Criminal acts should create more content

I have always been of the opinion that collective punishment is a rather intriguing and enjoyable activity. Since I believe in this principle, I think that it is an appropriate measure to make the corp and later the whole alliance free to engage in high sec and low sec if enough criminal activity has been committed in high sec or low sec.

Purely for the discussion’s sake I suggest that 50 criminal acts flag the corp and 100 criminal acts flag the alliance.

This would solve a few issues:

  • Engaging people in high sec is difficult. It requires wars or traps, which is not convenient and very costly. Being able to freely engage big groups that regularly stage activities in high sec that involve criminal acts would be quite the fun since they provide lots of targets.
  • People could be real pirates. This corp/alliance state would be a flag like suspect flag but would not involve lowering the security status of characters in that corp/alliance. This means that Faction Police or CONCORD will not interfere with capsuleer enjoyment.
  • Engaging people in low sec is also rather annoying since you lose security status if you engage someone whose sec status is not low enough or who is not at war with you. With this flag, more people would be available for engagements without other people having to worry about the security status too much.

A problem that I see is people could join corps and intentionally engage alts in a non-legal manner just to flag that corp for free engagements. However, with the Friendly Fire toggle a diligent corp leadership can prevent that from happening. Furthermore, you can just kick the corp from the alliance if it bothers you. It would also give people who want to do mischief a new avenue to attack corps. Last I heard people liked that. In order to alleviate the issue with corps going rogue, a timer similar to the war declaration activation could be implemented, to give leaders some time to respond but not too much time.

The flag would also have a wear off timer. If no criminal act has been committed for a number of days, the flag disappears.

Some additional notes which emerged from the discussion:

  • This is not just or primarily about gankers in high sec. Making CONDI perpetually engageable without a war sure is a nice side-effect, and definitely not unintentional, but a more important aspect for me is to make more people in low sec available for engagements without always screwing up your security status. This would help FW to reduce sec status losses, it would help casual roamers that live in high sec but engage in some PVP fun in low sec, among other things.
  • Criminal flags need to run out and a new criminal flag needs to be created in order to count towards the flat status. As far as I can tell, the criminal flag is not bound to a specific character but a global thing for your actions. With this limitation in place, the issue of random people just smartbombing 50 pods in low sec or lighting a smartbomb on the Jita gate to create 50 criminal actions in one go is alleviated.
  • Criminal activities in high sec and low sec are different and that stays with the flag. While illegally attacking a ship in high sec is a criminal flag, it is only a suspect flag in low sec and thus does not count towards the flag status. Only criminal activities (illegal attacks in high sec and podding in low sec count).
  • You cannot be locked in a corp by giving people roles. It is always possible to instantly quit a corp to an NPC corp.
  • The Friendly Fire toggle feature should be expanded into a full-fledged Safety button for the corp/alliance. This is to outright prevent going criminal if you as CEO want to have a safe ratting/missioning corp. This would prevent random mischievous people from just dropping by, killing a few of their alts to flag the corp and then farm the members ad nauseam.
  • Once the criminal flag status has been reached, the criminal count should not continue to increase indefinitely. Based on the discussion numbers of 50/100 and for the sake of balance, you could apply the principle of sov indices. Level 5 only goes up to another 100% and then stops. Similarly, the criminal count could only go up to 98/148 and decay with 1 criminal act per hour so that the flag wears off after 2 days if appropriate steps have been taken to stop people from going criminal.
  • If, despite the several mechanical steps to protect your corp from suffering this flag, someone still pulls off to go criminal 50/100 to trigger the flag, it would not go into effect right away exactly to prevent abuse. The waiting period of 24 hours (similar to wars) gives CEO/directors/other officers enough time to respond to these acts and flag you for automatic kicking at the next possible opportunity. With a 24 hours timer, this would forcibly happen at least once per day at downtime.

Can’t kick someone in space.
Too easy to abuse to make corps targetable and too avoidable by anyone who cares, I mean hello, NPC corps for a start.

I.e. This adds nothing but abuse.

Totally against this, i wish they did however require standings to anchor structures in high like was required before for POS’s. Wasnt a perfect system but required more work then buy 100 structures anchor them every where and have tether protection.

3 Likes

Either ganker corps would just reform after every 50 criminal acts, or it would be possible to attack a corp that accidentally accepted 50-criminal-acts character. Number does not matter much here.

This would suck beyond belief, the corps would just reform and all those bookmarks with negative standing would be useless.

-1

2 Likes

You clearly don’t know the history of people like me abusing such mechanics.

2 Likes

You can. A corp is not a pilot for starters, they can be kicked from alliances regardless of whereabouts of players. the Friendly Fire toggle prevents mishaps from happening in the first place.

And these people are already in NPC corps if they cared. And as said below, these gankers are not in space either most of the time, and their scanner chars are not in the ganker corps to begin with.
However, I this is not just about ganking as I have made clear in my opening post. It is about all sorts of illegal behavior that involves the Criminal flag and supposed to make more people available for easier interaction in low sec and high sec without incurring the wrath of FacPo, Concord or heavy standing loss for engaging a criminal organization just because the char before you in that organization has a positive security status.

This is rather pointless because of Access Lists. CODE has at least 5 out of CODE corps they use for putting up tethering structures that are not big dick signs.

They would not. Ganker corps do not care about that status. They are mostly docked in NPC stations or structures anyway.

That is not a concern. The acts would have to be committed in the corp. Previous criminal acts outside the corp would not matter. If the leadership accepts characters into a corp that have engaged in criminal activity, however, they knowingly accept the risk of that happening to their corp if they do not turn off FF. However, as said, I also see this as a positive thing because people want more avenues to make corps suffer. After all, the outcry after the FF toggle was introduced still howls strong in the mischievous community.

You are welcome to do that. People already abuse ACLs, so this will not be an issue.

Uh, no it doesn’t. Friendly fire prevents green safety mishaps.
it doesn’t stop criminal actions and it doesn’t stop someone shooting another corp to flag your entire corp as criminal.
At which point you can’t kick them from your corp since they are in space
And now your corp is stuck with the flag.
So… the only ‘benefit’ for this is the abuse, it doesn’t give anyone else a benefit at all. Since…

As you say, gankers already are criminal, the only other thing is remote reps.

Players that already operate at this level of activity are freely engageable and making the whole corp/alliance engageable would just lead to individual corps/people being removed.

For example, the KUSION SPECIAL TEAM is a member of Goonswarm.

Most of the players in Goons never take part in criminal activity at all, but by this proposal, the whole alliance of 31K odd characters would be treated as criminal?

Seems a bit excessive.

In any case, the Kusions would move out of Goons and then they are already engageable anyway, so nothing will have changed other than to have them kicked from their alliance. That also doesn’t seem like a great aim to achieve.

Kicking people from corp that are in space has been possible for a long time after CCP learned that you could not kick super and titan chars from your corps otherwise until the introduction of Keepstars. I could not find clear documentation if being in such a ship is a prerequisite but even if you can kick people in space if they are offline. That argument falls short.

That is actually true, my bad. However, that is not an issue. In good tradition of iterative development of an idea, CCP could expand the FF feature to include the prevention of engagements in criminal activities.

Please read my posts carefully. I outlined other benefits. As it is not just about gankers, it is also not just about high sec.

And that is exactly what I want to see. They have to decide whether they want to harbor a criminal organization in their ranks and be punished for it, or if they want to be left alone in high sec and low sec. Not to mention that big chunks of CONDI participate in Burn Jitas, which makes this “never take part in criminal activity” rather moot. For this particular example, it is not just Kusions that gank in Goons. It is a noticeable number of people from different corps that engage in this activity. Just recently PLA started to go big time ganking as well. To cut it short: CONDI in particular condones and fosters this activity and they should do so as it is part of the game.

However, as such there should be consequences for wallowing in vice. I want to see more people shooting each other in high sec without the introduction of broken mechanics like Killrights for ISK. You could even expand on this and make bounty hunting a profession again. As these big corps/alliances would be targetable, they could also be freely engaged for farming their sometimes massive bounty pools without bounty hunters losing their ships in the process.

Of course it is.
Shootable doesn’t matter outside of highsec, so the entire idea is a highsec only point.

No it is not. Must I remind you of topics like this: Low sec security status partial removal or Flagged Suspect When Going Through A FW Gate And Not Signed Up For FW

People care about their security status and making more people available to shoot easily helps destroying more ships and create engagements between people.

So your idea is never going to happen.

Hypothetically, let’s assume that the number of subscribed accounts in Goons is 25,000 and they all pay annually to get the best discount. That’s about 2.5 - 2.75 million USD in subs for CCP.

That has economic power and if CCP arbitrarily decided to punish all of the members of Goons, even if they didn’t want to kick out some of their members and/or wanted to punish all Goons for bringing content to the game, there would be mass unsubbing.

We’ve seen it before. 2011 and recently during the nullsec blackout.

Your idea may be aspirational, but it isn’t practical for CCP to implement.

Well, peaceful mining corporations would also be punished for accepting a character that commits a lot of criminal acts overnight.

Since when is harmful behavior a taboo in EVE? Corp theft is being encouraged in the past, ganking is being encouraged, traps are being encouraged, scamming is being encouraged. Awoxing is a revered thing in EVE. Just to name a few. And you would still have that timer to kick the person before the flag goes into effect.

Blanket, infinite war decs against Goons in the past didn’t do that and Goons fed a crap load of value into PIRAT, Marmite and company. I doubt that this kind of flag had a negative effect. On the other hand, with all the snowflakes these days you might be right.

Goons was just an example to illustrate the point. There are other large alliances, including a couple of reasonably large highsec alliances.

Oh yes, Mission Ready Mining, which hosted a ton of citadel scammers in the past. I would love to see them get flagged with that but sadly access denial scams do not fall under attacks. :smiley: Silent Company? They have over 9,000 characters and recently gotten war eligible and have not been feeding worse than they already did before that. They dropped from 12k to 9k, though, as scared corps left. Then there is this big Russian newb group, that hold, among other things, hostile cynos for low sec drops. I don’t see any reason why these groups would be disadvantaged by such a flag.

Is it always the victims who try to “create content” for the criminals, or am I seeing this wrong? Anyways, if you want to get rid of CONCORD, like any sensible person would, then you should just say so. No need to beat around the bush, really.

There is no way of improving the situation as long as there is CONCORD and there is no way of still having the cake (CONCORD interference) and eating it (the benefits of CONCORD not interfering), at the same time.

This comes from the fact that ganking, suicide or not, is something natural that can happen. Lots of people (doesn’t matter if alts or not) group up and attack someone. The only way of dealing with this would be artificial barriers/restrictions, which you can find in most other games.

Ganking is basically emergent social content happening and you can’t really restrict/prevent that in EVE in a sensible way, without completely blocking any and all “unlawful” attacks, which would be absolutely stupid.

I give you that your idea isn’t such a stupid pile of steaming excrements like most others. I don’t really see a point in it, but it’s still better than others.

1 Like

You didn’t read my opening post, did you? I can have the cake and I can eat it, too. :slight_smile: Getting rid of CONCORD is the last thing I ever want to see happen. They are there for a reason, they have a role and they are important. What I want is that criminal acts matter more and give players a way to create risk for organizations that indulge in criminal behavior. That goes counter to what CCP has been doing in the last few years since they have started to give away player activities to NPCs (structure attacks, miner attacks, drifters, etc). I want players to hunt organizations with criminals in it.

This suggestion is not going to. It’s not the aim of it at all. All it is supposed to do is create consequences for criminal flag activities that actually matter.

would not work, because the alts would be recycled as they are already; and it would lead to abuse.

If you want criminal to make more content, prevent people from respawning in HS and docking in HS when SS < 0, and in LS when SS is < 3 . This way gankers that get podded must come back from null.

Also increase the SS loss when taged on a KM, with criminal status, based on the KM value.
There is no reason to make the same loss when killing a freigther and a shuttle.