Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 12:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
During several games last evening myself and several other members of the DUST 514 community were all talking about hacking vehicles in a battle.
Currently when you hack an enemy vehicle you simply are granted friendly access to the LAV/HAV or Dropship for however long it takes you to run it off a cliff and blow it up Gumball Rally style.
The assumption was made that if you hacked the vehicle, you could keep it in your assets as you effectively "stole" it from your enemy, much like scamming or more specifically looting occurs in EVE Online.
CCP and fellow DUST players, I propose a change to the current system in which if/when you hack someones vehicle you can recall it and save the vehicle for future deployment either in that battle, or in whatever battle you wish in the future. This vehicle would and should be represented in your post match "Salvage" section, on top of any other salvage you might have received during that match.
This game mechanic is both a way to curb people from spawning tons of vehicles in a match, as well as provide those who hack the vehicle a reward for their effort.
I have brought this up to a CPM0 member and he is in support of it, and I hope both CCP and the DUST community would consider this proposal a good way to curb the mass vehicle spawning and provide people more incentives to work in the "Hacking" side of things for their respective armies. |
Mer Kure
DUST University Ivy League
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 12:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
Funny thing I was thinking the same, was about to make a thread but seeing this is already here I'll just add my +1.
Yeah, being able to chose whether to blow up or just try and take out the driver/ pilot and go take the vehicle from the enemy seems like a cool idea.
Specially considering the amount of time it'd take.
Plus it may make people stop trying to just blow up abandoned vehicles. (Or encourage them exactly so you/ others won't get it.) |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 12:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mer Kure wrote:Funny thing I was thinking the same, was about to make a thread but seeing this is already here I'll just add my +1. Yeah, being able to chose whether to blow up or just try and take out the driver/ pilot and go take the vehicle from the enemy seems like a cool idea. Specially considering the amount of time it'd take. Plus it may make people stop trying to just blow up abandoned vehicles. (Or encourage them exactly so you/ others won't get it.)
It's a valid mechanic to have really and I'm happy someone from DUST University agrees with such a concept. This could, in theory and my own biased mind, cause a focus on "hackers" being a more useful tool than they already are at the moment.
I haven't don't the space math but I do believe hacking a vehicle takes longer than hacking a point, meaning your effort and risk of dying goes unrewarded after the match. |
Dexter Peabody
Goonfeet
44
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 13:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
grand theft auto hell yeah |
Samahiel
Goonfeet
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 13:48:00 -
[5] - Quote
I wholeheartedly support this product and/or service. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 15:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
Thank you all for the support. I hope CCP takes a look and can comment on such a proposal. |
Lynn Beck
Tank Bros. DARKSTAR ARMY
57
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 15:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Dexter Peabody wrote:grand theft auto hell yeah No sir. Million Theft HAV |
Eltra Ardell
Goonfeet
66
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 16:01:00 -
[8] - Quote
I support this. I want to hijack tanks and dropships. Right now there's no incentive to even keep hacked vehicles alive. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 16:49:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP, I hope you consider this proposal as it is quite useful in terms of a "metagame" that is in some ways lacking.
Imagine CCP_FoxFour's corporation going to war with CCP_Eterne's corp over a stolen prototype tank? The potential for ridicule, good fights, and new twitter accounts handled by CCP_Fozzie would be limitless. |
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
354
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 17:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
As I'm against detailed info on fittings on future dust killmails,
I would still like to let people stealing arch enemies vehicles and see their fittings. Military secrets revealed! |
|
Shadow Archeus
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
64
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 18:28:00 -
[11] - Quote
If I hack your tank I should be able to keep it......love this idea |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 19:24:00 -
[12] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:As I'm against detailed info on fittings on future dust killmails,
I would still like to let people stealing arch enemies vehicles and see their fittings. Military secrets revealed!
This would and could in fact be a form of espionage and as previously stated add more to the metagame.
Shadow Archeus wrote:If I hack your tank I should be able to keep it......love this idea
I, and those who support this proposal, thank you for your support.
I have received word that CCP has taken a look at this concept and have stated its "definitely an interesting idea" so we may see this down the line.
Talk to your CEO, evemail your CPM representative and tweet at your favorite pair of socks and tell them you want this mechanic. |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1400
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 20:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
Abu Stij wrote:During several games last evening myself and several other members of the DUST 514 community were all talking about hacking vehicles in a battle.
Currently when you hack an enemy vehicle you simply are granted friendly access to the LAV/HAV or Dropship for however long it takes you to run it off a cliff and blow it up Gumball Rally style.
The assumption was made that if you hacked the vehicle, you could keep it in your assets as you effectively "stole" it from your enemy, much like scamming or more specifically looting occurs in EVE Online.
CCP and fellow DUST players, I propose a change to the current system in which if/when you hack someones vehicle you can recall it and save the vehicle for future deployment either in that battle, or in whatever battle you wish in the future. This vehicle would and should be represented in your post match "Salvage" section, on top of any other salvage you might have received during that match.
This game mechanic is both a way to curb people from spawning tons of vehicles in a match, as well as provide those who hack the vehicle a reward for their effort.
I have brought this up to a CPM0 member and he is in support of it, and I hope both CCP and the DUST community would consider this proposal a good way to curb the mass vehicle spawning and provide people more incentives to work in the "Hacking" side of things for their respective armies.
Yep, I remember this being mentioned and still a big +1 to the idea. Vehicle loot is best loot. |
Iron Wolf Saber
Den of Swords
4117
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 20:18:00 -
[14] - Quote
+1 |
zeroknexus
DUST University Ivy League
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 20:43:00 -
[15] - Quote
Definitely a great idea and with the recall mechanic already in place, an idea that would not take much work to implement
+1 |
Arx Ardashir
Bragian Order Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 20:59:00 -
[16] - Quote
So long as the free LAVs (or whatever they may be replaced with) aren't worth selling on the market, I support this idea. If someone ejects from a ship in EVE and someone else hops in, it's all theirs until they sell it/get it blown up. Should work the same way in DUST.
Edit: Oh, and maybe some sort of timer on the recall feature so it can't be used immediately. Once you hack it and steal it, you still have to make good your escape before it's yours for good. |
HAICD
Dogs of War Gaming DARKSTAR ARMY
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 21:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
+1 right now I just blow them up for WP but if I could keep them to sell or use myself in a later match that sounds cool |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
21
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 02:17:00 -
[18] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:
Yep, I remember this being mentioned and still a big +1 to the idea. Vehicle loot is best loot.
Thank you both for putting your political support behind this. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 13:24:00 -
[19] - Quote
Reminding all who would be interested that this proposal exists. |
Cybus Trama'dol
EYE Security Task Force and Resources Acquisition
52
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 13:31:00 -
[20] - Quote
+1 |
|
Aran Abbas
Goonfeet
27
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 16:00:00 -
[21] - Quote
I support this proposal for vehicle theft. |
Nova Knife
Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State
911
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 16:24:00 -
[22] - Quote
As far as I know, it was supposed to be this way already.
When I saw the recall feature at fanfest, the first thing I asked CCP Jian was "Can I use this to steal people's stuff?" He said Yes.
I think it's a bug that it doesn't work with enemy vehicles. But it should definitely add the stuff to your assets if you steal a friendly, non bpo vehicle.
Someone try it and let me know? |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
25
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 16:30:00 -
[23] - Quote
Nova Knife wrote:As far as I know, it was supposed to be this way already.
When I saw the recall feature at fanfest, the first thing I asked CCP Jian was "Can I use this to steal people's stuff?" He said Yes.
I think it's a bug that it doesn't work with enemy vehicles. But it should definitely add the stuff to your assets if you steal a friendly, non bpo vehicle.
Someone try it and let me know?
This was tried, and there was no noted increase in assets even when stealing a friendly vehicle.
The recall was added in Uprising but it has not been made capable of stealing both friendly and enemy vehicles you hack, which is what this proposal/request asks to be addressed and implemented.
Edit - Kane Spero was one of those who tested the recall and can provide feedback to you more directly as you two have more readily available communication with each other being on the CPM. |
Arron Rift
Commando Perkone Caldari State
126
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 18:51:00 -
[24] - Quote
I think hacked vehicles should go to the hacker's assets, but friendly vehicle should go beck to the owner. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 20:47:00 -
[25] - Quote
Arron Rift wrote:I think hacked vehicles should go to the hacker's assets, but friendly vehicle should go beck to the owner.
That is a more than a reasonable approach to this. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.17 23:22:00 -
[26] - Quote
Reminding you lovely people this wonderful idea is still available. |
XV1
Challenger 4
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.17 23:52:00 -
[27] - Quote
I like this idea as well. Right now there is not much point in hacking an enemy vehicle just as easy to blow it up. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
29
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 20:19:00 -
[28] - Quote
Reminding CCP this exists. |
|
CCP Blam!
C C P C C P Alliance
63
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 04:13:00 -
[29] - Quote
This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do. |
|
|
CCP Blam!
C C P C C P Alliance
63
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 04:15:00 -
[30] - Quote
A little tack-on here - it goes without saying that going this route would mean that you wouldn't be able to call in your salvage if you don't have the skills for it. It would work just as any other item you have in your inventory. |
|
|
Hunter Junko
Bojo's School of the Trades
98
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 05:12:00 -
[31] - Quote
before i read the thread, i thought of the title of "Looting vehicles for guns, ammo and other bits of salvage D: |
Farsund Solheim
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 06:21:00 -
[32] - Quote
Loving the response from the Devs here |
madd greazy
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
75
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 06:26:00 -
[33] - Quote
Abu Stij wrote:During several games last evening myself and several other members of the DUST 514 community were all talking about hacking vehicles in a battle.
Currently when you hack an enemy vehicle you simply are granted friendly access to the LAV/HAV or Dropship for however long it takes you to run it off a cliff and blow it up Gumball Rally style.
The assumption was made that if you hacked the vehicle, you could keep it in your assets as you effectively "stole" it from your enemy, much like scamming or more specifically looting occurs in EVE Online.
CCP and fellow DUST players, I propose a change to the current system in which if/when you hack someones vehicle you can recall it and save the vehicle for future deployment either in that battle, or in whatever battle you wish in the future. This vehicle would and should be represented in your post match "Salvage" section, on top of any other salvage you might have received during that match.
This game mechanic is both a way to curb people from spawning tons of vehicles in a match, as well as provide those who hack the vehicle a reward for their effort.
I have brought this up to a CPM0 member and he is in support of it, and I hope both CCP and the DUST community would consider this proposal a good way to curb the mass vehicle spawning and provide people more incentives to work in the "Hacking" side of things for their respective armies.
I completely agree, only that if you don't have the skills to use the stolen vehicle you cannot deploy it in another battle until you have the required skills, or until you change the fitting to something you can use. you would however be able to use the vehicle if you never recalled it from battle, and then at the end of the battle it would be added to your assets. |
madd greazy
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
75
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 06:27:00 -
[34] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:A little tack-on here - it goes without saying that going this route would mean that you wouldn't be able to call in your salvage if you don't have the skills for it. It would work just as any other item you have in your inventory.
I don't see a problem with this, it's only logical for it to work that way. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
793
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 08:34:00 -
[35] - Quote
I still feel that hacking an enemy vehicle should not award you the ability to drive it. Same thing goes for hopping into a friendly vehicle.
As it stands, Caldari HAV I has nothing to do with piloting the damn thing, just gives you the ability to call the RDV and tell it that you want it. |
G Torq
ALTA B2O
145
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 08:41:00 -
[36] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do.
Blam: @1: Make an ad-hoc SKU (temporary, deletable), that is "[orginal owner]'s [vehicle]" with all the modules, and not able to be replenished. That way, someone could get "CCP BLAM's Madrugar" as an item until they get it destroyed
@2: Have an option to break these (exluding BPOs) into their core components, and added to inventory.
@3 (next post): If you steal a vehicle, which you don't hav s |
Saucy Butt Love
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 09:58:00 -
[37] - Quote
Nova Knife wrote:As far as I know, it was supposed to be this way already.
When I saw the recall feature at fanfest, the first thing I asked CCP Jian was "Can I use this to steal people's stuff?" He said Yes.
I think it's a bug that it doesn't work with enemy vehicles. But it should definitely add the stuff to your assets if you steal a friendly, non bpo vehicle.
Someone try it and let me know?
Iv noticed there are many things that are supposed to or have been quoted to be in the game at this point but are not :/ in 2009 fanfest as (not sure who was playing) he was about to blow up the tank he said there are 8 vehicle classed due for release. We only have 3 :( also the doors in the war room and merc quarters and a few other things that go unnoticed :/.
Don't get me wronge I LOVE the game and honestly think CCP is the most dedicated company and that's why you are the best!!! But I do wish they were aspects already. |
Sirpidey Adtur
Aloren Foundations
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 10:01:00 -
[38] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
So, you are proposing that a consumable item gets popped out from nowhere? That seems ripe for abuse.
|
Saucy Butt Love
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 10:09:00 -
[39] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do.
Epic. ^ |
X-eon
Molon Labe. League of Infamy
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 10:21:00 -
[40] - Quote
Don't stray too far from your vehicle when this goes live. Proto Minmitar Logistics and complex code breakers means I hack faster than three people. :] |
|
Saucy Butt Love
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 10:22:00 -
[41] - Quote
Sirpidey Adtur wrote:CCP Blam! wrote:2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory. So, you are proposing that a consumable item gets popped out from nowhere? That seems ripe for abuse.
No you just get 1 vehicle when you hack 1 vehicle that makes perfect sence, if I steal a car in real life I only get that one. And one of everything in it, (radio, cd's and so on) it would be silly to gain a blue print from one car |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD Unclaimed.
528
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 11:18:00 -
[42] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do. The looting idea's best feature it that adds significantly to the story and drama generation potential for DUST.
Mercs assigned to watch an approach or patrol an area may now have to fight powerful temptation. In some instances the irresistible urge to hack sweet loot will result in corps losing battle, districts and hopefully planets =) |
Sylwester Dziewiecki
BetaMax. CRONOS.
72
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 12:11:00 -
[43] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do. What if:
1. Enemy infantry gonna hack my HAV. 2. My teammates gonna kill that guy before he manage to recall it. 3. My teammates gonna hack "my" HAV and try to recall it(?)
Whose property will be HAV in that scenario?
|
Kaze Eyrou
ROGUE SPADES EoN.
234
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 12:54:00 -
[44] - Quote
Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do. What if: 1. Enemy infantry gonna hack my HAV. 2. My teammates gonna kill that guy before he manage to recall it. 3. My teammates gonna hack "my" HAV and try to recall it(?) Whose property will be HAV in that scenario? My teammates can not simply recall my HAV. And what if 3 guys is hacking enemy vehicle, who of them will be able to recall it? Hmmm....
Maybe if the vehicle "remembers" it's original "owner"?
For instance, instead of switching the "owner", have two fields for "owners". One is the person that called in the vehicle, the other is changed depending on the enemy who hacked it.
Illustration time: I call in a Sica. That Sica has /owner1/ field as "Kaze Eyrou" and the /owner2/ field is blank or null. Now, I decide to recall it. Because /owner2/ field is blank or null, it refers to /owner1/ field and gives it back to that person. Also note that teammates who recall the vehicle do not switch the /owner1/ or /owner2/ fields, so if they recall it, I get my tank back.
Kaze calls in Sica. Sica deployed.
Kaze changes mind. Recalls Sica. Goes back into Kaze's inventory.
OR
Kaze calls in Sica. Sica deployed.
Kaze dies because of overpowered Duvolle Tactical Rifle. However, teammates secure field.
Teammate recalls vehicle. Goes back into Kaze's inventory.
Now let's say an enemy does hack it. The /owner2/ field will change and if that enemy recalls it, it goes into the enemy's inventory.
Kaze calls in Sica. Sica drops on Kaze. Kaze died.
Enemy strolls up to Sica and hacks it. When the hack is complete, /owner2/ field is changed from blank or null, to the enemy.
Enemy recalls Sica. Goes into Enemy's inventory.
And finally, this will allow teammates to hack it back and, should they recall it, it will go back to the original owner.
Kaze calls in Sica. Enemy Logi LAV with 7000 EHP runs him over.
Enemy hacks Sica. /owner2/ field change's to enemy's name.
Enemy killed by Nova Knives by Kaze's teammate. Kaze's teammate hacks the Sica back. /owner2/ field is changed back to blank or null.
Kaze's teammate recalls Sica. Goes back into Kaze's inventory.
What do you think? |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
46
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 16:09:00 -
[45] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do.
CCP Blam! wrote:A little tack-on here - it goes without saying that going this route would mean that you wouldn't be able to call in your salvage if you don't have the skills for it. It would work just as any other item you have in your inventory.
First off thank you for responding and providing some of the dilemmas CCP is having to tackle in addressing this mechanic.
1) Forgive me for a very basic understanding of how that sort of transfer works in a technical sense for the game but wouldn't it be possible to have the ownership be tagged to the players API like in EVE? You can trade items in EVE, as well as salvage wrecks. This shouldn't be that different no?
2) I'm not sure I follow what you mean but I'll give it a stab. If a player hacks a vehicle they don't have the blueprints for, or the skills to operate it, it simply resides in their assets and they can sell it or trade it to a corp mate or whomever. Again, thats the same sort of thing that goes on in EVE with looting. |
Sylwester Dziewiecki
BetaMax. CRONOS.
75
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 21:13:00 -
[46] - Quote
Kaze Eyrou wrote:And finally, this will allow teammates to hack it back and, should they recall it, it will go back to the original owner.
- Kaze calls in Sica. Enemy Logi LAV with 7000 EHP runs him over.
- Enemy hacks Sica. /owner2/ field change's to enemy's name.
- Enemy killed by Nova Knives by Kaze's teammate. Kaze's teammate hacks the Sica back. /owner2/ field is changed back to blank or null.
- Kaze's teammate recalls Sica. Goes back into Kaze's inventory.
That asking difficult question is easy part I think that the last guy that recall it would be really **** off that it didn't end up in his pocket, he risk his life while recalling it .
This situation is easy in Eve compare to Dust - after the whole gang thing FC shares loot among people that lose their ships during the battle to reimburse theirs losses(if no one lose ship all loot is going to corp "PvP shop", and people may buy this stuff for 50-75% of it's real value).
I would not mind if the entire pool of salvage after battle go to corp assets in Dust, and some director would have to split it among mercenaries(or not - if he is greedy). Today, when I losing HAV on battle there is very small chance that ISK reward plus salvage will make me happy at the end of this day. Corporation salvage-pool could save my day.
What would you say if every hacked and recalled enemy vehicle would go to Corporation-loot-pool? That would prevent people from killing each other just to hack and recall valuable enemy vehicles. Corp loot pool would be a system that allow to reward fairly more than just one guy, because it's not a job just for singiel guy - someone will have to cover guy who is hacking, and recalling vehicle. It would allow to grow corporation assets. We already collect tons of unnecessary items in our assets, so what's the difference if they will go to hends of corporation that may use it in future, or save it for hard times. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
55
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 14:32:00 -
[47] - Quote
Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:That asking difficult question is easy part I think that the last guy that recall it would be really **** off that it didn't end up in his pocket, he risk his life while recalling it . This situation is easy in Eve compare to Dust - after the whole gang thing FC shares loot among people that lose their ships during the battle to reimburse theirs losses(if no one lose ship all loot is going to corp "PvP shop", and people may buy this stuff for 50-75% of it's real value). I would not mind if the entire pool of salvage after battle go to corp assets in Dust, and some director would have to split it among mercenaries(or not - if he is greedy). Today, when I losing HAV on battle there is very small chance that ISK reward plus salvage will make me happy at the end of this day. Corporation salvage-pool could save my day. What would you say if every hacked and recalled enemy vehicle would go to Corporation-loot-pool? That would prevent people from killing each other just to hack and recall valuable enemy vehicles. Corp loot pool would be a system that allow to reward fairly more than just one guy, because it's not a job just for singiel guy - someone will have to cover guy who is hacking, and recalling vehicle. It would allow to grow corporation assets. We already collect tons of unnecessary items in our assets, so what's the difference if they will go to hends of corporation that may use it in future, or save it for hard times.
A loot recall directly to the corporation hanger can only work for so long. Some corps may never share the gear with their mercs, making the drive for them to steal vehicles meaningless. Others obviously would love that concept, but those not in a corp currently (i.e. newbies) would have no real incentive to ever steal a vehicle as their newly won prize goes into an NPC corp and not to them, after risking their time and clones to steal the item.
Currently DUST has no corporation hanger, nor a good enough UI to utilize such a thing. Its not a terrible proposal but there should be both the option to steal it and put it in your personal hanger or in your corps hanger, which could be a screen you use after the match in the post match stats, or even when looking at your assets in the mercenary quarters. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
73
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 15:33:00 -
[48] - Quote
CCP Blam! please respawn |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
81
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:05:00 -
[49] - Quote
Blam! doesn't love me enough. I see how it is bro, i s |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
113
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 14:22:00 -
[50] - Quote
Pushing back to the first page. Would like a CCP Dev to respond to our questions/suggestions. |
|
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
116
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 04:11:00 -
[51] - Quote
Still waiting for CCP Blam!, or any other dev, to respond to our feedback. |
Abu Stij
GoonFeet
119
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 13:32:00 -
[52] - Quote
Again, would like to hear back from CCP on this. |
XV1
Challenger 4
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 02:24:00 -
[53] - Quote
It would not be that difficult to make a copy of the blueprint item, or at least I would not imagine it would. I would like to see more salvage than just the random drops we get now, and salvage that is relevant to what the opponents were using. Current salvage does not make sense as you can get weapons that are only obtainable through that method, which begs the question of how did anyone get the first ones. I guess they would change the salvaging system once they release PvE.
No matter what they decide on the salvage system I think the stealing of red vehicles should definitely be added as it would provide some form of reward for hacking as right now it just is not worth it. Currently no WP reward for taking enemy vehicle............ |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
132
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 12:12:00 -
[54] - Quote
XV1 wrote:It would not be that difficult to make a copy of the blueprint item, or at least I would not imagine it would. I would like to see more salvage than just the random drops we get now, and salvage that is relevant to what the opponents were using. Current salvage does not make sense as you can get weapons that are only obtainable through that method, which begs the question of how did anyone get the first ones. I guess they would change the salvaging system once they release PvE.
No matter what they decide on the salvage system I think the stealing of red vehicles should definitely be added as it would provide some form of reward for hacking as right now it just is not worth it. Currently no WP reward for taking enemy vehicle............
Well there are two things at play here, one is the physical item and the other the BPO. Simply taking a vehicle someone has the BPO for doesn't mean they should lose that BPO, just that you get a single copy of that vehicle (based on the opponents BPO for it). They have said that they're reworking the salvaging system and there are many steps and stages to it that they're trying to get to. The current salvage for a public match is based off an algorithm they posted the stats for (weapons, though I hope they release the dropsuit & vehicle data as well for us spreadsheet nerds), and again, they've stated they're reworking the system due to either an issue they found or because they really didn't like the old one. In PC matches your salvage is based off what the other team fields so there's some sort of system in place that could, in theory, be transferable for vehicular looting which the Devs have openly supported.
I believe you get war points for hacking, but not for recalling a vehicle. I don't think you should be granted that much of a war point reward for recalling a stolen vehicle, 25pts seems fairly reasonable though I would probably argue for more along the lines of 10pts. The reasoning being you already got some points off the hack where as recalling it, and in essence making it semi-invulnerable once the recall ship comes, is just a small bonus to your work. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
144
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 17:14:00 -
[55] - Quote
Bumped |
Shady IceCream Truck
Intergalactic Cannibus Cartel
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 17:18:00 -
[56] - Quote
Abu Stij wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:As I'm against detailed info on fittings on future dust killmails,
I would still like to let people stealing arch enemies vehicles and see their fittings. Military secrets revealed! This would and could in fact be a form of espionage and as previously stated add more to the metagame. Shadow Archeus wrote:If I hack your tank I should be able to keep it......love this idea I, and those who support this proposal, thank you for your support. I have received word that CCP has taken a look at this concept and have stated its "definitely an interesting idea" so we may see this down the line. Talk to your CEO, evemail your CPM representative and tweet at your favorite pair of socks and tell them you want this mechanic.
Maybe make it so only SCOUT class can hack these? since the class is completely worthless as is.. |
darkiller300
Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 18:30:00 -
[57] - Quote
|
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
152
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 15:40:00 -
[58] - Quote
Shady IceCream Truck wrote:
Maybe make it so only SCOUT class can hack these? since the class is completely worthless as is..
I could actually get behind that to some degree. It would be nicer that everyone has the opportunity to steal items off the other team but perhaps that would work. |
Brush Master
HavoK Core RISE of LEGION
519
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 15:48:00 -
[59] - Quote
I would suggest that BPO should not be salvageable, only the modules or non bpo items on it. Allowing salvage on BPO vehicles would be very exploitable. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet
180
|
Posted - 2013.06.09 14:44:00 -
[60] - Quote
Brush Master wrote:I would suggest that BPO should not be salvageable, only the modules or non bpo items on it. Allowing salvage on BPO vehicles would be very exploitable.
Well, yeah that's one thing thats tricky and has to be worked out.
Since we're in an EVE related game, let's compare DUST looting to EVE looting.
If I remember correctly (it's been a while since I did this) in EVE when you steal someone's ship you get all the items in his cargohold. Which would include a BPO. But this isn't exactly like stealing someone's BPO in EVE since in EVE you use a POS/Research Station to use your BPOs, and if you steal a ship with BPOs in the cargo that's not really relatable to DUST since you don't have a "cargohold"
I think there should be some way to be able to liberate the BPOs of others for your own gain though, but simply stealing one vehicle off someone's BPO fit isn't exactly a "balanced" way of doing it. |
|
Abu Stij
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
183
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 13:54:00 -
[61] - Quote
Not bumping. |
Judge Rhadamanthus
Kapow Heavy Industries
150
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 14:23:00 -
[62] - Quote
But where is the balance? I call my DS in and chose a stupid spot. You kill me and keep 1.3 million of assets. How do I as a DS pilot make 1.3 million in ISK or assets from you?
I can't steal your guns or suits. Letting you keep it lets you gain something from a match in a way I cannot. That is not fair. If you can steal my stuff, I need to be able to steal yours. Otherwise we have a situation where those making high risk investments can be robbed by those who are taking no such risk.
How about if i get close enough to hold O on you you get knocked out and I get your suit? Fair? |
Shadow Archeus
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
90
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 14:30:00 -
[63] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:But where is the balance? I call my DS in and chose a stupid spot. You kill me and keep 1.3 million of assets. How do I as a DS pilot make 1.3 million in ISK or assets from you?
I can't steal your guns or suits. Letting you keep it lets you gain something from a match in a way I cannot. That is not fair. If you can steal my stuff, I need to be able to steal yours. Otherwise we have a situation where those making high risk investments can be robbed by those who are taking no such risk.
How about if i get close enough to hold O on you you get knocked out and I get your suit? Fair?
The fact that you even said chose a stupid spot.....ergo its not my problem.....pick a better spot......its fair whether u think it is or not |
Judge Rhadamanthus
Kapow Heavy Industries
150
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 14:41:00 -
[64] - Quote
Shadow Archeus wrote:The fact that you even said chose a stupid spot.....ergo its not my problem.....pick a better spot......its fair whether u think it is or not
Well done for avoiding the content of my post and focusing on a totally irrelevant point. Making an assertion that it's fair without justification is useless. Saying it is fair weather i think so or not is a somewhat weak argument. I can simply reply by saying it is not fair. Now where do we go. Justify your response or be ignored.
Ill try help you. Lets say its a great spot, but i disconnect, or it drops on me, or i get pushed far from it by a friendly lav..It makes no difference. You as infantry have a way to make millions of ISK. The Pilot does not.
Explain how it is fair that in a match we can both :
Kill Get War Points Get Skill Points Earn ISK from battle payments
But only you can stay in role and steal millions from me. I'm waiting. |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
186
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 18:01:00 -
[65] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:
Well done for avoiding the content of my post and focusing on a totally irrelevant point. Making an assertion that it's fair without justification is useless. Saying it is fair weather i think so or not is a somewhat weak argument. I can simply reply by saying it is not fair. Now where do we go. Justify your response or be ignored.
Ill try help you. Lets say its a great spot, but i disconnect, or it drops on me, or i get pushed far from it by a friendly lav..It makes no difference. You as infantry have a way to make millions of ISK. The Pilot does not.
Explain how it is fair that in a match we can both :
Kill Get War Points Get Skill Points Earn ISK from battle payments
But only you can stay in role and steal millions from me. I'm waiting.
It is fair, because you chose a poor spot to deploy from. Its a punishment for you making a bad decision in the match. In the current scenario, you don't get punished and the "thief" doesn't get any reward for keeping the dropship alive nor using your dropship during the battle other than a short term gain, which even then is easily stoppable through competent anti-vehicle dropsuit fittings.
You can, obviously, try stealing it back or steal something else or have one of your allies do the same thing the opponent just did to you.
The dropsuit/weapon loot option you mentioned is also a viable way to balance things out, and you actually do get that loot in a Planetary Conquest match so that point is moot if you're trying to make it seem like its not at all in place right now.
So in summary:
1) Take responsibility for your actions/decisions in the match 2) Coordinate with your team to take back your dropship or take something from the other team 3) Stop complaining you don't get loot when you do in PC matches, and ask that CCP implement better loot drops in all match types if you avoid PC matches.
The fact you are demanding someone make an assertion that something is "fair" when you opened your statement with "what if I chose a dumb spot?" is hilarious. This is New Eden, and if you haven't noticed or heard, but "fairness" is what the losing side harps about when they make a stupid decision. When CCP makes it so the fault of the end result is on the one who made the poor decision, its a fair thing as there is no one to blame but the person who chose to do the wrong thing. Don't blame the thief if you leave your car unlocked and with the key in the ignition. |
Judge Rhadamanthus
Kapow Heavy Industries
150
|
Posted - 2013.06.12 09:09:00 -
[66] - Quote
That a long reply where you missed the point. Ill try make this simple
1) We both die 5 times. Loot is handed out as part of loot table at the end of the match - Both of us share this method. Our suits and equipment are added to the loot table. Balance (well sort of. In a vehicle i lose a suit and a vehicle)
2) I die calling in a drop ship. How is totally irrelevant. Please try to get that. i lose my suit and you, because you were close can personally take my vehicle. it does NOT go into the loot pool for the team. - You gain from me and above your team millions of ISK.
Now is there a way for a tank/HAV/DS pilot to remove loot from the loot table and take it personally while playing his role? No. This is the imbalance. You are asking for a way to make more ISK in a match than I can just because you are infantry. That is imbalanced. That is the unfairness.
Now please stop with this childish truism about new eden being unfair. If your an adult you should know that this isn't new eden, this is a game on Earth. It is a profit generating medium targeted at the media market. It is a product that sells for real money things like tanks to people. If you do that you need to watch your product carefully to avoid breaking the law.
If i can have a AUR DS taken from me then the game needs to allow me to do the same to others. And not just their DS or Tank but whatever they have bought to the fight in the same manner they can take my stuff. In this case hacking it after their death.
Abu Stij wrote:Don't blame the thief if you leave your car unlocked and with the key in the ignition.
Also did you seriously write that while sober? What a ignorant thing to write. I guess if you wear a short dress and get drunk you cant blame the rapist, or the burglar for coming into your house on a warm night if you sleep with the window open. You see it all the time do you? You vulgar synonym for the human vulva |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
188
|
Posted - 2013.06.12 15:01:00 -
[67] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:That a long reply where you missed the point. Ill try make this simple 1) We both die 5 times. Loot is handed out as part of loot table at the end of the match - Both of us share this method. Our suits and equipment are added to the loot table. Balance (well sort of. In a vehicle i lose a suit and a vehicle) 2) I die calling in a drop ship. How is totally irrelevant. Please try to get that. i lose my suit and you, because you were close can personally take my vehicle. it does NOT go into the loot pool for the team. - You gain from me and above your team millions of ISK. Now is there a way for a tank/HAV/DS pilot to remove loot from the loot table and take it personally while playing his role? No. This is the imbalance. You are asking for a way to make more ISK in a match than I can just because you are infantry. That is imbalanced. That is the unfairness. Now please stop with this childish truism about new eden being unfair. If your an adult you should know that this isn't new eden, this is a game on Earth. It is a profit generating medium targeted at the media market. It is a product that sells for real money things like tanks to people. If you do that you need to watch your product carefully to avoid breaking the law. If i can have a AUR DS taken from me then the game needs to allow me to do the same to others. And not just their DS or Tank but whatever they have bought to the fight in the same manner they can take my stuff. In this case hacking it after their death. Abu Stij wrote:Don't blame the thief if you leave your car unlocked and with the key in the ignition. Also did you seriously write that while sober? What a ignorant thing to write. I guess if you wear a short dress and get drunk you cant blame the rapist, or the burglar for coming into your house on a warm night if you sleep with the window open. You see it all the time do you? You vulgar synonym for the human vulva
1) No, that is balance because both people lost something. Just because you're a pilot and someone else is a soldier doesn't mean the soldier has to lose more just to match your loss of a vehicle you willingly put out into the field.
2) It shouldn't go into the loot pool for the team because the individual was able to hack the device, and recall it to his own cargo hold. I'm not sure where you got the idea that the team gains the millions of ISK but sure, if you lost something why can't someone else get anything from it?
Actually there is, it's this nifty concept that you, as a pilot, have your team help you steal another vehicle on the map and take it for yourself. I'm not sure how you can't comprehend that as a strategy or plan or if you are being willfully obstinate but that is a fully capable thing you can do in any class across the game. There is no "pilots can't ever hack" mechanic in the game nor should there ever be.
If you're willing to put out your expensive ship with the knowledge that you can lose it, don't cry foul when someone takes it from you. You're basically asking for permanent protection of your items from your own mistakes with no way for the other party to gain anything outside of a handful of war-points for destroying something expensive.
The ad hominem about "you're being a child" is silly. The game takes place in New Eden. We're talking about that aspect, not what the medium is being used to enter that "world". The fact you're trying to apply that destroying or "stealing" someone's tank in a battle because they bought it with real money is potentially illegal is laughable and you're ignorance to laws is apparent. The game clearly states "you can lose your items" and that should apply to your tanks. Let's compare a game where you actually pay to play it that uses a similar mechanic and is also by CCP Games, EVE Online. In EVE people can ransom each other for the digital goods of a space ship you bought with digital money you converted with real money (via PLEX), there doesn't seem to be anyone claiming legal fault on CCP for allowing that to happen. They also have a pretty solid legal team at CCP and have to deal with a multitude of different country's laws and regulations to make their product available in as many places as possible.
Regarding to your accusation that I was supporting rapists by saying "Don't blame the thief if you leave your car unlocked with the key in the ignition"; Holy Christ you can't be that desperately grasping at straws can you? One is an inanimate object left unprotected, the other is assaulting a person because of the clothing they wore. Are you that dense or are you just trying to be? A person being violated is not the same as an object being taken, the fact you're trying to compare the two is hilarious.
Also thank's the for attempt to skirt around the rules, but be an adult and leave the name calling at home. |
Richard Hansaw
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 06:18:00 -
[68] - Quote
+1 |
PizztOleMan
Axis of Chaos
5
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 06:51:00 -
[69] - Quote
ive had these exact convo's with my friends... OP 100% support as long as its a true copy... un changeable and fully 'usable' (skill free) |
Richard Hansaw
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 07:02:00 -
[70] - Quote
I know I've already +1'd this, but I'd like to add that this would be a real nice addition, along with WP for "Vehicle Hack" and "Vehicle Capture" because it gives an incentive to vehicle hacking, otherwise you just shoot them for WP. |
|
DeathwindRising
ROGUE SPADES EoN.
28
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 07:46:00 -
[71] - Quote
Abu Stij wrote:During several games last evening myself and several other members of the DUST 514 community were all talking about hacking vehicles in a battle.
Currently when you hack an enemy vehicle you simply are granted friendly access to the LAV/HAV or Dropship for however long it takes you to run it off a cliff and blow it up Gumball Rally style.
The assumption was made that if you hacked the vehicle, you could keep it in your assets as you effectively "stole" it from your enemy, much like scamming or more specifically looting occurs in EVE Online.
CCP and fellow DUST players, I propose a change to the current system in which if/when you hack someones vehicle you can recall it and save the vehicle for future deployment either in that battle, or in whatever battle you wish in the future. This vehicle would and should be represented in your post match "Salvage" section, on top of any other salvage you might have received during that match.
This game mechanic is both a way to curb people from spawning tons of vehicles in a match, as well as provide those who hack the vehicle a reward for their effort.
I have brought this up to a CPM0 member and he is in support of it, and I hope both CCP and the DUST community would consider this proposal a good way to curb the mass vehicle spawning and provide people more incentives to work in the "Hacking" side of things for their respective armies.
unfortunately,CCP will most likely some how manage to do the exact opposite of what we want... like they always do. |
Sibri Vannikh
Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 08:00:00 -
[72] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do. What about saving the vehicle as a whole in the hackers inventory instead of saving each item and he could not change the fitting of the vehicle. Same could apply for recalling own vehicles. If you know how to weld you will know that it needs alot of work to un-weld something. Also it would not be as rugged anymore so it would be better to just leave it as it is. |
ARF 1049
The Phoenix Federation
27
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 08:04:00 -
[73] - Quote
yeah great idea just have it show up in your inventory as hacked-whatever vehicle. you can't edit it or anything only deploy it and it can't be recalled it has to survive the match |
Abu Stij
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
191
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 12:49:00 -
[74] - Quote
PizztOleMan wrote:ive had these exact convo's with my friends... OP 100% support as long as its a true copy... un changeable and fully 'usable' (skill free)
Making it unchangeable is a grey area as in EVE when you take someone's ship in a heist or scam, you can still change the fitting. What would be better is locking the vehicle from being changed while in battle, so that you can only alter it while in your Mercenary Quarters, which is the only way to actually change fittings in EVE. I would prefer that system over making it so that I can never change a stolen vehicles fitting.
I also think making it so that even if you don't have the skills, you can still call it into a battle makes the need for LAV, HAV or Dropship skills completely useless which isn't at all helpful. If you don't have the skills, you can't use it.
Referencing EVE again, I can scam someone out of a Tengu even if I can't fly it. I still own it, I just can't use it until I'm skilled in the required areas. Selling it/contracting it to my corp/alliance however, is entirely possible and a useful avenue for income so that should be applicable to this. |
Saucy Butt Love
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 20:42:00 -
[75] - Quote
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do.[/quote]What if:
1. Enemy infantry gonna hack my HAV. 2. My teammates gonna kill that guy before he manage to recall it. 3. My teammates gonna hack "my" HAV and try to recall it(?)
Whose property will be HAV in that scenario?
My teammates can not simply recall my HAV. And what if 3 guys is hacking enemy vehicle, who of them will be able to recall it?[/quote]
Wow your English is atrocious.
1. Enemy infantry hack 'my' HAV 2. My team mate kills the enemy after the hack but before he recalls it 3. My team mate hacks the enemy tank and recalls it.
Whose property is the HAV in that scenario? My team mates cannot simply recall my HAV, and what if 3 guys are hacking the enemy vehicle, who of them will be able to recall it?
Well in answer to you question after making it easier to read and understand.
Unfortunately the tank would be your team mates, however maybe there can be a 'gift back' command where if this happens you can gift the item back to the original owner and be rewarded 1000isk or 100wp.
The answer to your second question (3 guys hacking at once) is simple, whoever started hacking first. In the rare scenario where they hack at the same time then they can do all sorts of things from dual after the game or bid for it. |
Defy Gravity
Silver Talon Corporation
55
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:10:00 -
[76] - Quote
I support this fully! |
Dimitri Rascolovitch
The Immortal Knights
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 19:49:00 -
[77] - Quote
There are so many times where i have hacked peoples indestructo-LLAVS, HAVs and dropships, and become saddened because i couldnt recall it |
Abu Stij
Leessang.
236
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 21:50:00 -
[78] - Quote
Is it possible to get an update on this concept? |
The-Errorist
319
|
Posted - 2013.10.29 20:43:00 -
[79] - Quote
Still would like. |
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
45
|
Posted - 2013.10.29 21:22:00 -
[80] - Quote
There needs to be a new module: the booby trap. Potentially such that a proto-level mod that can destroy other assets in a player's inventory! :D
Let the griefing commence! |
|
General Erick
Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION
166
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 00:57:00 -
[81] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:A little tack-on here - it goes without saying that going this route would mean that you wouldn't be able to call in your salvage if you don't have the skills for it. It would work just as any other item you have in your inventory. Awww man, you just killed my buzz
Fatbros for life! Stand against the oppression that is AR, and fight!
|
SponkSponkSponk
The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine
455
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 03:24:00 -
[82] - Quote
Abu Stij wrote:Is it possible to get an update on this concept?
Is Blam still working for CCP?
"Pulvis et umbra sumus. (We are but dust and shadow.)"
GÇò Horace, The Odes of Horace
|
emtbraincase
Falconpunch Hatesurfers
20
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 06:22:00 -
[83] - Quote
It's all fun and games till a blueberry steals your dropship and recalls it. Or your tank. Or your logiLAV. If it has to be an enemy, then this would easily be used to transfer vehicles for isk transfers, thus circumventing the market restrictions currently in place.
That being said, I support this idea. |
KingBlade82
NECROM0NGERS
207
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 07:49:00 -
[84] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:This is a great thread. Let me provide some background.
We have discussed allowing players to directly salvage items - not just for vehicles, on the battlefield. I really like the proposal for the vehicle salvage, where hacked vehicles can be recalled into the hacker's inventory. To do this however, we would have to resolve a couple of technical issues:
1. Rather than making a vehicle usable by a particular team/individual after being hacked, enforce the concept of a new "owner" of the vehicle, so that the vehicle knows where to go to when being recalled.
2. Each blueprint and corresponding item would need to be linked. It wouldn't be feasible (or make much sense) to allow players who have hacked a vehicle that is a blueprint or has blueprints on it to inherit that blueprint. Rather, we would want a recall to place a blueprint's corresponding consumable item in the player's inventory.
This isn't a gargantuan task, but it's not something we can quickly deploy as part of a hotfix.
Thanks for the feedback guys, I will see what I can do.
not our fault u added vehicle BPO's
JOIN NECROM0NGERS TODAY
need 10 mil SP and a mic
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
121
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 09:25:00 -
[85] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:A little tack-on here - it goes without saying that going this route would mean that you wouldn't be able to call in your salvage if you don't have the skills for it. It would work just as any other item you have in your inventory. Tag, you like my tag:D?
(-í° -£-û -í°) Nerf Me If You Dare.
|
Xaviah Reaper
Nyain San Proficiency V.
172
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 14:03:00 -
[86] - Quote
Abu Stij wrote:During several games last evening myself and several other members of the DUST 514 community were all talking about hacking vehicles in a battle.
Currently when you hack an enemy vehicle you simply are granted friendly access to the LAV/HAV or Dropship for however long it takes you to run it off a cliff and blow it up Gumball Rally style.
The assumption was made that if you hacked the vehicle, you could keep it in your assets as you effectively "stole" it from your enemy, much like scamming or more specifically looting occurs in EVE Online.
CCP and fellow DUST players, I propose a change to the current system in which if/when you hack someones vehicle you can recall it and save the vehicle for future deployment either in that battle, or in whatever battle you wish in the future. This vehicle would and should be represented in your post match "Salvage" section, on top of any other salvage you might have received during that match.
This game mechanic is both a way to curb people from spawning tons of vehicles in a match, as well as provide those who hack the vehicle a reward for their effort.
I have brought this up to a CPM0 member and he is in support of it, and I hope both CCP and the DUST community would consider this proposal a good way to curb the mass vehicle spawning and provide people more incentives to work in the "Hacking" side of things for their respective armies.
the issue with this is that you may hack something you cant use therefore cant deploy. so you'll fill your inventory with loads of random crap you cant use. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
Kinsho Swords Caldari State
41
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:20:00 -
[87] - Quote
I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT SO MANY OF YOU LIKE THIS IDEAL . BUT THEN AGAIN I CAN . What if your not skilled in the mods or skilled enough to have YOUR OWN type of the same vehicle ??? Will this IDEAL be like how when you scavenge a weapon , that you can't use that said weapon , until YOU HAVE OBTAINED the skill to operate it ???? If that's the case then yes go ahead and use this , by all means . To have someone rolling around in a vehicle that they haven't put in the work to obtain the vehicle , vehicle mods , turrets and the skill set even just , SOUNDS FOOLISH and GREEDY as well as just STUPID and somewhat like a shortcut to scam the system , which might I add there is enough of that , that goes on already .
This is not something new and if CCP listens to you who like this ideal without implementing some specifics then that LETS ME KNOW what type of people that I support and they had me fooled .
You should have to gain the skill set NO QUESTIONS ASKED before you could operate whatever that you have obtained
But like someone already said this seems like having more stuff in your arsenal that your not using or just can't for those who don't have the skill and that just seems meaningless.
" Doubts are like flies and should be crushed !!!!!! " I hope that I am THE FLY SWATTER of those in my presence .
|
Seymor Krelborn
DUST University Ivy League
1036
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:27:00 -
[88] - Quote
I approve of this.
in the 9 months ive been playing its always been discussed, asked for, and wanted.
an added thought to make it work with the bpo vehicles...
the thief should get to keep that copy but the bpo should still remain the owner's |
Abu Stij
WaffleDingos
246
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 05:12:00 -
[89] - Quote
Xaviah Reaper wrote: the issue with this is that you may hack something you cant use therefore cant deploy. so you'll fill your inventory with loads of random crap you cant use.
So you're saying any items "looted" must be immediately usable by the person who looted them or stole them. You do realize how silly that is right?
Just because someone may not have the proper skills to use it doesn't mean they shouldn't even be able to steal it and store it in their hangar/war room. |
Komodo Jones
Chaotik Serenity
189
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 05:30:00 -
[90] - Quote
Great idea, but this brings up the question...how the hell are we able to pilot hacked vehicles in the first place without the correct skills to call one in yourself? Do the skills only apply to fitting the vehicle? No, several skills help functionality of any of the things you use in the game. My image of this plan being implemented is that you get the modules and the vehicle and the turrets just placed in your assets, in which case you wouldn't be able to use them anyway unless you had the right skills.
If it didn't happen like this then you're list of stolen vehicle fittings would become incredibly cluttered as alot of people have different fits of vehicles, therefore the only real application of stolen materials in this game unless by chance you had the skills to use them, would be to be sold on the market whenever it opens up. That is unless they modify the menu to accommodate the vast array of vehicles and other stolen gear that could be collected. |
|
Nyx Linx
Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 11:57:00 -
[91] - Quote
Aran Abbas wrote:I support this proposal for vehicle theft. gta5 |
Slag Emberforge
Immortal Retribution
114
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 15:30:00 -
[92] - Quote
Great thread, love the concept, I am not saying that this will always keep me from blowing them up. Buy you better believe if I'd recall a LAV that's full of mods rather than just leaving it to get blown up. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
Kinsho Swords Caldari State
53
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 17:07:00 -
[93] - Quote
Nova Knife wrote:As far as I know, it was supposed to be this way already.
When I saw the recall feature at fanfest, the first thing I asked CCP Jian was "Can I use this to steal people's stuff?" He said Yes.
I think it's a bug that it doesn't work with enemy vehicles. But it should definitely add the stuff to your assets if you steal a friendly, non bpo vehicle.
Someone try it and let me know?
So now your purposing and allowing the THIEVERY of team mates vehicles and for those same vehicles to become , another persons salvage ?????
( Shakes his head ) I have nothing to say about that . It just goes to show that those who develop this game DO NOT care about the HARD WORK that one puts into their character , nor DO THEY CARE about our happiness or success .
Shame .... Shame . Now I know and that makes me not even want to deploy a tank or any other vehicle to help in the efforts of a victory . Now I can't even gain PERSONAL enjoyment from working hard and enjoying the fruits of MY labor .
Come with the ignorance people , if you please because I'm sure a lot of you will have something cynical to say to this .
" Doubts are like flies and should be crushed !!!!!! " I hope that I am THE FLY SWATTER of those in my presence .
|
Wombat in combat
TeamPlayers EoN.
136
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 17:09:00 -
[94] - Quote
+1 And all that is fitted to the vehicle should also be salvaged. I like also the concept Blam! mentioned, to enable downed enemies to be "hacked" or salvaged for loot. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
Kinsho Swords Caldari State
53
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 17:15:00 -
[95] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:But where is the balance? I call my DS in and chose a stupid spot. You kill me and keep 1.3 million of assets. How do I as a DS pilot make 1.3 million in ISK or assets from you?
I can't steal your guns or suits. Letting you keep it lets you gain something from a match in a way I cannot. That is not fair. If you can steal my stuff, I need to be able to steal yours. Otherwise we have a situation where those making high risk investments can be robbed by those who are taking no such risk.
How about if i kill you and hold O on your body for 10 seconds, like the hack, I get your suit and can rob you of 500k ISK (to balance for vehicle users loss)? Fair?
The way CCP Blam describes it is unfair. Infantry get the chance to make Millions from vehicles but the pilots of tanks and DS don't, unless we get out or are playing off role. Drawing board.. return to.
A shame that I can ONLY give you ONE like .
" Doubts are like flies and should be crushed !!!!!! " I hope that I am THE FLY SWATTER of those in my presence .
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
Kinsho Swords Caldari State
53
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 17:35:00 -
[96] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Shadow Archeus wrote:The fact that you even said chose a stupid spot.....ergo its not my problem.....pick a better spot......its fair whether u think it is or not Well done for avoiding the content of my post and focusing on a totally irrelevant point. Making an assertion that it's fair without justification is useless. Saying it is fair weather i think so or not is a somewhat weak argument. I can simply reply by saying it is not fair. Now where do we go. Justify your response or be ignored. Ill try help you. Lets say its a great spot, but i disconnect, or it drops on me, or i get pushed far from it by a friendly lav..It makes no difference. You as infantry have a way to make millions of ISK. The Pilot does not. Explain how it is fair that in a match we can both : Kill Get War Points Get Skill Points Earn ISK from battle payments But only you can stay in role and steal millions from me. I'm waiting.
Sir , that's why you are in the position that you are in and thought of as being HIGHLY REGARDED . But I will elaborate with a series of questions ???
Why would those who have developed and created THIS game , who set up a system of checks and balances ( i.e. the skill tree ) allow such ??? What are WE working SO hard for to begin with then ??? What does this say about those making the rules and the fact that they are not , nor can they be held accountable ??? What other changes are in store ??? Is that stable or shows a since of stability ???
What are those who work hard , working for when someone who has done NOTHING but happen to be in a opportunistic place , time and doesn't have the skills for the vehicle , mods , turrets or the additional skill sets that are required to operate some vehicles ( Not to mention the fact that some skills add particular items ... i.e. increase in recharge time or computer and programming usage or a decrease of usage in regards of computer and programming by a particular mod ) , can just by chance acquire your vehicle , mods and turrets and place them in their arsenal for use and yes they happen to be on YOUR team to begin with ???
Use your brains people ( no disrespect intended ) and think , does this really make since ????
" Doubts are like flies and should be crushed !!!!!! " I hope that I am THE FLY SWATTER of those in my presence .
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
Kinsho Swords Caldari State
53
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 17:55:00 -
[97] - Quote
This feed just shows that there are SO MANY LAZY , untrustworthy ( has nothing to do with this being a game so don't use that as an excuse , it's just in your nature ) , unhappy ( happy people show respect and are happy for others , where clearly there are so many HATERS here ... don't like the term and feel it's over used and used inappropriately , like SWAG in an attempt to sound cool or hip ) and selfish people who play this game .
GET OUT AND GET YOUR OWN !!!!!! YOU ARE NOT HELPLESS AND MOST OF YOU HAVE BEEN PLAYING THIS GAME SINCE BETA AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T I CAN UNDERSTAND because that's just how your generation is . Full of non working but wanting to have the fruits of someone else's labor and always out sourcing . This world is coming to an end soon , I can tell . People have no since of self appreciation or since of self worth , just take from someone else what you can WORK and have for yourself . No wonder why these kids these days are the way they are , where they think that they know everything and don't know anything or doesn't listen to anyone because there isn't too many who are trying to set a positive example out there .
Have fun people . That's all you care about and you deserve it but your fun might not be fun for and to someone else but what do you care anyway huh ????
I'm threw preaching .
" Doubts are like flies and should be crushed !!!!!! " I hope that I am THE FLY SWATTER of those in my presence .
|
Nonya Bizznizz
Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 19:04:00 -
[98] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:A little tack-on here - it goes without saying that going this route would mean that you wouldn't be able to call in your salvage if you don't have the skills for it. It would work just as any other item you have in your inventory. I believe that you should be able to recall any vehicle you successfully hack, yet you cannot deploy it until you meet the skill requirement of everything in the fit, for example, if I hijack and recall a Soma fitted with advanced turrets I am not skilled into, I should be able to recall the Soma, and either swap the turrets or skill into them to be able to deploy it. |
Flint Beastgood III
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
287
|
Posted - 2013.11.06 11:08:00 -
[99] - Quote
I've always said this should be the case. CCP, please implement this along with the ability to lock our vehicles - the best way would be (as someone else suggested somewhere on these forums) to be able to select who can enter your vehicles (squad/corp/alliance).
Gÿó +¦ +¦ Gÿó
|
Abu Stij
WaffleDingos
254
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 15:45:00 -
[100] - Quote
I revive this in light of the new vehicle changes in 1.7 that vehicles should not be protected entities. |
|
CLONE117
planetary retaliation organisation
488
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 19:28:00 -
[101] - Quote
if this were implemented long ago. id be the new owner of a lot of enforcer tanks.
but it does have its problems. so some safe guards to prevent others on your own team from taking your own vehicle could be in place.
although i think what ppl are complaining about here would be the this example.
you lose your tank to an enemy. that same enemy then gets out and dies and your vehicle gets hacked back by some1 else on your team.
that player on your team now gets to keep your vehicle.
although i dont think the player should get to recall the vehicle after hacking it.
it should have to survive for the entire match and retrieved later as salvage. as the vehicle is still owned by the player that...misplaced it.
but at the end of that battle the player who hacked it last could become the new owner of said vehicle. i dont see any problem with this. other than the hoarding of hacked enemy vehicles.
and then theres bpos that could be involved in this.
so lets say a player spawns down a bpo vehicle. and it gets hacked,and salvaged.
the person who salvaged it wont get the bpo but instead gets a bpc of the vehicle instead. |
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon
1004
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 19:41:00 -
[102] - Quote
I hope they will implement this feature, even if they have fired the blue who tagged this thread, because it's a good idea. It doesn't happen very much to steal a vehicle, so it should not be a priority but it would be cool to do it.
For example i have a corpmate who has lost more tanks due to disconection than AV and other tanks, 90% of the time, i drive his tank for the rest of the match and i keep it alive, but his tank count as lost and he have to buy another one. With a feature that allows me to recall his tank, i would be able give the tank back to him and he would save a ton of isk.
"Just another piece of duct tape"
Some love for gunners
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY
303
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 21:46:00 -
[103] - Quote
I would only accept this if the hacker couldn't do this unless they had the skills to drive it, and even then, it should take a long ass time to do it. |
Abu Stij
WaffleDingos
260
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 07:48:00 -
[104] - Quote
Roger Cordill wrote:I would only accept this if the hacker couldn't do this unless they had the skills to drive it, and even then, it should take a long ass time to do it.
I have pretty much given hope about posting on these forums.
Anyway since I revived this dead thread let me address this. This sort of mechanic is a double negative for the person attempting to loot. You're punishing their attempt to steal the vehicle in two ways; first by requiring they need the appropriate skills just to steal the vehicle and secondly by requiring it to take additional time to hack versus say an objective.
That's a lot of investment/risk versus the reward which, arguably based off the number and types of suits lost trying to hack the vehicle, doesn't even out. I do think a required level of skill in hacking can solve the issue as it requires some level of investment on the players part.
Do You Like Waffles?
|
Mr m4gic
XSKvLLX
48
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 14:43:00 -
[105] - Quote
You can do iiit, this is definitely something tht needs to be added to the game, it makes complete sense, it might stop ppl from just, blowing your vehicles up as they would probably do they're best to try and evict you from the vehicle, especially if we can actually start selling our assets as it would be a good way of making profit. just had another idea tht you could have a fit on your vehicle tht makes it self destruct if it gets hacked.
Have you seen my baseball??
|
Draco Cerberus
BurgezzE.T.F Public Disorder.
677
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 17:02:00 -
[106] - Quote
There are no reasons that make sense for this not to be in game. Hacking any vehicle should allow you to return it to your inventory. The balance for this is that anyone can do it and if you are going to bring an asset into battle it is possible that you will lose that asset even to one of your team members. Guard your gear and have someone willing to hand it back able to hop in if you get killed.
+1
LogiGod earns his pips
|
Sextus Hardcock
0uter.Heaven
194
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 21:22:00 -
[107] - Quote
+1 nothing bad or exploitable about this idea |
Ghermard-ol Dizeriois
Maphia Clan Corporation
67
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 22:14:00 -
[108] - Quote
Sextus Hardcock wrote:+1 nothing bad or exploitable about this idea
I think you're not considering FW: let me kill you, steal your PRO tank and call the RDV to save it.
Problem?
Good for you I don't like tanks, but I'm pretty sure there are many lurkers hiding out there...
If you are an hacker, a cheater o a glitcher, you deserve death. In real life.
|
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom Renegade Alliance
1087
|
Posted - 2014.01.12 02:12:00 -
[109] - Quote
CCP Blam! wrote:A little tack-on here - it goes without saying that going this route would mean that you wouldn't be able to call in your salvage if you don't have the skills for it. It would work just as any other item you have in your inventory.
the thing I have issue with is: if I kill an aur tank I don't get the payout at the end of that match as if I would have blown up an isk tank. this is totally backwards. aur is more valuable than isk, and I should be paid appropriately when I kill any tank. it's a pain, after all, to kill one. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |