I think a suspect timer for cargo/fit scanning in HS, and unscannable Data/Relic cans are reasonable suggestions.
Wouldnt prevent scanning cargo/fit in HS, just adds some more PvP potential as people can attack the suspect scanner.
Can scanning is an unnecessary “perk”, for cherry-picking. Explo was already made easier when loot-spew was removed. You can still leave a site open if you wish, by simply leaving a can untouched.
An untouched site will stay for 3 to four days, however a partially completed site despairs after a couple hours.
Players want to keep Cargo Scanners on. A suspect timer for Cargo/Fit scanning in HS is a good idea, but not enough. It can be easily counter-played by interested players. So, by combining all suggestions, we have a set of solutions:
Make site cans and other secure containers in space immune for Cargo Scanners;
Cargo/Fit scanning should trigger a suspect timer in Hi-Sec;
Cargo scanners should contain scanning errors, which can be mitigated by some sort of cheap skills (250k);
Introduce a new type of Containers in game, which are immune for Cargo Scanners. Those containers should be like an expensive T3 level, which requires PI and Reaction materials for construction. Also, the containers should have some kind of diminishing returns on cargo capacity (by reducing available space for 20-30%). This will give a decision to choose between them, who will or will not want to install them.
Agreed (if you mean NPC containers, exclusively).
Agreed, if its of a player ship or owned object.
This exists, somewhat, in that a scan only reveals a maximum # of items (I dont know how many exactly). One common strat is to hide high value cargo among masses of junk to trick scanners.
Since the suspect timer is only relevant in HS, and scanning containers owned by players in HS incurs it, I dont see a reason for an unscannable player owned container. Its enough that NPC cans are unscannable, to prevent cherry-picking.
In many cases it’s a lot and enough information.
It will open a new kind of game style - a game of curiosity. A frigate with immune cargo in HS can be empty or can contain a 1B ISK in BPO. It will force somebody to gank or to not gank somebody. A immune cargo will be another bite tool in EVE. A game of big gains and big fails, because in Low-Sec or Null-Sec it doesn’t matter. Mainly all there will try to ‘rip your head off’ while being in sight range.
Cargo scan immunity is a Blockade Runner/cloaked ship exclusive trait.
You can also “double wrap” cargo, to make it cargo scan immune.
[quote=“Salvos_Rhoska, post:166, topic:76869”
You can also “double wrap” cargo, to make it cargo scan immune.
[/quote]
I can not provide you a quote but I have seen other writers claim that “double wrap” cargo for scan immunity is a myth. Massive amounts of outdated material exist regarding Eve and its features. If you have a current example, or a citation, showing the effect of the “double wrap” method it would be appreciated and may cool some of the debate.
https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Hauling_101
“If you put your goods in a secure container, and then make a courier contract with that container, then the items in the container will be “double wrapped”, and protected from cargo scans”
Not that this is going anywhere anyway, but as mentioned before is suspect state for cargo scanning …
… 1. simply not going to happen.
… 2. You would deeply regret it, because the idea will backfire so ■■■■■■■ hard, carebears will fill the forums with tears about how they got killed by someone they thought of as easy mark.
What a silly thread. People who have never done the things they are talking about should never be taken too seriously when it comes to changing something.
Interesting, interesting.
It’s too complex. Isn’t it? A special cargo containers for this will be much better.
Thank you very much for the link, much appreciated.
Untouched sites can last up to 48 hours or so. Sites with at least one hacking attempt made in them will disappear in 4 hours or less.
I think part of the issue is that there are no counterbalances, you don’t pay any sort of penalty to use a scanner so there’s no reason NOT to. If there was a meaningful penalty or cost then that would be different, and would balance out the power of the scanner.
Off the top of my head I think at minimum that cargo scanners as used on ships should be considered an offensive module, they are only used as the prelude to a gank, they should be considered an aggressive action. If that’s too far in the other direction at the very least they should cause some sort of disadvantage to the unit using them, and give players a warning that can be used by a smart and alert player to mitigate the coming gank.
What about a “active cargo defense system” module? it would fit in a low-slot (so you do give up something to use it, it takes a slot that could be an expander), and on detection of a cargo scan it would start to cycle, providing significant resist bonuses for a short period of time (a few seconds, realistically).
It would not make you gank-proof, but it would mean that you have a warning and your tank is bolstered for those few vital seconds necessary to start to resist an attack. Of course a group could still overcome it, you could be locked up and scrammed and they can wait out the module’s cycle, or they can just try to burn through the additional resists. The resists could also come in a few flavors so they can try to fit to hit a resist hole.
Another alternative would be something like a “reactive ECM cargo protection” system which triggers a brief but powerful EWAR burst to make you harder to target while you try to get to warp, again this can be overcome either by ECCM or by having someone with a passive targeting system pre-lock you and prepare to scram you down, but it increases the skill required and coordination necessary.
Well there is a fitting cost… which I agree is minor for a dedicated ship. But what possible cost could you add? Some sort of moderately expensive charge that is consumed?
Personally though I don’t see it as especially powerful in and of itself. It is an just a simple intel tool and one that takes time and effort to use. It does nothing to the target so I think it fine it has a near negligable cost to fit or use, especially as it enables content.
Neither of your ideas will work. Players will just scan themselves with alts to benefit from the increased tank in other combat situations.
There is a visual effect that is visible to attentive pilot that could give warning of an incoming attack. There could even be a ‘scan detector’ module that logs and beeps on a scan attempt to allow a pilot to react by heading for safety or calling for friends. But honestly, I’m not sure many players would use this if they aren’t already looking for the visual effect.
In the end, prudent haulers are better off if pirates have the ability to scan and choose the reckless haulers over them. I think good haulers should be happy the tool exists - you don’t have to outrun the bear, just the guy next to you and all that.
If the cooldown was long enough and the cycle short enough then I don’t think that the resistances effect would be abused much. If it has twice the resists of a damage control, but 5 seconds active time and 30 second cooldown that’s a 13% duty cycle, you’d be better off with a damage control.
My biggest problem is that there is to risk to the reward, and no way to stop it except flying one very specific ship. It seems to me that breaks the general design philosophy of EVE that everything has a counter and you can always take actions to mitigate what your enemy is doing.
You can take actions to mitigate being scanned - you can double wrap a container or fly a Blockade Runner. I’m fine with adding more counter-play to scanning, and counter-counter play, but it isn’t like there isn’t some already.
And as to the reward, scanning someone’s fit or cargo is as much a “reward” as having and overview or functional dscan is, that is not much. You still have to do something to benefit from that intel. Otherwise it is harmless.
That’s a very narrow view of “reward”. In this case the reward is being able to be mathematically certain any gank you undertake will be worth it. The reward is the fact it’s removing the entirety of the risk/reward calculation from the gank.
Not really. You still have to do something, and as I said before, allowing pirates to focus on the most profitable targets is a net benefit for everyone.
Forcing people to pirate blindly with no information on fit or cargo is silly. None of your fitting choices or cargo value choices matter then as it is a complete crap shoot if you are going to be attacked. It is much better for both sides that the overloaded and undertanked whales are a priority target. It’s literally the only reason the module exists in the game in the first place.
Piracy is an intended profession in the game. For it to be at all functional, pirates have to be able to find who has the juicy stuff. I am sympathetic to the argument that the CONCORD mechanic is too predictable, but ultimately people hauling more without precautions should be at more risk than people hauling less or who fit tank and fly aware.
If you want to hide high-value cargo as your strategy to move it you already can - use a Blockade Runner. Given the cost of actually ganking anything is so high already, I don’t see how you can impose any additional cost on the scanning part that won’t just be ignored by pirates who are willing to throw away entire battlecruisers on a piracy attempt.
Still can double wrap things as well.
By that logic, one should have a cost for pre-locking their target in highsec. Those first few seconds are critical, which makes them valuable. There’s no penalty or cost for those first few seconds either.