open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Incursion Can Flipper GLITCH
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9

Author Topic

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:19:00 - [181]
 

Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Edited by: Gavjack Bunk on 08/03/2011 16:04:19
Well since that would be Yet Another Thread, what about we Lord of the Rings this right up, all the way to the top?

ONE WARNING TO WARN THEM ALL.
-----------------------------

You have pressed Undock. Undocking puts your ship, fittings, cargo and anything else you placed inside it at GRAVE RISK INDEED. We cannot stress both the number and absurdity of ways this could end very badly for you, though we do know that it is inversely proportional to the skill and effort you are prepared to invest in making sure your ship returns home safely.
If you are particularly naive, lazy, stupid, tired, drunk, high or just plain old unlucky we give you this opportunity to STAY IN DOCK.

Are you sure you want to undock Yes/No?

[] Never ask me this again.
---------------------------------------


Surely, since the OP just wants warnings, and many of the rampant fever pitch mouthfoamers that have come later also claim to want warnings, surely, this, THE MOTHER OF ALL WARNINGS pretty much covers it?

Surely?


I'll go you one better:

At Login:
---------------------
WARNING
You are logging in to Eve Online. Our player base takes a great deal of delight in doing bad things to characters and then mocking them about it both in chat and on the forums. Are you really sure you want to log in?

No
----------------------


That should just about cover it.

Red Woodson
Estrale Frontiers
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:46:00 - [182]
 

Originally by: Gavascon
snip
2) ccp removes the handcuffs from FC's and allows ENTIRE FLEETS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES against greifer attackers - not just some members within the fleet.



So, is this a troll to get more chances to kill people unaware, or are you really underestimating the ingenuity of people whose only enjoyment in eve is to harvest tears?

Let me explain just one of the ways this can go horribly wrong.

Let's say there is a griefer alt, named griefer alt, that is the only member of Corp A. He wardecs corp B. Corp B finds and starts shooting griefer alt. The 50 man fleet that griefer alt is part of warps in and 'defends' griefer alt.

So, let me guess, now you want a warning: Warning: shooting this person may allow his fleet to shoot you. Proceed: y/n?

Now, to be clear, imho, there should be a warning for aggression transfer when aiding someone, before the next cycle of the aiding module begins, if it is already running. And i don't care if the agression is from them stealing, them being shot, them shooting someone, war dec, or whatever. Well, in empire, doesn't matter in nul sec. Why you ask? First, consistency. Second, to encourage people who normally wouldn't to get involved in group activities a certain degree of safety when they do. Maybe the fun of the experience will encourage them to actually seek out a good player corp. Third, make high sec a bit 'safer' for the players who want to help others rather than those who live for tears.

Don't much care if the majority of them are just lumped into a warning like: Warning, the player you are trying to assist has an active agression flag against another player, should you continue with this action, the flag will transfer to you. Continue? y/n

Would probably be easiest at that, just so long as global criminal and war dec keep separate warnings.

Gavascon
Posted - 2011.03.08 22:17:00 - [183]
 

Quote:
Originally by: Gavascon
snip
2) ccp removes the handcuffs from FC's and allows ENTIRE FLEETS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES against greifer attackers - not just some members within the fleet.


So, is this a troll to get more chances to kill people unaware, or are you really underestimating the ingenuity of people whose only enjoyment in eve is to harvest tears?

Let me explain just one of the ways this can go horribly wrong.

Let's say there is a griefer alt, named griefer alt, that is the only member of Corp A. He wardecs corp B. Corp B finds and starts shooting griefer alt. The 50 man fleet that griefer alt is part of warps in and 'defends' griefer alt.


since you quoted and are trolling i will respond:

1) you totally misunderstood the nature of my statement.
2) my statement has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with a war dec.

to be clear:

if a member of my fleet loots a can/wreck he grabs an aggression timer. he can be aggressed by: the person who owned the can/wreck and all the members of that corp.

if my fleet member then requests reps he passes the same aggression timer to the logistics.
within minutes all the logistic ships which cap share have the timer.

in warps the owner of the can/wreck with the members of his corp.
they attack: 1) the dps ship my fleet member is flying and/or 2) any/all of the logistic ships.

the fc of my fleet - comprised of pilots from different corps than the looter (now flashy red theif) cannot engage.
they must sit on the sidelines and watch. that is, under current rules.

the rule needs to be amended to allow the fc to engage the attackers (even though they have a right to engage) so the fleet that he is commanding can defend it's fleetmates.

your example is an orange and you are attempting to compare it to an apple.


Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.03.08 22:46:00 - [184]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 08/03/2011 22:47:33
Originally by: Gavascon
your example is an orange and you are attempting to compare it to an apple.
You mean that it's an apt and appropriate comparison then?

Yes, his example shows pretty much the result (or some variation thereof) of what you're asking for by wanting to be able to "defend your fleetmates".


Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.03.08 22:54:00 - [185]
 

Tippia, you have the patience of a saint. Cool

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.03.09 00:04:00 - [186]
 

Originally by: Mag's
Tippia, you have the patience of a saint. Cool


She has the patience of a couple of them. I'd have ***** slapped this guy by now if I could reach him.

Gavascon
Posted - 2011.03.09 00:45:00 - [187]
 

in the example above:

greifer alt a decs corp b.
corp b attacks greaifer alt
greifer alt has 50 man fleet warp in.

the ONLY thing the 50 mand fleet can do is provide remote repping to make themselves war targets (for which they get a pop up warning ).

if corp b chooses not to engage any of the 50 man fleet - they cannot shoot.
but they are aggressable.

the key here is: choice.

greifer alt has a choice to war dec or NOT.
corp b has a choice to engage greifer alt or NOT
50 man fleet has a choice.
corp b has a 2nd choice.

logistics do NOT have a choice.



De Guantanamo
Posted - 2011.03.09 00:59:00 - [188]
 

Originally by: Gavascon
in the example above:

greifer alt a decs corp b.
corp b attacks greaifer alt
greifer alt has 50 man fleet warp in.

the ONLY thing the 50 mand fleet can do is provide remote repping to make themselves war targets (for which they get a pop up warning ).

if corp b chooses not to engage any of the 50 man fleet - they cannot shoot.
but they are aggressable.

the key here is: choice.

greifer alt has a choice to war dec or NOT.
corp b has a choice to engage greifer alt or NOT
50 man fleet has a choice.
corp b has a 2nd choice.

logistics do NOT have a choice.





You should keep last posting in this thread.

Lorael Simatari
Posted - 2011.03.09 01:15:00 - [189]
 

I agree with previous postings that Vetting is an affective way to get around this .... issue. finding enough people to fleet with inside a corp environment would certainly get around the unknowns that are flying with new people from multiple corps. What Tippia tried to describe was building up a player base of people that know and Trust one another. (should I say that loosly) I know the value of isk per hour but since I like all of you are paying to play this game, my highest value is enjoyment of my time spent playing the game. So if one likes farming tears then so be it.

Getting back to the point I prefer flying with people who I know and trust. flying with anyone off the sidelines is too unknown for me and therefore I could expose myself to these mechanics. I am thinking corporations are the key to get around this. what people have been talking about is an easy way out to a problem that is avoidable. I agree a warning sounds like a good idea for people who insist in multiple corp fleets,but in my opinion prevention is better than the cure.

Assuming ccp chooses not to change anything people have to find ways to prevent this mechanic from affecting them in a negative way. Fly with people you know and trust, spend time sifting through the player base, do multiple lvl 4s at once in a fleet environment. loyalty points would rush in if you implemented the idea correctly. once you have sufficient members then try incursions. Once you think you can trust your fleet then you know can flipping isnt an issue. I know 50+ fleet members is a large number but you could make it a long term goal to get those numbers in a corp environment.


Gavjack Bunk
Gallente
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2011.03.09 09:29:00 - [190]
 

Originally by: De'Veldrin
I'll go you one better:

At Login:
---------------------
WARNING
You are logging in to Eve Online. Our player base takes a great deal of delight in doing bad things to characters and then mocking them about it both in chat and on the forums. Are you really sure you want to log in?

No
----------------------


That should just about cover it.



it's.... Shocked .... beautiful.....

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.03.09 14:12:00 - [191]
 

Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Originally by: De'Veldrin
I'll go you one better:

At Login:
---------------------
WARNING
You are logging in to Eve Online. Our player base takes a great deal of delight in doing bad things to characters and then mocking them about it both in chat and on the forums. Are you really sure you want to log in?

No
----------------------


That should just about cover it.



it's.... Shocked .... beautiful.....

Embarassed
Thank you. I call it - Warningus Ultimus. And I fear it, for it shall forever change the landscape of Eve as we know it.

TharOkha
Posted - 2011.03.09 14:40:00 - [192]
 

I must admit, you are a no.1 in trolling.

De Guantanamo
Posted - 2011.03.09 14:58:00 - [193]
 

Originally by: TharOkha
I must admit, I wish I was no.1 in trolling.


fypfy

Desirsar
Posted - 2011.03.09 21:24:00 - [194]
 

I don't get how this side topic is still going. Implement the warning as suggested in the original post and all these small side arguments go away. It affects no one unless it was intended as a valid tactic in the game's design, and no one can answer that but the devs. (But I'm sure people will jump in here and try. If it were me, I'd be handing out lifetime forum bans for having the audacity to so much as pretend to speak for the devs. :) )

Iris Saavedra
Posted - 2011.03.09 23:40:00 - [195]
 

Edited by: Iris Saavedra on 09/03/2011 23:41:00
I'd just like you guys to know, I blew over 45 minutes of quality time I could have spent playing Dragon Age: Witch Hunt to read this seven-page atrocity... I swear, the asininity of of some of the arguments and attitudes in this thread is off the scale.

That the raiders' execution isn't an exploit doesn't mean the logisticians and fleet commanders don't have a valid concern. They want to be able to protect their assets so they can clear the incursion. Right now, the only solution appears to be don't run the incursion at all, or do it only as a corp or alliance.
On the other hand, I can see the raiders' point as well; after all, it's a very efficient way to land confirmed kills. The griefer has the added bonus of forcing the rest of the fleet to withdraw. Allowing for their potential victim to calculate their own risk undermines that a great deal.

De Guantanamo
Posted - 2011.03.09 23:42:00 - [196]
 

Originally by: Iris Saavedra
Edited by: Iris Saavedra on 09/03/2011 23:41:00
I'd just like you guys to know, I blew over 45 minutes of quality time I could have spent playing Dragon Age: Witch Hunt to read this seven-page atrocity... I swear, the asininity of of some of the arguments and attitudes in this thread is off the scale.

That the raiders' execution isn't an exploit doesn't mean the logisticians and fleet commanders don't have a valid concern. They want to be able to protect their assets so they can clear the incursion. Right now, the only solution appears to be don't run the incursion at all, or do it only as a corp or alliance.
On the other hand, I can see the raiders' point as well; after all, it's a very efficient way to land confirmed kills. The griefer has the added bonus of forcing the rest of the fleet to withdraw. Allowing for their potential victim to calculate their own risk undermines that a great deal.


Raiders huh?

Kelon Darklight
Posted - 2011.03.10 02:01:00 - [197]
 

In fact, our fleets have had seen a huge decline in this tatic.. because we have a large and vetted group of pilots who we know and trust to run sites with us. We are also the guys who ignore the frantic calls of "X-amour cane for mom, etc." because we have enough pilots to run it without pulling from it. Not to say we dont, but as we limit recuiting, it has become diffcult for them to sneak a griefer alt in our fleets. Much easier for them to keep striking the new public fleet guys, as we know what to wacth for and warn our pilots about the tatics. (Ala kicking for looting cans and stuff, and calling for reps outside a site(useally a trap) in fact i have never heard of them actually doing this during a site, which is wise of them, the rats might nom on them instead) While this remains, for now, a legit tatic there is no particular reason it should stay this way(just because it has always been there is not a reason it has to always be there).

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.10 23:28:00 - [198]
 

Edited by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath on 10/03/2011 23:28:34
Originally by: Kelon Darklight
In fact, our fleets have had seen a huge decline in this tatic.. because we have a large and vetted group of pilots who we know and trust to run sites with us. We are also the guys who ignore the frantic calls of "X-amour cane for mom, etc." because we have enough pilots to run it without pulling from it. Not to say we dont, but as we limit recuiting, it has become diffcult for them to sneak a griefer alt in our fleets. Much easier for them to keep striking the new public fleet guys, as we know what to wacth for and warn our pilots about the tatics. (Ala kicking for looting cans and stuff, and calling for reps outside a site(useally a trap) in fact i have never heard of them actually doing this during a site, which is wise of them, the rats might nom on them instead) While this remains, for now, a legit tatic there is no particular reason it should stay this way(just because it has always been there is not a reason it has to always be there).


Holler at me on EVE voice, ((TS)) or convo me sometime brother.. I'll tell you at least one time where they did it in a site.

as far as recruiting for fleets is concerned, I simply will not invite anyone I don't know to my fleets any longer and the problem is solved, however, it's solved in opposition to CCP's entire premise and desire for the incursions, (something that the griefers and others keep hoping no one will know about, notice or remember from the DEV blog) and at the expense of what may be great, honest upstanding players who are now hindered by, left out, and/or ignored because of the actions of a few societal leeches, thieves, cowards and other such persons of ill repute.

o/ brother
K.S.

Edit: grammar...

De Guantanamo
Posted - 2011.03.11 00:24:00 - [199]
 

Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath
because we are scared of the actions of a few upstanding citizens of Eve.




fypfy

Iris Saavedra
Posted - 2011.03.11 01:31:00 - [200]
 

Originally by: De Guantanamo

Raiders huh?
My differentiation between griefers and non-malicious PvPers (those who PvP simply as part of the game and are not motivated by the intention of ****ing off other players).

Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe
Transmission Lost
Posted - 2011.03.11 04:46:00 - [201]
 

Edited by: Jaigar on 11/03/2011 04:53:37
The main issue here is consistancy. I remember reading one of the early blogs from this expansion stating that they wanted people from different corps to work together to drive these things back. This was a motivating force behind the incursion channel when you jump into an infested constellation: to provide players a way to form fleets.

Its not difficult for experienced pilots to get into good fleets for these things. People form their own channels for inviting people they trust or like to have in their fleet. These fleets don't fly with newer pilots just because of a trust issue.

And this trust issue can create a widening spread between groups running incursions. The good groups get more efficent, run more sites, and have less issues with griefers. The public fleets, IE the ones who use incursion chat to recruit fleet members, are more prone to griefing tactics, run sites much slower, and rarely run anything above a vanguard.

I hope everyone here argueing for a warning flag or message for repping a can flipper can see the problem can be avoided if you only fly with people you trust. But this isn't whats really in contention. The problem that arises is new players who are trying to run incursions: how do you convince a bunch of strangers to take you in their fleet when you can be a greater potential threat than an asset? It compartmentalizes (if thats a word) players into tiers, which from what my understanding, was not intended on this scale.

Incursions are unlike anything else in EVE. You get penalized for bringing people past a certain point, which limits the entrance of less-skilled pilots (think 2-3 month old characters exploring EVE still, perhaps in a drake). In null-sec, having that month old player in a Rifter who was able to jam and kill an enemy scout could a tremendous impact. But what can new players really add to incursion fleets? They are just low-dps burdens.

This problem only inflates and gets worse and worse the more incursions get mathematicly optimized. If anyone ever played WoW, you know of the horrors of gearscore and what that did. Players will start demanding more information from each other( they already demand fittings, which is reasonable), will start requiring t2 fittings, etc. All of this can be seen as done within reason, but what does this lead to bsides a bottleneck that new players must squeeze through?

Point being CCP's intent of bringing somewhat random players together is counter-EVE: repuation is downplayed, newer pilots take a bigger hit (most are welcome around null if they aren't half-******ed), and trust (which is always an issue in EVE) becomes even more difficult.

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.11 05:11:00 - [202]
 

Originally by: De Guantanamo
Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath
because we are scared of the actions of a few upstanding citizens of Eve.




fypfy




You know, it's too bad that you lied in quoting me, but I am sorry that I seemed to have struck a nerve... maybe Mommy or Daddy will tell you a bedtime story this evening and make you feel all better...
I've heard that the one about the three little pigs, and the one about Little Red Riding Hood are both excellent stories...

again, I'm sorry if my descriptive verbiage hurt your feelings that much...

*hugs*...




Iris Saavedra
Posted - 2011.03.11 10:48:00 - [203]
 

Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath

You know, it's too bad that you lied in quoting me, but I am sorry that I seemed to have struck a nerve... maybe Mommy or Daddy will tell you a bedtime story this evening and make you feel all better...
I've heard that the one about the three little pigs, and the one about Little Red Riding Hood are both excellent stories...

again, I'm sorry if my descriptive verbiage hurt your feelings that much...

*hugs*...

Nonono don't fall for the....aww, he sucked you right off..I mean right in.
I thought about dignifying his post with a reply, but decided not to. Nothing to be gained or proven by feeding that particular troll.

Gavjack Bunk
Gallente
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2011.03.11 11:29:00 - [204]
 

Converting threadnoughts into trollnaughts deflects CCP's Carebear Protection Initiative C/D?

De Guantanamo
Posted - 2011.03.11 13:32:00 - [205]
 

Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Converting threadnoughts into trollnaughts deflects CCP's Carebear Protection Initiative C/D?

LaughingLaughingLaughing

These guys feel superior when they "pwn" trolls on the forums.

Don't realize they are just taking bait like fools

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.12 04:26:00 - [206]
 

Originally by: De Guantanamo
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Converting threadnoughts into trollnaughts deflects CCP's Carebear Protection Initiative C/D?

LaughingLaughingLaughing

These guys feel superior when they "pwn" trolls on the forums.

Don't realize they are just taking bait like fools


Oh no.. it was quite the opposite tbh.. I felt ashamed of my self and sorry that I had hurt your feelings so badly even though it was unintentional...
But it reminded me to watch my verbiage so that in the future, I might not accidentally hurt them again...

would you like another Hug?

*HUGZ* there you go... :)

De Guantanamo
Posted - 2011.03.12 14:08:00 - [207]
 

Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Originally by: De Guantanamo
Originally by: Gavjack Bunk
Converting threadnoughts into trollnaughts deflects CCP's Carebear Protection Initiative C/D?

LaughingLaughingLaughing

These guys feel superior when they "pwn" trolls on the forums.

Don't realize they are just taking bait like fools


Oh no.. it was quite the opposite tbh.. I felt ashamed of my self and sorry that I had hurt your feelings so badly even though it was unintentional...
But it reminded me to watch my verbiage so that in the future, I might not accidentally hurt them again...

would you like another Hug?

*HUGZ* there you go... :)


Look how stupid you are.

lollisuck
Posted - 2011.03.12 14:09:00 - [208]
 

Originally by: Desirsar
I don't get how this side topic is still going. Implement the warning as suggested in the original post and all these small side arguments go away. It affects no one unless it was intended as a valid tactic in the game's design, and no one can answer that but the devs. (But I'm sure people will jump in here and try. If it were me, I'd be handing out lifetime forum bans for having the audacity to so much as pretend to speak for the devs. :) )


I think this is easier said than done.
Consider this: you are RRing player B, he flips a can, now what? if you get flagged, then the suggested change has achieved nothing. if you dont get flagged, congratulation, you just opened pandoras box of griefing ("hey mates start repping i'm gonna flip his can")

one possible solution (certainly not perfect): leave it the way it is but flag the aggressors of fleet members to the fleet.
also thieves should be flashy red to everyone...

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.12 14:14:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: De Guantanamo

Don't realize they are just taking bait like fools*


Look how stupid you are.


HAHAHA, talk about someone taking bait....

roflmao...
run along now child.. the grownups are talking...


Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.12 14:42:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: lollisuck
Originally by: Desirsar
I don't get how this side topic is still going. Implement the warning as suggested in the original post and all these small side arguments go away. It affects no one unless it was intended as a valid tactic in the game's design, and no one can answer that but the devs. (But I'm sure people will jump in here and try. If it were me, I'd be handing out lifetime forum bans for having the audacity to so much as pretend to speak for the devs. :) )


I think this is easier said than done.
Consider this: you are RRing player B, he flips a can, now what? if you get flagged, then the suggested change has achieved nothing. if you dont get flagged, congratulation, you just opened pandoras box of griefing ("hey mates start repping i'm gonna flip his can")

one possible solution (certainly not perfect): leave it the way it is but flag the aggressors of fleet members to the fleet.
also thieves should be flashy red to everyone...


Most certainly there should at least be a Yes/No dialog box that pops up and the player should be given a choice; this is something that they are not given now and that particular "game mechanic" in it's current form is being exploited by certain players to an unfair advantage,(IE. shooting unarmed ships without the or with very little possibility of reprisal) however, my personal favorite is the "fleet aggression" Idea posed in my thread here

I also agree with the other poster on the premise of action against those who present themselves as though they are speaking for CCP when in fact their commentary and opinion is no more important than anyone else's and who are most certainly not CCP's representatives.
I don't think that a perma-ban is the best though...
Public flogging would be much more entertaining.. Twisted Evil

o7
K.S.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only