Player Features and Ideas Discussion

A few things that need pointing out to members of both sides of this argument:

There are two premises that govern illegal highsec engagements:
Gankers need to deal out enough damage to destroy their target before Concord arrives.
Gankers consider the loss of their ships an acceptable loss to achieve their goal. Goals include:
--- Profit
--- Strong Arm tactics
--- Attention and/or tears.

Truly, this is very simple:
Increasing the tank on your vessel increases the costs to destroy you.
Decreasing the value within your ship decreases the Profit potential of gankers.

As with all things EvE, there is a trade off, as doing the two things above results in less efficiency. So what!

FYI: CCP allows suicide ganking because it is healthy for the game. It create a source of conflict that unites people, it has inspired content, and helps move along the economic circle.

p.s.. Your opening statement has many flawed aspects:
a.) Gankers have organizational costs, risks of failure, risks of an unfavorable loot fairy, etc.
b.) Recovery time is generally a very poor metric to measure loss. In a game where you can loot, steal, and scam; in a game where different activities have vastly different rewards, and where luck can play a huge role in reward, recovery time has too high a variance to truly be an effective metric.
c.) Rate of Return, Value of Convenience, disregard of the Risks, and the costs of showmanship all make balancing suicide ganking by isk-values anything but practical. At the end of the day, the solution is simple: can you thwart suicide ganking through in-game choices: Fitting a MSE to your exhumer, fitting a plate or two on your mission runner, lowering the value of goods you transport, etc, etc, etc. And with the new ability to refit in shape using deployable structures, there will be even more opportunity to minimize your risks.

Untanked retriever, 0.5 space.

1. a neutral rookie ship (or other barge, or venture, or any other "noncombat" ship) warps to belt, sets up mining 3,000 meters from you
2. after some length of time (30-90 seconds, let's say), 1-2 catalysts arrive.
3. next 10 seconds you're dead.

Now, before I give you the answer ... where do you believe the gank began (simple 1/2/3 answer)?

0?

thats not what i meant... I'll write explanation to 0 after OP tries to answer himself.

The gank began during the design phase of the game, when nobody predicted that allowing ships in High Sec to be taken out illegally by ships of a much lesser value before CONCORD arrives would be a problem.

However, they have been correcting the issue since, nerfing the ability to do that/cutting profits for such actions.

They are almost done with it, one or two more passes will finally balance the risk with the reward and the damage to the victim.

In that case you should probably find something else to play, seeing as you have a problem with a core design concept of this one.

is picking "1", "2", or "3" seriously that difficult?

Also, CCP doesn't feel that it's a problem (actually, the original iteration of CONCORD was "tankable")

who me? or someone else?

I mean we can change the scenario I proposed however you want ... still lookin for an answer though

HTFU buddy.

you can phrase what you want, Ganking without real penaltys for it, was and is allways the start for the End of the game. And im playing MMORPGs since 17 years now. I saw many games go down because of ganker.

I dont say, Ganking should be forbidden. Damn no, if someone wants to be a pirate, so be it. But it cant be, that he can move freely like any other Taxpaying char in this Sandbox. All bonuses and no risk at all, thats not working on a long distance for the game. But for that, CCP need to do real work, and make some changes.

I only cant see it anymore, that newbies, and all others only get killed, to get the Killboard up, or the ppl are bored so they Gank.

This System goes so on, until everyone ganks, or no more freighters moving products between the hubs.