These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Meaningful consequences for low standings and pirate behaviour

First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#61 - 2014-12-06 22:33:09 UTC
Dangeresque Too wrote:

I would look up the actual data on the ganking of ships for everywhere, aka not just Forge. Seeing how the main transit pipelines that see the most ganks are not in Forge... and 2 of the 3 SEO lvl 4 agents are not in Forge either. I don't have the time to check and count each one on the KB, but the first half dozen ganked freighters I looked at were catas, as well as the first half dozen marauders, catas/thrashers, and that was just going back a few days on zkill... So I'm sorry you can't understand a bit of sarcasm with slight exaggeration. But for sure there are many more times the number of ships getting ganked outside of Forge, and most of those are being ganked with dessies, not heavy hitting expensive ships.

So not exactly helping your point, so sorry for actually doing research on this... you may have responded, but you didn't deny you were wrong about only fail gankers use cheap ships...


The Forge is the most populous area in EVE and is home to the heart of the economy. By far the bulk of trade goes into and out of it and it is home to the largest population of miners and mission runners.

If your "slight exaggeration" was anywhere near being true we would see hundreds, not a paltry few dozen, ganked ships.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#62 - 2014-12-07 03:25:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Lipot wrote:
And a lot of the last round of changes delayed Concord's response.


Can i get a link? these completely passed me by.

Lipot wrote:

What people are saying that there needs to be something done that will change the risk vs reward options. Make it so that a group of ships that are worth under 100 million isk taking out a target and getting 10 billion isk in loot drop.


That ONLY ever happens when the victim puts 10bil+ worth of stuff into something that cannot tank less than 100mil worth of cats or talos's.

The victims are just as responsible for this as the gankers themselves. Dont MAKE yourself a target.

'(Yes the numbers are extreme but it has been happening more now then in the past.)'

Cause more ppl are over filling their freighters than ever before. Ganking has been nerfed so much ppl feel its ok to put so much in one ship.

Ganking is apparently at the lowest frequency it has ever been and the amount of groups pulling off ganks is visibly fewer than when i started playing this game.

Lipot wrote:

So what can be done. Find a way to keep the game play in place but balance it a bit so that the risks are worth the rewards. And since you can't counter gank as you tend not to have a ship so what is there to do? Rebalance the ships. HELL NO. So maybe open up more options for police forces to respond. Or provide a NPC corp option that would cause a response....


Victims can already put in the effort themselves to protect themselves. No mechanical change is needed, it is purely an attitude change of players trying to play the victim that needs changing.

Ive been playing for 4 years, ive never been ganked once but many have tried.

Dangeresque Too wrote:

Yeah, cause telling the afk pod pilots not to be stupid is ever going to work? That's like telling people not to put plex in a shuttle or to put ANY sort of mid slot tank on their badgers...


so you agree the victims are the 'problem', not ganking or the mechanics concerning ganking?

Dangeresque Too wrote:

And have you tried this which you say is so easy or did you just EFT it and compare scan res? Even though you can get much higher scan res than they can, doesn't mean the game will let you lock as soon as they can lock. In 95% of cases the game slightly extends their warp invul timer so you can't target them immediately like you presume. In which case your window for locking and jamming before they lock are extremely small. Do me a favor and try this out for a while and let me know how it goes. I've spent a fair bit of time trying it and from my experience with a sebo'd griffin with sebo rigs, just cause the numbers say its possible doesn't mean the server will let you do it. So that advantage, the real advantage, not the EFT advantage. Unless you live in the data center with the server, then maybe you can do it more successfully than the rest of us.


no, and i doubt you've had much practice either.

A triple sebo'd griffin locks a thrasher in 0.9 seconds. A thrasher with triple sebo AND a scan res rig locks a pod in 1.1 seconds.

now considering the server will send the signal out that the thrasher has left warp to all computers at exactly the same time, both the griffin and the thrasher can start locking at the same time (assuming they have the same latency). The server queues both locks, obv completing the griffins lock in 0.9 seconds and the thrasher for 1.1. If i remember the dev blog correctly the griffin will get a successful lock and can even queue his mods to be activated for the next server tick (which happens before the thrasher finishes his lock @1.1 seconds).

in fact, because the thrasher takes 1.1 seconds to lock i may be right in thinking it takes 2 seconds for the thrasher to get a lock AND activate mods. maybe.

It may be difficult but, if my understanding is correct and the griffin has the ganker selected and spams the lock button and F1+F2, he should have a whole second with which to lock and jam the ganker.

The 'real' advantage the ganker has is that his target is complacent (or that he can choose his complacent target). He does not have a mechanical advantage. At least whilst pods are involved.

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

Parsimony Kate
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2014-12-07 12:42:37 UTC
'Don't fly what you can't afford to lose' also applies to cargo.
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#64 - 2014-12-07 13:22:21 UTC
Jared Bertrand wrote:
So here I am, preparing to go back to null to avoid mindless ganking, and discussing with friends the lack of consequences for said actions.

As things currently stand, illegal behavior is "punished" by the slap on the wrist of losing your cheap catalyst. The security penalty is easily worked around with tags, or if the pirate in question is feeling cheeky, he pods his way around and picks up a new ship from a handy Orca alt. These pirates are also able to hide behind the skirts of law abiding NPC corporations, there-by avoiding constant wardecs.

I'm advocating a change to this. Should a player's security and faction standing drop below a certain point, the player should be dropped out of said lawful NPC corp and be moved to an NPC pirate corporation. (Yes I know under our current system we can't have players joining pirate corps, and this would need to change) Once said players are a part of such an unlawful pirate corporation, they would be legitimate targets of opportunity to players in Hi-Sec.

In addition to players hunting these pirates, house navies would agress these unlawful residents in defense of their empire space in an attempt to keep unlawful pilots out of law abiding space.

This change to the behavior of navies would make them proactive defenders of lawful citizens, while concord would remain the punishers of unlawful actions in hi-sec.

How does a person become a pirate you ask? Simple, for any unlawful activity a player participates in, the player's standing with their NPC corp decreases. Commit enough illegal acts and your NPC corp will kick you out and you land in a pirate corporation. Ideally a player could be considered a pirate in one empire, but not in others. This would allow for diverse player interactions, and also promote boarder trade hubs between the major factions.

So here are the ideas thought up by myself and a few friends. Bring on the critiques and the flames. I'm sure we'll have the gank community weighing in and calling foul. Can't wait to read the responses.



In actual fact the tide is slowly going the opposite direction in favour of the suicide gankers victims.

You will actually find far more miners & haulers in NPC corps than you will find suicide gankers. More often than not suicide gankers make it quite visible what they are doing via their corp descriptions, pilot bios, portrait appearances etc.

There are indeed consequences currently for those engaging in suicide ganking. Dependant on the ship types used and target ship the ship cost is not always that small. Flying around with -5.00 or less in security status is not without it's hazards and the planning has to be fairly meticulous. Increasing sec status is either a time consuming and hazardous task or an expensive cost via buying tags. It is not as easy a career option as it might seem I can tell you.

I sort of agree with your sentiments regarding membership of NPC corporations though. To my mind pilots should be allowed to be a member of NPC corporations for two months from creation then either have to join a player run corporation or drop into a wardeccable limbo. Of course recycling pilots to remain in NPC corporations would have to be a permable banning offence.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#65 - 2014-12-07 21:05:18 UTC
Removed an off topic post.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#66 - 2014-12-08 01:26:37 UTC
Lipot wrote:
No one is saying that change the mechanics to remove ganking. What people are saying that there needs to be something done that will change the risk vs reward options. Make it so that a group of ships that are worth under 100 million isk taking out a target and getting 10 billion isk in loot drop. (Yes the numbers are extreme but it has been happening more now then in the past.) Everyone that runs in high sec for awhile knows to be vigilant for ganks and have dozens of known gankers flagged as hostile. But that doesn't always work. So what can be done. Find a way to keep the game play in place but balance it a bit so that the risks are worth the rewards. And since you can't counter gank as you tend not to have a ship so what is there to do? Rebalance the ships. HELL NO. So maybe open up more options for police forces to respond. Or provide a NPC corp option that would cause a response....



thing is this doesn't do anything really.


A "pirate" npc corp not changing much.

Die hard bears are into pvp avoidance from the start. They won't be going lets go hunt down the evil twin to caldari provisions with the half assed perma war dec proposed.

THen you have people like me who can pvp who won't either. My empire interests when main can be assed to leave empire to pvp in 0.0 pays for that. I won't be going hunt the "bad" guy npc corp. I don't want them looking for my empire alts. It hurts the isk flow to the 0.0 char. Very bad for me as I make no claims of being uber, I tend to not want ships anymore quite a bit. So I want my isk flowing as smooth as possible. Having "evil twin" caldari provisions have my empire isk makers on watchlists....not a sound business decision to make this happen basically.

And this doesn't even guarantee wide banding of empire pvp'ers. first you have RvB...those peeps already doing their thing. They have real war targets to fight. And they have rules. Since a half assed war dec you wouldn't even get 100% guarantee this would not be allowed by them. This half assed war dec may still have evil twin caldari provisions not be allowed on their allowed kill lists.


Then many empire pvp corps are quite possibly people who cba to even gank/grief with threat concord and corp'd up to dec bear corps to avoid that. They won't be joining the fight here. They are similar players themselves.

And well...if they wanted real pvp they'd dec another empire pvp crew to get it. They don't, they dec mining corps with no pvp presence. then post whine threads about the miners avoiding war decs. As if this was some unexpected behavior they couldn't see coming.
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#67 - 2014-12-08 09:50:35 UTC  |  Edited by: McChicken Combo HalfMayo
If people fit and flew their ships properly, ganking would be almost non-existent.

Ganking and piracy doesn't need a nerf. The knowledge of players just needs a buff.

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#68 - 2014-12-08 10:11:43 UTC
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
If people fit and flew their ships properly, ganking would be almost non-existent.

Ganking and piracy doesn't need a nerf. The knowledge of players just needs a buff.


Unlikely, that assumes people only do it for profit. Given you get (near) empty freighters blowing up, this suggests profit is not the only motivation.

I find it slightly hilarious that our logistics pilots would rather go a circuitous route in low rather than fly gate to gate in high sec, even post phoebe Lol Tells you all you need to know, really.
Parsimony Kate
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2014-12-08 12:22:47 UTC
I heartily suspect that even if a mass conspiracy to be less stupid took place amongst high sec miners and haulers etc, and we all started fitting our ships 'properly' (and that in itself is open to interpretation), I don't imagine that ganking would suddenly stop. Gankers would adapt their strategy and continue. Not everyone runs from a challenge.

My issue with CCP adding more protection to high sec to squeeze out gankers is that whatever they do will just make life in high sec more predictable and mundane. That in turn encourages people to be logged on but absent, it gives less incentive for people to join with other players in social activities (less danger means its even easier to go solo) and it continues to separate us from the rest of the game. These don't appear to be things which CCP is in a huge hurry to encourage for (hopefully) obvious reasons.

I'm not sure I understand why some people think that ganking is so prevalent either? A few months ago I ran into another miner who was having a huge girly fit of hysteria (I am an actual girl and I swear I couldn't have done any better) about CODE being 'everywhere' and 'driving us out of EVE' and 'ruining all our lives' etc Roll. So I took a look through the kill records of their then 271 membership and found a surprisingly small amount of kills and destroyed assets. Mr. Wetting-His-Frilly-Bloomers Miner insisted that CODE had been rolling hundreds of freighters, Orcas and barges every single day, but I couldn't see any indications of this actually being true, the reality was really much less dramatic and exciting! Of course there are other ganking groups as well as CODE, but whichever way you look at it, it just isn't the cataclysmic epidemic some of us like to think it is!

Obviously there will be some who get unlucky on multiple occasions and some routes are going to be problem areas, but we are not obliged to give into the pro-ganker propaganda! We have the right and the capability to think for ourselves! So lets... you know... do that! Yeah!
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2014-12-08 12:47:05 UTC
Parsimony Kate wrote:
...We have the right and the capability to think for ourselves! ...


Is there a tech II module for that?
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2014-12-10 17:55:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Wolf Incaelum
Dangeresque Too wrote:
You haven't seen the thousands of marauders and officer fit battleships and freighters being hit with catas then I'm guessing. It is way cheaper and more effective with just a few more people than using 100m tier 3 battlecruisers to do the hit. If you are using a large expensive ship to make the hit, maybe you just need to find a couple friends and use less expensive ships and do it the right way.


First off, I didn't say that you can't use smaller ships to kill a bigger ship. I said that you need A larger ship to gank A larger ship. I was referring to solo ganking. Of course you can take a fleet of cats to kill one marauder or "officer fit" (what ever THAT means) battleship. Hell, you can probably use a fleet of frigs to take down a marauder or battleship if you have enough of them. The problem there is that the individual pay off is greatly reduced. Do you want to take a fleet of dessies and have to split the profit 10+ ways, or do you want to solo your target with a larger ship and keep all the profit for yourself?

Secondly, anyone who thinks that an "officer fit" anything is going to save them from being ganked, then they deserve to get blown up and podded. The only thing having an officer fit means is that you have a decent amount of money. Presumably enough money to replace your fancy ship if you lose it. If you don't have enough to replace it, it means that (1) you probably shouldn't be flying it, and (2) you probably spend the vast majority of your money on a fit that is more expensive than the hull.

Dangeresque Too wrote:
I think you mis-understood him on that. For example, this guy, Aaaarrgg, he has been -10 for years, yet it doesn't seem to me like it inhibits his enjoyment or gameplay much at all. He flies all over hi-sec, ganks anything he wants (miners, haulers, pods, freighters, mission runners, etc). No, you don't see -10 players trying to do normal hi-sec PvE, I don't think that was the point. Players that are generally in the criminal status don't do hi-sec PvE to begin with, that just isn't what they do. I know some guys that gank and do PvE and wormholes etc, and they gank until they get a few points down, then they grind back up, rinse and repeat. But as a whole -10 pilots are not wannabe carebears that really wish they could fly around in battleships doing lvl 4's like you are suggesting. And it isn't exactly hard to move around as a -10, dessies get through most things just fine, though I usually see a lot of them in interceptors as you can't catch those after the warp changes. And quite a lot of them still also just pod around. If -10 was so horribly inconvenient then why do we constantly see situations where guys running lvl 4's getting ganked by a dozen -10 pilots, or freighters get hit at the same time by several dozen -10 pilots?


Suppose someone wanted to stop ganking for a while and pursue other hisec activities. Mining, perhaps (which is rare and unusual), or maybe a ganker decides that he needs a quick, large influx of ISK and chooses to run missions for a while (also somewhat unlikely). Or maybe he's decided that he wants to take up ninja looting for a while. Ninja looting would be a real pain in the ass as KOS. And forget about going to any of the hubs for any trading that you might want to do. Most people would just choose to go with an alt. But in doing that, you either have to pay CCP more money for a second account or you have to log off of your main character to switch to another character on the same account, which causes what ever you are trying to do to take more time because you can't have both characters active at the same time.

It's not that it's particularly difficult to live in HS as KOS. You just have to take a little bit more care. You can't cut as many corners or be as complacent. It's challenging because you have to pay attention to things and be a little more accurate. You have to remember things like it's not a good idea to just fly straight to a station; you need to use an insta dock/warp and d-scan the station before you dock. It's just another way to live in HS. It has its benefits, but it comes with some serious drawbacks and limitations. Nobody can argue that life as a pirate doesn't sufficiently implement risk vs. reward. People just think that there are no consequences because they refuse to take the time to TRY piracy for themselves. The same way you get all these hisec dwellers who talk about how ****** and "stagnant" nullsec is...even though they've never been there to try it for themselves. They just repeat what they hear all the other sheep say, and inevitably develop a deluded perspective.

ANARCHYFOREVAAARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!

Dirritat'z Demblin
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2014-12-10 18:11:13 UTC
While I'm pretty sure it won't hit the gabkers as much as the OP thinks, I think that Idea has something to it... Well, mostly because I always wanted to join the Serpentis :D
Iain Cariaba
#73 - 2014-12-10 18:22:18 UTC
Parsimony Kate wrote:
...We have the right and the capability to think for ourselves! ...

StraightUghSmileBig smileLolLolLolLolLolLolLolLolLolLolLol

Oh wait... you were serious?

Take it from someone who deals with large numbers of people on a daily basis. People don't think. They react and consume, but very rarely think.
Parsimony Kate
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2014-12-11 21:59:02 UTC
Now you don't you know - cynicism makes the lickle baby jesus cry!