New "suspect" flag
- Minor crimes. Anyone can shoot you without penalty.
- Flipping a can for example
- Shooting someone makes you a suspect (I think)
- Anyone assisting a suspect becomes a suspect
- Not sure if gate guns will attack a suspect. Undecided yet.

Are you kidding? Now instead of having to be a douche for an hour in belts (or just forego any kind of pretext and suicide gank some hapless miner), you can now agress everyone in highsec by flipping your own neutral alt's can.

I think it'll have just the opposite effect. Seems more like a disguised consensual pvp flag than anything else. I know everyone hates on the idea but I think may lead to a resurgence of solo pvp (and all the asshattery that goes along with it, ofc) in highsec.

Just know it's still on paper. Nothing hard, nothing coded. Can go anyway from here.

Like a good point: friendly can flipping to have a 1 on 1 fight is out the window with these presumed changes.

Eve is a unforgiving harsh place. Now for everyone, not just bears.

HTFU, etc.

Mr Epeen

Okay just to be sure, am I correct in my understanding of the changes to suicide ganking?

Does this mean a single cruiser could spend an hour soloing a freighter in highsec, and only get CONCORDed when the freighter dies (however long that takes)? Sure anyone can shoot me... but how many people are actually going to shoot me instead of help kill that freighter and nab all the loot?

In other words... suicide ganking is gone. You don't even need to gank. Just kill them normally with the understanding that you will die too afterwards.

If you start going through my backpack on the street to see if anything was worth stealing, I guarentee you there will be repercussions or if I catch you stabbing the tire on my bike there will be consequences.

Also, shooting someone elses NPC should be a punisable offence, you might kill his trigger/trigger drop, which could end farming or prevent a turn-in of mission.

Why would I complain about police/TSA? Granted I don't like TSA, but they have a government appointed job. It's not your prerogative to check if I'm carrying something dangerous; you are invading private space and thus will be dealt with by me and/or bystanders (fun experiment, go out on the street and put your hand in someones purse and see what happens*)






*Actually don't, real life has real consequences

Could you rephrase that? Those of us not there don't have all the details so I am not sure I understand what you wrote.

If a player is flagged suspect, to everyone presumably from the way I heard it, and someone shoots a suspect, then the suspect can shoot back. Does the suspect shooting player also become suspect or just get aggro with the initial suspect?

i hear CCP has been recruiting devs from WoW. This would certainly explain many things...

Yes, I was expecting Greyscale to have come up with ideas that actually made sense from a gameplay perspective. I mean simplifying convoluted systems is great and everything, but I don't see how a sane person would think that doing it at the expense of completely removing non-war related PVP from highsec would be a good idea.

I'll tell you how it will promote it for me ... I don't have to worry about some guy warping in some neut repper or his silly orca alt - i'll be more inclined to fight, and more inclined to flip a few cans.

I'll make sure to pick my fights near gates and stations then. Let the chaos begin.

In other words, you will now face some real consequences and you're QQ'ing about it.

Welcome to Eve. Where there will now be consequences and risk for everyone.

EVERYONE.

If Eve gets too harsh and dark you could always try Hello Kitty Online.

What? Stop crying and whipe the boogies off your nose for a second because I'm not sure I understand what you ask for. Are you suggesting that someone not committing an aggression against another player and thus not aggroing Concord be flagged to you anyway because if you commit a crime against another player you are flagged?

Wrong.

Wrong.

There's already implications associated with standings and missions.

Suggest also re-reading the topic at hand. This is a topic about crimewatch and the associated aggression mechanics. Not inter-factional relationships.

Since neither of the areas you are dicussing are considered criminal activities, I don't see much relevance to the subject material. I'd love to see your arguments for making mining illegal in a seperate thread however, be fun seeing the responce.

NPCs don't pay the bills.

When a player pays a war dec Concord looks the other way, don't you think that it's possible factions will take out similar contracts (aka mission elements) in a similar way?

Actually no, not so much. The correct time is when the 'plans' are not on beer stained napkins but on the test server .. if you blow your load on every hypothetical you come across you'll die from dehydration.

First and foremost, NEUTRAL RR IS A DUMB GIMMICK STOP WHINING ABOUT IT THIS IS LONG OVERDUE.

Now, my question is: how will these changes affect nonconsensual PvP? Specifically, suicide ganking.

War decs are going to have to be consensual? Where did that rumor come from? I saw one thread started with that premise. The devs themselves trolled the hell out of it.

It's pretty smart. Puts the law in the hands of the players at large, not those who can best abuse the mechanics.

Stealing in EVE was never about theft. It was about drawing aggro and everyone knows it. The new mechanics don't allow the criminal to cherry pick thier aggro.

Cry moar.

Nice write up!

But why is this escalation a problem? There would definitively be times where this might escalate further than you thought and result in lots of wrecks. But that is just fun right? That is what we want.

If the timer is short (say 5 min) this would resolve itself rather quickly too.

It just makes a lot of sense and no-one would be caught in this mess without actually committing an agressive act in highsec anyway. You have to actually opt-in. And everyone should know that shooting at someone is dangerous and may lead to an unexpected situation and a loss of a ship.

I like it.

No, I think what they are saying is that if you commit a crime in hisec you get treated like a criminal and can be shot at. I reckon itll increase teh pvp fun of can flippers since thats what they are looking for right? Some pvp? Or are they just looking to shoot some low sp noobies who havnt yet learned to play properly?

Yep, that's the general principle on present-day planet Earth. Why should it be unreasonable in a far-distant far-future galaxy?

As a result if anyone attacks a suspect to enact white knighting, then why not simply allow the "suspect" to have clear defence to aggress that person without Concord intervention.

Again, the way I see it the current mechanics are just fine, and if people were smarter about how they played the game they could avoid a lot of the 'problems' that the proposed changes aim to 'fix'.

People keep saying this but what I want to know is are those new players going to stick around long term when level 4 missions start to pall and they can't sell what they manufacture because nobody is blowing ships up in high sec anymore.

Can you lay out for me the specific things you guys are currently trying to achieve involving can-flagging mechanics, so I can properly see the problem from your perspective?

You are talking about carebears and consequences while crying that it will be more difficult for you to to pursue the risk and consequence free high sec griefing you currently enjoy.

Except that the culpability for criminal actions and the associated interactions lies with the criminal who initiated the reason for the interaction in the first place not the intended victim. So irrepsective of any PvP Outcomes there should still be some attributable associative penalty for bad outcomes to the vicitm, even if it's small. This is why I like the associated security hits for criminal actions as proposed. Otherwise it just propells an inconsequential outcome for criminal activities.

It's more to do with making a criminal action valid as such. I'm not going to be drawn into RL comparison arguments. My view is that criminal actions in a policed area needs to have some effect for participation and those players need to have some responsibility for the choices they make as a result. Irrespective of all your childish avoidance examples and desires this view won't be changed by you wanting to have an easy time being a criminal.

Suppose they don't want to be a mining bwitch for everyone who happens by AND they don't want to PvP? Suppose they just want to play the game as a miner? Suppose they want to play their own version of the game and not have to choose whether to be a miner for everyone who happens by to steal out of a can they deployed next to their ship for their own use or have to play another's version of the game and get into PvP? Suppose you go find PvPers to PvP with instead of thinking everyone who is mining is secretly wanting to PvP?

There is no single player version of the game

Isn't this about the time when the can flippers should be told to HTFU or GTFO? Just saying

For every action, there should be a reaction, afterall isn't that what the sanbdox is fundementally all about?

I enjoy your semi-RP responses, they are amusing. They however are not very relevant to a mechanics discussion. The next time an NPC complains about me looting his wreck, I will send him to you so that you can be his lawyer. But make sure he has filed a petition with a GM prior to bothering the NPC judges.

As a mission runner, for example, I get to deal with ninja looters who can just steal all the tags from my wrecks freely (that's millions of isk per mission for no real effort, mind) and there's simply no way I can stop them from doing so, and since they're always in a speedy frigate it's pretty much impossible to gank them in the first place. This is risk-free thievery, and it sucks. It really, really sucks.

Little frig is in your mission stealing tags? Call up a corpmate to come in a frig, or dessie, or cloaky recon (if he's feeling spunky) to deal with the problem. Or if you do not like conflict, have a corp noob tag along with you and his primary job is to loot/salvage wrecks. Or train up to a Marauder and do it yourself on the fly. Or offer to hire the ninja salvager to become your partner for L4s and split the loot each time (half is better than nothing). Really there are many many solutions.

You are apparently intelligent enough to attempt to make the abstract argument, linking the two unlike things, but apparently not wise enough to know better than to base your position on an equivocation.

Players are not NPCs. If you want to make an argument for faction based "suspect" flags when players get below a certain faction standing and are in that faction's space, then make that argument, I might even support it. But this nandy pandy BS about taking rat loots from the poor miserable abused rats is below your abilities.

Also, being flagged to an entire corp for 15 minutes is hardly a price to pay or a deterrent. The average high sec corp is spread out over a constellation or a region, this is not a defense or a threat, and I know you know that. Your argument is attempting to exploit this very weakness in most high sec corps. They are loosely defined, they don't wander in packs, they are not organized and most of them don't want to be organized beyond hanging out with some internet friends and relaxing for an hour or two before they have to go to bed.

forget about high sec it's noobs zone, what are you still doing around there? -avoid losses?

Not to stamp it out entirely, but as one of the side-effects of said will be that people can no longer gank outside of stations (because they'll become targets as soon as they loot), and looting with a hauler will be much riskier than before. A poor timing on the pick-up will mean certain death.

Sure there are ways around it, but it means more effort. Most of these players are unable to adapt beyond pressing F1, then clicking the "Yes" button.

I'm sure that's what the horse thief claimed when the town's folk hung him up from a tree. You may not like it, but this puts some of 'law' into the hands of the 'community' and out of the hands of some silly NPCs. This is a development for Eve, from less game to more of a social sandbox, justice and mercy are ours now.

You've perhaps heard the saying, "You can't legislate morality"? You can't code it either.

only if they bother to undock; errrrrr wait i think every scam in eve need the victim consent aka clicky here to agree so so they are legit after all.

Crimewatch as it is now attempts to code morality, the scope of who can deliver the justice is limited to the corp. So not only is the current system attempting to define morality, it is attempting to define justice.

As to who is affected by the theft ... it is quite clear to me that everyone is impacted by the theft. If criminals are allowed to run free, then I might be next. If criminals are not allowed to run free, my chances of being next are greatly diminished. There is no such thing as a disinterested third party. If there were, the gankbears would not be as concerned by this, and in fact CCP would never have been required to attempt to code it in the first place.

Phone the police. Should we introduce similar parallels as RL then? Maybe let Concord take care of it?

Without a finalized plan, for the most part, these Crimewatch changes seem pretty sound. As long as high sec players have an option for consensual pvp ...maybe even a popup......Soandso has invited you to consensual pvp....do you accept y/n? .... the rest makes perfect sense. If I'm walking down the street and I see some dude kick an old lady in the face and steal her purse, I should be able to chase that guy down, make a citizen's arrest, and get her purse back without consequence. This won't end high-sec crime - and as criminals often do, I'm sure people are already working to circumvent the new rules - it's just providing realistic consequences for a place termed "high security."

It's noteworthy that for some pirates, who wear their -10 sec stat as a badge of honor, the only way to get a -10 now will be to mass pod non war targets. Great...

But I absolutely appreciate the extra hit dished out if the target has a +5 sec status. Plotting against the President rightfully carries a much stiffer penalty than plotting against a crackhead you find living in your garage. That makes sense. But really I think they can go even further with this concept. I'd like to see this idea balanced and expanded into a second layer making faction standings also relevant.

Currently faction standings are almost a pointless game mechanic. You need 8.0 with one npc corp for jump clones, 6.67 or so with one for tax-free refining, and that's about it. Following the recent changes involving agent consolidation, accessing lvl 4s is pretty easy now...since if you accomplish one of the two other tasks, you're already over the mark.

I'd like to see faction standing play a much more integral role in game. The first thing we do in EVE is choose a race but our choice plays almost no part in most people's adventure. Your relationship with your government should influence virtually everything imo. Got a 10.0 faction standing with Caldari? If you get ganked anywhere in Caldari space, Concord arrival time should be significantly decreased since they're rushing to help a VIP. I envision faction standing being a factor in calculating taxes, trades, police response time, sec status hits, and if you want to get crafty, maybe even warp speed and/or an ehp bonus when in favored space.

These bonuses/penalties could also be different in each faction's space. If different wormholes can create similar bonuses/penalties, I'm sure it could be explained as some racial technological advancement. I just think it would add another layer of complexity to the dynamism of high sec and maybe give players a real reason to run cosmos, epic arcs, etc. It would be great if this was done in concert with new mission content but maybe these things could be revamped together while changes are being made.

I'm not that upset to see CCP making jetcan theft more difficult since new players seem to be disproportionately affected. Miners call it an exploit, but as I've already pointed out, the cans themselves also seem like an exploit. It makes no sense to me that a frigate with a 100m3 cargo hold can create an object that can hold 25x that amount. The can created would be larger than the ship. Jetcan volume should be directly proportional to the cargobay size of the ship that created it imo. Maybe doing it this way would even make the value of losses commensurate with the ship type doing the canning.

It seems like the only two options CCP has to motivate players in New Eden is by using carrots or sticks. Once they're done giving pirates the high-sec stick, I'd like to see some emphasis put on a low-sec carrot. Players need some kind of encouragement to venture into low beyond increased financial gain. That's already there. More won't do the trick. A lot of the risk-takers in game are already there. So how do you get those less-inclined to take risks to venture out? Maybe an ehp bonus might be helpful. +15 percent in low and +25 in null? I dunno. The percentages aren't important. The ehp bonus keeps coming to mind because it would afford high seccers added security they think they need to venutre into low and conveniently, it would also make pvp more challenging for the guys already out there.

Anyway, I read through most of this topic, got a headache, and these were my initial reactions...

Yonis Kador

Speechless? Why so?

Whether you agree or disagree, it's just an opinion.

I even stated it was my first impressions.

If your opinion is that we should abolish high sec and disband Concord so you are free to gank weaponless miners, canflip noobs, and pillage with impunity like barbarian raiders, then that's yours. Just point me in the direction of WoW and use the words Hello Kitty Online somewhere in there.

As with all things, enjoyment is a relative term.

YK