Interesting :)

So, if you have cloak module active you have to de-cloak your ship in order to safely log off?? And what about emergency warp? Will it still work?

Greetings internet spaceship pilots!

I think we all agree that CONCORDOKKEN is bad, and also quite embarrassing when it happens.

This is nice for the new players but will make canflippers cry.
I am in two minds about it to be honest.

And when will Mr Greyscale stop spending his time on un-EVEish / useless feature ?
Kinda fed up of CCP thinking EvE player should be treated like stupid childrens.....

Canflippers are already screwed by Crimewatch 2.0 as it will become legal to steal from a suspect's can.

Fortunately the safety switches do nothing to prevent fools from shooting at ninjas or canflippers. If anything they'll just feel more protected by the reassuring green light. "Safety's on, so nothing I do can hurt me!"

Say I live 100% in Nullsec, can I have the option to hide the saftey button please?

(On the test server, it is there showing green / yellow / red all the time).

So you'd right click on the HUD options and click "Hide Saftey Indicator". Kind of like how you can "Hide Passive Modules" etc.

Other than that, I approve 100%.

children is a plural already and does not need an S added at the end .. Mr Greyscale might be right about the stupid part

So .... safe logoff timer is set at EXACTLY 45.6 secs, thats exactly 45600 milisecond or to be precise - 45,600,000 microsecond, correct?
I don't see any other numbers .... unless someone, ah umm ... forgot something ...

How is "safe logoff" safer than say... logging off - apart from the requirement to sit visibly in space with no active modules, which I can assure you, is far from safe.

Does 'safe logoff ' invalidate aggro timers or something?

It's a minute, that timer is counting down. I thought that was obvious.

Well, sir, you need to prove it. I can equally say it's counting down from 3 minutes without blinking.

Seems cool but still alot of 'major' issues that could've been looked at instead of this, like cloaky campers (fair enough they exist blah blah but they shouldn't be allowed to do it afk) how boring mining is, how ICE should've been removed from highsec, to make titans useful again ect ect

and also like to mention why is it razor got a bunch of carriers back when they lost them to the exploit of spam chats, when they lost them before it was classed as an exploit?? that sir is BS guarantee any other alliance not friendly to goons would off got the 'we show no errors in our logs'

meh im gonna go cry in a corner and listen to skrillex

How is "safe logoff" safer than say... logging off - apart from the requirement to sit visibly in space with no active modules, which I can assure you, is far from safe.

Does 'safe logoff ' invalidate aggro timers or something?

If you have safety switched on, can you still engage legal war targets?

Now that I think about it this isn't nannying. You aren't telling us not to climb trees, more that if you get hurt don't come crying to us.

Just too bad you can't have your cloak activated while safe logoff, so for me I will still stick around cloaked until I am sure all timers are up.

/c

How will accidental disconnections work?

So, i'm infering from your 'safety feature' that you think the average EVE player has the intelligence of a turnip and need their hand holding

Just two questions: Will maximum safety be enabled by default, even for veteran pilots?

And: Is safe logoff impossible while autopiloting? I'm guessing the answer is yes, but the dev blog isn't 100% clear about it.

Im trying to understand this statement:

"Today I'm going to talk about how to fly safely in Retribution! We are adding a couple of new features to ensure that, when you inevitably lose your ship in a very silly way, it is very definitely 100% your fault."

How is my ship protected from loss in the cases of a disconnect, client freeze or a ""the socket was closed" error? None of those are my fault, so based on the above statement I assume from now on none of those will result in the loss of a ship. How is that done?

but on a more serious note --- help me understand what is in place to prevent the nullbear botters from using the safe loggoff timer to the detriment of the antibots. many of us were drooling over the botageddon that would happen 12/4 when the aggro mechanics change, but now CCP is giving them all a nice yellow countdown that they can use to make their gutless logoffski mannerisms function nearly foolproof.

So will smartbombs be completely blocked from activation in hisec? Or will they miraculously shut down when a player comes into range? /edit: With the high security setting ofc.

Seems cool but still alot of 'major' issues that could've been looked at instead of this, like cloaky campers (fair enough they exist blah blah but they shouldn't be allowed to do it afk) how boring mining is, how ICE should've been removed from highsec, to make titans useful again ect ect

I would want an action that is not permitted under the current safety level to open a popup similar to the ones on TQ atm. "This action is not permitted because your safety level is blabla. Do you want to make an exception?". This way you still have the option to do some impulsive gcc'ing and so on. That would make the safety toggle be more like a confirmation toggle, but yeah. With it switched off, you have disabled all warnings and confirmations, excellent for eebil piwates and low sec dwellers. Me and most casual pvpers have all confirmation dialogs still on in case of misclicks, and to be able to turn them off temporarily (without having to go through the options menu) would be nice. Coupled with some confirmation pop up clarifications with clear consequences, it would go a long way.

TL;DR: Turning the safety toggle into a confirmation toggle would be nice although it won't happen.

If you have safety switched on, can you still engage legal war targets?

So the timer in the picture is 45.6 seconds... why? Is this a mistake, or a late change?

I hope safety setting is persistent through docking, jumping, logging off. If it constantly defaults to green, some people will be seriously annoyed.

This is nice for the new players but will make canflippers cry.
I am in two minds about it to be honest.

Oh. Whoops. Late change. Lemme go fix that...

currently unless it has changed since last week it is not persistant

Why does the safe logoff have a shorter timer than the unsafe logoff?

Should be persisted per session, but not currently between sessions (see above). Ie, so long as you stay logged in, it stays the same; log out and it goes back to default.

When you log back in after a safe log off will you simply pop into existence and be able to act immediately?

so wait if we unsafe logoff we DONT warp 1m km?

if so...things will get very interesting

Should be persisted per session, but not currently between sessions (see above). Ie, so long as you stay logged in, it stays the same; log out and it goes back to default.

Is making it persist between sessions on the table? I'd rather just turn it off and not have to deal with various safety settings ever.

I just tested this and you do 1000000km warp-in just to appear in space 1.8 AU from the spot where you logged out

It looks like there are some issues to be fixed.

@ ccp navigator.

Go **** yourself

You cannot be safely logging off while:

You have active modules
You're ejecting from a ship
You have aggression from players or NPCs
Your ship is exploding or self-destructing
You're issuing movement commands
You're launching or jettisoning objects
You're joining a fleet
You're deploying or reconnecting with drones
You have a target lock or are targeted
You're warping
You're decloaking or under gate cloak

No, we don't and yes it is. It's also a valuable learning experience. Just today I got GCC from accidentially hitting my mates fighters with my smart bomb. I did not even know that was criminal.

Please, don't dumb it down to much

If all my high-slot guns are disabled due to safeties, can I still overheat them and burn them out for no purpose? Due to misclick, due to being an idiot, whatever the reason, can I?

I don't see "your ship is moving" there. Does this mean I can align to something, safely log off, watch the timer tick down, and if anyone appears instantly warp off (aborting the timer but saving my ass)?

For one thing, this system guarantees that nothing like a "lofty scam"* can happen without the player's explicit consent. Not just that the current implementation of the system happens to not have any loopholes in it (as it is on TQ currently, AFAIK), but that the system simply does not allow it at a fundamental level. By enforcing it on the server as well as the client, it also allows us to catch corner cases which are otherwise-unsolvable.

For example, if a pilot in a war ejects from a ship in space, docks up and leaves the corporation, there's no sound way to tell war targets on grid with the ship that its owner is no longer at war with them without incurring a crippling performance hit on the server (there's an extensive technical reason to do with the way we propagate states that I'm not going to try and remember perfectly here). The end-user experience is that your client believes that ship you're targeting is a legal target, but when the server processes your attack it disagrees and you get CONCORDed. By having a safety system, and by tracking your safety state on the server, we can intervene at the last second and say "hey, that's not a legal target, your safeties are on, so your gun doesn't fire". This is essentially a generalization of the fix that we put in for remote assistance to prevent people getting entire Incursion fleets CONCORDed by having one guy in the rep chain pick up a GCC, to illustrate a completely different situation in which this sort of problem also occurs.

I too am interested to know if you use safe log off and then log back in if you're just sitting in space ready to act.

If you're going to make it go back to "default" every time you log on, I would suggest you make it possible to change the default setting client side. Otherwise, pirates will be unhappy. And when pirates are unhappy, they tend to make life miserable for the rest of us :)

My Sig Saur .40 P229 doesn't have a safety.

No, having just tested this now you appear to cloak in space same as you would if you logged off in a POS, but logging back on you will appear 1M km away and will warp back to where you were (again, same as if you logged off in a POS).

My Sig Saur .40 P229 doesn't have a safety.

No, having just tested this now you appear to cloak in space same as you would if you logged off in a POS, but logging back on you will appear 1M km away and will warp back to where you were (again, same as if you logged off in a POS).

I'd only say I agree with others that if you do try and pull an aggressive act with the safety on, that the safety level pops up and says "You said you didn't want to be up to this kind of business, so if you really really want to, please confirm the next lower safety level to continue with this aggressive act. It's not our fault if you're dokken'd."

Should be persisted per session, but not currently between sessions (see above). Ie, so long as you stay logged in, it stays the same; log out and it goes back to default.

I would imagine that having the safety system in "green safe mode" just wouldn't do anything in WH or null space since you don't pick up flags for doing anything there anyway. So if you live in null or WH 100% of the time you would never need to turn it off. Now if you live in lowsec this could certainly be annoying.

Image the hilarity if a lowsec roaming gang jumps into a hostile gang and then discovers that half of the fleet members forgot to turn off their safeties when they logged on.

Ok, so you can't initiate a safe logoff until your timers have ended anyway. The benefit of safe logoff is:

• Unsafe logoff: you close the client, your ship turns off its modules, emergency-warps, sits in space for a minute and then disappears
• Safe logoff: you hit safe logoff, your ship sits in space for thirty seconds with its modules off, and then disappears

Other than not generating you an instant 1m km safespot, there's really no upside to unsafe logoff other than speed.

"You have a target lock or are targeted
You have aggression from players or NPCs
and if they happen once the countdown is running, it'll be aborted."

Are you sure? If you unsafe log off without any timers and you're aggressed during the logoff, you will still disappear. But the safe logoff will cancel the logoff.


If you have a good enough buffer, it's safer to unsafe logoff than safe logoff as you'll disappear after 1 minute no matter what. Looks to me as an upside :)

If you have a good enough buffer, it's safer to unsafe logoff than safe logoff as you'll disappear after 1 minute no matter what. Looks to me as an upside :)

Are you sure? If you unsafe log off without any timers and you're aggressed during the logoff, you will still disappear. But the safe logoff will cancel the logoff.


If you have a good enough buffer, it's safer to unsafe logoff than safe logoff as you'll disappear after 1 minute no matter what. Looks to me as an upside :)

I would imagine that having the safety system in "green safe mode" just wouldn't do anything in WH or null space since you don't pick up flags for doing anything there anyway. So if you live in null or WH 100% of the time you would never need to turn it off. Now if you live in lowsec this could certainly be annoying.

Image the hilarity if a lowsec roaming gang jumps into a hostile gang and then discovers that half of the fleet members forgot to turn off their safeties when they logged on.

Specifically, you can gain a PvP timer after you log off, even if you didn't have one PRIOR to logging off....

The new safety system is pretty terrible for me, as a FW pilot in lowsec.

Case 1: In a big furball, I want to be able to shoot a neutral but can't because my safety won't let me.
Case 2: In the same furball, I don't want to accidentally shoot a neutral but do because my safety didn't stop me.
Case 3: As a logi pilot, I want to rep a friendly who is "gcc" but can't because my safety won't let me.
Case 4: As a logi pilot, I don't want to accidentally rep a friendly who is "gcc" but I do because my safety didn't stop me.

My point is, the current popup system is very useful when you're in grey areas where you aren't a pure "good guy white night anti-pirate carebear" or "bad guy flashy pirate ganker." The new system will make life very difficult for morally complex people.

Good points. What comes to mind: What happens if I am in a Guardian capchain, have security on, and my Guardian cap mate gets gcc? /edit: In lowsec.

Should be persisted per session, but not currently between sessions (see above). Ie, so long as you stay logged in, it stays the same; log out and it goes back to default.

Good points. What comes to mind: What happens if I am in a Guardian capchain, have security on, and my Guardian cap mate gets gcc? /edit: In lowsec.

Should be persisted per session, but not currently between sessions (see above). Ie, so long as you stay logged in, it stays the same; log out and it goes back to default.

This is rediculous! On the one hand you say you want to make our lives easier when going on a lowsec roam by removing annoying pop ups (which have a checkbox to only show them once). On the other hand you make us toggle our safeties after _every_ session change?

You're wrong.

They don't mean you have to toggle the safeties every "session change".

They mean you have to toggle the safeties every time you Log Onto your Character.

They don't mean you have to toggle the safeties every "session change".

They mean you have to toggle the safeties every time you Log Onto your Character.

Can a dev please confirm if this is the case for WH and Null dwellers? As in there is effectively no safety in those locations? Also, please please please, let me set my default and hide the safety button.

You notice that you can't rep him, you then choose to adjust your safety, or not.
Adjusting your safety is as easy as activating a module.

Will it be as fast to adjust your safety as clicking through the gcc warning? If so, great. But I suspect not; for the gcc warning I can just hit enter or tab enter (don't remember whether "yes" or "no" is default). To adjust safety, don't I have to open the safety dialogue, then move the mouse to choose one of the safety settings?

Will it be as fast to adjust your safety as clicking through the gcc warning? If so, great. But I suspect not; for the gcc warning I can just hit enter or tab enter (don't remember whether "yes" or "no" is default). To adjust safety, don't I have to open the safety dialogue, then move the mouse to choose one of the safety settings?

And when will Mr Greyscale stop spending his time on un-EVEish / useless feature ?
Kinda fed up of CCP thinking EvE player should be treated like stupid children.....

So you have a repper on.. and your power goes out so that you can't log back in right away; how long does your ship sit there in space now that an active mod running does let your ship logout?

Will these safety locks also prevent logistics from repping pilots with <-5.0 faction status so that they won't get targeted by the faction police? The bad faction aggrro is one othe last 'silent aggro' problems that incursioners still run into. No warning for bad faction status is definely not 100% the logi's fault. It is pretty silly to see faction police pop in your site & attack logi's with no warning at all

Should be persisted per session, but not currently between sessions (see above). Ie, so long as you stay logged in, it stays the same; log out and it goes back to default.

Thoughts:

1.) When I imagine changing the "safety" settings, I always imagined something in the escape menus that would pull me away from what's happing in space around me. I applaud the little UI button that clearly indicates my safety setting, and enables me to change it fluidly during a battle. With that said, I would like to be able to define my 'default' setting. I understand the need for everyone's default to be "safe" to start, but I really think having to switch it from safe to partially safe or living dangerous every time I log in is excessive. This is really only a minor gripe though....

2.) Do you have to come to a complete stop to "safe" logoff? It really sounded like you do, which is awkward:
--- If you can't move, you can't be aligned to escape assuming a hostile enter's grid. Many players often counter enemy probes by aligning to a warp out, and warping the moment a hostile enters the grid, but if they have to align from rest first, larger ships will be easily caught.
--- Essentially the upcoming changes mean you can NOT easily escape from hostiles probing for you by logging out.... even if you are safe at the moment by being at a random bookmark and cloaked. This is detrimental to any supercap pilot that attempts to log out in space when a determined opponent is in system. Their only options are to log out inside a POS, or to cyno out of the system. Perhaps reduce the "safe" logoff timer to 20 seconds, and then the window to catch these ships is small enough to make it generally possible.

3.) Overall, these are good changes... Thank you for your work!

4.) Are you planning to create a "system" safety settings too.... with an easily alterable HUD element that prevents you from entering highsec (while gcc) or lower sec (while risk-adverse)?

So you have a repper on.. and your power goes out so that you can't log back in right away; how long does your ship sit there in space now that an active mod running does let your ship logout?

And it's generally no good. :)

-Liang

jeez... fix this

Something that doesn't seem to have been covered...

The new "safe logoff" doesn't allow you to have any modules active or similar, which is fine, but what about using the directional scanner?

CCP i got one question about safe logofski, let imagine, im on hull, like 5 structure left (no agresion, no actives modules etc), my safe countdown show me 0.00 sec ( this mean i can exit form client or log off, what happens if after 0.1sec after i log off, somone lock my ship and fire? i lose my ship? its this safe countdown perfect and working even in this wired situation? also when player see 0.00 sec noboby may lock ship?

My Sig Saur .40 P229 doesn't have a safety.

I hope that safety is remembered between sessions.

That is going to get VERY VERY ANNOYING.

If I have to JUMP a gate, TURN OFF a safety and then LOCK + Activate a Warp Disruptor and I fail to do any one of the steps because of this stupid safety switch I'm going to be very annoyed.

Remember the setting between seesions.

I hope that safety is remembered between sessions.

That is going to get VERY VERY ANNOYING.

If I have to log in, undock, TURN OFF a safety and then LOCK + Activate a Warp Disruptor on a target that just undocked from my station because I haven't undocked in my current session and I fail to do any one of the steps because of this stupid safety switch I'm going to be very annoyed.

Remember the setting between seesions.

Should be persisted per session, but not currently between sessions (see above). Ie, so long as you stay logged in, it stays the same; log out and it goes back to default.

Though I'm not sure how despawn timers work with tidi in effect. And this.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2232017#post2232017

movement commands prevent log off. but not moving already.

also ... why cant the super cap sit out all timers and then log off safely once the cloak is turned off?

Aggressions with super caps is good. It leads to more super cap losses.

Stuff exploding is good. Think of all the poor graphics people who know that a limited number of people have seen their supercap blowing up sequences.

OMG safe logoff !!
I won't have anymore a titan's pilot ask me to check that he really disappeared from the POS

I have some questions about safe logoff:

* It can be interrupted, so if somebody has no timers is it not safer to NOT to use safe logoff? (Once you have logged off by closing the client, nobody can give you an aggression timer and you vanish in 1 minute nomatter what).

* Isn't closing the client safer because you can do it after jumping without decloaking, or in the middle of warp?

* Can you do this inside a bubble? Does the bubble aggress you?

* Can this be done during the 30 seconds invulnerability timer gained after jumping, or undocking?

* Does TiDi increase the timer length?

* You vanish without E-Warping, do you E-Warp when you log back in?

* If you do E-Warp back in, are you still aggressable while in the E-Warp spot but before entering warp?

* Will the existing logoff mechanics remain permanently, or is this a move towards replacing them?

If anybody knows of official answers to these I'd love to see them :)

Sounds like what you'll want to do most of the time is have your safety partial or off and make judgement calls of what to shoot or rep. It's just a lock to catch you for those weird edge cases.

If you don't like the safety, turn it off and leave it there.

PvP flags can (now) be applied to you by other people, even when you're logged off.

Can't be done while under gate cloak.

Thanks for that info. Can you link the dev blog/post? I can't find any mention in the crimewatch dev blog (http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=73443)

Thanks for that info. Can you link the dev blog/post? I can't find any mention in the crimewatch dev blog (http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=73443)

* PVP flags CAN be created and further extended after log-off even if the owner did not have a PVP flag at the time of disconnect.. If Char A logs off in space (with or without a PVP flag), and then char B attacks A, then A will get a PVP flag. Char A's ship will then remain in space for as long as that PVP flag exists.

safe logoff ... as in watch the timer running down while you're lying right there on the plate for each and everybody to scan you down.

Thanks Steve Ronuken and Dersen Lowery. It sounds like these changes make people even less safe, despite the introduction of the so-called "safe" logoff.

Thanks Steve Ronuken and Dersen Lowery. It sounds like these changes make people even less safe, despite the introduction of the so-called "safe" logoff.

That's the explicit goal.

The old way of just logging off is now quite dangerous, in order to prevent logoffski tricks; the "safe log off" feature is a way to log off in space with some reasonable assurance of safety if you are totally clear of danger--i.e., if you aren't pulling a logoffski because a red just appeared in Local. It's basically only "safe" because you are at the keyboard until your ship disappears.

Note that NPC aggro counts as "danger," so if you log off in a sanctum your carrier will hang around until the NPC timer expires 5 minutes later. If you warp out of the sanctum to safe-log-off, you still have to wait out that timer.

If another player managed to tag you with a PVP flag, you have to wait out the 15 minute PVP timer to safe-log-off; if you just DC, your ship will hang out for 15 minutes after it was tagged, and that timer will be reset every time your ship gets shot at.

Preventing botters from logging off is great, but the real losers here are supercap pilots. Under the current system if you're cloaked in a safe spot you can close the client to safely logoff. With the new system you need to decloak for 30 seconds in order to logoff, which is easily enough time to get probed and aggressed (alternatively e-warp then be probable for 60 seconds). The bad news is that this means we will be killing fewer supercaps this year, because people will simply use them less often (exactly what happened with the previous nerfs). Too bad.

I've seen people lobbying for the timer to be reduced to 20 seconds for that reason. Supercaps aren't my bailiwick, but I imagine that with something that huge, it's kind of hard to strike a balance between "always safe log off" and "always dead supercap."

Preventing botters from logging off is great, but the real losers here are supercap pilots. Under the current system if you're cloaked in a safe spot you can close the client to safely logoff. With the new system you need to decloak for 30 seconds in order to logoff, which is easily enough time to get probed and aggressed (alternatively e-warp then be probable for 60 seconds). The bad news is that this means we will be killing fewer supercaps this year, because people will simply use them less often (exactly what happened with the previous nerfs). Too bad.

Preventing botters from logging off is great, but the real losers here are supercap pilots. Under the current system if you're cloaked in a safe spot you can close the client to safely logoff. With the new system you need to decloak for 30 seconds in order to logoff, which is easily enough time to get probed and aggressed (alternatively e-warp then be probable for 60 seconds). The bad news is that this means we will be killing fewer supercaps this year, because people will simply use them less often (exactly what happened with the previous nerfs). Too bad.

Under the new system you can either:

Unsafe logout - At a safespot you logout. You ARE vulnerable to receiving flags while logging out. You have to ewarp, land, and wait 60 seconds before you are gone. You are at risk for 60+ seconds while not being able to dscan or even see people landing on grid. You do not know if you survived logging out until you log in next or someone in-game tells you.

OR

Safe logout - At a safespot you safe logout. You still are vulnerable but only for 30 seconds, and you CAN dscan and watch yourself. When your timer is gone you are gone and you know you are safe.

So between the two I think the choice will be easy imo.

And what happens if i just quit the game or close the window game? Does my ship get removed from space after a while or instantly ( i doubt it) ? And if it's after a while what is the timer?

From Page 3

Ah, I forgot: You can't have any modules running, but your ship's propulsion system isn't a module. So you can be aligned at full speed to a safe spot and do a safe logoff. Spam D-scan, and if something's coming for you, you can instawarp to the safe. That cancels log off, of course, but it leaves your would-be attacker in the middle of nowhere while you consider your options.

I can't possibly speak from experience, but that might be the supercap pilot's tactic of choice.

Yeah it's a difficult balancing act for CCP. Every time they nerf supers it leads to fewer super deaths and people complain. Every time they buff them (well ok, It's never happened) people complain that 35 billion shouldn't make you as powerful as 20 drakes. But making it 20 seconds seems like a good trade-off to me, in my opinion if you're cloaked in a safe spot you should be able to log off completely safely. That applies to all ships.

WORST FEATURE EV-AH.

I haven't been playing this game because it's easy. I could care less about all the "new" players that are stupid. Pain is a very good teacher. Everyone that's played this game for a year or longer has learned not to shoot people in high sec. If they haven't then they don't shoot people anyway so who cares.

Your doing these thing for the nubbins. This is a game. You make mistakes and get blown up. Its how you get EXPERIENCE that other people are looking for to fly with.

WHY DUMB THIS WONDERFUL GAME DOWN FURTHER? Instead of wasting VALUABLE development time on a completely STUPID feature that's only going to be broken when you release it, why not FIX all the crap that people have been screaming about? These new features will be broken or will break something else upon release. So then, not only have you wasted the Dev time coming up with these useless features, now you have to use MORE Dev time fixing it afterwards. What a waste.

I think 20 seconds is a good compromise.

In truth, if you are in a safe spot, with no NPC/PvP/Weapons timers, why do you need a logoff timer at all? If it was under 10 seconds, I'm sure it could be abused somehow, but I don't think it should be long enough for someone to run a probe scan, get a result, warp to you and aggress you.

AFAIK, modules do not stop running when you log off, until your ship successfully emergency warps or just times out and despawns--this is how an accidentally DC'd mission runner's ship can survive until he logs back in again. If the active tank was running at the time of DC, it keeps running until the ship caps out.

If that's true, the new "safe log off" is somewhat less safe than the old "cloak up and log off" tactic. But again, that's a design goal. If it ends up leading to a lot of dormant supercaps, you can petition CCP to shorten the timer to 20 seconds and/or allow cloaks and they'll probably make the change. They want more dead supers, after all.

Actually, the changes solve a great many problems with a horrible and overly complex system. The convoluted coding currently in place causes no end of technical headaches for the dev team, to no good purpose.

People should get themselves killed because they make, or are lured into making, stupid decisions... not because the aggression system is so obscure and full of loop holes your average player has difficulty making sense of it.

I've never been a fan of letting bad game mechanics do my fighting for me.

I would imagine that having the safety system in "green safe mode" just wouldn't do anything in WH or null space since you don't pick up flags for doing anything there anyway. So if you live in null or WH 100% of the time you would never need to turn it off.

That seems like dirty hardcoding in the background. So after logging off "safely" i get ported to a 1M KM distant space.

EDIT: dont make the font yellow...

Oh god... For a second I actually feared that you had added a way to let people choose not to be in danger at the expense of not being able to shoot at others... At least I was greatly mistaken, and for that, I am grateful. Looks like this is going to be a very nice change. No more annoying pop-ups in Empire-space. I like that.

What about putting in a practical "Safe log off button" that does what's needed to perform the safe log off? IE it turns off modules, stops the ships and stops whatever blocks the safe log off process and only then it initiates the safe log off?

It'd be useful in some of my ships where I'd have to go click 6-7 buttons and that's :effort:

Will these safety locks also prevent logistics from repping pilots with <-5.0 faction status so that they won't get targeted by the faction police? The bad faction aggrro is one othe last 'silent aggro' problems that incursioners still run into. No warning for bad faction status is definely not 100% the logi's fault. It is pretty silly to see faction police pop in your site & attack logi's with no warning at all

Preventing botters from logging off is great, but the real losers here are supercap pilots. Under the current system if you're cloaked in a safe spot you can close the client to safely logoff. With the new system you need to decloak for 30 seconds in order to logoff, which is easily enough time to get probed and aggressed (alternatively e-warp then be probable for 60 seconds). The bad news is that this means we will be killing fewer supercaps this year, because people will simply use them less often (exactly what happened with the previous nerfs). Too bad.

Will these changes still take into account if you're within a shield bubble (and not warp you away) like before?

you didn't say you were changing it, so I think your answer is that everything will be the same, but I still feel the need to ask.

CCP i got one question about safe logofski, let imagine, im on hull, like 5 structure left (no agresion, no actives modules etc), my safe countdown show me 0.00 sec ( this mean i can exit form client or log off, what happens if after 0.1sec after i log off, somone lock my ship and fire? i lose my ship? this safe countdown is perfect and working even in this wired situation? also when player see 0.00 sec noboby can lock my ship?

Old logout system isn't going anywhere, so nobody's losing out. If you don't want to use "safe logoff", then "logoff", "quit", ctrl-Q, or switching off your computer/router will all still work as they currently do.

On persisting the safety button setting: it's something we were hoping to get into this release but didn't quite have time. I can't give any kind of estimate on if/when it will happen right now because we're in the final stages of release prep and our team is focusing on Retribution launch rather than anything else. Once we've shipped and tidied up after ourselves, we'll look at what we're working on next

Cool. As long as it's on the radar, that's good...and will probably lead to amusing stories in the interim.

*prepares sticky note with DISABLE SAFETY WHEN PEWING IN LOWSEC for computer monitor*

I disagree. This should not be released in this condition.

I get the newbie protection, fine. I love some of the logoffski block changes. But this is just flat-out poor design and takes something that works fine now and breaks it.

Don't release this feature without the ability to set safety state permanently.

Don't release this feature without the ability to set safety state permanently.

People should get themselves killed because they make, or are lured into making, stupid decisions... not because the aggression system is so obscure and full of loop holes your average player has difficulty making sense of it.

On persisting the safety button setting: it's something we were hoping to get into this release but didn't quite have time.

Dear god, how many times do we really have to put up with this crap?

Yeah, having to cut things due to deadlines is only such an Eve thing.

I get the newbie protection, fine. I love some of the logoffski block changes. But this is just flat-out poor design and takes something that works fine now and breaks it.

Don't release this feature without the ability to set safety state permanently.

A deadline is no excuse to deliver a half-finished product.
I can see the lack of persistence becoming very irritating for highsec and lowsec pilots. Thankfully I'm not one of them, but this still reeks of Uni Inv all over again.

I see having to switch you're Safety Level everytime you log in as a MINOR annoyance.... This is not some gamebreaking thing (it would be if you had to do it every Session Change).

Most people will have a very specific state you put it in:

Green for the risk-adverse:
Yellow for morally grey players.
Red for Pirates. The only reason you set it to Red is so you can suicide gank people or shoot PODS in lowsec.

It's annoying to have to set it when you log in, but it's not some, OMG I can't handle this thing. It's easy to change, and all this bitching and whining over it is just ridiculous. Sure, let CCP know you want a user-definable default state... everyone does, and they know it... but quit acting like this is some dealbreaker issue that makes EvE unplayable...

Exactly.

Why are we hand-holding people? Why are we nannying their forgetfulness? Someone sets it to red and forgets that it's red, the game is there to protect them from their own lack of foresight?

What the hell is wrong with Greyscale? Seriously. Persistence isn't an oversight ... most of the game has persistence built-in ... it's no-brainer design. He made a conscious decision to have it reset every login.

I completely agree. I can see the safety causing some real problems with the low-sec crowd. Just one more thing to pay attention to when you log-in.

Can we maybe set the state before we undock? That would probably solve a lot of problems.

This conspiracy mongering is making it needlessly difficult to agree with what would otherwise be an entirely rational position, that CCP should have held off on the feature until they'd nailed persistence down, and rolled it out in a point release.

That said, I'm starting to wonder how many times a day some people log in. Yes, it's an additional Thing To Keep Track Of(TM), and annoying for that, but only until the patch lands.

I'm not sure I follow you on that one my friend. Worse case scenario for the Low Sec crowd is that they might miss out on a pod kill if they forget. A green safety will in no way stop them from firing on someones ship.

No, firing on a ship in low-sec still gains you a Suspect flag. You would need at least a Yellow light, if I'm reading this correct.

Just to expand on this for the FW folks: If you forget to at least go Yellow, you might end up trying to change your safety in the middle of a fight because it won't let you activate your modules.

In short, it's a very bad design decision.

Nothing has been built into this game without persistence (where it was applicable.)

I'm not, really. It's simply that this is kind of the last straw.

Exactly.

Why are we hand-holding people? Why are we nannying their forgetfulness? Someone sets it to red and forgets that it's red, the game is there to protect them from their own lack of foresight?

What the hell is wrong with Greyscale? Seriously. Persistence isn't an oversight ... most of the game has persistence built-in ... it's no-brainer design. He made a conscious decision to have it reset every login.

They've built more complex persistence into their UI in less time.

This was a conscious decision. Nothing has been built into this game without persistence (where it was applicable.) They avoided persistence here by design. It was purposeful.

Greyscale never expects the responses he gets to his design decisions. He's always been kind of clueless in this regard (see his panels at Fanfests for examples).

I've no doubt this could have made it into the Dec 4 release. But as an experiment, they'll want to see how this plays out for a few weeks. Because the first major x.1 release of Retribution won't come until January.

Well, if you've been shot, you can return fire without changing them

I disagree. This should not be released in this condition.

I get the newbie protection, fine. I love some of the logoffski block changes. But this is just flat-out poor design and takes something that works fine now and breaks it.

Don't release this feature without the ability to set safety state permanently.

So you are flat out saying Grayscale is lying?