Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So what you want to do is force suicide ganking to be more of an alt activity than it was before. Because thats all that training time freeze is going to do. People are going to train the suicide alt to whatever skills they want it at, and never train another skill again on that character. There I've effectively defeated you idea with no effort.

If you want the freeze to be account wide, no that is meta-gaming and will not help anyone.

About sec status penalty.
I would like that there is progression in sec status loss.
If you gank one ship in the last year or so you loose like now.
If you gank two, you loose 50% more of sec status.
And every other gank the next one will cost you 50% more of sec status.

This way you can gank, but you cant grief.

This.

We all knew the insurance removal wouldn't be enough.
How about you make a post listing all the things you can do to avoid being ganked, instead of trying to force meta gaming on people who are already punishing the lazy?

Story-wise, any of your solutions could be implemented. CONCORD regulates the communications networks and may have a deal with entities who have a large stake in Empire. There are several ways to avoid the meta-game aspect by twisting it into a storyline solution by CONCORD.

Here's my biggest problem, though. I sympathize with your plight. The risk vs reward ratio for a ganker is not very high. Hell, it's probably not even one and that is the problem. Why is this not very high, though? The gankee doesn't make it high. You have recognized that you are easy prey because your mining ship cannot defend itself. It was never intended to.

I believe, wholeheartedly, that what CCP would rather have happen would be that you and other players fight fire with fire. Get a group of players for PVP support, organize and plan with some frigs and destroyers, fit some EWAR mods and give your miners some time to escape before CONCORD shows up and takes you both out. Do it in alts just like them. This IS a pain, but if neither CCP nor CONCORD can defend you, you MUST defend yourself. Don't solo mine, but plan mining excursions with large groups and make yourselves unattractive. Have logi support. This can be overcome, it just requires some in game wheeling and dealing.

If you can do this and prove to CCP that you cannot even defend yourself because of game mechanics, then they will have more reason to listen.

I dunno, ganking should happen, it's legitimate in the game.

That being said, Concord is not an effective deterrent towards this, not currently.

If you want to balance it, make the gank a status change that makes the player an instant target to the authorities, not just after repeated offenses.

They want to be acknowledged as law enforcement? Give them power to enforce.

The price to restore security status is clearly written on the killmail, under total value.
Hop in that pod, and visit a Concord station to pay your fine, instant status restoration.
If they don't want to pay the price, they are free to remain outlaws to Concord.
(The insurance company lobbyists pushed this in order to cut losses in ships in high security space)

Unless you're getting ganked pretty much 23/7 when you undock in highsec, and unless you cannot tell the difference between highsec and lowsec, CONCORD is indeed an effective deterrent.

This one made me laugh =)

Testing locations are in Amamake and Rancer.

I'd have to go with this. The problem isn't ganking as a whole but the fact that players recycle characters doing it exploiting a game mechanic that is not intended for this purpose. The fact that you can gank an exhumer with a 2 week old character is also a broken mechanic

Despite what people say about the issue, there is no reasonable excuse for a ~150 million ISK ship being so vulnerable to sub 4 million ISK fits being piloted by essentially untrained temporary alts. Even a Retriever is an expensive ship by comparison and it's at the bottom of the T1 counterparts. Industrials and Mining ships are simply made unrealistically weak and I'll never change my opinion of that

In the recent Devblog on ship rebalancing an Exhumer was compared to an Oil Rig. Totally out of concept, but what do you think it would take to take one of those down outside of knocking its pylons from under it. These things are made to withstand undersea tremors and oceanic turbulence that would capsize most ships

That aside, players should be limited to doing these activities on a primary character or being restricted from selling or biomassing these characters for a certain period. Simply put, any suicide gank should put a timer on biomassing at the very least as well as restricting character sale in some way, and any trial account should get a typical warning except that perhaps they shouldn't be able to bypass it

I don't agree with the idea of administrative penalties aside from this which is intended to prevent further exploitation of the current system. Trial accounts are readily abused by a large percentage of the game population as it is, so I think it's time that CCP find a way to limit the way in which they can be abused; preferably without damaging the new player experience in the process. A simple, "You are on a Trial account and cannot proceed with this action," would be good

Aside from that, boost industrial ships with higher EHP and some additional fitting that doesn't boost their actual role in any undue fashion. It's silly to think that an industrial ship should be weak when you can look at any industrial vehicle on Earth and see that it is easily more durable than any commercial, consumer, and most military vehicles.

You realize that crime in EVE isn't actual crime right? It's just a type of gameplay.