Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 462
# 11
04-16-2013, 10:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattimeo97 View Post
Another thing I would add: If this person was high enough into leadership to kick everyone from the fleet, even this system wouldn't stop them. All they need to do is play with fleet ranks and purchase rights, and can deny everyone else the ability to use all those provisions, selling them only to who they wanted. Then they effectively drain the fleet of everything of value, all while the membership can sit and watch.
Actually, under this proposal the rest of the fleet would be allowed to leave the fleet, taking all of their contributions with it and leaving the thief unable to sell those tasty provisions.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 730
# 12
04-16-2013, 10:47 AM
It's a terrible thing what happened to your fleet, but this proposal actually wouldn't have stopped the hacker from deleting the fleet -- it would have reduced it to a Tier 0 starbase preventing it from having a sell/ransom value, but still be just as destructive.

I think any sufficiently good system would have to be of such a degree of complexity that Cryptic wouldn't spend the time to implement it, over actual content.
Fleet holding costs | Accolade Points: 18020 (Fed Engineer), 16400 (KDF Tactical)
Subscribe to Accolade thread | Join channel Accolades | Idea: Mail Revamp
New on STOwiki: Spire projects | STO Timeline | Fed-KDF Disparity | upcoming content
Fed Fleet: Section 31 (level 20) | KDF Fleet: Klingon Intelligence (level 20)
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 253
# 13
04-16-2013, 11:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jermbot View Post
This system would only hurt you terribly if you're kicking your fleets largest contributors every month.

If that's the case and your fleets biggest contributors are leaving or being kicked in droves, then I'd have to suggest you're doing something terribly wrong.
I don't know how your fleet works, but we end up dumping 20-30 people a month for inacitivty, and many of them make contributions at some point. T5 is one hell of a haul, and that's where we're headed now. Even the result of someone's 20k worth of fleet credits hurts if it's demoting us at this point.

Harming the fleet by removing members isn't the solution here. It's the ultimate form of griefing tool. The fleet management interface is a joke, and should be revamped to actually provide some sort of security to leadership beyond the account level.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,425
# 14
04-16-2013, 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by frtoaster View Post
I think a better solution would be to require some kind of vote or approval from the other leaders before a leader can be demoted or kicked out. It wouldn't prevent someone using a hacked account from looting all the provisions, but at least it would prevent them from taking control of the fleet.
That probably is going to be the more accepted option. I guess I jumped to the equity premise because I'm used to guild systems that were more focused on the individual player... And I guess my idea was that the counter to overly large fleets was not to invite people you anticipate kicking and that it's good to feel "stuck" with other people shy of pretty much a major offense. That booting people should hurt a little bit, which would discourage theft and push cohesion.

I can get that there's friction to that idea though... And I can see where the simplest solution is, like you say, leaders who can't remove one another so that if someone gets hacked and the hacked account goes on a booting spree, the other leaders could simply step in.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,425
# 15
04-16-2013, 11:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jermbot View Post
This system would only hurt you terribly if you're kicking your fleets largest contributors every month.

If that's the case and your fleets biggest contributors are leaving or being kicked in droves, then I'd have to suggest you're doing something terribly wrong.
Well. I'm not going to absolutely push my idea if it's unpopular but you do raise a good point... And fleets could limit liability by limiting contributions from new members.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,122
# 16
04-16-2013, 11:11 AM
I really don't like this idea in the slightest, people's decisions change, having a player being active, contributing and then taking a hissy fit and leaving and taking their cake with them isn't right to affect others.

Honestly, all inactive members should be demoted, this is part of fleet management. It doesn't solve the problem of people getting hacked that are active. Cryptic has put in account guard, its quite unlikely to get truly hacked unless everything you have is compromised, the person's computer needs to be verified before proceeding, meaning their e-mail is also hacked.
Delirium Tremens
Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
Nothing to do anymore.
http://dtfleet.com/
Visit our Youtube channel
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 462
# 17
04-16-2013, 11:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattimeo97 View Post
I don't know how your fleet works, but we end up dumping 20-30 people a month for inacitivty, and many of them make contributions at some point. T5 is one hell of a haul, and that's where we're headed now. Even the result of someone's 20k worth of fleet credits hurts if it's demoting us at this point.
Then under this system you'd find an inactive member who contributed quite a bit to be more valuable than an active member who never donates a thing. Admittedly, this is a tricky situation to be in, but not one I'm necessarily opposed to.

In fact, the way this would force a fleet to be loyal to a contributing member even if he's decided to take a break is one of the best arguments in favor of it.

Quote:
Harming the fleet by removing members isn't the solution here. It's the ultimate form of griefing tool. The fleet management interface is a joke, and should be revamped to actually provide some sort of security to leadership beyond the account level.
Now you're just being dramatic and silly. Sneaking into a fleet, donating time and effort into helping the fleet grow, then leaving to remove only your own time and effort, is a piss poor griefing tool. It requires entirely too much work for too little payoff.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 518
# 18
04-16-2013, 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jermbot View Post
This system would only hurt you terribly if you're kicking your fleets largest contributors every month.
How much someone contributes vs how good of a fleet mate they are, has nothing to do with each other.

Bottom line is that someone could join your fleet, donate a ton of fleet marks, then know that if you try and kick them the fleet as a whole will be punished for it. This means that they have you over a barrel, and the longer you let it go, the more they can contribute, the more painful it will be to kick them.

This is, if anything a griefers dream come true, a truly captive audience. You have to put up with them, because kicking them could quite easily become more painful then putting up with them.

If you think a griefer won't put some effort into creating a situation like this, you're fooling yourself.

Any system that punishes a fleet for removing someone, for any reason what so ever, is a very, very bad idea.

Quote:
And fleets could limit liability by limiting contributions from new members.
How exactly can you do that? There's no setting that I know of that lets you limit how much someone can contribute to the fleet projects.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 199
# 19
04-16-2013, 11:41 AM
Honestly, I think you and the rest of your fleet that got booted should pool your resources once again and instead of creating a new fleet, buy a lawyer. Real money can and does get put into Fleet bases. Theft is theft.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,962
# 20
04-16-2013, 11:45 AM
Yeah heard on Priority One the full details, and does suck.

Honestly, I'm surprised that Cryptic's security measures failed. This hacker had to also know the email of your leader and get the confirmation code.



When it comes to additional security, I have the idea that if a leader tries to demote or kick an officer or co-leader from the fleet, the other officers get a message wanting to confirm. Sort of like a take on the self destruction scene in Star Trek 3.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1xdGCvNMEY


And if kicking multiple non-Officers from the fleet that's been active within the past 60 days, a flag is raised to the other officers. Where they can approve or disapprove the action.



To prevent theft with Fleet banks, while there are permissions that limit certain ranks, I also propose an item limit. So lets say that a thief was acting to be part of the fleet and waited until promotion that they could suddenly wipe out your bank, with an item limit at the next rank, they could only remove 2 items within a week. (Also with Gateway, one could look at that persons characters to see if they were gearing up as intended).




Well, while a very painful lesson, hopefully this will prompt Cryptic to start putting up serious Fleet Security measures.

Until Customer Service restores your fleet to 100%, you guys are welcome to stay at my fleet starbase.
NO to ARC!

Season 9.5 = STO's NGE is Here! Welcome to the Grind!

New Crafting = It's not Crafting, is an overblown Reputation System.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:08 AM.