Forums » Suggestions
You do not understand. If you can't manu in safety then why is manu in nation space? We demand to manu in pease. It must be done in Dau, so we have more protection. Also rat bots are bad because they give pirates easy ways to find us. It should not be easy to find us. But we have plugins as well in TGFT, which are internet connected. So can devs manaully ban spotter accounts so we can use out the anti rat plugin to keep us safe?
There is no safety in Vendetta Online. That's one of the founding game precepts. There is a gradient of "relative" risk, which fluctuates, but "safety" should never be expected. Manufacturing has high-reward and also contains high-risk. The highest rewards will always come with the highest risks.
Spy-bots are inherently bad for the game, regardless of player perception (they keep sectors online artificially and are not-good for the server architecture). They are also a bad goal for "manual" developer intervention, as that is not a scalable long-term solution.
On a side-note, the largest guild in the game should be able to pull together enough combat escorts to run their transport traffic with impunity, regardless of the presence of pirates or spy-bots.
I'm aware that some believe we should just "allow" everyone to run spy-bots: The answer is No.
Spy-bots are inherently bad for the game, regardless of player perception (they keep sectors online artificially and are not-good for the server architecture). They are also a bad goal for "manual" developer intervention, as that is not a scalable long-term solution.
On a side-note, the largest guild in the game should be able to pull together enough combat escorts to run their transport traffic with impunity, regardless of the presence of pirates or spy-bots.
I'm aware that some believe we should just "allow" everyone to run spy-bots: The answer is No.
I know the IP thing will not work, in my area with my ISP we are all proxied through the same gateway to the Internet. It is a DSL line provided by my cable company and seems to work a lot like the old AOL dial-up connections. Although I do have an IPv4 address that is not shared, the IP that is shown externally is always the shared one (which makes hosting multiplayer games a nightmare - but it is the fastest connection I can get for the price).
Would it be possible to make VO only run ONCE on a system? Like I know the multi-platform thing might be hard, but if VO somehow checks itself at start up, and is already running displays an error to say something like "VO is already running, please restart your device if you think this is in error" that would go some way to prevent this (or make it harder than it should be).
Of course, things like this can be dodged with things like Virtualisation, but as VO is quite a heavy game, I do not think it would run too well on virtual GPU's (and PCI pass-through can only work on 1 OS instance). Might not make the entire problem go away as alt-swapping may always happen (and people with multiple devices of course make no difference to), but it would put an end to a lot of what I think started this thread.
Would it be possible to make VO only run ONCE on a system? Like I know the multi-platform thing might be hard, but if VO somehow checks itself at start up, and is already running displays an error to say something like "VO is already running, please restart your device if you think this is in error" that would go some way to prevent this (or make it harder than it should be).
Of course, things like this can be dodged with things like Virtualisation, but as VO is quite a heavy game, I do not think it would run too well on virtual GPU's (and PCI pass-through can only work on 1 OS instance). Might not make the entire problem go away as alt-swapping may always happen (and people with multiple devices of course make no difference to), but it would put an end to a lot of what I think started this thread.
What the OP describes is under the context of system-to-system trade, which by nature is more hazardous.
Would this work if a pilot were trading within a single system (not suggesting traders 'stay in their system', just pointing out certain trade routes are inherently riskier)?
At what point can we say alts are behaving as separate individuals who happen to be cooperating? Groups and guilds do cooperate. I would rather see people using alts in interesting ways than force some draconian "one user one identity" policy (not that Guild is moving in that direction).
If someone were to do what the OP describes to me, I'd consider it fair play. Having a scout/wingman is always a good idea when moving valuable items. I also fully understand Guild is doing their best to make spy-bots useless. Basically, if an alt happens to have as its main purpose 'alert my other guy when a trader enters the system' I'm fine with that if the alt is adding an interesting presence to the game as a player would. This is my perspective as a player.
Would this work if a pilot were trading within a single system (not suggesting traders 'stay in their system', just pointing out certain trade routes are inherently riskier)?
At what point can we say alts are behaving as separate individuals who happen to be cooperating? Groups and guilds do cooperate. I would rather see people using alts in interesting ways than force some draconian "one user one identity" policy (not that Guild is moving in that direction).
If someone were to do what the OP describes to me, I'd consider it fair play. Having a scout/wingman is always a good idea when moving valuable items. I also fully understand Guild is doing their best to make spy-bots useless. Basically, if an alt happens to have as its main purpose 'alert my other guy when a trader enters the system' I'm fine with that if the alt is adding an interesting presence to the game as a player would. This is my perspective as a player.
I keep seeing people mention having escorts just shoot the attacking pirate, without considering that those escorts will get KOS for firing on someone who is not firing on THEM.
Then this simply turns into the pirates second-favorite game of "Wreck their standing".
Making F-6 a Corvus station would be better in this respect! Then escorts could actually do their job without be penalized for it.
Regardless of which, this isn't *only* about F-6. This sort of thing can happen at any station that they decide to shut down.
Bringing in an alt to kill the spotter/killer alt wouldn't solve anything, as the escort-alt would be KOS while the pirate alt simply re-spawned in the station to launch and attack the incoming Behemoth. It quickly devolves into who-has-the-most-alts.
If you don't want new players to stay around, the current situation is ideal towards that end.
Requiring the creation and operation of multiple accounts at the same time while the primary account grinds out another goal is not what *any* new player is signing up for.
Then this simply turns into the pirates second-favorite game of "Wreck their standing".
Making F-6 a Corvus station would be better in this respect! Then escorts could actually do their job without be penalized for it.
Regardless of which, this isn't *only* about F-6. This sort of thing can happen at any station that they decide to shut down.
Bringing in an alt to kill the spotter/killer alt wouldn't solve anything, as the escort-alt would be KOS while the pirate alt simply re-spawned in the station to launch and attack the incoming Behemoth. It quickly devolves into who-has-the-most-alts.
If you don't want new players to stay around, the current situation is ideal towards that end.
Requiring the creation and operation of multiple accounts at the same time while the primary account grinds out another goal is not what *any* new player is signing up for.
Risk Everything makes a great point! An escort is basically useless in monitored space because of the factional repercussions of attacking a player that hasn't attacked you. All the escort can do is scout ahead for pirates. They cannot actually defend their mark unless they get the pirate to fire upon them first.
Perhaps there should be some type of /defend function where one is allowed to intervene on behalf of another ship if they are attacked.
@Phaserlight: I agree with a /defend option. For now we could extend the faction self defense flag to extend to any player you are grouped with.
Cargo salvage flag: Cargo dropped by an faction protected exploded ship should attach all faction flags that the exploded player carried, including the faction self defense flag, and any player that picks up the cargo, will have those flags applied to them, so that the exploded player can attack them, and get their cargo back.
Escorting should perhaps best be done with an expendable alt, so that you do not have to worry about faction loss.
A lot of this looks like we need to extend the faction standing system to cover these situations, such that we are not having to use expendable alts.
Cargo salvage flag: Cargo dropped by an faction protected exploded ship should attach all faction flags that the exploded player carried, including the faction self defense flag, and any player that picks up the cargo, will have those flags applied to them, so that the exploded player can attack them, and get their cargo back.
Escorting should perhaps best be done with an expendable alt, so that you do not have to worry about faction loss.
A lot of this looks like we need to extend the faction standing system to cover these situations, such that we are not having to use expendable alts.
As I posted before, you can manu RBH in Bractus M14. If you do that, then you can manu your entire capital ship without ever interacting with a station that has permanent faction standing loss issues.
This could actually be fun. Old pirates have told me stories about how VPR and pirates used to fight over a single piece of cargo at station sectors. This kind of flag transfer could be fun if it brought back different player factions having drawn out battles over items.
There should of course be a time limit for self defense flag for the item.
For now we could extend the faction self defense flag to extend to any player you are grouped with.
Cargo salvage flag: Cargo dropped by an faction protected exploded ship should attach all faction flags that the exploded player carried, including the faction self defense flag, and any player that picks up the cargo, will have those flags applied to them, so that the exploded player can attack them, and get their cargo back.
I think that's an interesting notion, and potentially worth exploring. The Cargo Salvage thing could be for 20 minutes or something.
Cargo salvage flag: Cargo dropped by an faction protected exploded ship should attach all faction flags that the exploded player carried, including the faction self defense flag, and any player that picks up the cargo, will have those flags applied to them, so that the exploded player can attack them, and get their cargo back.
I think that's an interesting notion, and potentially worth exploring. The Cargo Salvage thing could be for 20 minutes or something.
That sounds like an amazing idea. It will make escorting much more meaningful.
For now we could extend the faction self defense flag to any player you are grouped with.
Cargo salvage flag: Cargo dropped by a faction protected exploded ship should attach all faction flags that the exploded player carried, including the faction self defense flag, and any player that picks up the cargo, will have those flags applied to them, so that the exploded player can attack them, and get their cargo back.
- - - - - - - - - -
I think that's an interesting notion, and potentially worth exploring. The Cargo Salvage thing could be for 20 minutes or something.
- - - - - - - - - -
This sounds like a very worthwhile option to explore. It stands to reason that any ship attacking a member of the group should be allowed to take fire from any other member of the group.
Doubling the number of station guards during the faction defense timer would also make sense. When a ship is attacked, two more guards could launch from the station. These would defend any cargo that is dropped, so they couldn't be pulled away more than 1000m from the item. They would also escort whatever faction-friendly ship picks up said cargo.
Cargo salvage flag: Cargo dropped by a faction protected exploded ship should attach all faction flags that the exploded player carried, including the faction self defense flag, and any player that picks up the cargo, will have those flags applied to them, so that the exploded player can attack them, and get their cargo back.
- - - - - - - - - -
I think that's an interesting notion, and potentially worth exploring. The Cargo Salvage thing could be for 20 minutes or something.
- - - - - - - - - -
This sounds like a very worthwhile option to explore. It stands to reason that any ship attacking a member of the group should be allowed to take fire from any other member of the group.
Doubling the number of station guards during the faction defense timer would also make sense. When a ship is attacked, two more guards could launch from the station. These would defend any cargo that is dropped, so they couldn't be pulled away more than 1000m from the item. They would also escort whatever faction-friendly ship picks up said cargo.
@Risk Everything:
Perhaps if the killer was faction kos, (because they violated the NFZ), then the cargo would carry the kos flag with it, and in that case, strike force would guard the cargo.
Perhaps if the killer was faction kos, (because they violated the NFZ), then the cargo would carry the kos flag with it, and in that case, strike force would guard the cargo.
I think a KOS tag is a bit excessive. Maybe the faction where the offense happens denies permission to dock with hot cargo. Though some factions just won't care (corvus). Other factions may be friendly with each other (TPG/UIT) and will honor the ban on docking with hot cargo. Still other factions (such as Axia/Valent) will be fine with it because of their inverse relationship. This way, the pirate has a chance to make off with the goods, but it is not easy peasy.
The owner might even get tracking info on the cargo (even through unmonitored space) for the entire 20 minutes or so.
The owner might even get tracking info on the cargo (even through unmonitored space) for the entire 20 minutes or so.
<tongue in cheek>
Clearly, the only viable option here is to have a Netflix style "Are you still here" pop-up dialogue appear every 5-10 mins, blocking any other input until the user responds to it. To avoid automation, this will of course involve completing a "prove you are human" captcha, as well as re-entering the users username and password to ensure account security. This would ideally be done via a 3rd party speech to text app, with secure voice-print technology to aid in avoiding automation. Failure to respond to the various security prompts would shut down and uninstall the client, and for added security, format the device running the client, restoring it to factory settings.
</tongue in cheek>
Clearly, the only viable option here is to have a Netflix style "Are you still here" pop-up dialogue appear every 5-10 mins, blocking any other input until the user responds to it. To avoid automation, this will of course involve completing a "prove you are human" captcha, as well as re-entering the users username and password to ensure account security. This would ideally be done via a 3rd party speech to text app, with secure voice-print technology to aid in avoiding automation. Failure to respond to the various security prompts would shut down and uninstall the client, and for added security, format the device running the client, restoring it to factory settings.
</tongue in cheek>
Two distinct issues here regarding alt abuse. I think each issue should be addressed independently, by altering game mechanics
1) alts give a player the ability to be in multiple places simultaneously, using automation.
I am generally opposed to adding technical limitations client side. But I would support the addition of technical limitations, client side, such as making it more likely that spotter bots are more likely to be engaged in combat, or otherwise dealt with by the nature of not really being properly manned.
2) alts give a player a means for their primary characters to avoid faction standing loss, while still using their primary characters in some supporting role.
By extending the current faction system, such that primary characters can not be used in a supporting role without sharing the faction consequence, we can make the faction system much more interesting.
As a simplistic example, if killing a trader caused a faction loss, the cargo dropped, could carry a flag, that if you pick it up, you also accept that standing loss. I prefer something more complex than that, but it is an example.
Primary characters should be dramatically more versatile than expendable alts, in practically every way ( other than being expendable ), and we should alter the game mechanics to make this a reality.
1) alts give a player the ability to be in multiple places simultaneously, using automation.
I am generally opposed to adding technical limitations client side. But I would support the addition of technical limitations, client side, such as making it more likely that spotter bots are more likely to be engaged in combat, or otherwise dealt with by the nature of not really being properly manned.
2) alts give a player a means for their primary characters to avoid faction standing loss, while still using their primary characters in some supporting role.
By extending the current faction system, such that primary characters can not be used in a supporting role without sharing the faction consequence, we can make the faction system much more interesting.
As a simplistic example, if killing a trader caused a faction loss, the cargo dropped, could carry a flag, that if you pick it up, you also accept that standing loss. I prefer something more complex than that, but it is an example.
Primary characters should be dramatically more versatile than expendable alts, in practically every way ( other than being expendable ), and we should alter the game mechanics to make this a reality.
How about a small variation to the faction standings damage ? If you shoot a spotter bot i.e. a motionless ship that hasn't had any human interaction for 2 minutes then you don't suffer a penalty even if the bot has good standing. Rationale: the pilot has clearly suffered a heart attack and his ship is presenting a danger to shipping.
When you land your first shot on the ship, you wouldn't get the usual faction standing warning unless he springs back into action i.e. he was just in the back making a drink and now he's back at the controls.
I have several times come across motionless ships and wanted to blow them up but it's just not worth the hours of penance of bot shooting to recover my standing. This will make spotter bots obsolete and offer free PK's for everybody.
When you land your first shot on the ship, you wouldn't get the usual faction standing warning unless he springs back into action i.e. he was just in the back making a drink and now he's back at the controls.
I have several times come across motionless ships and wanted to blow them up but it's just not worth the hours of penance of bot shooting to recover my standing. This will make spotter bots obsolete and offer free PK's for everybody.
Can somebody please explain what the hell an expendable alt is and why it is good for the game?
I offered a solution for this problem a few weeks ago and it was quickly shot down. It was mentioned a few times in this post to just make the RBH at the Brac station.
Drop the number of FCP needed for RBH in Brac to match that of the amount of FCP needed in Nyrius. It it only required 2 FCP to make in Bractus then most builders would choose Bractus station and the use of spotter bots and this problem in Nyrius would be gone. This is a simple solution and one that could easily be setup by Inc
Drop the number of FCP needed for RBH in Brac to match that of the amount of FCP needed in Nyrius. It it only required 2 FCP to make in Bractus then most builders would choose Bractus station and the use of spotter bots and this problem in Nyrius would be gone. This is a simple solution and one that could easily be setup by Inc