These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Balancing hi-sec piracy and making it more realistic.

First post First post
Author
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#81 - 2013-09-17 10:01:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Kitty Bear
making piracy more realistic, from a consequences point of view ...

how do you hang a miscreant when yardarms are no longer a feature of ship design ?
also imprisonment would totally suck as a gameplay aspect
(it's what they used to do to pirates ... hanging or jail)



current system may be flawed, but it works and is playable
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#82 - 2013-09-17 10:07:23 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Make highsec safer

reasonable post from gooni Shocked

Eve is Dying (c)

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#83 - 2013-09-17 10:33:29 UTC
Maliandra wrote:
I'm one to smile when ganked - I think it makes hi-sec less boring knowing you can die at anytime - but the logic and balance is still not perfect and needs to be improved.

Hi-sec is illogical. You can pay off the police to commit crimes. .


What's illogical about this? It's fairly normal practice. Can you name a single police force, either current or historical, where this was not the case?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#84 - 2013-09-17 10:48:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
Malcanis wrote:
Maliandra wrote:
I'm one to smile when ganked - I think it makes hi-sec less boring knowing you can die at anytime - but the logic and balance is still not perfect and needs to be improved.

Hi-sec is illogical. You can pay off the police to commit crimes. .


What's illogical about this? It's fairly normal practice. Can you name a single police force, either current or historical, where this was not the case?


People live in a fantasy world where a criminal always gets caught & receives a proper punishment. In my country you don't even need to have money to get this treatment.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Solstice Project's Alt
Doomheim
#85 - 2013-09-17 11:12:35 UTC
*facepalm* Go away.

Buy Solstice Project for PLEX4GOOD ! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=301266 (this alt-character will get deleted once the sale is done, on 6th of december)

Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#86 - 2013-09-17 11:28:33 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
making piracy more realistic, from a consequences point of view ...

how do you hang a miscreant when yardarms are no longer a feature of ship design ?
also imprisonment would totally suck as a gameplay aspect
(it's what they used to do to pirates ... hanging or jail)

current system may be flawed, but it works and is playable

Well it works until you undock with nothing worthwhile to gank and you get ganked just for lols. The game needs to be balanced to the point that you CAN gank a ship but the penalties are such that if you are ganking one there needs to be a reason to do so.

Lulz is not a good enough reason. Its annoying at the very least and a huge loss when its an empty freighter or an empty jump freighter.

I think when ships are being popped empty for lolz, there's clearly an imbalance somewhere.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#87 - 2013-09-17 11:35:48 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Kitty Bear wrote:
making piracy more realistic, from a consequences point of view ...

how do you hang a miscreant when yardarms are no longer a feature of ship design ?
also imprisonment would totally suck as a gameplay aspect
(it's what they used to do to pirates ... hanging or jail)

current system may be flawed, but it works and is playable

Well it works until you undock with nothing worthwhile to gank and you get ganked just for lols. The game needs to be balanced to the point that you CAN gank a ship but the penalties are such that if you are ganking one there needs to be a reason to do so.

Lulz is not a good enough reason. Its annoying at the very least and a huge loss when its an empty freighter or an empty jump freighter.

I think when ships are being popped empty for lolz, there's clearly an imbalance somewhere.


So inflicting financial harm is no longer a good enough reason?

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Luna Void
#88 - 2013-09-17 11:40:01 UTC
I believe the main issue of suicide ganking is not the ganker's penalties, but the target's loss.

I'd focus on find a way to make ganked players' loss less perturbing and more affordable, like properly update and lower insurance costs; include fitting in the portion of the ISK regained by default when losing a ship; etc.

A ganker knows he will lose his ship, (mostly) the target doesn't (especially when it comes to AFKers); as a sandbox game that allows almost everything able to be done, I don't see the issue with suicidal ganking with the current penalties it involves, but I still believe the loss for its target might be quite severe in most occasions.

Fix me: the point of ganking is making profit at expense of others with legal penalties, the "making profit" and "with legal penalties" parts are ok for me, the "at expense of others" is the part I dislike.

- I'm not pissed about noobz asking noob questions in corp channel; I am, however, pissed at noobs who think corp channel is a noob questions chat. -

Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#89 - 2013-09-17 11:45:36 UTC
Luna Void wrote:
Fix me: the point of ganking is making profit at expense of others with legal penalties, the "making profit" and "with legal penalties" parts are ok for me, the "at expense of others" is the part I dislike.


When you undock you accept that you may not be docking up that ship again.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2013-09-17 11:55:01 UTC
OP this idea might be okay if it included the ability to use bombs in highsec.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#91 - 2013-09-17 12:05:08 UTC
Luna Void wrote:
I believe the main issue of suicide ganking is not the ganker's penalties, but the target's loss.

I'd focus on find a way to make ganked players' loss less perturbing and more affordable, like properly update and lower insurance costs; include fitting in the portion of the ISK regained by default when losing a ship; etc.

A ganker knows he will lose his ship, (mostly) the target doesn't (especially when it comes to AFKers); as a sandbox game that allows almost everything able to be done, I don't see the issue with suicidal ganking with the current penalties it involves, but I still believe the loss for its target might be quite severe in most occasions.

Fix me: the point of ganking is making profit at expense of others with legal penalties, the "making profit" and "with legal penalties" parts are ok for me, the "at expense of others" is the part I dislike.


You know, everyone else has to take their share of losses to keep the EVE economy working. Miners mine minerals overwhelmingly to supply replacement ships.

Why should they be exempted from the risk of loss that everyone else shares?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#92 - 2013-09-17 12:45:13 UTC
Moving this from General Discussion to Features & Ideas Discussions.

EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative ※ EVE Illuminati ※ Fiction Adept

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents

Luna Void
#93 - 2013-09-17 14:34:27 UTC
Quote:
You know, everyone else has to take their share of losses to keep the EVE economy working. Miners mine minerals overwhelmingly to supply replacement ships.

Why should they be exempted from the risk of loss that everyone else shares?


Because they don't cause the loss ?

What you are saying is: everyone in eve online must pay for suicidal ganking activity ? o_O

I am not saying "reward them for being ganked" I am saying "have some mercy for them because they were ganked".

If you POV of suicidal ganking is only what to do with the suicidal gankers, then yeah, nerf them more plspls.

- I'm not pissed about noobz asking noob questions in corp channel; I am, however, pissed at noobs who think corp channel is a noob questions chat. -

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#94 - 2013-09-17 14:55:27 UTC
Luna Void wrote:
I believe the main issue of suicide ganking is not the ganker's penalties, but the target's loss.

I'd focus on find a way to make ganked players' loss less perturbing and more affordable, like properly update and lower insurance costs; include fitting in the portion of the ISK regained by default when losing a ship; etc.
…and what ISK faucets do you propose to nerf into the ground to balance this out?

Also, why should the targets be more protected than anyone else? Why can't they take it upon themselves to minimise their losses?

Quote:
Because they don't cause the loss ?
Sure they did. They were the ones who chose to carry so much junk around that it was no longer a matter of gambling against people's miserliness (which is the foundation of highsec “safety”) and instead made themselves an almost guaranteed windfall for whomever found them.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#95 - 2013-09-17 15:07:37 UTC
Perhaps a better idea would be a penalty on the insurance payout if the amount of loot that drops when your ship explodes is greater than the insured hull value.

Claims adjusters will often reduce the value of a payout for claims where the claimer did not exercise due care and attention.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Dr0000 Maulerant
Union Nanide and Tooling
#96 - 2013-09-17 15:27:59 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


Claims adjusters will often reduce the value of a payout for claims where the claimer did not exercise due care and attention.


While that is true in extreme cases (left keys in ignition, left running, posted in "free stuff" on craigslist) upper tier insurance will pay you retail or fair market for any stolen goods.

Tell me again about how every playstyle you dont engage in "doesn't require any effort" and everyone who does it needs to die in a fire. Be sure to mention about how you tried it once but it was too easy/boring/ethnic-homophobic slur. 

Fia Magrath
The Clown Inquisition
#97 - 2013-09-17 17:38:25 UTC
while we're at it, lets also make concord killable with no ganking penalty at all if you manage to kill off the whaa police.
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#98 - 2013-09-17 18:31:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganthrithor
Maliandra wrote:
I'm one to smile when ganked - I think it makes hi-sec less boring knowing you can die at anytime - but the logic and balance is still not perfect and needs to be improved.

Hi-sec is illogical. You can pay off the police to commit crimes. The penalties for ganking are not severe enough (look at Niarji ffs). CONCORD ends up being more of an annoyance than a deterrent against criminal activity. With the ability to buy back sec status with ISK, this has really exasperated the issue further. I believe the following changes should be enacted to help create more balance:

1) Loss of sec status should be directly related to your current sec status and the sec status of the player being ganked.
2) Remove the ability to trade in pirate tags for sec status gain; or limit it to -2.0 instead of 0.
3) Negative sec status penalties should have their requirements cut in half (ex. effects of -4.0 happen at -2.0)

What does this result in?

a) Gankers must be more coordinated in hi-sec to be successful in the long run.
b) Gankers must pick and choose targets more wisely.
c) Gankers must head to low/null sec after causing a lot of havok in order to redeem themselves.
d) Players who have high security status (i.e. standing with CONCORD) are less likely to be ganked as CONCORD reacts more severely to action taken against them. Opposite can be said for those with negative sec status.

- Right now gankers will shoot down anything that is worth enough ISK to not be in inconvenience (inconvenience being having to reship and wait 5 mins). These changes make them think about what they are risking their sec status on.
- Right now gankers can use a tiny portion of their ganking earnings and buy tags whenever there sec status gets too low. These changes make them have to leave empire space eventually once they have committed to many criminal acts.
>> This makes a lot more sense.

This post does not touch on the faulty wardec system, however I'll leave that discussion for another time.


You should be banned from posting on this forum. You clearly don't understand the premises of EVE or how the game currently functions. Every one of your threads is a ****** "make EVE safe" thread. Just stop. Maybe this game isn't for you.

Also,

Maliandra wrote:
CONCORD ends up being more of an annoyance than a deterrent against criminal activity.


Congratulations, you just described every law-enforcement agency ever. So much for EVE being unrealistic.
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#99 - 2013-09-17 19:00:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Owen Levanth
Fia Magrath wrote:
while we're at it, lets also make concord killable with no ganking penalty at all if you manage to kill off the whaa police.


I like this. And to balance it out, every CONCORD-ship a player destroys earns you a "strike" on your character. The sec loss and the other penalties stay, of course. You just survive with your ship.

Let's say every character gets five strikes on top of normal penatlies like sec loss, which means you get five "Get out of jail free"-cards to run off after a gank. But if your character commits to many crimes, CONCORD orders your clones destroyed and you can't make new ones anymore. No jump clones, no medical clone. Nothing. If your character gets podded, you die and your character gets automatically erased.

Now you can make a new gank-character, but you got severely punished for your crimes, so everyone wins!
Luna Void
#100 - 2013-09-17 19:19:42 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:

Congratulations, you just described every law-enforcement agency ever. So much for EVE being unrealistic.


Sigh* kids want only explosions and violence with high epeen nowadays...

So, an internet game gives you the chance to gain in game currency by pissing others and you yell "hell yeah!!", EVE is supposed to be in hands of mature players working on groups to make an empire out of nothing, not for kids making cash by suicidally killing others.

If you promote suicidal ganking, you promote anarchy. yay for CONCORD shooting at everyone just coz they are in a miner ship (which of course means they are rich players who have infinite replaceable ships) and someone else can loot it. Hope that feature comes soon enough. coff*

If CCP promotes player income by piracy instead of industry, EVE online won't last another decade due to newbies feeling the game too hostile in their trial period and thus not subrcribing, not to mention the ragers who want to build instead of to shoot; player base lockdown, and eventually player migration to another MMO where no one can touch the things you achieve.

I feel sorry for those who found a game where they can be the bad guys and do it without giving a damn about other people when there are so many other ways to make the same profit.

- I'm not pissed about noobz asking noob questions in corp channel; I am, however, pissed at noobs who think corp channel is a noob questions chat. -