+1 Vote

Giving null-sec more high-sec characteristics, and more null-sec characteristics for high-sec

So by this do you mean if I had a high Amarr standing 7.0+ and decided to murder some random dude I should be able to pay a fee with a standings hit to not get concorded? Or perhaps I can bribe the Amarr government to let me have my way with a highsec system?

It would mean that you get a pass but you're standings take a hit so you have to go out and run more missions before you can gank away for free. I could also see your group having to pay "kickback" money to your government as something in place of taxes because you are engaged in an irregular economic activity.

I agree but perhaps it can be less of a faction hit depending on the offense and more of an LP/isk cost. This requires the criminals to do work for the NPC empires and that the NPC empires get their pound of flesh while the criminal can continue to make highsec a wonderful place. The best analogy I can give is that, an empire can easily condone vandalism (destroying structrures) and assault (destroying ships) but they can't condone murder (podding). Perhaps for podding there will be a faction hit but for the others a heavy isk and LP cost? It would give another use for the bill system, upon commission of the crime a bill is issued that accrues interest and has a deadline to be paid. As long as it's paid the criminals can keep acting, if it isn't paid they take a faction hit and become suspect in that faction's space.

Well lets say CCP wants to stay with its core concept that ganking gets a Concord response then lets say your faction standing doesn't take a hit. Again I am not a game designer by any means but I can point you in the right thematic direction any day of the week. As for your analogy it brought me back to my favorite movie The Godfather when Michael Corleone goes to the Italian Diner to shoot the corrupt cop and the gangster that tried to whack his father.

If you haven't seen the movie in the scene just before the family Concigleri or adviser warns of the repercussions despite their political connections. They could do it but they would get leaned on hard for it. So in our game perhaps Concord does come after you for blowing someone but your standings and Isk get used to have that Concord take a lunch break and pay for it in larger bills than reasonable. Sure you will have the law come down on you but you got to go full bore as a criminal who used his Ace in the hole to make things happen. Now it should require you effort and Isk to use that Ace in the hole and you have to go back around earning the Isk and standings to use your Ace in the hole again.

Read this: Hi Sec Rising

EVE is being made worse due and its not going to be some Hi Sec apologist that turns things around.

Wait so are you saying that we should vote for James 315? I thought this was your own CSM thread?

Wait so are you saying that we should vote for James 315? I thought this was your own CSM thread?