Crime & Punishment

I thought everything you guys said was pretty much spot on. There was some peripheral suggestions I wasn't that keen on, but on core issues 100% agree. These issues aren't just about maintaining High Sec PvP, it's really about maintaining the Sandbox. Don't expect a rational and reasonable discussion on the forums, this is an old battle that can be traced back to Trammel, and many of the newer MMO gamers that started out on Themepark MMORPGs don't even speak the same language. "Choices and consequences for instance means something entirely different to them than it does us.

What I really want you to do is to really take the message to CCP and drive it home. If CCP understands the issues (and after hearing CCP Greyscale I'm really not sure they do) and still pushes towards destroying the Sandbox at least we'll know it's by design and not by accident out of ignorance and incompetence

I really like the issues u guys addressed. High sec pvp has been dying out in the past year or so. There are no more real highsec pvp fleet battles going on for a long a time. Nobody uses rr fleet bs's anymore. Why the need since u got neutral logistics. Personally i don't feel the need to drag logistics behind all the time. There's no challenge in a fight then. Only if heavily outnumbered its an option for me .Neutral rr on can flipping frigs is just ********. Ecm drones, i only use them as a gtfo option if i'm getting pawned, i dont use them to perma jam a target for half the fight.

Surrendering during a wd, there should be a penalty. In RL if u surrender in a war do u just go back to jolly do what u'v done before? No, if u surrender in a war u'r resources will be available to the winners. ( in eve, Posses, Pi, etc..) As far as i remember if some1 surrenders, the other party has option to accept or not . There should be an option where a surrender can be accepted or rejected if terms are not met. Maybe in the form of a mutual agreed amount to accept the surrender. If said amount is paid that corp/alliance cant be decked again for the next 3,6 months or what ever.. There needs to be some repercussion in this matter.

To the Justin Bieber lookalike over there. One thing people often forget, is that we are all normal people looking to have some fun. U'r character does'nt define u as u are in RL. Most Pvp'rs do have an industrial alt or, yes a even miner to keep the purse funded. So any changes made to the game affects most people in more than 1 way.

Eve is balanced by profit and loss. There need to be property loss for an industrial/pve pilot to make profit. good high sec pvp is there so it doesn't get out of balance and also teaches the new player to fly smart or introduce him/her to the thrill of pvp( be it pve,industry,miner etc...) Why play a game if there is no challenge to it? In RL u can walk out u'r front door and get shot by some psycho or run over by a car. in some ways this is Eve and that what makes the game. Every1 in eve makes a difference to the game, no matter how small.

Good luck with u'r submission to CCP, a lot off old players that evolved with the game are leaving or not re-subbing, or not even inviting any1 in from other mmo's due to certain accpects to the game which has made it boring.

That's my 50c and wall of text let u'r balls fall where they may..

support everything u guys r saying

Can't really shove so many quotes into a reply, so I'll just address your points in order:

I addressed the "adaptability" issue to the suspect flag in some threads in GD. Basically, the way "scummies" will adapt will be via the use of ever-increasing groups that provide neutral assistance. Sure, I'll take a can, and get flagged to the whole universe. However, I'll have twenty guys off-grid ready to warp in and assist should someone decide to be the hero. This is bad, because the end result will be that blobbing won't just be encouraged, it will be necessary. Of course, if you (or other people) view blobbing as a good thing, then there's not much I can say. I'd just have to conform to whatever new military doctrine becomes the most efficient.
...

I disagree that victims don't have any safety mechanisms. Having a can thief become flagged to the whole corporation is actually quite a powerful tool. Most people simply choose not to utilize it. Just because this useful tool goes unused, doesn't mean that blame should be shifted toward the "scummies." There's no possible way that a can thief can prevent the corporation he's stealing from from having pvp members of its own that are able to protect the miners. Actually, as a long-time mercenary, when I sometimes asked potential clients if they'd like to buy pvp training and/or information on how to protect their corporation, the responses I received were along the lines of "wut? but den wed hav to buy them pvp shipz n stuff..." These people never ended up hiring mercenaries in the end, because they didn't expect that protection would cost money. This ineptitude, this greed, and not a lack of safety mechanisms, is why these people get taken advantage of.
...

Many "yarrbears" actually don't fly cheap ships. The ones that do are much more easily dealt with. Do you know how easy it is to kill a Rifter? Even a hardcore carebear corporation should have a guy or two who can fit some ECM Blackbirds with assault launchers.

As far as ganking the 100m ISK Iteron goes, all I can say is, it's not a good idea to haul 100m ISK of stuff in an untanked, 3,000 EHP ship. Heck, you can get a hauler's EHP over 10,000 with just shield extenders. The thing is, most suicide-gank victims are too ignorant to even consider that possibility. I have a 27,000 EHP Mammoth that would need at least three 1400mm volleys to kill, and if half the stuff drops, I'd need to be carrying over a PLEX's worth of stuff just for the gankers to break even. People can carry less at a time, use heavily-tanked combat ships to carry low-volume items, train for and use T2 haulers, freighters, and Orcas, use courier contracts, etc etc. The tools are all there. If I pop an unfit Sigil with three billion ISK of prints and datacores inside, can you truly, objectively blame me for that person's suffering?

That said, I would support a moderate amount of EHP increases for haulers and mining barges.

Biggest alliance is Goonswarm at 8,057 members. Based on their being in no wars, war dec cost would be 50m+(8057*500k), which totals up to 4,078,500,000 per week. Such a huge amount could affect merc contract work such as disrupting null-sec logistics like Moar Tears, etc. do with shooting at freighters in high sec.

I'm going to try answer some of your questions from a High Sec care bear pov because that is what I am

The issue we have in Eve today when it comes to ganks and War dec's is that too many people want it easy.

This is Eve and you always have an option, its up to you which option you take.

I have only ever been ganked once and I completely deserved. (Carrying 200m+ of stuff in a bestower doh!!!)

I had a number choices open to me

1. I could either go after the person who ganked me

2. Come on the forums and cry like a ***** over how unfair it is

3. Learn from my mistake and make sure it didn't happen again.

I went for option 3 and so far (a number of years later) I haven't been ganked since.

I do lots of mining, the difference between me and many others is that I do not mine afk, I watch D-Scan, I scout out the systems where I mine (use various sites to check kill mails for the system stats) so I know which corps/players to watch out for, have a good balance between tank and mining yield for my hulks / macks.

I also do lots of hauling in a freighter and I always use an alt or corp mate to scout each system before jumping and use the web warp trick.

If the value of my cargo is high enough then I will use a courier contract.

As for War Dec's, again you have a choice.

You can either just dock up and wait it out, fight, hire somebody to fight on your behalf.

I get sick and tired of seeing 50+ man corps complaining that its unfair and that they can't win against a 10 man corp.

Even if those 50+ are only 2 months old and the 10 man corp all have 100m SP you can still give them a hell of a fight.

You should spend some time reading up on how the Goons prep their noobs and you will see that a group of new players can be a force if they are prepared to fight.

I have been involved in a number of high sec wars and I got my arse kicked each time but you know what.. IT WAS GREAT !!!!

I leaned a lot from each fight simply because the guys who were doing the killing thought it was great that regardless of the numbers I was always prepared to give it a go.

I most cases they actually gave me what ever mods dropped and some isk as well as some great advice.

I hate the use of the word "consequences" It should not be down to the game mechanics to provide "consequences" but the players. It is not CCP's fault if people are not prepared to use the tools which are available to them

I'm a high sec carebear too, and I agree 100%.



Only once, wow that is pretty darn good. I can't count how many times I've been ganked .. usually my mistake one way or another too :/ .. doesn't mean the game is designed wrong though. Each gank is a learning experience.

Overall the round table discussion was constructive and mature, even if it's not from a point of view I share. And in response to the comment that most high sec players "just want griefers out of EVE" .. not really. Villains make a fictional universe more interesting, as annoying as it is to be on the receiving end of their villainy. A few too many people are trying to play the villain IMO, kind of makes it cliché after a while, but it doesn't mean we need to wipe out villains altogether. Maybe fewer, but smarter, classier villains?

When you jump into a system in your Industrial and 10 people from 6 different corps all target and scan you, something is seriously wrong with the game balance.

I already explained it: We all have the option not to play EVE if we don't like some aspect of it or changes being made. This renders all debate moot. Therefore, keep options out of it, otherwise I'll just trump you again and again.

Yes, carebears have the options to do this and do that and bla bla bla. And, regardless of the "security" changes CCP will make, pirates also will have options they can use to get around it and cope with the changes. In light of the "options" argument the position of scum boils down to: "I DON'T LIKE IT I DONT WANNA WAAAA WAAA!!!"

For instance: Scum argument: "Carebears have options, therefore changes should not be made." Counter argument: If the changes are made, you will have the option not to flip that can when there's 30 people in the belt. You have the option to scout an easier target. Therefore, the changes should be made."

See how that works: it's called mutual mootability.

Also: There are always options. Saying "well there's options so leave things as they are" is just a silly argument with 0 thought and effort put into it. It's one of those bad "stock arguments" people who can't be bothered to think spew out.

Yes, I'm excited to work out the adaptation.

Maybe in the future, instead of mass-ganking at hubs and choke points, it will be more ad hoc in peripheral systems. Because not only would the ganker get blowed up, but the person who loots the wreck would now be free game to everyone nearby. It would just create one gigantic fight where everyone is killing eachother trying to be the one that gets away with the loot.