Crime & Punishment

Long reaching? Suicide ganking has been a thing for as long as I've been playing and it's nothing new even with some 'cause' behind it. In fact, suicide ganking bots existed long, LONG before I even started playing. Your 'group' and 'savior' may be the most stupid notion I've ever heard in Eve. "Mining permits" oh, because this is new, too.

Maybe you are far reaching, perhaps you've changed the price of mackinaws across all of empire space by about 150isk. YOU HAVE CHANGED EMPIRE SPACE!

Actually, this is dubious. I have friends in several of the largest highsec mining and industry alliances and I have to be honest, half of them have never heard of you and the other half have had no interference by you. You seem to be failing pretty hard at scaring highsec.

Congratulations! Now, come at me bro.

Protip - mechanical restrictions for people you don't like don't work for long, mostly because we're pretty quick to adapt - in this case, I'd cycle between 3-4 tornado alts to constantly gank people who reject the sandbox, while the others waited out their "jail time" and one or two went to friendly space to grind sec status/some spare change for ammo and magstabs.

I see the restriction to allow breathing room for high-sec players. That is if increasing risk is implemented for high-sec players. And what if the restriction was a week's worth or more depending on the severity of the risk you took? say 20 days off from entering empire space. I suppose you would adapt with 10 or more alts.Then with my the love i bear for ingame "criminals" sub 10 accounts So you risk it shall you ripe the consequences. That's all I am saying. Making high-sec players pay for what they earn should also include the consequences on the risk gankers take.

Just as null-sec, game mechanics allow for restriction placed by players on those they dont like. High-sec game mechanics should allow a measure of security and justice players hence the name high-security. Unless you prefer EVE turn into an Open ended PVP MMO.

People like you ruin games like this.

You have all the tools you need to avoid ever being ganked.

Foremost being your ability to think and reason.

Why would the devs implement such restrictions when you have a ton that can help you?

My advice would be stop crying and learn how to use d-scan, local and F10.

Hell, local alone is such a huge advantage. Imagine if there was no local :P.

EVE has its limit interns of sandbox. If it was open ended there wouldn't be a high-sec. CCP puts in place a secure space to ensure compatibility too all players of different interpretation. Safety over adventure and vice-versa. If we were to consider crying over things, I would look to null-sec or opponents of high-sec pilots. Crying out how high-sec is generating too much isk. Safe to say game mechanics allows that to happen, and your ability to negate that effect pisses you off and turn to CCP for game mechanics to be change to ensure null-sec dominance.

As I have clearly stated my point. Your advocation of increased risk to reward in high-sec is commendable. But you must realize risk to consequences must be proportional as the latter. Temporary travel restriction thats all I ask.

My views are of a pilot who has done pretty much everything except criminal activities. It's nice to debate until a label appears.

I find it hard to believe that you have really lived outside of highsec if you think the risk-reward balance we're all crying for are to "ensure null-sec dominance", or think highsec needs to be made safer by making life hard for suicide gankers. Again.

Besides, why not broaden your horizons, and walk a mile in our shoes, before you try to comment on suicide ganking?

315 must be Ronryy.

I thought the point of "saving high-sec" was to push people into 0.0...

I was on the fence about voting for James 315 (+1 for his high-sec agenda, -1 because grrr goons) but if that's NO sanctioned behavior then I guess he won't make it on my list (as from my pov a miner moving to npc 0.0 is the absolutely best outcome one could hope for).

edit: sorry, if this post comes across as somewhat butthurt... I'm mostly kicking myself for buying too much into NO propaganda and thinking our interests were aligned when - in fact - they never were. I guess it's ultimately a good thing I noticed this before election time.

Right. You don't like the existing CONCORD mechanics, because they make you stay at the keyboard and play the game, or risk losing your ship.

So you want CCP to turn Highsec space into some kind of World of Warcraft PvE realm, where you can never be harmed if you don't flip your PvP flag on.

Go play World of Warcraft, little bunny.

I don't see how anyone can think it's primarily a PVE game when there is essentially no activities that don't affect other players somehow. Every mineral collected from mining competes directly on the market or manufacturing scene with other players. Every isk spent on ships, modules, etc is isk going to another player, and is one less ship or module available on the market for someone else. Etc.

The only way someone could play EVE as a purely PVE game is if they only collected bounties from rats in their own missions and only spent that isk on npc seeded items. See how far they'd get playing like that.