Comments

I wrote that in highsec you must tank to enjoy the protection of Concord. Today we’ll see why it is a bad design.

EVE is (supposed to be) a PvP game. Yet, in highsec where the new players without outside connection start their life is punishing PvP. No, I don’t mean you’ll be Concorded for ganking. I mean that you are punished for trying to defend yourself. Every damage, damage projection or EWAR (except ECM) mod you put on your ship decreases your chance to win an encounter. If you did 99% damage to the enemy and Concord did just 1%, you did nothing, as Concord would have killed it in the exact same moment anyway. Your combat mods just wasted slots, PG and CPU for more useful modules, namely tanking. The optimal way of winning against a ganker is having just a whoring mod and max tank. This teaches new players against proper PvP fitting. In other words, Highsec is fundamentally different from all other zones and mastering Highsec mechanics gives you no help in other zones. It’s a common problem in MMOs: the leveling game is very different from the endgame.

The necessity of some Highsec anti-aggression mechanic is obvious: a new player (without external help) would be completely devastated without it. However this mechanic should help him defend himself instead of simply doing it for him, without his contribution. Teach them to fish instead of giving them fish! Also, the rigid barrier between lowsec and highsec should be changed. A 0.5 system is more similar to a 1.0 than to a 0.4 and this shouldn’t stay.

To fix it, let me suggest a much better Concord mechanic that applies to all of empire (1.0-0.1):

- If you attack someone without kill right, wardec, awox or him being criminal/suspect, you get GCC (currently in lowsec you only get suspect) the length of GCC varies with sec status, 2.5 mins for every 0.1 (so 2:30 in 0.1, 5 mins in 0.2 … 25 in 1.0).

- During GCC, unless you are in a pod, you are afflicted by “Concord beam”. This is the only NPC effect, there are no Concord or Faction Police ships (Faction Navy that responds to low faction standings stays)

- The Concord beam makes you unable to warp, dock, take a gate or jump

- The Concord beam places a beacon on you that anyone can warp to. The name of the beacon contains the name of the hull you are flying, for example “Criminal Catalyst”. There is a new interface element that informs you about crimes in the region you are in, so anti-criminals can quickly take gates to arrive to a crime location.

Similarly to the incursion effect, the Concord beam decreases the damage of the afflicted player and his shield armor and hull resists. The decrease effect is 9% for every 0.1 sec status (so in 1.0 the ganker does 1/10 of his normal damage)

Gate and station guns are not changed, which means greatly increased incoming DPS due to decreased player resists
The only difference between highsec and lowsec is that you can’t cyno in 0.5 and above.

This new Concord mechanic wouldn’t kill an unlawful attacker but would make him significantly weaker, allowing the attacked party and whoever in system to fight against him when normally wouldn’t have a chance. This new mechanic would encourage players to defend themselves and each other. Having a group would be beneficial instead of just increased risk due to corp thefts, awoxes and wardecs. PvE ops would require support combat ships. This way a new player would learn to fight for himself and would be able to move lower and lower security systems as his abilities grow.

- Gevlon Goblin

His EVE journey show a very interesting “outside the box” approach to the game, PVE and the trade hubs, reason for which we invite you to pay a visit to his blog.

84 Comments

  1. bangevlon

    Do you even think about the crap ur smoked out head provides? This is literaly the most retarded article u have ever written(competition is high tho).

    But if it happend all i can imagine are cfc/n3/BL/PL fleets in tradehubs shooting everything they see. lower resist ? :D cant warp away ? :D
    who the fuck cares.

    October 12, 2013 at 8:46 am Reply
  2. Ashesofempires

    This argument suffers from a few fatal flaws, exposed in the first paragraph, and just tumbles downhill from there:

    First, only a small portion of the playerbase are gank victims, and an even smaller number are repeat victims.

    Second, the purpose of most ganks is to either profit from the wrecks of your victims, or to persuade them to stop doing something (mining, going to jita). Rarely do people gank, outside of sanctioned events, just to collect tears. Collecting tears happens alongside the previous activities.

    Third, there’s this odd assumption that gank victims learn that they died because they fit their ship to do something other than survive a gank attempt, and not that they undocked in a ship that was either wildly undertanked compared to the value of its fittings or cargo contents, or that they were being killed as part of a larger campaign against miners or people who go to jita.

    Finally, what the FUCK is this bullshit about “winning against the ganker?” You don’t win against a ganker. It’s a binary solution, either you die or you survive. If you die, they use an alt to snap up the wrecks. If you live, you go on with your day. There is no point in fitting to get a killmail against a ganker, because Concord is going to blap them for you.

    The only message a noobie gank victim needs to absorb is: know the risks of undocking in a ship that is worth ganking. Be it a bling fit ship, an industrial full of valuables, or a mining ship with no tank, you make yourself a target.

    Seriously, who the fuck undocks with the intent of getting ganked, in the hopes that they can fight back and get a killmail? I mean what the fuck dude, you’re really grasping at straws here.

    October 12, 2013 at 8:51 am Reply
  3. demrock

    shakes head and moves on

    October 12, 2013 at 3:33 pm Reply
  4. go die asshole

    Classic Goblin…

    October 12, 2013 at 6:16 pm Reply
  5. Laserzpewpew

    Get off this site. You are misguided and jaded.

    October 12, 2013 at 6:16 pm Reply
  6. Ganimoth

    I started reading this article and after few lines I was like “dafuq is this shit”. Then I checked who is author..

    October 12, 2013 at 8:27 pm Reply
  7. CVA Grunt

    most of this article is just mindless thought spewing but hi sec is broken when it comes to pvp if you have a negative standing you should have no protection at all anybody should be able to hunt you down and pod your ass and collect the bounty period ,no timers no kill rights you want to be a ganker/pirate you should have to face the music.
    I also think that battlefields should be free of concord recently some friends of mine were trying to save there pos from a attacker using the drone assist to take down the pos they filled there fleet up with neuts thus making the smart bomb tactics useless they were able to stay in a real tight formation and blast away making rr way more powerful than it normally would if the fleet was spread out..

    October 12, 2013 at 10:32 pm Reply
  8. how to spot a shit goblin post

    ctrl+f ‘gank’. First paragraph. Did not read. Goblin needs to get new material.

    October 13, 2013 at 2:05 am Reply
  9. fuck goblin

    Just fuck off goblin. More fucking bull shit ideas. You clearly are a degenerative mongoloid. Uninstall eve and go play your shitty wow before some ccp dev reads this utter crock of shit and implements it. And to the sites administrators and owners please stop letting these retarded articles from being posted. There aren’t many reasons TMC is better than eve24 but this is a big one.

    October 13, 2013 at 3:28 am Reply
  10. So it may be because it’s late here though am I reading this right.

    “To fix it, let me suggest a much better Concord mechanic that applies to all of empire (1.0-0.1)”
    “- During GCC, unless you are in a pod, you are afflicted by “Concord beam”. This is the only NPC effect, there are no Concord or Faction Police ships (Faction Navy that responds to low faction standings stays)”

    Are you saying bring concord to lowsec?? Also gcc currently works in the fashion mentioned.

    All in all, my thoughts on this article is goblin stfu!

    October 13, 2013 at 2:10 pm Reply
  11. crysantos

    Still have to chuckle when Gevlon is trying to talk about pvp but it’s as usual just about ganking, what a surprise. Nobody gives a shit.

    October 13, 2013 at 2:39 pm Reply
  12. GoblinLikes2SuckIt

    Reading this I was wondering who wrote this piece of shit? OHH Goblin that makes sense..

    New players don’t need protection from ganking because new players have nothing of value worth ganking. Your logic is null and void.

    October 14, 2013 at 7:18 am Reply
    1. Shawn Smith

      You mean you’ve never ganked a newb because they couldn’t fight back?

      October 14, 2013 at 7:13 pm Reply
      1. BS

        No, only people like Gevlon do that, most people don’t do that

        October 18, 2013 at 5:55 pm Reply
  13. Daniel Plain

    i have to admit i kind of enjoy GG’s articles just because they are such a clear window into his neurotic mind…

    October 14, 2013 at 9:44 am Reply
  14. test

    “EVE is (supposed to be) a PvP game” lol whatever moron

    October 14, 2013 at 11:41 pm Reply
  15. Dennis the Dreamer

    You all got Concorded.

    October 15, 2013 at 6:54 am Reply
  16. GG SUCKS DICK

    The best thing about GG articles is reading the comments section telling him what a retarded dickhead he is.

    October 15, 2013 at 7:52 am Reply
    1. oh no

      Riverini please don’t post anymore of these shitty articles.

      October 15, 2013 at 7:55 am Reply
  17. oh noes!

    The Troll in this topic is stronk

    October 15, 2013 at 10:54 am Reply
  18. The14th

    So basically an organized fleet could gank with impunity in the less-populated systems. Hell, a large alliance could crash through any major high-sec system with a strong enough fleet. Your stupid idea could lead to a permanent interdiction on the market hubs, allowing troll factions like the Goons to shut down commerce with nowhere near the isk cost from their current suicide-gank operations.

    And all because you want it to be easier to waste high-sec miners.

    October 15, 2013 at 5:16 pm Reply
  19. muh

    i’ve got a great idea to improve eve. let concord shoot GG’s toons werever they are, eject his assets from the station and make it so he doesn’t respawn. just be a corpse in space for everybody to shoot at.

    yea i think that will improve the game so mutch, i think ppl will actualy not complain about anything else ccp puts in the patch

    October 15, 2013 at 5:38 pm Reply
  20. Boris

    what a load of shit…

    October 15, 2013 at 6:56 pm Reply
  21. turmajin

    Personally id like to see concords response ,be more in line with the system status.IE 1.0 attacker loses ship withiin 1 second of attack,and aggression starts at targeting.This means that 1.0 systems would be no gank systems ,giving new players safe havens .Then for every 0.1 decrease in system status the concord response time increases by 0.5 seconds,till we get to 0.3 systems ,then it becomes free fire .I would also have the number of concord ships ,and types dependent on system status .The lower the status,the less concord ships there are,and of a lower class.So for 1.0 -0.9 systems concord have battleships ect,and in 0.4 they have only destroyers and frigates,and maybe only one battleship.0.3 systems and lower there is no concord presence at all.Thus we have a sliding scale of risk for both gankers ,and prey ,and totally safe systems for new players to lat least learn the basics of the game.

    October 16, 2013 at 2:59 am Reply

Leave a Reply