DUST Search - CPM Topic: How would you fix AWOXing

All Channels

General Discussions

CPM Topic: How would you fix AWOXing

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Natu Nobilis BetaMax Beta CRONOS. 298	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:00:00 - [91] - Quote Before battle: 1 - If you-¦re in a player corporation, you answer to people with functions / roles. 2 - One of this functions/roles, should be the one of designating people to battle on the corporations behalf. 3 - Be it assigning a squad leader and letting him choose his team, or handpicking the entire team themselves. 4 - Any resposability of bad picking lies with the person responsible for the battle designations. During battle: 1 - Implement a "Prevent spawn" similar to the flag already in place that is used when a team is out of clones to respawn. 2 - An active awoxer remains active until death. 3 - Awoxer cannot respawn at that battle, but still takes a slot, damaging the team. This way you can awox, you can damage the team, and you have a PERSON that is responsible for anything that happens with the team. If an awoxer got in, blame your HR responsible, fire him or have proper selection next time.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 356	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:00:00 - [92] - Quote I think that kicking would be a bad thing to implement. However, some controls on who's allowed in the match are definitely needed. If you can kick from matches, that completely neutralizes awoxing from the game. I'm sure some people would like this, but that's not what this game is about - it's meant to be something more than a simple lobby shooter (Whingers who believe that it is aside). If proper controls are in place, like specific roles for creating squads in PC matches, then someone able to convince someone with that role, or get that role themselves, should be able to go in and awox. With controls, there is a mechanic to protect against it, but without completely stopping awoxing entirely. It's like an overpowered weapon being nerfed completely to uselessness if there's a kick feature. The other problem with kick features is that it promotes general faggotry among those with the role. You can tell someone to find a better corp, but what if it's one director that they don't get on with, and they're spacebros with everyone else? Awoxing is a good thing for dust - it's exactly the kind of mechanic that this game should promote. Right now, though, it's like a tactical AR. It's far too effective, but care must be taken to ensure it's not broken completely when the nerfbat strikes.
Heidoukan Forsaken Immortals Gentlemen's Agreement 2	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:05:00 - [93] - Quote Nova Knife, How about solving the problem before they enter the designated corp ? Kicking is too aggressive for me and that will lead (in the long run) to corp's asking for players with impeccable K/D ratio (that's my opinion so don't take this the wrong way) Don't know if this already is implemented but since i don't have a PS3 in front of me i'll do it anyway. For everyone's approval. New Search Function (under Player Contacts) Who has access to this search function: People with Directors and Recruiters role How to obtain it: By using a skill Book. If CCP chooses they could create a new SP sink with this (under CORPORATION). Each level of the skill could for example open up a new sub section of information about the player in question. Having something like this is in essence a worthwhile long-term investment for any corporation who seeks to invest in FW+PC. I'll be using the skill book reference throughout this text. You either hate it or love it. Either way it will start to make people think about coming up with alternatives. Moving along..... How does it work and how is it useful Well quite simply (and if it's technically possible) the skill book gives access to information about a player by using there PSN_ID. Each level of the skill opens up more information which could be similar to what Eve players have atm with the API. You might say how is this information useful to me. Well if CCP could show every single character that PSN_ID is linked too, then how can't it be useful. More reasons on why this is useful: 1. It opens up new avenues for background checking. Each level of information should have a direct correlation to the level of the skill book. Why you ask. Well put simply, it's a give and take situation. CCP offers the information freely but they want something in return aka Gaming Time. If the Director/Recruiter wants more information, well you get the general idea... 2. It makes spies actually put in alot of work to infiltrate a corp. Let's be real here, spies are the bread and butter of EVE and they should exist but what gratification is there when it's so easy to infiltrate a corp. Let them have fun in coming up with new ways to bypass an obstacle. What kind of information This is an example of course->>>> Insert Player X PSN_ID*** Level 1 - Access to 1st Char SP + the usual info (PSN_ID + Game Name) Level 2 - Access to 1st Char SP + Skill Books Invested + the usual info (PSN_ID + Game Name) Level 3 - And so on and so on Level 4 - And so on and so on Level 5 - Access to all 3 Chars information (AUR, SP, Skill Books Invested, Most Weapon Used, K/D Ratio etc.. etc... ) Hope i didn't waste to much of your time reading through all of this. If i did, my humble apology. If i didn't hope you enjoyed it. Peace.
Natu Nobilis BetaMax Beta CRONOS. 298	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:12:00 - [94] - Quote Implement the damn MCC command role and the problem is solved. Every battle have one person in charge, the person in charge is responsible for all the things that happen during battle, including team picking. People should be responsible for their choices, specially the bad ones. Kicking people during battle is avoiding this responsability. If this becomes a game without consequences because of child whinners, the niche players will leave, and then the whinners will go to the new Battle Duty 15 and finally this game sinks. As said earlier, one person responsible for the pickings per battle, during battle active clones remains active, and prevent respawn will be harmful enough, not too much, not too little, for both parties.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 59	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:39:00 - [95] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Short disclaimer before going off into the sunset on fixing the issue. I'll admit it is far too easy and there needs to be some 'challenge' added for it to happen. Over time though corps will eventually burn all the alts out of the corp so this problem might die down or be reasonably managed within the coming weeks well before CCP pushes out a Sony patch to fix it. /kick or /votekick option would result in well... lets say far more drama and actual 'real grief' than Awoxing itself. Example 1 of why kick is bad. Timmy wanted to enjoy PC for the first time, he is rather fresh and nobody else was available to help fight at the minute the battle started. Timmy we come to find out is far better than originally though far better than the guy he is filling in for. Johnny logs on a minute late to the fight and see that Timmy took his spot. Johnny /kicks Timmy right in the middle of a what would have been a game winning hack and costs the corporation the planet. Johnny would have got fired but he's the CEO and blames Timmy for the loss and kicks him from the corp for something not his fault. Example 2 of why kick is bad. Floyd is a spy, he got the role to kick people from a corp match. The corp all goes into a battle and Floyd being very sneaky invites his not so friendly friends and makes them squad leader, and then kicks everyone that isn't his friends out. End Result nobody suspects Floyd because Floyd isn't in the fight and there is not a single friendly on the field. The one sided match does into a grand Mario Kart Race. TL:DR Barring the /kick option. What other 'out of the box' solutions would you have? Role? Other Mechanics? Corp Tools? Flagging? Anyways the floor is yours guys and gals; have at it. Gallows.
Sylwester Dziewiecki BetaMax. CRONOS. 78	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:41:00 - [96] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: TL:DR Barring the /kick option. What other 'out of the box' solutions would you have? Role? Other Mechanics? Corp Tools? Flagging? Anyways the floor is yours guys and gals; have at it. I'm not voting on option to kick someone from team while he is in battle - this is simple solution, and CCP usually don't use that kind of stuff, it's not in their stylle. I have three ideas. First one is new role 'team commander', he will be able to stuff that squad commander can do today, but on team level. Second one that is connected with first one - new corporation role, that allow to join PC match. The third idea is to implement equipment for spies which will help them to interfere in course of the combat, but not in so massive manner. 1. Let's implement Team Commander role to corporation management system(TC will be temporary Battlefield Commander that that in future will sit in MCC and command). TC should be able to: Primary rolles - Create team from X amount of squads. - While joining any corporation battle his team will have priority over people that are currently in War Warge(so mercenaries that are waiting for battle will be automatically kick from it). Secondary rolles - Team that TC creat will be able to queue for public matches, or mercenaries matches at same term as squad today. - TC will be able to manage voice settings for team as whole, squad commanders, squad mates - save those settings or unload that as he wish. That's it, I think it's pretty narrow thinks that TC could do at beginning in future this role could be transferred into Battlefield Commander with all fancy things. 2. Beside that I think that we need to have corporation roles that approve you to joining PC battles. Since today we have just two roles in corp(CEO and Director) I don't know if we can assign for a member more than just one roles to a member. Role 'PC Merc' will be required to join PC battle as a member, not as a squad commander. This role will not be required if you will be invited to team by Team Commander and then TC will join PC battle. Roles hierarchy: CEO Director Team Commander PC merc member 3. Equipment idea for 'silent' sabotage - actually while writing this post I was thinking only about equipment module that works similarly to Codebreaker, but instead of speed up your own hacking, it's slow down you and your teammates hacking speed extremely or just a little ..and that parameter depend on how many traces spy left behind. It could be plug-in equipment that can be left on null-cannon terminal, and stay there to the end of match. It stay there even after the match so who ever win this match he could disassemble the terminal, send it to some EVE friend that have Hacking skill and could decrypt it. Depending on how strong the module is used, depends on how much data have been decrypt. It may be just 'time' when module was plug it to terminal if it was light penalty to hacking or it could be mercenary ID if he used very strong module. And of course If some spy decide to use 'strong magic' to give his real friends victory he will risking much, so his real friends will try to do everything to prevent disclosure of they spy: by winning the match and taking in possession all terminals, with optional could be destroyed or send to EVE friend to 'clean them out'. Let's don't forget about EVE pilots honesty - if someone will want to clean up or decrypt terminal he will have to firstly move it to station, and of course he could die trying to do so. Important terminal could switch the owner, and previous owners could hear some 'reason' ransom offer. We could also implement this part into the Dust, by forcing district owners to move goods between districts, today we have districts that have clone storage so why not have districts that have orbital-rockets that seen stuff to EVE players. In that case goods will have to be move to different part of plant and that could give someone time intercept it, maybe be 'ambush' match or be 'skirmish' on district with rocked. Terminals could be available at the end of match same as salvage pool. Players could start physically trading information that may be encrypted on terminals. Beside "terminal idea" I have also thinking about Repair Tool that temporary reduce target resistance after it bening use on someone. Actually this idea raises a whole bunch of other Spying-Modulus ideas. I bet that you also have similar ideas after reading my post.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4490	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:44:00 - [97] - Quote Kushmir Nadian wrote: Ummmmm....I thought kicking was supported by the lore? I didnt read it but I was told malfunctioning clones got deactivated in the book Templar One. Not sure there's much difference between malfunctioning and betraying. SEMANTICS, really. When you had control of the only clones on the field you could have locked them out and kept the clone on stasis. Right now you don't you cannot prevent a person from reactivating, that leads to a permanent death as the consciousness is lost. A clone must activate somewhere with that conscious abound. CRUs are on demand devices and as long as the implants are batched with the router its going to allow it to build a clone. IMO a /blockclone command would be more ideal as it would force the hostile to use the enemy's clone supply instead. At least he'll be red and he will stop being able from using blue stuff.
Kushmir Nadian Valor Coalition RISE of LEGION 255	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:50:00 - [98] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Kushmir Nadian wrote: Ummmmm....I thought kicking was supported by the lore? I didnt read it but I was told malfunctioning clones got deactivated in the book Templar One. Not sure there's much difference between malfunctioning and betraying. SEMANTICS, really. When you had control of the only clones on the field you could have locked them out and kept the clone on stasis. Right now you don't you cannot prevent a person from reactivating, that leads to a permanent death as the consciousness is lost. A clone must activate somewhere with that conscious abound. CRUs are on demand devices and as long as the implants are batched with the router its going to allow it to build a clone. IMO a /blockclone command would be more ideal as it would force the hostile to use the enemy's clone supply instead. At least he'll be red and he will stop being able from using blue stuff. NOT BAD. wouldnt have a problem with this.
DeeJay One BetaMax. CRONOS. 30	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:51:00 - [99] - Quote Natu Nobilis wrote: During battle: 1 - Implement a "Prevent spawn" similar to the flag already in place that is used when a team is out of clones to respawn. 2 - An active awoxer remains active until death. 3 - Awoxer cannot respawn at that battle, but still takes a slot, damaging the team. So much this. As you have to bring clones before the match to the planet and each clone is tailored to the specific character leaving the spot taken by the player unavailable would be a good idea IMHO. Before people start crying that they need the spot - Hellstorm has shown that you can win even with AWOXers on your team. Can't really decide if this is ok for an interim solution, but I'd like to have it that way, instead of just kicking people and bringing others in that spot. As for the proper solution, corp roles/ranks with the above would be fine for me.
Ydubbs81 RND Ahrendee Mercenaries 1299	Posted - 2013.05.21 13:06:00 - [100] - Quote All of these tldr "fixes". Just only allow your corp members to join. Allies can still be used for calling orbitals, sharing strategies, training, non-aggressive pacts between allies, declaring war with simultaneous attacks, etc. Alliances will still be useful....but only allowing corp members to join a match will make this PC thing better. So, if someone wanted to spy or sabotage, they would really have to work for it to get more than one in a battle at the same time. Plus, more districts will be available for smaller corps since one corp may not be able to hold 20 districts by themselves.

The Robot Devil BetaMax. CRONOS. 266	Posted - 2013.05.21 13:32:00 - [101] - Quote Natu Nobilis wrote: Before battle: 1 - If you-¦re in a player corporation, you answer to people with functions / roles. 2 - One of this functions/roles, should be the one of designating people to battle on the corporations behalf. 3 - Be it assigning a squad leader and letting him choose his team, or handpicking the entire team themselves. 4 - Any resposability of bad picking lies with the person responsible for the battle designations. During battle: 1 - Implement a "Prevent spawn" similar to the flag already in place that is used when a team is out of clones to respawn. 2 - An active awoxer remains active until death. 3 - Awoxer cannot respawn at that battle, but still takes a slot, damaging the team. This way you can awox, you can damage the team, and you have a PERSON that is responsible for anything that happens with the team. If an awoxer got in, blame your HR responsible, fire him or have proper selection next time. +1
J Lav Opus Arcana Orion Empire 71	Posted - 2013.05.21 13:34:00 - [102] - Quote The foundational issue for CEO's and Directors at the moment, is implementing security measures within their Corp. The solution should not be to create another Corp, and I think CCP understands this. The solutions are found in management options and structure that puts power into the hands of the employer, without disenfranchising the employed. -Promotion in the ranks - Making it impossible for players to lead a Corp squad into a PC game without being of sufficient rank. ie. CEO promotes "Insert Name" and that player can now lead a squad into PC. In this way, CEO's have some control over who enters PC as a squad leader. Of course once in the game, this requirement is dropped so other players can be promoted if need be. -Command structure during battle - Communication that allows a designated officer in the Corp to give orders to all squads. If a spy is identified, the officer can communicate that to their squads, and contain them, even mark them as a traitor. (Could make for some fun >:D - CEO's could be given a view of members in their corp, and a simple toggle that indicates "approved for PC". In this way, CEO's and/or directors can decide who in their corp is cleared for Planetary Conquest. This would create the same separation as a trainer corp, but within the same corp. TL;DR: Provide Command structure, and CEO permissions to promote and assign roles, rather than punitive kicking.
Surt gods end Demon Ronin 119	Posted - 2013.05.21 13:43:00 - [103] - Quote All these "fixes" But very few are offer a compromise. Spies, or potential spies want an advantage. anti spies, want a quick fix. Just bloody cut the clone support for the spy once they are found out. Making them in red. solves problem. spy can still play, but not cause more damage to blue's. The real fairies here are those that want spies to be back bone of dust. like in eve, so that META becomes first, and actual battling takes a back seat. put the wolves in the cage, and let the bunnies rule. geez... Yup like RL. Politics everywhere, with the occasional fight. You know what's also like RL? SOCOM RULES. yeah bro! One life games. you die, you spectate. lets do it.
CHICAGOCUBS4EVER TeamPlayers EoN. 308	Posted - 2013.05.21 13:46:00 - [104] - Quote Bendtner92 wrote: Ironwolf, both of your examples suck you know. In example 1 it's sad for Timmy, but in that case he should find a better corp for him since that CEO (or director or whoever that kicked him) is just dumb. If a corp doesn't have a CEO and directors that can manage the kick function properly they don't deserve to be in charge of anything. I don't see how this is a problem. In example 2 you argue that once a player have been giving the ability to kick people from the match it's a problem that he can actually make use of that to sabotage the match? Like really? The corp shouldn't have given him the ability then. I don't see how this is a problem. agreed in both scenarios all you QQers can feel free to use your 'HTFU' catch phrase. The tools are in place to remove the saboteur(s) from the match. The fact that Timmy and uncle Gus cant operate the 'kick' button properly isn't anyone fault except maybe Aunt Bunny
Gunner Nightingale Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 570	Posted - 2013.05.21 13:53:00 - [105] - Quote Nova Knife wrote: Nova Knife wrote: People are getting too caught up on kicking as a 'solution'. The Long term, 'Best' Fix is proper roles to manage who can join PC, and Toggles for if a corp wants to allow 'ringers' in their matches or not. (Ringing honestly needs it's own contract marketplace IMO, but that is another issue/feature for later) The only reason CCP is discussing kicking is because it's something they can implement fairly quickly. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want ANOTHER half-assed, ill thought and disruptive mechanic put into the game to 'fix' a problem that only exists because of the same reason. To put it simply; CCP will add kicking over my QQ'ing corpse. I will fight tooth and nail to prevent any player from ever having control of the ability to kick another from any match. Of course, CCP is under no obligation to listen to me, but that's my thoughts on it. Every lobby multiplayer game I have ever played that allowed kicking, it was abused. It was not fun for anyone but the person doing the kicking. I can promise you that if a player is ever able to kick another player from the match... It will be used for far worse things than someone wasting an alt to win a match for their friends. Just because someone has director roles doesn't mean they aren't a jerk. You could argue "Oh, they should find a new corp if their directors suck" but what if they like their corpmates, and the director is so far up the CEO's ass that he will never be punished? Instead of getting caught up on 'fixing' the real problem by creating a different (much worse) problem, what people should be doing in this thread is exploring other methods to stop effortless sabotage that CCP can implement in the short term, that won't cause a massive headache and ruin people's fun? 'Preventing' the awox is a far more important step than 'stopping' the awox IMO. Proper role management IS coming. That fix WILL happen, but not any time in the immediate future. They need to wait for a major expansion for that. Like I said above : right now what the community should focus on is something that will make things better in the meantime without making things worse elsewhere. I don't always quote myself, but when I do, I feel sad that I need to reinforce a point that way. Seriously guys. I have seen like two alternate suggestions to kicking from a match. If you don't like the idea of kicking people... Start coming up with better ideas that are good for the short term that won't cause more problems in the long term than they solve You know what Nova, im quite sick of your personal agendas who the hell elected you to make decisions on behalf of the COMMUNITY, oh wait NOONE. Here we go again with CPMs overreaching and abusing their power and position "CCP will add kicking over my QQ'ing corpse." REALLY WHO THE EFF DO YOU THINK YOU ARE THAT YOUR OPINION IS THE VALID ARGUMENT AND THUS THE ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS. IWS at least gave some hypotheticals, the first hypothetical really isn't a good example because frankly if the situation did occur you don't QQ you get even and lead a coup or insurrection(look at how players in PRO did it when they wanted to get away from CBJ or look at the foundation of the IMPS for that matter. #2 was at least at least thought out more. Noone including us at NF want to stomp out AWOXXING; we love the idea but it has to be done properly and the fact still remains you have many robust tools EVEside that you simply don't have Dust side to limit awoxxing so in actuality you are comparing 2 entirely different methods of making this happen and why you need TEMPORARY measures in place. Frankly i dont care if you have an opinion you are entitled to it, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO A PERSONEL AGENDA AND ADAMANTLY ARGUE UNDER A FALSE PREMISE; YOU HAVE NOT JUSTIFIED YOUR STANCE AGAINST KICK FEATURE(EVEN IN A TEMPORARY MEASURE) BUT CONTINUE TO PRESS A PERSONAL AGENDA BASED ON PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND NOT COMMUNITY EXPERIENCE OR FEEDBACK. CPM is not a Player elected body stop acting as if you represent our voice and start actually listening to this community or watch it revolt and tear it to the ground this is why we didn't want a CPM in the first place and certainly not a CCP appointed CPM. Now hurry the eff up and setup the voting process so we as a community can make determinations in who should or should not be in CPM as this was the main purpose of CPM0, if you continue to abuse your power and your ability to influence CCP through filtered access and biased viewpoints you will do more harm than any kick feature can.
Rogatien Merc Ill Omens EoN. 55	Posted - 2013.05.21 13:55:00 - [106] - Quote Allow anyone in corp to join battle. Allow anyone in corp to take a full squad of that corp into battle. Add a role that would allow people to join battle with a squad that included out-of-corp mercenaries.
Cass Barr Red Star. EoN. 26	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:00:00 - [107] - Quote Allow kicking in the form of denying the use of corporate clones to the saboteur. If the enemy team wants to give them access to their clones, that's their choice. Otherwise they are removed from the battle the next time they die. Commanders and higher rank can grant clone access to rogue third parties in the battles. There should be a 1 minute timer from the time an agent is removed from the team's clones that the opposing team can allow the agent access to theirs. During this timer the agent will not be removed from the battle, just prevented from respawning if killed. This is to prevent an agent from being kicked killed and booted in rapid succession. If kicking is allowed in the pre-battle MCC the enemy team needs the ability to grant clone access that early as well. There also needs to be a 1:30 spawn timer at the start of the match, for reasons I went into elsewhere. Add the following roles under director: Commander, Squad Lead. Commander, Directors, and CEOs have implicit permission to join PC battles. Squad leaders need explicit permission, but only to join PC battles in general (meaning they only need a checkbox somewhere to allow them to join all PC battles, do not require explicit permission for each individual battle). Grunts require nothing, just being in the squad of someone with PC permissions to get them in. Send after-action reports to the CEO stating who joined a battle when and with whom, to prevent abusing the mechanic allowing a rogue to pull in hostile squads without ever risking his identity. Officers can only kick players of lower rank, and they must be present in the battle to do so. Squad leaders can only kick mercs in their squad. Once kicked the player is removed from the battle the next time they die if they haven't been granted access to the other team's clones within a minute of having been kicked. I think this is a flexible system of controls that still allows for sabotage of varying degrees of severity, dependent on how much planning went into implementing it and how much time and effort went into the infiltration.
Sylwester Dziewiecki BetaMax. CRONOS. 78	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:08:00 - [108] - Quote In EVE when someone kick another guy from Fleet, or Corp there is log that show it to others that have rights to see it. If someone still something from your corp container, you can check log of that container, and you have all date - time, who, what. If someone promise you something in game on chat, you can go to logs and you have evidence that he promised you something 'on paper'. When you fart loudly on 255 fleet, there is at least 10 people that know exactly that you did it, because that annoying sound in background is something that they hear in past in much smaller group. There is no such mechanics Dust At the moment when CCP will give CEO and Directors game mechanic that allow to kick players from match 'you' as CEO of your corp will be permanently kicked from every single battle including all others directors and teammates.. till you cut everyone's roles in corp to minimum. It is not difficult to guess how it will end - many more broken hearts, and the stench of decaying tissues..
CHICAGOCUBS4EVER TeamPlayers EoN. 308	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:08:00 - [109] - Quote holy f@ck really? this is yet another example of inability of some people to understand the simple fact that console gamers are NOT PC GAMERS! Us console players want to do just that... play. Not sit in the corner and play 'spin the bottle' with our e-friends cause we have no idea what day it is, much less if we need sunscreen to just walk upstairs out of the basement. Sure spies can sabotage a match to an extent, but once discovered there should be no reason that player(s) be prevented from being removed from the match. believe it or not.. we console gamers want to kill the opposition, work as a team to WIN. not CHEAT... which in its simplest form is all this bullsh1t is. Nova, try acting like someone that is in a position that represents others... your thoughts mean NOTHING. YOUR job is to represent your constituents and provide a platform for US, the players of this game, to iron things out for YOU to then take to CCP and mesh out details. a CPM member should have NO personal agenda, which you clearly do. rough week for CPM lol... just lost faith in another one.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4492	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:15:00 - [110] - Quote Sorry about the bad examples but here is where I see kick function being at It will be the same as refunding isk a disgruntled director stole from the corp.

CHICAGOCUBS4EVER TeamPlayers EoN. 308	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:21:00 - [111] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Sorry about the bad examples but here is where I see kick function being at It will be the same as refunding isk a disgruntled director stole from the corp. honestly I don't see that. We've already seen corps being disbanded and wallets looted from spies or whatever u wanna call them getting a trusted position allowing them access. It has happened a few times already and you know what? there has never been a call for CCP for 'fix' a broken mechanic. As the result every time ultimately was bad judgement of the CEO to make so and so a director. this action sabotages the corporation and sets them back... no one yells for the devs to give them a way to stop it, cause everything is already in place to prevent it, aside from the wildcard of people being human. now you are messing with actual gameplay, and us real gamers don't like that being messed with other than devs working to improve mechanics, otherwise we just move on to the next shooter and so forth until we find one that feels good in the palms of our hands. the kick function provides control to keep the whole sabotage role out of actual gameplay, which is how it should be
Cass Barr Red Star. EoN. 26	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:23:00 - [112] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Sorry about the bad examples but here is where I see kick function being at It will be the same as refunding isk a disgruntled director stole from the corp. Oh please an ISK refund like that that is basically obviating the entire sabotage. With a system like I outlined any smart saboteur can have a very large impact on a battle without it being so inane as sitting in the MCC eating grenades and lol'ing while no one can do anything about it. You really think those two are at all in any way equivalent?
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4492	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:30:00 - [113] - Quote Cass Barr wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Sorry about the bad examples but here is where I see kick function being at It will be the same as refunding isk a disgruntled director stole from the corp. Oh please an ISK refund like that that is basically obviating the entire sabotage. With a system like I outlined any smart saboteur can have a very large impact on a battle without it being so inane as sitting in the MCC eating grenades and lol'ing while no one can do anything about it. You really think those two are at all in any way equivalent? I was trying to equate the punishment of one corp's mistakes being easily going meh at it. A mistake should have impact regardless, we make them all the time in the game they typically result in loss of a clone. When a corp makes them it should be hurtful to the point that you cannot just instantly bloink what mistake?
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1095	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:31:00 - [114] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Sorry about the bad examples but here is where I see kick function being at It will be the same as refunding isk a disgruntled director stole from the corp. For me this is why you shouldnt be on the CPM You simply dont understand The quicker CCP gets the voting problem done with the quicker we can vote in players who know they are talking about i hope
Cass Barr Red Star. EoN. 26	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:41:00 - [115] - Quote And losing a battle, likely at least 150, and potentially all the way up to 450 clones isn't having an impact? What the hell would you call that then?
Ner'Zul Nexhawk Seraphim Auxiliaries CRONOS. 237	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:41:00 - [116] - Quote Natu Nobilis wrote: Before battle: 1 - If you-¦re in a player corporation, you answer to people with functions / roles. 2 - One of this functions/roles, should be the one of designating people to battle on the corporations behalf. 3 - Be it assigning a squad leader and letting him choose his team, or handpicking the entire team themselves. 4 - Any resposability of bad picking lies with the person responsible for the battle designations. During battle: 1 - Implement a "Prevent spawn" similar to the flag already in place that is used when a team is out of clones to respawn. 2 - An active awoxer remains active until death. 3 - Awoxer cannot respawn at that battle, but still takes a slot, damaging the team. This way you can awox, you can damage the team, and you have a PERSON that is responsible for anything that happens with the team. If an awoxer got in, blame your HR responsible, fire him or have proper selection next time. Definitely this. I am firmly against kicking AWOXers from the match altogether. What I am in favor of, however, is kicking them from the team. So here are my 2 ISK on the issue. Whenever you are TKed, you have the option to initiate the "Suspect" vote on the player that killed you. A small window appears on the top left corner of the screen of every team member except for the killer, prompting them to either "Approve" (arrow up) or "Deny" (arrow down). Once a set number of votes in favor has been casted (probably half of the team, since the TKer doesn't vote), the AWOXer now has a "Suspect" flag on him. What that means is that he will be marked yellow for the remainder of his team, allowing them to kill him without losing WP. He will be also restricted access to the team's clone vats, practically putting him into "hardcore" mode with one life. Upon death he, as it was suggested previously, will be able to ask the opposite team to accept him in, and a vote similar to "Suspect" would be performed to accept or reject his request. In the case where the enemy team doesn't accept the betrayer, his clone would remain on the ground for an extended period of time. During this time, if the AWOXer has a buddy that didn't yet reveal himself or wasn't killed as a Suspect, the latter can revive the fallen AWOXer silently and let him continue on his rampage. Note that the location of the downed Suspect should be shown to every merc in the battle with a nanite injector as the yellow NI sign to indicate that this is not simply a team member calling for help. Squad leaders should also have a "Suspect" option on their command wheel; this option would initiate the vote as well. This command would be useful when you see a person sabotaging your team but not by means of TKing anyone (for example, he still shoots his teammates, but only brings them to low health for the enemy to finish). I definitely agree with the suggestions of the corp roles, but I believe that the method described above will help when there are no people with sufficient rights present at the time of battle. That would especially work out better for small corps where directors and CEOs are not always online and can't decide who will go into the battles.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4497	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:43:00 - [117] - Quote EnglishSnake wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Sorry about the bad examples but here is where I see kick function being at It will be the same as refunding isk a disgruntled director stole from the corp. For me this is why you shouldnt be on the CPM You simply dont understand The quicker CCP gets the voting problem done with the quicker we can vote in players who know they are talking about i hope Maybe you misunderstand Dust a bit. The game is not designed to hold your hand every time you make a booboo.
Heidoukan Forsaken Immortals Gentlemen's Agreement 4	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:50:00 - [118] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber and Nova Knife. Just focus on reviewing the ideas people are giving you for this thread. Trust me, it creates less stress and it's more productive.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 4499	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:52:00 - [119] - Quote Heidoukan wrote: Iron Wolf Saber and Nova Knife. Just focus on reviewing the ideas people are giving you for this thread. Trust me, it creates less stress and it's more productive. I am just throwing explosive sand into the mix seeing the cauldron boil over a bit, prodding if you will.
Cass Barr Red Star. EoN. 26	Posted - 2013.05.21 14:58:00 - [120] - Quote Or you could quit ignoring solutions that resolve both sides of the problem simply because it uses a mechanic you personally disagree with. Or maybe it's because you don't understand it that you ignore it.



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.