Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So get a fast/insta-locking ship a do something about it instead of sitting around and begging CCP to play the game for you.



OK, let's play this game of yours (and please note, I am a line member! I am not in any sort of authority or position to make any official statements):

Yes, as a member of TEST, I would hate to lose fountain to the Goons (actually, as an aside, as a line member, I really don't care; I'm having too much fun shooting people, and would be fine if TEST were pushed out and we had to invade someone else's space). So to prevent Goons from taking Fountain, we made a stand against them. We were struggling on our own, so we called in some help, and with the aid of PL, NC., TRIBE, and all of the other many, many pilots aiding us, we are pushing back to prevent Goons from taking Fountain.

Now let's apply this to YOUR position (regarding -10's):

Instead of changing game mechanics to prevent -10's from entering highsec (which would be the equivalent of TEST petitioning CCP to prevent reds from using blue gates), you need to train up some insta-locking ships, and while doing so, start studying the routes that are common to flashy-red pilots in highsec (they exist, and yes, I know several, and no, I'm not going to hand them to you on a silver platter).

Once you are in an insta-locking ship and the skills to actually insta-lock, go out and hunt the -10's. Make them terrified to enter highsec. Camp common gates. Hunt them down. Learn who their alts and other common shipping methods are (not exactly difficult to do if you spend a few weeks watching), then wardec those corps. If they're in NPC corps, get into some blaster Catalysts, get into face-******* range, and start blasting their haulers in a suicide gank.

tl;dr :: If you want to stop something from happening, get off your lazy, fat, leach-encrusted arse, and do something about it instead of expecting CCP to hold your hand the entire time.

tl;dr's tl;dr :: Work with it via the in-game mechanics, or go back to the themepark MMO's who will hold your hand.

Similarly, any player with a security rating of +5 has evidently been spending too much time ganking helpless innocent NPCs. CONCORD should teach them the error of their ways by refusing to let them undock until they submit a 500-word essay in the form of a stuck petition apologising for their wayward behaviour. The petition must be perfectly spelled, punctuated, and grammatically correct.

There are already consequences for being -10 in highsec, pilots with that sec status are basically restricted to small fast ships so that they can evade the faction police and anybody can shoot at them without consequence from Concord. The tools to enforce the banishment of -10 pilots from highsec are already in the hands of the players, which is as it should be, CCP give us a framework, we build the content using it.

Gankers are not bullies, they are playing an open ended sandbox game in their own way. Without the risks of being ganked, scammed or otherwise bent over and violated, highsec would become extremely boring, not to mention that the so called bullies provide a valuable service in the form of creating a demand for ships and modules, both from themselves, and their victims. No destruction of ships and modules equals no market for replacements, for me and many other traders and industrialists that would be a "bad thing™", especially seeing as a lot of us fuel both sides of the equation.

Fair play Jonah but I do not believe this does impact the situation as much as you think it would. At this time there is a cap on Jita pretty much constantly most days and that is because the only place that people will congregate to buy,sell and scam is Jita. If a situation was provided that forced the requirement into low-sec, then you would have to sell your wares there - taking the pressure off that node.
CCP have long stated that they want more people to get out into lo and null sec. The two reasons why that doesn't happen is the risk adverse nature of some (and only some) people and the trade hubs in high sec.
I build, trade and buy in hi-sec as do you - but the situation is not ideal for doing that as long as there is a bottleneck in the system called hi-sec trade hubs.
Implementation of a plan like this would do three things:

1. Provide a place for the gankers to go with an incentive to earn their way back (and I guarantee the ganking would not stop)

2. Increase the trade in lo-sec and NPC null sec stations to meet those requirements

3. Depopulate hi-sec as more trade would be de-centralised.

Now as the the gankers being bullies etc - we will each have an opinion that should not come into the equation. What I am doing here is to increase the possibility of trade in other areas. Think big picture

Awww poor GC ... don't worry, I got some people I know that would hunt ur ass to extinction and back

I'm curious how, but it doesn't matter; this thread has been moved to Features & Graves, where all terrible ideas like this one go to die. Discussion over, I suppose.



Edit ::

Wasn't sure if I wanted to respond to this at first, but yes, I do: CCP introduced tags for one critical reason: enough people preferred to simply stop playing EvE over grinding their sec status back up.

Do you honestly believe that forcing people to do a very specific thing that is, to them, akin to watching paint dry, would be any different? CCP saw enough people leaving the game that they chose to intervene and offer a faster, easier way to fix sec status than grinding over rats.

Based on that information, I think it fairly safe to say that, if CCP were to completely prevent people from entering highsec, we would see a mass exodus of players who had previously populated lowsec.

I love this idea! If I ever dive into a EOL WH in a ship, or simply don't want to scan down my chain, all I have to do is fit a mining laser and I'll have a free port to kspace!

Posting in a covert butthurt gank victim thread.

Seriously though, automatically deporting gankers to lowsec once their sec status hits -5? And completely barring them from re-entering until their status improves? I don't get it, how does this improve the game?

Being -10 means you are open season for all, but instead of taking advantage of that you seek to restrict their game play with this idea. Just because other pilots do not shoot them or take on the responsibility of handing out justice, doesn't mean a change is required.

So it's a no.