Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So doing a mission in High Sec with a deadspace module equipped is as risky as jumping a lone capital in a hostile system?

That is a good reason for CCP to look at it then.

Still waiting for those numbers.

Also if it's so easy and profitable, then why are suicide ganks so rare?

I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. What id propose is make Security Status more useful.

Suggestion 1:

The player who is being unlawfully attacked Security Status has a direct effect on concord response time. A suggestion on numbers:

5.0 Sec Status means concord will respond 5 seconds quick to your aid
4.0 Sec Status - 4 Seconds
3.6 Sec Status - 3.6 seconds

Alot of hauler/freighter pilots have a sec status of between 0.0 and 1.0 so ganking would remain largely unaffected against them. Just more difficult against players with high sec status. You'd still be able to gank people in 0.6 and 0.5 systems using destroyer/stealth bomber gangs you'll just need to use another 1 or 2 pilots or chance your arm you'll kill them in time without them. Alot of ganking for profit is calculated anyway to ensure the target dies before concord arrives. They can either factor this in or take a chance.

Suggestion 2:

Another idea is to punish players who suicide gank alot and get a low sec status. Ive seen a fair few people ganking with up to -2.0 sec status.

The idea here is that the cumulative sec status from the players ganking reduces Concords response time instead - so 5 pilots with -2.0 sec reduce response time by 10 seconds. So you either fix your sec status or find more targets you can gank in time/bring more ships for the job.



These aren't hard numbers so can be changed if there too much.

Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. Why should the players getting ganked suffer far greater consequences (ie significant isk loss) than the gankers who loose a cheap hull and profit from your modules?. Also there's tags for getting sec status back now so its become even easier now to gank.

Sec status getting low? turn in some tags and keep on ganking! Wheres the risk or consequences if there easy to get around with little effort?

My only other thought is adjust insurance so that those that lose their T2 or pirate hulls get their cost back in insurance when killed illegally ie suicide ganking. That way insurance still wouldn't pay out on those hulls when used in legal combat.

A) the player only loses out on module/cargo cost
B) gankers still profit as well as they currently do
C) insurance balance remains intact

Are you running out of good questions so you keep asking what was already answered? :-)

What i said before should convince you that even the big Hauling Corporations carry less as they know they will get ganked otherwise.

Also,if you would bother doing a search, there are a lot of people complaining about Suicide Ganking, you will even find NEW PLAYERS say they were Suicide Ganked for fun after they just managed to get their ship and have no way to get another one.

Haven't read any farther yet, but saw this gem.


source
(emphasis mine)




Because the gankers are flying with friends. Did a run once through Hek with a full load of gallente ice to make bank on the goons oxytope interdiction...

... had three guardians, two falcons, two webbing inties, and several scouts the whole damn way ... was the entire corp getting in on the move ... granted this impacted the corp profits by half (because *GASP* paid my people) ... but was a good time.

edit - damn, no links in quote subjects

yes yes i forgot the removed insurance for ships killed by CONCORD we are all humans and make mistakes. It does not change anything, they still risk too little and gain too much.

The issue is that a Suicide Ganker can use a lovely 15mil ship(and get half the fit back) so his loss per person is at most 15mil.

A hauler loses 1bil + cargo, a level 4 mission ship(pirate/marauder) is again a lot of ISK.

So when a Suicide Ganker fails a gank he does not care. His loss is 15mil. And he is doing an illegal action.

When a hauler/mission ship gets ganked he cares. A lot. As he will need a lot of time to recover.


It would only be normal for a mechanic to be introduced so on ocasion... the suicide ganker ends up losing a few bilion. Not always, not often, but sometimes.

Then they would risk as much as everyone else and all would be fine in the world.

Because you are making it up as you go along. One minute it isn't rare, the next it is. I also asked you to provide us with the data to back up your early assertion that it wasn't rare. But you keep avoiding it.

The joke is people obviously are smarter than you take them for. By mitigating the risk and therefore making it a rare event. But as it took 4 rounds of censorship on your posts, before you stopped with the ridiculous and abhorrent real life comparisons, I'm not surprised.

Oh and mitigating risk, doesn't just involve reducing the value of the cargo you haul. It is also about using the tools provided and playing with friends. This is after all, an MMO.

So we still await these numbers and while you are at it, could provide citation that was asked for in post 163 and 169?

Yes I have already said people mitigate the risk. But not just by reducing the value of their cargo. Red Frog also have other parts to their group with different rules. You could always let us know what they are.
But all this proves is that their business model for fred frog, is for lone freighter transport with little input. Are you now suggesting that this should be possible without risk mitigation?

But we are not simply talking about freighters here are we? Or has that fact conveniently skipped your mind?
You claimed marauders and mining barge suicide ganks are also not rare. These are the numbers I have continually asked you for. The numbers you have continually avoided providing, as well as the citations asked for by another poster.