Player Features and Ideas Discussion

99% of what I do is PvP. The other 1% is drinking coffee...

All I expect is for you to use all the tools at your disposal. Adapt, thrive.

Also, unless I misread it, there's a 7 day block on new corps anchoring POS anyway. So what's the problem, it's the same length as an initial wardec - that's your impact right there

The only helpless target is the willfully helpless one. As to ganking buffs, we could go back to the old days of Concord not being un-killable, stop faction police bugging -5s, reverse the change from years back where Concord started responding faster, etc.

If you really want to nerf hisec income, then ultimately you need to start and end with the market hubs. Move them out of hisec and nerf complete.

Dropping incomes from mining, manufacturing etc will only increase the time factor, and ultimately fail. People in hisec will just spend more time to do what they already do. Removing Lvl4 missions will just push people to do Lvl3 missions instead. Some may choose to go to losec/null for higher rewards/vs/time, but I do not believe that much will change for the majority of hisec dwellers.

I will await the new structures that were announced. Things should get alot more interesting...

And that is how most things already work, btw. We could do better with a POS, for example. Or with our own POCOs for PI. Or mining in max-yield barges... the tools are already there. And with accordingly higher risks.

As long as we have easy access to market hubs, nothing will change significantly.

So people rolling corps and tearing down POS needing to suffer a 7 day hit to their POS use, we're saying this isn't an impact to them? Hell the very ballache of setting up a POS is punishment enough!

We also need to stop saying 'PvE player', if an individual is affecting you by their in game activities then by the very definition it is PvP. There are many ways to deal with this over and above wardec, as there has to be - trading is the ultimate PvP (in terms of what can be lost), yet not a shot is fired.

I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

12. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.

The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a support ticket under the Community & Forums Category.

Scanning is an intended mechanic to (among other things) allow gankers to identify and target overloaded/overfit ships. CCP literally added a module (the passive targeting module) whose sole purpose to is enable criminals to identify targets stealthily. Why would they go now and make it useless by identifying people scanning potential targets with a suspect flag? All that will do is encourage scouts to use disposable ships, or worse, gankers to randomly target and pop ships hoping for a drop. That is terrible gameplay as it removes a major part of the ganker-hauler dynamic which serves as an incentive for players to not overload their ships.

Your idea does absolutely nothing to make the game better, more dynamic or engaging. It just provides more safety to highsec haulers further incentivizing AFK gameplay while hurting other users of scanning modules by exposing them to attack.


I have lost many ships while an outlaw to opportunist or white knights (the gates around Uedama are a hot spot). But really what do you expect? The penalties are so harsh that an outlaw cannot do anything but warp from a station to a target. Even if gankers wandered into the belt a tried to give you a fight, the faction police will have them in a pod in short time.

That is the life of an outlaw. The NPC mechanics reduce them to quick hit-and-run attacks in disposable ships. The benefit to the "good" people of highsec is that this protects them from most of the damage the outlaws would want to inflict. The downside is that it is difficult for a player to get revenge (although it is trivial to protect oneself if you take precautions). That's the game.

Gankers accept a huge amount of consequences as their security status dips. It is true that the use of friends (or alts) can mitigate many of them, but this is true for all players in all playstyles. The key point that Kaarous I think is trying to make, is that from a game design perspective is that those making an reward be subject to increased risk. In this case, industrial corporations are receiving an increased benefit than if they had stayed in the NPC corp, but with no additional risk because of the current ability of them to trivially dodge wardecs. Using an alt to mitigate the risks of wardec, say a neutral hauler, is perfectly fine - that is just a reality of the CONCORD mechanics - but having 100% safe POSes in space is not.

From a game design perspective gankers do not benefit from increased income. In fact, they are a purely destructive force for the economy adding no resources to the game. Sure, they need to be balanced so that players can move stuff or mine safely if they choose, but they are there really to enforce the risk vs. reward design of the game. They provide the incentive for players to fit tank and limit their fittings/cargo. You should be able to avoid them completely (which you pretty much can), but also you can choose to go after increased reward if you expose yourself to them, like mining in a yield-fit hulk for example.

That is why CCP allows ganking: to make fitting and gameplay choices matter. Highsec ganking could be eliminated with just a couple lines of code but of course CCP has not done this as they think ganking is good for the game. But really, this is way off topic as we are suppose to be discussing changes to the wardec mechanics, not ganking.

Hmm. That is an interesting twist but it probably won't work as the lack of station access would make logistics/reshipping too crippling for the attacker. But perhaps depending on how the new structures work.

Hmmm... points made:

Ganking will raise prices at the markets, while industry will lower them.

Wardecs are an isk sink, which will also raise prices at the market.

Use of neutral alts is fine for everyone.

Dodging wardecs is bad (I assume you mean by dissolving corps?)

Playing around with the loot fairy can be good

It does have material consequence, there are serious limitations on both pos to new corps and how many you can get up per day.

Losing a POS access for 7 days is entirely non trivial, its a huge hit to industrial corps.