Make Concord Nerf Damage % In Highsec

Salt Foambreaker if you make it so obvious that you havn’t read my post, your answer looks rather stupid.

Nope, not a problem. The problem is people continuing to be stupid and flying gank-vulnerable ships into dangerous places.

Then don’t put 5b worth of loot on a ship. That’s the easy counter. Accept that you aren’t entitled to 100% theoretical maximum ISK/hour from PvE farming and have to consider PvP survivability in your plans. Keep your total value down, fit passive modules instead of active tank, etc. You could even carry a mobile depot and spare modules to fit a fully passive tank for situations like the Jita undock point and then refit into a PvE active tank once you reach the mission.

Most of your post was drivel. People make mistakes and then think the downstream consequences are important.

It is not stupid to fly mission ships fit for missions into the mission area, just that this time a gank fleet was in some random high-sec system.

Again: this is not about people being ganked at Jita, this is about people flying somewhere around in high-sec, far away from any trouble, yet suddenly they explode, because they were not prepared for PvP in a random high-sec system. Which is perfectly fine to assume, because random PvP should by definition not be a thing in high-sec.

Um no, wrong.

High sec is not a no PvP area.

Also, see the PvP section of “What can I do in EvE”:

What I meant was: you are not flying through high-sec expecting PvP around every corner, because that’s what low and null sec are fore. PvP in high-sec exists, but it is a rare thing and it has to be a rare thing, otherwise you can skip the entire concept of high-sec and drop everyone right into 0-space.

That said: the main issue is that this kind of ganking is way too easy and comes with way too few risks for the attacker. If you PvP in high-sec there should be a low chance of success, probably with a high price-tag. What the corp I mentioned does is 99% success with a low price-tag and a high income. In fact even the best missioneer couldn’t come remotely close to their win/loss ratio nor income. This is ok for low and null sec, but it should not be that easy in high-sec.

I feel dirty even thinking of agreeing with Merin, Scipio, or Salt, but in this case, they are right.

High Sec has rules against unlimited PvP. When you outfit your ship, you are taking on risk based on the value of what you fit. The more risk you choose to take on, the more vigilant you need to be in case someone decides to take you up on your offer of expensive loot.

That’s all on you man. You don’t even need a T2 fit battleship to clear level 4 missions. If you are risking 5 billion Ravens to collect a few million ISK an hour in missions… Maybe you need to rethink how much you are willing to risk for that reward.

But Ok, you did decide the risk of a 5 billion raven was worth the income you are getting from missions. Fair enough. It’s on you to protect that. Choose better hunting grounds, bring friends, stay aware of what’s in space with you…

It wasn’t me in that Raven. When they tried to shoot my PvP fitted Legion they failed, because I am paranoid when it comes to expensive ships and refuse to even fit modules worth too much ISK. And I am also always prepared for PvP everywhere, because I am paranoid.

I can however also think ahead: if that corp is making a fortune so easily others will follow. At some point we would have Tornado gank fleets at every major mission hub. They would snipe everyone who is not PvP but mission fitted and then we have a low-sec situation in high-sec, except that you cannot do preliminary strikes, because then Concord will kill you instead.

What rules?

You have misinterpreted the meaning of “High Sec”.

Rules like getting dunked by Concord if you shoot first on someone who isn’t a criminal.

Limited in the sense that it’s not free fire like everywhere else. There are limitations and mechanical structure to the engagements.

Man, that’s always been the case. This game has been here 15 years, and the only real change to that situation was the introduction of ABC’s to make it cheaper and easier to do.

Ever lost a ship to a cloak sneaking into smartbomb range? I have. I can laugh many years later, but it wasn’t funny then. Don’t tell me a cloaked ship can’t get you killed. But I digress.

If you are flying around high sec and think it should be safe from PvP, you have the wrong idea and this isn’t going to be very fun for you.

You mean like the gate guns in low sec, do you even play this game?

CONCOD is a deterrent, not even a very big one.

Yes. The gate guns that routinely get ignored are one such limitation, that one happens to exist in low sec and is part of the overall design that seperates High, Low, and Null sec regions.

It’s not like you have to choose to fight under those guns rather than looking for people doing exploration, faction war, missions or who knows what else.

I’m aware that Concord does not prevent PvP, merely raises the barrier to entry. That’s what I’m trying to explain to Raw Materials. Your comprehension impediment is hurting your own case here.

I never said that. Do people even read things posted here? I am starting to think no one actually does.

I put it simple: PvP in high-sec is fine, however the risk should be on the side of the attacker, not the side of the defender. If ppl gank in Jita it’s not nice, but if you fly there you know what you are up to. If people start to randomly gank you everywhere in high-sec then the system is broken and needs a fix.

You:

Also You:

Pick a side, man.

The gankers lose their ships unless you give yourself a criminal flag, accept a duel, are a wartarget…

I guess you could say they aren’t risking anything, because for them the loss of what they would be risking is a foregone conclusion.

Instead they are risking the profit should you not die with them, so stay ready and limit their reward and your own risk.

I have to agree that concord is pretty useless in its current state and theres a need to rething security status restrictions as well.

Its a bit funny that you with -10 sec status can sit into a 3 milion worth of Catalyst. And with 10-20 other dedicated hardcore gankers can ruin the game for 1 person to a point where they quit the game.

Its not even about the value of the cargo. We can ignore that. You get 20 dudes and gank empty freighters just for the fun of it. And while it costs you what? 20 milion isk a gank. It costs 1.2b for that 1 guy. So eventually you are isk effective ganking in HS. Not talking about the loot.

Point is theres definiately something to change. Either dont allow players with -10 sec status to undock in anything other than a pod in HS/agress in hs or make ganking a lot harder. Because currently you can kill anything with ease.

How concord currently works is a joke with the baiting them to a station with a rookie ship and ganking again in same system. Like come on. Its like going into a paintshop in GTA in front of the cops to come out them not chasing you anymore. Cant get stupider than that.

CONCORD works 100% effectively at what it is suppose to do: impose a cost on illegal aggression in highsec. There are no ways around this, nor does it ever fail and if a player finds a way to avoid paying this cost it is deemed an exploit an punishable by CCP.

Maybe there is a conversation to be had that this cost needs to be adjusted for some reason, but to claim that CONCORD is ineffective is wrong. Just because ships can be exploded by players willing to pay the cost is not proof that anything is wrong.

CCP spent years tweaking the mechanics with nerf after nerf to suicide ganking to get to where we are now where it almost always cost more to illegally explode a ship in highsec than it is worth, taking a normally fit T2 ship, and to requires a small fleet for all but the weakest of ships. Clearly this is influenced by how ships are fit, but most ships are unprofitable and fully tanked ships are hilariously expensive to gank. You only make yourself a target by fitting expensive modules or carrying expensive cargo which is honestly the perfect way to balance risk in highsec - rich and established players are targets for pirates while newbros in cheap T1 and T2 ships aren’t worth exploding.

As for security status it is also working as intended. The mechanic isn’t there to prevent player interaction. It is there to remove CONCORD protection from career criminals and put them at risk to the other players. It does this just fine, and even more by keeping criminals in check with NPC police and limiting what they can do in highsec. But it isn’t suppose to keep them away from you, otherwise how would you shoot them and how would they shoot you?

For highsec to not be safesec there needs to be some risk of the other players shooting you. If a 5B ISK missioning ship is not going to be at risk, I don’t know what should be then. The cost imposed by CONCORD keeps 99%+ of highsec players safe, and puts the richest players at the most risk so I’d say it is working fine. If you fly aware and prudently CONCORD protection is the most powerful tool you have to stay safe in the game.

Exactly my point there.

Sadly for a Gank member whos only 1 guy it costs 3 milion isk to be in that gank.
For the Target who is ganked it can cost billions of isk.
And yes while there is the need to 20 guys to work together and gank the target. On the individual level is only costs that 3 milion isk hes “sacrificing” to the brutally efficient CONCORD.

If you dont see the problem here that is really sad. CCP will never release a graph about “Players leaving the game forever after the first HS gank they recieve” with an isk counter attached.

So we are potentially talking about having someone leave the game forever for 3 milion isk while they were doing their “High Security” stuff and trying to get somwhere in the game.

Take code whos ganking miners for “not having a permit” sounds fun right?
Take the player who used his money on a trade opportunity to try and make 5% profit just to find himself ganked midway and stop the game forever. Sounds fun right?

The problem is that concord and HS as it is now is as broken as it can be. If a 100man rich group decides to ■■■■ ■■■■ up and gank every 2. ship becase why not. They could jsut do it. Losing 100 catalyst still comes up to 300m on the individual level. You can now guess how much damage 10.000 catalyst would inflict in a day of ganking. for a mere 300m a pop per person.

If you think this is not a broken mechanic then i dont know what is.

I still don’t see why that is sad. The amount of ISK a player carries is completely under the control of the player. Most ships, even battleships cost only a few hundred million ISK. If a player wants to take a risk to earn more by fitting expensive modules, they take the chance someone will pay the cost to CONCORD and try to take their stuff.

That doesn’t sound sad to me. That sounds like a game. Risk vs. reward.

Everything CCP has released about ganking and new players shows it isn’t a problem. New players are rarely ganked - which makes sense as they have nothing worth taking - and almost no one cites ship loss as a reason they are quitting. The MER shows that 99.8%+ of ships reach their destination safely in highsec, and even of those that are lost most aren’t due to suicide ganking. Highsec is objectively incredibly safe.

I get that players don’t like losing stuff to other players but piracy is an intended feature in this game. I don’t find that sad at all.

You clearly have no real understanding of the cost and effort that goes into ganking. Almost every ship is a loss to gank in highsec, or is uncatchable if the pilot does anything, even in a cheap destroyer. If it was that easy, highsec would be shutdown, yet almost everybody all the time is left alone. The facts don’t match this narrative you are painting that ganking is a cheap and effortless activity.

Ganking is only an issue for the complacent and rich, not new players, and even then it is easy to mitigate. There are professional hauling companies that move billions of ISK every day without incident. There are careful mission and incursion runners who fly expensive ships attentively every day without loss. Yes, there is nowhere that is perfectly safe in this game as was intended from the beginning, but that doesn’t mean there is nothing you can do to keep your assets safe. Everyone is going to experience a loss from time to time, whether to other players or NPCs, but that’s why we have the Golden Rules.

Highsec works perfectly fine to keep most people safe most of the time. Unless you think highsec should be perfectly safe and you free to fly 10B ISK mission ships or freighters with no worry, then I don’t know how you can claim that it is “broken”. You are basically only at risk of people taking your stuff if several people gang up on you after you made yourself a profitable target, and made several other mistakes on top of that, and probably also were very unlucky to be noticed at all in the first place.

2 Likes