promote player interaction than any other solution. It would be nice to see actual people in lo-sec and nullsec belts again, chasing after suddenly immensely valuable salvage rather than mindlessly chaining hi-sec L4s Actually that's not a bad idea. In fact I'd go as far as to say it's a good idea.

Eyup Mi'duck	Posted - 2011.05.01 10:22:00 - [651] To the OP, the answer is simple - run a tidy mission. Salvage as you go, don't leave the site littered with wrecks. Marauders are great for this. If a ninja salvager arrives, just warp out and let him tank the remaining rats, if there are a few left. Otherwise shoot the wrecks so that he can't have them either. If it happens too frequently, change your agent to a less busy system. 3 months ago I moved to another L4 agent of the same quality just 4x jumps away from my original one, and haven't seen a ninja salvager since.
Captain Megadeath	Posted - 2011.05.01 10:32:00 - [652] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka There's basically 4 camps to this argument: 1 - Those that ninja salvage, A valid tactic as described by CCP, the developers of this game. 2 - Those that don't ninja salvage or mission run. This group more than likely won't careless what the outcome is. 3 - Some mission runners, that see the wreak as part of the kill because after all they killed those pixels with pixel ammo (but ignore the fact that they recieved pixel ISK and pixel loot as payment as this detracts from their arguement). This group tends to cry when ninja salvagers arrive because they see them as nothing but vermin. These basement dwellers don't get out of mummys basement much and have a hard time understanding that this is a game of pixels. Said basement runners like to hoard pixel monies. 4 - Mission Runners, that understand that the salvage from wrecks does not belong to them. That if ninja salvagers are in the area they get fellow corp members to salvage for them during the mission in a noctis. Afterall this is a massive MULTIPLAYER online game where interacting is sometimes necessary and encouraged. These types of mission runner understand that this is just a game and if the developers say that those pixels aren't theirs then they respect that Fixed. BTW I'm in group 4. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Making the wreak part of the kill so that if someone salvages one of your wreaks then they are then flagged for PvP can only be a good thing. Someone salvaging someone elses wreak would flash red but in many cases I doubt the mission runner would do much about it, certainly not much different to what they do already. But some would do something about it, which means the ninja salvager could no longer be certain that they would not suffer loses, which is a very good thing. Instead of all that, I suggest that CCP remove Concord from mission deadspace. Since you and He11fire want to pew-pew these ninjas its win-win for everyone. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka I hear so much about risk and reward on these forums. With ninja salvaging as it is at the moment it's all reward and no risk. Now that does not sound very Eve like. Neither is there any risk for mission runners running level 4 missions. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka So like I said at the beginning of this post it is worth discussing this subject and this subject won't go away because there's a lot of people that just see it as another broken system. Oh yes, it can be discussed by deluded mission runners who either don't understand the mechanics of salvage, or by those who think that by making enough noise will make CCP change the mechanism. But EvE isn't a democracy and the Developers are the biggest griefers out their.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.01 11:23:00 - [653] Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 01/05/2011 11:26:17 Originally by: Captain Megadeath Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka I hear so much about risk and reward on these forums. With ninja salvaging as it is at the moment it's all reward and no risk. Now that does not sound very Eve like. Neither is there any risk for mission runners running level 4 missions. If you're finding level 4s too easy, I'd suggest you do level 5s
Cutter Isaacson Minmatar Hollow World Mining Corporation	Posted - 2011.05.01 11:36:00 - [654] Originally by: Captain Megadeath Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka There's basically 4 camps to this argument: 1 - Those that ninja salvage, A valid tactic as described by CCP, the developers of this game. 2 - Those that don't ninja salvage or mission run. This group more than likely won't careless what the outcome is. 3 - Some mission runners, that see the wreak as part of the kill because after all they killed those pixels with pixel ammo (but ignore the fact that they recieved pixel ISK and pixel loot as payment as this detracts from their arguement). This group tends to cry when ninja salvagers arrive because they see them as nothing but vermin. These basement dwellers don't get out of mummys basement much and have a hard time understanding that this is a game of pixels. Said basement runners like to hoard pixel monies. 4 - Mission Runners, that understand that the salvage from wrecks does not belong to them. That if ninja salvagers are in the area they get fellow corp members to salvage for them during the mission in a noctis. Afterall this is a massive MULTIPLAYER online game where interacting is sometimes necessary and encouraged. These types of mission runner understand that this is just a game and if the developers say that those pixels aren't theirs then they respect that Fixed. BTW I'm in group 4. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Making the wreak part of the kill so that if someone salvages one of your wreaks then they are then flagged for PvP can only be a good thing. Someone salvaging someone elses wreak would flash red but in many cases I doubt the mission runner would do much about it, certainly not much different to what they do already. But some would do something about it, which means the ninja salvager could no longer be certain that they would not suffer loses, which is a very good thing. Instead of all that, I suggest that CCP remove Concord from mission deadspace. Since you and He11fire want to pew-pew these ninjas its win-win for everyone. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka I hear so much about risk and reward on these forums. With ninja salvaging as it is at the moment it's all reward and no risk. Now that does not sound very Eve like. Neither is there any risk for mission runners running level 4 missions. Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka So like I said at the beginning of this post it is worth discussing this subject and this subject won't go away because there's a lot of people that just see it as another broken system. Oh yes, it can be discussed by deluded mission runners who either don't understand the mechanics of salvage, or by those who think that by making enough noise will make CCP change the mechanism. But EvE isn't a democracy and the Developers are the biggest griefers out their. Probably the best post in this otherwise pointless and pathetic thread. I am also in Group 4 with Captain Megadeath. Most of the time if a salvager turns up in my mission, I just turn everything blue and let them have it. The only time I tend not to do this is on missions where the loot and salvage are all I get (ie drone missions). Originally by: Johnny Dexter bombs everyone to Narnia
Captain Megadeath	Posted - 2011.05.01 11:51:00 - [655] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka If you're finding level 4s too easy, I'd suggest you do level 5s If you are finding mission running (with dedicated websites telling you what occurs in the mission, which resists/damage types to use and which rats are spawn points) hard, I suggest that you wait until you have proper support skills to run them. I assumed that your character is a forum alt but if it is your main then I suggest you run level 3s in a BC until you have proper support skills to fly a Battleship.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.01 12:00:00 - [656] Originally by: Captain Megadeath Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka If you're finding level 4s too easy, I'd suggest you do level 5s If you are finding mission running (with dedicated websites telling you what occurs in the mission, which resists/damage types to use and which rats are spawn points) hard, I suggest that you wait until you have proper support skills to run them. I assumed that your character is a forum alt but if it is your main then I suggest you run level 3s in a BC until you have proper support skills to fly a Battleship. Actually I don't look at any websites before doing a mission (never have done), all I do is look at the mission brief before/upon accepting the mission. Never understand why people want to take the fun out of a missions by knowing all about them first. Obviously the second time you get the same mission you already know what to expect. And yes this is a forum alt.
Johnny Dexter	Posted - 2011.05.01 13:46:00 - [657] Ah, the charms of living in 0.0 :) You can post as many CCP quotes as you like, but that doesn't make the game mechanic any more silly. You killed the rat and everything valuable in the wreck is yours. Luckily every 0.0 alliance understands that.
Renarla	Posted - 2011.05.01 15:21:00 - [658] I have absolutely no idea how this thread did not die on page 1. Okay, so let's say you get what you want. Ninja salvagers get flagged for salvaging. Whoopdidoo. Is that going to change anything? Are you actually going to shoot at them in your shiny faction fit Nightmare?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.01 15:28:00 - [659] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Making the wreak part of the kill so that if someone salvages one of your wreaks then they are then flagged for PvP can only be a good thing. Quite incorrect. In can be a very bad thing due to the fact that it needlessly buffs one of the most reward-heavy and risk-less activities in the game; due to the fact that it needlessly nerfs an entire professions; due to the fact that it makes salvaging inconsistent with other resource collection professions (causing more confusion); due to the fact that the PvP element already exists; and due to the fact that it would entirely go against the purpose for introducing wrecks to begin with. Why is it so hard to actually earn your rewards? Quote: I hear so much about risk and reward on these forums. àand that is why buffing missions is off the table. It won't happen. The risk is already nil; the rewards are already (far too) high. They don't need more. Ninja salvaging comes with risks built in ù you just adamantly refuse to acknowledge them (most likely because you're working from the disproved position that salvaging is part of mission running, rather than a competition between two parties). Oh, and I'm category 4 as well. Ninja salvagers are not a problem (much less the problem). 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
Tosser Galore	Posted - 2011.05.01 21:46:00 - [660] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 01/05/2011 09:36:01 Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 01/05/2011 09:23:50 Originally by: Kyra Felann I was referring to the people pointlessly arguing that salvage belongs to them as the brick wall. No matter how much evidence is shown that it's working as intended and no matter how many arguments are made to explain why, they choose to ignore it. It's not pointless arguing and as for CCP saying it's working as intended does not make it any less a poor game design. There's basically 3 camps to this argument: 1 - Those that ninja salvage, they will defend CCPs decision because they are making good amounts of isk (huge amounts of isk when the salvage prices used to be higher) from CCPs decision on this. They have it easy, there's no risk to them, it does not cost them anything other than time once they have their rig set up. As far as they are concerned they're onto any easy thing, so why change it is their argument. 2 - Those that don't ninja salvage or mission run. This group more than likely won't careless what the outcome is. 3 - Mission runners, that see the wreak as part of the kill because after all they killed it. This group tends to have little time for ninja salvagers because they see them as nothing but vermin that have been given a free ride by CCP and CCPs decision on this matter. Making the wreck part of the kill so that if someone salvages one of your wreaks then they are then flagged for PvP can only be a good thing. Someone salvaging someone elses wreak would flash red but in many cases I doubt the mission runner would do much about it, certainly not much different to what they do already. But some would do something about it, which means the ninja salvager could no longer be certain that they would not suffer loses, which is a very good thing. I hear so much about risk and reward on these forums. With ninja salvaging as it is at the moment it's all reward and no risk. Now that does not sound very Eve like. .... The bolded part here is key. Regardless of "buffing the income of MR carebear", eve revolves around risk vs reward. We need to bring more risk for the risk free "emergent game play" that is flying into the middle of you mission and extract isk from wrecks. This will bring more pvp into high sec. It's not a question about logic (politics are not built upon logic) or "entitlement" it's competing for resources, exploiting game mechanics, or being cushioned by them. The question regarding Ownership is just fluff. And since eve mechanics does not convey moral behavior (that itself is created by the player community, or immoral behavior) The categorical imperative, says that (among other things) "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction". This is a moral level. e.g If you lend money you expect it to be paid back. A "world" (or indeed micro cosmos, among peers) where money is not paid back, will dissolve (or at least undermine) the concept of lending money. Essentially that is how you moral behavior is created, on the macro and micro level. Reciprocity is key. The first premise is that a person acts morally if his or her conduct would, without condition, be the "right" conduct for any person in similar circumstances (the "First Maxim"). The second premise is that conduct is "right" if it treats others as ends in themselves and not as means to an end (the "Second Maxim"). The conclusion is that a person acts morally when he or she acts as if his or her conduct was establishing a universal law governing others in similar circumstances (the "Third Maxim"). Of course "immoral behavior. DEF: "actions that you yourself would not like to be done to you" is an parasitic organism, relying on others work feeding off their hard earned sweat. I'm in camp V. More pvp everywhere. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist

Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.01 21:56:00 - [661] Originally by: Kyra Felann In some missions, there are mineable asteroids that appear. Do you consider those "yours" also, since they wouldn't exist if you didn't accept the mission? Are they tagged with my corp name, implying ownership? No. If they were, would people believe that they were theirs? Not unreasonably, yes, they probably would. If the same asteroid contained ore that was yours and dirt that was a free for all, and the asteroid were labelled with your corp tag, and you had to spend time creating each and every asteroid to appear before it could be mined or scrapped for dirt... Well, then you might see why it's confusing, and why some people might THINK that the item which is labelled with their corp name is "theirs" and why they get irritated when someone can come in and manipulate "their" goods and they can't attack or defend the item which took them some investment to create.
Captain Megadeath	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:01:00 - [662] Originally by: Tosser Galore Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka I hear so much about risk and reward on these forums. With ninja salvaging as it is at the moment it's all reward and no risk. Now that does not sound very Eve like. .... The bolded part here is key. What like this ? Originally by: Captain Megadeath Neither is there any risk for mission runners running level 4 missions. Originally by: Tosser Galore Regardless of "buffing the income of MR carebear", eve revolves around risk vs reward. We need to bring more risk for the risk free "emergent game play" that is flying into the middle of you mission and extract isk from wrecks. This will bring more pvp into high sec. Want more PvP in highsec? Got you covered. Originally by: Captain Megadeath I suggest that CCP remove Concord from mission deadspace. Originally by: Captain Megadeath I'm in camp V. More pvp everywhere. Already covered there. Lowsec, Nullsec, wardecs and ganks are your friend. As for all that moral spiel linking RL with internet pixels, I'll let someone else deal with that......
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:04:00 - [663] This reminds of those birther peeps, they are also still in denial. 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.
Solstice Project	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:10:00 - [664] Seriously, why are you still talking about that crap ? First of all it's crap in space, i can interact with. Like with almost anything else in space, except these Large Collidible Objects or whatsitcalled. Warp to celestials, shoot structurs, shoot ships, board ship, enter a ship, mine a rock, shoot a structure, web a structure (looks awesome ^^), d-scan all of it, probe ships, bump the sun, etc etc. It's crap in space. It's crap ... in space ! Stop seeing the game as a game and start seeing it as it's intended to be seen. As a world in space. (Quote: "EvE is real") Some guys want to nerf a game, while the other guys want to live in a world. EvE Online is the only game that makes that possible ... in these dimensions, at least. Salvage is free, because wrecks are free, because it's crap in space! (CCP-fact ... no ownership) If you make wrecks untouchable for outsiders, you'd ruin the whole world-aspect. There's no logic behind "I own this crap, because i shot it down". By this logic, your ganked t3-wreck is owned by the ganker. But it's not... it's yours ! Care to enlighten already ? It's NPC-owned, but as they don't claim ownership, or as CONCORD makes the rules, it's public property. The Loot is yours because ... you shot the ship. (d'oh) Pirates (IRL, on sea) saw a ship, attacked the ship, boarded the ship, took the loot and either ... ... destroyed the ship ... ... or let it lose as a ghostship ... ... which makes it ... Public Property ! That's how EvE works. You may choose to destroy the wreck without consequences, because you shot the ship. In every other case it's public property. There's no flaw, it's how the game works. You just fail to play the game right.
Captain Megadeath	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:13:00 - [665] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Kyra Felann In some missions, there are mineable asteroids that appear. Do you consider those "yours" also, since they wouldn't exist if you didn't accept the mission? Are they tagged with my corp name, implying ownership? No. But they do not contain an object belonging to someone to have it tagged, namely the loot container. The container within the wreck (whether empty or full of loot) belongs to the person who killed it. The wreck and the salvage it contains does not belong to anyone. To clarify. The corp "Tag" only shows who owns the loot container spawned within the wreck.
Numa Hanaya	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:25:00 - [666] Wouldn't the easy way to prevent someone from salvaging your wrecks, would be to shoot and destroy your wrecks so there's nothing to salvage?
Solstice Project	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:48:00 - [667] Originally by: Numa Hanaya Wouldn't the easy way to prevent someone from salvaging your wrecks, would be to shoot and destroy your wrecks so there's nothing to salvage? Wow, you seem to be able to understand, how the game works. Thanks. I started to believe I'm the only one.
Tosser Galore	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:54:00 - [668] Originally by: Tippia Ninja salvaging comes with risks built in ù you just adamantly refuse to acknowledge them (most likely because you're working from the disproved position that salvaging is part of mission running, rather than a competition between two parties). This is BS and not taken out of context. There is NO risk since you are not being flagged, Using an alt, with expendable equipment. You risk nothing. This is an untold law of eve. If you win more than you loose, you sure will sacrifice that rook (or pawn) in order to get it. Seen from the "thief" standpoint, they risk a pawn and the gain is comparatively huge. This market niche relies and pony backs on the game mechanics. Tippias argumentation tries to disguise itself as logical. Politics are not logical, as is human behavior. There are no professions in eve. It's all left to the players to interact and create a functional/dysfunctional world of their own, and make a living or perish in flames. Again you are simply arguing you political standpoint (essentially backing the ninja camp) by seeing the "wreck" as and independent entity just floating around. From the other parts it's his ammo/time to train skills, ship cost/fittings that is being spent on the killing of npc. Compared that to: Oh noes I have to train a ninja alt... The risk vs reward ratio is skewed, when it comes to the competing parties. Indeed. If you get flagged for stealing (a very strange mechanic, that needs a lot of fluff to rationalize),you should also get flagged from using modules of wrecks you have not created, again not an question about ownership or entitlement. This would bring more pvp and make empire a less care bear free zone. The risk will increase and if you want to salvage in the safe haven that is empire space protected by the gankordokken, you better bring your guns and fight for it (regardless of whom it belongs to from the beginning). This leaves the choice for the players to duke it out. But first and foremost it levels the playing field, for both parties. Again the concept of entitlement and ownership in eve is lucid: If it's in your hangar/station it's yours. There is also no concept of "mission running" or "mission runner" or indeed the existence of a "profession" that is sat in stone. The question is about emergent morals, politics and game mechanics. Everything else is just fluff. You can create fluff that will suit your camp and back up your sides argumentation, but at the end of the day this is meta gaming and lobbying (for the benefit of your camp) towards ccp. Why doesn't "mission runners" (it's just an activity for isk not a profession) realize that they themselves can protect their wrecks by choosing to pvp the "whatever" that tries to salvage "your" wrecks (as they see it). Oh noes they can't because the ninja (it's just an activity for isk not a profession) is being pr0tected by the insta gank squad. Why not auto flag when you enter someones dead space pocket in empire? This will bring the need for the brave "wreck liberators" to protect their trade, use bigger ships etc, since that flimsy destroyer, would get into serious problem at the instant it landed. Of course he will just switch out to a bigger ship (No doubt warp in a overheated cane) and go after you but we would still have the usual aggro mechanics, and more pvp. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Tosser Galore	Posted - 2011.05.01 22:59:00 - [669] Edited by: Tosser Galore on 01/05/2011 22:59:17 Originally by: Solstice Project Seriously, why are you still talking about that crap ? First of all it's crap in space, i can interact with. Like with almost anything else in space, except these Large Collidible Objects or whatsitcalled. Warp to celestials, shoot structurs, shoot ships, board ship, enter a ship, mine a rock, shoot a structure, web a structure (looks awesome ^^), d-scan all of it, probe ships, bump the sun, etc etc. It's crap in space. It's crap ... in space ! Stop seeing the game as a game and start seeing it as it's intended to be seen. As a world in space. (Quote: "EvE is real") Some guys want to nerf a game, while the other guys want to live in a world. EvE Online is the only game that makes that possible ... in these dimensions, at least. Salvage is free, because wrecks are free, because it's crap in space! (CCP-fact ... no ownership) If you make wrecks untouchable for outsiders, you'd ruin the whole world-aspect. There's no logic behind "I own this crap, because i shot it down". By this logic, your ganked t3-wreck is owned by the ganker. But it's not... it's yours ! Care to enlighten already ? It's NPC-owned, but as they don't claim ownership, or as CONCORD makes the rules, it's public property. The Loot is yours because ... you shot the ship. (d'oh) Pirates (IRL, on sea) saw a ship, attacked the ship, boarded the ship, took the loot and either ... ... destroyed the ship ... ... or let it lose as a ghostship ... ... which makes it ... Public Property ! That's how EvE works. You may choose to destroy the wreck without consequences, because you shot the ship. In every other case it's public property. There's no flaw, it's how the game works. You just fail to play the game right. Your logic is flawed and biased. If you manage to secure it; "whatever" it is. It is yours. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Numa Hanaya	Posted - 2011.05.01 23:05:00 - [670] Originally by: Solstice Project Originally by: Numa Hanaya Wouldn't the easy way to prevent someone from salvaging your wrecks, would be to shoot and destroy your wrecks so there's nothing to salvage? Wow, you seem to be able to understand, how the game works. Thanks. I started to believe I'm the only one. Yeah I just figured that'd be an easy fix. I mean if people salvaging your wrecks bothers you so much, shoot the dang wrecks then lol.

Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.05.01 23:05:00 - [671] Quote: There is NO risk since you are not being flagged, This is complete BS. I've tried ninja salvaging. You risk not making any money, and wasting time. For every nice lvl 4 you scan down, there are also 20 or so other crap ones that get scanned. Heck, on a bad day, I make more doing lvl 2s than ninja salvaging.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.01 23:09:00 - [672] Edited by: Tippia on 01/05/2011 23:12:48 Originally by: Tosser Galore There is NO risk since you are not being flagged, Using an alt, with expendable equipment. You risk nothing. Yes you do: you risk not getting the stuff; wasting your time, just like the mission-runner. It's the same risk as with all competitive resource gathering. Quote: From the other parts it's his ammo/time to train skills, ship cost/fittings that is being spent on the killing of npc. None of which is of any relevance to the salvaging part of the equation. All those things are paid for and rewarded. Quote: The risk vs reward ratio is skewed, when it comes to the competing parties. Yes, it's a bit skewed in the mission-runner's favour since he's already on-site, rather than having to probe the site down and since he can use tractor beams, rather than having to travel to each and every wreck. Quote: This would bring more pvp and make empire a less care bear free zone. [à] Why not auto flag when you enter someones dead space pocket in empire? You know what else would do that? Making mission deadspace work like lowsec. Quote: Why doesn't "mission runners" realize that they themselves can protect their wrecks by choosing to pvp the "whatever" that tries to salvage "your" wrecks (as they see it). Oh noes they can't because the ninja is being pr0tected by the insta gank squad. They can protect the wrecks through PvP in the same way all salvagers can, and they have the same protection as all salvagers. It's about as balanced as it could ever be. 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
Renarla	Posted - 2011.05.01 23:10:00 - [673] Edited by: Renarla on 01/05/2011 23:10:43 You seem to make out Ninja Salvaging to be extremely lucrative. It's a really ****ty way of making isk, and the majority of the people doing it WANT you to shoot them. (So that they can shoot back)
Kyra Felann Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.05.01 23:20:00 - [674] Edited by: Kyra Felann on 01/05/2011 23:25:32 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka There's basically 3 camps to this argument: 1 - Those that ninja salvage, they will defend CCPs decision because they are making good amounts of isk (huge amounts of isk when the salvage prices used to be higher) from CCPs decision on this. They have it easy, there's no risk to them, it does not cost them anything other than time once they have their rig set up. As far as they are concerned they're onto any easy thing, so why change it is their argument. 2 - Those that don't ninja salvage or mission run. This group more than likely won't careless what the outcome is. 3 - Mission runners, that see the wreak as part of the kill because after all they killed it. This group tends to have little time for ninja salvagers because they see them as nothing but vermin that have been given a free ride by CCP and CCPs decision on this matter. Learn to spell. It's "wreck". Where do I fit into your nice, neat, wrong list of viewpoints? I run missions much more often than I ninja salvage, yet I think the way salvage works is just fine. Salvaging is not a free ride. You have to find the wrecks, fly to each one, since you can't use tractor beams, and activate a specialized module. There is about the same amount of risk. If you don't admit that missions are virtually risk free, then you're either lying or doing it horribly wrong. This is a pointless thread. All the evidence supporting salvage being just fine from CCP as well as very good, logical arguments defending it has been stated multiple times. But all the carebears with their senses of entitlement will never change their minds. This is like debating religion--it doesn't change anyone's mind and just wastes time. The point is: just because you indirectly cause a wreck to be created, it doesn't mean it's yours. You can pretend it is, but don't expect the rest of the playerbase or the game mechanics or CCP to agree. -----WARNING SIGNATURE BELOW----- Bring back the NeoNeoCom!
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.02 01:10:00 - [675] Dear everyone who thinks the only thing being discussed in this thread is carebears wanting to own wrecks. You've failed to read. Thank you.
Solstice Project	Posted - 2011.05.02 01:17:00 - [676] Originally by: Tosser Galore This is BS ... Exactly. Your post is bull**. Mission-Runner can always warp out and try to drop aggro on the ninja. Mission-Runners have even less risk than ninjas, because they fit their ships for "risk-free" or "no need to care about anymore" and that's it. And leave me alone with gankers invading missions. Not only is it your own fault (fitting expensive ships, "unable" to use d-scan right) ... ... sadly i am sure ppl will start nerf-threads about this too. (They'll "need" to get nerfed anyway, of course.) (It's unfair, and all.) ... Only thing that needs to be changed is the ing incompetency of that subgroup of a group of players. The incompetency of being unable to LOOK AFTER AND CARE FOR THEMSELVES ! Well ... for example. This one is bad enough already. If you care about a "ninja" taking PUBLIC PROPERTY, then shoot the damn wreck. That's your earned right from shooting the ship. That's it. Nothing else. My point is not biased, i am showing you in-game-reality. I am talking about how the game works. People want to change in-game-related stuff from outside of the game ... ... instead of accepting game-reality as it is ... ... and starting to deal with it on their own. (they could anyway) This and all related threads basically are about how incompetent most of you guys are and that you are trying to hide that fact behind an illusionary inbalance. Or you just don't ing know better. Enlighten already ! All of this discussion makes you guys seriously look ****ed ... ... and i love to rub it under your nose, too ! :)
Solstice Project	Posted - 2011.05.02 01:19:00 - [677] Originally by: Mortania Dear everyone who thinks the only thing being discussed in this thread is carebears wanting to own wrecks. You've failed to read. Thank you. Enlighten me, please.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.05.02 01:27:00 - [678] Originally by: Solstice Project Halp!! I can't read, please. Fixed.
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.02 01:29:00 - [679] Originally by: Solstice Project Originally by: Mortania Dear everyone who thinks the only thing being discussed in this thread is carebears wanting to own wrecks. You've failed to read. Thank you. Enlighten me, please. The reason this thread is long is NOT just people wanting ownership. The primary contention is that the current system is poor in communication. Yes, it's easy to understand the rules, but NO the rules are poorly communicated. I would be 100% ok with any simple system that better expressed the ownership of wrecks/loot/et. al. I believe the easiest result is that you give wreck creators ownership. Because it mimics loot cans, which wrecks replaced. And, honestly, because it's better. It will provide salvagers with more pew-pew which is what 99% of them want anyhow. If another easy to communicate system were proposed, I'd be fine with that too, really! Tippia believes that CCP doesn't want to spawn a wreck and a can, if needed, which might be true, but would be a simple solution. Not marking wrecks that are empty, also good. I mean, seriously. You own the "loot can", which CCP says was replaced by the wreck, but not the salvage, even if the wreck is "empty" it still has this "loot can"? Imagine being in a meeting and this is how someone proposes a system. It's TERRIBLE.
Solstice Project	Posted - 2011.05.02 01:57:00 - [680] Originally by: Mortania The reason this thread is long is NOT just people wanting ownership. The primary contention is that the current system is poor in communication. Yes, it's easy to understand the rules, but NO the rules are poorly communicated. Seems related to what disturbs me about the whole situation. Like ... noob doesn't know **, rages at the forum, gets told it's "working as intended" and uselessly argues against it, because he has no ing clue. 10 pages later ........ Am i seeing it right ? I'm all for any idea that spreads knowledge and informs people about game mechanics, how the game works, rules, etc. Google and Guides don't help. Most are too *ing dumb to even enter a search into google. Too bad many people don't give a damn, too. (also ... grammar. i have none.)*

Solstice Project	Posted - 2011.05.02 02:01:00 - [681] Edited by: Solstice Project on 02/05/2011 02:02:48 Originally by: Mortania I mean, seriously. You own the "loot can", which CCP says was replaced by the wreck, but not the salvage, even if the wreck is "empty" it still has this "loot can"? Imagine being in a meeting and this is how someone proposes a system. It's TERRIBLE. Pirates shoot at ship at sea. Pirates steal loot. Pirates abandon wreck. -> GhostShip. (or burn it down aka shoot the wreck) (it really doesn't matter if the mission-runner takes his loot now, or later) Makes sense to me, tbh.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.02 08:16:00 - [682] Originally by: Numa Hanaya Yeah I just figured that'd be an easy fix. I mean if people salvaging your wrecks bothers you so much, shoot the dang wrecks then lol. People do, I do that also. Trouble is that because ninja salvagers (scavengers, because that's what they really are) can salvage the wreak before it's looted you end up destroying wreaks with all the loot inside too. Which just leaves the mission reward and the bounties (if there are any). The ninja salvagers being the true scavengers that they are will salvage the wreaks and if they can get away with it steal the loot too, when you've flown through to the next section. I've known ninja salvagers make more from a mission than the missioner, yet the ninja salvager does not have any risk at all. So flag the ninja salvager and then at least salvaging (ninja style) will have some risk attached to it.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.02 08:19:00 - [683] Edited by: Tippia on 02/05/2011 08:25:12 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka I've known ninja salvagers make more from a mission than the missioner, yet the ninja salvager does not have any risk at all. Neither has the mission-runner ù L3s are even easier than L4s, and L4s are already largely risk-free. If you're talking about L4s, then trust me: that mission-runner is doing it wrong. Oh, and you just illustrated that there is a clear risk for the salvager already ù one that comes at no cost to the mission-runner if done right, to the point where one could even make a case for calling the mission-runners griefers considering the impact they can have on another player's activities and the negligible impact it would have on the mission-runnerà 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
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.05.02 08:25:00 - [684] Originally by: Tippia You know what else would do that? Making mission deadspace work like lowsec. Oh they would never agree to that. Balls would suddenly shrivel and disappear if that were implemented. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________ Huh?
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.02 08:27:00 - [685] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 02/05/2011 08:25:12 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka I've known ninja salvagers make more from a mission than the missioner, yet the ninja salvager does not have any risk at all. Neither has the mission-runner ù L3s are even easier than L4s, and L4s are already largely risk-free. If you're talking about L4s, then trust me: that mission-runner is doing it wrong. Oh, and you just illustrated that there is a clear risk for the salvager already ù one that comes at no cost to the mission-runner if done right, to the point where one could even make a case for calling the mission-runners griefers considering the impact they can have on another player's activities and the negligible impact it would have on the mission-runnerà So how is doing a mission right, in your opinion Tippia, you say a lot but what your say does not really mean much. So here's your chance.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.02 08:33:00 - [686] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka So how is doing a mission right, in your opinion Tippia, you say a lot but what your say does not really mean much. So here's your chance. Except for wrecks of opportunity (large wrecks that happen to be within tractor range), ignore the loot and salvage ù it only lowers your income.. Collect bounties according to taste and patience and balance the that against the time it takes to get the kill. That's if you're doing it for the ISK. If you're not doing it for the ISK, losing some salvage to the competition doesn't really matter anyway. 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
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.05.02 08:46:00 - [687] I always thought the salvage, was the mess outside of the can that you can see. Surely if it's outside the can, it's floating rubbish and without ownership. 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.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.02 09:11:00 - [688] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka So how is doing a mission right, in your opinion Tippia, you say a lot but what your say does not really mean much. So here's your chance. Except for wrecks of opportunity (large wrecks that happen to be within tractor range), ignore the loot and salvage ù it only lowers your income.. Collect bounties according to taste and patience and balance the that against the time it takes to get the kill. That's if you're doing it for the ISK. If you're not doing it for the ISK, losing some salvage to the competition doesn't really matter anyway. Isk and standing, although when the standing is where I want it and missions are too easy, that'll be the time to stop running missions. If I can tank the mission, i'll loot/salvage whilst killing the rats, I prefer it that way instead of having to go and pick up a dedicated salvage ship, even though I lose two high slots to the salvager and tractor beam. I use tactics that limit what a ninja can get from the missions I run, but that only works effectively if I'm able to sit and tank the mission. If I can't tank the mission then blowing up the wreaks is an option.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.02 09:13:00 - [689] Originally by: Mag's I always thought the salvage, was the mess outside of the can that you can see. Surely if it's outside the can, it's floating rubbish and without ownership. If they truely are seperate how come you can blow the wreak and the can is destroyed at the same time?
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.02 09:19:00 - [690] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Originally by: Tippia You know what else would do that? Making mission deadspace work like lowsec. Oh they would never agree to that. Balls would suddenly shrivel and disappear if that were implemented. Nonsense! These bold, aggressive mission runners are just aching for the opportunity to duel with the scurvy probers and mission-invaders. They will support the idea en-masse, just you wait and see. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.

Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.05.02 09:21:00 - [691] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Originally by: Mag's I always thought the salvage, was the mess outside of the can that you can see. Surely if it's outside the can, it's floating rubbish and without ownership. If they truely are seperate how come you can blow the wreak and the can is destroyed at the same time? I didn't say they were separate, I said the salvage is the rubbish you see on the outside. It's rubbish, not shield/armour protection. 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.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.02 09:41:00 - [692] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Originally by: Mag's I always thought the salvage, was the mess outside of the can that you can see. Surely if it's outside the can, it's floating rubbish and without ownership. If they truely are seperate how come you can blow the wreak and the can is destroyed at the same time? I didn't say they were separate, I said the salvage is the rubbish you see on the outside. It's rubbish, not shield/armour protection. Rubbish tends to be worthless, some of the items salvaged from wreaks these days are pretty much worthless (market prices) but others are still worth a decent amount of isk. If wreaks were truely just rubbish, neither the missioner or ninja salvager would bother with them.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.05.02 10:10:00 - [693] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Originally by: Mag's I didn't say they were separate, I said the salvage is the rubbish you see on the outside. It's rubbish, not shield/armour protection. Rubbish tends to be worthless, some of the items salvaged from wreaks these days are pretty much worthless (market prices) but others are still worth a decent amount of isk. If wreaks were truely just rubbish, neither the missioner or ninja salvager would bother with them. The stuff on the outside is rubbish, until you salvage it to see if there is anything worth salvaging. That's the point of salvaging. Oh and the word is 'wrecks', not 'wreaks'. 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.
Cybele Lanier Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2011.05.02 10:52:00 - [694] When these threads come up, I always wonder how many new ninja salvagers get started up just because of them? --------------- ""Minimum collateral damage" and "Entire star system" do not belong in the same sentence."
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.02 11:02:00 - [695] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Isk and standing Then loot and salvage is your last priority (as in somewhere below checking your skill queue and monitoring contract trends), since they're not worth the time it takes to get them. Quote: If I can tank the mission, i'll loot/salvage whilst killing the rats, I prefer it that way instead of having to go and pick up a dedicated salvage ship, even though I lose two high slots to the salvager and tractor beam. If you can put weapons in those highslots instead, do that ù it'll pay better. And if you can't tank the mission, you're wasting your time as well, so it kind of goes without saying that you can do thatà Quote: I use tactics that limit what a ninja can get from the missions I run To my ears, that sounds an awful lot like "not doing things that result in the rats dying and/or completing the mission"à which mean you're losing out on income. If you're blowing up wrecks, you're not blowing up rats. This is a waste of time, ISK and ammo, which again leads to the interesting contradiction: if you're going for the salvage, you're obviously not in it for the ISK, so it doesn't really matter if the ninjas manage to nab one every now and thenà 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
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.02 16:32:00 - [696] I'm not so sure the accepted common wisdom of loot/salvage is correct. I've been doing some mild checking on it and in the two to three missions I checked on, melting the loot alone was about 8-9M in minerals. Which comes close to the value of the BS in the mission. If you aren't blitzing missions, and most people don't as I understand it, how long would it take to destroy double the amount of BS's? Is the time getting your noctis and looting/salvaging more or less time than that? I suspect again, that except for your top mission runners, it's probably better to get your noctis on.
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.05.02 17:28:00 - [697] Originally by: Mortania I'm not so sure the accepted common wisdom of loot/salvage is correct. ... I don't think of my alt as a "top mission runner", but no, the looting and salvage isn't worth the time. In the same time I could take to loot/salvage a high-loot mission, I could run another mission, getting bounties, loot, and LP, which together add up to at least twice the 8-9 M you mention. And if I really need salvage for something (not that I can think of what that would be), I'd really rather haul out a ninja salvage ship to get it. EVE Online is, after all, all about the player conflict. :)
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.02 17:52:00 - [698] Originally by: Mintala Arana Originally by: Mortania I'm not so sure the accepted common wisdom of loot/salvage is correct. ... I don't think of my alt as a "top mission runner", but no, the looting and salvage isn't worth the time. In the same time I could take to loot/salvage a high-loot mission, I could run another mission, getting bounties, loot, and LP, which together add up to at least twice the 8-9 M you mention. And if I really need salvage for something (not that I can think of what that would be), I'd really rather haul out a ninja salvage ship to get it. EVE Online is, after all, all about the player conflict. :) I'll have to do a more concentrated study. I'm not sure I buy the same time, I can clear a room really damned fast with my Noctis. That 8-9 million was a 1 room haul. I'm curious now to see what the exact timings are.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.02 18:10:00 - [699] Originally by: Mortania I've been doing some mild checking on it and in the two to three missions I checked on, melting the loot alone was about 8-9M in minerals. Which comes close to the value of the BS in the mission. Well, if the battleship bounties of that mission comes out as just under 10M, I'd say that the mission itself is worth maybe one tenth of that, and about as much again in time bonus. I'd also estimate it to bring in LP worth another 8M (the value of standings is harder to calculate, but let's assume that you're way past the zero-tax stage and the rest becomes baked into the agent rewards). The automatic rewards thus total somewhere around 20M, compared to 8û9M worth of loot, of which 10M is (semi)fixed and unavoidable ù no matter how quickly (or slowly) you do the mission, you get the same amount. That's where the magic happens. Quote: If you aren't blitzing missions, and most people don't as I understand it, how long would it take to destroy double the amount of BS's? But that's just it: if the loot is worth about as much as the BS bounties, it still only comes in as one third of the total rewards. You don't have to destroy the same amount of BS:s to make up for the lost loot ù you only have to destroy half the amount. And that's before we get into the business of blitzing, where even destroying battleships will turn into an income loss: in the above example, you could probably get by by destroying only 1û2M worth of ships in 1/4 the timeà You'd miss out on was 6û7M of bounties, but you'd still get 12M or so worth of rewards: 60% the rewards for 25% the work. Quote: Is the time getting your noctis and looting/salvaging more or less time than that? I suspect again, that except for your top mission runners, it's probably better to get your noctis on. I'll admit that I'm not a good example ù I run in fast-travelling ships and I'm quite sedate when it comes to both the killing and the looting/salvaging ù but my experience is that it with something as molasses-like as the Noctis (even with an MWD), it takes about 50% as long to loot and salvage a mission as it does to run it, and travel time is a big killer for me. My experience is also that this extra 50% time does not translate into a 50% increase in income ù I'd put the number no higher than 30%, and I feel even that is being very generous. àthen again, I'm in Caldari space, where both loot and salvage is worth fsck-all. 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
Mister Rocknrolla	Posted - 2011.05.02 18:27:00 - [700] Originally by: Tippia Quote: Is the time getting your noctis and looting/salvaging more or less time than that? I suspect again, that except for your top mission runners, it's probably better to get your noctis on. I'll admit that I'm not a good example ù I run in fast-travelling ships and I'm quite sedate when it comes to both the killing and the looting/salvaging ù but my experience is that it with something as molasses-like as the Noctis (even with an MWD), it takes about 50% as long to loot and salvage a mission as it does to run it, and travel time is a big killer for me. My experience is also that this extra 50% time does not translate into a 50% increase in income ù I'd put the number no higher than 30%, and I feel even that is being very generous. àthen again, I'm in Caldari space, where both loot and salvage is worth fsck-all. Yeah...the Noctis for a mission runner should take about 10% of the time to salvage as run a mission (if that). My Noctis has never had to move once in a room, due to the increased range and speed of the tractor. An advantage an interloper doesn't have.

Tobiaz Spacerats	Posted - 2011.05.02 18:55:00 - [701] Edited by: Tobiaz on 02/05/2011 19:07:37 Edited by: Tobiaz on 02/05/2011 19:01:38 Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka Edited by: Tanya Tarajaka on 02/05/2011 10:49:40 Originally by: Numa Hanaya Yeah I just figured that'd be an easy fix. I mean if people salvaging your wrecks bothers you so much, shoot the dang wrecks then lol. People do, I do that also. Trouble is that because ninja salvagers (scavengers, because that's what they really are) can salvage the wreck before it's looted you end up destroying wrecks with all the loot inside too. Which just leaves the mission reward and the bounties (if there are any). The ninja salvagers being the true scavengers that they are will salvage the wrecks and if they can get away with it steal the loot too, when you've flown through to the next section. I've known ninja salvagers make more from a mission than the missioner, yet the ninja salvager does not have any risk at all. So flag the ninja salvager and then at least salvaging (ninja style) will have some risk attached to it. Wreckrats making more then agentrunners? What a load of nonsense. Even two years ago I didn't even come close to 10m/hour and that was before that bloody Noctis pulled the rug from under the market for salvage. And there already IS a risk, since it's FAR from a steady income. Besides there are some really nasty ways to deal with people yoinking your wrecks, but don't blame CCP if you can't come up with them. On the other hand, in my humble opinion all the people here arguing adamantly that the wrecks don't 'belong' to the one making them are a bunch of hippocrits and they know it! It's high-sec PvP and for a good, moral reason. But then again: this is a MMO and those thrive on challenges and conflict, even for the whiny carebears, though grinding their brains to much makes them inable to grasp the bigger picture here. Agentaddicts I'm all for CCP flagging ninja-salvage though, but only if that means we get to tractor yellow stuff as well, otherwise the risk/reward becomes just stupid. EDIT: It's fun to see at least the tears about high-sec ninja's are still flooding the forum. I wonder if Tenaj from TOOKURSTUFF is still around these days with her sandpaper tissues.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.02 19:08:00 - [702] Originally by: Mister Rocknrolla Yeah...the Noctis for a mission runner should take about 10% of the time to salvage as run a mission (if that). My Noctis has never had to move once in a room, due to the increased range and speed of the tractor. An advantage an interloper doesn't have. Well, yes. The actual salvaging part is quick. What takes time with the Noctis is the travel: to and from stations, between gates, between rooms in the missions. Even with MWD-to-warp it doesn't react well to gates or multi-room missions. But again, a lot of that perception, on my part, is probably due to the fact that I don't use battleships, so I'm not used to those long align times. 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
Whiteknight03 Theoretical Research	Posted - 2011.05.02 19:58:00 - [703] Step 1: Bookmark one wreck per room in a mission Step 2: Warp to base, turn in mission Step 3: Warp Noctis directly into each room without gates Step 4: ? ? ? Step 5: Profit! Not all that difficult. You don't have to move the noctis 80% of the time. It amazes me when people suggest flying the noctis through acceleration gates . . .
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.02 20:03:00 - [704] Originally by: Whiteknight03 Step 1: Bookmark one wreck per room in a mission Step 2: Warp to base, turn in mission Step 3: Warp Noctis directly into each room without gates Step 4: ? ? ? Step 5: Profit! Not all that difficult. You don't have to move the noctis 80% of the time. It amazes me when people suggest flying the noctis through acceleration gates . . . Shhhh.... don't TELL them. =)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.02 20:27:00 - [705] Originally by: Whiteknight03 Step 1: Bookmark one wreck per room in a mission Step 2: Warp to base, turn in mission Step 3: Warp Noctis directly into each room without gates Step 4: ? ? ? Step 5: ~~Profit!~~ Still a waste of time. It's not that it's difficult, it's that you still have to move the ship there, and with a slug like the Noctis, even with MWD-warp, this takes time. Quote: It amazes me when people suggest flying the noctis through acceleration gates . . . I don't think anyone has suggested thatà 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
Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.02 20:43:00 - [706] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Whiteknight03 Step 1: Bookmark one wreck per room in a mission Step 2: Warp to base, turn in mission Step 3: Warp Noctis directly into each room without gates Step 4: ? ? ? Step 5: ~~Profit!~~ Still a waste of time. It's not that it's difficult, it's that you still have to move the ship there, and with a slug like the Noctis, even with MWD-warp, this takes time. Quote: It amazes me when people suggest flying the noctis through acceleration gates . . . I don't think anyone has suggested thatà With this method there is 30 second switch delay, 30 second undocking, align time (possible multiple), warp time (possible multiple), jump time (if any), salvage/loot time, align time (which you can do while collecting), warp time, dock/switch delay. You shouldn't need MWD, but rather as many nanos as you think you can short your cargohold with.
Tanya Tarajaka	Posted - 2011.05.02 20:47:00 - [707] As far as I know you can't warp to a book mark within a gate, you just end up at the start of the mission position.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.05.02 20:53:00 - [708] Originally by: Mortania You shouldn't need MWD, but rather as many nanos as you think you can short your cargohold with. The MWD is there to cut down on the align time ù it does that far better than nanos can do, and does it in one (largely inconsequential) midslot, rather than sacrificing lowslots that could hold cargo expanders. MWD = 10s align time. 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
Doddy Excidium. Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2011.05.02 21:41:00 - [709] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Mortania You shouldn't need MWD, but rather as many nanos as you think you can short your cargohold with. The MWD is there to cut down on the align time ù it does that far better than nanos can do, and does it in one (largely inconsequential) midslot, rather than sacrificing lowslots that could hold cargo expanders. MWD = 10s align time. You think carebears know of the mwd-warp trick?
Doddy Excidium. Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2011.05.02 21:49:00 - [710] Originally by: Tanya Tarajaka As far as I know you can't warp to a book mark within a gate, you just end up at the start of the mission position. You finish the mission first

Mortania Minmatar No Compromise Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.02 22:11:00 - [711] Edited by: Mortania on 02/05/2011 22:11:08 Originally by: Doddy Edited by: Doddy on 02/05/2011 21:48:04 Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Mortania You shouldn't need MWD, but rather as many nanos as you think you can short your cargohold with. The MWD is there to cut down on the align time ù it does that far better than nanos can do, and does it in one (largely inconsequential) midslot, rather than sacrificing lowslots that could hold cargo expanders. MWD = 10s align time. You think carebears know of the mwd-warp trick? You are not actually correct, at max skills a triple nano noctis has a 9.5 sec align time. But then why would you use nanos? A istab fitted noctis has an 8.5 sec align time. Why bother with either when you can use mwd for 10 sec align time and have 2 expanders and a dc2 (noctis now single ship gank proof)? So in that respect you are correct. Why not get a buddy and web yourself? I don't think the 8 seconds your saving over the course of a trip is really the difference here, is it? EDIT: and by buddy, I mean alt, of course.
Jennifer Starling Imperial Navy Forum Patrol	Posted - 2011.05.03 13:43:00 - [712] Originally by: Amarraz Thief Salvaging Filthy little thieves! They stole the precious! Wicked! Tricksy! False!
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.05.03 13:45:00 - [713] Originally by: Jennifer Starling Originally by: Amarraz Thief Salvaging Filthy little thieves! They stole the precious! Wicked! Tricksy! False! Oh no you just didn't... Don't make me crank this sucker back up
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.03 14:16:00 - [714] What have I got in my deadspace pocket? Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2011.05.03 14:20:00 - [715] Originally by: Malcanis What have I got in my deadspace pocket? A hole for easy access?
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.05.06 14:30:00 - [716] Originally by: Mortania Originally by: Mintala Arana Originally by: Mortania I'm not so sure the accepted common wisdom of loot/salvage is correct. ... I don't think of my alt as a "top mission runner", but no, the looting and salvage isn't worth the time. In the same time I could take to loot/salvage a high-loot mission, I could run another mission, getting bounties, loot, and LP, which together add up to at least twice the 8-9 M you mention. And if I really need salvage for something (not that I can think of what that would be), I'd really rather haul out a ninja salvage ship to get it. EVE Online is, after all, all about the player conflict. :) I'll have to do a more concentrated study. I'm not sure I buy the same time, I can clear a room really damned fast with my Noctis. That 8-9 million was a 1 room haul. I'm curious now to see what the exact timings are. I went and took a closer look at this. I got a decent mission from a decent agent to see what the differences are; the mission wound up being Angels Blockade. For it, fixed rewards were: 1.7 M mission reward 1.9 M time bonus 21.3 M bounties 8 M LP (@ 1000 isk/LP) = 32.9 M total fixed rewards, earned in 40 minutes, including travel time, so call it 50 M isk/hr. Then I went and got my Noctis. R/T travel time in the Noctis, salvaging, and looting took another 25 minutes, and from it I got: 7.2 M loot (I took everything, then let EveHQ decide what to melt/sell and figure out what the profit would be) 8.1 M salvage (salvage sale prices, not building rigs) = 15.3 M. Added to the fixed rewards, this means Angels Blockade paid out 48.2 M isk in just over an hour, or 45 M isk/hour. Angels Blockade delivers an unusually large reward in terms of both bounty and salvage, but I don't think the basic ratios will change a whole lot for other good missions. And chaining together multiple missions (or salvage runs) will also not alter ratios appreciably. My conclusion is (still) that even a relatively lazy mission runner like myself makes more from skipping the loot/salvage, even when considering high-loot-value missions like Angels Blockade, AE, WC, etc. So the only missions I bother looting/salvaging any more are those that have a chance of dropping a high-value implant or module.
Mister Rocknrolla	Posted - 2011.05.06 15:11:00 - [717] Originally by: Mintala Arana I'll have to do a more concentrated study. I'm not sure I buy the same time, I can clear a room really damned fast with my Noctis. That 8-9 million was a 1 room haul. I'm curious now to see what the exact timings are. I went and took a closer look at this. I got a decent mission from a decent agent to see what the differences are; the mission wound up being Angels Blockade. For it, fixed rewards were: 1.7 M mission reward 1.9 M time bonus 21.3 M bounties 8 M LP (@ 1000 isk/LP) = 32.9 M total fixed rewards, earned in 40 minutes, including travel time, so call it 50 M isk/hr. Then I went and got my Noctis. R/T travel time in the Noctis, salvaging, and looting took another 25 minutes, and from it I got: 7.2 M loot (I took everything, then let EveHQ decide what to melt/sell and figure out what the profit would be) 8.1 M salvage (salvage sale prices, not building rigs) = 15.3 M. Added to the fixed rewards, this means Angels Blockade paid out 48.2 M isk in just over an hour, or 45 M isk/hour. Angels Blockade delivers an unusually large reward in terms of both bounty and salvage, but I don't think the basic ratios will change a whole lot for other good missions. And chaining together multiple missions (or salvage runs) will also not alter ratios appreciably. My conclusion is (still) that even a relatively lazy mission runner like myself makes more from skipping the loot/salvage, even when considering high-loot-value missions like Angels Blockade, AE, WC, etc. So the only missions I bother looting/salvaging any more are those that have a chance of dropping a high-value implant or module. ^^This data shows the advantage of blitz-clearing missions. Imagine how long it would take salvaging with an alt account that cannot tractor the wrecks. Start by parking your mission ship somewhere in the mission and make the alt scan it down, then salvage in a ship that doesn't have tractors. The total time may be significantly longer. Plus, if the missioner turns in the mission before the salvager has had a chance to BM all of the rooms, he doesn't even get all of the salvage. Makes one wonder why anyone would do it. Other than maybe they find it fun and it's what their pilot is trained to do. Much like mining. Or market-trading. Or manufacturing. Or mission-running.
Zyress	Posted - 2011.05.06 16:21:00 - [718] Some missions do have a really nice payout on bounties, others against empire faction rats don't pay any bounty, you could say that dog tags are their bounties but in some regions they won't even sell, some of them pay well but most are nothing like a bounty. Most evenings I have time for 1 level 4 mission looting and salvaging, even blitzing missions I don't have time for more than 1 good lvl 4 mission so yeah I consider it well worth my while to milk every isk out of it I can.
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.05.06 16:57:00 - [719] Originally by: Mister Rocknrolla ^^This data shows the advantage of blitz-clearing missions. Imagine how long it would take salvaging with an alt account that cannot tractor the wrecks. Start by parking your mission ship somewhere in the mission and make the alt scan it down, then salvage in a ship that doesn't have tractors. The total time may be significantly longer. Plus, if the missioner turns in the mission before the salvager has had a chance to BM all of the rooms, he doesn't even get all of the salvage. Makes one wonder why anyone would do it. Other than maybe they find it fun and it's what their pilot is trained to do. Much like mining. Or market-trading. Or manufacturing. Or mission-running. The mission was effectively (and accidentally) cherry-picked in favor of salvaging, so yes, that would be my point. Even an excellent candidate for salvaging currently pays out less isk than just running more missions. As for the rest, why on God's green earth would you not fleet your salvage alt, if that alt is in a different corp than you? Benefits of this include: Fleet bonuses from leadership. Your salvage alt can tractor your wrecks. For single room missions, your salvage alt can just "warp to fleet member". (For multi-room missions, station-trading bookmarks is still your best bet unless your salvage alt is right behind you in the current mission.) But in the end it doesn't matter. Unless you're missioning for reasons other than isk generation, running another mission will make you more isk/hr on average than looting/salvaging the one you just ran. And please note that the difference is actually larger than I showed above; I didn't take overhead into account. In this case, that's time spent sorting, melting, and selling, which has to be taken into account, since after all you could be doing something more entertaining.
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.05.06 17:00:00 - [720] Originally by: Zyress Some missions do have a really nice payout on bounties, others against empire faction rats don't pay any bounty, you could say that dog tags are their bounties but in some regions they won't even sell, some of them pay well but most are nothing like a bounty. Most evenings I have time for 1 level 4 mission looting and salvaging, even blitzing missions I don't have time for more than 1 good lvl 4 mission so yeah I consider it well worth my while to milk every isk out of it I can. Umm, if isk is your goal I beg to differ. Rearrange your schedule so you have two hours on alternate nights, instead of an hour a night, and you come out ahead on isk at the end of the week. And (as I pointed out above) you don't have to do any sorting/melting/selling of loot, which gives you back that time for doing something else. As for faction rats, if you're only running one or two missions a night just decline anti-Empire faction missions. If your current L4 agent gives lots of that sort of mission, find another L4 agent.

Mister Rocknrolla	Posted - 2011.05.06 19:02:00 - [721] Originally by: Mintala Arana As for the rest, why on God's green earth would you not fleet your salvage alt, if that alt is in a different corp than you? Benefits of this include: Slight misunderstanding. I was comparing a mission-runner salvaging his own wrecks to a ninja salvager salvaging the same wrecks. I was merely suggesting timing the salvaging of non-owned wrecks to see the extreme advantage a mission-runner has over a ninja salvager.
Zyress	Posted - 2011.05.06 21:21:00 - [722] Originally by: Mintala Arana Originally by: Zyress Some missions do have a really nice payout on bounties, others against empire faction rats don't pay any bounty, you could say that dog tags are their bounties but in some regions they won't even sell, some of them pay well but most are nothing like a bounty. Most evenings I have time for 1 level 4 mission looting and salvaging, even blitzing missions I don't have time for more than 1 good lvl 4 mission so yeah I consider it well worth my while to milk every isk out of it I can. Umm, if isk is your goal I beg to differ. Rearrange your schedule so you have two hours on alternate nights, instead of an hour a night, and you come out ahead on isk at the end of the week. And (as I pointed out above) you don't have to do any sorting/melting/selling of loot, which gives you back that time for doing something else. As for faction rats, if you're only running one or two missions a night just decline anti-Empire faction missions. If your current L4 agent gives lots of that sort of mission, find another L4 agent. I like my schedule
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.05.07 00:32:00 - [723] Originally by: Zyress I like my schedule Well, that's your choice.
Arnakoz	Posted - 2011.05.07 03:46:00 - [724] Originally by: Kranwe Sentai Say you go to the parking lot of the opera house and put sugar in everone's vehicles. Then you drive down the road and wait for the cars to leave the parking lot. You have one thing in mind: Get the cars imobilized so you can kill the driver and passengers so you can get rich on all their fancy jewelry they had on at the opera, and their wallets too. lmao. i jumped the last page and this is what i encounter. great out-of-context.. certainly a "wtf?!" moment :) to the OP: ninja salvagers can be defeated a number of ways - don't care about salvage; it generally isn't worth as much as if you were to just skip it and start a new mission, then buy the salvage you didn't spend time on. - if you are really just that big on getting that salvage then get it as you make the kills. at least the guy wont make off with much. - change systems. lastly, this doesn't happen all that often. i've actually never had it happen to me, and i've only personally known one person who had it happen once. so it really isn't so much of an issue that's it worth putting so much energy into.
Mintala Arana Amarr	Posted - 2011.05.07 15:39:00 - [725] Originally by: Arnakoz (following a rehash of stuff said on page 1 of this threadnaught) lastly, this doesn't happen all that often. i've actually never had it happen to me, and i've only personally known one person who had it happen once. so it really isn't so much of an issue that's it worth putting so much energy into. While true, some carebears have an overdeveloped sense of entitlement ("My wreck, my salvage! CCP fix this!"), and an underdeveloped sense of what will benefit them ("Give me the right to shoot at a ninja!" forgetting that they don't shoot at people stealing loot now, for excellent reasons related to 'sploding mission ships). Salvage mechanics are explained pretty clearly in EVElopedia, haven't changed since salvage was introduced, and seem designed to produce exactly the sort of angst and player conflict/competition for resources that we see. Which is a long winded way of saying that CCP is enjoying the sweet tears, I suppose.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: [one 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.