These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

pushing for harder punishment on hi sec gankers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#461 - 2014-09-13 16:25:39 UTC
Is Rod still crying about Darkfall? I guess he hasn't yet realized that different games are, in fact, different.

"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.
CALDARI CITIZEN 14330909
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#462 - 2014-09-13 23:13:57 UTC
Buffalo Wings are mighty tasty.
This thread is not.
Splash.

The Artist Formerly Known As AC. 

The terminal end of the digestive system. 

The Best CSM Candidate
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#463 - 2014-09-14 17:01:40 UTC
I think there need to be harder punishments for mining, beyond the fact that it drives you insane with the boredom. We should start a campaign on the forum, rather than using the existing tools to inflict said punishments ourselves.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Leto Thule
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#464 - 2014-09-14 17:37:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Leto Thule
admiral root wrote:
I think there need to be harder punishments for mining, beyond the fact that it drives you insane with the boredom. We should start a campaign on the forum, rather than using the existing tools to inflict said punishments ourselves.


SEC status loss for mining belts to depletion.

CONCORD strength pirate spawns for being in the same belt for longer than 15 mins.

Mining ships are only allowed to dock in ORE space.

Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment
Iain Cariaba
#465 - 2014-09-14 18:37:36 UTC
Leto Thule wrote:
admiral root wrote:
I think there need to be harder punishments for mining, beyond the fact that it drives you insane with the boredom. We should start a campaign on the forum, rather than using the existing tools to inflict said punishments ourselves.


SEC status loss for mining belts to depletion.

CONCORD strength pirate spawns for being in the same belt for longer than 15 mins.

Mining ships are only allowed to dock in ORE space.

Miners not being able to dock in highsec makes more sense than gankers not being able to dock. After all, each rock mined by a capsuleer miner is one rock of resources the great empires don't have access to anymore.
Kell Braugh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#466 - 2014-09-16 19:48:55 UTC
Giuseppe R Raimondo wrote:
a way to reduce highsec ganking is to remove the option to turn in tags and buy your security status up. Everyone knew it was a stupied idea when introduced, i am supriced its still a thing



Best mechanic ever imho.
Thomas Mayaki
Perkone
Caldari State
#467 - 2014-09-19 13:21:48 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Leto Thule wrote:
admiral root wrote:
I think there need to be harder punishments for mining, beyond the fact that it drives you insane with the boredom. We should start a campaign on the forum, rather than using the existing tools to inflict said punishments ourselves.


SEC status loss for mining belts to depletion.

CONCORD strength pirate spawns for being in the same belt for longer than 15 mins.

Mining ships are only allowed to dock in ORE space.

Miners not being able to dock in highsec makes more sense than gankers not being able to dock. After all, each rock mined by a capsuleer miner is one rock of resources the great empires don't have access to anymore.


I tried selling my ore to the empires but they didn't want it as it was too expensive due to the people ganking pushing up the costs. I suggested making the empire navies intercept the gankers/criminals quicker which would allow us to mine ore cheaper for them. Still waiting on that but its a win win situation for everyone.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#468 - 2014-09-19 14:12:45 UTC
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
I tried selling my ore to the empires but they didn't want it as it was too expensive due to the people ganking pushing up the costs.


Their needs don't decrease because the price increases. Try again.

Thomas Mayaki wrote:
I suggested making the empire navies intercept the gankers/criminals quicker which would allow us to mine ore cheaper for them. Still waiting on that but its a win win situation for everyone.


Wah! Wah! Having an omnipotent police force that can't be tanked or killed isn't enough for me! Wah, CCP!

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Iain Cariaba
#469 - 2014-09-19 15:44:43 UTC
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
I tried selling my ore to the empires but they didn't want it as it was too expensive due to the people ganking pushing up the costs.

No you didn't. What you did was try to sell your ore to another player for what was probably far more than fair market value. Most industrialists don't buy ore off market. Refine your ore, then sell the resulting minerals.

Thomas Mayaki wrote:
I suggested making the empire navies intercept the gankers/criminals quicker which would allow us to mine ore cheaper for them.

Do some research and learn the list of all the nerfs to ganking. Over time, Concord has been given much faster response times and eventually given their current god mode powers. Still you cry for moar.

Thomas Mayaki wrote:
Still waiting on that but its a win win situation for everyone.

No, this is only a win for you.
Thomas Mayaki
Perkone
Caldari State
#470 - 2014-09-20 09:39:23 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
I tried selling my ore to the empires but they didn't want it as it was too expensive due to the people ganking pushing up the costs.


Their needs don't decrease because the price increases. Try again.

Thomas Mayaki wrote:
I suggested making the empire navies intercept the gankers/criminals quicker which would allow us to mine ore cheaper for them. Still waiting on that but its a win win situation for everyone.


Wah! Wah! Having an omnipotent police force that can't be tanked or killed isn't enough for me! Wah, CCP!



I guess you didn't read the post to which it was replying to even though I quoted it?

As for Wah! Wah! I suggest you look up James 315 campaign for CSM .
Thomas Mayaki
Perkone
Caldari State
#471 - 2014-09-20 09:50:05 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
Still waiting on that but its a win win situation for everyone.
No, this is only a win for you.


Isn't that the only thing that matters.
Welcome to capitalism my 2nd world comrade :)
Iain Cariaba
#472 - 2014-09-20 15:24:18 UTC
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
Still waiting on that but its a win win situation for everyone.
No, this is only a win for you.


Isn't that the only thing that matters.
Welcome to capitalism my 2nd world comrade :)

Yet you claim it is for everyone. Which is it, a win for you or a win for everyone.

Come over to the world of logical thought.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#473 - 2014-09-20 18:35:08 UTC
Thomas Mayaki wrote:
I guess you didn't read the post to which it was replying to even though I quoted it?


I read it and my reply to you was still appropriate.

Thomas Mayaki wrote:
As for Wah! Wah! I suggest you look up James 315 campaign for CSM .


James 315 had a CSM campaign? I'm pretty sure he was never in the running.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#474 - 2014-09-21 02:56:35 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Leto Thule wrote:
A test then? I'll fly a hauler, you try to gank it. If what you say is true, you'll be able to spin up a capable gank pilot within a few days, and you should have no problem killing my tanked DST or blockade runner. You pick the trade hub, my cargo, and the destination. I'll choose how to get there.

I think you would find it isn't as easy as you think... When your dealing with someone who knows how to tank, uses bookmarks, and watches for obvious scouts.
Lol. So because a pilot can defend against a gank, that suddenly means it's difficult to be a ganker? There's absolutely no consequences to being a ganker. The things they say, "ooh, you can be a villain, but then you'll have low sec status!", who cares? Sec status is completely irrelevant except to make kill rights completely pointless, and when you're bored of ganking, you no longer need to rat to get it back to positive. Bounties are beyond a joke too.

I think you may have got yourself confused, so let me clear it up. I'm not saying every gank is easy, what I'm saying is that the choice of becoming a ganker is easy and easy to undo. I believe that when you make choices like that, you should commit to it, and there should be negatives as well as positives to making that choice. That should be the same with every choice in the game.


when a ganker kills someone, ganking is too easy. when a ganker cant kill someone its irrelevant and doesnt mean ganking is balanced. player choives should be removed from the equation unless their choices prove my point. lucaslogictm.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Lady Areola Fappington
#475 - 2014-09-21 03:11:41 UTC
Xuixien wrote:

when a ganker kills someone, ganking is too easy. when a ganker cant kill someone its irrelevant and doesnt mean ganking is balanced. player choives should be removed from the equation unless their choices prove my point. lucaslogictm.



It's always been this way. Gankers are totally irrelevant and have no impact on anything in the game, they need to be nerfed because of the tremendous impact they have on the game.


Cognitive dissonance is a scary thing.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#476 - 2014-09-22 02:16:24 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Xuixien wrote:

when a ganker kills someone, ganking is too easy. when a ganker cant kill someone its irrelevant and doesnt mean ganking is balanced. player choives should be removed from the equation unless their choices prove my point. lucaslogictm.



It's always been this way. Gankers are totally irrelevant and have no impact on anything in the game, they need to be nerfed because of the tremendous impact they have on the game.


Cognitive dissonance is a scary thing.


wouldnt it techically be a lack of cognitive dissonance?

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#477 - 2014-09-22 02:21:54 UTC
Man I wish CCP would take me seriously when I demand people be punished for engaging in gameplay that I personally object to for arbitrary reasons.

Those incursion runners would be hating their lives right now.
Renegade Heart
Doomheim
#478 - 2014-09-22 03:52:16 UTC
Gankers will always win Twisted

Good luck trying to change things though!
Wraymond Arji
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#479 - 2014-09-22 15:40:38 UTC
13 nonames wrote:
I would like to see a harder punishment set out for hi sec gankers such as a sec limiter put in place to make it so anyone with a -6 sec may no longer get into hi sec no more criminal driving around hi security space seeing as a so call advanced society would not have wanted criminal walking the street as well as a faster response time for concord and a new sytem put in place that makes it so the concord on your grid will aggress new and old criminals not just faction police


And I would like to see a larger benefits package set out for highsec gankers. Ganking is part of eve and always has been, for over a decade. I think the horse is dead and tenderized, maybe it's time to stop beating it...
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#480 - 2014-09-22 15:42:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
Possibly it is time to give the horse some medical attention.

However we all know that CCP will not ever do anything to make ganking better for the ganker. They will only ever nerf it, make it more difficult, more expensive and increase the negative consequences, because apparently carebears are the only people in high sec whose opinions on pvp matter.