| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Setec
   |
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:28:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Setec on 06/09/2003 23:35:20
Right now there is one very fundamental imbalance in the nature of Eve piracy. There are two basic styles: the m0o/Sinister "serial killer" style of killing people as fast as possible, often considered plain griefing, and the Space Invaders "armed robbery" style of attempting to disable a ship with the use of webifiers other devices, then negotiating payment in exchange for safe passage.
The imbalance is that the armed robbery style, which is the least damaging to the victim and the most potentially fun for both sides, is also by far the most difficult to execute. With everyone zipping around with microwarpdrives and warp core stabilizers and other such goodies, it's usually necessary to have one or more dedicated webifier/lockdown ships to reliably disable people long enough to negotiate payment. Even then many people can readily escape a formidable force of pirates. Many such people would not have escaped if the pirates were equipped and attempting to kill them outright as fast as possible.
It's also more dangerous to attempt the armed robbery style. Some dangers are inherent to the task, such as the fact that somebody may call for backup if given enough time in negotiations. But other dangers are problems with the game that can be repaired, such as the fact that an armed robber pirate weakens his combat strength by equipping things like multiple webifiers and a cargo scanner in slots where a serial killer pirate would have shield hardeners, boosters, and other such modules. And the armed robber pirate risks a much more likely escape by his victim, who may be slowly creeping away on a MWD, regenerating his shields, and various other sneaky things.
All of this encourages, and almost forces, pirates to adopt the serial killer style instead of the more agreeable armed robber style. I think that even people who hate piracy in all its forms can agree that it's wrong for the least-griefing style to be vastly more difficult, and put the pirates at more risk, than the griefing style.
I've thought of a perfect, simple solution to this problem. Allow us to select a mode in our settings such that, once we damage 100% of a ship's shield, armor, and structure, instead of being destroyed the ship is totally disabled--cannot move an inch, regenerate anything, activate any modules, etc. The attackers can then open negotiations if they wish and decide whether to release the ship or go through with the destruction.
The more merciful style of piracy would then be only slightly more difficult than the griefing style, instead of being vastly more difficult. Many serial killer pirates would probably switch over to armed robbery with this change. It would benefit everybody.
Comments? Additional ideas? Dev reactions? I'd love to see this in the game for real.
___________________________________________
Space Invaders website: http://www.si-corp.net |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:33:00 -
[2]
Sounds like a good idea in theory but how would you be able to judge the amount of damage you were going to do?
I imagine getting a wrecking shot of 500 when the target is at 99% damage would ruin your plans.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Santa Clause
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:34:00 -
[3]
The only problem I can see with the idea is that it could vastly reduce the profits for a great many EVE players i.e. ship builders.
Santa.
|
Shock
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:40:00 -
[4]
It used to be the idea that ships needed an set amount of energy to even engage warp. That would also make things more easy.
Also a tracking module allowing the players track a player anywhere in a system and start playing cat and mouse games in systems should make things more dynamic, for both sides.
And last, but not least: a module that will hide you from local. A module that can only be ativated if you shut everything else off.
---
soonÖ |
Setec
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:43:00 -
[5]
 Quote:
Sounds like a good idea in theory but how would you be able to judge the amount of damage you were going to do?
I imagine getting a wrecking shot of 500 when the target is at 99% damage would ruin your plans.
That's just it--this would be a specially coded disabled mode in which the ship would not be destroyed by traditional damage. Anyone who was firing on it when it reached 0% structure, and who opens fire on it after that, would perhaps be faced with a prompt reading, "Do you wish to destroy this ship or leave it disabled? Y/N," or something. It could not be destroyed by accident by any pilot who's put disabling on in his settings.
___________________________________________
Space Invaders website: http://www.si-corp.net |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:45:00 -
[6]
Sounds plausible, but I'd hate to have my ship entirely disabled only for the bloody robbers to warp away and leave me stranded there 
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Setec
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:49:00 -
[7]
There are various little details like that to work through Joshua. I didn't include them because I wanted to keep my post as short as possible.
For the situation you described, a restriction should be set that if the ships involved in the disabling warp or jump away, the disabled ship is free again to navigate. This would also possibly allow for rescue.
All these details are pretty easy problems to solve and the devs could do it in any number of ways. I just want to push the primary idea.
___________________________________________
Space Invaders website: http://www.si-corp.net |
Zotigh
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 23:55:00 -
[8]
Disabling all modules when shields are lost would make it easier for 'serial killer' pirates to do their job, Setec. You're only thinking of how you would approach it. The 'serial killer' types would simply keep firing, as they do now, when the shields are down. Why would someone want to lose any fighting chance whatsoever when they lose shields, but are otherwise intact?
Good intentions...sort of...but, bad idea.
|
Setec
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:01:00 -
[9]
Quote:
The 'serial killer' types would simply keep firing, as they do now, when the shields are down.
No, no, no, you didn't read the idea right.
Ships would become disabled at the point at which they would otherwise have exploded, not earlier. They wouldn't be disabled when their shields are down, but when their shields, hull, and structure are all completely gone.
So it doesn't make life easier for serial killer pirates. In fact, it has absolutely no effect on them at all, except that it may lead some of them to convert to being armed robber pirates intead.
___________________________________________
Space Invaders website: http://www.si-corp.net |
Zotigh
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:04:00 -
[10]
Ah! My appologies, sir. I misread your idea.
Yes, then. Very interesting. Sounds plausible, too.
|
Danton Marcellus
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:08:00 -
[11]
How about just giving up camping the same gates and use the map to find those deep space mining parties, announce your standard price for releasing hostages on the boards and simply announce that it's a hold up when warping into the system. Everyone then running gets it. 
Ok so I haven't practised it but in theory with lots of lines pointing to a capitalized keyword it looks very good!
Convert Stations
|
Morkt Drakt
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:10:00 -
[12]
Essentially the same as "being knocked unconcious" in the fantasy genres but then having to apply a killing blow to actually kill.
Potentially yes - issue would seem to be that it may work 1 on 1 but whens its more than 1 on 1 how do you synch the damage sources?
|
Hikaru Okuda
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:12:00 -
[13]
Hmm, Maybe a new skill and/or module perhaps? "Precision firing" or something. The higher the skill, the better your chance of disabling rather than destroying. And maybe if left alone (for long enough) the ship could limp away. To prevent disable and leave in space problems.
Neat idea that could have many uses in all PvP, not just piracy.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:12:00 -
[14]
I'm afraid I'd have to go against you on this one due to Risk vs Reward, Setec. Potentially, your method of robbery has a higher chance of reward than m0o's method. Depending on the stupidity/stubborness of the victim of course.
m0o's outright attacks have virtually assured people that negotiating with them is unlikely to do anything aside cost them what they pay and their ship as well. So few bother to attempt it or believe them if offered. If they're not AFK, like idiots, warping into a system with m0o turns into a game of Fox and Hounds, with the advantages to the Fox. Easy to lose them and log out somewhere to out wait them. Even if the victim actually blunders into the m0o blockade, m0o has to settle for the 50/50 chance per item on the ship for what they receive. Which we both know could be either 100m worth of megacyte...or a shield booster and a LiF.
Your more elaborate method provides better results in terms of chances for loot and carries a higher risk to it for being so. It's better, in the long run to push for changes that make it so if you do go through all the elaborate setup/tricks and such, that you completely cut off the chance of escape. Hacking stargates to allow/deny jump access. A bit better trade ratio on energy neutralizers (can't run mwd to creep towards the gate with no cap). Tractor Beams to keep people from reaching the gate no matter how hard they pull.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Toulak
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:15:00 -
[15]
Should just make it so you can target various areas of the ships systems once you reduced the enemy ships sheilds to 0%. Say you can target the enemies thrusters to disable it or shield regenerator etc etc. This would also encourage a more technically challenging combat system, than the simple point click I have bigger guns your dead routine, you could slowly disable a ship and make the enemy squeal for mercy 
Of course instead of just aiming anywhere on the ships hull the accuracy would have to be greater so there would be less chance of hittin the desired system. Still do damage but not to that particular system just basic armour/hull damage if u miss the intended system.
|
agrizla
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 00:18:00 -
[16]
Edited by: agrizla on 07/09/2003 00:19:06
I can see what you're getting at Setec, but I reckon a new gun/ammo which disables the electronics on the ship (much like the ion gun in the old X-Wing/Tie Fighter game did IIRC) would be a better idea. Electronics disabled = ship going nowhere.
It'd require some serious coding as ships would need another "layer" - ie shields, armour, structure and electronics displays around the HUD.
That way you can disable the ship for a set period of time (say 5 minutes after you stop firing), it'd allow for modules to defend against this, and you wouldn't be left with the messy (and non-intuitive) scenario of a ship with zero HP still being around.
What do you think?
|
Saladin
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 01:08:00 -
[17]
of course there are no garantees that you won't be shot at after you pay, so I don't see the need for this. If you ship is incapicated, then its useless unless you have a repair mod equiped. You can't equip anything in space so the ship is as good as gone. The most you could do is transport the cargo to another ship
---------------------------
(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. |
cball
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 01:22:00 -
[18]
How about leaving things as they are for the real pirates and BANNING the griefers that used exploits in violation of the EULA.
Total loss of thier corp, charactors that are part of that account, and all assets, deleted.
Now that would be showing the members of Eve that CCP has the intention of enforcing the few rules there are, and will not tolorate the exploitation of any bug. The piracy careers would then be left to pirates, instead of being associated with griefing.
...fear the evil monkey in your hanger...
|
MSDborris
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 01:36:00 -
[19]
i think the oringanl poster was thinking of E'n'B and the JUMPSTART skill
when u get atacked and u got 10-20% stuc left u get unable to move and u ask for help from someone who has the skill to jumps start yr engines this is in E'n'B and it worked quite well coz it was PvE..... if CCP put some thought into this i think it might be good/changes things dunno if it would be for better or for worse.......
*****
" MSDborris, " Baka!, Hentia! "
***** |
NoHawker
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 01:36:00 -
[20]
I see no problem with Setecs ideal. It can be useful to other non pirate PvP activities 
What are you going to do?
I'm going to kill them all sir |
ScreamingCricket
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 01:51:00 -
[21]
well rather than having the "victim" choose a setting to "be disabled" rather than destroyed, why not have different weapon settings. To be able to choose between, for anyone firing at anything, a lethal and non-lethal button you can toggle on/off near the auto-pilot button or something.
I'm sure this would make for some dynamic conflicts, pirate or otherwise. And maybe once the ship is disabled, then you could approch it on "open" up the cargo hold like normal cargo container.
just some thoughts
|
dalman
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 01:55:00 -
[22]
Only thing that needs to be changed is the unvulerability time so you pirates can't run from us
(yea, I know, it has to be there cause of the MAJOR lag in fleet engagements)
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
Cymoril
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 02:53:00 -
[23]
Agree.
I was thinking the same thing myself the other day, but figured if I posted it it would just open up a barrage of people complaining about carebears and the usual crap like that.
Here we have a pirate asking for this feature, and as far as I can tell, it is better for everybody. It doesn't inhibit anyone's ability to play the way they are currently, but adds the OPTION for other people to play a little differently. How could this possibly be seen as a bad thing? It doesn't even harm ship builders because the people who would use something like this don't normally destroy an excessive number of ships anyway, and those who wouldn't use this option, will keep right on with their usual activities.
I think something as simple as a button on your ship's status display at the bottom of the screen would be all it takes. When it is on, you weapons are set to disable, and you cannot actually destroy the ship no matter what, your weapons simply will not do any more damage if the shield/armor/structure are 0%. Turn it off, and your weapons behave normally.
/signed |
Setec
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 03:13:00 -
[24]
Quote:
of course there are no garantees that you won't be shot at after you pay, so I don't see the need for this. If you ship is incapicated, then its useless unless you have a repair mod equiped. You can't equip anything in space so the ship is as good as gone. The most you could do is transport the cargo to another ship
But many pirates do honor their word to let you go once you've paid. My corporation has never to my knowledge destroyed anyone after they paid. Not out of hundreds of robberies. Reputation is important here and I believe ours speaks well for us in this regard.
And the incapacitated ship would not remain incapacitated forever. It would be re-enabled at least for navigation when the people who disabled it warp away, jump away, or get blown up, or when one of them (maybe just the one who did the most damage--it's a detail to work out) selects to let the ship go. It would be able to regenerate its shields, dock, and repair.
Quote:
well rather than having the "victim" choose a setting to "be disabled" rather than destroyed, why not have different weapon settings. To be able to choose between, for anyone firing at anything, a lethal and non-lethal button you can toggle on/off near the auto-pilot button or something.
Read more carefully. :) That's my idea. The shooter chooses in his settings whether to disable or kill--the victim has no choice in the matter.
Quote:
Only thing that needs to be changed is the unvulerability time so you pirates can't run from us
Likewise, a change in the invulnerability time would be great for pirates too--no time for juicy indys full of goodies to say, "oh crap, pirates!" and warp away before we can even begin to target them.
___________________________________________
Space Invaders website: http://www.si-corp.net |
Saladin
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 03:53:00 -
[25]
So let me see if I understand this correctly. You want to be able to incapacitate a ship, and when you leave the scene it can move again. Sounds like a warp scrambler and webifier to me.
If the ship is immobolized by taking damage, then the damage cannot be repaired unless they allow you to fit a repair mod in space, ideally supplied by the armed robber. I'm just not sure that the mechanics of all this are practical
---------------------------
(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. |
QBall
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 04:54:00 -
[26]
Make it so that as soon as ship is disable a timer starts and in 3 minutes the ship will be functional again, and if you attempt to fire at a **** you will always get a dialog box saying this ship is disable press yes to fire neways.
I think that would actually be a pretty good idea.
--------
"OMG IT'S TRAMMEL 2.0!!!!"
-QBall
And
QQ is QQ |
Viceroy
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 05:32:00 -
[27]
Good idea, its really hard to keep someone on the hook while negociating. When the "module damage" bug was ingame it was easier to pirate people (cause people started taking 0.1 damage for like 15 seconds when their structure was 0), but now that that is fixed, an excellent shot = death = no money = nobody is happy.
-
|
Roba
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 06:23:00 -
[28]
Actually the only real solution is one that I think the DEVs ment to put in but got lazy and never did. All ship equipment has HP and can be dmged. Why the hell doesn't CCP allow us to target a ships modules and take them out once its sheilds and/or armor are down.
Also give us the option to target a ships reactor once its sheilds and ammor are gone leavings it systems unprotect thus cutting pwr to the ships star drives and equipment.
|
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 08:18:00 -
[29]
The idea of giving everybody a 'lethal/non-lethal' switch is good. A gang of pirates would all be set to non-lethal, and, while it would still tear them to pieces, you wouldn't be able to land a destroying blow.
Sin/mega/etc. style players would just never use it.
Everyone's happy. (except the victims, naturally)
.
|
Setec
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 13:05:00 -
[30]
Quote:
So let me see if I understand this correctly. You want to be able to incapacitate a ship, and when you leave the scene it can move again. Sounds like a warp scrambler and webifier to me.
Nooooooooooo not at all. You can still warp when warp scrambled if you've got stabilizers. You still regenerate your shields while sitting there. And most importantly, you can still move while webified... especially for people with microwarpdrives, it takes four or five webifiers on a single ship to slow them to what's basically a stop.
Quote:
If the ship is immobolized by taking damage, then the damage cannot be repaired unless they allow you to fit a repair mod in space, ideally supplied by the armed robber. I'm just not sure that the mechanics of all this are practical
It's immobilized only by taking complete damage, all the way to 0% shields/armor/hull. It's only immobilized at the point at which it would otherwise explode if the attacker's settings had disable off. They can from that point either be instantly destroyed, if the attacker chooses to, or "revived" into some basic state in which they can at least navigate to get to a station to repair, either at the choosing of the attacker or when the attacker leaves.
Quote:
Make it so that as soon as ship is disable a timer starts and in 3 minutes the ship will be functional again, and if you attempt to fire at a **** you will always get a dialog box saying this ship is disable press yes to fire neways.
I don't like the idea of a timer because some negotiations last longer than 3 minutes. I've spent over 30 minutes working out particularly complex payments to let a ship live. The ship could become functional when the attacker chooses to allow it, or when the attacker leaves. If the attacker for some weird and unlikely reason simply wants to annoyingly hold it prisoner indefinitely, the guy can always just self-destruct as though the attacker had disable off anyway. What purpose would an artificial timer serve?
___________________________________________
Space Invaders website: http://www.si-corp.net |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |