EVE Search - Quick N Easy: Ninja Salvaging vs. Salvage Theft

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

Quick N Easy: Ninja Salvaging vs. Salvage Theft

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 :: one page

Author	Topic
Lisa Waen	Posted - 2008.05.15 05:22:00 - [121] What about a claim system for salvages? Default setting would be off, but if a missionrunner has every intention of coming back and clearing up thier own salvage, they could set it to on, essentially 'staking a claim' to the fresh wreck. If the salvage is staked, then any ninja salvagers should be aggro flagged for being a claimjumper. This can work to the professional salvager's benefit as well, as they can stake any unclaimed wrecks to be salvaged later, enjoying the advantages of having freshly discovered salvage protected under the same rule as the salvaging missionrunner, regardless of location. This also takes care of the argument regarding whose salvage is it, the person who processes it first, or the person who sees it first? The answer becomes 'Neither, its the person who claims it first.'
Lisa Waen	Posted - 2008.05.15 05:43:00 - [122] This can also apply to standard loot within wrecks, but the default setting would be 'on' for that one, with the option of the ratter/missionier turning the claim flag 'off' if he doesn't care about the loot and is just out for the bounties. Also, I do like the idea of all mission deadspace sites being converted into salvage exploration sites for a time after the runner clears their mission. If the missionier has already cleared the salvage before collecting on the mission, then the salv exploration site becomes a bust for the salvager.
Flash Gordinia	Posted - 2008.05.15 06:01:00 - [123] I think the problem with this thread is that the real issue is not being addressed. Wrecks belong to whomever salvages them. The mission, however belongs to the mission runner and whomever he/she chooses to share it with. That does not typically include some random person who happens to have probes they don't know what to do with. I think it should be the uninvited entrance of an active mission which creates aggro, not the salvaging of wrecks. Further, as I have seen mentioned in this thread, a miner's only recourse against thieves or can flippers is typically a foolish one to take. There should be an alternative. Suppose you are doing a mission and a "ninja salvager" (since we have taken to calling mission griefers this) shows up in your (as I mentioned, the mission belongs to the mission runner) deadspace. This should instantly flag him for aggro but chances are he has you bookmarked as well as a much bigger ship nearby. However, suppose you had the option to report the offender to concord (they are, after all, supposed to be protecting us) and concord lowered the individuals security status according to the offense committed. If their security status became low enough then the mission runner or miner would have the ability to choose a time and place as well as the griefer does. Forget the salvage, just give us a level playing field.
Kayscha	Posted - 2008.05.15 06:22:00 - [124] I hate to kick this dead horse some more, but as this thread has long stopped being commented on by the candidates but is still alive, what the hell: I see the problem here as what people think should be the consequences of theft. It can be argued that ratters have earned the right to salvage their wrecks by doing a service to the sovereignty holder. Mission runners might even be regarded as being granted exclusive rights by their agent's corp. Ninja salvagers on the other hand have earned no special right. So ninja salvaging should be classified as minor theft indeed, much like can stealing. BUT this is not a very serious crime and should certainly not give the ratter or mission runner the right to shoot to kill. Also, salvagers should not be tempted to kill and salvage the runners, too, considering that this would not incur further negative consequences since they are already flagged. Instead, reduce their standing with the sovereignty holder or the mission provider corp AND a corresponding security loss. For example, -0.1 per theft to the former, -0.1*system security for the latter. Notorious griefers will eventually find themselves free for all and their welcome by the sentry guns outstayed. HOWEVER, add a timer for each wreck not just to expire into thin air but to have their ownership expire after a shortish while, maybe 5 minutes for ratters, 20 minutes for runners. Same with cans, BTW. Any CSM candidate think this would be a better solution?
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.05.15 12:19:00 - [125] I think I might surprise a few people with this post... Originally by: Flash Gordinia ...shows up in your (as I mentioned, the mission belongs to the mission runner) deadspace. This statement is fundamentally untrue, as 'deadspace' can be scanned out by probes... Thus, it's not your deadspace, it's just 'deadspace'. (If this were different, we would likely not be having this conversation, as probes would simply not work.) Originally by: Flash Gordinia I think it should be the uninvited entrance of an active mission which creates aggro, not the salvaging of wrecks. Actually - there's a fundamental idea in this thought, that I might be able to get behind. (Ok, before all of my compadres think I've gone loopy, or to the other side, hear me out.) Why not 'fix' the Mission, so that by entering Deadspace, while a Mission is going on, the rats can switch their aggro to the Ninja Salvager, as they would likely see him/her as a threat which could be easily squelched? Or, if by entering Mission Space when there are no rats, a new spawn could appear, possibly even on an equal power to the ship the Ninja Salvager is flying, which would give them the opportunity to salvage, but the added challenge of doing so while under fire? This would make the Mission a little more dangerous to the Ninja Salvager, give any Mission Runner in the Mission a little more time to switch ships to his Salvager (if he plans to do so) and open it up to what - I think - is possibly a little more 'true to form'. I'm sure Mission Runners are extremely irritated when a Ninja Salvager 'appears' in their Mission while they already have the 'active' spawns aggro'd, as the rats just leave everybody but them alone. I think - by adding this little bit of challenge - I could accept this as a possible modification. Do I think I should get aggro just for entering Mission Space? No. Should I lose standings? No. Should it be a bit of a challenge, by making the rats 'recognize' that they could swat me away, and then return to their job of fighting the Mission Runner? I say yes. I think this would 'level the playing field' by more than a bit - especially if now, I have to worry about losing a ship as much as the Mission Runner would. Discuss. We're Recruiting!
Lisa Waen	Posted - 2008.05.15 17:42:00 - [126] Oh sure, that would just mean that you bounce in, generate a new spawn, begin to get locked, and bounce out. The new spawn then, instead of evaporating into thin air, starts to attack the missionier. You bounce back in, and either generate a brand new spawn (see sentence above), or you have kept the missionier even busier with the new spawn, hence making your job that much easier. I still prefer a claim system implementation. If you want to dispute a claim for salvage, then you can take care of the dispute in the way many other disputes are taken care of in our harsh universe, without Concord intervention. No status hits, just free rein to shoot or not shoot as the offended party wishes. But remember, if a missionier doesn't want the salvage anyhow, he can set the claim tag to off, and has essentially said 'Here you go, I don't want this, and you are free to it.' No confusion.
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.05.15 18:43:00 - [127] Originally by: Lisa Waen Oh sure, that would just mean that you bounce in, generate a new spawn, begin to get locked, and bounce out. The new spawn then, instead of evaporating into thin air, starts to attack the missionier. Hmm. I never (honestly, no really) thought about that possibility. Hmm. Scratch that idea, then. Wait! What if - let's say - the spawn didn't 'evaporate' per se, but would give chase to the Ninja Salvager? Actually, if this were thought out well enough, anytime someone got aggro'd by the rats in a spawn, there could be a chance for them to suddenly 'appear' wherever the person was... So, lets say that I'm flying around a belt, and I decide to do some ratting. I do get the aggro when I decide to shoot the rats, and I kill them all. They're gone, and don't come back. Now, in the same situation, I decide, "Meh, this is boring. I'm going to leave" and fly back to the station to sit outside and twiddle my thumbs. Suddenly, after a couple minutes, the rats have found me, and choose to attack. (This could, of course, be totally random on whether they appear or not.) I could then choose to fight them, or run away, and then the chance thing enters into it again. In the Ninja Salvaging environment, this would protect the Mission Runner, (I know - you think I'm loopy again) and in fact, give the Ninja something more to worry about, as they now have 15 minutes of aggro to burn off by flying away, docking, etc. Think about this from a "what would really happen" point of view. Today, when I fly into a Mission space, the rats that have aggro'd the Mission Runner don't care about me. This could change, as they should be a little bit smarter than useless drones. Check it out - the Ninja Salvager's onto something smart. You can't tell me, from a Mission Runner's point of view, that I'm not working towards a fair solution for all involved. We're Recruiting!
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.05.15 19:51:00 - [128] Gosh, I hope that Ankhesentapemkah or LaVista Vista read this... I think that the two of them have provided the 'best' responses on this issue so far - that they would look for alternative solutions that would provide a fair balance to both Mission Runner and Ninja Salvager. I think we might have hit on something here. We're Recruiting!
Juang Mao	Posted - 2008.05.16 16:17:00 - [129] Edited by: Juang Mao on 16/05/2008 16:18:39 Salvaging of wrecks you didnt kill yourself, in the majority of opinions is simply wrong. Your argument that deadspace is not owned by the mission runner (given RL examples) is seriously flawed. I have a mortgage, so the bank own my house - so who calls the police when a burglar breaks in? Well that would have to be me, the man using the space owned by the bank. Same applies to missions. Suggesting that you have a chosen career as a 'salvager' after your sum total 3 months training gives you the right to steal form anyone (not just the mission runners) is even more flawed. Unless your suggesting all players that begun in 2003/4 were GIVEN the skills to fly Marauders, use weapons,, mods, and yes indeed salvage kit themselves. Simply not true as my characters and 4 years of play show. You are asking the CSM to justify your thievery. Any candidate following such biased and unfounded opinions should not only remove themselves from election, but be barred from ever standing as a Player representative again. As for yourself Tchell, you are nothing more than a mildly advanced thief/beggar and should have spent your early training on a less questionable path.
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.05.16 19:05:00 - [130] Originally by: Juang Mao As for yourself Tchell, you are nothing more than a mildly advanced thief/beggar and should have spent your early training on a less questionable path. Since we're calling a spade a spade, you're a mouthy jerk who's opinions aren't warranted amongst serious discussion. You're comparing deadspace to RL, and you choose a mortgage for your example? That makes me laugh. You don't own, nor lease, any piece of deadspace just because there's a mission there. How about you compare it to having someone tell you the best place to fish, instead? Are you calling the police because, all of a sudden, somebody drops a line in your favourite fishing hole? And just for the record - in my first three months, I've endeavoured to do more than you seem to have. I can't, honestly, speak for you however, as you have four years of experience - but if that means four years of Mission Running against drone NPC's, I seriously pity you. You seem to have been missing out on what EvE is. Next time you want to be taken seriously, post with your Main. Your four years of experience of which you claim to have is belied by the fact that you have a grand total of five posts here. I'd believe that you are more likely to have four days worth of experience, from the fact that you seem to be talking out of your ass. We're Recruiting!

Chi Quan Perkone	Posted - 2008.05.17 01:51:00 - [131] Edited by: Chi Quan on 17/05/2008 01:52:57 fishing. this IS THE BEST comparrison one could ever give. here is the current situation: a fisher knows where to get the best fish and, naturally goes there. after some time he catches something, but he doesn't carry that one fish home, he waits till he has more, so he deposits said fish in a bucket or net in the water. than somebody in black robes with funky karate moves and asian accent comes along and takes that fish while the fisher is only a few steps away. if the fisher tries to punch the ninja in the face, a police swat team drops by and shoots the fisher without questions. i'll leave the rest to your own judgment. ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it.
Keeves Minmatar Sexy Pirate Club	Posted - 2008.05.17 03:04:00 - [132] I ninja salvage on occasion and id have to agree with some statements that salvaging another persons wreck should actually create an aggression. The fact that someone can scan a mission down and steal 10-15mil in goods without any reprocussions at all just creates a lazy group in the "pirate" niche that i wouldnt want to be associated with. And in all reality its the safest way to keep isk going at a constant rate.
Lisa Waen	Posted - 2008.05.17 05:29:00 - [133] Hmm, seems that nobody has stated that my claimstaking and claimjumping suggested change is a good idea or a bad one. Is it because it makes good sense and no one feels the need to argue against it? Or is it because it makes good sense, and no one who wants to shoot holes in the idea can. Or is it such a silly idea that I am just being ignored as a loon? Or is it the consensus that any such change will never be implemented anyhow, thus making any response a pointless waste of bytes on a forum?
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.05.17 10:34:00 - [134] Originally by: Keeves The fact that someone can scan a mission down and steal 10-15mil in goods without any reprocussions at all just creates a lazy group in the "pirate" niche that i wouldnt want to be associated with. That hurts, Keeves. After all I've done for you. LOL. We're Recruiting!
Keeves Minmatar Sexy Pirate Club	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:34:00 - [135] Originally by: Tchell Dahhn Originally by: Keeves The fact that someone can scan a mission down and steal 10-15mil in goods without any reprocussions at all just creates a lazy group in the "pirate" niche that i wouldnt want to be associated with. That hurts, Keeves. After all I've done for you. LOL. Hey i meant no offense... just stop being lazy lol.
Rooker Lysian Enterprises	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:40:00 - [136] Why does this issue cause so many people to argue with analogy? Jetcan theft arguments cause the same thing. Using analogies is not a good way to argue a point. For every analogy one person can use to argue their opinion, someone else can make up another that's just as valid to argue the opposite opinion. So let's just not or this thread is going to go around in circles forever. I actually supported the idea when they first changed salvaging to not require removing loot first, because it made it difficult to salvage in belts and might have led to surprise bait ganks. It didn't even occur to me, although it should have, that people would start probing out missions to run off with the salvage. Silly me. I've certainly changed my mind on that. I believe salvaging a wreck you didn't create yourself should lead to aggression. It offends me that a so-called "PvP" game allows one player to take something valuable from another without much in the way of consequence. The only option someone has is scorched earth tactics, to blow up all the other wrecks so that nobody can salvage them. Tchell's idea of the mission rats switching targets to someone newly warping in would be amusing if salvage thieves started popping, but I think it would cause too much trouble for people who run missions in gangs. It also might lead to easy-mode mission farming, where you warp in a Basilisk then a Drake and let the Drake thumb its nose at the rats while somebody else kills them with a gank fit. Out of all the ideas I've heard, I most prefer Marlenus' - having the option to probe specifically for wrecks, with the caveat that they won't be listed if a player is within 30-50K of them. If it really was intended to be a profession, then upgrade the tools so people can go looking for those wrecks. We wouldn't need for salvaging to cause aggression then. If the choice is between risking hostile rats, hostile players and the possibility of a wardec for one mission's worth of wrecks or several missions worth of wrecks that already have been abandoned, I know which option I'd pick on the probing window. -- Let Us Avoid Systems Via Autopilot
The Cosmopolite Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.17 23:50:00 - [137] Just on this issue of salvage, personally while it remains so difficult to scan down mission runners (and please before anyone comes at me, it is considerably more difficult so long as the missioner remains in their spawned complex compared to the period when single-probe scanning came out and one could scan down a missioner in their complex instantly with recon probes) in mission deadspace then I am not so sure that flagging for salvaging should be brought in. The main defence of any mission-runner to being scanned is to salvage while the deadspace is still in place (ie. before redeeming the mission). Certainly, it is still possible to scan down missioners in deadspace but it is more time-consuming and requires some luck (spawn point needs to be within 4AU of a celestial as exploration probes need to be used - a recon probe has almost no chance because deadspace puts around a 100 multiplier on the difficulty). If there were to be a flag on salvage theft then the overall difficulty of scanning would have to be lowered (in line with sec status perhaps 1.0 = x100 modifier, 0.9 = x90 mod.. etc) and I would suggest a formal salvage rights contract be put in the game whereby someone can sell salvage rights for a specific fixed-price to some other person for a specified time-period. I imagine any change to scanning would have people up in arms but if you are making most of your mission money from salvage then you shouldn't be redeeming missions early .. or you should have a salvaging partner. My main point though is that with a flag probably needs to come in a salvage rights contract so that the salvaging profession can operate without fear of being baited into a trap by someone offering them wrecks to salvage. Cosmo The Star Fraction Communications Portal
Gailion Jut	Posted - 2008.05.18 00:18:00 - [138] Sometimes we get so focused on the two different options that we don't see a third or fourth. I too would like to salvage my wrecks without someone else coming in to profit from my hard earned rewards. I would propose that a timer be set on wrecks. This timer would allow a wreck owner time to salvage their wrecks say about 1.5 to 2 hours. Then at the end of that time the wrecks turn from yellow to white. Thus allowing anyone the opportunity to start salvaging and even looting. this would also allow players to collect from wrecks in Asteroid belts that usually go uncollected. i think that the second phase after the two hour timer is up should be about 45 minutes. this will then require a bit of skill and ability to get to the wrecks in time and quickly salvage them. Thus a well fitted ship and good skills will come into play Any comments
Jasqar	Posted - 2008.05.18 07:19:00 - [139] Originally by: Gailion Jut Sometimes we get so focused on the two different options that we don't see a third or fourth. I too would like to salvage my wrecks without someone else coming in to profit from my hard earned rewards. I would propose that a timer be set on wrecks. This timer would allow a wreck owner time to salvage their wrecks say about 1.5 to 2 hours. Then at the end of that time the wrecks turn from yellow to white. Thus allowing anyone the opportunity to start salvaging and even looting. this would also allow players to collect from wrecks in Asteroid belts that usually go uncollected. i think that the second phase after the two hour timer is up should be about 45 minutes. this will then require a bit of skill and ability to get to the wrecks in time and quickly salvage them. Thus a well fitted ship and good skills will come into play Any comments Yes, do not think this will be changed in any fashion:) Pretty obvious that there are many ways to change this. But who does it affect the most? Mainly Hi-sec PVE players. The lowest of the low in this game. Do just enough to keep them paying and no more. It is so obvious that in a pvp game the main aim should be to increase PVP. So some type of flagging should be mandatory. All the word games don't change the facts, using a salvager on a ship you didn't create should be flagged. Just simple to me, no mission runner? no wrecks. No ratter? no wrecks. The idea that the loot is yours and draws a flag if taken but not salvage is just ludicrous. Some player attacked and killed the ship. So the person that made the wreck gets the rights to it's loot and salvage. Anyone that wishes to salvage it should have to fight for it as well. Best would be a combination of the many,many different ideas that have floated around. Personal preference would be a combination of ideas, 1. Wreck probe drones. To find abandoned wrecks which might even increase salvage as the dev's claim they want. Make this a REAL profession not a risk free way to get ISK. 2. Timers on wrecks. So the person that killed the ship and made wreck can (if they wish) dispute having the salvage taken. After timer is gone(would say 1 hour since wrecks last 2 hours), then wreck, salvage and loot, is fair game.
zoolkhan Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Fate Weavers	Posted - 2008.05.18 08:37:00 - [140] Originally by: Lisa Waen What about a claim system for salvages? Default setting would be off, but if a missionrunner has every intention of coming back and clearing up thier own salvage, they could set it to on, essentially 'staking a claim' to the fresh wreck. If the salvage is staked, then any ninja salvagers should be aggro flagged for being a claimjumper. interesting compromise recruiting -forum

Lisa Waen	Posted - 2008.05.19 06:07:00 - [141] Originally by: The Cosmopolite My main point though is that with a flag probably needs to come in a salvage rights contract so that the salvaging profession can operate without fear of being baited into a trap by someone offering them wrecks to salvage. I am not quite sure how hard it would be to incorporate into a claims system, but should be possible to 'temporarily give [player] rights to salvage wrecks' that would time out in one hour (giving the player with temporary rights a text message when those rights expire), essentially sharing salvage rights with a selected player, thus allowing the sale of salvage rights to a professional salvager with a minimum of risk to either side. If standard cargo hold loot is also incorporated into the claims system, there could also be a 'temporarily give [player] rights to loot wrecks' option that will allow the same for standard loot as well. Simply put, these temporary rights allow a player to give another access without causing an agg flag, and without an actual 'ganging up' status that will allow the affected players to indiscriminately open fire upon one another with no concord intervention (if there is any concord presence). Its up to the individual players to wheel and deal over how much those salvage and loot rights are worth. And if no rights are given, the salvager who takes another's claimed wrecks are agg flagged as a claimjumper. This claims system will allow legal disposition of loot and salvage to become decided by the players, and not by an arbitrarily assigned status by the devs. Does it have its potential for abuse? Yes, because claimed loot and salvage would have the same inherent risks shared by miners who suffer from 'can flipping' pirate crews. However, it would also create ways for legitimate business deals between professional ratters/missioniers, and professional salvagers. As we all know, very little in Eve comes without risk, and salvaging should be no exception.
Sigul Siento	Posted - 2008.05.20 19:13:00 - [142] A system where you can claim wrecks and their salvage could be doable, but then it should be from some type of effort, not just a global on/off button. Say a mid slot module, a radio connected to concords salvage registry, which you must apply on wrecks you want to claim. It might be a handy option for some who don't want to use a high slot on a salvager, but can spare a mid slot. Instant effect, with longish range, and with 100% success rate. So something you can do while missioning without stopping the shooting, but that still require some effort from the missioner. If not, I can see no reason why a wreck should belong to anyone. "But the loot is mine, so should the wreck be!". No. Loot require no effort to pick up, it is just there, salvage must be salvaged, using specific skills and module. Flagging from taking loot is also a measure that allows you to protect mission-required items. As for ideas regarding NPC aggro to ninja salvagers, it would make sense if already exsisting NPC's shifted aggro, either randomly or through some form of analysis of which targets are easiest/most dangerous. This should of course apply to any players in a mission, whatever the reason they are there.
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.05.22 12:07:00 - [143] Originally by: Sigul Siento As for ideas regarding NPC aggro to ninja salvagers, it would make sense if already exsisting NPC's shifted aggro, either randomly or through some form of analysis of which targets are easiest/most dangerous. This should of course apply to any players in a mission, whatever the reason they are there. The more I think about my original idea, the more I think this is the way to go. I would definitely support better "Mission Rewards" in line with this, and make the NPC Rats that aggro the Ninja Salvager only pay their bounties to the Mission Runner. (Hey - I'm not there for your bounty - I'm cleaning up your mess!) I wouldn't necessarily take aggro from existing rats - rather, I'd like to see a new spawn appear to 'chase' the Ninja Salvager. (This way, the Mission Runner gets 'backup', without gaining more superfluous aggro.) Giving direct 'salvage aggro' to the Mission Runner tips the balance too far in their favour, and I would definitely like to keep an even playing field. We're Recruiting!
Zirketch Kruug Ta'liq	Posted - 2008.05.22 13:01:00 - [144] My Response: [X] The Ninja Salvager should NOT be aggro'd to the Mission Runner after the first wreck is salvaged, because I support CCP's current ruling that Salvage is free for anyone with the proper tools to retrieve from wrecks. To those that support 'The Ninja Salvager should be aggro'd to the Mission Runner' statement I have this to say, the mission runner did not own the wrecks before he/she destroyed them hence they do not own afterwards. Think of it this way: person x offers me a bounty to smash person y's car up with a bat, I do just that and get paid the bounty. Now do I own that wreckage? No, person y does. Person y gets an insurance payout if he/she had insurance. for another person (w say) to come along and strip it of anything valuable then person w has effectively taken some part of a property belonging to person y, not me. Therefore ninja slavager should not be agroe'd to the mission runner. Essentially the ninja salvager should be agroed to the particular rat, or as a long shot their respective corp. Thank you.
Zirketch Kruug Ta'liq	Posted - 2008.05.22 13:02:00 - [145] ps.. I hate finding these drned threats once they reach 5 pages.
Lisa Waen	Posted - 2008.05.22 18:45:00 - [146] A mid slot 'salvage claim registry' module wouldn't be a bad thing overall, as it could be used by salvagers as well for unclaimed salvage. Not a bad caveat to a claims system, but I am also unsure how it will affect lag. The on/off switch method is simpler. Even if it isn't 100% the best way to deal with open loot and salvage, I feel it is still superior to what we have now. As far as aggro switching, or rat spawn generation for extra ships entering a mission d.s. area goes... Great idea, in principle. Personally, I would have no objections to this, as the rats would gain some AI intellegence from this, making certain missions more fun and/or challenging. However, this function would have to come from the server-side, requiring more server processing power and information transfer. This equates to increased lag on the server. Since lag reduction is a major goal of the devs, I seriously doubt that anything resembling this will ever come to pass.
Garota'de'Ipanema	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:59:00 - [147] Originally by: Tchell Dahhn As a Ninja Salvager, I have spent time and ISK to train Astrometrics and related skills to be able to scan down Mission Runners. I have purchased Salvager modules, and may spend millions in ISK to rig ships with Salvage Tackle I/II rigs to make the salvaging faster and easier. (They cost ~16Mil ISK at the moment - not a small investment.) lol thats quite an emotional justification of your views check out the other side of the coin: as a missionrunner in order to decently run a mission I have to train marauders to 5, get a golem, t2 missile flightime and velocity rigs, t2 sieges with javelins, a gist x-type XL booster and a pith x-type amp, pith x-type hardeners etc - not a small investment , and ad to that another scout account that will jump before the golem and shoot at sentries to bring concord in to avoid suicidal tendencies therefore I would be entitled to own the rigs i worked and invested hard to produce. I admit that's also emotional personally i think the wrecks being available for everyone as at it's now adds a bit of flavour and excitement to the boring environment of the missions
Joe Starbreaker	Posted - 2008.05.24 05:53:00 - [148] AB;DF ---------------- [insert signature here]
Amarr Holymight Bat Country Aegis Militia	Posted - 2008.05.24 12:04:00 - [149] Just popped into say no to this.
outopian P.I.A.	Posted - 2008.05.26 13:12:00 - [150] As it stands, I believe wrecks should behave exactly as cans do game mechanic-wise, if only for the sake of consistency. I have ships that are meant for running missions and I have fully rigged ships equipped for salvaging. In most cases, the mission ships are used for running missions and the salvager is brought out later to clean up my mess afterwards. There are also times when I am called out by corp members to clean up their messes when they wish not to be bothered to do so or don't want to sacrifice the high slots (or DPS) for more difficult or time consuming tasks. As far as the argument as to salvaging being a profession I will put out there a resounding, "Yes". What I don't agree with is the idea that putting "Ninja" in the name of any profession denotes the person putting the "profession" in practice is doing something legally or morally legitimate. Professions by definition is being payed by someone for doing something task related or being sponcered to do something. Under these guidelines even piracy can be considered a profession, but as it defined being professional is not a question of whether you are skilled (Astrometrics) at doing something or not. Which is why I don't buy the "Ninja salvager as a profession" argument. In real life, If I am demolishing a house I own the rights to, and I catch someone taking all the copper piping out, I personally will be hitting someone with a claw hammer. There was a time I studied up a bunch of points in EW, which are mostly useless in solo missioning, which is what I was doing at the time. Yeah, I felt as though I wasted some time training things i didn't need when I didn't understand the roles that certain skills played in the game. I still have and use those skills when they are better suited to what I am doing at the time. If you are so skilled at scanning for ships, you can certainly tell if anyone from the given corp is close to the wreck they killed :-), risk vs. reward is the name of many aspects of the game, and I don't think salvaging should be excluded from that. I will also argue that I have yet to see a mission where my corp members, or I didn't intend to at the very least, salvage up after ourselves. I think any corp should have every right to shoot the s*** out of anyone who comes in and starts reaping the rewards of their efforts. On the other hand I suggest, and I would certainly endorse mechanics that would allow a corp or individual to contract their wrecks in a given system at the time or a period of time over to a "Professional Salvager". I.E., I would accept 2.5 - 5 million dollars an hour to let someone salvage up behind me and if they can't turn a sizable profit, well they suck at salvaging. Especially the time I'd save not having to stop missioning. I have yet to be a victim of "ninja salvaging", but if and when I am I would strongly suggest to my corpmates a wardec and a merciless hunt for the offending party and corp which I'm sure is going to be drifting around in flimsy little frigs and destroyers anyway. I really can't help but get the impression the ninja salvager's are complaining that their "work" might actually become work.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE 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 EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online 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, EVE-Search.com. 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.