Forums » Suggestions
The ability to gather intel on sectors without being in them is an important aspect of the game that has long been a case of contention between the haves and the have nots of spotting-information-sharing networks; namely: spybots.
In an effort to compliment another thread where a suggestion to denegrate available sensor data has found welcome support by Incarnate, I propose the following:
Recon Bouys
Addon Type: mine launcher (large port)
Damage: 1
Energy: 0
Delay: 2s
Mass: 500kg
Splash Radius: 30
Detonation: none (only when destroyed by a weapon)
Ammo: 5
Lifetime: 45 min
Detection Range: equal to standard ship radar/sensor ranges
Chat delay per each player: 5s
Max Deployment per character: 5 sectors
Max Deployment per sector: 42
Purpose:
-To provide enter/leave detection range chat alerts in sectors where they are deployed to assist in reconaissance.
-Available to any player who fulfills the requirements.
-To disincentivize spybot use.
-Like mines, can be destroyed without faction penalty.
Function:
[basic]
Prints to chat: name (including guild tag, if any) and ship type when a player enters range.
Prints to chat: name (including guild tag, if any) when player leaves range.
Prints to chat when bouy is destroyed or times out.
Examples:
[PA]Greenwall [ID: 136433], Valkyrie X-1 detected in Latos H-2.
[PA]Greenwal [ID: 136433] has left detection range.
Your recon bouy in Latos H-2 has been destroyed.
Your recon bouy in Latos H-2 has expired.
[advanced wishlist]
-Add optional checkbox to share recon info in group or guild chat (one or the other).
-Add "key" functionality, enabling sharing info with whomever has a key
-Add scrambling technology to existing Spoofer addons to prevent detection
-Mk2 version that provides additional information (i.e. cargo scan, addon scan, faction standings)
Comments:
While this seems like a basic technology that all nations/factions would employ in the space age, it might make more sense for it to be an exclusive Corvus product. It also should be manufacturable in an effort to bolster the player crafted items trade.
Making an easily deployed recon bouy would further disincentivize the use of spybots beyond the other suggestion listed above because the increased flexibility of anonymous deployment and removal of the need for a separate device or client instance to run the spybot. Note that other character info is not gathered (XP levels, badges, etc).
Furthermore, the temporary, destroyable and deployable nature of these bouys forces people to play the game to make them of use (as opposed to just leaving a character docked in a station or stationary in space indefinitely).
Damage of 1 ensures that they are not effectively laid within range of station guards or used in NFZs.
Spybots that utilize the following methods would likely still see use, but at least the ones docked at stations and in WH sectors would be rendered obsolete:
sector searching bots
faction protected bots
spybots hiding inside of asteroids / station structures
Potential Problems:
-Laying bouys inside of asteroids or station structures to evade detection.
In an effort to compliment another thread where a suggestion to denegrate available sensor data has found welcome support by Incarnate, I propose the following:
Recon Bouys
Addon Type: mine launcher (large port)
Damage: 1
Energy: 0
Delay: 2s
Mass: 500kg
Splash Radius: 30
Detonation: none (only when destroyed by a weapon)
Ammo: 5
Lifetime: 45 min
Detection Range: equal to standard ship radar/sensor ranges
Chat delay per each player: 5s
Max Deployment per character: 5 sectors
Max Deployment per sector: 42
Purpose:
-To provide enter/leave detection range chat alerts in sectors where they are deployed to assist in reconaissance.
-Available to any player who fulfills the requirements.
-To disincentivize spybot use.
-Like mines, can be destroyed without faction penalty.
Function:
[basic]
Prints to chat: name (including guild tag, if any) and ship type when a player enters range.
Prints to chat: name (including guild tag, if any) when player leaves range.
Prints to chat when bouy is destroyed or times out.
Examples:
[PA]Greenwall [ID: 136433], Valkyrie X-1 detected in Latos H-2.
[PA]Greenwal [ID: 136433] has left detection range.
Your recon bouy in Latos H-2 has been destroyed.
Your recon bouy in Latos H-2 has expired.
[advanced wishlist]
-Add optional checkbox to share recon info in group or guild chat (one or the other).
-Add "key" functionality, enabling sharing info with whomever has a key
-Add scrambling technology to existing Spoofer addons to prevent detection
-Mk2 version that provides additional information (i.e. cargo scan, addon scan, faction standings)
Comments:
While this seems like a basic technology that all nations/factions would employ in the space age, it might make more sense for it to be an exclusive Corvus product. It also should be manufacturable in an effort to bolster the player crafted items trade.
Making an easily deployed recon bouy would further disincentivize the use of spybots beyond the other suggestion listed above because the increased flexibility of anonymous deployment and removal of the need for a separate device or client instance to run the spybot. Note that other character info is not gathered (XP levels, badges, etc).
Furthermore, the temporary, destroyable and deployable nature of these bouys forces people to play the game to make them of use (as opposed to just leaving a character docked in a station or stationary in space indefinitely).
Damage of 1 ensures that they are not effectively laid within range of station guards or used in NFZs.
Spybots that utilize the following methods would likely still see use, but at least the ones docked at stations and in WH sectors would be rendered obsolete:
sector searching bots
faction protected bots
spybots hiding inside of asteroids / station structures
Potential Problems:
-Laying bouys inside of asteroids or station structures to evade detection.
+1
+1 Cheating made legit, love it!
-100
"If you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing."
So I guess I'll say nothing.
"If you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing."
So I guess I'll say nothing.
I'm neutral on this. Would I use them? Maybe, though 30 minutes is pretty short for something I'm going to need to spend several minutes properly deploying a network of before settling in to wait for prey (and VO population density being what it is, I may be waiting quite a while).
There's still a lot to be said for just parking a couple of free bus trial accounts in the WH sectors you're interested in: they last forever, have faction consequences for would-be destroyers, and are less hassle to deploy.
There's still a lot to be said for just parking a couple of free bus trial accounts in the WH sectors you're interested in: they last forever, have faction consequences for would-be destroyers, and are less hassle to deploy.
I support the idea in principle but not at all in the proposed form. Actually I think the proposed form is useful, but ultimately doesn't replace spotter bots so it's not really worth doing.
The thread about radar distance is dumb altogether and I wouldn't legitimize it by posting there, but it's relevance is important to this thread because the idea of spotter buoys are a far better solution to the problem of spotter bots or whatever perceived issue they cause.
I propose we do not modify the current radar distance without special justification (i.e. storm or other weather conditions
Instead, we should combat the perceived issue of spotter bots by making them redundant and obsolete through in-game means, the spotter buoys achieve this but not in their proposed form.
Spotter buoys should have an unlimited lifespan, be somewhat limited in terms of numbers, have the appropriate 15km range with the caveat that they are detectable on radar as being present in the sector (like bots) and be relatively straightforward to destroy once detected.
The justifications are two-fold:
1) They make spotting something that unskilled players can do who have the inclination to do so (i.e. equality amongst the players)
2) They create interesting gameplay because, for example, key sharing isn't just about who has conquerable station access, now it's about who is on who's spotter network and vice versa; more political gameplay means more depth.
If you deploy them in the current form you're not creating a replacement for spotter bots, you're inviting somebody to make a bot that deploys spotter buoys, significantly buffing their usefulness. Indeed that would be the first thing I do with them, and if there's one thing you can trust a guy called Espionage to do, it's spy on you.
The thread about radar distance is dumb altogether and I wouldn't legitimize it by posting there, but it's relevance is important to this thread because the idea of spotter buoys are a far better solution to the problem of spotter bots or whatever perceived issue they cause.
I propose we do not modify the current radar distance without special justification (i.e. storm or other weather conditions
Instead, we should combat the perceived issue of spotter bots by making them redundant and obsolete through in-game means, the spotter buoys achieve this but not in their proposed form.
Spotter buoys should have an unlimited lifespan, be somewhat limited in terms of numbers, have the appropriate 15km range with the caveat that they are detectable on radar as being present in the sector (like bots) and be relatively straightforward to destroy once detected.
The justifications are two-fold:
1) They make spotting something that unskilled players can do who have the inclination to do so (i.e. equality amongst the players)
2) They create interesting gameplay because, for example, key sharing isn't just about who has conquerable station access, now it's about who is on who's spotter network and vice versa; more political gameplay means more depth.
If you deploy them in the current form you're not creating a replacement for spotter bots, you're inviting somebody to make a bot that deploys spotter buoys, significantly buffing their usefulness. Indeed that would be the first thing I do with them, and if there's one thing you can trust a guy called Espionage to do, it's spy on you.
+1
Make it last 45 mins to 1 hour instead of only 30 mins.
Make it last 45 mins to 1 hour instead of only 30 mins.
I don't have any personal objection to the use of spotting or spotter bots in general. The only issue I have is the potential zero cost to the player or guild creating and using them. I like this because there is a cost, but don't think this solves the free problem.
If something like the OP is implemented, it should be open to enhancement by plugin developers.
If something like the OP is implemented, it should be open to enhancement by plugin developers.
updated to include keysharing and 45 minute duration
re: someone making a bot to deploy bouys:
Higher level requirements and unit cost/rarity could be adjusted so as to make a disposable deployment bot unlikely. Regardless, no bot will be able to strategically place the bouys without direct human interaction, something further ensured by the complimenting sensor range limitation referenced above.
Setting the range to 15km is not a good idea because it makes them completely undetectable (even if you can see them on the sensor list), which goes against one of the proposed purposes (destroyability). Locating ships hiding 15km away is only possible (in practical terms) by a combination of range-limit vector detection and visual scanning (assuming they aren't inside an asteroid). Mines, being much smaller than ships, would be undetectable visually at such a long range.
re: someone making a bot to deploy bouys:
Higher level requirements and unit cost/rarity could be adjusted so as to make a disposable deployment bot unlikely. Regardless, no bot will be able to strategically place the bouys without direct human interaction, something further ensured by the complimenting sensor range limitation referenced above.
Setting the range to 15km is not a good idea because it makes them completely undetectable (even if you can see them on the sensor list), which goes against one of the proposed purposes (destroyability). Locating ships hiding 15km away is only possible (in practical terms) by a combination of range-limit vector detection and visual scanning (assuming they aren't inside an asteroid). Mines, being much smaller than ships, would be undetectable visually at such a long range.
Actually you don't need visuals, although they help. You just have to feel out the shape of the sphere well enough to point in their general direction, then fly in that direction until you're close enough for radar and targeting. This is pretty easy, since we're talking about a 10 km wide sphere nested inside a 30 km wide sphere. The inner sphere takes up about 37 degrees of the sky, so you start with a roughly 20% chance to hit it if you don't do any feeling at all and simply find the edge of detection sphere and then fly in a direction that doesn't immediately take you out of it. But if you first strafe around a bit to feel out the slope and then alter your heading, you can get lined up much better.
Rin, it's nowhere near as easy as you make it out to be. I've been playing a long time and it's not "easy" to find ships parked 12k-15k from a WH. It's certainly possible, with enough detective work (again, assuming the bot is NOT inside of an asteroid, in which case you end up flying around for 10-15 minutes in confusion). But "easy" it is not.
My intent is to make it easier for the common player to destroy one of these compared to how it is NOW, not to enable an even more effective/evasive spying method than is currently possible using throwaway account.
This is not to say that the degree of difficulty involved in locating one of the proposed buoys is not a valid consideration. Multiple versions with increasingly longer ranges, for instance, might be worthwhile.
Also, I just realized that the correct spelling is "buoy" and I can't change the title of the thread. :(
My intent is to make it easier for the common player to destroy one of these compared to how it is NOW, not to enable an even more effective/evasive spying method than is currently possible using throwaway account.
This is not to say that the degree of difficulty involved in locating one of the proposed buoys is not a valid consideration. Multiple versions with increasingly longer ranges, for instance, might be worthwhile.
Also, I just realized that the correct spelling is "buoy" and I can't change the title of the thread. :(
Well, I do find it that easy, but maybe I'm not normal.
Anyway, sorry if you took my post as an argument in favor of longer range, because it wasn't meant that way. I was just refuting your claim that it would make them impractically hard to destroy. Now if you were specifically concerned about newbies I would agree. Well, specifically I would agree that it would be hard for newbies. I wouldn't agree that that is a bad thing, as newbies need challenges or they won't grow.
Point is, I don't have an opinion on what the buoy's range should be; I just want to make sure the people who do debate the merits are working from correct information.
Anyway, sorry if you took my post as an argument in favor of longer range, because it wasn't meant that way. I was just refuting your claim that it would make them impractically hard to destroy. Now if you were specifically concerned about newbies I would agree. Well, specifically I would agree that it would be hard for newbies. I wouldn't agree that that is a bad thing, as newbies need challenges or they won't grow.
Point is, I don't have an opinion on what the buoy's range should be; I just want to make sure the people who do debate the merits are working from correct information.
Regardless of how easy you think it is, my line of thinking was that if the buoy appeared as a "mine launcher_01" or whatever all mines currently appear as, then that alone would suffice as enough protection (i.e. risk of detonating an unknown mine type), since most people tend to steer clear of mines rather than detonate them (at least traders do!). Yes, people will engage in more minesweeping as a result, but that's a good thing.
Allowing the ability to hide it at incredible distances is not necessary, preferably avoided, and, if incarnate nerfs sensor ranges, completely impractical.
The suggested item would be used equally by people both drawn to and attempting to avoid combat. Pirates, traders, nationalists, miners, newbs -- anyone who has a vested interested in knowing what type of people are passing through a sector -- would find this useful. I designed it in such a way to require people to "play" in order to use them, rather than use a static dummy account.
Allowing the ability to hide it at incredible distances is not necessary, preferably avoided, and, if incarnate nerfs sensor ranges, completely impractical.
The suggested item would be used equally by people both drawn to and attempting to avoid combat. Pirates, traders, nationalists, miners, newbs -- anyone who has a vested interested in knowing what type of people are passing through a sector -- would find this useful. I designed it in such a way to require people to "play" in order to use them, rather than use a static dummy account.
I also find it easy, but I'm definitely not normal.
-1. Yer bored because there isn't enough players in the game. Fix something that will increase population not add to your offline IRC fapfest.
No Greenwall you are missing the point I think, it shouldn't be a mine. You shouldn't just get to receive location data from a mere mine. That's way too subtle.
It should be a deployable NPC that has a substantial radar profile and it much much more obvious. Hiding it should still be possible and I reiterate the point that if you do not make it at least as effective as automated bots, you will not eliminate the value in deploying bots and thus the practice of doing so.
It should be a deployable NPC that has a substantial radar profile and it much much more obvious. Hiding it should still be possible and I reiterate the point that if you do not make it at least as effective as automated bots, you will not eliminate the value in deploying bots and thus the practice of doing so.
Making it an NPC is a cool idea. I was trying to work within existing add-on mechanics to make it as easy as possible to impliment.
if you do not make it at least as effective as automated bots, you will not eliminate the value in deploying bots and thus the practice of doing so.
Obviously. To re-iterate, this suggestion was made as a compliment to another that Incarnate was in support of. In other words this suggestion was intended to be implimented alongside a sensor-nerf. A sensor range nerf alone would obviously make current automated bots less effective than my proposal. If incarnate choose to easily impliment his other anti-bot measures, then player run spybots would be even less effective.
And, honestly, making a buoy more effective than automated spybots currently are would not be good for the game. They currently are detrimental to gameplay because they require nearly zero-effort to maintain, keep sectors awake perpetually, and when docked, are impossible to remove. I think the best move would be to limit our ability to use spybots while simultaneously introducing something similar to the OP that requires more effort/involvement to implement and maintain as well game-wide access to the functionality.
if you do not make it at least as effective as automated bots, you will not eliminate the value in deploying bots and thus the practice of doing so.
Obviously. To re-iterate, this suggestion was made as a compliment to another that Incarnate was in support of. In other words this suggestion was intended to be implimented alongside a sensor-nerf. A sensor range nerf alone would obviously make current automated bots less effective than my proposal. If incarnate choose to easily impliment his other anti-bot measures, then player run spybots would be even less effective.
And, honestly, making a buoy more effective than automated spybots currently are would not be good for the game. They currently are detrimental to gameplay because they require nearly zero-effort to maintain, keep sectors awake perpetually, and when docked, are impossible to remove. I think the best move would be to limit our ability to use spybots while simultaneously introducing something similar to the OP that requires more effort/involvement to implement and maintain as well game-wide access to the functionality.
Yer bored because there isn't enough players in the game.
That's an accepted constant, 'oRe. And I've made plenty of suggestions to address that.
That's an accepted constant, 'oRe. And I've made plenty of suggestions to address that.
I think the best move would be to limit our ability to use spybots while simultaneously introducing something similar to the OP that requires more effort/involvement to implement and maintain as well game-wide access to the functionality.
Wouldn't this "other" solution also keep sectors perpetually alive (and cause server problems) just like spy bots?
Wouldn't this "other" solution also keep sectors perpetually alive (and cause server problems) just like spy bots?
Wouldn't this "other" solution also keep sectors perpetually alive (and cause server problems) just like spy bots?
Only by someone actively replacing the buoys every 45 minutes, which is a significant reduction (compare to currently where bots can remain online and docked in a station until the server gets reset... which could be a week or more of constantly being online).
Or, alternatively, perhaps the devs could figure out a way to allow the sector to go to sleep and re-awaken with the buoys intact? Deneb skirmishes reset but retain the ship-damage levels, so in theory at least the concept occurs elsewhere....
Only by someone actively replacing the buoys every 45 minutes, which is a significant reduction (compare to currently where bots can remain online and docked in a station until the server gets reset... which could be a week or more of constantly being online).
Or, alternatively, perhaps the devs could figure out a way to allow the sector to go to sleep and re-awaken with the buoys intact? Deneb skirmishes reset but retain the ship-damage levels, so in theory at least the concept occurs elsewhere....