But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back!

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose?

Oh, and no, the market will never have any limitations on it that reduces its efficiency for the simple reason that this would be horribly bad for the market. If you absolutely have to control who transacts with you, the game already has that functionality. All it means is that you completely remove your ability to sell in bulk and/or at a high margin, though.

Yes you do. And even if you didn't, why would you want to?

Yes. Pretty much all of them do, because it's not really in their interest not to, nor is it their business to police those things.

Oh, and no, the market will never have any limitations on it that reduces its efficiency for the simple reason that this would be horribly bad for the market. If you absolutely have to control who transacts with you, the game already has that functionality. All it means is that you completely remove your ability to sell in bulk and/or at a high margin, though.

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back! Not just that, but it's worse: those doing productive things are actively helping the destroyers by providing materials, ships, ammo, and fuel! This is terrible!

Gallente blaster boat producers are probably making a killing off these ganks, and without aforementioned destruction, EvE stops running; they are giving lots of people jobs and content on the industrial side. You are always in competition with everyone else - why not sell a high volume product which you can get other people to use shutting down your potential competition? Seems like a great business opportunity. Selling goods with a short shelf life ensures business stays good too.

Also neutral alts would make implementing this impossible. If you were seriously hell-bent and wanted to use market anonymity to your advantage, why not sell catalysts a little bit cheaper than you should, wait to see who buys them in bulk, and then gank the freighter that ends up moving them to their intended party-zone? Step up your game.

The recent deluge of freighter ganking and other hisec lawlessness is a travesty. Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

Keep It Simple: set your contact standings. Everyone who is red will not be able to buy things from you on the market or through contracts
Also everyone who has war declared on your corp will not be able to buy things from you on the market or through contracts.

PvPers will have to choose carefully who they gonna shoot, because there may be more consequences than just tears
Not going to be a popular idea, thus CCP is probably not going to do it, and additionally any ideas like this will be shot down.
But it sure is interesting, hypothetically speaking :P"

So implementing this idea would not affect me one little bit, even if someone wanted to.

Morals.

Are you talking about contracts? Because Public contracts cannot be limited by sec status.

They could also use this change if it hurts the market's "efficiency" too much (how does processing fewer orders hurt efficiency?).

Congratulations, you are playing patch-proof correctly.

So all the talk about Eve having non-violent PvP in the market and stuff is smoke and mirrors? I am aware enabling socipoaths is profitable but I'm asking to limit profits in order to not enable crime. Eve would only "stop running" (under your definition) if everyone jumped on board and limted their transactions. They won't, because it's profitable not to.

Anyway must the solution always be "shoot it"? It's a sandbox, shouldn't there be more options than violence all the time?

There are. You just have to choose to use them. Your choice not to do so isn't sufficient reason to break the engine that makes the game turn around.

As is/will everyone. This idea doesn't provide a non-violent solution to what you are trying to do.

I'm all for more diversity and if PvE players have more tools that they feel comfortable using in order to "fight back", then great.

You just have to realise though, that many players within Corps/Alliances like CODE., The Marmite Collective, etc. already use their own industry/hauling alts.

Solutions can be used by anyone, even non-violent ones.

You already have violent solutions to your perceived problem. Opening up other non-violent means to fight back will also open up other fronts on which people can also fight against you.

You already have violent solutions to your perceived problem. Opening up other non-violent means to fight back will also open up other fronts on which people can also fight against you.

When the only solutions to an economic problem are "shoot the *******" and "give up and go back to trading in shiny pebbles and using an abacus" there is a need for a new solution. Eve being what it is, that needs to involve a change to mechanics.

No. Just build your own. No mechanics need to be changed in the process, and doing so would just break things and kill one of the key points of the market.

All the tools you need are there. If you can't be arsed to build it, then that's just another check-box on the list of things that aren't sufficient reason to break a core mechanic, right alongside the other ones you've offered so far.

Scipio ...

It's Petrus.


He's trolling ...

Good. I'm proposing a new way to play, not a "make everything easy-mode" button.

The recent deluge of freighter ganking and other hisec lawlessness is a travesty. Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back! Not just that, but it's worse: those doing productive things are actively helping the destroyers by providing materials, ships, ammo, and fuel! This is terrible!

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

CCP this is an enemy that only fights on his terms and has the objective of ruining the game. We want to advance and contribute to the game. Give us market pirate blacklisting, or sec status limits on orders, so we can fight them on our terms! More content for everyone and Eve grows.

Then surely you should be celebrating the Code, Marmites and the organisations they and other gankers/wardeccers have built around their activities?

They also dislike the easy-mode playstyle of bots and people in highsec that have a general disregard for their own safety.

So if I understand you correctly, you want this feature in order to use against people who get ganked because they are playing the game on easy-mode. I think the title of your thread might be a little misleading then.

Have you considered buying a permit from a New Order agent? At 10m per year, it's a real bargain.

Your logic is contrived.

I like the idea. Or maybe set tax brackets for bad standings. Basically you can charge more based on standings or sec status.

Seems like a lot of trouble for a feature that is made meaningless by the existence of alts.

I like the idea. Or maybe set tax brackets for bad standings. Basically you can charge more based on standings or sec status.

Ah, so for the best prices I should only shop on my no-pvp 5.0 sec status alt.

And this solves what exactly?

Why do you people say, "It can easily be circumvented with alts," like that's a bad thing? More people needing more alts is good for CCP, and what's good for CCP is good for EVE.

Why do you people say, "It can easily be circumvented with alts," like that's a bad thing? More people needing more alts is good for CCP, and what's good for CCP is good for EVE.

Is 5.0 sec so easy to achieve that literally every ganker has such an alt? A system like the one proposed here increases the value of "lawful" characters, be they alts or mains. Why is that a problem?

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

I think any and all of us could circumvent it with our existing complement of alts.. so lots of coding work for CCP with no new driver for more accounts.

It punishes players who go into low sec to kill pirates (say that pirate has repaired his sec status, the 'good guy' shooting him will take a sec hit in low for killing a bad guy and as a result would have to pay more in high sec to replace lost ships).

Is 5.0 sec so easy to achieve that literally every ganker has such an alt?

A system like the one proposed here increases the value of "lawful" characters, be they alts or mains. Why is that a problem?

Why do you people say, "It can easily be circumvented with alts," like that's a bad thing? More people needing more alts is good for CCP, and what's good for CCP is good for EVE.

Yep. I can't speak for "literally every ganker", but myself and every ganker (and most of the wardecers) I hang out with has them, yeah. Gotta run locators somehow.



It's not a problem. It's merely pointing out a gaping flaw in your proposal.

That being, that it would have no functional effect besides making things more of a pain in the ass for new players. It has often puzzled me why every "proposal" people come up with to combat the theoretical problem of ganking would almost always have the effect of sharply discouraging new players in some aspect of the game.

Yep. I can't speak for "literally every ganker", but myself and every ganker (and most of the wardecers) I hang out with has them, yeah. Gotta run locators somehow.

It's not a problem. It's merely pointing out a gaping flaw in your proposal.

That being, that it would have no functional effect besides making things more of a pain in the ass for new players. It has often puzzled me why every "proposal" people come up with to combat the theoretical problem of ganking would almost always have the effect of sharply discouraging new players in some aspect of the game.

New players come in at -10 sec status now? No sane marketeer looking for profit would limit by sec status over 0.0 security, since that eliminates a huge chunk of buyers.

If a new player chooses to wreck his sec status I don't see why he should be exempt from the same consequences older players face.

I don't actually have a carebearing or mining alt. -.-

It also takes a huge amount of arrogance for people to think that they could come up with an idea that would work as intended in an enetertainment product used by thousands upon thousands of very creative and dastardly gamers.

But not all of your sisters are at negative sec status either? Surely at least 1 of them is at 0.0

Plus, being the friendly type that you are, even if you were all at -10.0, you'd easliy be able to make an arrangement with someone for your market needs.

So far nobody has proposed anything that invalidates the idea's usefulness.

Let them run out of their little dessies. See what they do then. If we're lucky, they'll all migrate to Elder Scrolls Online,
and we can go back to what we do best here.

Let them run out of their little dessies. See what they do then. If we're lucky, they'll all migrate to Elder Scrolls Online,
and we can go back to what we do best here.

The recent deluge of freighter ganking and other hisec lawlessness is a travesty. Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back! Not just that, but it's worse: those doing productive things are actively helping the destroyers by providing materials, ships, ammo, and fuel! This is terrible!

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

CCP this is an enemy that only fights on his terms and has the objective of ruining the game. We want to advance and contribute to the game. Give us market pirate blacklisting, or sec status limits on orders, so we can fight them on our terms! More content for everyone and Eve grows.

"Stop playing" is exactly what griefers want. Why not take a page out of their book and make me play my way instead?

Let them run out of their little dessies. See what they do then. If we're lucky, they'll all migrate to Elder Scrolls Online,
and we can go back to what we do best here.

Only a carebear could come up with a "solution" like this.

"Gankers are making it harder to make a profit. Solution? Just stop making a profit at all! Hooray for emotional rabbit groupthink!"

You know we build all of our own stuff right?

I don't, and I freely admit it.

Although I might start, now that the industry interface is less... what's a good word for what it used to be? Horribad?

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

So... if I asked for CCP to fix the forum eating my posts your solution would be to tell me to go build my own forum system and get people using them because the tools are there?

So far nobody has proposed anything that invalidates the idea's usefulness.

As far as the original suggestion goes, in the unlikely scenario it worked at all, the few ganker corps not making their own stuff would just create a dummy corp and recruit lots of newbs to make stuff for them.

The recent deluge of freighter ganking and other hisec lawlessness is a travesty. Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back! Not just that, but it's worse: those doing productive things are actively helping the destroyers by providing materials, ships, ammo, and fuel! This is terrible!

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

CCP this is an enemy that only fights on his terms and has the objective of ruining the game. We want to advance and contribute to the game. Give us market pirate blacklisting, or sec status limits on orders, so we can fight them on our terms! More content for everyone and Eve grows.

+1

market orders based on standings, I approve.

a whole new level of flexibility, perhaps even different prices based on standings / security status

If you use standings as a metric it opens up a whole new level of market fuckery.

I can think of several people that would be set to terrible based on certain criteria, such as forum posts.

With regards to sec status, as others have said, people who are neg 10 will merely use an alt or a 3rd party to buy their stuff.

If you use standings as a metric it opens up a whole new level of market fuckery.

I can think of several people that would be set to terrible based on certain criteria, such as forum posts.

With regards to sec status, as others have said, people who are neg 10 will merely use an alt or a 3rd party to buy their stuff.

people will always use a neutral alt to buy stuff regardless, as it would insure the product was available and the best prices possible to the masses.

But just the idea of being able to gouge people on the market via setting standings based on things like their forum posts is appealing

The recent deluge of freighter ganking and other hisec lawlessness is a travesty. Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back! Not just that, but it's worse: those doing productive things are actively helping the destroyers by providing materials, ships, ammo, and fuel! This is terrible!

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

CCP this is an enemy that only fights on his terms and has the objective of ruining the game. We want to advance and contribute to the game. Give us market pirate blacklisting, or sec status limits on orders, so we can fight them on our terms! More content for everyone and Eve grows.

making me log in to an alt to buy things isn't an interesting, or fun idea. it's just another layer of tedium that the game doesn't require.

your idea is therefore, bad.

Thats your problem because you chose to use an alt and you think its tedious.

Alternatively you could:
Make your own.
Use force to get what you want (instead of buying).
Ask someone else to buy it for you (allies, a "middle man").
Seach for a new supplier.

I don't know if you realise ... but adding customers to a black lists hurts the supplier as well (they make less money).

[...]Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

But [...]

GǪexcept that all that'll happen is that they buy from the lowest price, which won't be yours. All you achieve is to not sell.

making me log in to an alt to buy things isn't an interesting, or fun idea. it's just another layer of tedium that the game doesn't require.

your idea is therefore, bad.

Something like ...

OP didn't put enough thought into the idea prior posting.

I never said it was a good idea, just an appealing one

Wow the Daily Mail (or US equivalent) brigade are really out in force this week

Didn't realise there were so many hurt feelies out there

I hope someone is taking appropriate credit for these precious tearlettes

The recent deluge of freighter ganking and other hisec lawlessness is a travesty. Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back! Not just that, but it's worse: those doing productive things are actively helping the destroyers by providing materials, ships, ammo, and fuel! This is terrible!

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

CCP this is an enemy that only fights on his terms and has the objective of ruining the game. We want to advance and contribute to the game. Give us market pirate blacklisting, or sec status limits on orders, so we can fight them on our terms! More content for everyone and Eve grows.

same as every other person who has suggested this terrible idea before him.

Because he's doing it wrong.

Every new player starts off with a 'Highsec Trade Permit'.

Permit is necessary to buy, station trade, accept contracts and access corp hangars in highsec.

Permit is revoked if sec status drops below -2.0.


Probably a terrible idea, but it would work.

What's the point? People use alts. It changes nothing to the better.

Is an idea bad just beacuse it doesn't benefit a specific group of people?

It wouldn't matter whose alt it is. Use a character for ganking --> sec status decreases --> that character couldn't get equipment in highsec stations.


Or an alternative, very simple version: station lockout based on sec status.

Ditch NPC Police (a bad mechanic imo), but revoke highsec station docking privileges altogether, based on sec status.

Gankers would have to stage at highsec POS, which makes sense since they're 'naughty pirates'. And POS are attackable.

Increase the challenge for gankers, give a real 'fight back' opportunity to white knights, if they're up to it.

If necessary, tweak CONCORD response times to make up for the net impact on ganks of ditching NPC Police + station lockouts.

An idea is bad when it doesn't work as intended, hurts the people it's supposed to help and helps the people it's supposed to hurt (among other things).

Your idea wouldn't affect me at all, in fact if there were people who would only sell to people with (for example) 5.0 sec status, it would actually benefit me greatly as I have 8 characters at or near that now (of the other 4 only one is in the negative because of shooting at non-FW targets while in FW).

But just because something benefits an individual, that doesn't make it in any way a good idea for the 'community' ('game' in this case). An idea is a good one when it does what it's supposed to do, has limited negative and unintended consequences, and benefits the most people in the community in question.

Your idea does not of that. You can sink into that place where 'bright idea' people go to mentally hide (when other people demonstrate to them that they really aren't that smart and their idea isn't just horrible, it would be horrible for the person making the idea i the 1st place), but that doesn't make the idea we're talking about any less horrible.

EVE would have to have a strict ban on alts, contracts, and in station direct trading (hell, you'd even have to some how stop people from jet-canning stuff too lest you create a real , in space, 'black market' lol) enforced by game mechanics for your idea to even begin to have even the slightest merit.

What?

There have been several examples posted of why the idea isn't useful.

They all come back to - it will have no practical affect on anything. Nothing will change and it won't achieve one iota of difference.

It's no better than a Carebear throwing ISK away by placing a bounty on someone and thinking that makes a difference.

This is an idea doomed to the same level of usefulness. It will only annoy new players who don't have the knowledge or experience to understand that's it's a compliment, not a road block.

Agree, obviously.

What about station lockout based on sec status? Coupled with elimination of NPC Police.

Outlaws could roam freely in highsec, but would need to base in lowsec or set up a POS.

Could be an interesting way to shake up boring highsec mechanics.

Agree, obviously.

What about station lockout based on sec status? Coupled with elimination of NPC Police.

Outlaws could roam freely in highsec, but would need to base in lowsec or set up a POS.

Could be an interesting way to shake up boring highsec mechanics.

The recent deluge of freighter ganking and other hisec lawlessness is a travesty. Yeah I get it, it's Eve you can do what you want, sandbox, HTFU, etc etc etc.

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back! Not just that, but it's worse: those doing productive things are actively helping the destroyers by providing materials, ships, ammo, and fuel! This is terrible!

If you were an automobile manufacturer IRL would you sell your cars to a guy who has a record of using those cars to nudge lorries off the road, or cause horrific traffic accidents on purpose? NO! Why can we not do the same thing?

CCP this is an enemy that only fights on his terms and has the objective of ruining the game. We want to advance and contribute to the game. Give us market pirate blacklisting, or sec status limits on orders, so we can fight them on our terms! More content for everyone and Eve grows.

Read my post above yours.

Stealth nerf ganking

Fighter Jets GuitarSolo.

I support this idea.

The less you sell to those who gank you, the more I sell to those who gank you.

So why would a manufacturer want to lock themselves out of FW/lowsec market and lose all of that isk flow?

But we people who choose to focus on things other than destructio (and keep Eve running in the process) have no way to fight back!

Hiding behind alts is the single biggest reason to completely lock all the gankbears out of highsec stations.

We've got -10 security pirates taking down fully tanked ships , and far from lowec systems, all made possible by their high securiy alts doing the prep work and the complete safety of stations. You've got to be a trully risk averse carebear to support this type of system.

~~But orca alts just circumvent that.~~

See? That stupid alt argument can be used to argue against a lot of changes that would make the game better.

Yes they do. Still don't understand why forming a fleet with people doesn't set everyones security to that of the lowest security member. I realize big bad pirates want their warm milk and safetly blanket but lets be real here.

Whoever designed Crimewatch needs to take it beyond the scribbles on the back of a napkin stage and put some real coding behind it.

I can actually see this being a cool idea in an EVE without alts. It might cause the creation of true pirate hubs. And everyone wants seedy pirate trade hubs.

Because joining an innocent-looking +10 sec character's fleet will get you killed since he has a -10 sec alt sitting in a safe spot in system, and joins the fleet right after you join it, causing you to become instantly shootable?