Thursday, February 7, 2013

Security Status

Also posted on the EVE Online Forums here.

The Plan


Security Status is no longer percentage based, but ticks up and down in discrete amounts.

  • Performing a criminally flagged act will instantly drop you 1 point of security status
  • Performing a suspect flagged act will instantly drop you 0.1 point of security status

Sec should be straightforward and intuitive. Get rid of the four digit decimals, the rounding issues, and the percentages that make it hard to see how much you will get punished for various actions.


CONCORD care about criminals. The Faction Police care about people with low Faction standings.

  • The speed in which CONCORD responds to a situation is based on the security level of the system AND the security status of the individual performing the crime.
  • The Faction Police only shoot enemies to their Faction.

The primary point of locking criminals out of highsec is achieved –and more accurately and efficiently so. Consequences for crimes will directly impact the ability to further commit more crimes.

However, the problems that arise from locking players from high-sec are eliminated. Players can freely visit trade hubs, (though they still bear the risk of being shot by players since they are still perma-flashy) and can freely shoot legal targets in high-sec, such as wartargets.  This will open the door on a vast amount of legitimate consensual pvp that is currently being deterred due to risk via NPCs.

Regaining Security Status

There’s no perfect way to do this, so I settled on solving one key issue:

  • Players shouldn’t have to travel to null-sec to pay for crimes committed in low-sec and high-sec.

Furthermore, I think that a player regaining security status is an opportunity for unique, interesting, and fun gameplay. While I’m not explicitly against ‘tags for sec’ or other such notions, I think we can do much more.

How about:

Level-less CONCORD agents scattered, in-space, throughout low-sec and high-sec. These agents would offer missions, each of which give a player 0.1 security status.

  • The missions would be similar to FW missions in that they pop a public beacon when opened, are relatively easy, and require some traveling
  • Agent locations would be prime places for players to ‘camp’ –both other pirates and anti-pirates.
  • Players could hunt pirates inside the public missions
  • Regaining sec may incur pvp in and of itself, as opposed to mindless grinding in null-sec


  1. Honestly, I'd rather see CONCORD tossed out (at least from a narrative point of view) and have the faction navies doing most of the policing, so that you can be a criminal in the Caldari State but still run around free elsewhere.

    I admit I'd also like to see the killing NPCs (in any fashion -- be it ratting in nullsec forever or doing CONCORD missions) to get security standings up go away as well...if you're a mass murderer, the fact that you kill a bunch of bad people later doesn't really let you off the hook. I'm aware that's a bit unrealistic to expect from CCP, but it'd be nice if you were at least forced to go after actual capsuleers if you want to get your sec status back up. Splitting up the way your criminal status is accounted for might make being locked out of one particular empire less of an issue as well.

  2. "I admit I'd also like to see the killing NPCs (in any fashion -- be it ratting in nullsec forever or doing CONCORD missions) to get security standings up go away as well...if you're a mass murderer, the fact that you kill a bunch of bad people later doesn't really let you off the hook."

    The majority of the methods used to raise standings of all types, not just sec. status, involve killing a ton of people. You want to change all those as well, I assume? We could just remove combat from the game altogether, while we're at it? I'm not trying to be overly snarky, but throwing around terms like 'mass murderer' in reference to games in which the majority of the content is combat based is the kind of hyperbole that is difficult to respond to without sounding equally off kilter. Dial it back a few notches.

    1. "The speed in which CONCORD responds to a situation is based on the security level of the system AND the security status of the individual performing the crime."

      That doesn't make sense. Their warp drives are faster based on how badly the criminal smells? How can they smell him from 40 AU away? It's based on what the defender's ship transmits to concord? Well then, as the defending ship, I'll just transmit that I'm being attacked by someone with a -10.0 sec status every time, so that concord gets there faster, because they have variable warp-speed engines for some reason.

      Ok, ok, I'm focusing on the mechanics which could be changed somehow, maybe, but that's a side issue, what this is really about is your argument for why -10 criminals should be locked out of effectively performing criminal actions in hisec...wait, where's that argument, again? I'd respond to it, if I could find it.

      Under this scenario, the current scene where we have a genre of -10 sec status folk who play the role of criminals would be gone. Instead, we'd have people who stayed at -2 or -3, committing a criminal act and then paying for it with boring pve missions in hisec. staying at -2 would mean the highsec missions would be pure pve, as they wouldn't be pvp targets at that sec level. end result: much less criminal action in highsec, those who did these actions would have to do boring pve grind to pay for it, and would therefore focus only on high-isk targets. If your only goal is to reduce criminal action in highsec, then this is actually a decent plan. Is that indeed your goal?

    2. I don’t like the idea of limiting suicide ganking any more then you do. I it were up to me and my play style, there would be no CONCORD at all. Or police…everyone could shoot anyone.

      You ask…why should criminals be locked out of performing criminal acts in highsec. I ask you, why shouldn’t they be? They’re -10 criminals. Does it not make sense that CONCORD would keep a stricter eye on them?
      And, I know the whole ‘it’s a sandbox’ argument for allowing free for all suicide ganking. But, a sandbox is also governed by rules surrounding consequences for your actions. Cause and effect.

      What long-term effects are there, or consequences are there, to a -10 pirate suicide ganking in highsec?

      Furthermore, you completely ignore the rest of the proposal. -5…..-6….-10 pirates would be able to FREELY roam in high-sec without faction police shooting them. This means they can sit battleships on a gate, if they so choose. Obviously, the possibilities this brings are lost on you. ;)

  3. Myself, I'd rather have faction navies hunting me, rather than CONCORD. However, let me say that criminal activities drop overall security standing AND empire standings with 1) empire that I'm in when doing something criminal 2) empires having high standing for that character killed.

    I kill a minnie-blessed character in Amarr space, my standings could drop with both empires. However, it turns out the minnie character had negative amarr standings, so my standings actually go up with amarr, as the character was a known bad guy.

    Killing folks hated by an empire should increase your standings, but based on the relative standings as seen by the empire. If I kill a character with 10.0 standings with the Amarr, my standings with the amarr are going to take a pounding. Of course, offing anyone in hisec will displease the empire. offing a bad guy in losec is biggest gain.

  4. I don't see anything in this plan I like the sound of.

    And I want to point out that no one has to go to null sec to fix their sec status. It might be faster to go rat in 0.0, but it is not necessary at all. I do like the idea of there being more ways to increase sec status besides just ratting. It's annoying there is only one thing you can do. I like the idea commented above about criminal status being tied to different empires, too. Tho I have not thought about how to implement such a change.

    Whole point of sec for criminal acts and 0.1 for suspect acts? I kind of like the weird ambiguity of it as it is now. If i shoot someone and go suspect who is -2.8, I take much less of a standings hit as compared to shooting someone who is +5.0.

    I guess I do agree with the idea of making it fewer significant digits tho, so there's that. Four decimal places is too much precision. Just make it two decimal places.

    But I don't see why -10 pilots should be allowed free access to trade hubs. For one, that would make being a low sec merchant a very poor career choice. Making criminal combat more easy to find in high sec space doesn't sound good either. The current system seems much better than the one you suggest, in my opinion.