Hi there,

I would like to say, I too understand your frustration but I cant support your thread, because you clearly dont understand the way Eve works, and what Eve IS.

((I'd like to say the people who are saying "buffer tank your hulk", "tank your hulk better" are idiots and have obviously never been suicide ganked in a hulk. Even with the best possible buffer or active tank with max skills (except officer fit that is), you will never survive a suicide gank against 3 well fit destroyers))

I also agree that this situation is a problem for new players and potentially stunts CCPs and Eve Online's growth as a company.

Instead, I would sugest that Suicide Ganking should be mentioned in the mining tutorial missions or something of the sort. I think players expectations of highsec are that it should be "safe", at least when you start playing Eve. I dont think we need to change the fact that it isn't safe, we need to change new players expectations so that they are more in line with the reality.

I also agree that tech 2 ship insurance payouts are terrible and need looking at.

Otherwise though, the rest of your post is rediculous.

If you let this thread die (like you should) and start a new proposal to give new players a more realistic impression of their relative safety in high sec, I will support it.

Ps;



It is against the EULA (or whatever the hell its called) to pick on players in newb entry systems. You can get them banned for that.

So tell me oh brilliant EVElopediapoddie psychophant the answer to this:

1. EVE used to be one world with no differential in what you could do, where.
2. A selection of actions that are fine in most of EVE are now bannable under the EULA if done in new player starting systems.

Guess what, since I last played, and now, CCP has introduced safe zones into EVE. I didn't, they did. Logically the next thing is for those to get bigger, if the subscriptions targets are not met.

To those who attack the poster not the ideas: you pitiful creatures. Use your brain, God did give you one too. I don't know you, you don't know me, you can't possibly know how much I know about this game, this industry, or simple business reality from the age of the toon.

Oh and to the nice poster who said PLEX is money in the bank. No, it's money that was in the bank. CCP had to let some people go last year due to the financial downturn, you can infer they have no huge pile of cash from past PLEX sitting about. What they have is a debt to players on thier financials. Times have been hard, they need new players to join, pay, and stay, paying with real money. CCP have already "carebeared it up" in various areas of the game over the past few years. Guess what the cold, hard business reality is likely to push them to do next. So give CCP better ideas to achieve the goal of increasing new player retention past the 3 month point, or bite your fingers rather than type.

For my part: Add Highsec ganker 24 hour cooldown flag, which makes them attackable by anyone, and poddable by anyone, and which pays bounties on them 50% to someone who kills thier ship (where the ship must be value >20% of the bountry to be a qualifying kill), and 50% to whoever kills thier pod. Ganking should also have higher security and NPC faction hits.

As drawn out by the discussion above, the real issue is not that hulks are unsafe, but that the Concord mechanics mean that people with bounties on them ARE safe. Spaceship Barbie with her huge bounty, horrible security status, can and does undock in her Navy Megathron, complete with superb tank. And CONCORD protect her from all random attacks, in a 1.0 system, even though she is one of the highest bounty players most players will ever actually see in the same system. Gankers should not be safer than miners in Highsec: that is simply broken.