DUST Search - [Suggestion] Spawn IN your called vehicle.

Zero Harpuia wrote:

Geirskoegul wrote:

Zero Harpuia wrote:

EVICER wrote:

The stealing of the vehicles is ******** yes but you know how to fix that?Run yes run away from the actual spawn point and them summon the vehicle....eh? Thats what I do....It only took one time and that was the end of that.

Spawning in the vehicles ....yaaaa not so much.People pay out the anus for you (a team player) to be sble to spawn in there vehicle.In SP and cold hard ISK.

The point is, when you are choosing a dropsuit to spawn in, to also have the option to pick a vehicle and wait for the counter, then the queue. Not to spawn in someone else's vehicle. I hope this alters your opinion.

As for being invulnerable during the 'summons', Geirs, why is that a big deal? What is the issue with the vehicle person already being in his vehicle? He is waiting a longer time than usual to do so, and that is extra time for your team to be up a man. There is no reason to be against this unless you are just upset over the man on the ground not being an easy 50 SP. Just leave him to us Forge Gun players and go shoot someone else.

He's referring to those of us that have CRUs on all of our vehicle loadouts, so players can spawn in the vehicle, and so why should you get to autospawn in it without a CRU. It's one of the issues I originally raised, if you'll recall.

He's waiting a longer time while completely invulnerable. This is a big deal because clones will eventually cost money (not having an up to date clone results in SP loss in EVE; it's a Very Bad ThingGäó to die without remembering to update). Furthermore, one of the match win conditions is exhausting the enemy supply of clones. Finally, if I kill you while you're waiting for your vehicle, you're out of the fight EVEN LONGER, which helps my time AND it means I don't need to kill your vehicle, I can hack it and kill you with the vehicle you paid for yourself, instead, which is far more satisfying.

Basically, your proposal has many negatives, only one marginal positive, and a far more elegant, true-to-lore solution exists by simply enforcing the skill requirements to drive vehicles and online the modules they're equipped with.

Forums ate my eloquent post, so let me be brief.

First, clones aren't implemented yet, so it may just be jumpclones to move around without EVE players. Don't bet on anything that hasn't been introduced yet. Also, when have you heard a 'clone reserves low' message in Skirmish? I've heard 'Clone reserves 50%' sometimes as the MCC was docking, but that's about it.

Secondly, as for lore, the world of New Eden isn't 'fair', it's practical. If being flown in with the vehicle makes more monetary sense, it will be done. Ever heard of gate camping? Blobs? Bubbles? It's all based on murdering someone who has no chance of fighting back, usually due to numbers crushing you, whatever you pilot. It's the only game where corporate espionage and theft are common practice, not something you go to a dark and shady chatroom for.

Also, a CRU won't activate til a vehicle is both uncoupled and being constantly piloted, so noone else could spawn to it until 10 seconds after you land anyway.

Finally, Cheecham's proposal was to have someone who is already dead trade extra time to spawn with already having his vehicle, and having to suffer its fate if it or the deployment ship is shot down. To use an allegory, when I go to work, I don't take a bus halfway, then disembark and call my wife to bring me the car. I drive the car the whole way, because it makes more sense, and it doesn't expose me to whatever could happen on the bus or while waiting on the curb.

Your problems were originally that you should need skills to get to pilot a ship, which I support, and that it doesn't make sense without a CRU, which you admitted as bunk when you realized there was a main base. The only thing left is 'fair', and as I can shoot down a transport in two shots, there is your fair. You might enjoy camping a man into B, but I think it would be karmic if he flew in with a Sagaris to punish me for doing so.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.15 22:25:00 - [1] - Quote Dewie Cheecham wrote: The current calling of a vehicle is ok, with modifications, such as handling the issue of vehicle theft by friendlies. One solution could be to mark the vehicle by owner name. and definitely type (at least to friendlies) However, there is another possible solution for handling the vehicle drops right after respawning. Enable us to select a vehicle to spawn in if we so choose. To avoid abuse, have the same spawn timer, then have us being flown in to the spawn point we selected. Easily fixed with a locking system like planetside in combination with actually enforcing skill requirements (the latter is infinitely more important than the former). Spawning in the vehicle is a no-go unless your selected fit has a CRU, otherwise it's an unfair advantage as you're not vulnerable while waiting for it to arrive (though you could be shot down on the way in.) Regardless, without the CRU, there's no way for you to spawn in the vehicle in the first place, so, quite simply, no to your request. The better fix, though, as stated, is simply to enforce the skill requirements (can sit in the driver's seat without the skill, any modules you don't have the skills for are disabled), and can be further augmented by a locking system like was found in PlanetSide. That said, this will be less of an issue once you're playing with your corp instead of pugs. At that point I don't much see the need for a locking system (only the skill requirements being enforced). Theft and betrayal are a part of EVE, and it should, in theory, assume friendlies are just that: friendly. If your mate steals your tank, that's for you and your mate to work out, quite possibly with a blaster to the face (it's how we deal with traitors in EVE, and it's how we deal with traitors in a combat situation in RL.)
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.15 22:37:00 - [2] - Quote Dewie Cheecham wrote: Not an advantage at all, as you first have to wait for the spawn timer to finish, then have to wait while the vehicle is flown in to the drop point from the MCC. You mention being killed while waiting. That is another concern, I've probably lost about half my tanks that way. You'd be waiting 10 seconds for the queue before it'd be inbound. In your scenario, those are 10 seconds where you aren't at risk of dying before the vehicle arrives, thus ensuring that you didn't just buy a vehicle that you won't be there for the arrival of. EDIT: You also, as mentioned, aren't vulnerable to dying while it's inbound in your scenario. Sure, it could be shot down and you die that way, but it could always be shot down anyway. In your scenario you die if it's shot down, but it's still reducing the number of targets on the field, and for a longer period. All things considered, your suggestion would be a pretty significant advantage compared to how it is now. Yours is not the solution to the issue. The solution is to enforce skill requirements. Doing that you single-handedly eliminate a significant portion of the player-base from stealing any given vehicle you summon.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.15 22:50:00 - [3] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: Geirskoegul wrote: Dewie Cheecham wrote: The current calling of a vehicle is ok, with modifications, such as handling the issue of vehicle theft by friendlies. One solution could be to mark the vehicle by owner name. and definitely type (at least to friendlies) However, there is another possible solution for handling the vehicle drops right after respawning. Enable us to select a vehicle to spawn in if we so choose. To avoid abuse, have the same spawn timer, then have us being flown in to the spawn point we selected. Easily fixed with a locking system like planetside in combination with actually enforcing skill requirements (the latter is infinitely more important than the former). Spawning in the vehicle is a no-go unless your selected fit has a CRU, otherwise it's an unfair advantage as you're not vulnerable while waiting for it to arrive (though you could be shot down on the way in.) Regardless, without the CRU, there's no way for you to spawn in the vehicle in the first place, so, quite simply, no to your request. The better fix, though, as stated, is simply to enforce the skill requirements (can sit in the driver's seat without the skill, any modules you don't have the skills for are disabled), and can be further augmented by a locking system like was found in PlanetSide. That said, this will be less of an issue once you're playing with your corp instead of pugs. At that point I don't much see the need for a locking system (only the skill requirements being enforced). Theft and betrayal are a part of EVE, and it should, in theory, assume friendlies are just that: friendly. If your mate steals your tank, that's for you and your mate to work out, quite possibly with a blaster to the face (it's how we deal with traitors in EVE, and it's how we deal with traitors in a combat situation in RL.) He doesn't mean you literally spawn in the vehicle. It's not like we pull them from the ether, we own the vehicles, so it makes sense that we would have a CRU back at the base where we fly them in from. Plus with the amount I'm shot at by friendlies because of the crap UI distance or just idiotic blindfire, a blaster to the face would be more of a griefing tool than a useful mechanic... plus, that blaster won't work on the guy who's in your tank. War is hell, ain't it? ^^ As to the "CRU at base" I can see that making sense. Now we're simply left with the massive issue of greatly decreased vulnerability (you can't be killed while the vehicle's queued, you can't be killed while it's inbound, the only way to take you or the vehicle out is to take out the RDV or vehicle while it's inbound). I don't see that being fixable. You're trying to fix symptoms as opposed to the problem. The core problem is that skill requirements aren't enforced in matches, only for setting up fits. Enforce skill requirements and you eliminate a significant portion of thefts. After that, it's fixed by killing traitors and properly screening recruits. Even WoWtards engage in (relatively) minimal whining when someone robs their guild banks, and they were the dumbasses that granted the thief access in the first place (though part of that could be that Actiblizzion bends over the table for anyone that was made to cry; CCP would sit back and giggle at the thought that you bothered to petition for someone robbing you, when you had to give them the permissions that let them do it in the first place). In the case of military vehicles, they don't have keys. Tanks and aircraft don't have keys, and neither do the trucks, HMMWVs, etc. Securing them is based on controlling access to them, and the fact that getting in won't do you much good if you don't have the skill required to use it (brings us back to the fix I keep mentioning). It's the future, and we do have some FoF identification (you have to hack enemy vehicles to climb into them), but it's completely logical to assume that it'd be a blanket ID for the team, not personal. I'm not ruling out PlanetSide's vehicle locking implementation, I'd be fine with it, at least in the high-sec pug matches. But at the end of the day, theft by people with the skills boils down to an issue of inviting people to your corp that can't be trusted. That's a management issue, not a gameplay issue. The rest can be mitigated greatly by simply enforcing the skill requirements. As it stands now, you can (and many have) sat there summoning vehicles for others on their team to climb into. Happened more in the last build, since you didn't have the militia tank or dropship, so you HAD to have the skills to summon one, but anyone could climb in. Still can happen now, and absolutely will if skill reqs aren't enforced at launch, because then we'll have others funding us, not just the NPCs.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.16 00:08:00 - [4] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: Quick note: The vehicle deployment ships can take all of two standard Forge Gun rounds, and the vehicle itself is a sitting duck while being uncoupled. I don't use vehicle, I dismantle them, so I am not too aware of the issues with them beyond theft, and I do agree with the prereqs idea, but the fact still stands that in the context of New Eden, in a world where nothing is played 'fair', being dropped off in the vehicle doesn't sound too bad... and it guarantees me an extra 50 SP when I gun down those incoming coffins. Like I said, it's about the amount of time you're exposed. If you ride the vehicle in, there's only one target on the field, and for a shorter period of time. Normally, you have to call it in, which takes a moment in the menu where you're vulnerable. You now need to stay alive and in the area while waiting on the queue. Now you need to stay alive and in the area while it's on its way. Finally, you need to get to and climb into the vehicle without dying or being immediately blown up (and the vehicle can still be blown up on the way in.) That's a pretty massive difference in the time spent vulnerable, and two targets instead of just one, and killing either the player or the vehicle will (in all likelihood) take the vehicle out of commission, at least for a period of time while they respawn and try to get back to it, or wait for someone else to get in it (which should eventually require the proper skills.) If you ride it in, it's one target, for a much shorter time, with much less opportunity to counter it before it's in the field. Unless I can call in an orbital strike on the "home base" you're cloning at, I don't really see it being a good or fair idea. Because guess what my first target is going to be if I'm fighting a war? Yup, the CRUs. You can't respawn if you don't have any bodies to climb into.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.16 01:05:00 - [5] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: While waiting to spawn in a vehicle, you still have to wait for the queue, still have to wait to be dropped, and still are vulnerable coming in. If you aren't on the battlefield, you're doing jackall to help your team, and most people call in vehicles in the enemy's red zone anyway. If you can gun down the vehicle on its way in, and the smaller number of active enemy combatants makes it easier for your team, then what else do you need? This isn't a question of 'fair', it is a question of practicality, and possibly spawn protection. Removing the vulnerability of a clunky interface and the vulnerability of hiding behind a rock until the tank lands doesn't sound like any great sacrifice to either fairness or usefulness. That's a very poor implementation of spawn protection, since it's effectively uncounterable, and provides a lot of time for you to not risk dying and burning up a clone. And it's not about the having to wait for the queue, it's about the waiting for the queue while 100% invulnerable. This has no place in Dust.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.16 06:57:00 - [6] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: EVICER wrote: The stealing of the vehicles is ******** yes but you know how to fix that?Run yes run away from the actual spawn point and them summon the vehicle....eh? Thats what I do....It only took one time and that was the end of that. Spawning in the vehicles ....yaaaa not so much.People pay out the anus for you (a team player) to be sble to spawn in there vehicle.In SP and cold hard ISK. The point is, when you are choosing a dropsuit to spawn in, to also have the option to pick a vehicle and wait for the counter, then the queue. Not to spawn in someone else's vehicle. I hope this alters your opinion. As for being invulnerable during the 'summons', Geirs, why is that a big deal? What is the issue with the vehicle person already being in his vehicle? He is waiting a longer time than usual to do so, and that is extra time for your team to be up a man. There is no reason to be against this unless you are just upset over the man on the ground not being an easy 50 SP. Just leave him to us Forge Gun players and go shoot someone else. He's referring to those of us that have CRUs on all of our vehicle loadouts, so players can spawn in the vehicle, and so why should you get to autospawn in it without a CRU. It's one of the issues I originally raised, if you'll recall. He's waiting a longer time while completely invulnerable. This is a big deal because clones will eventually cost money (not having an up to date clone results in SP loss in EVE; it's a Very Bad ThingGäó to die without remembering to update). Furthermore, one of the match win conditions is exhausting the enemy supply of clones. Finally, if I kill you while you're waiting for your vehicle, you're out of the fight EVEN LONGER, which helps my time AND it means I don't need to kill your vehicle, I can hack it and kill you with the vehicle you paid for yourself, instead, which is far more satisfying. Basically, your proposal has many negatives, only one marginal positive, and a far more elegant, true-to-lore solution exists by simply enforcing the skill requirements to drive vehicles and online the modules they're equipped with.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.16 19:17:00 - [7] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: Geirskoegul wrote: Zero Harpuia wrote: EVICER wrote: The stealing of the vehicles is ******** yes but you know how to fix that?Run yes run away from the actual spawn point and them summon the vehicle....eh? Thats what I do....It only took one time and that was the end of that. Spawning in the vehicles ....yaaaa not so much.People pay out the anus for you (a team player) to be sble to spawn in there vehicle.In SP and cold hard ISK. The point is, when you are choosing a dropsuit to spawn in, to also have the option to pick a vehicle and wait for the counter, then the queue. Not to spawn in someone else's vehicle. I hope this alters your opinion. As for being invulnerable during the 'summons', Geirs, why is that a big deal? What is the issue with the vehicle person already being in his vehicle? He is waiting a longer time than usual to do so, and that is extra time for your team to be up a man. There is no reason to be against this unless you are just upset over the man on the ground not being an easy 50 SP. Just leave him to us Forge Gun players and go shoot someone else. He's referring to those of us that have CRUs on all of our vehicle loadouts, so players can spawn in the vehicle, and so why should you get to autospawn in it without a CRU. It's one of the issues I originally raised, if you'll recall. He's waiting a longer time while completely invulnerable. This is a big deal because clones will eventually cost money (not having an up to date clone results in SP loss in EVE; it's a Very Bad ThingGäó to die without remembering to update). Furthermore, one of the match win conditions is exhausting the enemy supply of clones. Finally, if I kill you while you're waiting for your vehicle, you're out of the fight EVEN LONGER, which helps my time AND it means I don't need to kill your vehicle, I can hack it and kill you with the vehicle you paid for yourself, instead, which is far more satisfying. Basically, your proposal has many negatives, only one marginal positive, and a far more elegant, true-to-lore solution exists by simply enforcing the skill requirements to drive vehicles and online the modules they're equipped with. Forums ate my eloquent post, so let me be brief. First, clones aren't implemented yet, so it may just be jumpclones to move around without EVE players. Don't bet on anything that hasn't been introduced yet. Also, when have you heard a 'clone reserves low' message in Skirmish? I've heard 'Clone reserves 50%' sometimes as the MCC was docking, but that's about it. Secondly, as for lore, the world of New Eden isn't 'fair', it's practical. If being flown in with the vehicle makes more monetary sense, it will be done. Ever heard of gate camping? Blobs? Bubbles? It's all based on murdering someone who has no chance of fighting back, usually due to numbers crushing you, whatever you pilot. It's the only game where corporate espionage and theft are common practice, not something you go to a dark and shady chatroom for. Also, a CRU won't activate til a vehicle is both uncoupled and being constantly piloted, so noone else could spawn to it until 10 seconds after you land anyway. Finally, Cheecham's proposal was to have someone who is already dead trade extra time to spawn with already having his vehicle, and having to suffer its fate if it or the deployment ship is shot down. To use an allegory, when I go to work, I don't take a bus halfway, then disembark and call my wife to bring me the car. I drive the car the whole way, because it makes more sense, and it doesn't expose me to whatever could happen on the bus or while waiting on the curb. Your problems were originally that you should need skills to get to pilot a ship, which I support, and that it doesn't make sense without a CRU, which you admitted as bunk when you realized there was a main base. The only thing left is 'fair', and as I can shoot down a transport in two shots, there is your fair. You might enjoy camping a man into B, but I think it would be karmic if he flew in with a Sagaris to punish me for doing so. Nothing you've said offers even a remotely valid refutation of my point. The only time you're safe in EVE is while you're docked. Your solution here lets you do a bunch of stuff that would, in EVE, have to be done while UNDOCKED, and therefor vulnerable. In the end, you're still talking about making people invulnerable and letting timers and actions play out WHILE invulnerable. You can't do that in EVE. You're also attempting to conflate unfairness with actual imbalance. The proposal in this thread is highly imbalanced, for all the reasons I've explained. In the end, EVE is perfectly fair, you have viable counters to those gate camps (scouting, for starters, and dropping in a better-prepared fleet). How do you propose I counter all that extra time the guy in this proposal is invulnerable and unable to be made to wait even longer (by killing him again) and potentially lose his vehicle for more (legitimate) reasons? How do you propose I counter the fact that now I only have one choice of target to remove or delay the threat, instead of two? The proposal seems simple, but the implications on mechanics and balance are far greater. The solution is simple and easy: enforce skill requirements, and screen your corpmates. Problem solved. Giving someone invulnerability and reducing their exposure and potential to loss is simply not acceptable. Not in EVE, not in Dust, not in New Eden period.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.16 20:24:00 - [8] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: You said: 'Your solution here lets you do a bunch of stuff that would, in EVE, have to be done while UNDOCKED, and therefor vulnerable.' I'm sorry, but who deploys a ship from a hanger while not being in it? Do you undock in your pod and ask the drydock to send you your Hulk? CAN you do that? As for the counter, if your waiting for him to spawn, you are SPAWN CAMPING. The counter is to find someone already fighting and shoot HIM. And there are two targets: the vehicle and the transport. You keep going on about invulnerability, but guess what? While spawning, you are 'docked'. While flying in, you are vulnerable to Swarm Launchers, Turrets, Vehicles, Forge Guns, and if its a really soft vehicle, CreoDron Breach ARs. You apparently don't use these, so you're upset at the loss of a target and think that this man is now 'invulnerable. Find a new target. As for refuting your point, I don't have to refute nonsense. In EVE, you'd have to undock, fly to someplace that has a med bay (if that station didn't) to update your clone, undock again, head to somplace that had the ship and gear you wanted (hopefully you had it pre-fit), then fly that to the battle. At any point of this, you can be killed. In dust, you can't. it is, quite simply, unbalanced and a poor, cludgy solution for Dust. Its only effect is to provide you with extended invulnerability and reduced exposure. I won't keep repeating myself. Quite simply, your solution is poor (putting it nicely), and your justification is as weak as Ryan Seacrest's o-ring. Who said anything about waiting for him to spawn? I'm talking about the time he'd be on the ground, summoning a vehicle, waiting on the queue, waiting on the arrival, and then trying to get into the vehicle. That's not spawn camping, that's killing a mofo while he's vulnerable, keeping him away from a vehicle for longer, keeping him out of the fight for longer, and generally helping your team. You keep missing the FACT taht you're tryign to provide craptons of immunity and invulnerability where you would have none in EVE, and where you absolutely should not have any in Dust. If you want you're 100% pure **** solution, then you damn well better let me OS that non-existent rear base that's impossible to get to, using a titan, wiping it off the map.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.16 20:52:00 - [9] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: Geirskoegul wrote: Zero Harpuia wrote: You said: 'Your solution here lets you do a bunch of stuff that would, in EVE, have to be done while UNDOCKED, and therefor vulnerable.' I'm sorry, but who deploys a ship from a hanger while not being in it? Do you undock in your pod and ask the drydock to send you your Hulk? CAN you do that? As for the counter, if your waiting for him to spawn, you are SPAWN CAMPING. The counter is to find someone already fighting and shoot HIM. And there are two targets: the vehicle and the transport. You keep going on about invulnerability, but guess what? While spawning, you are 'docked'. While flying in, you are vulnerable to Swarm Launchers, Turrets, Vehicles, Forge Guns, and if its a really soft vehicle, CreoDron Breach ARs. You apparently don't use these, so you're upset at the loss of a target and think that this man is now 'invulnerable. Find a new target. As for refuting your point, I don't have to refute nonsense. In EVE, you'd have to undock, fly to someplace that has a med bay (if that station didn't) to update your clone, undock again, head to somplace that had the ship and gear you wanted (hopefully you had it pre-fit), then fly that to the battle. At any point of this, you can be killed. In dust, you can't. it is, quite simply, unbalanced and a poor, cludgy solution for Dust. Its only effect is to provide you with extended invulnerability and reduced exposure. I won't keep repeating myself. Quite simply, your solution is poor (putting it nicely), and your justification is as weak as Ryan Seacrest's o-ring. Who said anything about waiting for him to spawn? I'm talking about the time he'd be on the ground, summoning a vehicle, waiting on the queue, waiting on the arrival, and then trying to get into the vehicle. That's not spawn camping, that's killing a mofo while he's vulnerable, keeping him away from a vehicle for longer, keeping him out of the fight for longer, and generally helping your team. You keep missing the FACT taht you're tryign to provide craptons of immunity and invulnerability where you would have none in EVE, and where you absolutely should not have any in Dust. If you want you're 100% pure ** solution, then you damn well better let me OS that non-existent rear base that's impossible to get to, using a titan, wiping it off the map. In EVE, when you buy things analogs to buying things in the DUST market. Spawning analogs to undocking. Also, I can sit in spawncam for a minute, and OH NOES, I'm invulnerable for a full minute! Doesn't do ANYONE any good. As for waiting for him to spawn, we are discussing altering spawning with adding vehicle inclusion. The only time some does this is when the are spawning. At spawn. If you are killing someone at spawn waiting for this vehicle, you are... wait for it... SPAWN KILLING. There is no added invulnerability which isn't balanced by the fact that a player who isn't playing isn't contributing anything, so please take your shiny little sniper rifle to an objective and do some defense. Also, that rear base? THATS THE GOAL OF THE MCC. TO CAPTURE THE BASE. Blasting it from the face of the planet is COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. The whole reason DUST exists is to prevent the destruction of the infrastructure. Didn't think I had to spell it out, but damn. And Titans don't OS, there are specific guns for it... No, it doesn't "analog" (this is not a verb, by the way) anything. You are asking for free invulnerability and easy mode access to your vehicle. You want to not be able to be killed and have instant safe access to your vehicle without ever being vulnerable except those last couple seconds before it arrives. This is severely damaging to the game mechanics, and a generally ** idea. Please return to CoD, ** knee-jerk solutions that break the game are welcome in ** games. Elegant solutions that actually fix problems rather than create them are what we want here. All of that added invulnerability ensures that you don't have any chance of dying an extra time (thus increasing your out-of-action time), losing the vehicle because you died while waiting (thus increasing your out-of-action time), makes it impossible to steal the vehicle out from under you, etc. We're talking massive advantages to you, no appreciable gains to the game. You're idea, once again, is complete and absolute **, is horribly imbalanced, horribly unreasonable, solves no legitimate problems, introduces numerous significant problems and unreasonable advantages, and at the end of the day is 100% unnecessary and pointless.
Geirskoegul Soul-Strike 134	Posted - 2012.07.17 15:34:00 - [10] - Quote Logisticus, while it makes sense, it is unbalancing. Fairness doesn't enter into it. Even if you do have all of those things at one station, there will generally be significant travel involved in getting back to the fight, at any point of which you could be killed again, keeping you out of the fight longer. Hell, in a defensive situation, there's actually call to AVOID podkilling people, for the simple fact that it would mean they have to fly BACK before they can get the new ship before coming back AGAIN with the new ship. This is all time out of the fight, with the potential to spend EVEN MORE time out of the fight, which helps your side. The OP's proposed solution removes a very significant amount of risk, a very significant amount of time, cuts the number of targets that can cause a delay in half, and completely eliminates a lot of opportunities to cause greater delays to your enemy returning to the fight. EVE is ruthless, and you're right, "fair" doesn't enter into it. Balance, however, is paramount. Even when EVE isn't fair, it _is_ balanced. This solution is unbalanced, for all the reasons addressed ad nauseam. Even if it were the only solution, no action would be the better solution. Since it's not, and there _are_ far better, more elegant solutions that _are not_ a detriment to balance, the OP's solution is an even worse option. The supposed "problem" to be solved is vehicles being stolen when summoned. Ok. The closest EVE parallel is that of a capital ship ejecting a ship into space (unpiloted) for a friendly pilot to climb into. At this point, before it's piloted, anyone with the necessary skills can climb into it and take it, so already Dust is more forgiving, since only your team can climb in without hacking it. Simply by enforcing the skill requirements, we eliminate the greatest factor in vehicle theft: ANYONE being able to take it. By making it so only people with the right skills can take it and online all the modules, you eliminate a large portion of players from being able to steal your vehicle. The issue can and will be further reduced once proper grouping, and especially corporations, are implemented, since at that point the only people on your team SHOULD be people that you trust and on comms with. If you have thieves and traitors in your corp, that's a separate problem entirely. As to an ownership system, as I mentioned, PlanetSide handled it wonderfully, by having a control interface with dropdowns for the slot types: driver, gunner, and passenger. The selections for each of those were "private," "team," "outfit" (corporation), and "all." The driver seat defaulted to private, while all others defaulted to all. This ensured that the driver was the only one that could TAKE the vehicle, while letting anyone else climb in and help right away. Set the options differently, and if someone in a gunner or passenger seat no longer meets the criteria, they're kicked out of it. It worked extremely well, and while not necessary for a game like Dust, I don't see it as being unbalanced or overkill. It's a very reasonable, very effective solution to address the issue. The best solution, however, remains being to simply enforce the skill requirements, and screen people before you let them in your corp (and kill them repeatedly before booting them out if they prove they can't be trusted.)