Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Roaming for rats

EVE players first heard about the "tags for sec" proposal in the winter summit minutes (pages 63 and 64) at which point we were told five things about them:
  1. There would be a new type of tag that could be traded for higher security status, when combined with some ISK.
  2. The rats that dropped these tags would appear only in low-sec, "about as often as hauler spawns."
  3. The point to the tags was less about allowing pirates to repair their security status, and more about getting people into low-sec.
  4. The tags would only be exchangeable in low-sec CONCORD stations.  And,
  5. There would be a hard limit on how much your security status could be improved using this system.
At the time, a lot of players -- including myself -- thought that last one meant that there would be a hard limit on how often the tags could be used.  A final note in the minutes indicated that...
Greyscale cautioned that the Tags4sec system was far more lenient towards suicide gankers, and so they had to be careful about lessening the penalties for low-sec piracy, which might buff suicide ganking to an unacceptable degree.
Today, CCP Masterplan has released the dev-blog talking about the implementation of these changes for Odyssey.  The remarkable thing about the dev-blog is how little has changed between December and May.  Often when we read about upcoming game mechanics changes in the CSM Summit Minutes, by the time those changes are implemented, the specifics are unrecognizable.  Not so this time where almost nothing has changed.  Here's the money line of the dev-blog:
We have had players that would rather stop playing altogether than grind their way back up by killing NPCs
Yup.  ;-)  Heaven knows that occasional pirate players have been begging for the ability to skip the asteroid rat grind for quite a while now.  On paper, "tags for sec" is a great idea for three reasons:
  • it creates a new profession for players that want to farm these tags;
  • it creates a reason for players to be out in space in low-sec; and,
  • it allows players that wish to skip the grind to do so--
Wait.  Aren't those last two goals mutually incompatible?

Er... yes.  They are.  The question is... does it matter?  EVE -- and indeed, any MMO -- will always have players that don't mind the grind and players that do.  With this change, EVE is simply offering players the option to skip it.  Yes, it's rather ironic that the ability for you to be able to skip the grind is purchased by someone else out there doing twice the grinding.  But as long as someone is out there in space atoning for your sins, that would seem to be the important bit.  ;-)

Let's go back to the premise that tags are unlimited use, though, because there's some interesting implications to that.  Now, we have no idea yet how the market is going to value these tags.  But if they are not too awfully expensive, there's some interesting implications here.  Rote Kapelle has been known to go in for suicide ganking from time to time.  Suppose I set up a Rote ganking fleet along the following lines:
  1. Pre-stage a big pile of these tags and a small pile of Taloses in a low-sec CONCORD station close to Jita.
  2. Do a low-sec roam of Rote Kapelle pilots from our home system in Syndicate to this low-sec system.
  3. Everyone sets their medical clone to a station in this system, the CONCORD station itself if possible.
  4. Everyone draws a Talos, then uses enough tags to get their security status to -2.5.
  5. The Talos gang roams to Jita.  Meanwhile, a neutral alt cargo scans ships until a juicy hauler or freighter is found.
  6. Upon arrival, the Rote gang ganks the hauler or freighter using as many Taloses as necessary.  The survivors scoop the loot, standing guard over each other until everyone warps off.
  7. Those killed and those with security status below -2.5 jump clone back to the low-sec system where their medical clone is.
  8. Repeat/continue from step four until everyone gets bored.
Again, "roaming" in this fashion would either require a fairly low-cost tags market or some pretty good hauler drops from those ganked to pay for those tags.  But it's not outside the realm of possibility for more casual "Jita ganking roams."  Is this buffing suicide ganking to an unacceptable degree?  I and another player specifically asked about this sort of thing during the round tables at Fanfest on this topic and were told that yes, this was working as designed.

It's something you Jita traders might want to keep in mind.

That said, the numbers of these tags are going to be low enough that it's virtually assured that someone is going to try to corner the market on these tags, and try to do so right from the first day.  So it'll be entertaining to see what the initial price point for the tags are.

One other thing: the same dev-blog also describes a very significant change to the way ratting happens today.  The type of security status ratting that all of us that do it favor is a quick jaunt from system to system to system in a bomber, killing one battleship rat per system.  Every 15 minutes or so, you'd then rack up the sec status for each of these rat kills with the game giving you all of the ISK credit and sec status credit for the highest-value rat that you'd killed in each system.  Apparently though, this type of ratting was not intended and is a side effect of how the caching system works rather than something designed.  We've just all been taking advantage of it for a while.

The new system will instead give you security status credit for the highest-value rat that you kill every five minutes, regardless of the number of systems you travel to.  It's also implied that the security status credit for rats is going to be somewhat nerfed as well.  So, if you want to sec status rat you can still do so, but somewhat ironically you're no longer going to be encouraged to travel to a lot of different systems to do it.  A circle of three systems or so is going to be the new optimal, as long as you can find three systems each with one or more BS rats in it.  At the end of each 15-minute three-system cycle, the rat in the first system should respawn so you can return to it to start the cycle again.

Given the new tags, though, it'll be interesting to see if players still do this, or alternately try to follow this kind of cycle in low-sec while seeking out the new rats.  I can tell you from experience that hauler spawns don't drop very often...

Happy ratting!


  1. Dinsdale PirannhaMay 2, 2013 at 4:54 PM

    So, in a nutshell, high sec just got less safe, and at the same time high sec mining rewards have been smashed, especially in trit and pyerite mining. Yeah, tell me more about this risk / reward system that CCP and the null sec propagandists love so much.

    In other news HBC and Nulli are supposed to be going to war, but of course, attacking the moon goo infrastructure of your adversary is off-limits. And of course, any ship losses that are doctrine fit are replaced by the alliance.

    Yes, good to see that risk / reward is alive and well in null sec, just like in high sec.

    1. You're comparing the mechanical realities of hisec with the political realities of nullsec. CCP has nothing to do with the fact that sovereign nullsec is too gentlemanly at the moment.

    2. CCP didn't nerf the HS mining, but buff the null sec mining.
      Go mining in null then, if you think it has better reward, and less risk.
      The extra trit and pyerite spawned in null will not likely flow back to hs, only meet the need of null sec industry.

    3. hisec risk/reward was way off (too much reward for not enough risk, if that wasn't thunderously obvious); this corrects some of the imbalance.

      If you want your hisec alliance to have a ship replacement fund, they can make one. Regardless of which entity (player or player alliance), risk of ship loss remains waayyy higher in null than hisec.

      As for moon goo, that wealth is getting redistributed in what's sure to be a more contestable, violent way, and that only as an intermediate step.

    4. Oh look another "Nullsec is safer than highsec becuase players make it safe for themselves" idiot.

    5. meanwhile mex and iso are still a bottleneck and the smart miner will switch to plag and omber to profit.

      anybody not in a fleet with mining boost plus hauling logistics AND using a procurer or skiff deserves to be kicked in the teeth when they are located in a belt. the only thing that bothers me is the half-hearted response to bumping from CCP. let me point to dec-shielding; exploit, exploit, exploit - accepted.

      meanwhile Ice got improved through better cycle times. 600sec per cycle?! at that rate afk is not crime but a necessity for sanity sake.

      in other news, Burn Jita turned out to be a flash in a pan. (pun intended). Hulkageddon V has become a joke that nobody knows the punchline to.

      as for risk and reward. of course it is a piece of crap invented as excuse for demeaning hi-sec. its the trump card deal out for just about every post which touches on the eternal war between industrialist and pirate. when trit was worth 0.6 isk per unit, and suicide ganking was insurable - where was this vaulted risk/reward rubbish then? so it is a obvious invention. what were miners told when there was a lack of reward? go run missions.

      what you think you can do something about it? forgot about it. let them whine. Dinsdale - do know why mining in hi became so lucrative suddenly? because of null whining in the first place. they shot themselves in the foot before and will do again.

    6. I quite agree.

      It seems that CCP is encouraging a migration towards low/null. It will be interesting to see how much the high sec population declines as null sec manufacturing alts disappear.

    7. Remind me again which game mechanics protect the moon goo infrastructure, or replace the doctrine fits.
      The security of the 0.0 empires is based on their ability to organize and maintain diplomatic relations, granted they have become very good at it and maybe something should be done in that direction but your argument is faulty nevertheless.

      As a (mostly) highsec industrialist im intrigued by the changes, yes it might shake up my operations. Two of the bigger ones are just entering a cooldownphase and might be on hold until the ore, ice and mineral-markets settle down but with every change there are oportunities. Even if you are not as quik and ruthless in exploiting them as a certain new collaegue of our host, congratulations by the way, there will be lots of interesting new waays to make isk.
      And if you are right and worst comes to worst ill just settle back to stationtrading (boring btw) and lowsec exploration (really fun but not really good money compared to industry or trading).
      All in all the world is changing but not ending adapt and have fun.

    8. I'm a W space dweller who doesn't really care too much about the tag for security status changes, but I have to agree with Dinsdale Pirannha. Every form of PVP should have some risk to it, otherwise there's just no challenge. High sec griefing has been the most risk adverse form of PVP in the game since the beginning, and it needs to be balanced (although what I call balance the high sec griefers call "nerfing"). There should be no risk free PVP in Eve (and getting your ship blown up by Concord does not qualify).

    9. Before you say high sec just got less safe, you have to see how the market for tags comes out. I hadn't noticed the "as often as hauler spawns" part, which is a very low rate. And how many tags are required to pull up sec status? Just these two things makes me think the tags will be too expensive to support the gank roam scenario presented here. If tags are as scarce as I think they will be, as Jester says, Goons will probably use their Tech wealth to snap them up to support their freighter ganking ops.

      In practice, I think this all means people will still need to grind up sec status but the occasional tag drop will help speed up the process in the way that storyline missions give big boosts to faction status.

    10. I don't really see your point here.

      If you've ever ratted in low/null, you'll know that hauler spawns are pretty rare. Seeing one once every 10 hours or so is about right for me... So I think you're assuming these are going to be incredibly cheap, almost throwaway items. If CCP are also nerfing the ability to gain sec status without the tags, then they're going to be in even higher demand, probably far in excess of supply.

      The result of this will be that ganking haulers is likely to become more common, but only on those targets that carry a larger drop value than is currently considered worthwhile, to make up for the purchasing of these (likely pretty expensive) tags. Simply adding more suicide ships won't work as well, due to the tags being in short supply, and only effective for an individual, not the group involved. So, the simple solution is don't fly haulers with billions of ISK worth of goods. Carry less stuff, and make more trips.

      As for the mining (which is a little off topic, but whatever), lets look at some figures for the earning potential, per hour, of a level V perfect character, refining these ores in their retriever:

      - Arkonor [NULL] = 16,502,304
      - Jaspet [LOW] = 14,565,082
      - Scordite [HI] = 13,073,114

      That's before worrying about things like docking to deposit ore, flying from belt to belt, and availability/quantity of the ores.

      So, going to mine in null, where it's open season for ganking, battleship rat spawns are commonplace, and hauling is a nightmare. All that should net you an extra 3.5 million ISK an hour?

      Putting that into some context; the going rate for a T2 fitted retriever is about 50-60 million. To make it worthwhile mining in null, as opposed to hi-sec, you're looking at that difference as your incentive. The huge increase in risk means that having to spend 15 hours to buyback your fitted retriever simply isn't worth it. If you lose two mining ships in this 15 hour window, you're already considerably worse off than if you would've just mined with minimal risk in hi-sec.

      In that respect, I wouldn't view mining rewards in hi-sec being "smashed", I'd look at low and null-sec mining operations getting a much needed (and deserved) buff.

      The very fact that Spodumain's description reads:

      "Spodumain is amongst the most valuable ore types around, as it is one of only three ore types that yields the ultra-rare megacyte."

      Yet, using our earlier test character, nets a whopping 4,920,213 ISK an hour, says that the current yield system isn't working as intended.

      Oh, and as for the HBC and Nulli war. Them not destroying each others moon goo infrastructure, and their ships being reimbursed. That's up to them. During WWII, there was an agreement between all the involved parties not to bomb Rome, due to its historical relevance. This was kept to, as you can tell if you've ever been there (beautiful place), and I fail to see how this is really any different. It's their war, they can agree anything they want. That's the whole point and the major appeal for many of this great sandbox game we call EVE.

    11. On the other hand an alliance of 2000 russians and 3500 renters just got destroyed last month. Many of them still have *all* their assets locked down in an outpost which has been turned into a complete lockdown jail (themittani.com/news/destroying-outposts-workaround).

      The big alliances do things to lessen the risk for their line members, but the risk is still there. It's moved up the food chain. A player in one of the large blocks can lose far more than any gank victim when an alliance falls.

  2. "I can tell you from experience that hauler spawns don't drop very often…" no they don't, do they. And lowsec isn't filled with ratters like hi sec and 0.0 to catch every one of those spawns. So rare in fact that I think in the end, just about everyone will end up being disappointed wit this new feature. The average -10 joe is going to be sad when they realize just how rare and expensive these end up being. Those that heard about his and thought "great, now I can get my sec back to go to jita and shop or do an incursion once every few months" are going to be disappointed. But eve has some very rich people in it, so the high sec guys will still be in danger of the gank/tags/repeat roam.

    In the end, I bet most -10s are going to be mad they can't afford the tags, and chain ratting was nerfed for them. Hi sec haulers will be mad they still will get ganked by people using this. And everyone will end up saying this was put in game specifically to help out the goons.

  3. While I'm neutral on most of the changes until I can see them in SiSi, I am annoyed at the contradiction between the talk of "We recognize solo and hisec as valid play styles" and the actions of "We are nerfing existing solo and hisec play options". Along with, of course, the contradiction between "We want more people to mine/industry in low-sec so we are upping the ore" versus "We are putting very high value rats into the ore belts the drop something PvP players really want". One of those things is going to be unsuccessful and a waste of CCP's time. The whole things feels a bit of left hand not talking to the right hand…or worse, CCP trying to be clever.

    It does feel weird to actually agree with Greyscale on something…tags4sec as currently described is going to be a nightmare to balance. I don't think it would take a major change to make it a little more reasonable though…all it might take is a cooldown period between purchases of sec status, or an activation delay between the purchase and when the status changes. Still no grinding, but stockpiling the tags gets a little less useful and will require more planning.

  4. Hi Jester - dont the tags only impact your status up to 0? I think that if you want to get to +2.5 you have to do it the 'traditional way'.


    1. Yep, the tags only work to 0. But in the description above, I only mention using enough tags to get to -2.5 (enough to safely traverse Jita), not +2.5.

  5. CCP will probably insure the tags are expensive enough to only be used on occasion to save people from quitting due to the grind. Very rich gangkers may use them at the beginning but I doubt they will use them over and over.

    Speaking of which, when is CCP going to give some love to 0.0 NPC space

  6. EXACTLY because of described here player style, the tag's tier system introduced in devblog makes sense.

    I do expect the second-from-top tier (Transporter) to be cost far more than any other.
    Pirates with -10,0 already could not care less about their secstatus, so 90% of peoples who do care are casual lowsec roamers and Jita gankers, and they all need their secstatus to just be able to enter that highsec after roam or a few ganks. So i think market should balance itself out after a while, so this could be working as intended indeed...

  7. Hmm this does mean a fairly major change to ratting patterns. In that you need to wipe out each spawn to have a chance of getting a tag rather than just killing the high value BS and waiting for it to return to the spawn. Bombers really wont be so hot if the frigates need killing also.

  8. Everyone - and I mean, everyone - agrees that grinding sec status is one of the absolutely worst things in EVE. Worse than mining, worse than POS bashing.

    Even the high sec players agree, which is why many of them won't go to low sec, even on a roam. Preemptive attacks penalize the attacker - which is fine for a -10 low sec pirate, but not so good for a 0.0 high sec resident, who still wants to be able to roam freely through high sec. This has always been a barrier for noobs, many of whom are dismayed to learn that having a good time for few hours in low sec usually means you can't get back into high sec (a common comment I hear from noobs is "this sec thing sucks", just before they quit).

    So, Tags4Sec is a good thing.

    Unfortunately, unlike tags for faction standings, which each player can only do one-time, tags for sec status is something that will be done repeatedly, per player - pretty much each and every time high sec players go roaming in low sec, and each and every time a low sec player wants to go roaming in high sec.

    This means that a lot, and I mean, a LOT, of tags need to drop, regularly, often, frequently. Much more than currently drop for faction standings.

    If not, then the tags will be ridiculously expensive, and, like T2 rigs, few players will use them, with one exception. The majority will end up going back to the newly nerfed sec status grind, and complain even more loudly about it. High sec players and noobs will still be totally put off from roaming low sec.

    The one exception? High sec gankers.

    Even if the tags are expensive, ganking an AFK AP hauler, filled with PLEX, hardwirings, and other goodies will make it worthwhile. Esp. when coupled with the new bounty system, which actually pays off big if you pop a pod full of expensive +5 and HG pirate implants.

    So... I don't see Tags4Sec working, unless there are a lot of tags available, and everyone can afford to use them. I hope CCP realizes this fully.

    Based on this scenario, then, tags prices will probably start out high, folks will rush to low sec to mine them, and the market will eventually be flooded, pushing prices back down. The gold rush will end, and the only people mining tags will be full-time low sec residents - everyone else will just buy them off market, as with faction standing tags.

    High sec players will be less reticent about visiting low sec, since those sec hits can now be more easily erased. Low sec players get a new revenue stream, unique to low sec.

    Gankers? Not much will change there. Really. As it stands now, -10 sec status isn't much of an impediment to high sec ganking. I've done it several times myself, easy as pie - some -10 players do it all day long. Tags4Sec will make setting up some larger ganks a bit more convenient, and perhaps a few more wannabee gankers will appear, but those wannabees will get bored and soon drift off to something else, just like the wannabee ninjas.

    tl;dr - Tags4Sec can and should be a good thing for everyone (assuming CCP doesn't screw it up).

  9. "Now, we have no idea yet how the market is going to value these tags."

    You certainly *do* have an idea. You and your group of suicide taloses *are* the market. Very few who lives in null-sec or wormholes will ever need them because they don't take sec hits. Everyone who PvPs in low-sec will use them, but the use case will be limited. This leaves high-sec suicide gankers as the primary user of tags-4-sec. At least the negotiator and transporter tags. Let me explain.

    Assuming even distribution of drops, the tags that take you from -5.0 to 0 will be worth quite a bit more than the ones that take you from -10 to -5 simply because they will be used more often. Take a low-sec resident with moderate PvP activity. The only reason to raise security status is to be able to travel in high-sec without being shot at. It will be a one-off affair. He'll need some tags from all of the spectrum anywhere from every few weeks to every few months. Meanwhile, a suicide squad like you described would need to constantly hover between -5.0 and 0, depending on the security status of the system they'd like to rat in. Due to the transporter tags (from -5 to -2) being used for 50% more of the spectrum than negotiator tags (-2 to 0), they'll likely be the most expensive. And suicide squads will be able to gobble them up like candy.

    So the market price will be determined largely by what suicide gankers are willing to pay for them. They're start at a predictably high price due to the slow trickle of them into the market and attempts at cornering the market. As more flow in, the price will slowly settle down. Just as you treat your talos, mods, and ammo as consumables in a high-sec gank, factor in how much more you'd be willing to pay to use (what are likely to be quite expensive) tags and how much that would raise the bar for potential targets. While a freighter hauling 1.5 bil of goods might be profitable to gank, if you factor in the cost of tags and their redemption fee for every member of your fleet after every couple kills, that threshold might well rise above 2-3 billion, meaning less viable targets to shoot for profit.

    I don't think it will happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if the rate of freighter kills in high-sec actually dropped after odessey.

  10. I feel bad using the old phrase "But think of the children" but - "think of the miners!" in this situation sounds better! :P

    Its funny as if you read through all of the dev blog a dev (or any other player) hardly EVER actually says "How will this affect the buff on ore belts?" as it seems like that they are giving miners an excuse to head into low sec and then letting out a pack of rabid dogs to go chase them down!

    The rareity actually works against the miners favor as it means that there will simply be MORE people looking for them more often and since they are rare they'll have a fairly high value and that will obviously keep competition high.

    Any miners caught in the cross fire will be an added bonus; even to a fuzzy carebear in low sec easy pray like a mining barge would be too good to miss.

    Ok its a neat idea to allow players to 'redeem' themselves and get back into highsec, but I really don't think there will be many players who have seen the errors of their ways and gone good - they are most likely going to use this system to simply regain access to high sec and cause trouble. With this change I can see a 0.0 sec status being considered the same as 'low sec status' since it is most likely a pirate usings tags to keep up a 'nice guy' ruse and allow access into high sec.

    I can see 'good guy' corps and fleets now wanting > 1.0+ sec standing as it would at least force the most determined awoxer to grind up sec status again in a way that you simply can't buy and maybe it'll add a little more prestige and protection for those players who do have a high sec status as everyone at 0.0 simply can't be trusted any more. The only problem with that is with miners & industrialists who don't mission run to increase that sec status and while may be completely harmless and 'good' they may find themselves less trusted because of their 0.0 sec status as they could be a 'wolf in sheeps clothing'.

    Like I said on the forums - it would be nice to see the sec status change history; its recorded on the character that YOU can see but not anyone else, and giving others access to that information would at least give some indication of 'repeat offenders' who you can see have bounced between negative and 0.0 a lot and it would imply that they simply reset their sec status when it gets too low and it can raise a few red flags if they try to pass themselves off as anything else.

    Ganking like you said it going to be an interesting one because Hans was saying in the forum post that this type of activity is EXPECTED because they want MORE trouble in high sec rather than less - and the reason that some people don't gank in high sec is because they have a low sec status (from ganking) and it prevents them from re-entering high.

    Is that now a GOOD thing? To allow MORE ganking in high sec? Ok it sounds great to the ganker but what about the victim? We all know that most gankers have quite deep pockets, else they wouldn't be doing the ganking in the first place - so losing a ship to them is a drop in the oceon - add these tags to the mix and is it really going to be that expensive to be prohibiative? Probably not. But to the victims a gank can be a game ender. They can invest every last ISK cent into a mining barge to have some one blow it up for them and they'll rage quit there and then. Ok the fact that they 'rage quit' in the first place is another topic as it aruges if they are a player worth keeping in the first place but surely adding MORE ganks will result in LESS high sec / new players as they get slowly killed off from the places they feel are supposed to be safe (ie, high sec).

    Other than that I think CCP need to seriously consider how and where these tags drop and / or where low sec ore lives as I can see the tags being a big hit but the ore changes will change little for those poor neglected ore belts of low.

  11. Wasn't there some talk at FanFest 2013 about this "tags 4 sec" thing ending up costing in the order of 300-500M just in ISK to complete the tag hand-in?

    I imagine that you'd want to have a fairly profitable suicide ganking spree in order to justify 300M ISK investment.

    1. I don't think anyone knows yet what the tags are gonna cost. It's going to have a lot to do initially with who tries to control the market.

    2. jester.. I think they were referring to the cost paid to concord with the tag. not the cost of the tag

  12. "And of course, any ship losses that are doctrine fit are replaced by the alliance.

    Yes, good to see that risk / reward is alive and well in null sec"

    When ships blow up, they gotta be replaced.
    Just because the HighSec Alliances dont got SRP for their ships, its not the fault of the "risk/reward" in nullsec. The assets still get destroyed, the reward in 0.0 is just big enough that allianced pile enough money that they dont have to care up to a certain level.

  13. I don't think the Tags4Sec will have much impact on ganking. Yes a player can join ganking sooner as he can just pay for the tags and buy his sec status back up.
    But as you said, the ganking target must be worth it. And that is simply the point. Those out there who take there 10-15 bil in one freighter simply deserve to die by gankers.
    If you want to get that stuff to market you should be willing to take either more trips on your own or call in friends (or alts) and run it with 5 to 8 freighters in a convoy. Just because you travel in high sec doesn't mean you have to do it all alone.

    And I wouldn't be surprised if most of the ganked freighters are just some alts of super rich players who don't mind. In that case all stuff "redistributed" to the gankers is good stuff.

    Short: If you don't want to get ganked, don't put everything and your mother in one freighter. Get friends, split the value!

  14. Why exactly should I roam through 3 systems to find BS's? There are forsaken hubs or sacred havens in each decent 0.0 system that have tons of BS in it, if I want I can even combine farming isk with gaining sec status 3 times as fast as before when not doing sec safaris.

  15. The dev blog also mentions Processing fee.
    "Each tag has an associated ISK fee. This 'processing fee' is paid to CONCORD along with the tag when you turn it in. [This value is still in balancing, and is likely to change before release]"
    If this fee is maybe around 75-100 million isk to get from -10 to 0 then those roam not be that common.

  16. While it looks like that this system creates a new industry for low sec ratters, it ultimately benefits the larger groups who now can trade ISK for sec status via tags bought on the market. If these corps can also blockade the transfer of tags to stations where they can be redeemed, yet another level of game play can be envisaged. Really large blocs may use their rank and file pilots to create buffers of tags to be used in high sec activities such as Burn Jita. This would give young players a goal, a means to add value to their team and exposure to lowsec rather than stay in blue nullsec.

    Ultimately, the price of tags will be set by the players and their actions - and that can't possibly be a bad thing.

  17. Dinsdale, if you are so pissed about this risk vs reward, maybe you need to get some moons for yourself?

    But be aware that the risk of boredom is a real risk as well. ;-)

  18. I strongly suspect that these tags will be hellishly expensive for quite some time, until a balance point is reached between supply and demand. Which is all right and proper.

    Some folks seem to feel that hisec ganking should be viable as a profession. What this says to me, is that hisec ganking is viable as an activity, but like all forms of PVP, you're going to need pay for it. What this tags for sec status is giving, is a way to pay for your sec status with PLEX. It give you that option, no different when your PVP boats get popped, to buy yourself back into the game.

    The changes to the timer for grinding status, seems to be to be a slight nerf, increasing the time to get that status back. But coupled with the market option for instant status gain, I see hisec ganking carrying on.

  19. For what it's worth, the closest low-sec Concord station to Jita I was able to find is Jan (http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/Jan), 5 jumps from Jita. I suspect that's where the most robust tag market will develop. (At least it's where I'd sell tags, unless there's a closer station.)

    That's not a terribly long distance to travel after a suicide gank. It really all does depend on what prices finally work out to.

  20. Oddly, I reach almost the opposite conclusion reading this, after taking into account the orders of magnitude of the factors involved.

    For simplification, let's split the gankers in a few categories:
    G1: gankers that grind their sec-status back, the normal way.
    G2: gankers that circunvent their sec-status.
    G3: gankers that use tags.

    Pre-Odyssey: {G1, G2}
    Pos-Odyssey: {G1, G2, G3}

    Since grinding sec-status will be harder, there is a pressure to shrink G1. Given the supply and demand of the tags, they will likely be expensive, which puts a soft cap on G3.

    I expect a significant portion of G1 to either migrate to G2 or G3 or, failing that, stop ganking. I don't expect any significant impact on G2. I expect a few people that currently are neither (or only occasionally) in G1 or G2 to join G3.

    Whether there will be more ganking than now will happen only if the activity provided by G3, plus the increase on G2, will be bigger than the decrease of activity likely to be seen on G1.

  21. I'm for a sec4tag system, but I would like it not to be NPC based. Actually gave it some thought back in January and posted this:
    to Features and Ideas, but only to deaf ears it seams.
    Yes, after giving it some more thought I see that there are a lot of other aspects that needs to fall in line first, such as getting old-school pirates into pirate factions and such, but I still think something like this idea should be the long term goal for this feature. Or am I at a total loss here??

  22. I'm extremely excited for this, though I say that with a great deal of reserve.

    I've wanted my sec status up for ages, but the grind is unfathomably long and boring for a player with no interest in shooting red crosses.

    My first thought is that I would love to be able to pay to skip that grind. Given the rarity of low-sec hauler spawns though, I get the feeling that it'll cost far more than it's worth - in the order of several billion.

    Second thought is that, if it really is that expensive, perhaps we'll actually see people coming to low-sec for the PvE. I assume that if the price gets high enough then that is inevitable.

    With a good balance, this could make low-sec exactly what it should be - a place for the high-sec players to roam into for some high risk, high reward adventures without attracting enormous alliances or competing with null.

    Unfortunately, the cynic in me thinks the tags-for-sec will either offer too little standing to be worthwhile, cap the sec increases too early, cost too much isk with the npc redemption, or some combination thereof and waste the potential.

  23. I can see that Dinsdale Pirannha also like to troll Jester blog, what's the matter dude? Banned again on the forums for being a retard conspiracy theory retard? Take your head your of your ass, Risk vs Reward is broken and this is the first step to fix it. Now people can finally move their alt's from highsec to lowsec/nullsec/WH space.

    1. Dinsdale PirannhaMay 6, 2013 at 5:53 AM

      Funny that my "conspiracy theories" seem to come to pass. Yeah, I had my account banned by the null sec cartel's henchmen in the ISD, and I am quite certain it will be banned on another flimsy pretext as soon as it is unbanned.

      I also find it amusing starting to read other people's "conspiracy theories" about discrepancies in the CSM selection process, while I was the one that pointed out that a certain member of the HBC was the one who introduced this insult of a "voting system", and what the results would end up looking like.

      BTW, that was deemed "a personal attack on a CCP employee" , even though I used no names of any CCP employees.

  24. Also Dinsdale Pirannha, i can see you have missed the memo, tech died in this expansion. It's over. Also the ice will prevent power projection of alliences. And the ore changes help nullsec industry alot.

  25. "We have had players that would rather stop playing altogether than grind their way back up by killing NPCs."

    Shoe on other foot, isn't that the _exact_ same argument people use for :totallysafehisec: and the elimination of suicide-ganking?

    Sure looks familiar to me, somehow. ;-)

    On the surface, at least, this appears to be a case of CCP talking out of both sides of mouth: On the one hand "nerfing" the traditional sec status gain (and putting a piss-stream on the fire of the age-old carebear argument that it's too easy to get sec back up), but on the other assuring PvPers (who fight voluntary targets or not) that there's a better, easier means to bump their sec back up.
    Also, in a startling act of ventriloquism, they can murmur from the back of the crowd, "Hey, isn't this the big lowsec buff people have been asking for for years???"

    Well, if DUST falls flat and EVE goes tits-up, at least the honchos at CCP can begin highly successful political careers, as they seem to have mastered the the art of appearing to pander to everyone while actually achieving a net-zero change in the grander scheme. >;-D

  26. If farmed like this the tags would rapidly adjust in value to compensate.

    tbh. Tags are probably going to be quite pricy unless there are a lot of low-sec ratters.

  27. What about that Processing fee, if that is high enough then this type of ganking fleets won't work.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.