|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
   |
Posted - 2012.06.27 20:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Heavens to Betsy! Everyone in HiSec can be ganked provided the attacker is willing to pay the price. When the price is too steep they don't bother (unless enraged!).
Hulkageddon lowers the cost of HiSec ganking by providing isk/goods sufficient to offset the costs and/or providing an additional source of notoriety for gankers.
Being at risk is ok; being a desirable target is not. The flood of isk in this part of the galaxy has unbalanced the sandbox.
If CCP will not find a way to raise the cost of HiSec ganking, preferably to both the participants and the providers, then the galaxy will devolve into something akin to a NullSec gankfest as the non-gankers withdraw to other games.
Even PvPers don't really enjoy ganking as far as I know. They like a good fight.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 21:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:A properly tanked Hulk cannot be profitably suicide ganked (.5 space is breakeven, higher is a direct loss).
True, but its not just Hulks. Anyone who loses a Hulk to a mere ganker must be either afk or have had some sort of system problem. [edit]But is it still true if you are getting paid extra?[end edit]
Hulkageddon isn't just about ganking Hulks though. It also includes Macs, transports, etc.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 00:35:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Andar Purvanen wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:A properly tanked Hulk cannot be profitably suicide ganked (.5 space is breakeven, higher is a direct loss). True, but its not just Hulks. Anyone who loses a Hulk to a mere ganker must be either afk or have had some sort of system problem. [edit]But is it still true if you are getting paid extra?[end edit] Hulkageddon isn't just about ganking Hulks though. It also includes Macs, transports, etc. You were complaining about being a desirable target. Flying your ship in a way that makes it a desirable target is your choice because you can fly your ship in a way that doesn't make it a desirable target. If you can fly a Mack, you can fly a Hulk. A Hulk can fit Ice Lasers just fine, Tank your Hulk and you'll mine ice without being a desirable target. Transport ships don't qualify for the GSF bounties, so the rules of Isk tanking your transports remain the same as always. Your job as a miner is to get the greatest quantity of Ore/Ice from the belt to the station safely that you can. If the ship with the best Belt->Cargo extraction rate keeps getting you shot, then pick another ship.
I'm always a desirable target; ask my many girlfriends. One more try at this.
I am complaining about being rendered one of many desirable targets by bored bullies empowered by CCP. There is a difference between being a potential target (as in the past) and a desirable target briefly (during past Hulkageddons).
Being rendered a desirable target permanently is indistinguishable from harassment only to the extent that an entire group is now being hounded out for wanting to play differently in the sand.
The only recourse is to play the game your way?
No, you should be playing the game my way. Mine more or die. Leader boards will be used henceforth solely to glorify those who mine the most every day, every week, every month.
Learn to play or go play Carebear PvP gankfest.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 02:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:One more try at this. What you're having issue with are the defining principles of EvE. You can play the game however you want. So can everyone else. Including Goonswarm. Putting bounties on Exhumers and Barges is currently how they want to play the game. Your choices are to adapt or suffer the consequences. CCP Wrangler wrote:EVE is a dark and harsh world, you're supposed to feel a bit worried and slightly angry when you log in, you're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, that's what hello kitty online is for. Harassment per EVE's TOS is if they talk to you individually in certain ways. Not what they do with in Game tools. Oh, and CCP's been nerfing HS aggression since CONCORD stopped being tankable. How much nerfing will it take to make you happy?
I have other choices beyond the two you proclaim and I've exercised them all along. I dislike seeing the closest thing to a sandbox degenerate into yet another gankfest leading to a rapid decline.
However, as the quote by CCP Wrangler seems to suggest (unless you made it up) CCP approves this bullying and will continue to permit it to be financed.
I'll be fine and Goonswarm will be trashing other sandcastles with apparent CCP complicity for some time to come.
Too bad. It was once a much better game.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 10:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:You're literally complaining about having to adapt.
No, I'm complaining about the evolution toward a ganking format.
CCP controls the game mechanics and there is plenty of evidence that this is exactly what they are doing.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 10:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Which game mechanics have changed to make ganking easier or cheaper?
Was it when Insurance was nerfed?
Was it the several times Concord Reaction time was Buffed?
Maybe it was when bomeranging got declared an exploit for you? (despite being legal for years)
Or was it way back when CONCORD stopped being tankable?
Which one is the evidence that's leading you to believe that EvE's mechanics are changing to encourage ganking?
(Oh, and CCP has always said HS isn't meant to be safe, so stop expecting it to be safe.)
Tears!!! Real tears!!! I can die happy now. At last, miner ganking, even with inferior gear, is win!!!
Odd, I never claimed HS was safe. I claimed gankers were sufficiently empowered to be griefing whole categories of other players rather than just individuals.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 10:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
Roime wrote:It's spelt cognitive dissonance. You seem to struggle with it, by the way.
I'm a miner not a scowler
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 18:01:00 -
[8] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Andar Purvanen wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Which game mechanics have changed to make ganking easier or cheaper?
Was it when Insurance was nerfed?
Was it the several times Concord Reaction time was Buffed?
Maybe it was when bomeranging got declared an exploit for you? (despite being legal for years)
Or was it way back when CONCORD stopped being tankable?
Which one is the evidence that's leading you to believe that EvE's mechanics are changing to encourage ganking?
(Oh, and CCP has always said HS isn't meant to be safe, so stop expecting it to be safe.) Tears!!! Real tears!!! I can die happy now. At last, miner ganking, even with inferior gear, is win!!! Odd, I never claimed HS was safe. I claimed gankers were sufficiently empowered to be griefing whole categories of other players rather than just individuals. Which of those buffs to Ganking was it that newly empowered gankers to grief you (TOS says griefing's a bannable offense, so I assume you actually mean "Gank")?
None. Its a cumulative and likely unintended consequence of other changes over time. It is also Griefing though admittedly a large scale generalized form rather than directed against an individual.
You may play rules lawyer over the definition if you wish. Become one with Bill Clinton! Those being griefed know it when it happens to them.
To continue, despite heavy and repeated losses, PvPers still build and fight on and...have plenty of isk to do it with. Warships evolve and grow better.
And so ganking, always possible, is empowered in HighSec. But not particularly profitable. Except, potentially, during Hulkageddon when the rewards go up.
Now that it is year around the penalty/reward balance has skewed in favor of the Gankers/Griefers. Some sort of adjustment is required to offset the griefing directed against Miners while still permitting some forms of ganking in HighSec. I suggest it NOT be to ban the griefers.
It would appear to be a delicate balance sure to please no one.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
Andar Purvanen
Cognitive Disonance
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 22:42:00 -
[9] - Quote
It isn't a specific mechanic. It is a result of the flood of isk unleashed by a combination of bounties and rewards provided by CCP (i.e., The State). That is and will always be the part of the sandbox that isn't player controlled.
Its going to be up to CCP to decide if it is a problem and, if they decide it is, what to do about it.
Death does not deter.-á I will mine until you surrender. |
|
|
| |
|