It's not griefers vs CCP, it's griefers vs people who don't like to acknowledge that there are other people in the game. The miners should learn that Eve isn't a safe and cuddly place and watch out for griefers, sitting there in a crowd of expensive and untanked ships is just asking for it (and I say that as someone who spent the first part of my career mining).

A. That doesn't even make any sense
B. You clearly don't understand how the insurance mechanic works or why it's that way
C. You can't fix the stupid miners refusing to tank their Hulks or pay attention to the space around them, which is the real issue (it's not hard to put 2 and 2 together if you see a couple negative sec Thrashers show up in the belt)
D. Way too exploitable. Either form a chat channel to hang out and have your social experience in or man up and get a corp, with associated benefits/dangers.
E. T1 ships are still pretty amazing when used right. And look at the fanfest vids and such, they're working on balancing moon mats already.
F. No safety in game where nothing is safe for you, it's way too exploitable and totally against all of what Eve is.
G. lol, scamming is completely in keeping with the game's rules and is, in fact, encouraged if anything. If it looks to good to be true and you click it anyways, it's your fault for not reading the fine print.
H. Alts are completely disassociated with mains, so you'd never know who they are anyways.
I. You can already see that it's a player, you just have to open your eyes.
J. You can already see who has a bounty or not, just learn to set up your overview.

And if you're going to continue to whine about not being safe in Eve, a game where safety is something you fight for, not something that's given to you, then maybe Eve isn't the game for you. The door is that way, we won't hate you if you leave.

So far the OP has managed to soundly refute every argument posed against their idea. While I don't completely agree 100% with the idea I can say that most of it is sound. There IS a problem with a 300m mining ship and how weak it's defenses are. Insurance does suck but that's how it goes with Tech 2 ships. If that is going to change for the Hulk, it will need to change for all Tech 2 ships. I don't see that happening.

I can fly a Hulk on several of my accounts and I have mined before but honestly have never experienced being ganked in high sec. It was always in Null and I was running D-Scan constantly...a major pain in the ass that needs to be corrected. The game stops being fun when you have to spam click a single button to perform one mind numbing process just to stay safe. Sorry...that's a mechanic that needs correction. Period.

Overall I agree with the OP. I am not going to nitpick the parts I don't agree with in the OP as they are minor in the grand scheme.

My Sweet Lupiah,

You're missing the point. Whine Tanking, to function, must produce noticeable disruptions in CCPs bottom line. CCP knows they need paying customers. They have over 300,000 now. If you're going to wrestle CCP into changes via Whine Tanking you and yours need to terminate your accounts - en mass - to generate sufficient ripple among that 300,000+ for them to take notice. Lacking sufficient ripple, Whine Tanking will prove ineffectual. CCP needs customers but they donGÇÖt need any one specific customer and they donGÇÖt need you. CCP sells EvE as a harsh and brutal universe. The approach has treated them well so far. Until you prove to them via mass account terminations that EvE should be less harsh and brutal in your little corner of the universe, your Whine Tanking will prove ineffectual.

Perhaps I misunderstand your intent however. Perhaps youGÇÖre not engaged in Follow Through Whine Tanking. Perhaps you have no intent to Follow Through. Perhaps you merely wish to Whine. Very well. YouGÇÖve found the place for it. Whine away! One caveat, however. As youGÇÖre discovering, the EvE forums are every bit as harsh and brutal as the in-game universe.

Welcome to EvE Lady Lupiah,
WeGÇÖll see if you have the mettle for it,
Luv,
DireNecessity

Yes...continue to be an ignorant fool, typical of your mindset. What does the age of his toon have to do with the idea itself? Oh...right...it doesn't. You are just looking for an excuse to disagree because you are incapable of using your own brain to think about new ideas.

I am just going to block you again. You never have anything of value to contribute at all.

I completely agree with the OP. Drake your argument is now utterly invalid, rather than just idiotic.

To whoever linked kills of freighters for the "burn Jita" month ... nice one. It's meaningless data as it has no context, just like a hulk getting killed because I was using it as an afk bait in a WH to lure people in to thier doom is also just as utterly irrelevant to this discussion. I wonder what % of those players ganked unsubscribed because a bored null-sec alliance ruined their gameplay, without any real risk (lets face it, unless you lose systems there is not real risk for many top level Corps, or thier pilots, given jump clones).

And as for "whine tanking" needing to hit CCP's bottom line ... have you noticed that PLEX is suddenly on sale? Part of the comments above are that social players are the ones who are most likely to buy PLEX to acieve things they want in-game.

If you stop casual players being able to use Hulks / mine safely in Highsec, then you depress demand for PLEX from that highly volitile customer group, and that hits CCPs pocket. I personally would love to see PLEX use/sales data, particularly analysed by account age. I don't think we ever will, but CCP will. And yes, that's going to impact their business bottom line.

... but an Iteron V can have 20,000 cargo without blinking, and has a ton of slots to play with. The dump truck has more mid slots and generic high slots. Varying Hulk's high/low/mid slots would be an option, as would introducing a T3 exhumer with cusomisable configs.

Your faith in game dev's ability to learn from past blunders is so cute. So too the blind optimism of some in the thread that CCPS is happy that EVE keeps failing to meet its potential, despite their attempts to increase its appeal to pave players who are not in love with spreadsheets.

Accountants in space, how the accountants adore thee.

Aw, cute...a spineless, one-line meme-regurgitator who can't contribute anything to the discussion.

Play at the kiddies table until you learn how to comport yourself, sonny.


OP: I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with you. You're asking to take away some of the most basic things that make EVE great. I can understand your reasoning and the thoughts behind it, but it's just not personally to my taste.

Ok, here's an option to protect the new players:

Supershield v1
Expands defenses of trial qualified ships to be more in line with the defenses enjoyed by capitals.
Very short term use, only available to accounts under 2 weeks in age.
Can't be traded, nor can it be used on another account. In other words, it's a complete account lock.
It would work down to 0.4 sec status, but doesn't work any deeper then that. This would give the new pilot a chance to get back to 0.5+ space without the sudden and violent end of their ship due to a very simple to make mistake. Do feel free to shoot, they will take damage. Just don't expect to kill it.

This shield would burn out by the end of a normal trial period and would start warning the pilot that it's about to expire and that they will become vulnerable to normal attack mechanics within 72 hours.

This would protect the new players looking to get a taste of what Eve is about, but would also leave them vulnerable to a well executed trap to catch them.

This would effectively end the grief aimed towards the new players, while letting them get used to how the actual mechanics work.


Call it the New Player Protection Act.

-suicide ganking is part of the game except when it become harrasment.
-new players get to learn from these Experiances at an early stage is very much a good and for them probly a bad thing
-people that take Serious Spaceship Bizniz to a new low should be shot by Concord asap
-and Im in agreement for Insurance changes see another post topic in Assembly hall, As Its officially not to of any one use.

Well, any ship is gankable in high sec. 29 billion ship to your rookie ship. I remember losing my rookie ship transporting a few true sansha amps. Life in eve is hard can't deal just quit. Evidently a lot of people are still here. Its just the few who ***** and ***** about it.

Oh? Where did I state that they'd be invulnerable? Where have I ever stated that this couldn't be modified? Are you going to post tripe and crap about how it's just a bad thing, or are you going to make an actual suggestion to make it better, or at least workable, from your point of view?

Until you make a constructive post of some kind, versus this type of flamebait, I'm going to classify you as a latent troll until proven otherwise and ignore anything further from you.

indeed. new toons make excellent bait. :D

You offering up Goonswarm to help mentor new players? Oh wait, they already do that: they teach them how to greif other new players out of EVE, and how to pay for subs with PLEX rather than pay CCP actual US$.

Simple:

A ship that can destroy a 250mil ship should cost 250mil or damn close.

5mil V250mil is bullsh*t

I dont want to start a trend, and I dont want to say too much. But there is a very viable way of stopping suicide gankers... Its not been there long.

Use your head.

Actually, it is hard. You tell me how to stop a hulk from getting suicide ganked by 4 destoyers. It's not possible, especailly for newer players. CONCORD protects gankers, and people with wanted bounties on them. Broken system is broken.

EVE is about largest wallet wins. Happens all the time, and that's ok. It inspires people to make more ISK. But there is no credible defence to suicide ganking at the moment, and that's broken. PvP should never be certain kill, any more than having a big shiny warship should never guarantee victory without skill.

haha notice how those who oppose such suggestions are always the gutless rats incapable of fighting a fair gun fight and so make themselves feel big by picking on the very people trying t help provide the very ships they fly and ammo they shoot, in this that is supposed to be an economy driven game.

less alt accounts might make the gankers appreciate the miners hard work to keep the chain of supply and demand going more.

i think it needs some refining of course but i support this. they always bang on about balance when making updates but where is the balance for the industrialists? it needs to change! as said it doesn't matter your views on it the fact is this will only drive away new players and leave ccp with no income. then you will have no game to gank in at all.

Theft is fine and is part of the game but i feel something like can flipping is more an exploit, as i explain and make case for here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114684&find=unread

its time to start balancing the odds for those who do the hard work. its not about stopping criminality and PvP and its not about making the game 100% safe. its just about evening the odds, its about or old friend "balance", and matching things up in the respective sectors of space.

Ha! Its oh so simple for all the Rich Btch (IRL) Players, with no life and their multi accounts to sit and say this is what you need to do to get along. But some of us don't just have money to throw away. And yes we can join a corp and team up, we do, but that only covers maybe 75% of game play at most. But there will always be times where e are left to our own devices.

Now i agree PvP is an important part of the game and that there is always risks and such.

But seriously, when did it become acceptable to pick on the little guy. Its utterly pathetic! Id like to say you wouldnt do it IRL, but i dont know. Your probably the type of people who would beat partners and children cos it makes you feel big.

But your not, your crap. You have simply played long enough to earn enough ISK and train enough skills to fly these ganking ships. And now you hide in high sec getting your little kicks hitting at the hard workers working to provide the materials you all need. If you were actually any good, truely had any skill, you would P*** of and find a real fight, more evenly matched.

If the consensus is that ganking is fine, then sure ill go with that, ill watch my back and just try to get on. But dont act like your the high and mighty for doing it. If we're playing it that way then accept your role; you are the Scum, the lowest of the low of Eve and nothing more.

The problem with ganking is that you can't wrangle up some corpmates and have them help you out.

Let us fly ships that actively protect a friendly. After-the-fact repair is no good. Neither is buffing the Hulk which only encourages solo play in an MMO. Give us Aegis Destroyers: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=97610

What???

I wish people would read and think before they pose weird questions and make points.

Im referring to Time not physical Activity. What only covers 75% of time playing is teaming up with people in a corp. You see its all there in that one sentance. "But there will always be times where we are left to our own devices" ergo refering to the remainder of the time spent playing, the 25% you question, as being solo play.

Ok, just to be clear:

• 75% Team Play
-------------------------- = 100% of time spent playing.

• 25% Solo Play

I like your ideas and perhaps it should be more subtle.

But the fact is High sec is supposed to be Low Risk... and before anyone starts crying i'm not asking for no risk but it SHOULD be low. Yes it should because other wise CCP would not have made a gradient of Sec statuses at all. The gradient from High to Low to Nul is supposed to indicate the varying levels of risk. But as it stands the risk in high sec is far too high.

The only suggestion i have made on this matter before was with regards to Can Flipping. That being that if a theft from you can be recognized, in order to flag another player, then it should not be a great leap to recognize those items as yours and allow you to take them with no consequence no matter where they reside so long as that place is accessible to you.

The entire point of this idea was simply to suggest something that would create more balance in game play. Those who want to steal would have to use the proper tools for the job, such as a hauler to grab a large amount, less i simply take my haul away before they get a hauler there. Yet as it currently stands they can leave our goods in their own cans for half hour while we are powerless to ever attempt to get them back. Furthermore to this point is that if they had to use proper tools in order to get away with stealing large worth while amounts they would now be in a hauler NOT an over the top fighting vessel. So solo or group miners would be afforded the opportunity to chase them down and destroy them while they are in a relatively defenseless ship, and with no consequence for doing so due to the aggression flag they picked up when stealing that players items. Now that would be true Risk Vs Reward and far more balanced game play.

Now i'm not saying this is a great idea and perhaps it is not truely workable, but at least it is in the right direction.

No i'm fully aware of what high sec space is like At the Moment. But my definition is based on what CCP and the tools they implement suggest it should be.

Ok Drake i'm going to spell it out for you nice and clear because you really need to stop acting as though people with the same sort of views as me are wrong.

Neither you Or I are wrong at this point.

What it comes down to is weather OVER ALL players decide they want a purely Pro friendly game with very few new players entering. (Which personally i only see leading to stagnation and collapse)

OR

Whether OVER ALL players decide they want a full Sandbox RPG that encompasses all levels of difficulty and security. As such providing a much more low risk high security areas that enable new players to grow more easily and so keeps the game fresh.

Game age doesn't make anyone less or more privy to what EVE is or isn't. Trying to say someone has no right to make suggestions is like saying a person straight out of whatever school they were learning at has no right to work as whatever they were learning to be until they worked as what they were for a year.

There is all kinds of content in eve, and just because PvP is part of the game doesn't mean PVP is the game.

You cant expect these people to have any skill to do these sorts of things you have listed. They require true skill knowledge and tactics because the things there actually pose a threat to them. That's why they so aggressively oppose such changes as suggested, they are only capable of feeling big by killing the defenseless and Industrialists.

I know he is on my side and i appreciate what he is saying. My point is trying to get that across to guys like you is like talking to a brick wall. You will never see and take on and try to understand others points of view because you only want things they way they suit you.

So Suicide gank the Suicide gankers?

Anywho, It took me a little while to remember what the name was, but alot of what you see from people in eve can be attributed to what is known as "Stockholm Syndrome"

Basically people get to a point where their enemy is their friend, and they start to do things they normally wouldn't do because for whatever reason it now seems to be the right way to do things.

I can Genuinely tell you from experience from the multiple corp mates i have had that Stockholm Syndrome does exist in eve.

Nooblet prattle