Plausibale doesn't equal practical.

Why not just stay on topic and answer what mechanics you think are so desperately threatened by this idea?

Hell, reduce the staggering standing loss on mission failure and give me a chance to FAIL missions without the intervention of someone trying to make the boring grind even harder on me by interrupting it. They aren't adding any gameplay, they're just being annoying.

To be perfectly fair, he is being kind of whiny, and his idea does punish people who normally might not intend any harm or foul play. It doesn't help that he keeps saying "Criminal flag" when I think he means "Suspect flag", since Criminal would imply everyone would get concorded for setting foot in another person's missioning space, which is kind of the worst idea imaginable.

Teach us all. Tell us exactly what you are afraid of. Tell us all of the implications.

You're afraid of this suggestion and that's obvious. To understand your fears, you need to open up to us and tell us what you are afraid of.

Yes, ok, I get the opinion part of your comments: there are "implications" that I don't understand... the idea is "terrible"... there are "severe consequences".... but you really never say much more than that.

Spell it out. Make your case. State the facts.

Well then. At least thank you for taking the time and effort to post all of your opinions in this thread. Your failure to support them causes some problems though.

This is a copy paste from the Sticky at the top of the forums titled "Features and Ideas Rules." You may want to read it.




The Features and Ideas forum is primarily for players to make suggestions or put forth ideas that they feel may improve EVE.

...

Along with this, the RULES are going to be enforced at a more vigorous level.

Please, read the forum rules, and pay attention to them. If you don't like someone's idea, please remember to post with respect towards fellow players at all times and remain constructive.

Thus a couple ground rules:
1) This is a breeding ground for ideas. If someone has an idea, listen to it. If you don't like it, think about why. Constructive feedback is good. Posting "That's an awful idea," is not constructive.

...

Edit: removed most of the items to help focus here. I think it's needed.

Maybe you should read my response to post #124 as you obviously missed post #128

And you can just read my post #134 in reponse to your #133

It's not too late to actually present some facts.

Are you going to make me search the thread only to find out you're lying? Could you just reiterate the reasons for me briefly?

The suggestion is to add a simple flag to anyone warping to a mission pocket without a legal reason and without the pocket owners approval.

With enough Talos, it kind of is. Looting the wreck is maybe the hardest part.

If I remember correctly in this instance the thief is instalooting (almost nil risk) the item in question which is worth ~1.5 Bil and ransoming it for 500 mil. That would be outside many players immediate ability to pay, and they only have a day to do so or they lose *all* remaining COSMOS missions. That's why I am in favour of amending the mission itself in this instance.

I believe that would be one possible solution to the content lock out threat, and that you are probably right that no one would contest it.

It is does not offer the best counter-play option though, imo.

The criminal is most often getting flagged only after the loot is in their possession and then insta-warping.

As spelled out in several earlier posts, this is creating a situation in which legitimate counter-play options do not exist for the missioner.

And, even if the thief chooses to PvP bait, which is often the only time a missioner even has chance at some sort of counter, doing so has a significant chance of destroying the item as a result.

This results in the risk being significantly and disproportionately higher to the missioner than to that of the thief. ie the whole risk/reward equation and game balance is off.

I also agree with that observation about mission runners in general, specifically in hisec.

My personal preference is play and counter-play options create a much more rewarding atmosphere, in this specific case for both parties.

I made a semi-flippant comment about the current low risk/high reward that currently exists for the mission thief depriving them of getting the full EVE experience, but I was more than half serious.

I sincerely feel that the whole interaction would be much more satisfying to both parties if a warp in flag were introduced.

Generally, the onus is on the person making the claim to substantiate it, not the person that they are talking to.