These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Making High Sec Safer

First post
Author
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#61 - 2013-09-30 19:38:23 UTC
Dream Kim wrote:
Quote:
PVP is an option


No, no it's not...


EvE means Everyone vs Everyone.

PvP is NOT an option, as long as you are playing the game. Furthermore, PvP in EvE is typically Non-Consensual!!!!

In highsec, it is easier to avoid Non-consensual PvP, because the rules of aggression add some consequences to ship combat.
In lowsec, the consequences of ship to ship combat is reduece.
In Nullsec, there are no ship consequences, and there are mechanics (bubbles) to further assist players trying to attack you.

And even docked in station, people will compete with you on the market, they will scam you in contracts, etc...

SCORPION VEN0M
Infinite Technologies
#62 - 2013-09-30 19:43:11 UTC  |  Edited by: SCORPION VEN0M
Marcos Boirelle wrote:
If you feel that hunting me down for posting on the forums then I guess that is how it works.

Either way, I stand by my post and the fact that the invitation was open from CCP to share ideas.





The invitation is also open from ccp to play eve, but you whine about basic mechanics ccp has repeatedly said is designed to work that way. You keep whining about being unable to defend against suicide ganks, that's only because you decide NOT to.
It's very easy to defend against a suicide gank. tank your ship so it requires at least 2 gankfit catalysts to kill. Set your overview settings to show -5 and lower pilots in local. it will show up as a RED marker. If you see more than 2 jump in at a time, go dock.

Congrats, you beat a suicide gank! That was difficult wasn't it? Your ideas come from a critical misunderstanding of basic game mechanics the vast majority of eve understands. The biggest misconception you seem to hold is that highsec is designed to be safe. Let us make this clear now. Highsec was, and will never be designed to be safe. This is not a flaw in the game, it is a feature. If you need this translated into any other language i will be happy to use Google Translate for that. Once again, CCP designed the game, to let pilots like you, get suicide ganked on a regular basis. If you want highsec to be safe, you have to fly safely. loading your Retriever with Mining Upgrades will get you killed. If you don't want to die, build a retriever that actually has a tank on it.

Instead of arguing with me now, you should ask me to explain more game mechanics to you, so you can ACTIVELY make yourself safer. Safety is not a right, or a privilege, it is something you have to protect and maintain.

Edit; sorry for wall of text
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#63 - 2013-09-30 19:44:12 UTC
OP... what you are trying to do here is modify mechanics because you personally don't like the concept they are based on (and you disregard to the larger effects changing it might have).

And it's not just any concept; it is one of the core ones that sets EVE apart from other MMOs... that you are never, nor ever should be safe without exerting some form of effort (and/or more effort than people who wish you harm).

Many of us remember what happened to Ultimate Online when Trammel server was brought online... and many of us would hate to see EVE die the same slow, painful death.
Gospadin
Bastard Children of Poinen
#64 - 2013-09-30 19:48:19 UTC
Marcos Boirelle wrote:
If you do not want to PVP you should not be forced into PVP space.


EVE does not, and never has made a guarantee such as this.

Plenty of PVP occurs in high security space via war declarations, non-consentual attacks, and dueling / engagement timers. People with low security status are already free-to-attack in high security space. (-5 or below)

CONCORD has never been about preventing violence. Just like the police IRL, CONCORD punishes people after-the-fact.


Oswaldos
Shore Leave Inc.
Greater Domain Cooperative
#65 - 2013-09-30 19:51:17 UTC
Lair Osen wrote:


Also many gankers hide in NPC corps for the very reason of AVOIDING PvP by preventing war decs.



I'm not trying to change topic here but this may actually be a valid point if gankers stay in NPC corps then their is no way short of counter ganking that a person could activly combat a ganker. Maybe its time to remove NPC corps from non-new players. So if you dropped out of a corp you would go into your own personal corp (i.e. Oswaldos's Corporation) And all current mechanics could be applied to that corp.

So if you wanted to combat a person running suicide ganks in high sec.. dec his corp or hire mercs to do it and give a little pay back
Luc Chastot
#66 - 2013-09-30 19:56:34 UTC
You are too new to understand how EVE works.

Also, you missed one more area of space: w-space.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#67 - 2013-09-30 20:15:03 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.

That said, the OP has the right to post an idea to discuss and has the right to expect a civil and healthy discussion as a result. You don't have to agree, but post your arguments in a civil manner please.

The rules:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.


4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.


5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2013-09-30 20:48:05 UTC
Samillian wrote:
Where are all these ganks and gankers?

My trade and industry toon spends the majority of its time in HiSec (and I have a lot of contacts there as I spent my first year and a half in game as a miner / manufacturer before starting my second account) and if just half of what is claimed on the forums were true I wouldn't be able to get my freighter close enough to a gate to activate it for the wrecks littering it.

This is so true. My main's first eight months were spent in Hisec, and my hisec alt (this guy) has spent almost his whole life in hisec. The only hisec ganks I've ever seen going down were one off the Hek undock, and one that I performed at the Rens undock (some guy was sitting off the undock in a pod and flashing criminal red, so I blew him away as I aligned to warp - serious ganking/PvP there). Oh, and a corp-mate got podded on the Amarr-Jita pipe whilst running through in the pod - he somehow got caught despite not being afk or on auto-pilot.

I've never come close to being shot at whilst mining. I've never had my hauler shot at (though I've never carried more than a few tens of millions in it at a time). I've never had anyone steal my wrecks while ratting or runs missions even. I have had a couple of cans flipped, way back when I couldn't yet fly a Retriever and mining destroyers were still a thing.

The contrast between this and losec - go through the wrong gate or have the wrong ship for that gate and you'll lose it, and nullsec - dead quiet most of the time, but with sudden bursts of ultraviolence, is very strong.

Quote:

There is a very vocal HiSec minority screaming for more safety when to be honest the majority of players I know are happy to take the minimal risks in HiSec and just get on with their business from day to day without expecting CCP to be their guardian angel every second they are online.

I think that the vast majority of hisec dwellers are okay with the risks, and see them as the cost of living there. They are actually less risk-averse, as a group, than the nullbears, IME.
Telios Madronin
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#69 - 2013-09-30 21:09:46 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Personal attack removed. Forum rule 4. Personal attacks are prohibited. - ISD Tyrozan

Terrible ultra-carebear idea
Velicitia
XS Tech
#70 - 2013-09-30 21:23:47 UTC
tried offering prizes for api-confirmed kills ... ISD wasn't happy about it :(

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Karma Codolle
Chimera Research and Development
#71 - 2013-10-01 00:46:51 UTC
From a lore perspective this suggestion makes 0 sense.

Outside of Concord systems, Concord doesn't control the gates. Those are empire controlled and they really don't give a **** about you. Concord shoots people because they have to do something or else people would complain and they'd be dissolved. They're a corrupt force, don't forget.

How are they corrupt? Well you can pay them to look the other way while you go to war on another corporation.

They exist more as penalty not a deterrent. If you want a deterrent you have to fit your ship properly to protect yourself. You want max mining yield, youre sacrificing tank for more profit. If you fit for tank, you're sacrificing profit. It's a permanent give and take relationship. That's how the game works. And yes you can protect yourself SOLO against destroyer ganks. Dont be lazy

Also how do your mechanics of barring griefers from hisec work against wardecs? Are you going to forbid those from occurring anymore.

There is a progressive system in place already that makes pilots shoot on sight if they're known for violence.


EvE is a harsh universe, the dev's want that. They don't want to give us pure happy carefree space so you can play isolated and protected from the game.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#72 - 2013-10-01 02:19:56 UTC
Lair Osen wrote:
Also many gankers hide in NPC corps for the very reason of AVOIDING PvP by preventing war decs.

As do many miners.

Players will often drop to an NPC corp to avoid a wardec, you can close and reopen a corp to avoid a wardec. Both mechanics were championed by miners and non PvP groups, both have ended up being used against the very people who wanted them.

Highsec is safer, it is not safe, never has been and never should be. Avoiding ganks requires actually paying attention, planning for the worst and hoping for the best. If mining, make the others in the belt more gankable by fitting appropriately, use local to keep an eye out for folks of a violent persuasion. If hauling, don't AP high value cargo, don't use T1 haulers for high value cargo.

Most people don't get ganked. The majority of those that do have usually done something daft, like autopilot a freighter full of shiny stuff through Uedama, and have noone to blame but themselves .

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#73 - 2013-10-01 06:43:32 UTC
Marcos Boirelle wrote:
Safer


^ primary ^

Evil
Wapu Kashuken
Serenity Rising LLC
Controlled Chaos
#74 - 2013-10-01 07:40:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Wapu Kashuken
Quote:


  • Concord to install surveillance equipment at each Stargate that connects from Null/Low Sec to High Sec and all High Sec Stargates. The purpose of the surveillance is to alert Concord when a pilot enters who is not wanted in High Sec Space. Concord will initiate a boarding procedure and escort the pilot out of High Sec space which includes confiscating the Ship. If the Pilot flees, Concord will initiate a Chase with the authority to destroy the ship and kill the pilot.


  • The technology available allows blocking certain ship types from accessing acceleration gates. This technology could be used to secure High Sec from allowing ships belonging to Pilots with a history of High Sec violance, thus, the pilot cannot use a High Sec stargate.


  • When a pilot violates High Sec law, not only should the pilot's ship be destroyed but the pilot should be killed or arrested and fined. If arrested the pilot's ship should be confiscated.


  • The higher security status the victim has the more focus is given towards the penalty received for attacikng this pilot in High Sec space.


  • Concord reaction time is to slow, the loss for an unarmed miner for instance will always be greater than the loss for an attacker. Concord to hire more pilots and be more active in High Sec Space.



Cry me a river, better yet, FIT A BETTER SHIP!!!

Tired of HS Miner TEARS. Especially in light of the FACT that any given day I can go out and scan mining ships and come up with a 90-percentile population that fits for max mining and little-to-no tank.

So, my suggestions would be:

1) Quit being so greedy and fit some tank
2) fly in fleets w/ a rep on hand
3) look out in local
4) for extreme measure, create your own gank account. i.e. secondary garbage account in an ibis sitting next to you. Soon as a known ganker comes in system/grid, shoot someone... Concord arrives faster, your secondary account gets concorded, but your fleet is safer (for the short duration).

High Sec does NOT automatically equal SAFE, nor does it entitle you to believe otherwise. Guaranteed, if CCP ever changes their stance on this, thousands will quit and you will find yourself selling your ore to your alts.
Siobhan MacLeary
Doomheim
#75 - 2013-10-01 08:10:47 UTC
The OP of this thread assumes there is codified law in highsec regarding capsuleer actions.

This is incorrect, and highsec does not need to be made safer, nor should any 'improvement' to EVE deny gankers their chosen playstyle.

CONCORD is not a capsuleer police force - their job is not to ensure the safety of we immortals. Their purpose is to be an entity that exists outside any government for the purpose of protecting the billions upon billions of planetbound mortals.

CONCORD's purpose in destroying those capsuleers who commit aggressive acts against unsanctioned targets is twofold - to enact swift retribution for those acts and to prevent the actions of an immortal capsuleer from igniting all-out war between the empires.

If you don't understand this basic bit of lore which reinforces the already-extant game mechanics, please biomass your character(s) and unsub your account(s) because EVE is not the place for you.

Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.” - CCP Soundwave

Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#76 - 2013-10-01 08:23:59 UTC
There's more carebears hiding from wardecs in NPC corps that there is gankers doing the same. At some point they cross -5.0 sec and they can be shot anywhere, at any time without a war declaration - NPC corp or not. I'm sure if relative "safety" of NPC corporations was removed, there would be a sea of hisec bear-tears rather than the expected decrease in violence.

High security space is safe but not free of threats. If you're dumb you'll end up feeding the smarter ones - providing either financial gain (expensive mission boat hits, attacks on freighters, extorting miners) or amusement value (failed to pay your belt protection money? Well, guess what happens if you don't pay the mob. Bravely standing your ground against them works only in the movies unless you're packing some serious guns and friends - and if you do, you're probably not in hisec anyway.)

Plus, if Rubicon is anything to go by... it looks like CONCORD is slowly getting overwhelmed by capsuleer influence and industrial power. It kind of sucks to be a mortal now more than ever.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph

TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#77 - 2013-10-01 08:30:02 UTC
Wow, this OP must be horribly buttfrustrated to come up with a horrible idea like that.

The best advise I can give you is 'start playing hello kitty online'
because a rough environment in which nonconsensual-PvP is the standard, is nothing for you.

Also keep in mind, that CONCORD by NO means is there to make High-Sec safer, CONCORD is the consequence.
Safe is inside a station.

And to quote approximatly 10 bazillion people before me 'every time you undock you agree to nonconsensual pvp'

My Condor costs less than that module!

culo duro
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2013-10-01 10:37:56 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
tried offering prizes for api-confirmed kills ... ISD wasn't happy about it :(


You should totally mail me in-game.

I've starting blogging http://www.epvpc.blogspot.com 

Barry Filler
Cold Moon Consortium
#79 - 2013-10-01 11:36:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Barry Filler
As a high sec pilot I actually wants the concord to be weaker, makes for more exciting gameplay. I was relieved then Rubicon got announced, because CCP actually wants a total sandbox, and features like NPC Empires and Concord are placeholders. Of course Concord will need to be there as long there is no other solution to deal with complete chaos

I'm maybe too logical in some players taste, But I think Concord makes no sense, ANYONE with the same Superman powers as Concord would abuse that power and conquer whole EVE. If you want EVE to be safe you will get even more disappointed with the future. EVE is not going to get more causal

But I can agree to that point, that I'm not happy with the new system of buying security status. There need to be more severe consequences of attacking in high sec. Right now it's mainly a "isk vs isk" risk.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#80 - 2013-10-01 11:52:21 UTC
Barry Filler wrote:
As a high sec pilot I actually wants the concord to be weaker, makes for more exciting gameplay. I was relieved then Rubicon got announced, because CCP actually wants a total sandbox, and features like NPC Empires and Concord are placeholders. Of course Concord will need to be there as long there is no other solution to deal with complete chaos

I'm maybe too logical in some players taste, But I think Concord makes no sense, ANYONE with the same Superman powers as Concord would abuse that power and conquer whole EVE. If you want EVE to be safe you will get even more disappointed with the future. EVE is not going to get more causal


CONCORD got to be "instant death" because certain parties figured out how to actually blockade systems (CONCORD was tankable at the time, like the navies still are) and, IIRC m0o blockaded Yulai (the trade hub at the time) for several days.


For a long time (5-6 years) "assured ship destruction" was enough to keep all parties happy enough, but within the past 2.5-3 years (maybe a bit longer), the whiner sect got louder about how they shouldn't have to tank their mining barges and still be 100% safe in hisec.

This removed certain "CONCORD evasion" tactics that would allow you to get in 2-3 kills before finally getting caught by the cops, removed insurance payouts for CONCORD-induced ship losses, re-balanced barges to make them tankier (which caused all sorts of tears from the miners), and other things that I'm forgetting about. It wasn't all at once though (started with the small things, ended with new barges, IIRC).

Many of the players agree with you in some manner ... trouble is the whiners will never accept that "the orange PLAY button on the login screen launcher is your 'consenting to PVP' button"

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia