These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Sec Ganking - CONCORD Balance request

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
NightmareX
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#101 - 2017-02-26 01:36:03 UTC  |  Edited by: NightmareX
Teckos Pech wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
So just because "it's a game", there should be no rl logic in the game?


No, of course not. Your logic is flawed because the norms in game are not the same as RL. Stealing in RL is not tolerated, yet there is virtually no in game mechanism to punish a corp thief or a scammer.

OMG!!! CCP!!! Fix scamming. Patch it out. It is not like RL. Roll

If you find out who stole from you in EVE, there is basicly a million ways you can hunt that player down and make his ingame life miserable. So that excuse doesn't hold water.
Dom Arkaral wrote:
No.
Also, HTFU

Kthxbai Lol

Why?

You can't just say no without explaining why, can you?

Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#102 - 2017-02-26 01:36:33 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
No.
Also, HTFU

Kthxbai Lol


Lul... another ganker. How's Kusion been. Do I need to start coming around again.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#103 - 2017-02-26 01:39:31 UTC
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Jakara Dakara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2017-02-26 01:40:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jakara Dakara
Erich Einstein wrote:
Disclaimer: I understand that ganking is a part of the game and I am completely ok with that. I actually like that people in highsec are not completely protected.

Given that, CONCORD and the security status are completely useless against repeat offenders (mainly -5.0 and lower) who fleet gank every 15min - 24hours a day. Yeah, im talking about those staged up in Jita V - Moon 17 station. Ganking as a profession and source of income should come with the requirement of having to manage and repair your security status based on the system that you are ganking in.

To implement this i propose two changes:

First:
CONCORD should respond differently if a pilot's security status falls low enough in a particular highsec system. This second phase of aggression would consist of stations and jump gates instantly webbing and warp-disrupting while CONCORD moves in. This prevents serial criminals from freely moving through highsec and also prevent gank fleets from staging in highsec systems unless they control their security status correctly. Customs officials already behave this way on gates so it makes complete sense to expand this behavior to CONCORD's abilities. CONCORD should not be made to look like fools who can be manipulated.

Here is an example of when this second phase would kick in:

1.0 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-4.0 and lower)
0.9 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-5.0 and lower)
0.8 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-6.0 and lower)
0.7 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-7.0 and lower)
0.6 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-8.0 and lower)
0.5 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-9.0 and lower)
0.4 system and lower - not applicable

Second:
To prevent alpha clones from continually being rolled and used as disposable gank toons, I propose that only omega pilots be allowed to set their safety to red, while alpha clones can only set their safety to yellow at most.

I feel that this will balance out the security and safety of highsec without damaging the ability to gank. This change will require gank fleets to put in an effort if they want to treat highsec like a free meal.

This would also bring more meaning to tags, where they can be used to repair status so that mission running is not the only option. Gankers would have to weigh tags cost against target profit to be effective.

CCPlease implement this or something similar so that repeat gank fleets can not freely stage and travel in highsec. If career criminals want to take advantage of major markets like jita and amarr, then they can use an alt or carrier service to get goods. No need for career criminals to even be allowed in highsec. That is what a security status is meant to control.



OK
1) You should try searching the forum, this post has been made, ad nauseam, again and again and again.
2) Concord is designed to react to a crime not prevent, CCP has not mentioned wanting to change this.
3) Concord gets regularly made a fool out of in the lore, why can't we have fun with the police too?
4) Having alpha safety locks has been mentioned in other threads as well, they don't want to take emergent game play away from them
5) Everything you mentioned would still severely damage the ability for dudes to gank, even worse than it has been already.
6) You've mentioned you steal the loot from a gank and profit off of it (making it less worthwhile for the gankers I might add), why would you want to remove that emergent gameplay/profit source from yourself?
NightmareX
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#105 - 2017-02-26 01:42:59 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.

Is lame excuses all you can give?

You don't even give any reasonable arguments or reasons why there shouldn't be a system in EVE like i mentioned. So why should we listen to you?

You said this is EVE yadda yadda yadda. Yes we know it's EVE, but EVE still has to be balanced both towards normal players AND the gankers.

Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#106 - 2017-02-26 01:46:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Erich Einstein
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.


You obviously dont know that goons sit in jita ganking whatever they can 24 hours a day. They are able to sit in 0.9 and 1.0 system stations with -10.0 security status. When they undock they dont even have to worry about faction police. They jump whereever they want and gank whatever they want without any negating gameplay effects whatsoever. All it takes is a mach bumper on each gate and they can stop any freighter that they desire and hold them as long as they desire. Bumpers do not go suspect and can even target the freighter so that it cant log out for 15min. Its a complete joke.
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#107 - 2017-02-26 01:48:10 UTC
Jakara Dakara wrote:
Erich Einstein wrote:
Disclaimer: I understand that ganking is a part of the game and I am completely ok with that. I actually like that people in highsec are not completely protected.

Given that, CONCORD and the security status are completely useless against repeat offenders (mainly -5.0 and lower) who fleet gank every 15min - 24hours a day. Yeah, im talking about those staged up in Jita V - Moon 17 station. Ganking as a profession and source of income should come with the requirement of having to manage and repair your security status based on the system that you are ganking in.

To implement this i propose two changes:

First:
CONCORD should respond differently if a pilot's security status falls low enough in a particular highsec system. This second phase of aggression would consist of stations and jump gates instantly webbing and warp-disrupting while CONCORD moves in. This prevents serial criminals from freely moving through highsec and also prevent gank fleets from staging in highsec systems unless they control their security status correctly. Customs officials already behave this way on gates so it makes complete sense to expand this behavior to CONCORD's abilities. CONCORD should not be made to look like fools who can be manipulated.

Here is an example of when this second phase would kick in:

1.0 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-4.0 and lower)
0.9 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-5.0 and lower)
0.8 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-6.0 and lower)
0.7 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-7.0 and lower)
0.6 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-8.0 and lower)
0.5 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-9.0 and lower)
0.4 system and lower - not applicable

Second:
To prevent alpha clones from continually being rolled and used as disposable gank toons, I propose that only omega pilots be allowed to set their safety to red, while alpha clones can only set their safety to yellow at most.

I feel that this will balance out the security and safety of highsec without damaging the ability to gank. This change will require gank fleets to put in an effort if they want to treat highsec like a free meal.

This would also bring more meaning to tags, where they can be used to repair status so that mission running is not the only option. Gankers would have to weigh tags cost against target profit to be effective.

CCPlease implement this or something similar so that repeat gank fleets can not freely stage and travel in highsec. If career criminals want to take advantage of major markets like jita and amarr, then they can use an alt or carrier service to get goods. No need for career criminals to even be allowed in highsec. That is what a security status is meant to control.



OK
1) You should try searching the forum, this post has been made, ad nauseam, again and again and again.
2) Concord is designed to react to a crime not prevent, CCP has not mentioned wanting to change this.
3) Concord gets regularly made a fool out of in the lore, why can't we have fun with the police too?
4) Having alpha safety locks has been mentioned in other threads as well, they don't want to take emergent game play away from them
5) Everything you mentioned would still severely damage the ability for dudes to gank, even worse than it has been already.
6) You've mentioned you steal the loot from a gank and profit off of it (making it less worthwhile for the gankers I might add), why would you want to remove that emergent gameplay/profit source from yourself?


because its bad gameplay for a highsec system and I can make isk in any security status. I dont rely on ganks for income.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#108 - 2017-02-26 01:50:05 UTC
Thats not a joke. Thats the game. Don't like it? Don't play.

Goons even announce this event ahead of time. If you are still getting ganked its your own dumb arse fault and ccp aren't going to protect you from your own stupidity.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
NightmareX
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#109 - 2017-02-26 01:51:46 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Thats not a joke. Thats the game. Don't like it? Don't play.

Goons even announce this event ahead of time. If you are still getting ganked its your own dumb arse fault and ccp aren't going to protect you from your own stupidity.

So basicly, the game can't be changed for the better, just because EVE is EVE.

So i have to stop playing EVE because EVE is EVE and it can't be changed is what you are saying?

Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#110 - 2017-02-26 01:51:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Erich Einstein
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Thats not a joke. Thats the game. Don't like it? Don't play.

Goons even announce this event ahead of time. If you are still getting ganked its your own dumb arse fault and ccp aren't going to protect you from your own stupidity.


Sorry... but I like the game and want to make it better so that more people will play. No good-old-boy clubs here trying to keep a feature that fits their gameplay style and allows them to rake in mountain of plex. Pay your subscriptions or earn them properly like everyone else. That is why we have a highsec, lowsec, and nullsec. I agree with ganking, but it is out of hand at the moment.
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#111 - 2017-02-26 01:56:32 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Thats not a joke. Thats the game. Don't like it? Don't play.

Goons even announce this event ahead of time. If you are still getting ganked its your own dumb arse fault and ccp aren't going to protect you from your own stupidity.


And btw... this has nothing to do with the burn Jita event. Goons do this all day, everyday, all year long. I already told you where they are stationed... go see for yourself.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#112 - 2017-02-26 02:02:15 UTC
NightmareX wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
So just because "it's a game", there should be no rl logic in the game?


No, of course not. Your logic is flawed because the norms in game are not the same as RL. Stealing in RL is not tolerated, yet there is virtually no in game mechanism to punish a corp thief or a scammer.

OMG!!! CCP!!! Fix scamming. Patch it out. It is not like RL. Roll

If you find out who stole from you in EVE, there is basicly a million ways you can hunt that player down and make his ingame life miserable. So that excuse doesn't hold water


Please. You can say the same thing to those who suicide gank. But you aren't you want CCP to punish them. And you talk of logic. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#113 - 2017-02-26 02:03:33 UTC
If you want to make the game better you'd be asking for buffs to ganking. Increases rewards for smart players. Penalises the dumb and lazy. And i mean for haulers and miners when i say that.

But no. Just another carebear that doesn't know his arse from his elbow. Wants the game to change so he doesn't have to think.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#114 - 2017-02-26 02:04:46 UTC
NightmareX wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.

Is lame excuses all you can give?

You don't even give any reasonable arguments or reasons why there shouldn't be a system in EVE like i mentioned. So why should we listen to you?

You said this is EVE yadda yadda yadda. Yes we know it's EVE, but EVE still has to be balanced both towards normal players AND the gankers.


I keep repeating it hoping you'll understand the point. The freighter pilot creates the ganking opportunity by overloading his freighter. You keep calling it lame because you can't logically refute the point.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#115 - 2017-02-26 02:08:05 UTC
Erich Einstein wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.


You obviously dont know that goons sit in jita ganking whatever they can 24 hours a day. They are able to sit in 0.9 and 1.0 system stations with -10.0 security status. When they undock they dont even have to worry about faction police. They jump whereever they want and gank whatever they want without any negating gameplay effects whatsoever. All it takes is a mach bumper on each gate and they can stop any freighter that they desire and hold them as long as they desire. Bumpers do not go suspect and can even target the freighter so that it cant log out for 15min. Its a complete joke.


Aside from Burn events Goons gank for profit as a general rule. The profit is created by the freighter pilot overloading his freighter.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#116 - 2017-02-26 02:09:38 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
If you want to make the game better you'd be asking for buffs to ganking. Increases rewards for smart players. Penalises the dumb and lazy. And i mean for haulers and miners when i say that.

But no. Just another carebear that doesn't know his arse from his elbow. Wants the game to change so he doesn't have to think.


You must be on a troll fest or something. That or you are just really dumb...
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#117 - 2017-02-26 02:10:41 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.

Is lame excuses all you can give?

You don't even give any reasonable arguments or reasons why there shouldn't be a system in EVE like i mentioned. So why should we listen to you?

You said this is EVE yadda yadda yadda. Yes we know it's EVE, but EVE still has to be balanced both towards normal players AND the gankers.


I keep repeating it hoping you'll understand the point. The freighter pilot creates the ganking opportunity by overloading his freighter. You keep calling it lame because you can't logically refute the point.


Have you never heard of "agree to disagree." You dont need to keep repeating your point. We get it.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#118 - 2017-02-26 02:17:02 UTC
Erich Einstein wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.

Is lame excuses all you can give?

You don't even give any reasonable arguments or reasons why there shouldn't be a system in EVE like i mentioned. So why should we listen to you?

You said this is EVE yadda yadda yadda. Yes we know it's EVE, but EVE still has to be balanced both towards normal players AND the gankers.


I keep repeating it hoping you'll understand the point. The freighter pilot creates the ganking opportunity by overloading his freighter. You keep calling it lame because you can't logically refute the point.


Have you never heard of "agree to disagree." You dont need to keep repeating your point. We get it.


You get it. Then why do you have a problem with ganking? The player getting ganked had the power to avoid the gank he chose not too. Why do you want to shield such players from the consequences of their foolishness.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#119 - 2017-02-26 02:20:25 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Erich Einstein wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is not Candy Land, this is EVE. If you take on too much risk, you bear the consequences. The OP is just flat out wrong on the basic nature of the game. Don't take on more risk than you can tolerate. That's it. A freighter being suicide ganked generally the player has taken on too much risk.

Is lame excuses all you can give?

You don't even give any reasonable arguments or reasons why there shouldn't be a system in EVE like i mentioned. So why should we listen to you?

You said this is EVE yadda yadda yadda. Yes we know it's EVE, but EVE still has to be balanced both towards normal players AND the gankers.


I keep repeating it hoping you'll understand the point. The freighter pilot creates the ganking opportunity by overloading his freighter. You keep calling it lame because you can't logically refute the point.


Have you never heard of "agree to disagree." You dont need to keep repeating your point. We get it.


You get it. Then why do you have a problem with ganking? The player getting ganked had the power to avoid the gank he chose not too. Why do you want to shield such players from the consequences of their foolishness.


Officially ignore for trolling
Janeos
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#120 - 2017-02-26 02:52:00 UTC
I haven't seen a vein of salt this rich in YEARS.