Possible Pirate Flag?

[Scipio_Artelius]

@DeMichael_Crimson

Heh, if that were true there wouldn’t be any ‘Tags For Security’ in the game.

The devblog from CCP when security tags were introduced was pretty clear about the target audience for the tags. That was based on aims to:

1. get people out in space, particularly in lowsec
2. alternative method for reformed outlaws to get back to highsec

Tags weren’t aimed at gankers, but at lowsec pvpers, which was part of why they are only available in lowsec.

However, that motivation from CCP could obviously be used differently by gankers, but it isn’t. They don’t really care about security status as they can effectively work around the limitations.

For example, this morning I pulled the last 2000 kills by CODE. and averaged the security status of the gankers in each killmail.

The average came out as:

Total killmails analysed: 2000
Average security status: -9.60121049092139

The average ganker within CODE. is an outlaw (many of them are at -10), and they are the most active gankers in the game. When you look at the killmails manually, this is the kind of thing that is most common you’ll see:

A total of 12 attackers on that one killmail, all -10 security status.

When you do it automatically and run thousands of killmails through software, the same picture emerges. gankers don’t care about security status. They operate as outlaws regardless.

For miniluv it is a bit more difficult as they have people come and go to and from nullsec for gank fleets, however they aren’t using tags either. Ratting is much more prevalent for Goons than the use of tags are. It’s rare to even see a Goon in lowsec.

@DeMichael_Crimson

Also Kill Rights first have to be made publicly available by the character who originally got the kill right.

Yep and they generally are. I put an alt into Burn Jita as a ganker and previously spent a couple of months solo ganking with that alt so I could understand what’s involved. The public access of the killrights at the moment:

5 of the 9 killrights publicly available, the cheapest at 0 ISK (which would be the first activated if someone activates one). This is consistent with the experience from the previous ganking about 6 months ago.

If you go spend any time in Uedama, Niarja, Madirmilire, etc., and watch a gank fleet come on grid (undocking or arriving at target), you’ll pretty much see all of them with activatable killrights, even though they are already also outlaws.

@DeMichael_Crimson

Then it can be activated after possibly paying an ISK fee. Lastly the kill right is only good for 30 days from the time it was initially gained.

This is true, but gankers gank, so they have a never ending supply of killrights that end up being set to public.

All pointless anyway, since being outlaw doesn’t worry them and they can be shot on sight by anyone good enough.

[Ima_Wreckyou]

@DeMichael_Crimson

If so then they’d be attacked constantly by NPC’s in high sec.

We are indeed constantly attacked by NPC’s in high sec.

[DeMichael_Crimson]

You can try to whitewash the whole situation all you want.

Those who constantly sit on gates or at station undock definitely use Tags. Others have NPC alts mark targets, then quickly jump in and warp to gank knowing they have x amount of time before any NPC action actually happens.

The main reason ‘Tags For Security’ were implemented is because players would rather stop playing altogether than grind their way back up by killing NPC’s. Those Tags are spawned in Low Sec to give Low Sec PvP players targets and to make it much easier for characters kicked out of High Sec due to ganking to get back in and continue ganking. CCP removed the aspect of ‘Consequences For Actions’ by implementing those Tags and on top of that to insure there were plenty of Mining ships easily accessible as targets, changed Ore sites from Cosmic Signatures to Cosmic Anomalies.

Most players are busy doing something else and don’t have the time to open up every character’s info window to see if there’s a Kill Right. As for activating the Kill Right itself, they have to be on-grid and by the time that’s done, the Kill Right character has already accomplished their task and is gone. Those characters with negative security KoS status are constantly moving around so good luck on being on-grid with them.

[Scipio_Artelius]

@DeMichael_Crimson

You can try to whitewash the whole situation all you want.

Great data presented to backup your claims…would be if there was any I’m sure.

[DeMichael_Crimson]

Oh yeah, forgot to add that CCP also changed the ‘Security Cycle Ratting’ ticks mechanic. Before players would only get a security status increase for killing the largest bounty NPC within a 15 - 20 minute cycle. For those ratting in Low Sec to raise their negative security status, they would have to jump into another system to reset the tick cycle. CCP removed that aspect of the mechanic and changed the tick to a 5 minute cycle, thus making it even faster to regain security status.

[Scipio_Artelius]

@DeMichael_Crimson

Oh yeah, forgot to add that CCP also changed the ‘Security Cycle Ratting’ ticks mechanic. Before players would only get a security status increase for killing the largest bounty NPC within a 15 - 20 minute cycle. For those ratting in Low Sec to raise their negative security status, they would have to jump into another system to reset the tick cycle. CCP removed that aspect of the mechanic and changed the tick to a 5 minute cycle, thus making it even faster to regain security status.

I agree with all this, but it doesn’t have anything to do with highsec ganking.

I wish CCP hadn’t introduced tags either (though I was pretty strongly in favour of it at the time), but it’s also not reall6 relevant to the subject of this thread, although it can be used faster than ratting.

[Black_Pedro]

@Scipio_Artelius

I wish CCP hadn’t introduced tags either (though I was pretty strongly in favour of it at the time), but it’s also not reall6 relevant to the subject of this thread, although it can be used faster than ratting.

I still like it. I think adding a resources like Clone Soldier Tags to lowsec creates a much needed mini-profession for lowsec. Further, just because tags allow players to trade the time grinding tags for ISK, doesn’t mean it removes consequences. It just makes the consequences more “liquid” and provides a way to pay people to repair those consequences for you.

If it really is a problem though for some reason, it seems to me that CCP could easily add ‘tag fatigue’ to prevent highsec gankers from regularly using the tags while still allowing those who tank their security status in lowsec and who presumably use them less frequently to access the mechanic to outsource their security status repair. But kill rights already function as a security-status independent consequence that impose risk on criminals for a period of time so I don’t think it is a big issue.

Still, I like the pirate NPC corp idea as a social idea to bring like-minded folks together and perhaps serve as a badge of honour. Beyond that though, it isn’t going to add anymore risk than kill rights and sec-status already do. I mean, a pirate can just join/form a player corp at any time and leave the pirate NPC corp can’t they?

[Max_Deveron]

i understand what this is about…

If a guy ends up in one of these pirate corps, but is utilized as a bumper later on…
Despite a Sec Stat fix he is still a shootable target because he is in the pirate faction corp…

nice stealth anti-bumper thread idea.

HOw does one get out of the pirate corp now?

[Caolan_Carraig]

There’s nothing “stealth” about it.
The idea is to add an element of balance where a bumper can be engaged as a defensive measure. At present, there is no balance and no risk for the bumper at all.

How do you get out of the pirate Corp? Same way you get out of any NPC Corp, join a player one.

[Scipio_Artelius]

@Caolan_Carraig

add an element of balance

Balance - one of the most abused words in the forum.

There’s nothing balanced about this suggestion. It’s just a straight shift, not balanced at all by anything else in the suggestion.

[Caolan_Carraig]

Glad you think so, but it’s all I’ve come to expect from you.

[Scipio_Artelius]

@Caolan_Carraig

I’ve come to expect from you.

That’s ok anonymous forum alt. I don’t expect anything at all in reverse and that’s perfectly fine.

Doesn’t change the abuse that the word ‘balance’ received here.

[Caolan_Carraig]

The only people who think that balancing things is unnecessary are the fat kids on the seesaw… as long as they benefit, everything is fair.

[Scipio_Artelius]

@Caolan_Carraig

The only people who think that balancing things is unnecessary are the fat kids on the seesaw… as long as they benefit, everything is fair.

That would also clearly be unbalanced. However it doesn’t really apply to us. We are EVE players, we haven’t even been outdoors in years, let alone anywhere near a seesaw.

From my own basement dweller perspective, balancing is fine and constantly occuring. But where ‘balance’ is used as a way to push more deterrents to player interaction, that’s not balance. That’s just nerf.

[Your_Ex-Girlfriend]

Gotta love it when people who have no experience with ganking make suggestions to try to “fix” ganking.

They always run the gammut from terribad to pointless, like this one.

[Caolan_Carraig]

@Your_Ex-Girlfriend
Gotta love when one forum alt incorrectly assumes the experience of another forum alt!