These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Suicide Gank Fix

Author
Sir Dangler
Doomheim
#1 - 2014-04-22 02:49:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir Dangler
Hello,

There's a few blogs out there discussing the risk vs reward aspect of Eve, and after reading up on evenews24 about high sec suicide ganking, the solution was obvious.

From what I can tell, a suicide gank is a risk averse action. Players who engage in this skill-less activity suffer no significant penalties. It is true that the loot fairy will sometimes be unforgiving, but this is 95% not the case. Losing a nado or talos is not a big deal. Barely losing security status is not an issue either, as this is quickly farmed back up.

To counter these risk-averse pilots conducting their non-risky operation of suicide ganking a hauler full of treasure, there should be a repercussion that is also of equivalent significance in the risk vs reward world of EvE Online.

The solution, then, is simple. When a pilot shoots another pilot in high sec that is neither wardecced or criminal, that pilot should receive a very significant security status penalty endorsed by CONCORD, since they have illegally shot another innocent carebear in high sec!

The security status of the risk averse ganker should become -10.0.

Why does it make sense that CONCORD penalizes an insignificant amount of security status, and ignores you after 15 minutes, when a ganker is clearly conducting an illegal act? Surely, that pilot should receive an important status loss.

The implications?

A ganker will therefore have to choose his target wisely, or be more tactful in his ganking operation. The risk-averse Talos ISBoxing derp will receive -10 across all his alts, but he might gain a reward out of it.

Risk vs reward!

What do you think?
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#2 - 2014-04-22 02:52:26 UTC
I'm on a mobile, my reply will be short.

No.

I'll elaborate later.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3 - 2014-04-22 02:52:56 UTC
Sir Dangler wrote:


What do you think?


I think you should have checked the "Commonly Proposed Ideas" thread.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#4 - 2014-04-22 03:17:23 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Current penalties for suicide ganking...

Direct Penalties:
- you lose your ship
- you lose any insurance you have the ship
- you lose Security Status
- you gain a Suspect Flag for 10-15 minutes and can be shot at by anyone and everyone in the game without penalty
- you gain a Criminal Flag for 15 minutes (see: can't undock in high-sec in anything other than a pod without being CONCORDed again)


Indirect Penalties:
- if your Security Status goes low enough (see: below -5.0) then you can be shot by anyone, anywhere, at any time.
- if your Security Status goes below certain levels then you will find yourself less and less able to enter higher security systems without the Faction Police attacking you (you can still avoid them in smaller ships though).
- with lower Security Status you will be less and less able to get new supplies from high-sec trade hubs and/or must buy from low-sec stations at a premium and/or must rely on friends/alts to resupply you.
- if you want to raise your Security Status you must either kill pirate NPCs for a godawful amount of time or spend a fair bit of cash to buy the security tags needed.


Other Risks:
- you botch the gank attempt and eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason.
- the target may be tanked more than you think... resulting in a failed gank attempt where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason.
- the target never shows and you have wasted time.
- the loot that you are ganking for never drops... resulting in a failed gank where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason.
- the gank is successful, the loot you want drops, but someone else picked it up before your friend/alt did... resulting in a failed gank where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason.
- you don't have enough people to properly suicide gank.


tl;dr...
- professional gankers (who are usually -10 already) won't care about this change and will continue on as usual.
- "casual" players who want to try it once or twice just to see what it is will be discouraged from ever trying it (thus limiting their perspective in the game).
- if a newbie makes a mistake (as they often do) they will be suck in a position they won't know how to crawl out of (see: they have no "support network" that the vets have, probably not enough money to buy Security Status Tags, and little understanding about how to survive in low-sec).
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#5 - 2014-04-22 03:34:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
OP, you do know -10 is kind of goal for true pirates, right? had one friend who loved piracy and never got -10. Got in the -9's then for various reasons had to fix it.


Kind of loses its meaning if you get it in less than 10 seconds flat. Well let me rephrase this, in less than 10 seconds not setting up smartbomb shuttle killing sprees on say jita 4.4 undock to cause a concord cascade leading to potenial node failure (google some of these videos....they are quite fun to watch).

That and gankers take their risks. the payout may not be there or as I have seen in the past....they picked the wrong bear. They picked a bear with teeth. Or they picked a 0.0 burnout who can pvp on an empire break. Had quite a few friends shock the crap out of gankers as it was they who went boom....not my friends.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#6 - 2014-04-22 05:27:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
OP, why do you read EN24? Do you want tinfoil? Because that's how you get tinfoil.

Additionally, no. There is nothing broken about suicide ganking, and if it's nerfed in any way then highsec will be proportionally nerfed as well, since CCP sees suicide ganking as one of the mechanics that keeps highsec balanced.

Also, posting in "someone ganked my freighter" thread.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#7 - 2014-04-22 05:42:18 UTC
Pointless idea is pointless.

No.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Sirran The Lunatic
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#8 - 2014-04-22 05:47:54 UTC
The above listed consequences, both actual and suggested, mean absolutely nothing. There is no tangible penalty aside from a stupidity factor. Anyone who wishes to pirate and gank will not give a rat's ass, and only serves to compell the attempt, given the increased challenge.

You can simply avoid getting ganked by paying attention, and not afk ratting, bottling, or just have a RR alt with you. But if someone wants you dead bad enough in eve, you'll die
Dave Stark
#9 - 2014-04-22 05:48:32 UTC
Sir Dangler wrote:
From what I can tell


this phrase right here undermines your whole post; it communicates that you have no idea about the topic you're attempting to 'fix'.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-04-22 06:46:33 UTC
Suicide ganking is working as intended.


Move along.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Luwc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#11 - 2014-04-22 07:22:32 UTC
Sir Dangler wrote:
Hello,

There's a few blogs out there discussing the risk vs reward aspect of Eve, and after reading up on evenews24 about high sec suicide ganking, the solution was obvious.

From what I can tell, a suicide gank is a risk averse action. Players who engage in this skill-less activity suffer no significant penalties. It is true that the loot fairy will sometimes be unforgiving, but this is 95% not the case. Losing a nado or talos is not a big deal. Barely losing security status is not an issue either, as this is quickly farmed back up.

To counter these risk-averse pilots conducting their non-risky operation of suicide ganking a hauler full of treasure, there should be a repercussion that is also of equivalent significance in the risk vs reward world of EvE Online.

The solution, then, is simple. When a pilot shoots another pilot in high sec that is neither wardecced or criminal, that pilot should receive a very significant security status penalty endorsed by CONCORD, since they have illegally shot another innocent carebear in high sec!

The security status of the risk averse ganker should become -10.0.

Why does it make sense that CONCORD penalizes an insignificant amount of security status, and ignores you after 15 minutes, when a ganker is clearly conducting an illegal act? Surely, that pilot should receive an important status loss.

The implications?

A ganker will therefore have to choose his target wisely, or be more tactful in his ganking operation. The risk-averse Talos ISBoxing derp will receive -10 across all his alts, but he might gain a reward out of it.

Risk vs reward!

What do you think?



Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooor.... The people getting ganked actually start using their brain.


stop beeing idiots..

...

Stop blaming your own stupidity on people that abuse your lack of intelligence

http://hugelolcdn.com/i/267520.gif

Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#12 - 2014-04-22 12:13:22 UTC
You do not fix what isnt broken.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#13 - 2014-04-22 12:24:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
Rowells wrote:
I'm on a mobile, my reply will be short.

No.

I'll elaborate later.


I wouldn't d that, "no" is such a wonderfull, short and yet at the same time elaborate answer. A word that stands for itself, no bullshit allowed, only rarely an insult and so incredibly direct as only a word like no (or maybe even yes) can be.

"No" is a good answer, one of the best even, to a great deal of questions asked every day.

I support "No."

Say Yes to No.

Cool

EDIT: That was a lot of edits for such a short post... (o_รด)

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#14 - 2014-04-22 12:40:21 UTC
Luwc wrote:

Stop blaming your own stupidity on people that abuse your lack of intelligence


I endorse this message

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Abyss Azizora
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2014-04-22 15:37:44 UTC
I will agree that the sec status hit for suicide ganking does need to be MUCH higher than it currently is, as you said it can be replaced very fast, hell a single day in fact.

But going instant -10.0 is WAY too far in the other direction, it should be a large drop, but not anywhere near THAT large.
Emizeko Chai
Freight Club
#16 - 2014-04-22 16:27:57 UTC
Sir Dangler wrote:

It is true that the loot fairy will sometimes be unforgiving, but this is 95% not the case.
...
What do you think?


I think you don't know the difference between 95% and 50%.
Jur Tissant
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-04-22 17:01:59 UTC
Then where would the achievement be in acquiring -10 sec? Think of all those hard-working gatecampers.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#18 - 2014-04-22 19:12:27 UTC
Without suicide gankers, there wouldn't be the necessary risk factor in hi-sec, and the risk/reward balance of hauling would be broken. 100% Safe, AFK hauling, sometimes in max cargo t1 industrial ships would not be a good thing.

While you probably think the penalties should be harsher, and I most certainly think the penalties should be lighter, there is inherently more damage to be done by making them too severe. When it becomes too much work/hassle/effort to just to gank, you'd end up giving too much power to the AFK menace, and you'd severely devalue the time of people doing it right, i.e. destroying a profession due to your own sloth. If you made them lighter, than you would lower the bar for 'enforcement' or 'natural selection' and end up improving the value associated with proper hauling.

People that want something in exchange for nothing in this game....ugh.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#19 - 2014-04-22 21:59:55 UTC
As a carebear at heart, having been a victim myself to a suicide gank, I can honestly say...no. A slight-moderate increase in sec status hit, maybe. Immediate -10, absolutely no.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#20 - 2014-04-22 22:02:03 UTC
Jur Tissant wrote:
Then where would the achievement be in acquiring -10 sec? Think of all those hard-working gatecampers.


Or, a medal.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

123Next pageLast page