Criminals should be treated the same as other criminals.
Can anyone explain to me why gankers with negative ten standings can be tethered in HS?
The tactic these gankers use is simple. They sit tetherd at their structures and aligned to a gate with a scout sitting on the gate at either side and when a juicy target makes the jump, they warp to gate, land and gank before Concord can respond. This sure seems like an exploit, but arguably not.
The issue is that they are flashy criminals and they sit tethered with Concord and Navy/Faction ships all surrounding them, unable to shoot them because they are invulnerable.
If I commit a crime, I cannot dock, jump, tether, etc. until my criminal flag expires.
A negative ten player has an ACTIVE criminal flag. They should be unable to dock, tether, etc until their standings come up and their flag clears.
I know there is a difference in suspect, criminal, and neg standings…I feel there shouldn’t be.
Making it so someone who can be openly aggressed for ANY flag, is unable to tether would significantly reduce the gank kills, prevent rage quitting, reduce the number of complaints regarding gankers, and cut down on the tickets created for losses due to BS mechanics.
Gankers say it’s too bad so sad, to get over it or quit.
They taunt people and love when people get upset.
That’s not gaming, that’s being an A-hole.
Ganking in general is not the issue.
Being jerks isn’t the issue.
The only reason this post was made was to call attention to the fact that the mechanics of a criminal flag is being abused by way of sitting tethered to a structure so they are invulnerable.
Adapt or die seems to be their motto, I say it’s time they adapt or die.
Change the mechanic so that if you are negative enough to be flashy in local, you cannot tether until your status improves.
There is already a method for players to increase their standings by using tags, make them use it before they can go back about their ganking ways.
There are two types of highsec gankers. The alpha tornado pilots usually maintain security status. The joie de vivre destroyer fleets usually just accept the -10.0 and live a carefree life of joy and camaraderie.
I’m not sure how to form a proper response because it seems you are both saying that Criminal Flags and low sec status are different, and at the same time saying low sec status is the same as an active criminal flag.
Unauthorized aggression in low or high security space generates a criminal flag. Criminal flags come with a set of consequences I can’t completely enumerate, but the most significant of those is death by CONCORD in high security space.
Losing enough sec status to bring you to -5 or less has a different set of effects not related to criminal flags at all. You are hunted by the Faction Police, a far less powerful force than CONCORD, and anyone who manages to shoot you won’t be punished by CONCORD. These players may be thought of as criminals, but from a game mechanics stand point, they do not have the criminal flag active.
The UI may make these two conditions seem to be the same thing by presenting both as flashy red on your overview so that you know some bad juju is going on, but they’re otherwise totally separate.
So, I gather that what you want to say is that people who have -5 or lower sec status shouldn’t be able to tether, but people still complained about the same when they’d just dock up. The structure could face whatever gate they wanted to camp and then they’d fire off in its direction straight away, what then? Deny them docking rights as well? (I know you did not suggest this, but I do not know where else this can go when just blocking tether ends up not satisfying the reason for the complaint.)
-5s can be proactively shot as soon as they land on grid with the gate. Jammed and warp disrupted, they’re sitting ducks for the faction police and/or gate guns. They seem to be sufficiently penalized to me. People just don’t find it worth their while to exercise the precautions necessary to contend with this weakened enemy and sometimes pay the price for it.
If they’re harassing players, that’s not a problem to address with changes to tether mechanics. That sort of inappropriate behavior should be reported when observed, regardless of whether the person is a ganker, miner, trader, or whatever so that CCP can keep the community clean and fun for all players on all sides of CONCORD law.
Much better said than I was able.
Personally, I wanted to shoot a -10 player who ganked me in HS but was unable to do so because they were tethered. Undocked, in a fleet, and aligned. He was -10 and I was unable to lock them due to tethering.
Seemed like the mechanic was geared in their favor and unless they chose to leave the safety of their tether, I was unable to engage. Bumping them was ineffective.
I would like the sec status mechanic aligned more with the criminal mechanic where tethering and docking is concerned.
I know you can never satisfy everyone, but if very low sec status forced them to remain docked or constantly moving, it would certainly eliminate a lot of the complaints about HS ganking.
I do understand where your coming from, but the only difference I see is that in one situation you cannot see them and in the other you can? The end result is the same.
I agree that it should be possible to retaliate against ganker, and single kill permit is really not a solution. And especially if they sit tethered there is not much you can do.
Criminals do exploit safety to their benefit in high sec, that privilege should be removed (or altered at least). Everything should have consequences.