| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Joshua Calvert
   |
Posted - 2003.08.27 00:50:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 27/08/2003 00:53:29
I'm fully expecting to be flamed for this post but I just hope it provokes some interesting debate on certain players moral and ethic codes.
This post is both in relation to this thread and also my own observation.
Let us set the scenario.
The character: ShockAndAwe and 2 members of the corporation TJM.
The setting: Luminaire-Algogille jumpgate
The background: ShockAndAwe is currently the proud owner of a -1.5 security rating and a 1.5 million isk bounty.
ShockAndAwe's current "trick" is to target passersby who, having already received the yellow threat box on their screen when they come out of warp to the gate, then see the yellow threat turn to orange after he target locks them.
Now, the problem lies in the fact that, having only been at that jumpgate for 15 minutes tonight myself, ShockAndAwe was responsible for the destruction of 2 cruisers and one battleship by sentry guns.
This occurs because the pilots fired upon him after mistakenly thinking that, with a 1.5M bounty and a -1.5 negative security rating, he could be shot at will.
Of course, this isn't the case and they were destroyed pretty damn quickly.
This is where I'm expecting to be flamed.
You will all say the cruiser/BS pilots should be aware of the rules and should know not to attack when the threat is orange.
I totally agree.
My point is this: ShockandAwe is fully aware of this little trick he is pulling and is using the ignorance of others for his own gain.
Those 3 pilots weren't the first and won't be the last.
It isn't his fault that players don't know the rules of engagement, but can it be said it is the players faults for not knowing the rules of engagement?
No.
The REAL problem (casting aisde ShockandAwe's low underhanded tactics) lies in the fact we have had no real and proper explanation of the rules of engagement.
I could probably muster up a pretty clear and concise explanation of when it is and when it isn't safe to shoot first.
However, what does the current n00b know?
Sod all, if my little experiment using an alt is anything to go by.
I asked a few questions in the DCM corp. channel tonight to some players and not one of them realised you couldn't shoot someone with a -1.5 security rating in systems above 0.5 rating.
The manual says nothing of this and the only explanation offered by CCP is much like the notice of the destruction of Authur Dents council house - placed somewhere people are unlikely to go. Namely, here.
The answer to "When is an exploit not an exploit?" is when you're exploting the ignorance of the players and not the game mechanics.
Let's get the current rules of engagement added as an ingame tutorial and see the end of griefers like ShockAndAwe.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Endureth
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 00:55:00 -
[2]
Sucks don't it?
Meybe you should be less trigger happy.
Or maybe CCP should fix the game.
-E
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 01:00:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 27/08/2003 01:02:20
Try telling that to the guy who lost a Megathorn in about 10 seconds.
I understand that ShockAndAwe isn't an exploiter and that CCP don't have to "fix" anything except make it clear to new players (and old) that this is now that instead of having to sift through a forum (with no search function) and a support page that is pretty hard to navigate.
It's 2am and my eyes hurt from playing Eve for 15 hours.
When I wake up in 6 hours I fully expect myself to be flamed like nobody has ever been flamed before but, as some of you are aware, I've always supported CCP and think that they do a great job.
It could be better in this instance though.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Gan Howorth
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 01:09:00 -
[4]
Hmm, l make a point of knowing the latest about these sorts of games. Mainly because its self evidently not entirely documented and its constantly evolving.
I dont see how someone could get to owning a megathron and not know these things. Frankly it ****es me off that l'm miles away from getting such a beast when someone like this seems barely sentient and is jollying around in one like a Moss Side twoccer.
Pointless jealousy aside, CCP could address this better. But how when it transpires that only a minority actually read the forums...or anything it would seem?
|
Gan Howorth
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 01:10:00 -
[5]
Oh yeah and Josh, what sort of civil servant are you that can play Eve for 15 hours on a weekday. You aren't a spook are you?
|
loci
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 01:46:00 -
[6]
concord concurs that the system is ****
|
HendriX
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 02:05:00 -
[7]
Josh, two callouts I would like to make that come from your post(btw I totally agree):
- Eve manual should be updated frequently and released as a PDF document thru the website, mass mailing ppl and letting them know its updated (If CCP cant do it, volunteers can be found to do it in section by section, or whole of it, I volunteer for one),
- The current system of notifying customers about the changes should be wievable on the first page of Eve, rahter than being hidden in some Q&A stuff.
Thank you,
HendriX
|
StealthNet
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 03:59:00 -
[8]
Something is considered an exploit when someone uses a known bug to take certain advantage.
There is no bug here, so, no exploit.
_______________________________________________
|
Entity
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 04:00:00 -
[9]
It's a form of griefing though.
 |
SC0RPIAN
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 04:01:00 -
[10]
I have a problem with the word "exploit"
How does one know what is an exploit or not? Is selling isogen at 64 isk per unit an exploit? You will all say no. But you can sell isogen quite often at 64, even to NPC's. It is a part of the game. ------ Now lets say something like this happens ------ You figure out a way to make your ship warp without using any capacitor. (Without hacking into CCP's structure, or changing files... ect) Is warping your ship without using capacitor an exploit? You will all say yes. But lets say you did this capacitor trick, within the limits of not cheating/hacking. I did something that CCP allowed to happen, in their programming. CCP allows isogen to sell at 64 isk per unit to NPC's. No one calls this an exploit, do they? So why should a trick, like the no capacitor drain on warping be called an exploit?
(I dont know how to warp without using capacitor...so dont jump on me for "exploiting")
Im just saying, that there is no way to tell what an exploit is. If you can do it in-game, without hacking, changing files and **** like that... I would say it is fine, and it shouldnt be bashed or punishable.
Just my 2 cents... I hate when people say exploiter, or exploits. To me, it is a cheat, a hack or something like that. CCP shouldnt punish people for doing things that THEY allow to happen in-game... (without hacking and stuff)
Thanks, SCORPIAN
|
SC0RPIAN
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 04:02:00 -
[11]
*Once again, i made up the capacitor trick thing... Pure Example*
|
Saladin
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 04:22:00 -
[12]
I think a lot of people are misreading Joshua's post. I believe (and feel free to correct me Joshua) that when he uses the term 'exploit' he does not mean it in the technical mmorpg sense, but in the normal sense of the word. By the dictionary definition of exploitation, then no one can argue that people's ignorance is being exploited here.
All Joshua is asking here is that CCP make the documentation for the rules of engagement and the consequences of hostile acts to be clearly documented in a high visibility location. This will reduce the instances of people getting tricked and loosing their hard earned ships and equipment. This will also reduce the number of petitions on incidents like this, which is a good thing right? I don't see anything wrong with what he suggested, and would like to add my voice to his on this matter
---------------------------
(c) Copyright Saladin, 2005.
Any editing of this post by a third party will be in violation United States Internet Copyright law 46525 of 2003. |
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 04:27:00 -
[13]
When is a carebear a carebear?
When he posts like Joshua.
|
Singha Miasong
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 04:32:00 -
[14]
Stop trying to justify something that is wrong
moronic paraphrase:"i can buy a gun at a chain store, and buy bullets too. so that must mean i can shoot anything i want...thats the same as me using a method in a game to be a griefing cheater..." 
Cheating is cheating, a criminal act is a criminal act, the severity of the offense is up to the court to decide, or in eve's case, the GM's and DEV's.
those that can't win by working within the rules deserve to be banned, so go suck your thumb and whine about all the carebears that wont let you cheat, somewhere else...
|
Ruulex DeMors
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 05:04:00 -
[15]
 Quote:
When is a carebear a carebear?
When he posts like Joshua.
Stow it Molly. Why is EVE's population falling? Because ppl like you and Tank that gank noobs in 1.0 space (yes I know it's fixed).
Joshua has a very valid point, documentation should be made in-game. Not everyone comes here or to the website (which is not very user friendly). If EVE is to see the server pop start to rise it needs to be more friendly to new players instead of just saying here's mining laser there's a asteroid, target, activate laser, blah blah blah...The only combat rules that is gives is how to lock and fire. Nothing on rules of engagement. I make sure all my Corp-mates know the rules of engagement, reguardless on how long they have played (it annoys some, but they see why and understand).
Am I calling the guy in the Mega a noob? Yes, he didn't know the rules even though he had a ship worth 20 times as much as my Thorax. Is it his fault he didn't know the rules? No, there should be no reason anyone has to come to this forum or website to get info on game rules. It should be in-game and easy to access.
Is what screwball with the -1.5 rating doing an exploit? No. Is it griefing? IMO yes. Should he be punished? Not by CCP, it's their fault the info isn't easily accessed in-game not his. Heck he is making easy money with NO RISK...isn't that why you want trade nerfed Molly? Because there is little to no risk? Nerf this guys easy money habit by putting out info in-game. Or make it to where you can kill anyone below -1.0 sec rating w/o fear of Concord... The Devs can choose which one is less drastic and easier to program.
-------------------------------------
Interm-CEO for EVE Marshals
http://www.EVEMarshals.com |
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 05:34:00 -
[16]
"Stow it Molly. Why is EVE's population falling? Because ppl like you and Tank that gank noobs in 1.0 space (yes I know it's fixed)."
Really? Oh my god.
*****Cat had 300 Million ISK in her wallet, dropped 250k Isogen and 4 x Partiall Cargo Hull Expander I as I shot her in 1.0. Others were similar. Considered a noob? Holy ****. How much would him make not a noob?
Since it is fixed now as you say it, shouldn't the eve population increase again?
Don't try to argue with me if you know a **** about what I have shot and if you know a **** about why the eve population is rising or falling.
|
Ruulex DeMors
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 05:36:00 -
[17]
Quote:
"Stow it Molly. Why is EVE's population falling? Because ppl like you and Tank that gank noobs in 1.0 space (yes I know it's fixed)."
Really? Oh my god.
*****Cat had 300 Million ISK in her wallet, dropped 250k Isogen and 4 x Partiall Cargo Hull Expander I as I shot her in 1.0. Others were similar. Considered a noob? Holy ****. How much would him make not a noob?
Since it is fixed now as you say it, shouldn't the eve population increase again?
Don't try to argue with me if you know a **** about what I have shot and if you know a **** about why the eve population is rising or falling.
Good the reaction I was looking for. Same way I feel about ppl with valid points about CCP's short falls be called Carebears....
-------------------------------------
Interm-CEO for EVE Marshals
http://www.EVEMarshals.com |
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 05:46:00 -
[18]
Some points are valid. Right.
But he used the word exploit, the word griefer and asked for an out-game solution (which already exists btw) to end the playstyle of a player. Typical carebear, only a better skilled one.
It is really not that hard to differ between yellow, orange and red and read some updated online documentation or ask in your corp or help channel before you do something dangerous like openinig fire on someone.
But since I am a nice person, I will repost the part of the documentation Joshua is asking for, you can find it in the Support part of this site under Answers:
Why can't I freely attack wanted players, or place a bounty on them?
There are varying levels of criminality. The mere fact that a player is sought by CONCORD does not automatically signify that he qualifies as an automatic target for everyone else.
In the eyes of the official law, someone who's committed only minor crimes in EVE does not deserve to be shot. Note the word "official": Other players can place a bounty on someone's head if his security status falls below a certain level (currently -1.0) but this does not imply CONCORD approval. A player can only justifiably be attacked if his security status is below -5.0. If you see someone with a "Wanted" stamp, they're wanted by other players and not necessarily the system itself. The discrepancy in these levels is a result of the Empires' policy to keep personal bickering out of the hands of CONCORD, who are already taxed to the limit dealing with pirates and more serious criminals. Thus, attacking a player, regardless of his wanted status will result in Concord attacking YOU, if the attack takes place in a high security sector of Empire space.
Keep in mind that bounty hunters always operate, if not on the wrong side of the law, then on its very edge. They're trespassing on CONCORD's territory and are therefore naturally not held in high regard by official forces. If you try to place a bounty on someone whose security status is high enough that he's clearly not a serious criminal in the eyes of CONCORD or the Empire then it won't be allowed, no matter what personal vendettas you may have. Neither can you expect help or any kind of assistance from the police if you choose to take up bounty hunting as a career. Violence and murder are serious crimes and are treated as such. If you're in pursuit of another player, your losses - of security, ship or life - are your own. "
|
Ruulex DeMors
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 05:57:00 -
[19]
Yes, it's in the FAQ. Wrangler had the courtesy to post it. But I still say that all this info should be available in the tutorial, or have the tutorial explain where to find the rules of engagement. Something. I know to look at websites/forums for answers, but some ppl don't. This may be their first MMO, and they are used to single player games where the mechanics/rules never change.
Until then and some more features, EVE will still be very Anti-newbie.
-------------------------------------
Interm-CEO for EVE Marshals
http://www.EVEMarshals.com |
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 06:11:00 -
[20]
Sorry, but every experienced player is able to bash a newbie.
|
Ruulex DeMors
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 06:18:00 -
[21]
Quote:
Sorry, but every experienced player is able to bash a newbie.
I agree. But that's not what I'm getting at. Screwball is using a tactic (underhanded but valid) to entice newbies to attack him. Then he takes their cargo. There is zero risk for him. Newbies should be aware from the tutorial stage that Concord will fry your ass if you fire on anyone above -5 sec rating, unless you fire in self defense (which sometimes gets you fried anyway).
Oh and on the indicator window, I forgot to mention that some of us are slightly color-blind. I have difficulty telling the differnce in slight shade changes. The only reason I know it is a threat and not a lock is because the threat pops up right when I exit warp. The lock takes 10 secs after I exit warp.
-------------------------------------
Interm-CEO for EVE Marshals
http://www.EVEMarshals.com |
Othnark
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 06:24:00 -
[22]
I think we have to go with the famous old saying here. Ignorance is no excuse from the law.
As to Joshua's question.... everything in this game is an exploit. To exploit just means to take advantage of something. What we are prohibited from doing is exploiting game mechanics or a bug. What the player your described and many others like him is doing is exploiting people's ignorance. There is no difference between this and someone who convinces another player to sell him ISO at 24Isk. Sure the stakes are way higher, but tough.
Ive been told many times from petition replies that it was "part of gameplay" to figure out how faction affects work. Security status losses are not defined anywhere and arent even working correctly. What do I do? I deal with it and move on. But because noobs are losing expensive items because they cant take 5 minutes to experiment in a noob ship before putting a month long investment at risk, we all have to hear people going around yelling exploit? Come on.
Here we have something well defined and well known fact. Hell, you get a warning about firing on someone. If you choose to disregard it without knowing what you are doing, you deserve the results.
-Othnark
|
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 06:27:00 -
[23]
Yup, underhanded. That's fine.
-5.0 should be mentioned too, but then again the whole security rating stuff needs to be explained by a CONCORD agent or someone at the begining of a character creation for all character types, pirates and people fighting them.
|
Jolo
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 06:34:00 -
[24]
someone mentioned making an updated PDF manual about the game availible. If i had bought the game today, i would ****ed to find no ark or spod! heheh plus there's no explanation of the security system easily accessble. the other prolbem is a lot of people don't even use this web site, so how are they supposed to search the forums or read the other crap.
---------------------------------------
|
Ruulex DeMors
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 06:34:00 -
[25]
Othnark, I shut that warning off when it poped up against the training drone.
So, we should just deal with it? Should we just deal with the Sensor Boosters CTD'ing us also? Or heck don't forget the Cap Neutralizer CTD'ing us also, I guess I should just live with it right? Like I have been for the past 6 wks.
This is an easy fix that wouldn't take much time to put into game. It wouldn't take much time away from them fixing the issues that keep me from using very helpful modules in combat.
-------------------------------------
Interm-CEO for EVE Marshals
http://www.EVEMarshals.com |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 07:24:00 -
[26]
Molly, I think if you re-read my 2nd post in this topic you would see I agreed that ShockAndAwe was not an exploiter.
He does, however, exploit the confusion regarding rules of engagement.
As someone kindly pointed out, exploit and exploit have two different meanings when it comes to MMPROG's - I meant he was simply taking advantage of players' ignorance NOT the game mechanics.
I didn't really want to get into the whole "exploit" thing anyway.
My point was that new rules should be made more widely available than in some hard-to-navigate part of the website.
As usual Molly, you've once again used a topic to make as many references to "carebear" as possible. You've become a parody of yourself. Grow up.
Thanks to everyone who bothered to post constructively and without flame.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 07:24:00 -
[27]
Quote:
Oh yeah and Josh, what sort of civil servant are you that can play Eve for 15 hours on a weekday. You aren't a spook are you?
I have 2 weeks off 
Gotta love flexi-time.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 07:57:00 -
[28]
Edited by: j0sephine on 27/08/2003 08:20:00
"My point was that new rules should be made more widely available than in some hard-to-navigate part of the website."
... There's that nice 'Help' button on the main toolbar in game; it opens the requester and lets you easily search either the FAQ/Support or the Oracle thing.
I agree the info could be provided in more direct manner (part of the tutorial while fighting the combat drone maybe?) but it's not that inaccessible, either... ^^;
|
Serge
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 08:05:00 -
[29]
I totally agree, Josh! A really severe issue such as the security rating / bounty and status with Concord MUST needs be adressed via tutorial or similar means! Better tell them ppl twice be4 they fall victim to this underhand tactic.
There are similar points to the above stated - gangs: I still miss an explanation of gang-functionality .. lost a cruiser to this issue 1,5 month ago and still no info about gang-functionality!
***********************************************
... "we suddenly have a good 2 dozen Chicken Littles running about proclaiming tha |
Avon
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 08:47:00 -
[30]
Two words:
Patch Notes.
It is all in there. Anyone who patches software without reading the notes deserves to get blown into itty bits.
Sutpid people deserve to die, they only weaken their races gene pool.
'Gene police, you (points) get out of the pool!'
I know they can't help being dumb or ignorant, it isn't their fault that out of 100 million sperm a defective one was the fastest.
Help channel:
OMFG TEH GAME SUX I R DED - EXPLOITERS SUX.
Really? Would you like to explain that in English without the caps?
I r teh shoot some1 at a gate and teh guns blew me to bits.
Hmmm, are you familiar with the security system?
no - no1 told me nefing about it
Well, do you read the patch notes each time you update the game? You really should do this to keep yourself informed of any game changes which may affect you.
STFU u h0m0 f4gz n00b! Reading is 4 dumb ppl!
Oh. Nothing to see here, move along please.
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Othnark
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 08:52:00 -
[31]
Quote:
Othnark, I shut that warning off when it poped up against the training drone.
I too turned that warning off halfway through the tutorial. My point is, I understood from that warning that firing on things is dangerous. And you can be damn sure i put my noob ship at risk before my cruiser.
Quote:
So, we should just deal with it? Should we just deal with the Sensor Boosters CTD'ing us also? Or heck don't forget the Cap Neutralizer CTD'ing us also, I guess I should just live with it right? Like I have been for the past 6 wks.
I didnt say you should deal with bugs. Bugs are annoying as hell and should be fixed yesterday. Here the so-called problem isnt a game bug. Slowly but surely the "buyer beware" aspect of Eve is being squashed out.... thats too bad I think.
There are plenty of ways to find out what the rule is for firing on someone. There are no ways for me to find out where i may or may not take a security hit. Currently "its part of the game" to figure it out. Well let everything be "part of the game" then.
-Othnark
|
McWatt
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 08:55:00 -
[32]
Quote:
The REAL problem (casting aisde ShockandAwe's low underhanded tactics) lies in the fact we have had no real and proper explanation of the rules of engagement.
joshua for once even got a point here.
doc and info policy of ccp suck.
but as always, he misses the main issue:
the REAL problem is, that concord was tailored to handle the (few) ueber pirates.
now ueber concord uses insta lock, scamble, web and multi bs firepower to******anything in seconds.
combined with the bad documentation of the rules of engagement and multiple bugs this is a recipe for disaster.
i d like to thank ShockandAwe for pointing this out to some more players. keep on going.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 09:01:00 -
[33]
Quote:
Quote:
The REAL problem (casting aisde ShockandAwe's low underhanded tactics) lies in the fact we have had no real and proper explanation of the rules of engagement.
joshua for once even got a point here.
doc and info policy of ccp suck.
but as always, he misses the main issue:
the REAL problem is, that concord was tailored to handle the (few) ueber pirates.
now ueber concord uses insta lock, scamble, web and multi bs firepower to******anything in seconds.
combined with the bad documentation of the rules of engagement and multiple bugs this is a recipe for disaster.
i d like to thank ShockandAwe for pointing this out to some more players. keep on going.
CONCORD wouldn't need to insta-lock innocents if the rules of engagement were more widely known but I see your (and Jash's) point regarding a mistake being punished to extremes.
Perhaps CONCORD should respond with just as much force but should give at least 20 seconds to "get out of dodge"?
This combined with more awareness of current rules might allow for mistakes.
I refuse to believe ShockAndAwe is doing this to "highlight" current confusions with rules of engagement - he is always hanging around that gate with at least one Industrial from TJM corporation.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
XeQtR
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 09:06:00 -
[34]
"When is a carebear a carebear?
When he posts like Joshua."
When is Molly quitting EVE?
Apparently never. 
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 09:08:00 -
[35]
Edited by: j0sephine on 27/08/2003 09:09:21
"Two words:
Patch Notes.
It is all in there. Anyone who patches software without reading the notes deserves to get blown into itty bits."
... You are welcome to show where exactly the subject of security status and -5.0 rule is dealt with in the patch notes. (to make it quicker, it isn't; for that matter many quite important things like the factions being partially enabled in the latest 'official' build are nowhere to be found in the patch notes)
But speaking of the patch notes:
"1183
Sentry guns (..) will now broadcast a warning message like the police do."
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 09:46:00 -
[36]
Just a few things from the patch notes:
Patch 1077 - 1105
New Features / Configuration Changes and Bug Fixes
NPCs
Stargate and station sentry guns in systems with 0.45 or higher security level now attack players who come within range and have -5 (or lower) security status.
Sentry guns around stations now attack people within range who lose or recently lost standing from the corporation that owns them or the faction that the owning corporation belongs to.
Sentry guns around stargates now attack people within range who lose or recently lost standing from the corporation that owns them or the faction that owns the solarsystem.
Build 1077
Improvements, 1058 - 1077
In Space
If a player loses security status within range of certain sentry guns then they will attack that player at the earliest opportunity
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
StealthNet
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:00:00 -
[37]
Edited by: StealthNet on 27/08/2003 10:02:38
xploiter, no. Griefer, hmm... yes, if he knows what he is doing (which is prolly the case).
As someone already mentioned, the problem are the rules of engagement: those are messy, confusing and not clear enough (they keep somewhat changing too).
Since gold, I remember that it changed once or twice. And I keep saying this: there is no point in creating a whole new PvP system while other games out there have successful and tested systems in place. The KISS rule is a must here.
1. if someone open fire, the victim can fire back in X minutes, no matter what the attacker do or where he goes (jumping or logging off will not reset his condition of attacker). If the attacker fires back within the X minutes, the timer is reset and start counting again.
2. gang member must be treated as one entity, so if you attack someone, any victim's gang member can attack back (see rule number 1)
3. any neg sec rating + bounty = hunted everywhere you go (any1 can open fire without getting cops after)
4. -5 or worse sec rating = hunted everywhere you go (see 4)
5. most important: make the rules available where every1 can read them.
Cops response:
1. immediate, to any attack in 1.0 sec space;
2. add 7 seconds to cops delay to every .1 less sec space: so if you are in a .6 sec space, cops will show in 35 seconds; if you are in a .3 sec space, cops will show in 49 seconds.
3. from .1 sec and down, no cop response.
Sec hit:
1. no sec hit of any kind in non empire space.
_______________________________________________
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:03:00 -
[38]
Edited by: j0sephine on 27/08/2003 10:03:50
"Just a few things from the patch notes:"
... *sighs* the notes you quote translate to:
if your security rating is less than -5 and you try to enter safe space, you die. If you screw up with some company near their sentry guns, you die. if you do something unlawful near the sentry guns, you die.
None of them says, "attacking 'wanted' players with security rating above -5 in empire space is unlawful thing (see sentry guns, doing unlawful things nearby)"
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:13:00 -
[39]
Quote:
None of them says, "attacking 'wanted' players with security rating above -5 in empire space is unlawful thing
You get that warning the first time you try to shoot anyone - it is an ingame warning even more obvious than reading the patch notes.
If you don't know shooting at people is a crime then you must play with your eyes closed.
It is quite possible to have a bounty and a +sec rating, would you still think it is ok to shoot those players?
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Oosel
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:25:00 -
[40]
i was there last night when the guy lost his mega what was more cruel was the guys who he had come to help ie the indies and such who were there all running for the gate because of shocks tactics then all descended on his stuff that was left once concord had left his ship in bits unless of course these guys were the ones in league with shockandawe....in all fairness to shock he isnt firing on anyone he is just there
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:28:00 -
[41]
"You get that warning the first time you try to shoot anyone - it is an ingame warning even more obvious than reading the patch notes."
You get the warning that shooting people with security rating above -5 in empire space is unlawful thing resulting in security drop? Then it must be new, the warning i got the first time i shot at the combat drone was about unspecified consequences of my actions, and worded in manner so vague it was bordering on being pointless.
"If you don't know shooting at people is a crime then you must play with your eyes closed."
* unless their security rating is below -5,
* unless you are in uncontrolled 0.0 space,
* but not always because security level indicator can play tricks on you (see: Molly),
* and number of other conditions,
* clauses,
* and exceptions.
... besides, we've strayed quite far from the original point which was how everything is in the patch notes, non?.. :s
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:32:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Avon on 27/08/2003 10:32:44
Quote:
besides, we've strayed quite far from the original point which was how everything is in the patch notes, non?
No, I think the original point was about exploiting.
If people are too dumb to check what they can do they deserve to die - and they certainly shouldn't be in BS's if they don't even know the basics.
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:40:00 -
[43]
"No, I think the original point was about exploiting."
Of Josh, i think it was actually about not being given enough clearly worded info on the game rules of engagement; i meant your original point though... ("Two words: Patch Notes." etc.) Sorry, should've made it more obvious indeed.
|
High Priestess
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 10:44:00 -
[44]
I think the pirates (PC) are to blame for this. All those people early on who podded players for no reason, attacked newbies in 1.0 space and generally griefed everyone while using exploited devices and modules. CCP nerfed the game so much because of them it's now nothing like it was probably meant to be. This is basically an economic game anyway not PvP yet its run like more and more like a guild battle type game now then ever. Its schewed too much toward solo player combat and not toward big corp wars like we were promised. Players that do stuff like this are no better then Tank podding newbies in 1.0 space because they have a -10. rating and arent killed by Concord. They're bored kids who have nothing better to do then try and ruin it for everyone else.
Yes Im a carebear too and proud of it.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 11:01:00 -
[45]
The EULA clearly state that game content can change and that it is the players responsibility to keep themselves up-to-date.
You agree to the EULA to play, you abide by those rules.
The rules of engagement are EXPLICITLY stated on this website, and the implimentation of the steps that brought them about are in the patch notes.
There is no excuse for not knowing them.
People cry because they want their hand held and don't want to be responsible for their actions. Basically they are unable to come to terms with their mistakes and want to blame anything other than their own ignorance.
Taking advantage of, or 'exploiting', peoples ignorance is perfectly acceptable, if they can't be bothered to help themselves why should anyone care what happens to them?
OK, it is sad to lose a BS because you were ignorant of the rules and someone took advantage of that, but who's fault is it really?
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Georg
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 11:09:00 -
[46]
Ram them! Not an offensive action and unfortunately doesn't cause any damage but it is fun to see their ships tumbling in space. And they don't seem to like it up 'em (UK people'll get the reference).
Incidentally, at least he's got a proper name. Over the weekend I ran into a player calling himself 'serpentis patroller' doing the same trick: thankfully I was armed only with mining lasers and didn't engage before it dawned that a) the system was 0.8 so no gate pirates and b) he wasn't no cross. He'd also dropped several containers of crap around the gate which I hoovered up for a useable amount of Plag. actually. There were a couple of corpses floating in the area too probably down to him. I basically hounded him until he either logged, warped or jumped. Then reported him as there is a specific GM policy about calling oneself an NPC name (Why is there no name filter for these obvious abuses: he didn't even have to misspell it?).
|
Saladin
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 11:40:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Saladin on 27/08/2003 11:40:11
Well I think that poor documentation is a problem with EVE, not just for this issue but many others. I bought 4 giant secure containers yesterday (at 152k each) and only discovered afterwards that they were bugged and were not 'secure'.
I don't see why people have to bring pirate vs. carebear into this discussion. Why would someone be against improving the documentation, and making information more readily available to people?
I work for a software company myself and whenever times get tough, guess who gets hit with layoffs first? Thats right, the documenation guys. While I don't know the financial status of CCP, they might be doing the same thing
---------------------------
(c) Copyright Saladin, 2005.
Any editing of this post by a third party will be in violation United States Internet Copyright law 46525 of 2003. |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 11:46:00 -
[48]
Quote:
"No, I think the original point was about exploiting."
Of Josh, i think it was actually about not being given enough clearly worded info on the game rules of engagement; i meant your original point though... ("Two words: Patch Notes." etc.) Sorry, should've made it more obvious indeed.
j0sephine, it's unfortunate that some people see the word "exploit" and become fixated upon it.
Nice to see you're not one of them 
All I want are clearly laid out rules specifying the rules of engagement as they currently stand.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Aenedor
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 11:58:00 -
[49]
Quote:
Othnark, I shut that warning off when it poped up against the training drone.
I didn't and won't. I would hate to accidently shoot another player when I didn't mean too take a securtity rating hit and a destroyed ship.
It can be annoying when it pops up but it only takes 1 second to click OK, so no biggie.
"are you a winner or a whiner?" |
Aenedor
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 12:00:00 -
[50]
Quote:
I think the pirates (PC) are to blame for this. All those people early on who podded players for no reason, attacked newbies in 1.0 space and generally griefed everyone while using exploited devices and modules. CCP nerfed the game so much because of them it's now nothing like it was probably meant to be. This is basically an economic game anyway not PvP yet its run like more and more like a guild battle type game now then ever. Its schewed too much toward solo player combat and not toward big corp wars like we were promised. Players that do stuff like this are no better then Tank podding newbies in 1.0 space because they have a -10. rating and arent killed by Concord. They're bored kids who have nothing better to do then try and ruin it for everyone else.
Yes Im a carebear too and proud of it.
EH?????
This is a PVP game, perhaps you should stick to EnB or SWG.
"are you a winner or a whiner?" |
Avon
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 12:00:00 -
[51]
Quote:
All I want are clearly laid out rules specifying the rules of engagement as they currently stand.
But as has been pointed out these are already available.
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 12:00:00 -
[52]
Quote:
Quote:
Othnark, I shut that warning off when it poped up against the training drone.
I didn't and won't. I would hate to accidently shoot another player when I didn't mean too take a securtity rating hit and a destroyed ship.
It can be annoying when it pops up but it only takes 1 second to click OK, so no biggie.
Problem is, that second is the difference between jamming him or being jammed, getting that first volley, or loading up your tac shields.
1 second can be a life saver.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Serge
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 12:05:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Serge on 27/08/2003 12:05:30
Quote:
But as has been pointed out these are already available.
Where?
***********************************************
... "we suddenly have a good 2 dozen Chicken Littles running about proclaiming tha |
Asmodia
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 12:09:00 -
[54]
Quote:
*****Cat had 300 Million ISK in her wallet, dropped 250k Isogen and 4 x Partiall Cargo Hull Expander I as I shot her in 1.0. Others were similar. Considered a noob? Holy ****. How much would him make not a noob?
yes, Molly. they r n00bs. We were in Sanchas Nation and 7 n00bs in Battleships tried to get our 3 Blackbirds. They tried it for hours. One of them was Tank CEO. the rest were in 'The Collective'. We doesnt used our Weps , because we want NOT to be Noobibashers like u !!! 
------------------------------------------------
CEO of Spectre Syndicate - Curse Alliance
------------------------------------------------ |
Endyl
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 12:17:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Endyl on 27/08/2003 12:17:46
I think simply that the way it should work is that if the stripe near the ship icon displays red, you can shoot, if not, then you can not shoot.
If that doesn't work that way, then it's wrong.
EDIT: ah but the icon disapear once you target... something is flawed... :)
|
SISQO
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 12:30:00 -
[56]
Edited by: SISQO on 27/08/2003 12:34:15
Its NOT an exploit, cheap tactic yes, but perfectly legitimate. The blames lies with CCP for lack of information and BAD game mechanics.
Anyone with a bounty on them should be free kill. It takes a god damn while to drop your sec, or raise your sec nowadays, so if your got negative sec your a criminal. Don't even bother saying there are some good people with negative sec, negative sec baddies far outweight those accidental good guys, 100 to 1.
If CCP removed all these lame ANTI-PVP fixes, this game would actually see some excitement where more people would be fighting, which means more ships lost, which also means more ships being bought. Carebears being happy that their ships sales are going up, fighters happy that they can actually kill something.
If we reverted back to all Beta 6 rules, this game would be so much more enjoyable then this EvE: Sims Online that it currently is.
I'm just waiting for the day where everyone's grandmas, sons, uncles, daddys, nephews, cousins, brother has a ******* BS, to be truly sure this game has gone to **** ever since the end of beta.
|
Scragg
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 13:48:00 -
[57]
I bet those three pilots know about the law in Empire Space now.
Scragg, Tyrell Corporation
Vice-Director Military Operations |
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 13:49:00 -
[58]
Shockandawe isn't doing anything wrong.
This is CCP's fault for having ridiculous sentry guns at every gate 
Seriously though, CCP needs to spell out, IN THE TUTORIAL which people you can and can not shoot safely.
I think its a mistake to show NPC pirates with a 'wanted' sign and nothing else on them. It makes players think anyone with a 'wanted' sign is open game.
I think all pirates should have 'wanted' and 'sec level -5.0' on them :P That might help the new players.
Or heck, add a mission where there's a whole field of drones with varying sec levels and you shoot only the correct ones.
OR you could follow the plan of never shooting at someone smaller than you in high sec space unless he shoots first.
|
Jericho
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 14:00:00 -
[59]
HOLY SHIAT MOLLY... you are still around? I thought you quit, then came back and got your name, then quit again... now your back.
How can anything you say be taken seriously?
|
Singha Miasong
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 14:10:00 -
[60]
Can they just ban Molly and her negitive atitude. Is it worth the time and effort to read her post, no. People like Molly get fired, banned, kicked out, for their mouth, and total disregard to the rest of the population.
BAN MOLLY, from the forums, so something constructive can be worked on, instead of her "i hate you all because you're carebears and will ruin the game for anyone I want too" attitude. Now go away molly, leave eve for the people that bought it to play as an RPG, vs your idea of "griefer madness"
|
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 15:24:00 -
[61]
Lol, 2 additional fans. Too sad you are full of whining.
|
Fusco T
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 17:20:00 -
[62]
Well actually he is exploiting but then again so do most people to one degree or another.
Def 1: 'To employ to the greatest possible advantage'
Most of us have "exploited" the poor AI of NPCs, Either warping to opposite ends of a long belt to avoid killing NPCs. Or hiding behind large scordite to avoid missle attacks. Or toying with the last of an escort, counting on NPCs calling for reinforcements.
Now the only difference is that this shockandawe fella' is exploiting and using definition 2: 'To make use of selfishly or unethically'
So both scenarios fit the definition of exploit.
|
Acix
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 17:21:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Acix on 27/08/2003 17:22:59
hey molly, why don't you come play with someone that knows the rules and has a ship outfitted to kick your waste of biomass all over the universe. Your useless posts have no place here.
Defenition time, everything you wanted to know through Molly's (and her sidekick retards that share her opinion's) eyes:
Exploit = a word that carebears use. Derived from the latin phrase "ex-plotitis", meaning "he who is carbear"
Griefer = fictional person that does not exist in game play. Derived from latin phrase "gree-phor", meaning "he who does not exist"
Carebear = anyone that has a differing opinion. Derived from the latin phrase "crie-bier", meaning "he who does not share my same thought"
More to come later.........
Anyone seeing a pattern here. I do Molly must die, oh and Avon, go back to selling useless cleaning products door to door. Hey look its the Avon Lady
edits for spelling
SNIGG is now officially open for business. We are a merc corp looking for contracts.
For more info click below
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=68313 |
Adam Edwards
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 18:13:00 -
[64]
LOL. Tell em Acix.
|
nono
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 18:20:00 -
[65]
LOL Avon is make-up and perfume.
Your thinking of Amway.
|
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 19:10:00 -
[66]
"hey molly, why don't you come play with someone that knows the rules and has a ship outfitted to kick your waste of biomass all over the universe. Your useless posts have no place here."
Huh? I have destroyed dozens of cruisers in G-5EN2 and neighbour systems while EVE Marshals were hiding, so stop making me laugh please. You aren't kicking anything. Thank you.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 19:19:00 -
[67]
Begging the mods to ban someone just because you disagree with them is the height of carebear'ism.
I don't find your posts worth reading at all. Am I complaining to the mods to have you banned? No, I just skip your posts.
Why don't you just skip Molly's?
|
Acix
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 20:44:00 -
[68]
Molly I have never seen you in any space near me before. If others were out doing something and didn't notice you fine so what. We haven't ever even set out to find you before. We have not hidden from anyone since I have been a member. People have hidden from us tho. They like to run too.....
Avon/amway whatever doesn't matter to me, just funny that his name is that.
Banning Molly and the others was probably meant as a joke by a frustrated reader tired of molly calling everone a carebear that thinks ruining the game for noob's is a bad idea.
Anyway what people are trying to get across here is that if you have something bad to say about what someone has posted put exactly why. Just calling them a carebear does not make you point valid. It does make you look stupid. Why don't you try to use that chunck of grey fatty material in your skull. Put your constructive thought together so someone else can understand it, then post. A "just because" or "your a carebear" reason is really dumb.
This guy has a valid point to make in his initial post (if you read it and understand it). The combat for eve is easily used in ways that it was not meant in theory to function. Killing people in 1.0 space was never meant to work like Molly and Tank used it. That is why the over-reaction came from CCP. If you know things like this are out of bounds (think about it stupid, don't post the bull **** well that game let me do it, its not a valid reason)then report the incident to CCP so it can be fixed, because it was never meant to work like that to begin with.
You might call me a carebear for reporting odd bug like things like that, I don't care. I would rather play the game as it was meant to be played than find some bull**** trick that makes me uber powerful over everyone else. It proves nothing that i can use a trick to kill someone when obviously i was never meant to be able to do the trick to begin with. You loose player base from doing this. CCP is a business and I happen to like EVE. If you want to go around and grief new players, fine do it and watch EVE start to circle the toilet rim and soon just go down with a big flush..............
SNIGG is now officially open for business. We are a merc corp looking for contracts.
For more info click below
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=68313 |
Kyn Aerie
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 21:39:00 -
[69]
Dunno if anyone has mentioned this, yet. I didn't bother to read the entire thread.
I'm not going to mention what CCP should or should not do. That's already been debated in this thread. I have an option that you can pursue whenever you see this tactic being used. This will get the pirate to stop and (hopefully) pad your wallet a little bit.
Hang out with him. That's it. And when his tactic works on a newb, collect the stuff that he's been waiting on. If a few people stick with him in the systems he's camping, he'll get hardly any loot from his 'exploit' and give up or move on.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 21:46:00 -
[70]
Kyn,
Good idea - you could also shoot the cans when they're dropped.
that would REALLY annoy the little griefer.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
H3R0
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 21:56:00 -
[71]
Well maybe not so many have noticed that the sentry guns are bugged to, hapened 3 times now for and my friend that the sentries shoot at u when fiting at npc guarding containers at gates. If we start firing the sentry start firing on us even tho it is npc we are shooting at.
And I agree the shield and armor vanishes really fast took arund 2-3 sec onds to get to half armor on my moa before warp away.
CEO - The Allies |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.27 21:58:00 -
[72]
I stopped shooting NPC rats around gates as soon as the loot tables were nerfed because I was gutted when Alpha Hull Mods stopped dropping from NPC pirates at the Balle gates.
As it stands now, shooting NPC gate pirates only prevents me from travelling for 30 seconds.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
ShockAndAwe
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 07:33:00 -
[73]
Edited by: ShockAndAwe on 28/08/2003 07:37:34
Actions speak louder than words, you've witnessed my actions now hear my words:
1. All pirates with a bounty should be freely attacked by anyone, in any security without police protection.
2. I will delete the character if CCP ask me to.... Polaris have turned up twice, but have said or done nothing.
3. I will continue to use this method as my only option of protest, becuase we all know petitions do jack ****.
4. The more people that complain and moan about my actions the better, CCP will start to listen and take notice of the silly pirate protection rules.
5. I don't target new characters.
6. As soon as I can freely target and kill a wanted player, without retribution from Concord, I will delete this character and go back to being a happy miner.
7. I work alone and have turned down all offers of joining pirate corps. |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 07:57:00 -
[74]
Quote:
Edited by: ShockAndAwe on 28/08/2003 07:37:34
Actions speak louder than words, you've witnessed my actions now hear my words:
1. All pirates with a bounty should be freely attacked by anyone, in any security without police protection.
2. I will delete the character if CCP ask me to.... Polaris have turned up twice, but have said or done nothing.
3. I will continue to use this method as my only option of protest, becuase we all know petitions do jack ****.
4. The more people that complain and moan about my actions the better, CCP will start to listen and take notice of the silly pirate protection rules.
5. I don't target new characters.
6. As soon as I can freely target and kill a wanted player, without retribution from Concord, I will delete this character and go back to being a happy miner.
7. I work alone and have turned down all offers of joining pirate corps.
[flame on]
Considering you have a -1.5 sec rating, that would make you fair game.
Very noble goals, but riddle me this: If your protest is against pirates being too protected, why don't you spend your time learning to fight them where they CAN be attacked, rather than griefing innocent bystanders?
Is it because you know that you're incapable of killing anyone in a fair manner?
Is it because you know you're incapable of killing anyone who actually does have a -5.0 sec rating?
You, my boy, have come up with the most obvious excuse for your griefing.
You aren't doing it for the good of the community, you're doing it for yourself.
Why else do you have indies with you to cart away the loot dropped by those innocent bystanders?
Do you offer to give them it back and then explain your reasons for their ship being destroyed?
No.
Your excuse stinks, just like your tactics.
[flame off]
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Asmodia
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 09:21:00 -
[75]
Quote:
hey molly, why don't you come play with someone that knows the rules and has a ship outfitted to kick your waste of biomass all over the universe. Your useless posts have no place here.
Looks like u speak NOT about urself and ur corp. IAs we had the nice playing with Tank CEO and 6 BS of 'The Collective' we contacted one of ur members to ask , if he want to join the fun.
answer : 'NO, Stain region is dangerous ... blah blah blah'
It is a shame that one of ur members had contact to Eve Marshalls. He had a trade with a guy of them and he told him : 'We fight vs M0o'
question:'Did u destroyed ships of M0o?'
answer:'No, we didnt'
I think u clown asses need a reality check. Molly never would waste ammunition on u. The only contest u would win vs her is a 'mining contest'..... maybe
Yes, i am ****ed off of our posts, Mining Marshalls. Only big words .....
Ban Molly from the forum ? Better ban u from eve, because u use a name like Sentenis Patroller or Angel Rough. You guys are only a FAKE.
------------------------------------------------
CEO of Spectre Syndicate - Curse Alliance
------------------------------------------------ |
Callum McGrath
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 09:40:00 -
[76]
Hee! Hee! What fun!
As far as I can see the population of Eve is split into two sections ;
People who want to play the game, see it evolve, do a bit of this and that, make nice comments, petition about something every now and again etc..,
People who want to play the game until they get boredand then try and see what they can get away with.
Now, new players... is a new player defined by money alone? Tell you what, I'll give a 10 year old 100mil isk and a nice ship - does that make him/her experienced? You could be flying round in a frigate but be the CEO of one of the biggest Corps in EVE but have no money or anything of worth on you - does that make you a new player? Honestly some people!!!
This game does have a steep learning curve, I'd still classify myself as a new player, only been playing a month or so, there are still tricks to learn different tatics etc..,
Anyway, I'd just like to add my twopenneth worth - if you find something which you think - hey this is cool, then try it out, obviously if this involves doing something which is so obviously not in the sprit of the game then tell the devs - oh, you don't want to... nice person.
Ohh, I found your cash card, ohh, you left your pin number on it, hang on.... ohh, I've just taken 3000 out of your account, I hand the card into the police (after making sure there are no finger prints on it, nor was I caught on CCTV) - any exploit or criminal activity?
I'll leave it for you to think about.
|
ShockAndAwe
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 12:21:00 -
[77]
Edited by: ShockAndAwe on 28/08/2003 12:23:04
Joshua: I said I play solo!
|
ULTIMA TREX
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 12:55:00 -
[78]
You ever heard of the saying "never judge a book by its cover"
|
Jarrick Camdar
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 13:20:00 -
[79]
Josh, you keep coming back to this "everyone should know" point. It's like you can't hear the other players complaining about the substance of the rules as they stand. They don't make sense. They are currently built to discourage conflict. Where are the bounty hunters? Where is the conflict? Should we all move to 0.0 non-empire space and have it? Can't you see the problem with a system like that?
Jarrick
|
Georg
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 13:48:00 -
[80]
To the person talking about sentry guns firing when you shot at NPCs: are you *absolutely* sure it was an NPC. I personally have run into a PC who had given their character the name 'serpentis patroller' and was deliberately targetting and tricking people into firing on him. Unless you checked the ship icon for cross/box you would not even be aware that you had been had. Thankfully I only had mining lasers installed and so didn't go charging straight in.
|
ShockAndAwe
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 15:13:00 -
[81]
Edited by: ShockAndAwe on 28/08/2003 15:17:25
I'll leave you all with this to ponder on.....
The other night a few of the locals, about 4 - 5 we're at the jumpgate, moaning and groaning about me being there. The local channel was full of hate.
The next thing you know a bloody great big 'Megathon' shows up, destroys my ship and then gets wasted by Concord. The locals then rush towards the loot. Their cries of delight fills the local chat with "I'm rich" and "woohoo"...
One minute I'm public enemy No.1 the next I'm their Robin Hood!
What can I say? |
Anya Stark
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 15:38:00 -
[82]
Back to "what should CCP do" maybe people?
Personally I think the warning is good (I didn't turn it off until the end of my first week) but needs to be split into two sections that can be disabled separately. First, one that generally warns you that you are about to take hostile action. Leave this one only if you are some kind of role play pacifist. Second, a warning that you are about to commit an agressive action with clear Concorde or faction implications (ie. firing first at a PC, attacking an NPC station or gate, attacking NPC police or Concorde). This second warning would prolly only be disabled by serious badass pirate types, leaving the rest of us to say "whoa, hell no, cancel" whenever we got this second warning, unless we clicked okay in order to kill a convoy or something.
I took the warning seriously when I started and left it on because Kang (see the Darwin awards) is a friend of mine and got podded by a sentry gun in beta because of accidently firing on a station (yup, they used to pod you). I have ever since paid close attention to how CCP implements the flashing lights, and did some research on EVE-i to be sure I understood security status and gate/cop reactions in detail. I don't really want to be killed by PCs, but I sure as hell don't want to be killed by accident.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.08.28 15:41:00 -
[83]
Quote:
Josh, you keep coming back to this "everyone should know" point. It's like you can't hear the other players complaining about the substance of the rules as they stand. They don't make sense. They are currently built to discourage conflict. Where are the bounty hunters? Where is the conflict? Should we all move to 0.0 non-empire space and have it? Can't you see the problem with a system like that?
Jarrick
Jarrick,
Read my first post again.
You'll see I am asking for more documentation.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Battle Arena
|
Posted - 2003.08.29 05:30:00 -
[84]
I have to agree with Joshua about better documentation, maybe a static message at the top of the news section, featured on the warpgate spamboards, re-warning people of the dangers of first contact.
|
Jolo
|
Posted - 2003.08.29 07:28:00 -
[85]
The warning just says "There may be consequences" am I right? Doesn't say "Your battleship will be destroyed on site" or You better be sure the player has a -5.0 or you are in 0.4 or less space. etc. If i recall, it was just a simple warning.
---------------------------------------
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |