Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This highlights an endemic highsec problem. With all of this focus on AFK gameplay there isn't much of a reason for players to interact. We all know EVE PvE needs help, I think a step in the right direction would be integrating players into it and decreasing npcs.

no amount of forum mod c*ock gobbling will get you into isd

Thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.

This is actually false, but please continue. All discussion provoking thoughts are welcome here.

Why should highsec ganking be suppressed?

Don't hate for this, but I liked the OP. I see potential in it, and I will explain why.

Ever play something called T.A.G.?
It was a game about hunting down a person whose name you were given. That person, in turn, had a name which they were hunting as well.

It basically amounted to a killing loop that got smaller at multiple points each time someone caught up with the person in front of them.

They took the name of that person's target, after killing them, and eventually won the game if they got the piece of paper with their own name on it.
(No shortcuts, you basically had to kill everyone else to do this)

Have a quest agent start this.
It can begin in multiple locations, even have range or limits to number of players involved.

No security hits would be flagged, Concord would not intervene. There was basically a war declaration across all players involved.
If you left high sec, you were disqualified, and the name you were hunting would be passed to the person who had been hunting you.

It is not needed to pod a target, as the loot dropped by their ship would contain a code to update your target to the next person in line. That said, you CAN pod the target if you like to, it simply won't make the reward any better or game any easier.
If you accept the next target, before podding the previous, the rights to kill them vanish instantly.

You never know who is hunting you, unless they tell you.
The person who WAS hunting you and got caught could be a sore loser, and tip you off, however, as to who just inherited your assignment.

Oh, yeah....

Have fun, and watch your back.

The winner gets a prize, possibly the top five get lesser prizes.

This I have no issues with as long as it's something you sign up for. The OP is just talking about "the game should pay me for going and ganking some guy doing missions"



Because if high-sec ganking is inherently profitable it takes away what safety there is from High Sec.

If you want to PvP and possibly turn a profit then go join Factional Warfare, I hear if you're good you can break even and even turn a profit blowing people up.

I don't either, and I specifically said I don't have any issue with suicide ganking. I take issue with the idea that it should be actively encouraged by CCP, rather than passively encouraged by hilariously over-priced mission fits.

That isn't inherently profitable, when I say "inherently profitable" I mean that you can turn a profit whether you're ganking someone's T2 fitted mission ship, T1 scanning frig, or that absolutely hilariously over-priced Officer fit.

If you want to use the profits from the 10 billion in Plex/officer-mods/T2 BPOs you ganked last night to go on a random ganking spree that's great, but that's going to be off-setting your losses, not turning a profit off of those ganks. The OP and the person I was responding to were both (as far as I can tell) talking about being paid directly or otherwise compensated for high-sec ganking.

Don't change current mechanics for ganking. Add this as an opt-in where the bear gets 20% more mining yield/bounties/mission rewards for joining and the extra risk. I wonder how many would do it.

there is probably more emergent gameplay in highsec than in nullsec lol.