Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sir Dangler
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 02:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello,
There's a few blogs out there discussing the risk vs reward aspect of Eve, and after reading up on evenews24 about high sec suicide ganking, the solution was obvious.
From what I can tell, a suicide gank is a risk averse action. Players who engage in this skill-less activity suffer no significant penalties. It is true that the loot fairy will sometimes be unforgiving, but this is 95% not the case. Losing a nado or talos is not a big deal. Barely losing security status is not an issue either, as this is quickly farmed back up.
To counter these risk-averse pilots conducting their non-risky operation of suicide ganking a hauler full of treasure, there should be a repercussion that is also of equivalent significance in the risk vs reward world of EvE Online.
The solution, then, is simple. When a pilot shoots another pilot in high sec that is neither wardecced or criminal, that pilot should receive a very significant security status penalty endorsed by CONCORD, since they have illegally shot another innocent carebear in high sec!
The security status of the risk averse ganker should become -10.0.
Why does it make sense that CONCORD penalizes an insignificant amount of security status, and ignores you after 15 minutes, when a ganker is clearly conducting an illegal act? Surely, that pilot should receive an important status loss.
The implications?
A ganker will therefore have to choose his target wisely, or be more tactful in his ganking operation. The risk-averse Talos ISBoxing derp will receive -10 across all his alts, but he might gain a reward out of it.
Risk vs reward!
What do you think? |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
484
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 02:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'm on a mobile, my reply will be short.
No.
I'll elaborate later. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
5198
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 02:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sir Dangler wrote:
What do you think?
I think you should have checked the "Commonly Proposed Ideas" thread. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
-áPsychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5275
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 03:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
Currently penalties for suicide ganking...
Direct Penalties: - you lose your ship - you lose any insurance you have the ship - you lose Security Status - you gain a Suspect Flag for 10-15 minutes and can be shot at by anyone and everyone in the game without penalty - you gain a Criminal Flag for 15 minutes (see: can't undock in high-sec in anything other than a pod without being CONCORDed again)
Indirect Penalties: - if your Security Status goes low enough (see: below -5.0) then you can be shot by anyone, anywhere, at any time. - if your Security Status goes below certain levels then you will find yourself less and less able to enter higher security systems without the Faction Police attacking you (you can still avoid them in smaller ships though). - with lower Security Status you will be less and less able to get new supplies from high-sec trade hubs and/or must buy from low-sec stations at a premium and/or must rely on friends/alts to resupply you. - if you want to raise your Security Status you must either kill pirate NPCs for a godawful amount of time or spend a fair bit of cash to buy the security tags needed.
Other Risks: - you botch the gank attempt and eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - the target may be tanked more than you think... resulting in a failed gank attempt where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - the target never shows and you have wasted time. - the loot that you are ganking for never drops... resulting in a failed gank where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - the gank is successful, the loot you want drops, but someone else picked it up before your friend/alt did... resulting in a failed gank where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - you don't have enough people to properly suicide gank.
tl;dr... - professional gankers (who are usually -10 already) won't care about this change and will continue on as usual. - "casual" players who want to try it once or twice just to see what it is will be discouraged from ever trying it (thus limiting their perspective in the game). - if a newbie makes a mistake (as they often do) they will be suck in a position they won't know how to crawl out of (see: they have no "support network" that the vets have, probably not enough money to buy Security Status Tags, and little understanding about how to survive in low-sec). Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
415
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 03:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
OP, you do know -10 is kind of goal for true pirates, right? had one friend who loved piracy and never got -10. Got in the -9's then for various reasons had to fix it.
Kind of losses its meaning if you get it in less than 10 seconds flat. Well let me rephrase this, in less than 10 seconds not setting up smartbomb shuttle killing sprees on say jita 4.4 undock to cause a concord cascade leading to potenial node failure (google some of these videos....they are quite fun to watch).
That and gankers take their risks. the payout may not be there or as I have seen in the past....they picked the wrong bear. They picked a bear with teeth. Or they picked a 0.0 burnout who can pvp on an empire break. Had quite a few friends shock the crap out of gankers as it was they who went boom....not my friends. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2100
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 05:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
OP, why do you read EN24? Do you want tinfoil? Because that's how you get tinfoil.
Additionally, no. There is nothing broken about suicide ganking, and if it's nerfed in any way then highsec will be proportionally nerfed as well, since CCP sees suicide ganking as one of the mechanics that keeps highsec balanced.
Also, posting in "someone ganked my freighter" thread. |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
17108
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 05:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
Pointless idea is pointless.
No.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Sirran The Lunatic
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
12
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 05:47:00 -
[8] - Quote
The above listed consequences, both actual and suggested, mean absolutely nothing. There is no tangible penalty aside from a stupidity factor. Anyone who wishes to pirate and gank will not give a rat's ass, and only serves to compell the attempt, given the increased challenge.
You can simply avoid getting ganked by paying attention, and not afk ratting, bottling, or just have a RR alt with you. But if someone wants you dead bad enough in eve, you'll die |
Dave Stark
4938
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 05:48:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sir Dangler wrote:From what I can tell
this phrase right here undermines your whole post; it communicates that you have no idea about the topic you're attempting to 'fix'. |
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
290
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 06:46:00 -
[10] - Quote
Suicide ganking is working as intended.
Move along. The Law is a point of View |
|
Luwc
Biohazard. WINMATAR.
114
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 07:22:00 -
[11] - Quote
Sir Dangler wrote:Hello,
There's a few blogs out there discussing the risk vs reward aspect of Eve, and after reading up on evenews24 about high sec suicide ganking, the solution was obvious.
From what I can tell, a suicide gank is a risk averse action. Players who engage in this skill-less activity suffer no significant penalties. It is true that the loot fairy will sometimes be unforgiving, but this is 95% not the case. Losing a nado or talos is not a big deal. Barely losing security status is not an issue either, as this is quickly farmed back up.
To counter these risk-averse pilots conducting their non-risky operation of suicide ganking a hauler full of treasure, there should be a repercussion that is also of equivalent significance in the risk vs reward world of EvE Online.
The solution, then, is simple. When a pilot shoots another pilot in high sec that is neither wardecced or criminal, that pilot should receive a very significant security status penalty endorsed by CONCORD, since they have illegally shot another innocent carebear in high sec!
The security status of the risk averse ganker should become -10.0.
Why does it make sense that CONCORD penalizes an insignificant amount of security status, and ignores you after 15 minutes, when a ganker is clearly conducting an illegal act? Surely, that pilot should receive an important status loss.
The implications?
A ganker will therefore have to choose his target wisely, or be more tactful in his ganking operation. The risk-averse Talos ISBoxing derp will receive -10 across all his alts, but he might gain a reward out of it.
Risk vs reward!
What do you think?
Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooor.... The people getting ganked actually start using their brain.
stop beeing idiots..
...
Stop blaming your own stupidity on people that abuse your lack of intelligence
|
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
565
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 12:13:00 -
[12] - Quote
You do not fix what isnt broken. |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
974
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 12:24:00 -
[13] - Quote
Rowells wrote:I'm on a mobile, my reply will be short.
No.
I'll elaborate later.
I wouldn't d that, "no" is such a wonderfull, short and yet at the same time elaborate answer. A word that stands for itself, no bullshit allowed, only rarely an insult and so incredibly direct as only a word like no (or maybe even yes) can be.
"No" is a good answer, one of the best even, to a great deal of questions asked every day.
I support "No."
Say Yes to No.
EDIT: That was a lot of edits for such a short post... (o_+¦) Stupidity should be a bannable offense.
Also This --> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216699 Please stop making "afk cloak" threads, thanks in advance. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1379
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 12:40:00 -
[14] - Quote
Luwc wrote: Stop blaming your own stupidity on people that abuse your lack of intelligence
I endorse this message 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""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Abyss Azizora
Astro Industrial Technologies
108
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 15:37:00 -
[15] - Quote
I will agree that the sec status hit for suicide ganking does need to be MUCH higher than it currently is, as you said it can be replaced very fast, hell a single day in fact.
But going instant -10.0 is WAY too far in the other direction, it should be a large drop, but not anywhere near THAT large. |
Emizeko Chai
Freight Club
29
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 16:27:00 -
[16] - Quote
Sir Dangler wrote: It is true that the loot fairy will sometimes be unforgiving, but this is 95% not the case. ... What do you think?
I think you don't know the difference between 95% and 50%. |
Jur Tissant
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 17:01:00 -
[17] - Quote
Then where would the achievement be in acquiring -10 sec? Think of all those hard-working gatecampers. |
Vic Jefferson
Life. Universe. Everything. Clockwork Pineapple
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 19:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
Without suicide gankers, there wouldn't be the necessary risk factor in hi-sec, and the risk/reward balance of hauling would be broken. 100% Safe, AFK hauling, sometimes in max cargo t1 industrial ships would not be a good thing.
While you probably think the penalties should be harsher, and I most certainly think the penalties should be lighter, there is inherently more damage to be done by making them too severe. When it becomes too much work/hassle/effort to just to gank, you'd end up giving too much power to the AFK menace, and you'd severely devalue the time of people doing it right, i.e. destroying a profession due to your own sloth. If you made them lighter, than you would lower the bar for 'enforcement' or 'natural selection' and end up improving the value associated with proper hauling.
People that want something in exchange for nothing in this game....ugh.
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
277
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:59:00 -
[19] - Quote
As a carebear at heart, having been a victim myself to a suicide gank, I can honestly say...no. A slight-moderate increase in sec status hit, maybe. Immediate -10, absolutely no. |
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
277
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:02:00 -
[20] - Quote
Jur Tissant wrote:Then where would the achievement be in acquiring -10 sec? Think of all those hard-working gatecampers.
Or, a medal. |
|
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
1317
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:25:00 -
[21] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Currently penalties for suicide ganking...
Direct Penalties: - you lose your ship - you lose any insurance you have the ship - you lose Security Status - you gain a Suspect Flag for 10-15 minutes and can be shot at by anyone and everyone in the game without penalty - you gain a Criminal Flag for 15 minutes (see: can't undock in high-sec in anything other than a pod without being CONCORDed again)
Indirect Penalties: - if your Security Status goes low enough (see: below -5.0) then you can be shot by anyone, anywhere, at any time. - if your Security Status goes below certain levels then you will find yourself less and less able to enter higher security systems without the Faction Police attacking you (you can still avoid them in smaller ships though). - with lower Security Status you will be less and less able to get new supplies from high-sec trade hubs and/or must buy from low-sec stations at a premium and/or must rely on friends/alts to resupply you. - if you want to raise your Security Status you must either kill pirate NPCs for a godawful amount of time or spend a fair bit of cash to buy the security tags needed.
Other Risks: - you botch the gank attempt and eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - the target may be tanked more than you think... resulting in a failed gank attempt where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - the target never shows and you have wasted time. - the loot that you are ganking for never drops... resulting in a failed gank where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - the gank is successful, the loot you want drops, but someone else picked it up before your friend/alt did... resulting in a failed gank where you eat the cost of the ship and gain a security hit (and 15 minutes of idle time) for no reason. - you don't have enough people to properly suicide gank.
tl;dr... - professional gankers (who are usually -10 already) won't care about this change and will continue on as usual. - "casual" players who want to try it once or twice just to see what it is will be discouraged from ever trying it (thus limiting their perspective in the game). - if a newbie makes a mistake (as they often do) they will be suck in a position they won't know how to crawl out of (see: they have no "support network" that the vets have, probably not enough money to buy Security Status Tags, and little understanding about how to survive in low-sec).
throw in a big fine like x5 value of ship, fittings and cargo per gank, you could lose concord then.
Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |
admiral root
Red Galaxy Disband.
1145
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:35:00 -
[22] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:throw in a big fine like x5 value of ship, fittings and cargo per gank, you could lose concord then.
That would be absolutely horrible. Removing Concord would only work if new tools were provided to replace them. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff |
CW Itovuo
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
17
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 04:35:00 -
[23] - Quote
Sir Dangler wrote:Hello,
risk-averse
You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.
|
Bertral
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 12:31:00 -
[24] - Quote
You could have waited for Burn Jita to happen before complaining about suicide ganking. You would have had a lot more support ! |
Elliecsientie
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 13:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
Sir Dangler wrote: another innocent carebear in high sec!
Really? There are none not guilty of expecting no risk in highsec?
Sir Dangler wrote: Risk vs reward!
What do you think?
Right on. Where's the risk to your "innocent carebear" here?
|
Carmen Electra
Drunk Chaos
370
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 16:55:00 -
[26] - Quote
OP, you might want to try suicide ganking. You'll probably be asking for it to be buffed when you're done. It's not nearly as easy (or profitable) as you seem to think. |
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
167
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 17:58:00 -
[27] - Quote
my only addition to suicide ganking penalties - the suspect timer should last longer than the criminal timer, say by an extra half-hour...... For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it WILL be. |
nia starstryder
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 19:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
i find it hard to believe that everyone missed the obvious sarcasm. an instant -10 come on, that's obvious sarcasm.
seriously, I do believe there should be more penalites, such as making the criminal flag last 1 hour then SLOWLY have the danger reduced, but no one would seriously believe that an instant -10 would be good for the game. |
Nalelmir Ahashion
Omegon 42nd Core
293
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 20:02:00 -
[29] - Quote
my problem with suicide gankers is that they seem to prefer retrievers\mackinaws kills over Covetors\hulks kills.
Dear gankers, do your service for all eve players and nuke multiboxers\afk miners and gold (isk) farmers. "What's worse than a foul-mouthed eight-year-old constantly claiming he's had relations with your mother? A foul-mouthed eight-year-old constantly claiming he's had relations with your mother who thinks he's a gangser, that's what." --áAaron Birch |
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
925
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 20:48:00 -
[30] - Quote
OP...
For your heresy against HTFU and calls for nerfs we are adding a +1 to the Kill-It-Forward queue.
We look forward to murdering an innocent carebear in hisec in your name, and informing him it was you caused his demise.
Your heresy, our hands, their blood, your conscience. Stop the heresy, we will stop the slaughter.
F
Would you like to know more? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |