It is dangerous and pirates can do something, but yes I agree there needs to be made some kind of fix, personally I would say that maybe allow "report crimes on me" to broadcast a "help me" signal to all in the system? maybe coloring the wake another color then white like the others one's have? red perhaps?, if this was done I could easily see the cooldown on fsd being increased even when submitting.
Getting EXTREMELY frustrated with a certain interdiction exploit
- Thread starter Alexander the Grape
- Start date
Pirate frustrations?
Got stopped near Yembo - first time I've been robbed so thought I'd try running in my T7 - he's in a Clipper and asks for 30 tons. I end up with 2% hull, he gets 30 tons.
Tell my contacts who are hunting - one of them finds him, interdicts and - he combat logs!!! lol
At this point I switch to group for my inward runs because theres no cargo insurance.
If trading in hi security systems traders need either better response from friendly law enforcement or much better shields - for ships of comparative base cost I didn't stand a chance.
Got stopped near Yembo - first time I've been robbed so thought I'd try running in my T7 - he's in a Clipper and asks for 30 tons. I end up with 2% hull, he gets 30 tons.
Tell my contacts who are hunting - one of them finds him, interdicts and - he combat logs!!! lol
At this point I switch to group for my inward runs because theres no cargo insurance.
If trading in hi security systems traders need either better response from friendly law enforcement or much better shields - for ships of comparative base cost I didn't stand a chance.
Last edited:
Yeah.....unfortunately if the trend is the same as in other games, a lot of pirates just want to affect and hit other players, but they don't want to risk anything themselves, almost the same as griefers but not quite, it is just sad.
Edit: Feels like you know, those fake gang kids or such you know those that will harrass steal and such from people, but when they get attacked themselves they whimper, whine, complain and run away.
Last edited:
I replied to your question about the Anaconda. I see now I misread.
My point still stands anyway.
Cobra: Faster, agile, heavy ordnance load-out.
T6 or bigger (trade vessel): Slower, sluggish, minimal ordnance load-out (or none at all with focus on jump distance, shields and cargo space - a perfectly legit playstyle).
In a straight up fight up, the Cobra will win. Ever tried to dogfight in a T6? Case in point.
The only (sensible) option for a trader is to leg it. So yes, that seems perfectly fair to me.
Instead, you want to decrease the traders chances of survival because you (generally speaking) can't whittle your target down (and hunt them), or be patient and save up slowly to get a better ship?
How I feel about your arguments to nerf the only real shot a trader has at survival against a persistent pirate:
View attachment 15091
Again, you are quite completely missing my point here.
If you go read the OP's original post you'll see that he has a fully upgraded Cobra.
Fully upgraded.
And he still can't whittle down the shields of a T6 before it is able to jump away after submitting to an interdiction.
That should tell you something about how fast the FSD recovers after submitting.
So since he has a fully upgraded cobra, the fourth level of combat ship after the sidey, eagle and viper, telling him to "get a better ship" to be able to stop the 2nd smallest trade ship in the game, is kinda... well, I'll just say "not very well thought through".
The next ship would be an asp, and that's no longer a "combat ship", it's a frikkin cruiser.
Also, the devs have confirmed that it is indeed too fast and they're gonna fix it so this entire discussion is moot.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Of course it will!
The Asp is a 280 ton ship with 6 hardpoints and a class 5 power plant.
It's LOADS bigger than the T6.
We're talking about a Cobra here, something that is roughly the same size as the T6 but geared for combat.
It should be able to take down the T6's shields before it's able to jump away, but right now it isn't.
You can't use the argument of having a massively larger ship being able to kill the T6 before jumping as some sort of validation that the jump time is ok.
If that was the case then having a 1 second cooldown and 1 second spool-up would be "fine" because a capital ship could destroy a hauler in that time...
I've had wanted NPC's do this to me and let me tell you this much: If I can't kill an enemy NPC Viper/Sidewinder/Adder in my cobra before it jumps away after submitting to an interdiction, the cooldown time is WAY too short.
Because those NPC's are pretty quick to kill... but that cooldown is quicker still.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Nor is it called EuroTrucking: Space Edition.
Honestly, the best way to deal with this is to fly a ship that mass locks your chosen target. I like the asp for this: it's reasonably quick and mass locks everything up to and including a type 9.
You shouldn't have to get the 5th level combat ship (and 2nd best combat ship in the game) to be able to stop the 2nd smallest transport ship in the game.
Last edited:
It isnt about justifying my gameplay, its about rationalising and using a perfectly acceptable game mechanic to my best advantage. As for intent, i can never be sure the person interdicting me is going to be playing the 'drop some cargo and i'll let you go' game, or the 'im just gonna blow you up' game, so i'll err on the side of caution and run. As for the mini game, not even worth trying in a type 9, and there is no way im going to take the better part of a 1mill credit hit for attempting it and failing. So i'll happily continue to make use of the current system while it lasts, and if they change it to the point i'm going to loose money every interdiction, i'll swap my type 9 out for my python, run less and kill more.
That sounds an awful lot like me, I interdicted you in my clipper, got 30 tons and left you with low hull, too bad I never combat log. It must have been someone else.
Last edited:
micky1up
Banned
No what it boils down to is as with all games mechanic knowledge and SKILL
Why not? Where is it written down that a pirate only needs a cobra to take out a transport ship? You should use the correct tool for the job not complain the tool you chose isn't good enough.
Easy to avoid people like you are , some problem with heads I think, you do hunt weak targets but u never hunt strong targets who can respond on your attacks well, when I trading with lacon I am in solo mode, but when I trading with 30 mils geared ASP I am in open, nick is same like on forum well not full same, fanta_bh , just feel free to interdict me I will not run I will fight to the end.
+1 on that but I actually wanted to say: I liked your signature.
I love this thread...
Traders going "OMG GREIIIFFEEER YOU DEZERV TO BE SPLOITED" and PvP players trying to be reasonable. Oh wait, that's Elite in a nutshell.
Seriously though he can interdict whoever he wants to in open and shoot whoever he likes. On no occasion should the outcome be guaranteed when engaging a target, at the moment it's pretty much a guaranteed win for the trader if they submit to the interdiction... This is folly.
Traders going "OMG GREIIIFFEEER YOU DEZERV TO BE SPLOITED" and PvP players trying to be reasonable. Oh wait, that's Elite in a nutshell.
Seriously though he can interdict whoever he wants to in open and shoot whoever he likes. On no occasion should the outcome be guaranteed when engaging a target, at the moment it's pretty much a guaranteed win for the trader if they submit to the interdiction... This is folly.
Last edited by a moderator:
excellent post.. let me guess you are 1 of the reasonable pvp players? and of course calling traders idiots is a perfectly reasonable thing to do?! as someone else mentioned, the problem here isnt the mechanics, its the mentality, and your post really helps make that point.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes it is stacked in favour of the more agile ship. They're going to pull you in most of the time, one way or another - which is what happens now. All I'm suggesting is that if you're going to be able to high-tail it fast after the interdiction ends, that's something you should earn by doing a halfway respectable job at trying to escape the interdiction, rather than by doing nothing. That way the skilful pirates do better than the un-skilful pirates, and the skilful traders do better than the un-skilful traders.
Right now, nothing is fundamentally broken, unless you're working from the principal that a game should be about a relative measure of skills, rather than about one team learning a simple trick that works every time and that's the end of the game.
That's not quite the intent I'm talking about. Yes, you don't know what the interdictor is going to want, so the best thing to do is to run. If you want to run, the best thing to do should be to run, not to stop. As the game designer, if I'm trying to work out whether you're looking to escape or looking to fight, stopping should be your indication you want to fight.
So if the two of you have signalled you want to fight it out, I should handicap neither of you with a loss of control, and set both of your cooldown timers really high so no-one can wuss out. I should do that because for two player that have declared to me, the designer, that they both want to fight - the interdictor by starting the interdiction and the interdictee by submitting - that's the best fight scenario. Two men enter, one man leaves, Thunderdome!
If you want to run, you should run. You're unlikely to escape altogether, but by drawing out the chase, that's how you should buy yourself the short cooldown to jump out again. This can be rationalised anyhow you like, and mechanically it makes sense. Right now, if you want to run, there's no point just trying to escape the interdiction because you won't ever actually get away, and you'll be punished for trying. You shouldn't be. That's broken too. That's what's currently forcing you to take the route you are. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you should be trying to play the interdiction game as it is now. That would be madness!
I understand if you want to keep things the way they are because it means you always win. Almost everyone does. Personally, I don't trade much and I've never even tried piracy, so I don't really have a horse in this race. All I see is an obviously broken gameplay mechanic that punishes players for trying and failing, and rewards them for not trying at all.
however if they have no sheilds you have no issues getting your limpets on and breaking their hatch so the issue is still moot. yess maybe if the fsd cooldown was a little longer but I have also submitted many a time only to get treated as if I lost the mini game. I submit in my Asp because I wish to fight, I do not play open however due to my crap connection and lag I get when playing with other commanders. There are other issues which are being mentioned but ignored by those who just want it harder for traders to run.
Pirates get a bigger ship and mass lock....... if you can not afford it have a think how did the trader get it, if its so easy to make millions you should have no issue spending a little time to do so.
hunt in packs, I have seen this argument used on traders to defend themselves maybe you should be targeting fsd wakes and dropping in on your pirate mates to take out the trader
Yes FSD cooldown could be a little longer but making it the same as interdiction success is wrong as well.
How is this an exploit when it was designed that way?
Call it a bad choice from FD if you will (from your point of view at least), but it certainly isn't an exploit.
It was tentatively called an exploit because the original intent was to allow clean players interdicted by local security to submit and accept a scan without taking hull damage. Further they didn't want said pilot to then be stuck in local space for 40 seconds. It wasn't intended to allow a quick getaway from piracy interdictions. When Sandro Sammarco called it an exploit I don't think he was labelling it as the same kind of exploit as say firing missiles at ships with PDS so a space station attacks them, but it is an unintended use of an intentional system. I don't think calling it an exploit was the language I'd have used, purely because of the other connotations, but technically it still fits.
Last edited:
The way I see it, the problem is this;
Pirates don't like the short FSD cooldown
Nonpirates don't like the fact that if the short FSD cooldown is removed, they are basically dead
I can see a way of resolving this;
Interdiction in a policed system immediately brings a law enforcement presence to the area, so the pirate has more than just one target to worry about, but you can then increase the cooldown time because the interdicted player has some support.
However, to do this, you HAVE to allow the non-pirate the option to either plot their own route, or if using route plotting in the galaxy map, they MUST be given the option to avoid anarchy and/or systems which have an unknown allegiance.
I see this as a good way of resolving both issues in a single sweep....
discuss.
Pirates don't like the short FSD cooldown
Nonpirates don't like the fact that if the short FSD cooldown is removed, they are basically dead
I can see a way of resolving this;
Interdiction in a policed system immediately brings a law enforcement presence to the area, so the pirate has more than just one target to worry about, but you can then increase the cooldown time because the interdicted player has some support.
However, to do this, you HAVE to allow the non-pirate the option to either plot their own route, or if using route plotting in the galaxy map, they MUST be given the option to avoid anarchy and/or systems which have an unknown allegiance.
I see this as a good way of resolving both issues in a single sweep....
discuss.
Last edited by a moderator: