Say your peace then get on with it.
We all have our agendas. I still want a war dec fix. No one can come up with a good idea, but you don’t see me spamming the forums for it.
No massive EvE drone fleet fight above Reykjavik harbor ?
Sad bunny.
Okay, back to a fix for wardecs, ehm ganking.
I’m too old to deploy sadly. 
1 Like
So, uhhh… new player, and relatively new to the forums. Looks like this thread is filled with a whole bunch of drama, so I’m going to sidestep all that and reply to the OP instead of the debate going on below it.
To start off (I’ve said this in a few threads on related topics), I’m a new face in EVE Online, but this isn’t my first step ever into New Eden. I played DUST 514, through beta and launch and up until close to its death. I had fun, and while it hasn’t involved actual gameplay, I’ve also followed information and news about the game because of various friends who have played the game over the years, dating right back to the game’s launch. I haven’t followed it as closely as games I’m playing personally, but I know more than a typical new person would. I’m not going to pretend to know everything, because I really don’t, but I have seen where this game has come from, and where it’s been going, in fairly general terms at least.
So, looking back at the OP… I have to say this feedback is at the very least much better thought out than a lot of the suggestions people have made. That said, I don’t agree with most of it. I’ll be listing the headings (not quoting) and providing my reasons for disagreeing, some of which are just “gut feeling” because it just seems like this is working as intended from my perspective. Now that we’re clear on what’s happening… lets go!
1-2 CONCORD Pulls
Quite simply, I disagree that this is a problem. This is one of those “gut feeling” things. This game is designed to feel like a real place, and in the real world, it makes sense - if you have the logistics in place to make it happen - to draw the attention of local security or police ofrces to a location that’s not where you want to break in and commit crimes, then do youre real villainy somewhere else before they can turn around. 6 seconds is a long time in PvP, but I think it’s a fair thing to build into the game. It gives players a way to, with some investment in effort (if not resources), expand the viability of their hisec raiding strategies.
1-3 The “forcing values” argument
This isn’t a problem, it’s an argument in defense of the claim that there are problems. And it’s not a very good argument, from where I’m sitting. Freedom means not facing consequences for your decisions. Giving a player full freedom means allowing them to use that freedom to impair the freedom of others. Limiting their ability to impair another player’s freedom is a limitation on their freedom. You’re arguing for more safety here, not more player freedom. Balancing safety/security against freedom is something the real world has to deal with in difficult ways, and most games push harder toward the “security” side of the fence. EVE Online is specifically and intentionally designed to fall closer to actual player freedom, but that means, to a degree, a lack of consequeces.
2-1 safety restrictions on Alphas
This one, from what I know of the system, seems like a very minor restriction to impose. That said, I think it should only apply to hisec. Even lowsec, and obviously for null and elsewhere, even alphas should be able to go red.
2-2 CONCORD arrival time
For obvious reasons, given that I disagree with the premise that this is a problem, I disagree with this suggestion to “fix” it. If the devs decide they like your idea more than I do, though, I won’t complain. I’m a hisec miner so it’ll work to my benefit.
2-3 Kill Rights improvements
I didn’t argue with the problem being addressed here, because I agree with it. That said, I don’t entirely agree with your suggestion for how to fix it. I think you’re suggesting making it too strong in one sense, and not strong enough in another. Firstly, 30 days seems to me like a fair amount of time, I don’t think it should be extended. Second, I’m assuming you mean that the target of the Kill Right is assigned a weapon timer, to prevent them from docking. And 60s is the default weapon timer, so that seems fair to me as well. In addition, I think using a Kill Right to destroy a ship should count as CONCORD authorised, so the (former) ganker doesn’t get their insurance payout. Giving the player the target’s name is sufficient for a Locator Agent to be used, BUT I think there should be some effective standing bonus for a player wishing to do this against a Kill Right target, so you can get the rest of the information more easily, but only on that target (and so experienced and willing alphas can more effectively work their way to proper access when hunting with Kill Rights). This would have the same result you’re looking for, but without creating excessively long-term penalties for a shot stint as a pirate. It’s something a lot of players recommend for new players to at least try out sometime, and giving them a year-long punishment for doing so would be a bit too much.
2-4 Ban on hisec station/structure access for negative SS players
This is another problem where I agree that there’s a problem, but disagree with your solution, at least in part. I’d argue not to hard-block a player from docking, but to charge a docking fee for players with deep enough negative SS. With the cost of docking being scaled to not just the security rating of the system and the status of the player, but also on the value of the ship they’re bringing into the station. Alongside (or instead of?) this, they could add a permanent suspect flag on the more heavily negative SS players in hisec space. If you’re in 0.5 this would only kick in when you hit -10.0 but for higher security, this could drop as a linear progression to 1.0 space flagging anyone at -5.0 or worse. This makes these players a more attractive target for potential gankers, and anti-gankers trying to play at being police, but lets the identified criminal at least have a chance to rush through an attack and dock up.
3. Data extraction
This one, I just flat disagree with. I don’t think it’s at all necessary or will provide any meaningful benefit to the community, the developers, or the game world.
I hope this post derails the other conversation that’s going on right now… probably not but we’ll see 
1 Like
The way things stand right now a character with a sec status below -5 becomes an ‘outlaw’, or, less formally, ‘permaflashy’. These characters flash red, like criminals, but do not have the criminal flag that summons CONCORD. They are free to engage. In addition to being free to engage, outlaws are pursued by faction police (FacPo, for short), if they remain stationary for too long. FacPo are not invincible and all powerful, like CONCORD, but they are formidable enough to discourage outlaws from remaining in one place in space for long and thus other players will rarely find them in space to fire on.
2 Likes
But we know it to be true 
Sure bud. We all know you used an alpha. You sure didn’t use your “main”
Grampy, no one uses kid anymore
Many people argue the opposite of OP: make CONCORD response times longer.
That makes it easier for newbies to get into ganking as there is more time – and therefore more lesser-SP tool options – to use to get into ganking. Furthermore, it allows anti-ganking fleets more time to actually perform roles other than EWAR or remote repair roles. For them, too, it opens up more counter-play. Finally, veteran gankers would need to multibox less, which intorduces a negative financial incentive for CCP but improves general morale of the playerbase, as many people view multiboxing as a net negative on the game’s ecosystem – but it is so prevalent, it is one of those “necessary evil” things.
All of these would be more engaging playstyle choices for players involved. However, it undoubtedly controversial to propose due to the increased danger to everyone in high sec.
1 Like
Home skillet, you admitted to the botting.
You admitted to the griefing
Also uh did you check your EVE box for writing that highlighted being away from the keyboard is a central tenet to playing the game or
1 Like
Thanks for this! (the whole post, not just the line I’m quoting)
It’s good to see the reverse of the OP’s suggestion being proposed with reasons why it’s a good idea. I haven’t dug into this much (well, not for a LOOOONG time, anyway, and I wasn’t a player back then), so hearing all sides of the conversation helps me to understand the current state (and the possibilities) better.
Do you mean that in the literal sense of the word “ganking” in EvE, namely unexpectedly attacked (perhaps while you were AFK mining) ?
Or do you mean it in a post-discussion sort of way, that people had the audacity to post their own opinions and not be so gracious to let you have the spotlights and the floor all to yourself, in any thread with the word “gank” ?
Objectively speaking, would you say that you had more right to thread space than anyone else ?
And how do you equate other people posting opinions different from yours with “harassment” ?
Uh huh. So like you said, it should be written on that box of yours right?
Right?
2 Likes
Uh huh. So what you’re saying is it isn’t written on the box.
Despite you claiming being away from the keyboard is a core tenet of playing EVE Online.
Man. You just decided to hijack that ROFLcopter and nosedive it into the ground yourself huh?
Bro. I am literally secondhand embarrassed for you ROFL.
Well, you dodged my question twice
Is it on the box or not
Embarrassed for what? I’m not claiming a core tenet of a vidya game is not being at the keyboard for the game
You not only said your piece, you’ve repeated it at anyone who had the nerve to contradict you, in every single thread you showed up in, making you the most prolific poster in most cases.
You can hardly claim a victim spot, after everything you wrote, forcing people to either block you or leave the forums.
The patient ones first try with advice on how to protect against ganking, not understanding that you don’t want any advice at all, neither do you like it when advice is given to new players when it comes to ganking. As you have openly advertised that you want ganking nerfed or, preferably, banned altogether, you initiated an open conflict. You’ve become a perpetually transmitting propaganda station, constantly drawing attention - which may or may not be humorous or patient. And just like with any propaganda station you don’t shy away from using any tactic. That is what people reproach you. So don’t start complaining about the attention you created. If it’s not the kind of attention you were after, try a different tactic next time.
You took people for fools. It seems that people are telling you they’re on to you and your psychological games. Those games are, quite frankly, obnoxious.
4 Likes
You realize my very uses of the term show how long I’ve played online games. LOL. Never bought an account for any game in my life
Why not giggle? It’s hilarious
And uh, you dodged the question a third time. Maybe it slipped your mind?
Is what you’re claiming on the box or
No problem.
I have also seen arguments around the old bounty system – which was suddenly removed with no solid explanation other than “it’ll come back Soon™” (it did not) – which helped financially lower the barrier to some high sec schenanigans. As the larger a player bounty, the more that payout offset the cost to gank them, or wardec them, in high sec.
I’m personally not convinced returning the player bounty system alone would improve the stagnant nature of high sec. From my understanding, it was unchanged even from how I remember it of 10 years ago – and that was “pre-Crimewatch” era, where anyone and everyone was wardeccing each other in high sec – so at that time bounties were just a way to help (but not solely, unless you truly hunted after the hefty-bountied players) make a living doing PVP and fighting wars. In that sense, I think the “player bounties” concept would need to be a part of a larger, more comprehensive change involving wardecs and such. Today, it is very hard to make decent living purely doing PvP, and CCP’s future with Faction Warfare seems to be towards creating new PvEvP content instead. 10 years ago, with passive moons and various ways to get ISK for blapping a ship (beyond simple loot drops), there was great incentive for PvP folks to fight over moons so they could skip the PvE grind and go straight into optimizing their PvP fights to keep their moons, to keep their income streams, to keep PvP-ing.
I’m not saying that passive moons are the answer, either. It’s just illustrative of how “living off of PvP” today is a lifestyle out of reach of almost all players.
1 Like
Not the same battle as @Altara_Zemara, but at one point it was at 28%, and one of the many hostile supercaps on grid was a Molok.
1 Like
That’s not what happened.
Step 1: Lucas Kell makes a statement about ganking
Step 2: Anyone else tells you that your viewpoint is not in line with the way the game is intentionally designed (often adding proof, like old advertisements, snippets from interviews, etc)
Step 3: Lucas Kell repeats statement, more sharply and maybe starts using ad hominems
Step 4: The people who get offended by your step 3 start bickering with you
Step 5: An uninteresting endless loop of bickering, blaming, victim posturing, repeating, word twisting, gaslighting, duck testing, insulting, and usually spiraling out of control
While I was trying to write a decent reply you come up with another insult. So I deleted it and will end with what you just typed.
Earlier we had a small exchange about honesty and decency on the forums. You laughed it away.
Here’s a hint: write on social media as you would speak to a person face to face. But then we wouldn’t have these funny, content driven threads, would we.
7 Likes
You left out step 6…
1 Like
I think Wad has the right of it…
Lucas you are the type of guy that barges into a place where a group of people of playing Monopoly exactly by the rules in the manual…
You start telling them how they are playing wrong and blah blah…and teh more they point at the rulebook the more violent you get at them, until you start telling them houses and hotels are not allowed!
please dude, go get some help
6 Likes