Mind you, you’re not wrong that it’s far more common to just worry about your own fleet… which is kinda why soe many of us were surprised that there’s no carve-out for ‘same war, same fleet’ situations.
Yes, it’d be ‘hard’, and yes, it could be abused/exploited… but you know, the statement ‘this is an exploit, don’t do it’ covers a lot of ground… and hard generally means more ‘something worth trying to achieve’ than ‘ew, no, we shouldn’t try’.
How’s that line go? We choose to go to the moon, and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard?
Oh I agree with you. I wish CCP was more clear cut on a lot of things. If CCP saw that players were using game mechanics to bypass a change that was intended to effect the meta of something… man are we killing emergent gameplay here?
No but seriously they need to get it right. It’s totally worth pursuing because it would make wars and all this much more dynamic.
An easy solution would be a neutral logi has limits on who it can rep without concord giving them a back hand slap, while in house logi can rep its own corp/alliance and also anyone declared as allied to that war.
This way if Init have 5 wars, Init Mercs can assist on all 5 wars and do joint fleets. also giving smaller defenders better options when teaming up to attack HQ’s.
Yea, but you can always rep your enemies. So you just have a mutual war with another corp/alliance of your own and bring them in to rep you when you are suspect baiting. This lies the issue these guys are struggling with. They aren’t taking this out of the game they are just changing the way you have to do it.
Or anyone who has a limited engagement timer. It’s gonna be awesome. Anti-gankers getting blown up by CONCORD when they try to rep trap-freighters will be hilarious.
As long as they don’t have a red safety they won’t explode.
And one assumes they use green safeties to stop the same thing happening now, since they would go suspect and then be blappable if that was done currently.
I.E. I don’t see there being any great change there.
I can confirm that AG when repping will have their safety set to green, the only time they did otherwise was taking a risk to rep some tool who decided to accept a duel, but very few would take that risk and that is now off the table with this change.
If I could peek over a CCP meeting next year, I would love to see the meeting when they find out a new and interesting correlation between setting up your first structure and leaving the game. Them being CCP, they will clinge on the tiny % who will actually endure and keep playing the game (probably by joining some old fart’s club) and will claim “working as intended” as the almost bald accounting guys pull some more hairs at what shocking amount of money is CCP losing through wars since industrialists lost herd protection.
“If you think that losing noobs just for joining a corp was bad, wait until you lose them just for setting up a structure”.
I suggest that neutral logi would not get you concorded, but instead have more negative drawbacks. In order to have this done properly I suggest in HiSec switching weapon safety from green to yellow or red would make you a suspect.
I have followed the discussion with great interest. And I think there are some good changes done, planned and about to be implemented but they could be even better. I also think that touching only the wardecs is not correct approach as it should be PvP aggression in hi sec after all this is sandbox and everything is related. I’m mainly a wormholer (I have experience from Null and from hisec wardec corp) and as such HS wardecs don’t concern us that much. Years ago we even sometimes got out and started to hunt the wardec’ers, but it turned out to be boring. HS wardec groups are prepared for HS war and fight them well. You should prepare equally and we just could not be bothered to do that in HS where we do not operate in. When we had a proper fleet the HS wardec groups mostly just docked up and there was no fight. If they escalated way beyond our numbers we just went back to the wormholes with no fight. Now with the War HQ I see a way to force a fight with HS wargroups. However, assembling a mixed force to attack the War HQ is way harder if you cannot rep inside the fleet. After the new war mechanics go live, groups that specialize in HS wars will adapt and be prepared for that. Removing neutral logi will prevent or reduce the chance of co-operation against already well prepared wardec’ers.
Suspects and Criminals
This is really an issue that is in the core of aggression system in HS. Currently you can only react to criminal activity after the fact. There has been something fundamentally wrong with this from the start. The current system is like the flawed version of the Star Wars where Greedo shoots first. I mean you see that attack is coming but you cannot fire first as you would be concorded, besides everyone knows: Han shot first! One fix could be implemented using the safety system that is already in game.
I suggest that suspect flag is tied to your weapon safety setting. If you fly in HS safety in red or yellow you will be suspect. To prevent becoming accidentally suspect your safety should automatically turn green when entering hi-sec space. However if you don’t have your safety green you will become suspect and you can be fired upon. NPC corp membership would force green safety. Turning safety to red or yellow would add delay timer before you can attack or rep. However if you are fired upon, one must always be able to return fire toward the aggressor (like it is now in limited engagement).
Currently everyone in EvE can shoot a suspect or criminal. There could be some extra negative traits to go with those statuses for that ex. suspect or criminal status would make you a global warp target, just like you would be fleeted with all EvE. Maybe ongrid warp only, or even a full system wide warp from local? The status could also boost your sig radius at least for locking purposes. Also suspects and criminals could only dock to the structures in pods and they would not be able to switch ship until the flag expires. I think that these kind of changes would be better than having neutral logi concorded.
I am notorious LSG my post are hidden by community, deleted/removed/hidden by mods and ccp stuff, KIA, MIA … you name it …
I spend xy alts to write on forum and been personally attacked many times, banned many times, but never beaten by arguments
I see so the “4th condition” so to speak is actually saying that even if the neutral logi pilot has a LE with the target of the person they’re remote repping the logi will still get concorded if it is not in the war.
So basically you guys are just trying to stop people from being able to be involved in combat if they are not a part of one of the warring entities.[quote=“CCP_Lebowski, post:271, topic:142879”]
providing remote assistance to a player in high sec who is currently in a limited engagement will be a criminal offence, regardless of their war status.
[/quote]
This is complete ■■■■. This change completely removes and playstyle that has been going on for 10+ years just so you can bubble wrap and bunch of kiddos who do nothing for your game.
You are DESTROYING content in this game. This change is forcing an entire subset of content to move to more suicide ganking ■■■■■■■■. Is this really what you want? Instead of variable content that has tons of social engineering and tons of interaction you just want us to warp in a bunch of cats and blow people up just to see this game burn? It’s what happens every time you further bubble wrap ■■■■ and it’s what we’re going to do with this change.
Be ready for wayyyy more support tickets than you have currently because we’re seriously going to burn this ■■■■ to the ground if this change goes through. Real talk.
