These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Suicide Gank Fix

Author
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#21 - 2014-04-22 22:25:41 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Currently 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).



throw in a big fine like x5 value of ship, fittings and cargo per gank, you could lose concord then.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...

admiral root
Red Galaxy
#22 - 2014-04-22 22:35:10 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
throw in a big fine like x5 value of ship, fittings and cargo per gank, you could lose concord then.


That would be absolutely horrible. Removing Concord would only work if new tools were provided to replace them.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

CW Itovuo
The Executioners
#23 - 2014-04-23 04:35:49 UTC
Sir Dangler wrote:
Hello,

risk-averse



You keep using that word.

I do not think it means what you think it means.




Bertral
Les chevaliers de l'ordre
Goonswarm Federation
#24 - 2014-04-23 12:31:02 UTC
You could have waited for Burn Jita to happen before complaining about suicide ganking. You would have had a lot more support !
Elliecsientie
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2014-04-23 13:02:50 UTC
Sir Dangler wrote:

another innocent carebear in high sec!


Really? There are none not guilty of expecting no risk in highsec?

Sir Dangler wrote:

Risk vs reward!

What do you think?


Right on. Where's the risk to your "innocent carebear" here?
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#26 - 2014-04-24 16:55:15 UTC
OP, you might want to try suicide ganking. You'll probably be asking for it to be buffed when you're done. It's not nearly as easy (or profitable) as you seem to think.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#27 - 2014-04-24 17:58:59 UTC
my only addition to suicide ganking penalties -
the suspect timer should last longer than the criminal timer, say by an extra half-hour......

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.

nia starstryder
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2014-04-24 19:45:34 UTC
i find it hard to believe that everyone missed the obvious sarcasm. an instant -10 come on, that's obvious sarcasm.

seriously, I do believe there should be more penalites, such as making the criminal flag last 1 hour then SLOWLY have the danger reduced, but no one would seriously believe that an instant -10 would be good for the game.
Nalelmir Ahashion
Industrial Management and Engineering
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#29 - 2014-04-24 20:02:33 UTC
my problem with suicide gankers is that they seem to prefer retrievers\mackinaws kills over Covetors\hulks kills.

Dear gankers, do your service for all eve players and nuke multiboxers\afk miners and gold (isk) farmers.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#30 - 2014-04-24 20:48:15 UTC
OP...

For your heresy against HTFU and calls for nerfs we are adding a +1 to the Kill-It-Forward queue.

We look forward to murdering an innocent carebear in hisec in your name, and informing him it was you caused his demise.

Your heresy, our hands, their blood, your conscience. Stop the heresy, we will stop the slaughter.

F
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#31 - 2014-04-24 20:50:47 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
EDIT: That was a lot of edits for such a short post... (o_รด)

Edits?
w3ak3stl1nk
Hedion University
#32 - 2014-04-27 02:03:53 UTC
Maybe criminal timer should be 1 hour? Seems more reasonable than all that crazy talk.

Is that my two cents or yours?

DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#33 - 2014-04-27 04:18:57 UTC
Suicide Gankers should make even Pirates throw up.

Every time you gank you lose security status, standing with the local NPC corps...all of them and CONCORD. The more you gank means the longer you remain a target for someone to attack.

For example if you reach a -.1 status because of ganking you would remain flashy to everyone for three days. The only way to get around staying flashy red for three days is to go into low sector and secure a Return to High Sector Permit from one of the low sector rat ships at the gates or the belts.

Each Permit reduces the three day penalty by six hours. So in order to return to high sector you would need a total of 12 Permits issued by the low sector rats to clear the three day penalty timer.

Equal justice for those who unequally justify their existence.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#34 - 2014-04-27 05:54:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Simple solution would be to always spawn a new CONCORD spawn when someone is non-consensually (who has no susp/crim flags or duel flags) killed in High sec. Currently you can divert the attention of CONCORD from a ganking crime site by ganking a Noob ship elsewhere in the system and free the gate or station from CONCORD. That should mechanic should be removed and the problem is solved without any further repercussions or limitations for gankers. Twisted

In exchange for the perma camping CONCORD, they should vanish after a couple of hours (whatever random time between 1- open end hours it takes to investigate a crime scene thoroughly, depending on the size of the ganked ship (the bigger, the longer they stay)).

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

motie one
Secret Passage
#35 - 2014-04-28 17:23:50 UTC  |  Edited by: motie one
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Sir Dangler wrote:


What do you think?


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



I wonder why it is commonly proposed? What?

Possibly only a ganker can love a ganker?

So plus 1000 to original poster.
TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#36 - 2014-04-28 17:28:24 UTC
Being Risk Averse should result in -10.0 Standing? If that applies to every carebear that leaves corp on wardec or that decides to hide in undeccable NPC corps aswell, then I'm okay with that.

My Condor costs less than that module!

motie one
Secret Passage
#37 - 2014-04-28 17:33:08 UTC  |  Edited by: motie one
DrysonBennington wrote:
Suicide Gankers should make even Pirates throw up.

Every time you gank you lose security status, standing with the local NPC corps...all of them and CONCORD. The more you gank means the longer you remain a target for someone to attack.

For example if you reach a -.1 status because of ganking you would remain flashy to everyone for three days. The only way to get around staying flashy red for three days is to go into low sector and secure a Return to High Sector Permit from one of the low sector rat ships at the gates or the belts.

Each Permit reduces the three day penalty by six hours. So in order to return to high sector you would need a total of 12 Permits issued by the low sector rats to clear the three day penalty timer.

Equal justice for those who unequally justify their existence.


Honestly, a high sec Ganker should be KOS in Highsec, permanently.

Bet that's popular.

Being realistic though, nothing wrong with Ganking if it is for money. If the value of the kill is greater than loss then NP, carry on. If purely for the lutz. Concord them as now and podkill them to deep deep null.

Mmm risk reward, sounds familiar.

A real solution? Leave everything unchanged and make a New EvE through the EvE gate with different values.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#38 - 2014-04-28 20:49:10 UTC
The real solution would be to read up on a game before forking out the subscription fee.

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

Kat-da Killa
4S Corporation
The Initiative.
#39 - 2014-05-01 13:08:35 UTC
ISBox ganking in HS is game breaking. It's griefing, and it should be something CCP does not allow.

ISBox for PVE, whatever, not bad, and for PVP in Low/Null, is fine.

Ganking is game working as intended, but ISBox ganking fleets are something that need to be removed to balance the gameplay.
oohthey ioh
Doomheim
#40 - 2014-05-03 10:47:57 UTC
there isn't enough ganking, there need to be more, it's a all time low.