| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Orestes
   |
Posted - 2004.03.05 12:48:00 -
[1]
Now, we all know that Concord is a bit 'loopy' when it comes to identifying agressors and their companions.
Rather then having to lock every post on the subject, please post your suggestions in this thread.
I will do my best to get the devs to look at the suggestions.
As always, keep the thread nice and clean and free of exploit talk.
Join the IC! |
Brobro
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 12:56:00 -
[2]
Ok, as stated before :-)
1. Make people performing defensive/healing/tanking actions on the person doing the illegal agression act (against concord rulez) also be in violation, and thus subject to attack.
2. Make people in violation of an illegal agression act, 'open season' to all players for the same duration as they are 'open season' to concord.
|
Basileus
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:08:00 -
[3]
var
X, Y: players
EM: energy module (function of player)
Begin
if X attacks in safe system do
attack X
call in reinforcements
if EM(Y)=on AND target of EM(Y)=X then
attack Y
end if
if Concord is suffering losses
call in more Concord
end if
end if
End |
Mitchman
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:08:00 -
[4]
As the previous poster said, with the additions:
1. If CONCORD has not been able to beat the aggressor within a set time interval, say 3 minutes, then reenforcements will automatically arrive doubling the number of CONCORD ships.
2. If 1 or more CONCORD ships are destroyed, call in reenforcements, doubling the number of CONCORD ships.
3. Rinse and repeat.
This will make for a scalable response depending on the opposition, and make sure anyone tanking CONCORD won't be able to do that for a prolonged time.
CONCORD shouldn't deal any uber-damage, it's enough as it is.
This might also apply to sentry guns. If they have not been able to kill or chase away the criminal within a time interval, they should double their RoF, then rinse and repeat as necessary.
I think these measures should stop tanking and probably won't be too hard to implement.
|
Harakiri
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:12:00 -
[5]
To avoid sneaky kills:
* All people in same gang as the agressor should be flagged as agressors
* Similar flagging as above for corp members ^^
Dunno how to solve problem when an agressor have some "friends" in a NPC corp .. perhaps identifying via chat-channels ? 
|
Mitchman
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:16:00 -
[6]
I don't think gang or corp members should be automatically flagged as criminal. What if you have a new player in the corp, he makes a mistake and a whole corp is wiped out because of it? NO WAY.
|
SwitchBl4d3
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:17:00 -
[7]
ok, i would like to have killable concord, and ones that drop loot.
And also the NPC ai in this game is rock bottom in the coding aspect so why not remove it all together and have EVE like the wild west with just maybe sentry guns on belts and gates and just planets are free for all.
"Teh lord of Nonni"
|
Takeda Seikiri
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:23:00 -
[8]
 Quote:
As the previous poster said, with the additions:
1. If CONCORD has not been able to beat the aggressor within a set time interval, say 3 minutes, then reenforcements will automatically arrive doubling the number of CONCORD ships.
2. If 1 or more CONCORD ships are destroyed, call in reenforcements, doubling the number of CONCORD ships.
3. Rinse and repeat.
This will make for a scalable response depending on the opposition, and make sure anyone tanking CONCORD won't be able to do that for a prolonged time.
CONCORD shouldn't deal any uber-damage, it's enough as it is.
This might also apply to sentry guns. If they have not been able to kill or chase away the criminal within a time interval, they should double their RoF, then rinse and repeat as necessary.
I think these measures should stop tanking and probably won't be too hard to implement.
if they are going to do it, this is the easiest and simpliest way without having to worry about all the gang, corp related coding, i'm sure would get messed up anyways.
there might be a few civilian casualties while concord keeps calling in reinforcements to take out the aggressors but that's just reality.
If you want, have concord actually pursue people so there is no way they can escape (only in 1.0 sec systems...even if they jump out as long as it was initiated in 1.0, they would follow you..also, sentry guns would pound you)
 |
Davich MacGregor
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:26:00 -
[9]
Quote:
To avoid sneaky kills:
* All people in same gang as the agressor should be flagged as agressors
* Similar flagging as above for corp members ^^
Dunno how to solve problem when an agressor have some "friends" in a NPC corp .. perhaps identifying via chat-channels ?
This is a great idea. The whole corporation is flagged as -10 and KOS for Concord and everyone else in EVE and it doesn't go away...ever. Even new members get flagged. Anyone killing them gets a great boost to their security status. Afterall, anyone in civilized world who kills a cop becomes a mortal enemy of society, why not in EVE too?
Stellar Products and Quality Resources
ticker: SPQR
established 6-03
|
Mitchman
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:30:00 -
[10]
I hope that was sarcasm 
Seriously, flagging gang and corp members is a BAD idea, for the reasons stated previously.
|
Siddy
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:30:00 -
[11]
well.. i hope u all are prepeared for the flood of Convoy killers ant other players who just reacently lost they ships because of sentrys
Convoy killing is joke now
and so is gate campping
incoming: Waah Waah Waah everybody hide!
-------------------------------------------
|
Vacuole
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:35:00 -
[12]
No need for all that...
Make it even simpler.
If in 1.0 space, and if attacking people/shooting CONCORD, then the aggressor's ship simply blows up.. no insurance.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:36:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Nyphur on 05/03/2004 13:42:28
First, I'd like to counter a point made by someone that people are praising without thinking about the consequences of:
Quote:
To avoid sneaky kills:
* All people in same gang as the agressor should be flagged as agressors
* Similar flagging as above for corp members ^^
Great... So if I'm out mining with my corp and one of them accidentally lets go a smart bomb near CPP, we have to stop the entire operation since none of us can go near the stargate to haul our ore back? People in the same corp or gang could be in completely different places, doing completely different things. What if I'm on my way to dock and upgrade to my new ship because my training for cruiser just finished (ooh, a few minutes to go on that one ;)) and a corp or gang member decides to go nuts and shoot at CPP? The space station I'm heading for would just blow me up without provolkation.
There's too much room for error there. Far too much.
Since my post on the issue was destroyed, I will choose select sentences from the backup I kept and try not to break the magic unwritten rules of Polaris.
The problem arises in the fact that they used this system to stop the battleship being destroyed by the automated turrets, to allow them to prey on those going to the stargate in 1.0 space, which is (of all things) a safe haven.
If something CAN happen in a game, it is generally assumed that the game designers expect you to be able to do it or that to surmount certain challenges, it may be neccecary. The tactic employed which got those few banned is not a bug or abuse - it, in itself, is tactical genius. The fact that it was used to circumvent a game convention is an oversight and perhaps abuse, but not a bug. The automated guns at stargates are just that - automated. They should not be descibed in-game as being manned and indeed, they aren't. I always assumed that they were, in-game, AI guns. The problem, therefore, is the AI. The AI system didn't see the cruisers sending energy to the battleship as threats because they weren't aggressors. The answer is to have the AI determine alliances between ships and link their status - that everyone aiding an aggressor ship is allied with them and thus labled an aggressor.
Another thing that would prevent abuse in other areas by using the tactic in areas which aren't near a stargate (it's a perfectly acceptable tactic, but perhaps requires limits) is that perhaps the ship's capacitor should not be able to handle the ammount of energy that is being put into it. After a certain point, the capacitor should perhaps take damage. It's just an idea, but there need to be limits to the game to preserve playability while still making it a withwhile strategy.
Is this worthy of not being deleted, or will I have to rewrite it to remove the possibility that someone might catch on to how the system works by reading the message? I tell you, there's no way to talk about the problem without mentioning, at least on some level, how it works. That's all I have to say on the issue.
|
Hafthor
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:38:00 -
[14]
I really like the idea of criminal flagging people for a set period if they show aggression in 0.4 and lower. Realistically CONCORD does not operate there and should instead allow the people to defend themselves from criminals without losing sec over it.
I got attacked in a 0.4 system the other day, random attack by some guys that come to the system on a regular basis and pod miners. I feel it is rather harsh that my corpmates lose sec when destroying their ships. I suggest a criminal flag set for aggression until you leave the system. Logging off shouldn't change it, when you jump you are free. Untill then you are considered a wanted man in a 'lawless' area.
|
Coupe Soleil
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:47:00 -
[15]
How about this: if someone shows aggression in 1.0 space his sec.rating drops to -10 immediately. This allows everybody to shoot him/her. Concord warps in and starts shooting. If Concord cant solve the problem fast they can put a bounty on the head of the agressor and then ask help from everybody in local to support them. I'm sure many ppl wouldn't mind helping out, and having a change on the final blow and getting the bounty. I don't know how shield-tanking will last against a massive assault of locals throwing everything they've got against the agressor. If they warp away it could become a massive man-hunt overal several systems, the locals chasing the pirats away. =) This makes eve more interactive and interesting, and it allows for this event (cause that is what it will turn out to be) to happen again.
|
Cookie
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:57:00 -
[16]
what if ... CONCORD would target jam the agressor ?
maybe add some energy drainers and there shouldn't be too much work to implement this.
|
Naal Morno
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 13:59:00 -
[17]
Quote:
No need for all that...
Make it even simpler.
If in 1.0 space, and if attacking people/shooting CONCORD, then the aggressor's ship simply blows up.. no insurance.
Heck, saves on coding, that's for sure.
Secondly, subtract from their wallets 100MLN for operational fee of concord, after all they used 'services'
Your Heavy Neutron Blaster II perfectly strikes Serpentis Chief Sentinel, wrecking for 660.4 damage.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 14:06:00 -
[18]
OK, time to comment on the police system in EVE bluntly - it doesn't work. Security in eve is entirely circumventable. The police seem to have absolutely no long term memory and as long as you keep your security rating up, you can sneak into a 1.0 system and blow up some poor, unsuspecting guy. The police are NOT made "better" by giving them bigger guns, longer ranges and making the invinceable. The police should be as realistic as everything else in the game - It should be possible to destroy the police, but that there are stronger and more police in higher security rating systems. Perhaps also patrolling police AI ships with cargo scanners near space stations, planets and asteroid fields could pick up on illegal cargo such as drugs or slaves, wherever they might be said to be illegal. You need smarter police, not stronger police. The AI needs some work.
Even a game called Frontier: Elite II, which is much like eve, which I played in the 1990's had a better way of dealing with security than I personally believe Eve does. I admit that the security rating for systems and players is pretty clever and since systems are more or less isolated, star gates are the way to travel.
It is my opinion that a criminal record system needs to be implemented into EVE. Various offences, such as trafficing in slaves in a system which does nto allow them, should be put onto your record along with the punishment issued, such as a fine. Players going through stargates could be checked for outstanding punishments with a small percentage chance to find them based on the security rating of the system. Players docking at a space station should be checked with a higher percentage to find outstanding punishments such as fines and such, a percentage which should increase for military bases and perhaps decreased for trading posts. Secure systems such as 1.0 systems should have the right to refuse admittance to players who have a bad criminal record, even if they have completed their punishment. In this way, pirates would be more confined to being pirates and doing things a pirate way and players should be safer in 1.0 systems.
Players who are caught should get a further punishment which is worse than the first one. Severe punishments such as prison terms (their character cannot be used for an hour, for example), could be implemented. Players need to feel that the punishment is harsh enough to make them avoid doing uncharacteristic things like a pirate with stolen goods and a long list of criminal offences docking at a 1.0 space station.
There should be a system whereby stolen goods (looted from players) could have a percentage chance of being discovered and if found, the crime "Handling stolen goods" be aded to their list of criminal offences.
Criminal offences should stay on a person's record for one year so that if a pirate wants to reform, he can do so over a period of a year, which is a fairly realistic ammount of time for such a thing. Also, people don't like things looming over their heads like that - jsut because they accidentally let off a smartbomb at a stargate doesn't mean they should be branded witha black mark on their criminal record.
Just a few ideas... They don't need to be taken to heart, but there should be enough usable ideas there to chew on for something useful to come out of it.
|
Mitchman
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 14:08:00 -
[19]
How about if someone initiates agression in 1.0, their account will be closed and they will automatically receive a perma-ban?
People, be a bit realistic here. Pumping to -10 and all that is TOO extreme. You're thinking of the Yulai incident, but there are other contexts where such a reaction would be way over the top. Try explaining for the poor new player making a mistake that not only did he lose his ship, but he will be fair game for all other players to shoot indefinately (or for 2 days, which is how long he would continue playing).
Be realistic and look at it from multiple standpoints, please.
|
Eduard
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 14:09:00 -
[20]
I would like to see in game again fully implemented security status working.
1. Player get hit when he destroy or help destroy ship in > 0.0 security let say equal to security status of system
2. Player get hit when he POD kill person or help to pod kill someone in > 0.0 security equal to 2 * security level of system
3. CONCORD, SENTRY guns will react according to security status of attacking person.
4. To eliminate accidental kills of noob or innocent players if player will stop aggression then CONCORD and Sentries will stop firing.
5. If person gets negative security status it will be unwanted and chased in proportion to his sec status. Persons with -5 and bellow will not be able freely stay around sentries in sec system > 0.0 according to formula "security level of system - (sec-ratting / 5)"
6. Security ratting needs to be fixed back to normal gain per every kill of NPC pirate or working for agents. Actually is not possible to farm NPC pirates so it wouldn't be issue anymore. This will give chance to pirates who want change his life in EVE to work it out relatively fast. It will allow occasional raid of pirates to empire space and do pirating before thy fall fast down to deeply negative security ratting.
I don't think it would need to make CONCORD or sentry unbeatable, because in most cases players who are simply dumb or not well informed players getting killed first. Player security ratting should scale sentry guns and CONCORD power. On high security placers sentries and concord will be mild. But on deeply negative players they will hit hard. So if player would continue killing ships, players in systems with security above 0.0 he will fast fall down in security status and response from Sentry and or CONCORD get harder and harder.
It would satisfy both sides pray/aggressor. Aggressor gets punished for his acts in scale and pray will know that aggressor get punished in time.
Working security status and scaled CONCORD/sentry response according to security status will help. It will definitely bring back meaning to security status. In hand to hand must be fixed security gain/loss. It wouldn't be like it's now only one acts is noted per 15 minutes!
It's extremely unfair against people who want have good security ratting and extremely negative against victims. PKers are able kill more than 20 people in 15 minutes if enough preys come to theirs guns and what happens? They got only one security hit.
EVE doesn't need invent wheel. Working security ratting was here before Castor it should be only taken back with old setup. Rise/hit is get per each act.
Scaling response from CONCORD and Sentries should help a lot. It would prevent instakill for person who simply did push wrong button, but will prevent aggressor to doing same thing long enough. It will still give to retreat for pirates.
I think they should be allowed to sneak in Empire space and use hit/run tactics. It doesn't make sense to allow pirates to block and sit in Empire space at all for long time.
|
Morkt Drakt
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 14:47:00 -
[21]
Make it so that transfer modules(etc) only work when ganged.
Then apply sechits and "aggressor" tags to the whole gang. That way anybody attacked can take down the "helpers" without fear of CONCORD reprisal @ them.
Pretty simple really - and its bascically the same as a Group-only skill in DAOC or EQ.
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 14:51:00 -
[22]
When people makes these crimes they are forced to pay a fine to make the sentries and concord stop attacking.
The size of the fine depends on the nature of the crime. Simply shooting somone means a small fine, destroying somones ship leads to a much bigger fine and a pod kill leads to a huge fine. No matter what they do or where they go all police in the empire will attack them on sight and until it has been paid.
The fine is al cumulative that means if the player keeps attacking the fine just keeps increasing. It can still increase no matter where you are in the empire if you commit a crime.
Also the scale of the fine determines the size of the response. A low fine only gets a light response. As it grows you get more and more police on your back. If you are shot down the fine still remains until it is paid.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Gan Howorth
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 14:54:00 -
[23]
Fines, turn up in payable bills: graded by action and sec rating of system where criminal act took place. Failure to pay bill within a set time gives an ADDITIONAL loss of sec to any already lost directly from the action.
Response graded by action and system sec rating. Time of response also graded by sec rating of system. For example it isn't entirely objectionable that the police should show up in 0.1 They just take much longer to show..it would allow a blockade in lower sec space to occur but not be a permanent feature limited only by player boredom.
And include the criminal flagging thingy including those who aid aggressors. 
|
Barfolemew
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 14:56:00 -
[24]
Quote:
what if ... CONCORD would target jam the agressor ?
maybe add some energy drainers and there shouldn't be too much work to implement this.
Concord target jams, why do you think the yulai killers were useing smartbombs?
|
Phoenixgurl
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 15:27:00 -
[25]
In Earth and Beyond, when you "helped" a player, like recharging his sheilds, boost his resistance, etc. you get ganked by the mobs. It should be the same thing in Eve. If you help someone, no matter what you do, you should be flagged as the same as the other player.
--------------------------
When the universe collapses and dies, there will be 3 survivors: Tyr Anasazi, the coc*roaches ... and Dylan Hunt trying to save the coc*roaches. --Tyr (Andromeda) |
Jivan Kennoren
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 15:46:00 -
[26]
I agree with the "support ships seen as aggressors too" idea. If you "heal" a ship that is attacking an NPC, even if you had never fired a shot at the NPC, you are still considered an aggressor to that NPC and therefore, could be fired on. Actually, a "smart" NPC would fire upon the supporting ships first.
This should be coded to cover all NPC's, Concord as well as rats (even though right now, rats insta-target/insta-shoot all player ships in their range anyway).
|
Varia
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 15:49:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Varia on 05/03/2004 15:54:27
Simple solution.
If you have a >-4.0 sec rating and you fire upon a ship the response is Concord Target Jams, webs (@100%) & Cap drains your ship, you are then held there for 15 minutes then released gaining a sec hit for your act.
If you have a -4.0 to -10.0 sec rating and you fire upon a ship the response is Concord Target Jams, webs (@100%) & Cap drains, your ship is then impounded leaving you in your pod.
The ship would then be placed on sale at the nearest station at 50% reduction of current npc price (-Mods).
Women that strive to equal men lack ambition. |
Burga Galti
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 15:54:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Burga Galti on 05/03/2004 15:55:18
Quote:
Simple solution.
If you have a >-4.0 sec rating you fire upon a ship the response is Concord Target Jams, webs (@100%) & Cap drains your ship, you are then held there for 15 minutes then released gaining a sec hit for your act.
If you have a -4.0 to -10.0 sec rating and you fire upon a ship the response is Concord Target Jams, webs (@100%) & Cap drains your ship, your ship is then impounded leaving you in your pod.
The ship would then be placed on sale in the nearest station at 50% reduction of current npc price.
I like this idea... not too harsh but effective. The violator(s) get off one shot every 15min. They'd also be a sitting duck so the target can have revenge if they want :)
Tales from the EVE Cluster |
Hematic
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 16:03:00 -
[29]
First act of aggression:
1) Standard Concord arrives on scene.
2) Time transpires (2 min. maybe) reinforcements arrive and drop a 100k warp disruptor field (evacuation of civilians).
3) Time transpires (another 2 min.ish) reinforcements are called again. etc...
Sentry guns imo should NOT get magically better as a fight goes on. I don't mind suspending disbelief but the less the better.
How to handle gang members:
1) The gang members CANNOT be auto aggressors as this would be used as a griefing tactic. Someone gangs up some new players and then purposely does something to bring in concord and wipe whole gang.
2) There are only a set number of helpful mods. Make these set the flag as accomplice for treating who is part of the aggressors force. Signal boosting, shield/energy xfer, tracking boosters.
AI:
1) Change the AI to start firing on the latest seperate act of aggression (keeping in mind that 'healing' is considered aggression in this case). This way the guns/concord will not have tunnel vision on one target.
|
Eddie Gordo
|
Posted - 2004.03.05 16:36:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Eddie Gordo on 05/03/2004 16:44:21
how about this for an idea :
The ship causing the aggression gets targetted by sentry guns + concords guns
The ships acting as healers get target jammed & suffer a -0.1 sec hit as if they had shot someone.
Once the support ships are jammed the shooter will go down in about 1-3mins "wammo".
When I heard what the "pirate corp" (not sure if I can mention by name) were doing I went on the help channel and told ppl how to bring them down. however nobody seemed willing to try. It could have been done with 8 ew frigs : 2 groups of 4 each with sensor dampners (the shooting ship would have tried to take the first lot down, so therefore a 2nd task force may have been needed)
Instas??
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |