EVE General Discussion

However the point is removing docking rights to characters with negative security status linked to some scale that CCP come up with.

How about a 6 hour GCC timer for a -10 sec status ganker? Sliding scale downwards depending on sec status. We don't need to make the ganker care, we just need to make ganking painful enough to make the incidence decline.

Why should docking rights be removed? You like others, seem to be looking for NPC mechanics, instead of what CCP like to look for which is player driven ones.

It is in large part NPC mechanics, that drive -10 player into dock. Why not simply remove that need to dock, instead of trying to fix an NPC mechanic with another bad one?

Or remove one before adding the other, if NPC hand holding is what you really need. But let's face it, it wouldn't stop anything. It merely adds yet more pointless restrictions, which are easy to circumvent.

Mag's, what I am searching for is to change the mechanics so that there is a possibility fight, or a way for people to disrupt CODE for example, I like the fact that Ganking occurs, however its too easy. My suggestion was to make it so people had to do more work, like undocking with another toon and exiting the ship, or using a POS or using an Orca, all of the three detailed give more risk and a bit more effort, and ways that people can try to disrupt them, rather than the current method.

In another thread I talked to a merc corp about the difference between convoy duty whcih is what Indy corps wanted as compared to hunter killer which is what mercs want to do, so I am pushing the undock suggestion as a way to enable hunter killer rather than convoy.

The restrictions are to make people more vulnerable, its not pointless.

The real question is why would you want to do this. Ganking and criminal game play have been explicitly built into the game as a form a player conflict. Adding more arbitrary penalties in an effort to reduce ganking, something on purpose built into the game, is silly. If you don't want ganking in the game, then just argue to remove it. If you think it is too profitable, then make changes to ship stats to change that. Player conflict is good so more arbitrary NPC-based restrictions to reduce that are not helpful.

Increased GCC times are terrible idea as it prevents players from actually playing the game, but restrictions on docking I could see as generating better gameplay if it was part of a complete revamp of mechanics. For instance, the faction police mechanic is a major inhibitor of player conflict as it forces -10 players to stay in the station most of the time. If you made it so the faction police only chased player with negative standing to that empire, but not security status, and removed station docking, then gankers could still operate in space (and they still would), but might be more exposed and tempted to take on anti-gankers knowing the faction police wasn't going to appear and pop them.

But just adding more penalties for the sake of "reducing ganking" is pointless. Gankers are going to gank (and more importantly, are suppose to gank), so they will adapt and similar number of lazy, clueless or greedy players will die. You will then conclude that your measures aren't harsh enough and call for more restrictions. This will go on until it is actually impossible to gank, which would have profound effect on the sandbox that Eve is suppose to be.

This has been going on for years now. Highsec is safer than ever (and so lucrative it is smothering gameplay in non-highsec). I am sure that changes could be made to make criminals play in highsec more dynamic and interesting but just tacking on more "consequences" for the sake of discouraging game play that is suppose to be there is silly. It is already next-to-impossible to die in highsec if you spend a small amount of effort, how much "safer" do you want it to be?

It is easy to scan down an Orca, also the vulnerability time is greater for a person in a pod jumping into the system, warping to the Orca, boarding his ship, its not like an instra station bookmark is it.

This is where you miss the plot, I do not want to change GCC timers and linking me in with someone who suggested that is plain incorrect, and I do not want to reduce ganking as such, what I am after is creating additional points of weakness in the current mechanics to enable people to fight back, thus adding to the sandbox and creating emergent gameplay. My suggestion is to enable people to have ways to disrupt the gankers in more meaningful ways.

Stop being emotional about it, its all about mechanics and emrgent gameplay, or is that just something the gankbears use when it suits them?

CCP should introduce gank fatigue: the more you gank the longer your timers last. And this fatigue should be account oriented so no more relogging to your peaceful carebear main.

I write it with totally serious expression on my face. Grrr, so serious!

Then we are on the same page. If your problem with the current ganking situation is that you think it could be made better to drive more interesting player conflict, then I look forward to your suggestions to improve the game (beyond just making it "harder" for gankers for no reason other than to dissuade them). If your problem with gankers is that you don't like it and think it unfair for the strong to destroy the weak, or the prepared exploding the unprepared, you should do something about in-game, or realize that perhaps you would be better off playing a different game altogether.