These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Remove griefing from highsec, but allow PvP
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#21 - 2014-09-08 21:14:40 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Momiji Sakora wrote:
There are lots of ways to protect yourself against the above issues in OP's post. However these are often learnt the hard way, and are incredibly damaging to the whole atmosphere of the game - don't trust anyone, etc etc.




Yes this is what drew me and many others to the game. The challenge that comes from playing against the other people and when you can't trust anyone the bonds you form with the people you do trust become that much stronger.



+1

I do very little PvP (meaning, fleets to actively hunt), but if PvP wasn't as big of a part of this game, I wouldn't be around.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#22 - 2014-09-08 21:28:28 UTC
Momiji Sakora wrote:



+1

I do very little PvP (meaning, fleets to actively hunt), but if PvP wasn't as big of a part of this game, I wouldn't be around.




Indeed one of the best things about eve is you can't avoid PvP and still play be you competing with a small gang, a fleet of warships, other miners in a belt or against other traders on the market.



EvE is all about player interaction and confrontation if that's not the type of game you want to play then don't. Now i'm not against making the game more accessible or appealing to newer players (The more of them we have the more player interaction we have and the better the game gets) but it needs to be in a way that doesn't go against the core ideals of the game.


BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Martin Corwin
Doomheim
#23 - 2014-09-08 22:28:50 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

1 - Don't think this is a good idea. In real life anyone can attack you at anytime, and Eve should certainly not be more sheltered than real life.

You don't have throwaway alts and always a fresh clone ready in RL. I would say Eve is already way more sheltered than RL.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#24 - 2014-09-08 22:39:55 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
3 - Probably agree - The awox mechanic never made much sense.



It allows for inter-corp sparring. Testing of fits and such.

It also allows for acts of aggression you'd want that doesn't get the other concorded. Webbing of freighters to launch off gates faster a big one.

And OP quoting Mittens is not good. That site relies on sensationalism at time to generate hits. HIs organization is famous for its member joining corps to do this very thing. When you quote a source it be best if that source actually does something to keep that in check in his own crew. It lends itself to such things as legitimacy or credibility.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2014-09-08 23:23:04 UTC
If you wish to discourage griefing, you shouldn't reward players for having a low security status by allowing them the privilege to gank. There is already a great mechanic in play which causes players that make a habit of ganking in empire space receive less protection.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#26 - 2014-09-09 00:18:45 UTC
No to all.

Highsec needs less safety, not more.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#27 - 2014-09-09 01:45:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
I wasn't going to post, but then I decided that I really just had to post.

Heather Tsukaya wrote:
#1: Only allow players who are criminals (-5 sec status or below) to suicide gank. This allows players to defend themselves and each other from suicide ganks. CONCORD should NOT be protecting suicide gankers.

To compensate for these changes, the NPC police should be removed from highsec, and players should have an option to "go criminal" if they choose to do so.


No. You clearly don't know what you're asking for. Suicide ganking is a big part of what keeps highsec balanced. Remove it, regulate it or curtail it in any way and watch CCP take away any possibility of earning ISK in highsec outside of Jita.

Quote:
#2: Only corps with POSs or POCOs should be war decable. Basically create two types of corps. One type "interbus registered" can anchor POSs, POCOs and other structures, but in return can be war decced. There is a fee of 100m to become registered. Another type of corp "unregistered" can not anchor structures, but also can't be war decced. This is the default type of corp. This stops high SP mercs from griefing new player social corps of players still trying to learn the game.


If you're still trying to learn the game, you should still be in your rookie corp. Leaving your rookie corp to join or form a player corporation is tantamount to saying "I know what I'm doing, I understand the risks and I'm ready to get out of the kiddie pool and swim with the big fish."

Quote:
#3: Remove highsec awoxing. CONCORD should protect corp mates from each other. Even people like The Mittani agree that the whole "safari" mechanic should be removed from the game.


While Mittens does have a point that the duel mechanic obsoletes some uses of being able to shoot freely at corpmates, it doesn't replace other uses and removing free-fire also removes an entire sub-profession from the game. Significantly worse than that, it also helps promote the idea that it's okay to be oblivious in space and to trust anyone you meet, which are completely bad and wrong ideas that have no place in EVE.

Quote:
These changes should help prevent new players from being "griefed." Right now highsec is one of the least newbie friendly areas of the game because new players have no way to protect themselves from being griefed. Hopefully a day comes when I no longer have tell new players "join a lowsec or nullsec corp as quickly as possible or you will end up quitting the game."


None of those things are considered as griefing, and so these changes will do nothing to prevent it. You're correct that highsec isn't very newbie-friendly; the best place for newbies right now is (and long has been) deep blue null. People come here with these ideas that have been taught to them in other MMOs that are functionally and fundamentally nothing like EVE, then expect that EVE should change to be more like those other MMOs that it isn't.

Stop. Look. Listen. Think. Understand where you are. Understand what makes EVE the place - and game - that it is. These suggestions are the opposite of that.

Not supported. -1.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#28 - 2014-09-09 01:49:00 UTC
Banning awoxing? CCP uses it to advertise eve.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Luwc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2014-09-09 06:50:55 UTC
another carebear post demanding something pathetic.

inb4 lock

http://hugelolcdn.com/i/267520.gif
Lugh Crow-Slave
#30 - 2014-09-09 07:00:57 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
Banning awoxing? CCP uses it to advertise eve.



for reference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGplrpWvz0I

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#31 - 2014-09-09 07:03:00 UTC
Heather Tsukaya wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Griefing is already banned in EVE.

Well surely you agree with your leader on #3 at least.


You'll find that a lot of us don't. Sure, I don't agree with people joining newbie corps for their awoxing safari, but awoxing does have its legitimate pros.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Josef Djugashvilis
#32 - 2014-09-09 07:44:07 UTC
What some see as griefing, others see as fun.

This is not a signature.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#33 - 2014-09-09 09:26:26 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
What some see as griefing, others see as fun.


What CCP sees as griefing is the only relevant definition and that definition hasn't been described in this thread even once. Carry on with your spaceship asshattery, sir. o7
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#34 - 2014-09-09 10:28:17 UTC
Just read the OP, and what I saw was:

Remove all non-consensual PvP.

Not supported, (and that is coming from a former highsec carebear!)

Friends
Beta Maoye
#35 - 2014-09-10 10:47:53 UTC
Heather Tsukaya wrote:
#1: Only allow players who are criminals (-5 sec status or below) to suicide gank. This allows players to defend themselves and each other from suicide ganks. CONCORD should NOT be protecting suicide gankers.

To compensate for these changes, the NPC police should be removed from highsec, and players should have an option to "go criminal" if they choose to do so.


Not all high sec are populated with players. Some high sec far from trading hubs are sparsely populated. Your suggestion makes ganking more convenient in remote high sec that are neighbors to low or null. I don't think it is good for players who has not yet gained enough experience in true free spaces.

Even in populated spaces, a ganker group can cloak in a safe spot and use an alt to scout for the target. Experienced suicide gankers can get the job done within a few seconds before other players can interfere. After the primary target is down, if the situation is not too hot, they could add more killmails in their operation.

I think your idea give a hand to griefing instead of removing it.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#36 - 2014-09-10 11:22:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Heather Tsukaya wrote:
#1: Only allow players who are criminals (-5 sec status or below) to suicide gank. This allows players to defend themselves and each other from suicide ganks. CONCORD should NOT be protecting suicide gankers.

To compensate for these changes, the NPC police should be removed from highsec, and players should have an option to "go criminal" if they choose to do so.

#2: Only corps with POSs or POCOs should be war decable. Basically create two types of corps. One type "interbus registered" can anchor POSs, POCOs and other structures, but in return can be war decced. There is a fee of 100m to become registered. Another type of corp "unregistered" can not anchor structures, but also can't be war decced. This is the default type of corp. This stops high SP mercs from griefing new player social corps of players still trying to learn the game.

#3: Remove highsec awoxing. CONCORD should protect corp mates from each other. Even people like The Mittani agree that the whole "safari" mechanic should be removed from the game.

These changes should help prevent new players from being "griefed." Right now highsec is one of the least newbie friendly areas of the game because new players have no way to protect themselves from being griefed. Hopefully a day comes when I no longer have tell new players "join a lowsec or nullsec corp as quickly as possible or you will end up quitting the game."


1. CONCORD does not and never has protected suicide gankers, they will have their ships destroyed. They could make it a bit more interesting if CONCORD would pod the criminal as well but that would seem to go against the 'humanity' dictate to which CONCORD seems to abide.

Trading in the police for your requested change is like giving someone an apple in exchange for their home.

2. I could get behind this idea but I'm sure many will not as it makes highsec even safer than it already is and the safety of highsec is already a frequent complaint you see in the forums.

It might; however, help to accomplish one of CCP's stated goals in that it would encourage grouping in highsec which at this time happens in extremely low numbers and leads to a sense of disconnection from the EVE community. Further it would encourage cooperative game play like mass mining operations which if you see one today it is most often a single-player corp running 10 computers at once.

3. I agree that CONCORD should intervene in any combat situation other than formally agreed to combat in highsec. That this isn't the case goes directly counter to the 'humanity' dictate It seems CONCORD follows with regards to not podding gankers in its areas of influence.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#37 - 2014-09-10 11:27:16 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
Just read the OP, and what I saw was:

Remove all non-consensual PvP.

Not supported, (and that is coming from a former highsec carebear!)


Recommending you take some classes in reading comprehension then.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#38 - 2014-09-10 11:49:54 UTC
Hmmm while I don't really agree with the OP fact is I know more people IRL who have been put off playing eve due to being ganked or "awoxed" multiple times before they've had enough time to learn the ropes than I know that have stuck with the game.

Based on extremely strawpoll type numbers that may not be representative of the whole the eve player base would probably be more like 50% higher than it is if there was a little more protection of new players (whether that is a good thing or not is another matter).
Toriessian
Helion Production Labs
Independent Operators Consortium
#39 - 2014-09-10 16:06:10 UTC
If theres any change to Wardecs I'd like a mechanic where the AGGRESSOR can set an ISK value that is publicly shown on the dec where if they (the aggressor) lose X amount in ships the war gets invalidated. It seems like a strange mechanic, but I'd like the attackers to have a carrot to offer the defender to actually undock and try to fight. Theres not enough trying to fight in HS.

-From the aggressor perspective this may get you more kills.

-From the defenders perspective this is actually a reason to bother trying. 3 noobs in omens might just move the meter even if they all die.

I'd be happy to see HS AWOXING go. I understand the freedom of the sandbox, but any mechanic that is preventing new players from grouping has gotta go IMO. When reading about war decs, the suggestion for new players is to group up and fight back. Theres a contradiction here, and I think fixing that might get us another percent or two added to the 10% of the players that actually get involved with the game past leveling up their Raven.

Every day I'm wafflin!
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Doomheim
#40 - 2014-09-10 16:12:15 UTC  |  Edited by: NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
You are correct that there is much greifing in high-sec but CCP is just too stupid and lazy to realize these unfair and broken mechanics are only doing harm to their game.