# Proposal for Rebalancing of the Suicide Gank **URL:** \ **Category:** Crime & Punishment\ **Tags:** high-sec\ **Created:** [June 24, 2022, 9:28am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013 "2022-06-24T09:28:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Altara\_Zemara](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/altara_zemara/32/390110_2.png) [@Altara\_Zemara](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Altara_Zemara)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2022, 1:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/362 "2022-07-20T13:23:16Z")
> [@Katana\_Masen](#): > > It is for real, in Chinese experimental server Howcome the _only_ reference to it that one can find anywhere, and the only place one can find the alleged ‘donut’ map, on the entire internet is on that utterly reliable site Reddit ? Is April 1st on a different day of the year in China ? ---
**Author:** ![Ax\_l\_Thorne](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ax_l_thorne/32/412835_2.png) [@Ax\_l\_Thorne](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ax_l_Thorne)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2022, 2:14pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/363 "2022-07-20T14:14:48Z")
I like how people automatically assume that “just because it exists on the Chinese server” means that it _will absolutely_ be implemented into tranquility. ---
**Author:** ![Vokan\_Narkar](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/vokan_narkar/32/326293_2.png) [@Vokan\_Narkar](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Vokan_Narkar)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2022, 2:20pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/364 "2022-07-20T14:20:13Z")
And test server at that. Not the live one. Still I would like them to do it and put it live on Tranquility. Finally I would be able to overcome my addiction to this game 🙂 . ---
**Author:** ![Altara\_Zemara](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/altara_zemara/32/390110_2.png) [@Altara\_Zemara](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Altara_Zemara)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2022, 2:31pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/365 "2022-07-20T14:31:28Z")
Me too. I have 42 games in my Steam wish list…that I could be playing if CCP fart about with Eve too much. ---
**Author:** ![Qia\_Kare](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/qia_kare/32/279281_2.png) [@Qia\_Kare](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Qia_Kare)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2022, 2:38pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/366 "2022-07-20T14:38:50Z")
The links take you to to an archive of Netease’s offical Eve news. It doesn’t use the site directly so that it doesn’t trigger the Reddit spam filter, but if you visit the official site it says the same thing (in Chinese). There’s no indication that it’d be ported over to TQ (I didn’t read carefully but I didn’t see that they were planning to overwrite Serenity, either), and we have no reason to believe they would at this stage, but it is real, unless you don’t take the developer at their word. ---
**Author:** ![Jesse\_W\_James](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/jesse_w_james/32/316227_2.png) [@Jesse\_W\_James](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Jesse_W_James)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2022, 4:24pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/367 "2022-07-20T16:24:53Z")
> [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > And why shouldn’t it? Safeties locked to green in high-sec should’ve been in from the start. No game should allow players to grief other players by destroying their progress. That’s basically criminal behavior. Destiny I have been completely wrong about you, and much apologies, great post and 100% agree with you. JJ ---
**Author:** ![Jesse\_W\_James](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/jesse_w_james/32/316227_2.png) [@Jesse\_W\_James](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Jesse_W_James)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2022, 4:26pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/368 "2022-07-20T16:26:44Z")
> [@Jumpdrive](#): > > We should still have some time at least. Enjoy it while it lasts. > > They’ll probably make sure the changes are commercially successful in China, before they’d roll it out to us. > > When I look at what usually happens to older MMOs and when I look at the new Diablo game, the worst outcome seems plausible, but if the Chinese players give CCP and Netease the middle finger first, then we still have a chance. Actually you are incorrect, most PvP only games that don’t have a PvE area die… that is 100% true, it is only the PvE games with a portion of PvP area that have managed to last decades. But do enjoy as I am banking on swift changes once completed on Serienity. JJ ---
**Author:** ![Geminus\_Duolphus](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/geminus_duolphus/32/329938_2.png) [@Geminus\_Duolphus](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Geminus_Duolphus)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2022, 11:06pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/369 "2022-07-31T23:06:04Z")
There is only one rebalance that is needed. Get rid of high sec. At this point in the game it serves no function. Entities exist in the game with wealth vast enough that ganking doesn’t even need to be profitable. They can just fork out enough catalysts to gank any ship, no matter the size. Care Bears will cry to begin with. By Care Bears I mean both the miners and mission runners and also the gankers. After a while with pvp on rails gone the new bros will begin to group up they will run missions in fleets and when pvp ships arrive the fights will be epic exchanges. No one stays in eve because getting their ship blown up by a blob of people who threw away their own ships to do it somehow excited them. They stay in the game because they got involved in something that woke up their imagination. The Care Bears doing the ganking will get to keep their ships when they gank, they will get to prey on the weak but will also have to accept people get to hunt them in turn. Yes this means effectively removing the ganking play style. But honestly I have no sympathy for people that want to play this game without risk of failure. That was never what the sandbox was about in my opinion. So TLDR it’s time to throw away high sec. It has served its purpose and is now irrelevant. We will lose people on both sides who cry about this but what is left will be much more epic and much less cheap. ---
**Author:** ![Iceacid\_Frostpacker](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/iceacid_frostpacker/32/505689_2.png) [@Iceacid\_Frostpacker](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Iceacid_Frostpacker)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2022, 8:38am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/370 "2022-08-01T08:38:05Z")
It’s like throwing a bone to the wolves, the person who leaked it knew the reaction it would agitate some Capsuleers before releasing it. ---
**Author:** ![Zaera\_Keena](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zaera_keena/32/449938_2.png) [@Zaera\_Keena](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zaera_Keena)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2022, 10:03am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/371 "2022-08-01T10:03:30Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > Gank in high sec means interfering with the activities of a player who prefers production and PVE, which is against the morality of gameplay and amounts to harassment. Gotta be one of the best trolls ever. You almost had me fooled. @Dracvlad as usual fell for it hook line and sinker. This is obviously @Aiko_Danuja having a bit of fun ![](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/f/1/2/f129fac4416bc4fbbefa425fef96e545a384d107.gif) ---
**Author:** ![Uriel\_the\_Flame](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/uriel_the_flame/32/490165_2.png) [@Uriel\_the\_Flame](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Uriel_the_Flame)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2022, 10:09am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/372 "2022-08-01T10:09:30Z")
…funny thing, I wonder what CCP thinks about what the supposed “`morality of gameplay`” is. 🤔 Completely unrelated videos… [![](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/3X/9/d/9dba09442ddba1799cdc9b397985f465838d8215.jpeg "Permaband - HTFU") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgvM7av1o1Q) [![](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/3X/5/8/5840844730a9368c8688e3c290f246df898665fd.jpeg "EVE Online: Citadel Cinematic Trailer") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bjTrPutt4k) `Maybe someone's dreams just got wrecked.` 🤭 😏 :dealwithitparrot: ---
**Author:** ![Iceacid\_Frostpacker](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/iceacid_frostpacker/32/505689_2.png) [@Iceacid\_Frostpacker](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Iceacid_Frostpacker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 4:17pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/373 "2022-09-07T16:17:52Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > ## 1-2. CONCORD response time delay problem due to “CONCORD Pulling” > > As has been discussed in past forums, the technique of delaying the arrival time of a CONCORD by approximately 6 seconds by performing a criminal act while the CONCORD is spawned on a different grid in the system, known as “CONCORD Pulling,” is now legal. Could pulling concord away from a gank location moments after a gank had taken place cause Concord to respond slower than normal spawn times for the next criminal activity? Does Concord really take an up to a extra 6 seconds in a 0.5 system making it become even more cost effective gameplay to become a highsec ganker? > [@Beatlise](#): > > (For this reason, I would like to propose an improvement, not to fix the spawn logic, but simply to adjust the calculation of arrival time.) This could be a step in the right direction. ---
**Author:** ![Arya\_Yeshe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arya_yeshe/32/397211_2.png) [@Arya\_Yeshe](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arya_Yeshe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 5:58pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/374 "2022-09-07T17:58:33Z")
It has come to my attention that certain people in high sec have from 10 to 15 freighters per player, endlessly farming ISK and they don’t want to be touched by nobody. They also have other ISK sources. Is this topic about rebalancing the gank or is this in fact just a farce to protect a very specific group of people? We can’t continue on this topic because this topic is dishonest. ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 6:00pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/375 "2022-09-07T18:00:37Z")
But think of the new players? By which I mean Hilmar’s money-children. ---
**Author:** ![Arya\_Yeshe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arya_yeshe/32/397211_2.png) [@Arya\_Yeshe](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arya_Yeshe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 6:10pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/376 "2022-09-07T18:10:44Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > ## 1-4. “Kill Rights” as a means of retaliation is almost non-functional. > > A “Kill Right” will be issued to the player who ganks a player in high sec. Normally, this would be a means of retaliation on the part of the victim, but the kill right only flags the other player as a suspect, allowing him or her to escape immediately by station docking or gate jumping. > In addition, the “Kill Rights” becomes almost worthless if the player escapes into low-sec or null-sec space, where it is possible to legally attack other players in the first place. Not only that, when the victim handles you the kill right then the kill right target will receive a notification telling him who is hunting him… he can simply reship and keep an eye in local. The target should never receive any notification and he should be oblivious about what is going on, this is the way. Also, the hunter who receive the right on the kill right will never be notified of anything and the kill rights window will never show any kill right handled to him. The hunter should be able to see all kill rights that were handled to him in the kill rights window. When the kill right target dies it’s wreck is blue, open for everybody who is passing by, everybody is entitled for the loot. This loot show be white for everybody and fleets who shot the target and yellow to everybody else. ---
**Author:** ![Arya\_Yeshe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arya_yeshe/32/397211_2.png) [@Arya\_Yeshe](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arya_Yeshe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 6:22pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/377 "2022-09-07T18:22:19Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > ![fig-2](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/3/4/9/3499bacbf6570750fafed9fa49bdaef6005b21ba.png) This would be true if there was input broadcasting in play, in multiboxing a realistic number would be engaging 3 catalysts per second. Which means you waste damage each 3 cats, because you have to cycle through at least 3 alt per second. You need actual unique people to have optimal damage… even if you have 2-3 people with one catalyst only the damage loss will be lessened and the final output will be much bigger… it is best having a guy in a T1 cat shooting since tick 1 than having and alt shotting a t2 cat much later. Real math for 12 alts damage output: tick 1: 2310 tick 2: 4620 tick 3: 6930 tick 4: 9240 Damage wasted since there is no input broadcast: 13860 damage The ban on input broadcasting is the greatest antiganker in EVE, the more alts you have the more damage you waste and the more ISK you spend. CCP did their job. ---
**Author:** ![Arya\_Yeshe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arya_yeshe/32/397211_2.png) [@Arya\_Yeshe](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arya_Yeshe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 6:31pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/378 "2022-09-07T18:31:43Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > This is an issue that should be fixed immediately, but (in my opinion) the CONCORD spawn logic is a code that has existed since the beginning of the service, and I suspect that it has become a legacy code that is difficult to fix today. > (For this reason, I would like to propose an improvement, not to fix the spawn logic, but simply to adjust the calculation of arrival time.) I won’t expose what and how to get banned, but there is still a way to get banned! But if you aren’t trying to do a very specific thing that can make the pulling exploitable, then you won’t get banned. I mean… you could do the thing by accident if certain things are happenning in the system, but it’s best if people don’t learn that thing. In general, pulling concord will never ban anyone, it is fine. ---
**Author:** ![Arya\_Yeshe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arya_yeshe/32/397211_2.png) [@Arya\_Yeshe](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arya_Yeshe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 6:38pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/379 "2022-09-07T18:38:02Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > ## 1-5. The player’s SS has become mere decoration. > > Even “outlaw, wanted of the galaxy” players with a SS of -10.0 can enter Jita 4-4 and shop. > In addition, they can tether themselves to the structure near the gate and ambush their next prey. Of course, look at low seccers, you can barely do any PVP and you go from 5.0 to 4.0 and then to -10.0… they will be shooting everybody from all factions and all kinds of people… what the State has to do with this? Nothing… the State should never have a say in this. People shouldn’t be punished for their security status… the faction police is already too much to bear. ---
**Author:** ![Arya\_Yeshe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arya_yeshe/32/397211_2.png) [@Arya\_Yeshe](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arya_Yeshe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 6:42pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/380 "2022-09-07T18:42:07Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > - (New) Alpha clones cannot be safety set to red. The idea of existing Alpha accounts is for trying out EVE, if they want to try piracy and pod people in low sec they need safety to red. Also we don’t see big fleets of alpha gankers in high sec. There is no reason to change anything. ---
**Author:** ![Arya\_Yeshe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arya_yeshe/32/397211_2.png) [@Arya\_Yeshe](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arya_Yeshe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2022, 6:46pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013/381 "2022-09-07T18:46:57Z")
> [@Beatlise](#): > > ## 2-2. Reduce CONCORD arrival time by 30%. This changes nothing for alpha ganks anyway, changes nothing for all those cargo fitted ships with no tank. Who are you trying to protect then? Haulers, just the mega rich haulers… shoud we the EVE community worry about them? I think they are fine and need no protection. If the CONCORD respoense time gets reduced to the point of being an issue for gankers, then they will simply unite and organize more, even I who will join a big group and help them in any ways I can to fight against EVE’s mega rich and oversized whales. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013.md?page=18) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-for-rebalancing-of-the-suicide-gank/368013.md?page=20)