Randomized CONCORD Response

What I would like is to have an academic discussion on the pros and cons. Think of it as a ‘what if’ and tell me what the consequences would be, either positive or negative, from your point of view. Please try to be civil to each other. I know this topic can be controversial, but I’m interested in either factual assessments or subjective opinions. Anyway… Guess we may find out if Ramona thinks I’m a sucker or a masochist.

The idea goes something like this. When a player first open fires on another in a situation that would normally create a criminal timer, the game will randomly decide between setting the player criminal or just suspect. The higher the security of a system, the higher the chance of going criminal is.

The check is made per defender such that if all ships are attacking a single target, only one check will be made, otherwise a large fleet is almost guaranteed to trigger CONCORD early. Once CONCORD is triggered by a defender, everyone who shoots that defender illegally goes criminal, but could still save themselves if they break off the attack before firing another shot. Once CONCORD arrives on grid or the defender leaves the grid, they lose their special CONCORD triggering status.

CONCORD still reacts immediately to criminal activity that happens on grid with them, though CONCORD can be pulled off grid in the usual ways (though the timing will be randomized, which may be a little more annoying).

If the aggressing ship does not initially trigger CONCORD, survives any counter attacks, breaks off their attack before the next random check, and they’ve not gone criminal, then they get to keep their ship. If they continue to press the attack, the check is repeated, either renewing the suspect flag or applying the criminal flag and summoning CONCORD.

Let us assume that the random values, time between random checks, and delay before CONCORD arrives when triggered are set such that, on average, CONCORD response time is the same as the existing response time for a system of a given security status, but that they may show up sooner or later depending on luck.

Let us also assume that, for the purposes of the discussion, the development team has the ability and the will to implement the system if the player base approves of it. We all know this is not true, but I am not interested in what’s practical, just what people would think of it if it were practical.

This is an attempt to address the criticism that ganking does not have risk because the results and mechanics are completely predictable. It is also an attempt to incentivize players to rely on CONCORD less by making them less reliable and give anti-gankers more to do by allowing gankers to potentially save their ships, but still be viable targets if anyone is on grid to shoot at them. I am trying not to penalize or promote any particular play style (Except maybe to make it more feasible to be the police if CONCORD doesn’t come). If you feel it does favor one style over another, let me know which style and why you think it is favored.

Again, if you hate the idea, or see flaws in it, that’s fine and I’d like to hear from you, but please don’t go on a tirade about how stupid and terrible a person I must be for thinking of it.

This further decreases risk and makes the alpha tornadoes an instant win risk free cost free gank ship.

This really only affects small time ganking, where it actually makes it worse for prey, in that there may be little to no retribution for the attackers.

That is, if the chance on a check is 50%, then after just 4 attackers, the change of it being a criminal flag are really no different to now (very close to now).

That is, based on a 50:50 RNG roll:

ships % Criminal
1 50%
2 75%
3 87.5%
4 94%

So essentially, after 4 attacking ships, nothing changes really for the predator or the prey and the outcome is as predictable as now, almost always. Freighter ganking for example, will be essentially 100% criminal as it is now.

However, for small end ganking, this does nothing for the prey. It just offers a buff to ganking T1 haulers, miners, etc. that can be ganked solo.

I don’t see the reason why that part of ganking needs a buff.

I’m not sure what you mean. I specified that the check is based on the defenders, of which there is ordinarily just 1 regardless of the number of ships attacking. (Gankers, as I understand them, rarely split their targets.)

I do see room for criticism, and why someone would interpret it as a ganking buff, but I’m not sure the reasoning you’ve used applies unless I’m missing something.

Yep you did. My mistake in reading it. That makes it even worse.

Gankers usually only attack 1 target at a time, so as a sliding risk, how does this offer anything at all for the prey?

What do they get out of it?

The only advantage they get is that CONCORD may arrive early since the check is made when the target first fires.

I’m not trying to defend the idea, really, just gauge what people think of it and what criticisms they have so I appreciate your taking the time to comment, even if it is to disapprove.

I especially appreciate the objective tone you use in your response.

So there’s a shorter CONCORD response time that goes along with going criminal?

Somehow I don’t see that anywhere in the OP.

If that’s the case, then the natural response from gankers would be to plan on the shortest response time as the time to calculate their dps for; and they’d just bring more ships to still get the kill.

That will be balanced by them not dying every time, so it still seems like a buff for ganking and still just a calculation to provide near certainty.

Someone like @Githany_Red might like it, because it will give them targets that are suspect rather than criminal to shoot, making their intervention more important, but I don’t know that it would really address the criticism of predictability, but rather just move where “predictable” sits if that makes sense.

1 Like

Thank you. That is very good feedback. :slight_smile:

1 Like

While I would like to see CONCORD be less predictable, I feel like your suggestion would be too easily gamed.

As the criminal/not criminal state of a gank is rolled once per defender, all the gankers need to do is to agress any potential target with a single free suicide corvette to check the legal state of the gank. If it’s criminal, gank as usual. If it’s suspect, free kill.

I fear this would make high sec way too dangerous as there basically is no cost to rolling the dice on a target to see if it is a free kill.

1 Like

The check is rolled once per defender per some abstract time value I have deliberately not defined because I don’t feel I am knowledgeable enough on the subject to set it to a fair value. The longer a gank takes, though, the greater the chances the ships are forfeited to CONCORD.

It seems I was unclear when I wrote the OP, but CONCORD response time once a player goes criminal would be shortened by whatever the average delay this system adds before a player goes criminal so that the average response time in total is equal to the current response time.

I grant that this increases the survival rate of gankers, and I also grant that alpha gankers would be all or nothing, except that they’d have to deal with anyone taking advantage of their going suspect. Both are legitimate criticisms/observations.

If EVE is a society, what’s wrong with Concord predictability?

I sure hope Concord response never gets nerfed. Kiss half your player bases bye-bye if it does.

(Ready for the accusations of being a “carebear”)

If you’re asking my opinion, CONCORD is not a part of Eve society. It’s a part of Eve’s rules.

I do not recall seeing Gankers complain about CONCORD response being too fast or too perfect. Instead they will note the mechanics when someone complains that they still die, to which the counter response is sometimes that ganking is not a real risk because the ships are consigned to a loss from the start. Ironically, it’s the carebears who complain that CONCORD is too perfect without realizing it.

I have seen other proposals for randomization but they were all clearly aimed at making ganking harder and gankers didn’t want to engage with such a proposal. However, for my purposes, gankers are the experts on this subject and I don’t want to alienate them if I am to learn anything from those with actual experience and expertise. They may still think I’m full of BS (and I kind of am since I am not well versed on this subject) but my chances of getting quality replies goes up if I make an attempt to be objective and fair in my ignorant proposals.

1 Like

Okay, so it’s not not only rolled once per defender but also repeatedly rolled over time. This means the ‘free kill’ I described earlier won’t be a free kill in many cases when the fight comtinues for some time, as it will eventually turn into a criminal fight due to the periodic rolls.

However, there will still be cases where people can get free kills: high alpha ganks, where a ship is killed instantly.

  1. Use free corvette to check criminal status of gank
  2. If not criminal, kill the target with one shot from Tornados or other high alpha ships
  3. Loot

The only thing lost for the ganker is a free corvette. And it can be applied to any ship, provided you have enough alpha volley ships.

1 Like

Oh, yes, that is a very good point. I hadn’t thought about testing the results with a throw away ship first to see if you have a free window.

I’d make the response time more variable but not a case of ‘response or no response’.

1 Like

It springs to mind, also, that AGers could use a bunch of free corvettes and one ship with a smartbomb to force many checks to happen at once.

1 Like


I support your idea.

If there’s a 50% chance concord bring logi for the victim.

How do you feel about it now?

I don’t have enough information on which to base an opinion. Once CONCORD shows up, as I understand it, the party is over and the gankers are jammed almost immediately and have to wait for the police captain to land a final blow. I don’t think logistics would help a victim much, so I don’t have any reason to change my opinion unless my interpretation is wrong. (Which it could be since I don’t gank or get ganked enough to have a lot of familiarity with exactly what happens.)

Really, though, what I’m asking about is how people feel about making it so criminals could potentially escape. I was also trying to gauge whether people can even have a reasonable discussion on the subject. The exact CONCORD mechanics aren’t something I worry about, though, since I don’t rely on them to protect me. Even though this is my own proposal, I could take it or leave it and it doesn’t bother me either way.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.