Forums » Suggestions
Per this discussion, this suggestion materialized out of it with both support and indifference, but notably little pushback:
Issue notifications to owners of user keys whose IFF and Docking Rights have been toggled the same way key giving and revocation currently do.
Currently these settings can be deactivated unbeknownst to their key holders and monitoring their status is cumbersome.
Issue notifications to owners of user keys whose IFF and Docking Rights have been toggled the same way key giving and revocation currently do.
Currently these settings can be deactivated unbeknownst to their key holders and monitoring their status is cumbersome.
-1 this does not address the underlying issue which is in fact key management. Active keys should appear at the top of the key list. There should be check boxes next to each key to allow multiselection and removal with only an “are you sure” confirmation box.
This is one minuscule thing that can be improved in the interim whilst a full key system overhaul is done, which everybody wants. And, even if key management was improved to the extent that finding active keys was easier, it's still a setting attributed to a player that changes without their knowledge. That alone is reason enough to make this small, minor, but very helpful tweak.
I'm not concerned with protecting the gameplay preferences of the very few people who exploit this feature because it takes advantage of a gaping hole in situational awareness when executed effectively.
I'm not concerned with protecting the gameplay preferences of the very few people who exploit this feature because it takes advantage of a gaping hole in situational awareness when executed effectively.
+1 for key modifications making noise.
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/33699
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/33483
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/33483
+1 name of key when received and when settings change would be nice
+1
-1
This would destroy certain flavors of gameplay.
This would destroy certain flavors of gameplay.
+100000
"I'm not concerned with protecting the gameplay preferences of the very few people who exploit this feature because it takes advantage of a gaping hole in situational awareness when executed effectively."
How often has this particular "exploit" occurred, Greenwall? To borrow Incarnates favourite term, it does seem a rather non-trivial update to fix something I've never heard of actually occurring. I am not opposed to notifications, but you do seem to be fixated on a rather specific use of the IFF checkbox. While I can see that devious played could use the IFF toggle as you describe, I've not heard of it being done. Presumably it has at one time or another, or you'd not be so invested in this change, but surely, its an edge case?
That said, +1 to improving situational awareness. I'm all for notifying key users of changes to that key. Might need a spam-prevention timer though. Perhaps the notification could be as simple as "The (feature) of (Key Name/ID) has been modified in the last 5 minutes" or similar.
How often has this particular "exploit" occurred, Greenwall? To borrow Incarnates favourite term, it does seem a rather non-trivial update to fix something I've never heard of actually occurring. I am not opposed to notifications, but you do seem to be fixated on a rather specific use of the IFF checkbox. While I can see that devious played could use the IFF toggle as you describe, I've not heard of it being done. Presumably it has at one time or another, or you'd not be so invested in this change, but surely, its an edge case?
That said, +1 to improving situational awareness. I'm all for notifying key users of changes to that key. Might need a spam-prevention timer though. Perhaps the notification could be as simple as "The (feature) of (Key Name/ID) has been modified in the last 5 minutes" or similar.
I'm sure there's a hilarious story of how greenwall lost his trident, otherwise he wouldn't press so hard for this.
As someone who actually starts/ends conflicts at the CS I can tell you I've seen the key flipped on people countless times. That it isn't the "victims" fault is a laughable mindset, it sure is.
This is not an exploit, and shouldn't be argued as such. This is nothing more than hope that we get a revamp of the key system.
This is not an exploit, and shouldn't be argued as such. This is nothing more than hope that we get a revamp of the key system.
Fairy nuff. I've never seen it happen, and Greenwall has been pretty insistent about it, so I figured I'd ask.
This suggestion doesn't do anything you can't already do via plugin, and it makes sense that if you can see your IFF status, you should be able to be notified about changes to it.
I would also +1 suggestions to make broadcasting the IFF status in the first place optional, as well as suggestions to let you upgrade a station with a Corvus Identification Friend or Faux module that lets you broadcast a false IFF signal.
I would also +1 suggestions to make broadcasting the IFF status in the first place optional, as well as suggestions to let you upgrade a station with a Corvus Identification Friend or Faux module that lets you broadcast a false IFF signal.
I haven't had it personally happen to me, this suggestion is an offshoot of viking ranger's suggestion.
I won't name name names obviously, but anyone who plays this game enough is well aware there are some people who's whole MO is to find things like this to trick people into damaging situations without the ability to detect or prevent them. I think that kind of gameplay is detrimental to the game and I'm against anything that facilitates it.
I won't name name names obviously, but anyone who plays this game enough is well aware there are some people who's whole MO is to find things like this to trick people into damaging situations without the ability to detect or prevent them. I think that kind of gameplay is detrimental to the game and I'm against anything that facilitates it.
"I think that kind of gameplay is detrimental to the game and I'm against anything that facilitates it."
So make it more carebear and remove any responsibility on the player for their own situational awareness whatsoever?
So let's review the carebearism of the game in recent years:
1. Capitol System Safety - you can't shoot your own nation in said systems
2. All systems now monitored space in capitol systems
3. No more mines in NFZs
4. Lock 15 minute defense timer till offender is killed by target rather than SF
5. ludicrous sphere of jump distances when following players to new sectors
So because you don't think players should be bothered to have to think about whether they should trust a conq station key or not and god forbid have to decide to take that station for themselves to be 100% sure they are safe and then actually do said station taking that is detrimental to the game?
Why not just suggest making all widget moving completely automated from station to station with Ai escorts to protect said movements then all players would have to do is log in and pick some widgets and move them with a mouse click then sit back and let the game play its self with no danger.
So make it more carebear and remove any responsibility on the player for their own situational awareness whatsoever?
So let's review the carebearism of the game in recent years:
1. Capitol System Safety - you can't shoot your own nation in said systems
2. All systems now monitored space in capitol systems
3. No more mines in NFZs
4. Lock 15 minute defense timer till offender is killed by target rather than SF
5. ludicrous sphere of jump distances when following players to new sectors
So because you don't think players should be bothered to have to think about whether they should trust a conq station key or not and god forbid have to decide to take that station for themselves to be 100% sure they are safe and then actually do said station taking that is detrimental to the game?
Why not just suggest making all widget moving completely automated from station to station with Ai escorts to protect said movements then all players would have to do is log in and pick some widgets and move them with a mouse click then sit back and let the game play its self with no danger.
Natives in good standing not being able to shoot each other in their capitals is an old thing, not a recent change. I don't know when it happened, but it was more than nine years ago. And the only thing that has changed regarding following people is the addition of the auto-nav feature from TCS, which is the opposite of a carebear change.
You did, however, forget the persistent 24-hour temp-kos you get for killing more than three non-hostiles in guarded sectors within a week. That one's only a few years old. You forgot the self defense addition too. So you can still pad your list out to five items if you want.
You did, however, forget the persistent 24-hour temp-kos you get for killing more than three non-hostiles in guarded sectors within a week. That one's only a few years old. You forgot the self defense addition too. So you can still pad your list out to five items if you want.
What's more, those conquerable stations are IN grayspace. If they are in nation space where people can expect relative safety, greenwall's argument has some merit.
The problem here is that certain people come to VO with an expectation of how they will play it, totally ignoring the fact that VO is first and foremost a combat game that also happens to be a sandbox. They feel violated when other people blow up their ships filled with precious cargo because they fail to understand this.
It is not within their right to redefine the game into something more palatable for them. They are not the game developers. If they don't like this game, go play some other game that fits their tastes better.
This applies very much to you, greenwall.
The problem here is that certain people come to VO with an expectation of how they will play it, totally ignoring the fact that VO is first and foremost a combat game that also happens to be a sandbox. They feel violated when other people blow up their ships filled with precious cargo because they fail to understand this.
It is not within their right to redefine the game into something more palatable for them. They are not the game developers. If they don't like this game, go play some other game that fits their tastes better.
This applies very much to you, greenwall.
We have a suggestions board specifically for pilots to come give suggestions about what they'd like to see in the game. Others can then join the discussion, productively, and give more positive and negatives regarding a suggestion. Keep in mind that these discussions need to take place in a civil and productive manner. Name calling does not fall under productive, civil discussion.
This is a suggestion about adding additional notifications with regards to keys. Nothing more, nothing less. Let's keep the conversation on the topic at hand, weighing the positives and negatives of the suggestion.
This is a suggestion about adding additional notifications with regards to keys. Nothing more, nothing less. Let's keep the conversation on the topic at hand, weighing the positives and negatives of the suggestion.
@wash
So make it more carebear and remove any responsibility on the player for their own situational awareness whatsoever?
This is not about making the game more "carebear", it's about making it more fair. They are not the same, despite attempts to conflate them. An alert of a status change of your character is well within the range of "normal" in VO. It is also just a simply alert -- it offers no extra protection. If you undock from a conquerable station and someone flicks off your IFF, you still might die -- but at least you will know WHY they turrets were suddenly firing at you, rather than siting there scratching your head wondering if you had somehow inadvertently caused damage to a turret or guard without knowing it.
So because you don't think players should be bothered to have to think about whether they should trust a conq station key or not and god forbid have to decide to take that station for themselves to be 100% sure they are safe and then actually do said station taking that is detrimental to the game?
And, as I've stated before, which you evidently did not read (or comprehend), it's not simply a matter of trusting a key. It's entirely possible for a trusted key to be abused, because users do not get to see owners, and would have no way of knowing if a formerly trusted owner key was somehow compromised, or, worse, if one of the trusted owners was an impostor.
Having to take a station *every time* you desire access in order to guarantee the turrets won't start firing at you without warning IS detrimental to the game, even more so now that we have been discussing it so much and making people aware of how the IFF can be exploited successfully against the unwitting.
Why not just suggest making all widget moving completely automated from station to station with Ai escorts to protect said movements then all players would have to do is log in and pick some widgets and move them with a mouse click then sit back and let the game play its self with no danger.
Because unlike you, I don't make irrational leaps of logic. Only a fool would think that simply alerting users to an IFF change is the final, irreversible gateway to fully converting the game to risk free, "carebear" play.
And for what it's worth, I wasn't a huge fan of several of those changes you mentioned.
So make it more carebear and remove any responsibility on the player for their own situational awareness whatsoever?
This is not about making the game more "carebear", it's about making it more fair. They are not the same, despite attempts to conflate them. An alert of a status change of your character is well within the range of "normal" in VO. It is also just a simply alert -- it offers no extra protection. If you undock from a conquerable station and someone flicks off your IFF, you still might die -- but at least you will know WHY they turrets were suddenly firing at you, rather than siting there scratching your head wondering if you had somehow inadvertently caused damage to a turret or guard without knowing it.
So because you don't think players should be bothered to have to think about whether they should trust a conq station key or not and god forbid have to decide to take that station for themselves to be 100% sure they are safe and then actually do said station taking that is detrimental to the game?
And, as I've stated before, which you evidently did not read (or comprehend), it's not simply a matter of trusting a key. It's entirely possible for a trusted key to be abused, because users do not get to see owners, and would have no way of knowing if a formerly trusted owner key was somehow compromised, or, worse, if one of the trusted owners was an impostor.
Having to take a station *every time* you desire access in order to guarantee the turrets won't start firing at you without warning IS detrimental to the game, even more so now that we have been discussing it so much and making people aware of how the IFF can be exploited successfully against the unwitting.
Why not just suggest making all widget moving completely automated from station to station with Ai escorts to protect said movements then all players would have to do is log in and pick some widgets and move them with a mouse click then sit back and let the game play its self with no danger.
Because unlike you, I don't make irrational leaps of logic. Only a fool would think that simply alerting users to an IFF change is the final, irreversible gateway to fully converting the game to risk free, "carebear" play.
And for what it's worth, I wasn't a huge fan of several of those changes you mentioned.