EVE Search - Revamp Personal Security Rating

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Revamp Personal Security Rating

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 657	Posted - 2014.05.23 04:39:00 - [31] - Quote Erutpar Ambient wrote: SurrenderMonkey wrote: Erutpar Ambient wrote: I've change my original post a little bit. Reread it and see if it addresses any problems you have with it. No, still a pretty awful, still subject to Malcanis's law, still unworkable all around. Then I'm at a loss. Please explain your point of view to me. What mechanic, in our current system, will be impacted in a way that will be detrimental to everyone, especially new players (via malcanis' law) As the mechanics don't have much weight to them now i'm finding it very hard to see how any change can damage them at all. Really, you don't think the part where it's open season on anything under 0.0 is going to ultimately have hilarious unintended consequences on newer, dumber players? It takes a pretty concerted effort to get to -5. Which is to say, it takes a pretty concerted effort to get your sec status low enough that you can be freely engaged, by default, in high sec. You're pretending like that's not intentional. Or, alternatively, you're assuming that that's some problem to be fixed, but you're conveniently skipping the part where you actually present an argument that it's a problem, and jump right ahead to, "Hurrs muh solution, guiz!" It's the quintessential solution looking for a problem. These are dirt-common. See any T2 BPO thread, war dec thread, or AFK cloaking thread ever.
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 153	Posted - 2014.05.23 04:40:00 - [32] - Quote Cardano Firesnake wrote: http://evenews24.com/2014/05/19/bridging-the-gap-space-police/ I like this... I generally like the concepts Marlona Sky comes up with, however i feel like he makes them overly complicated. If we had a Security Rating system like the one I'm proposing, there wouldn't really be much need for a player run CONCORD service. The players themselves would end up in positions to do such activities on their own (player driven content). However, i don't see why both of our ideas can't coexist. I just think that instead of increasing the complication of the security rating, it should be simplified.
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 153	Posted - 2014.05.23 05:00:00 - [33] - Quote SurrenderMonkey wrote: Really, you don't think the part where it's open season on anything under 0.0 is going to ultimately have hilarious unintended consequences on newer, dumber players? The design i came up with has quite a bit of resistance to people going below 0.0. You start with a buffer. You have to kill ships to lose the buffer. You have to do it a lot. You have to do it over a fairly large period of time. At a certain point they will earn their negative status. And if they are so dumb as to do this, then i have no sympathy. What i want is a security rating that means something. Right now you can lose it in a flash and you can gain it back in a flash. It really means nothing. With my system gaining security rating takes effort and so does losing it. Lets say you gain 0.02 rating per kill, and only one kill per 20 minutes affects your rating. 5 kills will drop your rating by 0.1 so to get from 0.5 to -0.1 you'll have to kill 30 ships over the course of thirty 20min intervals which is 3 ships per hour for 10 hours. And the same player won't affect your rating twice in one day so you need 30 unique pilots. So to actually get to being a free target it takes 10 hours of maximum intensity to become "accidentally" a free target. Is this not good enough? Then we can change it to 0.01 rating per tick. Then it's 20 hours of killing ships 3 times per hour (and it has to be a different person's ship each time).
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 155	Posted - 2014.05.27 02:21:00 - [34] - Quote Can I get anymore feed back on this idea?
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 158	Posted - 2014.05.29 22:23:00 - [35] - Quote Hmph, i really put a lot of thought into this idea.... Is the lack of support or opposition because of the amount of apathy towards the mechanic in it's current state?
Arya Regnar Darwins Right Hand 387	Posted - 2014.05.29 23:02:00 - [36] - Quote This will only punish new players. For me getting sec to above 0 is a simple matter of buying tags or just using alts to gank. -5 and below FFA makes sense and there is no reason for it to be changed. As for concord killing you, well it sucks to be stupid. HTFU. EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 773	Posted - 2014.05.29 23:11:00 - [37] - Quote Erutpar Ambient wrote: Hmph, i really put a lot of thought into this idea.... Is the lack of support or opposition because of the amount of apathy towards the mechanic in it's current state? Yes. That's it. It's not that it's a bad idea or anything. Couldn't be that. "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 159	Posted - 2014.05.29 23:42:00 - [38] - Quote Arya Regnar wrote: This will only punish new players. For me getting sec to above 0 is a simple matter of buying tags or just using alts to gank. -5 and below FFA makes sense and there is no reason for it to be changed. As for concord killing you, well it sucks to be stupid. HTFU. This won't punish new players in the least. Players won't be affected by this unless they engage in PvP. What about this will punish new players? You can get to 0.0 sec with tags sure, but that will also cause the tags for sec mechanic to gain viability and become more lucrative. This would give purpose to the Negotiator tags. And of course they will already not bring you above 0.0 sec. With this system either more people will make money off of the tags, or the tags will become much more valuable making it less arbitrary to shed your negative security rating. Using alts to gank is nothing new. It doesn't really impact anything. Unless you mean kill your own alts for a security boost, in which case you'd need a very large number of alts and to be very diligent for a pretty good while to bring it back up. If you gain 0.01 security rating for a kill only once in 20 min. The maximum change you could see in a day would be by killing 69 unique characters over 23 hours and you'd change your total rating by 0.69. If this is too fast they could always adjust the period per tick as well. On the other hand, if a new player starts with a rating of 0.5, the fastest they could go to -0.1 security would be to kill 51 different pilots, one each 20 minute period for 17 hours. Again, how does this punish a new player? -5 and below FFA only makes sense in the scope of the current mechanics we have because getting negative sec is so arbitrary. The entire point of my idea is to make security change much, much less arbitrary and breath new life into the mechanic. As the mechanic really has no meaning or gameplay value it does need to be changed, and very much at that. What is the point of having -0.1 to -4.9 security status as it stands now?
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 159	Posted - 2014.05.29 23:42:00 - [39] - Quote SurrenderMonkey wrote: Erutpar Ambient wrote: Hmph, i really put a lot of thought into this idea.... Is the lack of support or opposition because of the amount of apathy towards the mechanic in it's current state? Yes. That's it. It's not that it's a bad idea or anything. Couldn't be that. If you think it's bad, please explain why.
Alternative Splicing Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 44	Posted - 2014.05.29 23:57:00 - [40] - Quote Erutpar Ambient wrote: What is the point of having -0.1 to -4.9 security status as it stands now? There are many thresholds within that band of security status for being able to enter or not enter systems. I don't see any major problem with the current system at all, truth be had. Learning this very nuanced game is going to inevitably result in some moments of hilarity and misunderstanding, so it's best to learn to read thoroughly and often. The safety in game already prevents accidents as long as people are smart enough to use it. I'm not understanding where the present system is failing, or where this new system is better. Present hisec mechanics do the job just fine if people bother to learn them.
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 159	Posted - 2014.05.30 00:38:00 - [41] - Quote Alternative Splicing wrote: Erutpar Ambient wrote: What is the point of having -0.1 to -4.9 security status as it stands now? There are many thresholds within that band of security status for being able to enter or not enter systems. I don't see any major problem with the current system at all, truth be had. Learning this very nuanced game is going to inevitably result in some moments of hilarity and misunderstanding, so it's best to learn to read thoroughly and often. The safety in game already prevents accidents as long as people are smart enough to use it. I'm not understanding where the present system is failing, or where this new system is better. Present hisec mechanics do the job just fine if people bother to learn them. Those bands for being able to enter/not enter systems, do those really create emergent gameplay? Do they even really have any impact on your ability to enter/not enter a system? Unlike -5.0, that makes you a target in high sec, ratings of -0.1 to -4.9 are an inconvenience at the most. They really have no impact for having such a strong label on your portrait (by default of course). Learning is one of the major problems with this game for getting and retaining new players. Moments of misunderstanding may be hilarious for some but i'm sure there's a strong negative impact on many players. Saying that players should learn to read "thoroughly and often" is not a good business model. By that statement you have attested that you agree there is a major problem with the current system. Another place where the system is failing is in low sec, especially in faction warfare. There are plenty of people flying around with a -4.9 or higher sec rating willing to make the first shot, however if you try to defend yourself preemptively your security status will suffer. Currently with tags for sec, it's very very easy and cheap to get your security status up from -10.0 to a level where you're no longer a sec hit free target. What my idea does is makes the multitude of systems work together better. So yes the current system fails in relation to other game mechanics.
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 773	Posted - 2014.05.30 00:56:00 - [42] - Quote SurrenderMonkey wrote: Erutpar Ambient wrote: Hmph, i really put a lot of thought into this idea.... Is the lack of support or opposition because of the amount of apathy towards the mechanic in it's current state? Yes. That's it. It's not that it's a bad idea or anything. Couldn't be that. I already did, but in this case, I was mostly making an observation on your (rather arrogantly) attributing the disinterest in your idea to external factors, rather than the quality of the idea. This is, what, like the third confused, "Y r nobody like my idea?!?" bump so far? "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Jacid Aliastra Gallente Federation 52	Posted - 2014.05.30 00:59:00 - [43] - Quote As a general concept I think the idea is pretty sound. It seems to me nobody has given it any negitive feed back other than to say they dislike it.. for whatever reason. What about in addition to the sec status system you suggest what about removing faction police aggression -5 and remove concord aggression from anybody attacking a person with a negative sec status. In this way high sec should be able to police itself. Also the same rule should apply to pods (if it doesn't already) in regard to sec status hits and whos free to shoot whom.
w3ak3stl1nk Hedion University Amarr Empire 52	Posted - 2014.05.30 01:24:00 - [44] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: a simpler and more flexible way to set up ur overview would be nice. unless i am terribad (very possible) there is no way to setup an overview for just suspect and criminal flags, and id like one. :) Yup the question is always shoot or don't shoot.
w3ak3stl1nk Hedion University Amarr Empire 52	Posted - 2014.05.30 01:39:00 - [45] - Quote 1, 6 and 8 I agree with. Simplify shoot or don't shoot and even newbies will shoot.
Bearded Forum Alt Republic University Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2014.05.30 02:14:00 - [46] - Quote Erutpar Ambient wrote: Those bands for being able to enter/not enter systems, do those really create emergent gameplay? Do they even really have any impact on your ability to enter/not enter a system? Unlike -5.0, that makes you a target in high sec, ratings of -0.1 to -4.9 are an inconvenience at the most. They really have no impact for having such a strong label on your portrait (by default of course). Learning is one of the major problems with this game for getting and retaining new players.... Actually, the gradual change helped to prepare me for life as a permanent criminal. Over a couple of weeks, I had to move from Dodixie to Villiore, then from there to Old Man Star. The gradual decrease gave me a chance to consider how life would be different, and what I would need to do about logistics, and let me decide on whether or not I could handle those changes. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 159	Posted - 2014.05.30 02:39:00 - [47] - Quote SurrenderMonkey wrote: I already did, but in this case, I was mostly making an observation on your (rather arrogantly) attributing the disinterest in your idea to external factors, rather than the quality of the idea. You never did reply to my last rebuttal where i explained why it would be just as hard, if not harder, to go from +0.5 to -0.1 sec in my system than to go from 0.0 to -5.0 in the current system we have now. This mechanic change isn't designed specifically to benefit new players, it's designed to benefit all players. My mention of new players was mostly to paint the picture of why the system is not intuitive because for all the vets out there we've had to deal with this crappy mechanic long enough that it's just another day for us. Everything in this idea i designed with everyone in mind and what would generate fights and create the most dynamic player interaction system. Jacid wrote: What about in addition to the sec status system you suggest what about removing faction police aggression -5 and remove concord aggression from anybody attacking a person with a negative sec status. In this way high sec should be able to police itself. As of now, i don't think it's that necessary to change the police aggression mechanics for the respective negative sec levels... The other part, well, that's one of the main points for the change. w3ak3stl1nk wrote: 1, 6 and 8 I agree with. Simplify shoot or don't shoot and even newbies will shoot. This~ Why should whether or not you can kill someone be so complicated? If they're yellow/red, you can shoot. If they're blue/neutral, you can't. Bearded Forum Alt wrote: Actually, the gradual change helped to prepare me for life as a permanent criminal. Over a couple of weeks, I had to move from Dodixie to Villiore, then from there to Old Man Star. The gradual decrease gave me a chance to consider how life would be different, and what I would need to do about logistics, and let me decide on whether or not I could handle those changes. I'm sure I'm not the only one. This is actually a really good point. Thank you. I don't know if it's much consolation, but you can still enter high sec at the same rating levels, you'd just have to either fight your way through people or slip past them with a fast or cloaky ship. How do you feel about the rest of the points? Do you feel the gradual change in accessibility is big enough of an issue that it over shadows the rest of the items?
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 160	Posted - 2014.06.01 20:48:00 - [48] - Quote You know, there's another cool thing you can do with a system like this too. If we make above +5.0 and below -5.0 security rating decay over time back to + or - 5.0. Then there can be a type of leader board for Meanest Pirate and Best Pirate Hunter based on the amount of kills (security points) you rack up. And the top Pirate Hunter and top Pirate would be the only pilots with + or - 10.0 security rating and everyone else on the top 10 list would be the only pilots with +or - 9.X security rating. And once a week all the points accumulated will be cut in half for everyone. So everyone will still be in the same position, but if you're not out there actively killing you'll fall off the leader board. Also only killing blows count towards your leader board score. And killing people in the opposite top 10 list could give you extra points and they would lose those extra points you get to make it harder to stay top 10. If you go below +5.0 or above -5.0 all your respective points are lost. Maybe top 10ers get bonus LP payouts from navy/pirate factions? How does that sound? I think it sounds like a great way to encourage piracy/anti-piracy.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Repeat 0ffenders 438	Posted - 2014.06.02 07:16:00 - [49] - Quote Erutpar Ambient wrote: 8. Accessibility and CONCORD intervention based on security rating will remain the same for negative security pilots. CONCORD doesn't intervene based on personal sec rating, faction police does. Consider ditching this mechanic in your proposal. I mean, have neg sec rating players NOT be attacked by faction police in highsec. You would have many more lowsec pvp-ers in highsec, hunting other lowsec pvp-ers. Would be fun.
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 161	Posted - 2014.06.02 16:14:00 - [50] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Erutpar Ambient wrote: 8. Accessibility and CONCORD intervention based on security rating will remain the same for negative security pilots. CONCORD doesn't intervene based on personal sec rating, faction police does. Consider ditching this mechanic in your proposal. I mean, have neg sec rating players NOT be attacked by faction police in highsec. You would have many more lowsec pvp-ers in highsec, hunting other lowsec pvp-ers. Would be fun. Yeah, you're right. It does sound good to have more targets. And I guess Goons could still have their fun with Burn Jita and interdictions.
Erutpar Ambient The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance 171	Posted - 2014.06.13 07:43:00 - [51] - Quote Now that the stickies are gone maybe more people will get a chance to read and put in some input. :)

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.