| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
NaMorham Santorin
Tech 1 Holdings Limited
Tech Holdings Limited
   |
Posted - 2008.10.13 11:24:00 -
[1]
Ideally if someone went to flip from one can to another, it is instantaneous, and easy, an assault ship with a tiny cargo bay can insta steal 27000m3 of ore, while I like the fact that jet can mining is risky (and should stay risky) I do not like the fact that aside from never doing it, it cannot be prevented. The fact you get kill rights doesn't stop it, the numerous newbies who have been blown away in their bantams by a hawk pilot in a 0.9 system shows it. There is no way that bantam pilot can stop it.
If however, when someone who is not flagged friendly goes to remove something from a can within a small distance of the owner (1.5km) a popup appeared and the owner could "slam the lid" of the can preventing the flip it would mean that jet can miners who pay attention are safer. The popup should be short lived too (5 seconds, reducing in duration depending on sec, so that there is no popup in 0.5?). When the time is combined with the proximity then it will be careless and inattentive miners who get robbed. The proximity means that if you are on the other side of the belt, or not in the region then you just have to suck it up. Maybe even link it to standing instead of preventing the theft. If you click the popup within time (when in a certain distance) then it's akin to getting a look at the culprit and reporting it to the police.
That way if someone does it once, then big deal slight loss in standing, if they repetedly do it in close proximity to the owner it is not unreasonable that the police would start to take an interest.
Obviously this could be better realised, but I'm not here as a game designer.
Just to reiterate, I'm not trying to stop can flipping, it has a place and should stay. I just think that it is currently too 1 sided (I've never heard of a newbie bantam beating a hawk, in theory it's possible, but not likely)
I am aware this will probably end in a flame fest, but I would love to hear some reasoned debate. If something just makes you angry, go read something else for a bit before posting. It's not a problem that will just disappear, but it could reach a compromise.
NaM
|
Irn Bruce
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 14:36:00 -
[2]
The compromise has already been made. Kill rights and secure cans. No more compromise is necessary. Just mine to a secure can or your hold and you'll be fine.
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 18:00:00 -
[3]
Sigh.
Jetcanning is an exploit. Jetcanning was never an intended thing. The only reason CCP hasn't fixed this EXPLOIT is because it, surprisingly, has an interesting risk/reward factor which improves the gameplay.
If you want to be ultrasafe sitting in your belt, then mine into your hold.
 Originally by: Catharacta
My CNR runs on salvager tears.
|
NaMorham Santorin
Tech 1 Holdings Limited
Tech Holdings Limited
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 23:15:00 -
[4]
I should probably qualify what I am proposing better. I do not want to remove the risk of jetcanning, I want to add some risk the other way, because most people who get effectively griefed by can flipping are newbies, there is not really any risk to the flipper. I wouldn't care if they were flipping to get the minerals, but I would be surprised if even 1 in a 100 flips are for the minerals rather than hoping to get the "noob" to flip back. If there was a secure can of resonable size, I imagine it would be used more, but there isn't, even a secure can twice the size would be fine, it wouldn't be close in size to a jet can, but would be practical. When I mine I mine to my hold, and frankly I do not mine often because warping bacwards and forwards is an extra level of tedium. I am aware a lot of players seem to feel that everyone should play their way, I don't expect anyone to carebear when I feel like carebearing, and I shouldn't have to pvp when I don't want to.
Would a short delay on flipping really cause flippers that much grief, I'm sure plenty of people would still be flipped, and still keep flipping back and getting blown away by pilots with way more skillpoints.
|
Zeb DaMadMiner
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 23:20:00 -
[5]
i see what your trying to say, its not a bad idea. tho yes it would take out some of the risks... what i say instead of preventing the can from being popped, a warnning pops up saying what happens if you attack this guy etc.
|
Ashley Thomas
Kiith Paktu
Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 00:27:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Ashley Thomas on 14/10/2008 00:28:10
how about it cant go directly from can to can, but rather can to hold to can... i'd love it if an inty had to spend the time to move 10km3 from can to can with its small little hold.
to prevent complicating logistics with corps and the like ill revise it a bit, cant move from neutral can to yours, but can move friendly to friendly.
|
Jimbob Hennings
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 01:05:00 -
[7]
I agree, flipping can be a bother but, that¦s why we have corps, to help a friend in need.
But I would like the secure can to be a bit bigger but I suppose those who can afford to buy one and haul it in position could probably buy a few more.
But it¦s a good idea. Might be another thing incorporating it into Eve, programing vise. Not that I know much about it.
|
NaMorham Santorin
Tech 1 Holdings Limited
Tech Holdings Limited
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 23:31:00 -
[8]
A bigger can, should just require a new item in the db, all the functionality is present in smaller cans already, the icons are already in the DB, the models in space are the same, so just needs a new db id? OR such is my understanding
|
TheGhostofJusNyce
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 23:38:00 -
[9]
Why change anything for industrial characters, they are only going to get bored in a few months and quit anyway?
|
Bud Johnson
Tacos Revolution
Morsus Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 02:27:00 -
[10]
"I shouldn't have to pvp when I don't want to."
Move along people. Shows over. No obvious carebear agenda here.
|
|
|
Epegi Givo
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 03:32:00 -
[11]
-------------------------------------
|
Jed Clampett
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 09:41:00 -
[12]
Actually I favor the idea that you have to move stuff to your hold before putting it in another jetcan. At least not without a tractor or some special module. If they use an Indy to steal your ore that is "fair" as can be. They took the risk.
(1) But there should be no physical way for a tiny hold raider to steal all your jetcan ore at once.
If the thief can paint over your name on the can so easily and officially -- then why does he get marked as a thief? It should be like you never owned it.
So obviously he IS moving the ore into HIS can from YOUR can. Nor can you put a drone or corpse into a jetcan without using cargo hold first. All ships have the ability to jetcan, scoop cargo to their hold from jetcans, and move stuff between hold and jetcan...but nothing short of tractor should able to move stuff from outside location to outside location.
(2) Rotating jetcans is sort of silly and should have the same restriction about moving through your hold. Half an hour in one place should be enough for anyone before starting haul back to station. If you have haulers working for you, there is no good reason to stick to one jetcan. I have rotated cans, so I know it is really more of a distraction from boredom than practical necessity.
(3) Of course it is actually rather easy to steal a large chunk of your ore back with an Indy and the correct timing...unless your thief wants to risk blasting you before you drop the ore in your hold as you warp away. So jetcanning works well for overflow <1 full cargohold.
|
Jed Clampett
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 09:57:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
Sigh.
Jetcanning is an exploit. Jetcanning was never an intended thing. The only reason CCP hasn't fixed this EXPLOIT is because it, surprisingly, has an interesting risk/reward factor which improves the gameplay.
What were jetcans intended for then? I can't imagine they put an item in the UI whose every purpose is an EXPLOIT. I would say that maybe they underestimated the frequency of its use in mining. They might not have forseen the total impact of setting the size so large. But it is almost in conceivable that mining didn't at least pass through their minds as they implemented jetcans.
I would think that one of the first items that a developer might think a player would eject from cargo would be low value ore, perhaps in exchange for a high value module. Plus why didn't they just have the ejected item destroyed? So obviously they thought about later pick up...even if it might be ore.
I guess you could be saying that allowing players to create jetcans was only intended for ammo exchange during long battles. But 27000m3 seems to be over doing it. Cargo swap at gates? Doesn't seem like a necessity unless the system has no station...which sort of raises the question of what the receiver is going to do with the cargo in that system. And cargo swap is a lot better argument for secure cans.
|
Valkerias
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 13:33:00 -
[14]
Originally by: TheGhostofJusNyce
Why change anything for industrial characters, they are only going to get bored in a few months and quit anyway?
[sarcasm]Move along, no griefer agenda here, no sir.[/sarcasm]
A great many industrial players DO stay for the long haul, thank you. 0.0 occupation would be impossible without them.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |