These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Sec Ganking - CONCORD Balance request

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#41 - 2017-02-25 22:55:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Erich Einstein wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
For the OP, chasing down those with low security status is the job of the Faction Police, not Concord.

Concord are the tactical team with the fancy toys, that only come out to play when capsuleers shoot each other in the face without the necessary flags.


Thats false, CONCORD appears right when these criminals undock and start pursuit before they have even attacked anything. This is because of their security status.
Sorry, that's exactly how it works. The NPCs that appear for people with low sec status aren't Concord, they are the Faction Police; Concord are inescapable and invincible, the Faction Police can be eluded and fought.

I neglected to mention that the result of Concord killing you is a 15 minute criminal flag where they'll kill you again if you undock.

Concord only react to a criminal flag, without one they leave you alone.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Sintei Ruhl
Raubritter und Wegelagerer GmbH
#42 - 2017-02-25 22:58:23 UTC
Erich Einstein wrote:
Sintei Ruhl wrote:
Interesting enough, this is one Person advocating another nerf to ganking and getting no backup at all. I would say the majority here is just fine with the mechanic as it is..... so no reason to pursue this further...


LUL.... most of the people support it. Especially through the Fackbook post's comments on the EVE Online GROUP https://www.facebook.com/groups/EveOnlineFans/permalink/10155193915391015/.



hmmmm that thread doesn't really seem to be overwhelmingly in your favour..... some are thinking about your idea and some dont like it....

Here no one really likes it.....

Soooo the majority is still against it.... not matter how often you try to shake of comments with a CapsLock "LUL"....
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#43 - 2017-02-25 23:01:52 UTC
Sintei Ruhl wrote:
Erich Einstein wrote:
Sintei Ruhl wrote:
Interesting enough, this is one Person advocating another nerf to ganking and getting no backup at all. I would say the majority here is just fine with the mechanic as it is..... so no reason to pursue this further...


LUL.... most of the people support it. Especially through the Fackbook post's comments on the EVE Online GROUP https://www.facebook.com/groups/EveOnlineFans/permalink/10155193915391015/.



hmmmm that thread doesn't really seem to be overwhelmingly in your favour..... some are thinking about your idea and some dont like it....

Here no one really likes it.....

Soooo the majority is still against it.... not matter how often you try to shake of comments with a CapsLock "LUL"....


Some of the ones who dont like it admit to be gankers when I called them out on it. Of course gankers are going to oppose anyone who wants to take their free lunch away.
Firnen Bakru
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#44 - 2017-02-25 23:09:26 UTC
https://zkillboard.com/kill/59201657/

I was the bumper on this one. On a scale from one to booty blasted, how butthurt are you?
Leyanora Varkain
Special Assault Unit
Pandemic Horde
#45 - 2017-02-25 23:09:56 UTC
Hm wow where to start. So first of all: if you get ganked in a freighter first of all you as a freighter pilot did something wrong like:

1.) Not having webs with you to help you
2.) Beeing greedy by scramming everything you got into one ship (always a rather unfortunate thing)
3.) Just play all alone in an MMO and not know about things like "Burn Jita" because nobody told you (*)

I also have lost a freigher once because I was just beeing a way too juicy target for any ganker to ignore and I dont blame anyone but me.

Another thing is:
CONCORD is not around to protect anyone but rather to punish players who did something they should probably not have done (or did because they were fully aware of the consequences).

Also fumbling with alpha mechanics here would not be a good option. I am still not sure if I should applaud the duders that setup the BJBee accounts or as myself it this was not some kind of abuse that should not happen (thinking about account sharing).



(*) footnote here: it is literaly INSANE there are still so many freighter kills while an event like Burn Jita is happening. I still dont get why a person with a decent amount of common sense would go like "ok there have been a couple of freighter kills in the area around Jita - but I really need to haul over some tritanium now... and while I am on it I could easily get some plex over aswell".
Sintei Ruhl
Raubritter und Wegelagerer GmbH
#46 - 2017-02-25 23:11:23 UTC
Erich Einstein wrote:
Sintei Ruhl wrote:
Erich Einstein wrote:
Sintei Ruhl wrote:
Interesting enough, this is one Person advocating another nerf to ganking and getting no backup at all. I would say the majority here is just fine with the mechanic as it is..... so no reason to pursue this further...


LUL.... most of the people support it. Especially through the Fackbook post's comments on the EVE Online GROUP https://www.facebook.com/groups/EveOnlineFans/permalink/10155193915391015/.



hmmmm that thread doesn't really seem to be overwhelmingly in your favour..... some are thinking about your idea and some dont like it....

Here no one really likes it.....

Soooo the majority is still against it.... not matter how often you try to shake of comments with a CapsLock "LUL"....


Some of the ones who dont like it admit to be gankers when I called them out on it. Of course gankers are going to oppose anyone who wants to take their free lunch away.



I don't understand people who cry to deny other people their fun wich existed in that game forever while the are absolutely finde with the machanics wich provide them their own fun, which can be put up for debate too (ninja looting being the example here wich you claim to be one of your professions)
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#47 - 2017-02-25 23:17:16 UTC
Firnen Bakru wrote:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/59201657/

I was the bumper on this one. On a scale from one to booty blasted, how butthurt are you?


Fully insured ... and I expected to be ganked given that I was testing its viability as a swoop freighter to steal your ****... hardly! I expected to lose that ship. Note that its completely empty!! P
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#48 - 2017-02-25 23:18:01 UTC
Erich Einstein wrote:
Owen Levanth wrote:
Erich Einstein wrote:
Disclaimer: I understand that ganking is a part of the game and I am completely ok with that. I actually like that people in highsec are not completely protected.

Given that, CONCORD and the security status are completely useless against repeat offenders (mainly -5.0 and lower) who fleet gank every 15min - 24hours a day. Yeah, im talking about those staged up in Jita V - Moon 17 station. Ganking as a profession and source of income should come with the requirement of having to manage and repair your security status based on the system that you are ganking in.

To implement this i propose two changes:

First:
CONCORD should respond differently if a pilot's security status falls low enough in a particular highsec system. This second phase of aggression would consist of stations and jump gates instantly webbing and warp-disrupting while CONCORD moves in. This prevents serial criminals from freely moving through highsec and also prevent gank fleets from staging in highsec systems unless they control their security status correctly. Customs officials already behave this way on gates so it makes complete sense to expand this behavior to CONCORD's abilities. CONCORD should not be made to look like fools who can be manipulated.

Here is an example of when this second phase would kick in:

1.0 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-4.0 and lower)
0.9 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-5.0 and lower)
0.8 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-6.0 and lower)
0.7 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-7.0 and lower)
0.6 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-8.0 and lower)
0.5 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-9.0 and lower)
0.4 system and lower - not applicable

Second:
To prevent alpha clones from continually being rolled and used as disposable gank toons, I propose that only omega pilots be allowed to set their safety to red, while alpha clones can only set their safety to yellow at most.

I feel that this will balance out the security and safety of highsec without damaging the ability to gank. This change will require gank fleets to put in an effort if they want to treat highsec like a free meal.

This would also bring more meaning to tags, where they can be used to repair status so that mission running is not the only option. Gankers would have to weigh tags cost against target profit to be effective.

CCPlease implement this or something similar so that repeat gank fleets can not freely stage and travel in highsec. If career criminals want to take advantage of major markets like jita and amarr, then they can use an alt or carrier service to get goods. No need for career criminals to even be allowed in highsec. That is what a security status is meant to control.



It amuses me to no end that even in a time of invulnerable police fleets calmly destroying your ship for every transgression, there are people who think that's not enough. I guess if someone ever writes a parody about this, it will inevitably end with CONCORD just automatically biomassing a ganker and transfering everything he owned to his victim. Of course his victim will get everything he lost restored, too.

And at the very end the one who demanded this last change to destroy ganking accidentally opens fire on a pirate-owned structure in one of his missions, leading to him losing his 100-billion blinged pirate battleship to CONCORD, losing his character and everything he owned gets transferred to some now very confused player on the other side of New Eden.*


*Based on an actual bug I experienced.


If you are going to contribute to the post, try not to wonder off into la la land.


This entire thread is la la land already, it's impossible to constructively add anything here. Thread should already be closed, in my opinion.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#49 - 2017-02-25 23:18:58 UTC
The only people supporting this idea is: one person who doesn't know the mechanics and one liar. SSDD.

Btw, im not a ganker. I mine and i fly freighters. Im just not a complete tool when i undock.

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
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#50 - 2017-02-25 23:19:14 UTC
Leyanora Varkain wrote:
Hm wow where to start. So first of all: if you get ganked in a freighter first of all you as a freighter pilot did something wrong like:

1.) Not having webs with you to help you
2.) Beeing greedy by scramming everything you got into one ship (always a rather unfortunate thing)
3.) Just play all alone in an MMO and not know about things like "Burn Jita" because nobody told you (*)

I also have lost a freigher once because I was just beeing a way too juicy target for any ganker to ignore and I dont blame anyone but me.

Another thing is:
CONCORD is not around to protect anyone but rather to punish players who did something they should probably not have done (or did because they were fully aware of the consequences).

Also fumbling with alpha mechanics here would not be a good option. I am still not sure if I should applaud the duders that setup the BJBee accounts or as myself it this was not some kind of abuse that should not happen (thinking about account sharing).



(*) footnote here: it is literaly INSANE there are still so many freighter kills while an event like Burn Jita is happening. I still dont get why a person with a decent amount of common sense would go like "ok there have been a couple of freighter kills in the area around Jita - but I really need to haul over some tritanium now... and while I am on it I could easily get some plex over aswell".



The thread has already covered these angles and their rebuttals....
Sintei Ruhl
Raubritter und Wegelagerer GmbH
#51 - 2017-02-25 23:26:18 UTC
"rebuttals" .... from you or what??
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#52 - 2017-02-25 23:26:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Erich Einstein wrote:
The thread has already covered these angles and their rebuttals....
Rebuttals which have shown that you have no idea about how Concord and Crimewatch actually work.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#53 - 2017-02-25 23:29:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Erich Einstein wrote:


This is complete BS... all it takes to stop a freighter in its tracks is one mach bumper... nothing else! and you cant get away from it by logging or anything else if they also target you. Then the gank teams shows up when they can and you go down. This happens every 15min 24hours a day out of Jita V - Moon 17 station (goons).


Empty freighters are rarely bumped and ganked.

Freighters without that much cargo value are rarely bumped or ganked.

Freighters piloted by an idiot who put 6.5 billion ISK worth cargo in the hold...those get bumped and ganked.

So, the implication is, don't be an idiot.

If you actually engaged your brain and looked at the underlying incentives you'd realize there is NO problem with suicide ganking of freighters. It is correcting people who were stupid.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#54 - 2017-02-25 23:37:35 UTC
Alderson Point wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
No.

The Mutuality of Freighter Ganking

Ganking, especially freighters, has as much to do with the idiocy of the freighter pilot as the ganker. In fact, the freighter pilot's idiocy has to precede the actions of the suicide gankers. First, the freighter pilot does something idiotic (usually several idiotic somethings) then and only then can the suicide gankers act.

First, the rise of professional ganking organizations is a direct result of this kind of nonsense. Before ganking was a rather desultory activity. You worried about it, but not like today. Groups like CODE. and Miniluv, the latter of which ganks almost entirely for profit, were not a thing.

Second, nobody ganks every 15 minutes 24 hours/day. The reason why you get groups that can do that, like Miniluv, is because of requests like this.

Maybe you should stop making requests like this.

Third your idea would impact LS pirates too. It is ****** game design if you nerf the game play of people who are not in the target group.

As for Alphas, why limit their game play? What if they want to try LS pirating or suicide ganking to see if it is a career path they'd like to pursue in game and maybe even lead to them going Omega after finding out if they like it or not.

No, this is idea is **** from beginning to end. Even if you had just written the word '****' in place of every word in your current post it could not get any shittier.



I am not against ganking, however blaming the Victim only works when the predator doesn't massacre every target it sees.
When empty freighters and low value industrials can travel without being blown up for lutz, then you may have the beginnings of a valid argument. Reddit just witnessed gankers compaining they didn't make any real money because most of the "kills" were not ever going to be profitable. They still continued.

So this argument fails, When ganking has sufficient deterrence, that only profitable Ganks are undertaken, then we will be nearer to balance.

Op has a valid point.


Blame the victim? WITF? He is a victim of his own stupidity. Nobody has a right to move a crap ton of valuable stuff IN THIS GAME with out the consequences. It isn't the case that he had a legal right to be safe and secure when undocking. No, not in THIS GAME.

You are conflating what happens OUT OF GAME with what happens IN GAME. The two are not the same.

So your argument is not even relevant to my claims. Try again and leave the real world morals at the login window. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Jevatoxa
Amandla Legion
#55 - 2017-02-25 23:45:29 UTC
Erich Einstein wrote:
Given that, CONCORD and the security status are completely useless against repeat offenders (mainly -5.0 and lower) who fleet gank every 15min - 24hours a day. Yeah, im talking about those staged up in Jita V - Moon 17 station....blah, blah, blah, whine.


No. Go away.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#56 - 2017-02-25 23:46:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
I want to be clear on this "blame the victim" bullshit that some try to trot out as some sort of justification against ganking.

In the real world, for example, if you are a woman you have the right to walk around without being raped. There are no additional qualifiers about time of day, style of clothing, etc. Those are the social norms and how the laws work. So, when somebody says, "Oh she was raped because she dressed like a ****." That is considered blaming the victim. That is wrong because our social norms and laws say that is not valid reason to **** a woman (and in fact there is no valid reason for raping a woman, or a man for that matter).

Now. In game, is there a social norm or law or the like that says: You can turn your ship into a ginormous loot pinata and fly around in HS space unmolested?

No.

Let me repeat that. No.

You have no expectation of being able to fly around unmolested at all. If I decide to accept the consequences of shooting you in HS, I can shoot you in HS.

That is the social norm and "law" of this game.

When you go further and turn your ship into a loot pinata you are literally asking for trouble. You are taking on considerable risk. And when that downside risk materializes and you lose your stuff. Well...tough ****.

So knock of this infantile SJW bullshit of "you're blaming the victim." Grow up and learn the culture of the game you are playing.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
McCope McCopenhagen
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#57 - 2017-02-25 23:49:52 UTC
man you're ******* stupid lmao
Circo Maximo
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2017-02-25 23:50:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Circo Maximo
wrote:

Second:
To prevent alpha clones from continually being rolled and used as disposable gank toons, I propose that only omega pilots be allowed to set their safety to red, while alpha clones can only set their safety to yellow at most.

I feel that this will balance out the security and safety of highsec without damaging the ability to gank. This change will require gank fleets to put in an effort if they want to treat highsec like a free meal.

This would also bring more meaning to tags, where they can be used to repair status so that mission running is not the only option. Gankers would have to weigh tags cost against target profit to be effective.

CCPlease implement this or something similar so that repeat gank fleets can not freely stage and travel in highsec. If career criminals want to take advantage of major markets like jita and amarr, then they can use an alt or carrier service to get goods. No need for career criminals to even be allowed in highsec. That is what a security status is meant to control.


Which bee stung you?
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#59 - 2017-02-25 23:51:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Whoever posted this picture of Veers on his Facebook group thread owes me coffee.

Well played.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Joe Barbarian
Back Street Boys With Capital Toys
#60 - 2017-02-25 23:53:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Barbarian
Erich Einstein wrote:
Disclaimer: I understand that ganking is a part of the game and I am completely ok with that. I actually like that people in highsec are not completely protected.

Given that, CONCORD and the security status are completely useless against repeat offenders (mainly -5.0 and lower) who fleet gank every 15min - 24hours a day. Yeah, im talking about those staged up in Jita V - Moon 17 station. Ganking as a profession and source of income should come with the requirement of having to manage and repair your security status based on the system that you are ganking in.

To implement this i propose two changes:

First:
CONCORD should respond differently if a pilot's security status falls low enough in a particular highsec system. This second phase of aggression would consist of stations and jump gates instantly webbing and warp-disrupting while CONCORD moves in. This prevents serial criminals from freely moving through highsec and also prevent gank fleets from staging in highsec systems unless they control their security status correctly. Customs officials already behave this way on gates so it makes complete sense to expand this behavior to CONCORD's abilities. CONCORD should not be made to look like fools who can be manipulated.

Here is an example of when this second phase would kick in:

1.0 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-4.0 and lower)
0.9 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-5.0 and lower)
0.8 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-6.0 and lower)
0.7 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-7.0 and lower)
0.6 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-8.0 and lower)
0.5 system - CONCORD phase 2 (-9.0 and lower)
0.4 system and lower - not applicable

Second:
To prevent alpha clones from continually being rolled and used as disposable gank toons, I propose that only omega pilots be allowed to set their safety to red, while alpha clones can only set their safety to yellow at most.

I feel that this will balance out the security and safety of highsec without damaging the ability to gank. This change will require gank fleets to put in an effort if they want to treat highsec like a free meal.

This would also bring more meaning to tags, where they can be used to repair status so that mission running is not the only option. Gankers would have to weigh tags cost against target profit to be effective.

CCPlease implement this or something similar so that repeat gank fleets can not freely stage and travel in highsec. If career criminals want to take advantage of major markets like jita and amarr, then they can use an alt or carrier service to get goods. No need for career criminals to even be allowed in highsec. That is what a security status is meant to control.


Not sure if this point has already been made, but why should alpha clones have even more limited game play? You are in effect punishing many players for the actions of a few. I see and understand the need for highsec only players feel the need to ask developers to protect your ships and/or cargo. In the land where EvE is supposedly a sandbox game making such changes will effectively take more away from this "sandbox"