Crime & Punishment

Some people aren't looking for arguments that are logical. Some men just want to watch their own sanity burn.

Not to toot my own horn, but here's one.

I just assumed it was a bad troll post, but I guess some regulars on here might not actually be able to put 1 and 1 together sometimes.

Most of your argument breaks down due to the fact you are not limited to one character in EVE. Maybe if you were, the "penalties" you associate with suicide ganking are wouldn't be so totally meaningless.

1. Meaningless

2. Meaningless

3. Meaningless: Insignificant, ISK

4. Meaningless: Insignificant, ISK

5. You are saying that the RNG loot drop chance is the "risk" in risk/reward. Its not. Loot Its usually evenly split 50/50, if possible, and in addition to that, the suicide ganker gets to pick his targets, ensuring profitability, if that is even the goal.

Suicide ganking is also commonly used as a griefing tool where a person is willing to pay a higherISK cost to cause emotional suffering on another player. The value of the isk lost is different for each player, irrespective of the amount of isk lost. IE: For a sociopathic veteran EVE player, 10 mil is nothing for the opportunity ruin someones entire day, 40 minutes afk on veldspar in 1.0 sec. For a newer player that starts out with nothing, 10 mil represents great deal of time. The result is that the the insignificant isk costs associated with suicide ganking are nowhere near punitive enough to act as a deterrent.


Let me give you an example of how a more sensible pvp mmorpg deals with the sociopaths who would drive people out of the game if left unchecked:

In Ultima Online, EVEs predecessor and the first full loot pvp mmorpg with risk/reward, every kill against an non-criminal or aggressor adds a counter with an 8 hour timer to your character. If you accumulate 5 of these, your character will go into "stat-loss", meaning that if you should die and wish to be revived again before your timer has dropped below 5, you will suffer a massive -5% hit to all your stats, which can represent months worth of work. Those who wish to destroy "innocents" non-stop may do so but face significant penalties that effectively serve as a deterrent to rampant unchecked abuse of non-combatants who make sandbox games great. These players also were worth going after due to huge bounties on their heads and the epic loot they carried, very much unlike high sec suicide gankers.

This is a reasonable example of fairness with regards to aggression against weak, non-combatants who do not wish to fight.
Without these rules, the people who populate your game and make it great see the blatant unfairness where potential sociopaths have all the advantages, including potentially incredible profits, while paying no significant penalties whatsoever, all within the comfort of high-sec, preying mostly upon the newer and casual players who aren't aware of the possibilities of a new game, and it is disgusting to them. As a former 7 year vet of UO, 3 year vet of Darkfall Online (Original) and avid pvper in all realms, I am disgusted.


Props for actually addressing the subject instead of shrieking: "EVE IS A PVP GAEM!" "U NO LIKE PVP U GO!!!" like so many rabid regulars seem compelled to do.

Next

You are making a lot of assumptions and that is the root of your problem. Again, I reiterate.

Bronson is the only one who hangs out here who I have never ever seen a post a troll response.

And fit a covert ops cloak. I think you left it slightly underpowered.

So long as there is the ability to undock, target another player, shoot, and kill them in highsec, groups like CODE will exist. CCP has stated that there will always be the ability to undock, target another player, shoot, and kill in highsec.

At this point, any perceived "nerf" to ganking will just result in 10x the ISK needed to overcome it in donations. CCP could nerf ganking down so that the only way you can get a kill is with an alpha volley from a BS, and guess what, there'll be people out there fitting up alpha volley BS gank ships, and other people funneling ISK to them for reimbursement.

That's the cold, hard truth that the anti-sandboxers don't want to face. Highsec could drop down to one suicide gank a week, and anti-sandboxer will still scream bloody murder.

In the end, it has little to do with actual ship ganking itself. Anti-sandboxers find the idea of "other people impacting your game" to be anathema. So long as the risk of someone else influencing their game exists, they'll scream and cry. Why they play EVE is beyond me, seeing as how the game is built around various and sundry ways to impact other people's games. It's a core design philosophy I don't see CCP abandoning any time soon

At that rate, you may as well just include a free Fedo....

I just noticed one CODE pilot has gone missing...

If you click"View Profile" on the author of this post you will see that he "cannot be found"

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4999644#post4999644

Ah sucky... I guess it's better than him just disappearing... I thought maybe he was "Deleted" or something.

I guess after 7 years his name is no longer acceptable

I'm familiar with Ultima Online, and with how they handled player aggression. In that setting, I feel a system like that worked just fine.

EvE is different. EvE is not UO. "Stats" work differently; players can't lose or gain them, they can only be shuffled around. While it's possible that CCP could implement some sort of stat-penalty, all that does is slow down the training of skills. Skillpoints are the real "hard currency" in terms of player time investment, so any effective penalty would have to hit players there.

But if you think about this for a moment and you'll see that even if CCP implemented some sort of skill penalty, it wouldn't be very effective. Many suicide gankers are throw-away alts with only a few months worth of training, so if CCP implemented a UO-style penalty on skillpoints for being "overly aggressive" in hisec, it would be largely harmless because players would just constantly re-train the lost skills or biomass the characters and roll new ones. That penalty would likely be no more effective at stopping them as the loss of their security status, or their ship. Also, remember that suicide gankers are vulnerable to podding, so if they don't keep their clones up to date, this is a consequence they risk suffering already.


Ultimately, I think the issue here is differing definitions of the term "sensible". You seem to want a UO-style system in EvE, and think that is perfectly sensible. I think the current system is perfectly sensible. "Sensible" is a subjective term, so neither of us can really be wrong. This is why I said several pages back that this discussion is largely pointless because the only opinion that matter's is CCP's, and they currently favor keeping things as-is.

With that in mind, I'm bowing out of this for now. Keep it classy folks.