These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

I've found out what I was looking for. Thank you to those who participated.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kazacy
BACKFIRE Squad
#21 - 2012-04-15 20:04:29 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:

and no, i have never been suicide ganked. its just a stupid mechanic that for a few mil you can kill a hulk loot it and possibly make isk off the deal.


tell this to a taliban when shoot a very expensive (training cost and so on) american soldier with a cheap ak-47; maybe they should need to buy expensive gear before shoot americans? imo it's logical to try to inflict maximum damage with minimum cost.
Shai 'Hulud
#22 - 2012-04-15 20:09:35 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
all they need now is a buff to t2 industrial and exhumer EHP so that it takes more the 2 destroyers to suicide them.
You have obviously never played with a Mastodon in EFT...

The most useful slaves are those that believe themselves to be free
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2012-04-15 20:11:09 UTC
I too, use real life examples in video games.
this isn't real life get over it, balance >>>>>>> realism.

t2 industrial and mining ships... as well as probably black ops and numerous other t2 ships
should get an EHP boost.

maximum damage and minimum cost does make sense,
except its the equivalent of a blade of grass stopping a tank 100 times a day...
Kazacy
BACKFIRE Squad
#24 - 2012-04-15 20:17:32 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
I too, use real life examples in video games.
this isn't real life get over it, balance >>>>>>> realism.

t2 industrial and mining ships... as well as probably black ops and numerous other t2 ships
should get an EHP boost.

maximum damage and minimum cost does make sense,
except its the equivalent of a blade of grass stopping a tank 100 times a day...


you do realize if you actually pay attention and stay aligned you are practically invulnerable in any mining ship in hisec? the tank it's not the problem here, maybe the brain or lack of him.

P.S.
or maybe ppl are too lazy and like to play AFK mining and they deserve this.
Kale Eledar
Venerated Industries
#25 - 2012-04-15 20:32:07 UTC
Liang has an interesting blog post regarding this sort of thing, and it has a link to an article that has a differing viewpoint.


http://liangnuren.wordpress.com/2012/03/28/social-contracts/

First come smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire.
lanyaie
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
#26 - 2012-04-15 20:54:09 UTC
Cause in reallife there are 15km long buttplugs that float around in space and can transport other vechicles piloted by forever living "capsuleers" Roll


Stop comparing eve to reallife dammit if eve was like rl I'd be in jail in both of them.

Spaceprincess

People who put passwords on char bazaar Eveboards are the worst.
Delhaven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-04-15 21:09:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Delhaven
Kale Eledar wrote:
Liang has an interesting blog post regarding this sort of thing, and it has a link to an article that has a differing viewpoint.

http://liangnuren.wordpress.com/2012/03/28/social-contracts/

Very interesting... thank you for pointing that out. I'll have to digest that.

Mental note: must re-watch "As Good As It Gets" and listen to Jack Nicholson before posting next time...

"People who talk in metaphors oughta shampoo my crotch. " Blink

...because they're obviously lost here.
Delhaven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-04-15 21:37:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Delhaven
Herping yourDerp wrote:
and no, i have never been suicide ganked. its just a stupid mechanic that for a few mil you can kill a hulk loot it and possibly make isk off the deal.

I have been suicide ganked, and to me it's just the cost of doing business. As long as I come out ahead in the long run I'm happy, and anything else is just a challenge or a setback. The old "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" still applies. I still think CONCORD still sucks at it's job though.

Kazacy wrote:
tell this to a taliban when shoot a very expensive (training cost and so on) american soldier with a cheap ak-47; maybe they should need to buy expensive gear before shoot americans? imo it's logical to try to inflict maximum damage with minimum cost.

Interesting point, but I'd think that would be a case of war between nations (or corps/alliances) or a civil war (or parts of null) as opposed to crime. The wardec and faction warfare systems are supposed to take care of those. If a declared war happens though, you're absolutely right.

Herping yourDerp wrote:
I too, use real life examples in video games.
this isn't real life get over it, balance >>>>>>> realism.

I could just as easily have used an example from another game as opposed to real life, but Eve is unique enough that I can't think of any.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2012-04-15 22:10:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
I spent a lof time thinking about what it was in your post that bothered me. This is it: in real life a ganker has a fairly high percentage of failure unlike EVE where there is almost 100% chance of success if you do it right along with the consequences of your action.. (success is measured by meeting a goal despite the law of the EVE universe that there are consequences for your actions). In real life, when a criminal is ID'ed he doesn't have the luxury of trying to change the constant law of the universe by complaining on a forum; the police are after him and he knows it.. it serves no purpose to complain about it.

Understanding that this a game is essential. it's supposed to be space where witnesses more than likely can't id you.. but concord can.. that said, concord has 100% chance of ID'ing anyone in their space and tracking them due to some overwhelming transponder markers. They will get you..and finding a way to "get a way with it" (avoiding consequences) breaks the EULA.

Instead of trying to mold EVE in a vision you have, you should find ways to work with what exists and learn to live within the frame of the game universe.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Eryn Velasquez
#30 - 2012-04-15 22:43:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Eryn Velasquez
All those discussions about "risk" are useless, when you're caught everytime.

Why not change to a real risky system, depending on the sec-status of the systems?

The chance to get caught by CONCORD in a 1.0 System would be near 90%, in a 0.9 system near 75%, 0.8 would be 50, then 40, 30 and 20 % for 0.7, 0.6 and 0.5.

This means, the chance CONCORD arrives at the crimescene in time gets lower, the lower the sec-status of the system is. So, the ganker has a chance to survive.

But, in case he gets caught, he has to pay the loss of the victim.

In addition to

"Don't fly, what you can't afford to loose" it then would be

"Don't gank, what you can't afford to pay"

That would be a real risk.

_“A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.” ― Jean-Jacques Rousseau _
StefanKumansky
Public Embarrasment
#31 - 2012-04-16 03:07:51 UTC
Delhaven wrote:
This will force the Aggressor to stay docked up (in jail) or flee justice (to low-sec of null) for that time period; and/or



Forcing the Suicide Gankers into Low sec Sounds like a plan.
Kazacy
BACKFIRE Squad
#32 - 2012-04-16 10:35:29 UTC
Eryn Velasquez wrote:
All those discussions about "risk" are useless, when you're caught everytime.

Why not change to a real risky system, depending on the sec-status of the systems?

The chance to get caught by CONCORD in a 1.0 System would be near 90%, in a 0.9 system near 75%, 0.8 would be 50, then 40, 30 and 20 % for 0.7, 0.6 and 0.5.

This means, the chance CONCORD arrives at the crimescene in time gets lower, the lower the sec-status of the system is. So, the ganker has a chance to survive.

But, in case he gets caught, he has to pay the loss of the victim.

In addition to

"Don't fly, what you can't afford to loose" it then would be

"Don't gank, what you can't afford to pay"

That would be a real risk.


Do you realize you can create a character only for suicide ganking with wallet 0 and use ships ejected/leaved in space by your friends at safespots? So your solution it's not viable at all even with 100% chance to repay the victim. This ideea get into my head right after i read your post without any effort so i bet they are more clever ways to get around your solution.
Also i don't get it why some ppl need to have a special status in this game; if i lose a ship it's lost no matter the circumstances so why another set of rules when these rules seems fine for everyone?
Aggressive Nutmeg
#33 - 2012-04-16 11:11:33 UTC
I won't take sides here because I'm half carebear, half ******** - depending on which characters I log in with.

Let me just say I can understand some people getting frustrated with the lack of realism in Eve.

I agree, suicide ganking is comically easy. I've done it. But then the CONCORD mechanic is totally unrealistic:: Space police that turn up instantly and you have no chance of escape.

Eventually, you will give up being frustrated with the broken game mechanics and do what most of the people in this thread have already done:

Give in to the system. Suspend your disbelief and immerse yourself in this world that doesn't make any sense.

That's when you'll start having fun.

Never make eye contact with someone while eating a banana.
Mortis vonShadow
Balanaz Mining and Development Inc.
#34 - 2012-04-16 11:17:33 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
CCP nerfs gankers three times in a single month.
Carebears just keep on crying.
Everything normal, I can see.


You're a dumbass.

Some days you're the bug, and some days your the windscreen.                   And some days, you're just a man with a gun.
Daemon Ceed
Ice Fire Warriors
#35 - 2012-04-16 11:17:44 UTC
Personally, I'd rather the mechanics stay the way they are. I sui-gank you, you take my ship. Done and done. Jail is stupid and just further discourages an important part of the game; destruction.

What people don't seem to get a grasp on is every time a Hulk gets ganked, a miner is making money by the need for minerals going up to build new Hulks and the Hulk producer is making money to sell a replacement Hulk to the victim. It's all supply and demand. Destruction and creation. It just so happens that some of us enjoy the destruction part more, and that is truly what makes Eve great.
Eryn Velasquez
#36 - 2012-04-16 11:38:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Eryn Velasquez
Kazacy wrote:
Eryn Velasquez wrote:
All those discussions about "risk" are useless, when you're caught everytime.

Why not change to a real risky system, depending on the sec-status of the systems?

The chance to get caught by CONCORD in a 1.0 System would be near 90%, in a 0.9 system near 75%, 0.8 would be 50, then 40, 30 and 20 % for 0.7, 0.6 and 0.5.

This means, the chance CONCORD arrives at the crimescene in time gets lower, the lower the sec-status of the system is. So, the ganker has a chance to survive.

But, in case he gets caught, he has to pay the loss of the victim.

In addition to

"Don't fly, what you can't afford to loose" it then would be

"Don't gank, what you can't afford to pay"

That would be a real risk.


Do you realize you can create a character only for suicide ganking with wallet 0 and use ships ejected/leaved in space by your friends at safespots? So your solution it's not viable at all even with 100% chance to repay the victim. This ideea get into my head right after i read your post without any effort so i bet they are more clever ways to get around your solution.
Also i don't get it why some ppl need to have a special status in this game; if i lose a ship it's lost no matter the circumstances so why another set of rules when these rules seems fine for everyone?


Of course i know, that the possibility exists to create such chars. Do you know what happens with a char that has MINUS in his wallet today?
No trade, no contracts - the only additional thing would be, that donations to this character, whether in ISK and also ships/assets would first be used to get his wallet in balance.

And the thing with your so called "special status" - there is none. If the criminal gets caught, he has to pay. Simple as that.

_“A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.” ― Jean-Jacques Rousseau _
Kazacy
BACKFIRE Squad
#37 - 2012-04-16 12:23:33 UTC
Eryn Velasquez wrote:

Of cause i know, that the possibility exists to create such chars. Do you know what happens with a char that has MINUS in his wallet today?
No trade, no contracts - the only additional thing would be, that donations to this character, whether in ISK and also ships/assets would first be used to get his wallet in balance.

And the thing with your so called "special status" - there is none. If the criminal gets caught, he has to pay. Simple as that.


like i said before the character can be created with sole purpose to suicide gank and the negative wallet it's ok for this. also "special status" it's crystal clear: if i pop a ship why should i pay for this? if i be a suicidal taliban why should i pay for the destruction of New York towers Big smile
wardec me, suicide gank me and so on you have alotsa posibilities to get revenge but you only want an automatic response from CCP server wich it's against the sandbox.
anyway pls cry some more because in this way you'l get a true hisec space and yeah imo this will kill eve as we know.
Eryn Velasquez
#38 - 2012-04-16 13:01:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Eryn Velasquez
Kazacy wrote:

like i said before the character can be created with sole purpose to suicide gank and the negative wallet it's ok for this. also "special status" it's crystal clear: if i pop a ship why should i pay for this? if i be a suicidal taliban why should i pay for the destruction of New York towers Big smile
wardec me, suicide gank me and so on you have alotsa posibilities to get revenge but you only want an automatic response from CCP server wich it's against the sandbox.
anyway pls cry some more because in this way you'l get a true hisec space and yeah imo this will kill eve as we know.


The only ones whining here and still crying for risk free ganking are all those gankbears. There is no risk, wenn you defintely loose your ship. It's a calculated loss.

My proposal gives you a chance to get off with your ship and your loot - but there is a chance, that when you get caught it will become expensive. This is a real risk.

_“A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.” ― Jean-Jacques Rousseau _
Kazacy
BACKFIRE Squad
#39 - 2012-04-16 13:13:17 UTC
Eryn Velasquez wrote:
Kazacy wrote:

like i said before the character can be created with sole purpose to suicide gank and the negative wallet it's ok for this. also "special status" it's crystal clear: if i pop a ship why should i pay for this? if i be a suicidal taliban why should i pay for the destruction of New York towers Big smile
wardec me, suicide gank me and so on you have alotsa posibilities to get revenge but you only want an automatic response from CCP server wich it's against the sandbox.
anyway pls cry some more because in this way you'l get a true hisec space and yeah imo this will kill eve as we know.


The only ones whining here and still crying for risk free ganking are all those gankbears. There is no risk, wenn you defintely loose your ship. It's a calculated loss.

My proposal gives you a chance to get off with your ship and your loot - but there is a chance, that when you get caught it will become expensive. This is a real risk.


the problem is not the risk for ganker. the real problem is even your proposal will became reality will be another cry from miners and in the end after countless 'solutions' CCP will deactivate (read final solution) the guns for nonconsesual pvp and yes this will be bad even for carebears (no isk sink no need for industry).
Ikonia
Royal Amarr Expeditions
#40 - 2012-04-16 13:37:52 UTC
From a logical point of view the comparison between Gankers and RL robbing is false, obviously.

Ganker has no risk at all but a few ISK. Robber risks his life in freedom or even his life at all.
Ganker is not interested in profit but in annoying players. Robber is interested in profit only, not in annoying victims.
Ganker is exploiting a game mechanic. Robber is not exploiting, he is working for income.
Ganker is wasting time of himself and other players sparetime. Robber is not wasting his time, but other persons time from a certain point of view (time at police, medics, aso).
CONCORD is fast, but only comes when the crime has taken place. Police is not really fast, but can be in place even at luck right at time or short before the crime takes place.
CONCORD is executing only once. Police will do that very much longer in many different ways.
Ganker can gain faction easily after loosing it. Robber will never again loose his bad reputation for his entire life.

From that point of view the punishment is not really very hard to compensate. A ganker can cause anger to many more successfull, better skilled and more valuable players for the community in a short time, than the consequences taking place by CONCORD interaction can compensate.

Therefor the punishement and the consequences MUST and hopefully WILL be increased very soon. In this world there is no place for gankers, simply forbid shooting at other players in hisec.

Cheers