I will agree with you on this point.

If I was in your shoes, and I saw the events your previously post take place... I would have engaged the significantly weakened Orca and scooped the wonderful pinata of cargo. Rather than you know, just sitting around.

Appropriate actin requires criminal Flagg.

Could you describe how the game wuld differentiat between accidenysl and intentional bumping?



I'm sort am a bit inebriated but do not mind to discuss.

They do intervene, they just don't intervene the moment you want them to.

Everything you just said is wrong.

Yes, you should have to bother to defend yourself, and you should have to have multiple people to defend against a large swarm of other players. No, CONCORD should not intervene, in fact they should not exist in the first place if you get right down to it. And no, that is not what highsec is about.

The sec levels are about NPC inflicted consequences for "criminal" activity. Highsec is about that consequence being the destruction of your ship.

Could you answer my Q? Am trying to shoe you that what you are asking fot is impossible t o implement..


Any pilot can use an alt to shoot.them and giarantee align ang warp.

GǪexcept that there is nothing aggressive or offensive about being bumped and it is shares none of the characteristics of warp disruption. After all, you can just warp off.

And yet, it had several ways to escape that were not used. That was not it's "best efforts", it was absolutely nothing.



Utterly false. As I said, there are a few things you can do in that situation, and the Orca did none of them.

You seem to think that "pressing the warp button a few more times" equates to actually trying to defend himself. It doesn't.

GǪbut it's not entrapment (much less anything unlawful) since you can, you know, just go away.

Bad news: CONCORD is not a police force, and this is not GÇ£the worldGÇ¥. So your point makes no sense since you are asking CCP to follow a completely unrelated and irrelevant GÇ£designGÇ¥.

GǪisn't what it does. You can warp away just fine.

They can't.

Nope. As long as you have at least 1 point of warp strength, you can warp off. Bumping removes zero points of warp strength.

The point is that Veers Belvar absolutely refuses to accept the very simple fact that bumping is not illegal and never will be. He also refuses to accept the very simple fact that bumping does not make impossible to warp.

I suppose the point could be that he's trolling, but that just makes it more worth-while to use him as a proxy for all the nutters who sincerely believe the same nonsense.

I would say that a 100% ideal response includes not jumping into a system with 10-20 very well known gankers.

It needs around 15 players/chars and more to gank a Freighter or Orca in Highsec while it needs 1 additional char to secure the path of the Freighter or Orca. And you still think this is too much effort for the Freighter/Orca and that CCP should change the game once again in their favor?

Correct.

Ergo, bumping is not criminal activity.

GǪaside from not affecting your warp strength and not prohibiting you from warping and not shutting down your MWD and not shutting down your MJD. So that makes it 0% functionally equivalent to warp scrambling.

How is it inconsistent? It creates a deterrent, and it does so in a reactive manner, just like he said.

How is it GÇ£a real trollGÇ¥ to point out the realities of the situation? Just because you refuse to accept how things actually work does not make it a troll to explain these things to you.

If it were, then CONCORD would respond to it.

Since they don't, clearly you are defining it incorrectly.

It's not impossible to warp off while being bumped. It's actually fairly easy, if you aren't terrible at EVE Online.

GǪand bumping qualifies as neither of those.

That's not a fact, since it's not impossible to warp off. Nor is it a criminal act to keep someone from warping off.

No, it's not a problem that CONCORD doesn't respond to legal activities.

None of those are facts, though. And just like CCP Falcon stated, CONCORD acts as a reactive deterrent, so there's nothing strange or inconsistent about their behaviour.

Nope.
It is 100% accurate.

If he can't warp off, it is not his best efforts. That is a fact.

There's no such thing.

Nope and nope, in that order.

They already have. Bumping is allowed. It does not trigger CONCORD, even after CrimeWatch 2.0-

Yes.

Tippia is not a suicide ganker.

And if you do get a Dev response, you aren't going to like the results. Nevermind why any of them should bother with a anklebiting troll like you.

So you'll accept my answer then? Good.

The devs have already answered your question. Bumping is allowed. It does not trigger CONCORD, even after CW2.0. And yes, the freighter can get away GÇö after all, he's not warp scrambled or anything like that.

I'm not getting the argument here apparently. Bumping is allowed, and it can be done well enough to prevent you from warping. CONCORD is not a police force, because that analogy breaks down rather quickly. But the mechanic is obviously one that's been sanctioned by CCP, so it's a part of the game, like it or not.

The point is that when bumping is used as a mechanism to make it impossible for ships to warp off between successive gank attempts from the exact same gankers, the failure of CONCORD to respond to such is inconsistent with the both the purpose of OONCORD and the design of highsec.

You've got me there, but I called him out on that as well, and I think the only way you can consider CONCORD a police force is in a role-playing scenario. No police force in the world metes out the same punishment to repeat offenders as it does to first timers.

The second invincible NPC pirates start chasing mission runners, sure.

Until then, "occupational hazard" can't be something you only apply to the people you don't like.

Then you also don't understand why the allies allowed dozens of german and japanese war criminals to get away scot free after WWII?

You were wondering why some individuals are not being punished for their crimes. N++rnberg provides one example and explanation, if the EVE lore doesn't explain it well enough for you. vOv

Start your own thread rather than making a mess of other peoples.

If you have an idea, start a thread in Features and Ideas where it belongs. If it deserves it, which at the moment it does, it'll get a better class of ridicule.

If you want to be taken seriously, educate yourself in how the mechanic you're talking about works; how it's done, and what the counters to it are, of which there are a few, and how they work too.

Only then will you be taken seriously.

Nah, he's burned that bridge by now. Time to reroll an alt.

You aren't familiar with the mechanic at all, you've demonstrated that quite clearly.

Especially since you keep saying stupid **** like "bumping is 100% effective" and such. Bumping pretty much only works if they are afk or really freaking stupid. Fortunately people like that are everywhere.

What bumping exploit?

What problem?

So how come your entire argument is based on something that doesn't happen in the game? How come you keep repeating the same incorrect claims and what is going on? How come you have yet to present anything that demonstrates that the game is not working as intended?

If you are familiar with the mechanics, why is everything you say about them wrong?

So when you say that you are familiar with the mechanics, what you actually mean is that you've heard something about the mechanics but have absolutely no idea what it is or how it works.

Because that is literally the only explanation for how you keep being 100% wrong about this in spite of having it explained to you a dozen times by now. Stop lying. it means you have no argument.

And since you have, as you already admitted, neither done this (which I have), nor had this done to you (which I have), you have nothing to back up that lie.

It can be easily, trivially avoided.

Yeah, I suppose you can say that all you like. Just makes you look kind of silly.

The people who actually make the decision (CCP) think otherwise, and have said as much.

I mean, hell, I can point out hundreds of valid reasons why CCP should give me every skill in the game maxxed out to 5, but, it ain't gonna happen, no matter how much I insist I'm 100% right.

Here and here.

But that's in response to the strawman you warped his answer into. What CCP has said is that ganking and bumping GÇö contrary to your protestations GÇö is not in need of a serious nerf. In fact, both are working as intended.

It doesn't have to be CCP saying it, if people do it every day.

You're just trying to obfuscate again, in an attempt to disqualify evidence against your halfassed excuse for an argument.

True. No matter how much rabid forum socialites try to deny it, gankers seem to have all the advantages of doing this without repurcussions in the safety of high-sec. Not only is there the potential for tremendous profits but they are able to operate in high sec with essentially zero risk. Its no wonder so many are flocking to suicide ganking as this gross imbalances continues to go unchecked.

I notice you left out your "100% inescapable" lie this time. Finally given up on that nonsense?

Yes, it is. I've done it myself, and several other people who have posted in this thread have either done it themselves, or had a target escape doing it.






Oh, do tell me what you think "significant isk" constitutes. This ought to be rich.





I already have proved it, by virtue of my hauler alt not having a Providence lossmail on the 23rd of last month. People prove it every day, but you're not smart enough to realize this.

The last time people let stupid ideas get spouted off without challenge, freighters got rigging slots.

And the carebears cried about that with such tears as hadn't been seen in years.

Don't try to assume moral equivalency here, there is none.

I know you saw what CCP Falcon said. After that do you really think CCP is going to budge on this issue?

There are no "victims" in a PvP game. Everyone agreed to the rules of their own volition.




No, not really. But it does all boil down to "highsec is not supposed to be safe", which comes not just from me, but from CCP itself. You don't get to disagree with them, they are the only ones whose opinions actually matter here.

Certainly not yours.




Firstly, new players don't have capital ships. If, by the time someone does have a capital ship, they are "unaware", that is their own problem, and no one else's.

Secondly, CCP disagrees with your assessment of the risk/reward. In fact, if it weren't for suicide ganking, hauling would have zero risk whatsoever. And since they clearly get rewards enough to carry billions in their cargo hold, I think it would be fair to say that if risk/reward is unbalanced, that it's in their favor.




Sure they will. CCP themselves did it repeatedly.

It's really easy because what you're saying is 100% lies in the first place.

If suicide ganks were such an issue any helpful player would go on and on about how to avoid them and tell newbie to be careful. So yes I expect that every player in the game should know how to avoid suicide ganking. And no suicide ganking is not balanced. It is much to hard to do. The cost of doing business is much too high and the amount of effort targets put into avoiding them is much to low. People have to stop thinking about high sec as safe sec and think of it as a place where you still need to follow all the basic protection rules because you can and will blow up if you get too complacent.

There is no debate. It's just you two morons butting your heads against an iron wall.

The last statement from CCP on the matter is that, not only is suicide ganking fine, but they have zero problems with bumping as well.






It's only easy if your target does nothing to defend themselves. There is nothing wrong with people who don't bother with self defense getting blown up.

In fact, it clearly doesn't happen often enough, since people like you still cry about it like it's something new and shocking.

No, it really doesn't. it just shows that enough people enjoy ships blowing up that they're willing to sponsor an effort to that effect.

Actually (and shh, because this is secret!), they do it to earn ISK. =ƒÖè
I suppose there might be some epeen involved as well, but the mighty ISK sure is powerful.

Except that there is a serious punishment for them. You just refuse to mete it out for some odd reason. By doing that, you lose all rights to complain about their lack of punishment. You willingly gave them carte blanche to keep doing it.

Why is this still being debated?

Stuff goes boom all the time.

Just roll with the punches and adapt.

the freighter nerf was appropriate adjustment reached through intelligent analysis?


... i agree

The freighters became categorically worse than they were before and there is no way to bring them back to the pre-patch omni-awesome stats. And you consider this a buff?!
Yeah, I think I'll stick with GÇ£oddGÇ¥.

So this is yet another thing that you have no insight into and instead try to comment on based on hearsay rather than any kind of established facts.

It is impossible to fit a freighter that can get the same tank and cargo as before the nerf. You will have less of one or the other.

So yes, freighters got nerfed.

To go back 151 pages: NO, ganking has not become a problem. It's not too easy, it's not unbalanced. It's not bad or wrong or 'evil'.

The reason it hasn't become any of those things is because it CAN'T. It's a legal, condoned, allowed video game activity in a game that specifically allows it. In the same way that a mission runner can't run too many missions or a miner can't mine too many rocks, a ganker crew can't gank enough frieghters (full, empty, painted bright pink and wearing a tutu, whatever) to make ganking a 'problem'.

EVE features universal non-consensual pvp in space. CCP and freaking GOOGLE tell you this before you ever even try to install EVE Online. That means that at any moment you are in space, you can be engaged by another player for any reason that other player sees fit. It can be for profit, it can be for some other oppurtunity, or (because this is a video game) it can be fore that other guy to get his jollies. The game will not protect you fro this interaction, because non-consensual pvp is at the heart of EVe Online's game design.

You are free to dislike the fact that people who are not like you exist and paid 15 bucks to play a video game you have also chosen, but that's just a personality flaw on your side, not a problem with that actions of the other guys. If you don't like that EVE online is, at it's heart, a video game version of a mosh pit, the fault lies with you for choosing to play it, not with the game company that has ALWAYS produced the game the way it is, or the player base that pays for this specific kind of game.

TL;DR **** off of you don't like it you weak minded popinjay.

If they died then they are not good haulers.

It has never been as low as 1.5 per day.

So when other people did it, that was ok?

When gankers only ever came at you without wearing an armband that said "Im a ganker, I will kill you if I want", that was ok?

Tbh I prefer what the guy in the corp says ...
... over what the coward hiding behind the npc alt says.


Still no reason to assume it's not actually the same person.

I'm not willing to look into it ... but I would totally understand it,
considering the fact that he has literally NO ONE agreeing with him.


Which, of course, does not make him realise anything at all.


I still do believe that he is a CODE alt too.

What CODE does is ridiculously NOTHING compared to all the other ganking out there.


The ISK amount is high, but the actual impact is almost ZERO!

you are a new player. solstice is not.

you are a new player. solstice is not.

Well ...

You do insist that CODE is relevant.
They are not.

Hell, even DJ says so.


You are the only one making an issue out of nothing,
just like the CODE propaganda machine keeps doing.


It's just 1+1=2, you know?

Also ... does anyone else notice the aggressive tone in his replies towards me?

That's rather mean and I would appreciate if you stopped that.


Anyhow ... as I said ... I'll just repeat it ...


CODE is irrelevant in the big picture.

The only one making them look like an issue is the one who keeps mentioning
them and that's the one person who keeps spreading the most hatred in this thread.


Is it worth it going through all his posts to see if a ban is warranted?

You have provided no evidence.

Anti-ganking is full of CODE alts.


All you do is pretending that CODE is relevant,
just like the CODE propaganda machine. (:


Also ... you show signs that you are reaching your limit. :)

That's not banworthy. Your persistent trolling and abuse, on the other handGǪ

You keep insisting that CODE is overly relevant,
while they are not. Just like the propaganda machine. :)


As long as you behave like you are behaving,
it makes absolutely sense to assume that you are just a CODE alt. (:

One can also argue that you put so much effort into making people think you are not ...
... that you might as well be one. A well placed and well thought out one... but still. :)


Also, unlike you, other people are absolutely capable of feeling the negative energy
in pretty much ALL of your posts.

Not really, no, since I don't troll, and any abuse you feel you might get is return-fire for what you threw in the first place.

They've done it before. vOv

Well, if you keep acting like one, I'm sure they'll keep doing it. After all, why should they stop?

Except that CODE is not relevant, that suicide ganking is on an all time low
and that ISK value has nothing to do with actual relevancy.

Even DJEntropy himself says that CODE has no relevancy
and that it's the propaganda machine doing all the work.


You are either a CODE alt, or a victim of the propaganda machine.


Also ... one does not need "name calling" to spread hatred an negativity.
The tone of most of your posts is pretty clear and hints at obsessive behaviour.

Prove it.

So it actually never happened, then, since you have no arguments and no facts, only hearsay, ignorance, and misunderstandings GÇö all of which have been addressed and corrected.

No, that's just another lie on your part. You haven't tried. You started calling people names the instant it was proven that you had no clue what you were talking about and you had no other way of trying (and failing) to stay in the conversation.

lol they're going to be seriously disappointed, not only is the PvE mediocre it's indirectly, via the market, PvP. I'm mostly a PvE player, believe me it's mediocre unless you deliberately make it challenging by using a downsized ship or running with friends in destroyers.

I mainly do it so that I have isk via selling LP items to dabble in the market, which is most definitely is PvP, brutal PvP at that.

It's not endless, the percentage of people affected by suicide ganking is very small, as is the percentage of the people actually doing the ganking.

As for tears, yours are currently being used by CCP Guard

EDIT: Nah, that's a poor thing, what I said in this comment, withdrawn, your honour.

there are no sides here. there's some people

and 'civil discourse' does not really include either ignoring people or calling them trolls when they disagree with you

No. You were lying, remember? You said that you were familiar with the mechanics, and then you proved that you weren't. So you were lying about that.
You also kept saying that bumping is equivalent to a warp scrambler, when it isn't and had long since been demonstrated to you that it wasn't. So you were lying about that too.

No. Pointing out that you were wilfully misrepresenting (aka lying) about what CCP Falcon had said.

Not really, no.

Everyone who suggests that Veers is a New Order member or even a CODE. member gets completely removed from my Xmas presents list! And don't start to cry now, you knew it was a kick into the nuts when you wrote it!

:(

I'm sorry. :(

*hugs* ?


But it makes him so seriously mad to write it ........................................

Except that it's not and the negative energy in his posts are clearly visible for anyone. (:

His obsessive behavior too, btw. :)

It doesn't. Nor does it shut down MWDs or MJDs.
Therefore, any claim that it is functionally equivalent to a warp scrambler is a lie.
Any subsequent claim that you are familiar with the game mechanics is therefore also a lie.

GǪbut the subsequent misrepresentation (aka lie) about what he said can be and was.

Saying that you lie when you lie and saying that you wilfully twist the language when you wilfully twist the language is not abuse. It is just fact.

1. I did not apologise to you. Learn to read who I quoted to.

2. The negative energy in your posts is clearly visible. The fact that you have calmed down
again does not change that. The fact that you do not even know what I am talking about ... neither.

3. Also: obsessive.

(:
:)

It helps to know what you're talking about, not to mention paying close attention to dev posts, if you want to make reasonable suggestions.



Hysteria and abuse? You're claiming the sky is green and being told no, it's blue. That's neither hysterical nor abusive.

It is possible to warp after being bumped. There are also several ways to stop a bump from even happening.

Web the freighter, warp to celestial, warp to a safe, warp to an intercepter in your fleet in your alignment cone etc..

People have posted many, many, many, many times on this forum explaining how to avoid being bumped in the first place. Doing so has the interesting side-effect of letting you warp off regardless of how many would-be bumpers are present. It's remarkably similar to the way a ganker can't gank you if you're already going to warp when they land on grid.

Now sure, once in a blue moon you're going to get unlucky, kinda like a poor rapier pilot who once ran a gatecamp I was in and had the sheer misfortune to have come through the gate too close to me to be able to cloak. Stuff happens. As a rule, though, the simple, effective means of avoiding being bumped tackled works almost every time.

Leaving aside the "CODE is destroying the game" line, CCP has explicitly disagreed with every post you've made.

CONCORD is not a law enforcement agency.

Bumping is not a criminal act.

They make the decisions for the game they own, not me, you, baltec, Ramona, James...CCP.

Your opinion, ultimately, does not matter. When a game dev comes right out and says "If it's a choice between removing player interaction and closing, we will choose closing", well, you aren't going to get very far advocating your own views that remove player interaction.

There is a good explanation why we are not "really affected" by the current consequences. It's what you said in your next sentence, well kinda, i will correct it:


We "use" the tools provided by the sandbox, there is no "abuse" going on here. Suicide ganking is a valid game mechanic and so are collisions between spaceships. Just because a group of players finds a way to use this tools in a certain way does not mean they are "abusing" the game mechanic. They are playing the game by the rules the game provides.


We are a group of players who use the tools of the sandbox and try new strategies to explode other peoples spaceships, for profit , power projection/control or just for fun. We chose an environment which is seen by a lot of players as safe, because they have a wrong concept of what highsec is, a PvP free area, which it isn't. It is a area with a certain kind of rules which was shifted over the years to benefit the careless player and even reinforce the feeling of safety.

The problem with highsec is not that we gank empty freighters, the problem is that CCP reinforced the protection so much that the players there actually feel save to AFK autopilot ships with a value of billions of ISK or even worse with cargo worth in tens of billions. The view of this people got so distorted that they actually think that the few tools left to kill such careless players are an abuse of game mechanics.

There are always people like you who come to this game ignorant about the history and the game mechanics who think their ideas are new and special. They are not, they have been discussed a hundred times and they where not better when they where brought to the table the first time.

Highsec game mechanics have been constantly nerfed for the last 11 years and everytime some guy claims this is the final nerf which will "fix" the game for them. And then the nerf get's implemented, we adopt and the tears start over with a new idea abut a small nerf that will "fix" the game.

I spelled it out many times before and I will do it again just for you. This is not about gankers v.s. carebears, this is about "people who care about game mechanics" v.s. "players who think this is a solo game with a safe zone".

Your strategy did not work for 11 years, there was always a guy like you. Adopt and play with the tools the sandbox provides or play a game which provides a setting you like better (try STO and embrace the boring and meaningless world you try to create in EVE). But just stop wasting everyones time with your unsound ideas and old arguments.

Thanks

Ok so it wasn't a link, prepare to get a lesson.

We are the corp that industrialized ganking. The gank CAT? That is our design. The tactics used for mass ganking of freighters? We came up with it. We have done a lot of homework on this subject so lets get started.

On average around a dozen freighters are killed a day, of these around half happen in high sec. You can then on average half it again to take out all of the freighters that are killed due to war decs, criminal countdowns and even the odd concord kill.

So we have a number ganker per day of around at most 6 mostly 1-3. The current estimate for active freighter trips per day is somewhere between 100,000 and 300,000.

So that is at most a 6 in 100,000 chance of you being suicide ganked statistically speaking. There is a greater chance of you being involved in a car accident than being ganked in your freighter.

Freighter ganking is infact down from last year. Why? Because Freighter pilots have learned for the most part not to stuff 10 billion in the hold like they used to. The days of netting 60-120 billion in a freighter are more or less over. Most keep their cargo down below gank worthy level and are thus, more or less safe.

Freighters are statistically one of the safest ships to be in in all of EVE.

And now he admits that he pulled everything he said about the ALARMING rate ...
... straight out of his ass.



And OF COURSE it increased since CODE started doing it!


The more people gank freighters, the more freighters get ganked!


Seriously, that was a bad try!

I'm going to run with this

As of the time of this, Zkill is showing a grand total of 23 freighters/orcas dying universe wide since 00.00, 20 of which were in highsec.
Out of those 20, 4 are down to wars.

For yesterday Zkill is showing a total of 21 freighters/orcas dying universe wide, 14 of which are in highsec, 1 of which is down to a war.

I think I can safely say that freighter and orcas account for 10's if not 100's of thousands jumps per day. The odds of a freighter or an orca exploding are minuscule.

So (with the exception of the CODE KB, which only proves 1 thing; they sink ships) your evidence is third hand ancedotal evidence.

You are the one who is currently bringing the suppositions that 1) Ganking is going up and 2) This is bad for EvE

Therefore, it falls to you to provide hard evidence to back this and let it be peer reviewed.

Please.

The chance is less than 0.22%, as that's the percentage of all ship types combined. I've seen it get as high as a whopping 0.5% some days.

It hasn't. Compared to a year ago freighter ganking has halved.

I understand the question. In the past 24 hours there was a 0.22% chance of your ship exploding there, regardless of type therefore the chance of a freighter exploding has to be less than that (unless every ship killed was a freighter).

So why havent you?

Yes, you do.

Doesn't stop you from doing it yourself. All of the data is open to the public.

Which part of the statement "All of the data is open to the public" didn't you understand?

As he said, historical data on Freighter kills can be found here:
https://zkillboard.com/kills/freighters/

Nobody's going to do your job for you. You made the claim, you provide the evidence to support it.

They're not making any claims. You are. Which means it's your job to provide evidence to support your claims.

If I claim Coca-Cola is made of Cheese, I don't get to insist that the Coca-Cola Company release the recipe in order to disprove my claim.

You have provided no such thing. You haven't even presented evidence of a trend over the short term.

And again, it won't take 300 hours, you don't have to manually tabulate it, and the amount of effort it might or might not take to provide evidence for your claims has no bearing on your obligation to provide the evidence.

I'm not making any claims. You are.

You are saying:
"Ganking has increased"
Everyone here is saying:
"Prove it"

Since you're unable to do so, it's quite safe to conclude that you're making things up out of whole cloth.

code's killboard provides the information that code sometimes kills ships and sometimes loses ships
the minerbumping dot com website is a comedy blog with links to killboards
your intel channels and complaints from npc forum alts are not authoritative sources
and your personal observations are extremely limited

perhaps if the information from the killboard was presented alongside wider context in some kind of easy-to-comprehend visual format

good on them! this is a fact entirely disconnected from any kind of reasoning or context

I count 5 if statements in your short paragraph that you need to provide evidence for.

By the way, of the last 4 Freighters that were ganked, zero of them fitted any tank.

Now, are you willing to accept that Coca Cola is made out of Cheese?

Let me tell you a story.

I started playing this game when I got banned from Darkfall, a player-skill based full loot pvp game with siege warfare and the best combat you could ask for.

EVE wasn't a game that was very exciting to me. The combat I felt was uninteresting to me and required little player skill. I only started playing it because it was one of the only risk/reward pvp games in existence. What was interesting to me was the complexity of the game so I continued to play it, not actually playing it but having it run in the backgrounds. This is the only way I will play EVE as it currently does not feel worth my time investment to get more into it. I don't play enough to be in a corp and have always been solo.

I used to mine in a hauler before the mackinaw changes. "Why would anyone mine in a hauler?" you might ask. The reason was because it had a cargo hold and i could leave it AFK while I got **** done in real life and played other games. Since I was only checking back every so often, it made more sense for me to play this way and I loved that there were creative solutions for your playstyle (or there was for me untill the Rattlesnake nerfs ).

I set out to play EVE with an AFK playstyle in mind. I maxed planetary interaction and R&D skills and I trained for a freighter, thinking that transporting goods would be the best way for me to actively make money with my character while AFK for long periods of time. At least half the isk used to purchase my freighter came from mining in a hauler, my first purchase over 400 mil.

I had been hauling in my freighter afk for several months before I first heard of "bumping", and then I still wasn't sure what it was. I had no idea that it was even possible to gank a freighter in high sec, and I did not pay close attention to the forums as I find most of the regular posters here to be disgusting people.

Even after 3 years I still consider myself a newer/casual player. I hadn't done a lot of hauling in my freighter but it It has only been out of sheer luck and my casual playstyle that I have not been ganked. Had such a catastrophic loss occured for me, I surely would have quit this game. The narrow profit margins of hauling in a freighter nowhere near make up for the excessive precautions now needed to ensure you aren't victimized by a bunch of greif monkeys that pay no significant costs or penalties for their actions.

When broken stuff like this happens and you see people getting away with it in high sec, it seems completely unfair and you will ask yourself if the game is worth it knowing that you will continue to be at the mercy of people who are often sociopaths and who seem to have all the advantages.

This game has really been on the ropes for me now after I found out I can't play this game like I thought I would, and after CCP Rise gutted the creative possibilities of the Rattlesnake . I only do afk activities anymore but I still pay a monthly sub in cash, hopeing that the game will change for the better soon. Maybe for some of you, this game is your life, but for many it can be fairly easy to drop once something pushes you over the edge.

TLDR: Casuals, newer players can own freighters. Suicide ganking does cause people to quit and its usually the casual, newer players who pay cash for their subs. It takes away from the game and causes disgust with the game from its players.

dude there is no need to quote that much text.

dont be a ****, this is just stupid. cut it.

besides ppl already realised he is a troll and you are the same.

Nah, their grammar structure is too different. No one is that hardcore.

I am seriously considering putting out a contract on Belvedere though. He's starting to become tiresome.

This thread needs a lock!

Please confirm!

Tried to actually retrieve the data about Freighter kills, but too tired to actually plot the stuff. This is the script I used (forum somehow murders the indentation):


It somehow crashed because of some ssl crap I was to lazy to debug still got some of the data, probably zkillboards site. Don't murder me because I abused the API. It also has a cap at 200 kills, which I was too lazy to fix as well. But it may still give you some idea about the state of things.

Obviously you haven't found this thread with over 400 replies...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=199310


Do we really need a sticky for people to troll about bumping and suicide ganking? CCP has said both are part of the game mechanics and not an exploit.

I honestly don't like bumping as a game mechanic. Not because I don't think it's "fair" but it seems silly to "bump" another ship in space. I can whine and cry on the forms for weeks but you know what... At the end of the day it's how the game is played so adapt and overcome.


You can avoid most ganks if you use your brain... People make themselves easy targets and they die. Maybe we need a sticky on facts about how not to get ganked rather than a whine thread about how ganking is bad. Then people will stop being easy targets and the problem won't be there. As long as you have AFK pilots in untanked ships you'll have ganks.

Why should there be less ganking of empty or tanked haulers?

Even if 3 optimally fitted and flown Machs were inescapable (which they aren't), why shouldn't 3 players (plus the 10+ player gank squad) not be able to successfully mess with a single player?

Yes you have. You just didn't understand what was shown to you because you don't understand or know about the mechanics involved. So, again, what you think is irrelevant GÇö the undeniable fact is that they can't.


And the answer is simple: since it's not an aggressive act, they should do nothing.

How many and by whom?

This is an MMO, they are using a fleet, what makes you think you don't have to use at least one friend to counter the efforts of 25 people?

How do you know they were done at a loss?

Actually, no. Now you're moving the goal posts.

Why not? Especially if you can make money from itGǪ

You claimed empty, tanked freighters were being killed. None of those are empty, none are tanked.

Why should it be able to escape a trap laid by 15 plus people without any help. This isn't a single player game.

They are being paid to gank freighters, that is where their money comes from.

No. Protection of your freighter is down to you not NPCs. To get out of being bumped is as easy as simply having an alt in a web ship or having an interceptor fly out in front of a bumped freighter to provide a warp point.

Think about what you just asked...

If I'm sitting on a gate in lowsec and someone comes through with a hauler do I scan or convo the guy and ask if his cargo is worth me killing? No it's called PVP and Eve is a PVP game so I blow him up! No one would ask why did I kill this poor innocent person.

Change this to highsec and I'm a mean "Ganker" This is because some people think highsec should be or is PVP free. It's not and hopefully never will be! If I can kill a one billion ISK freighter who made himself an easy target by auto piloting with no tank... Why not?

He really is this stupid, folks.

Ok, since you can't find both of your brains cells to rub together and figure it out, I will spell it out for you. I'll try to use small words.

Your idea lets a ship have an immunity period alongside an insta warp, if a gank fails.

So I deliberately fail a gank against myself with an alt, any time I am in danger.

And I am thus invincible.

Congratulations, you broke quite literally the entire game.

Oh, and civility is given to civilized people. Not thumbless, ignorant monkeys.

Why should they?

This is in every way the exact opposite of what they're there for. They are only there to make people lose ISK by blowing up their ships. That is their only purpose. They are also not an ISK sink. The only part you got right was that they are not random.

That is GÇö very explicitly and deliberately GÇö not what CONCORD is for. That role has been given to players, and at no point will NPCs ever be created to take a player's job.

No, numbskull, actually read it for five freaking seconds. The instant warping part of your suggestion grants me immunity to being scrammed by a war target too.

All I have to do is blap my own freighter, I get my 60 seconds of instant warp just like you said, and poof, I instantly disappear into the nearest station. Immune to war targets, too.

If you want people to have a better estimate of your intelligence, you need to stop saying such staggeringly unintelligent things.

In other words, they share two characteristics with a law enforcement agency: they provide a deterrent and they are reactive. This does not mean that they are one.

The operative word missing is GÇ£otherGÇ¥. Be it GÇ£the same as any other law enforcement agencyGÇ¥ or GÇ£as with any other policeGÇ¥. Without that word, they are not in the same class GÇö they just have shared characteristics with the class. There's a reason why I said that your linguistic insight was insufficient and getting you into trouble. Words have meaning GÇö a small word can make all the difference in the world.

No. CONCORD's response (and the reason for that response) is simply compared with the law. They are an arbitrary cost enforcement mechanism GÇö that's how they offer a deterrent.

Incorrect. The sentence makes sense if CONCORD is a cost enforcement mechanism that happens after a gank rather than before it: it creates a deterrent through punitive and reactive measures. As it happens, that is exactly what CONCORD is and what it does and why it does it. All without being a police force. Fancy that.

By the way, you do know that EVE has a police force, right? In fact, it has numerous police forces. They fight crime. They also have those characteristics by virtue of being within that class.

GǪand that lets you do exactly what he describes. This is bad thing. Your idea is bad. It also does not solve anything. It is trying to GǣfixGǥ a problem that doesn't even exist.

Yeah, at this point he has been moved from the "persistent bad troll" file into the "completely un-salvageable, utterly without merit" file.

Stop twisting his words.

He said that concord are like police because they do not protect, they punish after the event has happened.

It is required to draw the conclusions you're drawing. Since it's missing, those conclusions can't be drawn.

Parking meter attendants can be described the same way, yet they are not a police force.
The UN can be described the same way, yet they are not a police force.
Hall monitors can be described the same way, yet they are not a police force.
I can be described the same way, yet I am not a police force.

GǪand guess what? He has said pretty much exactly that. Do you know why? Because that's how highsec works; that's how CONCORD works; and that's how personal responsibility works.

Onoz, WTs incoming. Trigger CONCORD to get a free out if it turns out we can't take them!

CCP Falcon said that exact thing in the sentences immediately surrounding the one you're quoting:



Notice the use of a rhetorical question to explain that CCP (and thus the mechanics of the game) do not provide and are not meant to provide protection to you.

Also notice how he coolly dismisses your claim that HS is not a place where you need friends.

If fighting weren't against the rules in the school, I'd expect him to do exactly that.
The parking attendant will not enforce not-laws. Just like CONCORD doesn't punish those not performing Criminal Actions in HS.

Whats your point? Trying to fly a freighter under a wardec is about as moronic as it gets.

What is it you don't get about it? You get an instawarp that you can call in if you need it, which means you are in full control of the encounter. Before they can bring anything to bear on you, you have already decided the outcome. This is a bad thing. Your idea is bad. it also solves nothing.

That is not their role so they never will.

That doesn't answer his question: why are you even trying to fly a freighter under a wardec?

GǪexcept that there is exactly zero functional overlap, as you know full well by now. So there is zero reason why it should be a crime. That's why it isn't on and why CONCORD (to say nothing of the GMs) doesn't and shouldn't care about it.

No it shouldn't.

It is laughably easy to avoid and if you do get bumped there are several very easy ways to get out of it.

At no point does he limit his statements the way you're claiming he does.

CONCORD does act intelligently to enforce the laws of New Eden. Preventing someone from warping is not against the law in New Eden, only Activating an Aggressive Module in HS is.

Since you claimed to be a lawyer, think of this as being like going to Louisiana and arguing Common Law.

No, they wont. Concord will not stop people from pointing you.

No.

This has already been explained in full.

Veers, are you braindead? Concord would be the hall attendant. He shows up AFTER it starts.

Incorrect. You just didn't understand it GÇö as always GÇö and said so very clearly.

Because it means CCP is protecting you rather than you protecting yourself.

Do you even know why freighters are bumped?

Wrong.

They are still able to warp off if they use a web or warp to a celestial or safe or to a ship that is in front of them. They are bumped to get them away from the gate guns and navy ships on the gate.

You're finally getting it.
Do you understand how why your GÇ£experienceGÇ¥ was disqualified as pretty much worthless and irrelevant to the discussion?

What happened is that you met the proverbial bigger fool.

Then open your eyes. It's not any more complicated than that.

It's not a question for them, because the answer is obvious: yes. The mechanics say so, experience says so, in fact, everything says so. Trying to appeal to a GÇ£higher powerGÇ¥ to change the fact of the matter will not work.

Welcome to highsec. The answer is not any more complicated than that. If you think otherwise, the only solution is for you to stop. Breaking the game certainly won't solve the problem.

Oh it's clear you're not seeing it.

CCP already said what they had to say on this matter. You're just not happy with what that was so you want something different. Not going to happen so sorry

Again, why should a solo pilot be able to escape the efforts of three pilots specifically fit and flown to stop him?

They have a good shot at escaping a single mach and with help (webber or interceptor) can escape a large number of machs. The reason for this is the way warping works, which bumping doesn't stop. If you are moving in the direction of your warp target at better than 75% of your speed, you will immediately enter warp. Doesn't matter why you're moving that direction.

They stuff billions into untanked t1 haulrs. Yes they are that stupid.

F1

Why is it not useful? It adds yet more cost.

But why wait till they are in pods? One guy in this thread, took the time to try out shooting them them in their ships and had fun doing so.

So what was the problem again?

Veers is like Gorilla and many before him a type of player we call New Order fanboys. They follow us around wherever we go and try to interrupt our operation. Some of them used to sympathize with the Code or parts of it, but do to some lack of social competence or good humor they never actually realized what it is all about and collided with the actual reality.

Since they are usually not really good at EVE, they don't come up with tactics that would actually stop us. I am absolutely convinced that everyone on the other side of this discussion would come up with a more effective counter in a few minutes than what they have tried so far.

Because they are so unsuccessful ingame they get frustrated and start to blame the game mechanics and CCP for not balancing the game. In their mind it should be possible to disrupt an operation of 20 people with a single player who does not even care about game mechanics. Also CCP should support them, because the fanboys protect the "new players" and the "innocent" and because of that they deserve special support from above.

So instead of actually playing the game they now use the forums and the petition system to fight us. Because they are just bad at the game.

But I guess this people are in every game, I remember back from the FPS games, when we used to play CS at LAN parties and suddenly some guy accused me of "being able to fly" or plain cheating. In reality they where just really really bad at the game and looking for an excuse to hide their own deficiencies. In their mind it was impossible that they where so bad at the game, there had to be another explanation. In my opinion we have a similar case here with Veers and friends.

Veers is like Gorilla and many before him a type of player we call New Order fanboys. They follow us around wherever we go and try to interrupt our operation. Some of them used to sympathize with the Code or parts of it, but do to some lack of social competence or good humor they never actually realized what it is all about and collided with the actual reality.

Since they are usually not really good at EVE, they don't come up with tactics that would actually stop us. I am absolutely convinced that everyone on the other side of this discussion would come up with a more effective counter in a few minutes than what they have tried so far.

Because they are so unsuccessful ingame they get frustrated and start to blame the game mechanics and CCP for not balancing the game. In their mind it should be possible to disrupt an operation of 20 people with a single player who does not even care about game mechanics. Also CCP should support them, because the fanboys protect the "new players" and the "innocent" and because of that they deserve special support from above.

So instead of actually playing the game they now use the forums and the petition system to fight us. Because they are just bad at the game.

But I guess this people are in every game, I remember back from the FPS games, when we used to play CS at LAN parties and suddenly some guy accused me of "being able to fly" or plain cheating. In reality they where just really really bad at the game and looking for an excuse to hide their own deficiencies. In their mind it was impossible that they where so bad at the game, there had to be another explanation. In my opinion we have a similar case here with Veers and friends.

While I disagree with your conclusion (bumping freighters is an emergent use of existing mechanics, not broken) I am glad you have come to a resolution in your mind. And as to your suggestions, I believe the game already punishes those at -10 with significant, non-trivial penalties and that the actual loot drops from a target incentivizes gankers to go after non-empty ships.

Your suggestion to make those agressed immune from bumping would be an extension of CONCORD's role and original purpose and thus should be raised properly in Features & Ideas where it can be discussed as a change in game mechanics (and where the unforeseen complications of it in other aspects of the game can be hashed out). However, I would point out that freighter ganks are incredibly rare as a fraction of total ship losses in New Eden, and ones that involve multiple attempts using bumping to keep the target from escaping are only a minority (tiny minority?) of these losses. Do you really think that adding this new ability to CONCORD is a useful use of game developer resources? This new "feature" you propose would only serve to help a handful of AFK haulers escape a gank at the expense of introducing a new mechanic that can possibly be exploited elsewhere in the game, and one that discourages player-to-player conflict through a new mechanism to avoid a fight.

This seems like something CCP isn't likely to make a high priority. Perhaps you should find a new cause to direct your forum warrior energies, one more likely to be embraced by the game developers.

I dont think so. I'd say given the lack of thoughtfulness of your post and the fact you live on the forums, I would say you probably aren't very smart and nobody can stand to be around you. There are people like you on every forums of every video game and they are usually always absolutely garbage at the game and there is always a reason their social life is restricted to the forums. Nobody would do what you do because they want to. You are just fulfilling the void. I see right through you and what I see is pretty sad.

One day you may look back on your life and realize you have nothing and have no one and wasted your life-time arguing with nobodys on an internet forum. This will serve as justice for all the shiptosting you have done.

I guess if there is one thing you have provided to this forum, it is that we can all be thankful that we aren't you.

I've never done any suicide ganking. Ganking in lowsec, sure. Wormhole eviction, yes. But never any suicide ganking.

That said, without suicide ganking highsec would be a dull and boring place. A grind without dangers. Cause there are no dangers in HS space apart from suicide ganking. Suicide ganking is the spice in HS life.

It doesn't matter, why someone is into suicide ganking. Whatever the reason, he is rending you a service. It doesn't matter how good he is in... errm, whatever you think is good PvP. As long as he's there to create risk, to create danger. That's a suicide gankers purpose.

I agree it's not the best thing to be selective and pick rookies as targets. But apart from that everyone is fair game. Why should casual players be entitled to a different treatment? What is even a casual player in New Eden but a person with a below average amount of available playtime? Why should such a player be special?

Now it may be there are things, that need tweaking. But certainly not more than that.

they already lose stupid amounts of isk ganking empties when they do

suicide gankers aren't an npc police killing players who make bad decisions, they're players who do what they want to do, playing a game that's supposed to support just that

what keeps things interesting is not suicide ganking it's metagame

you can keep saying 'ccp needs to' all you like, until you make an argument for action you're just repeating the tear soaked wailing of gank victims

I'm still deciding whether or not to report that as a personal attack, on the one hand it blatantly is, on the other hand I don't want to stoop to the kind of tactics people of his ilk use on the forums.

Besides, it would only fuel his persecution complex.

You should have addressed that in your post where you replied to NoLife NoFriends StillPosting's personal attack on another player with "Just ignore the trolls...this is what they all do..."

*Ahem*



Please cite your source for this. Or are you making things up again?

Unless you have an insta which, let's be real, a lot of casual players don't know about. And even then, THAT's not a guarantee. Stop being an absolutist nerd.

Why does it need to be tweaked? There is no abuse going on and all the mechanics in question are working as intended. The incentive to treat ganking as a business is already there GÇö after all, that's how it's done right now.

No, it's not. There is nothing special or magical about those that suddenly makes game mechanics not apply to them. They're as relevant to them as to everyone else.

Solution to what? You haven't defined the problem you're trying to solve yet. And why on earth should they have to suffer from more grinding for no good reason? They already care about ISK GÇö this is obvious to anyone who has actually looked at how they operate, and it has already been explained to you why this is the case. Why is it that you are so steadfastly determined to never have any kind of attachment to reality in your arguments?

GǪand as proven beyond any doubt, that scenario does not live up to the description of Gǣ100% impossible to escapeGǥ. And you have yet to demonstrate that, even if it were true, that is actually presents any kind of problem that needs to be solved.

"replicate warp scrambling"... you keep saying this and i'm not sure you know what this means. There are actual modules called "warp scramblers/warp disruptors" that ACTUALLY STOP a player from warping if activated and which can be activated at any time WITHOUT CONCORD BEING PRESENT. Do you even EVE bro? Also i am aware you are familiar with http://www.minerbumping.com/ . That little box up in the left corner called "New Order Treasury" which at this time has TEN BILLION ISK in it that people have GIVEN to CODE and also that 10 MILLION ISK charge to adhere to JAMES 315's highsec code which people pay to mine in does in fact make it a BUSINESS. Lets see you argue your way out of that one

Exactly right.

Since suicide gankers are risking nothing more than cheap disposable ships, they need to have some counter balances in place, as the current penalties are not significant enough to deter the activity whatsoever and it becomes ever more popular as an easy way to make isk without significant risks or penalties.

No real risk, potentially incredible rewards. Completely unfair to every other profession in EVE.

No, smart gameplay should not be punished because it is successful. Certainly not for the sake of the afk, the lazy, and the bot aspirants.

PvP should not be "detered", it is a valid playstyle.



Yeah, nerf mining.

Oh wait.

Ah, look, he's switched gears again.

Do tell, how do you think this unnecessary goal should be accomplished?

I must have missed that one. There's only so many pages of bizarre stuff you can read before your eyes start to glaze over.

More Mayhem in high sec is good, because Content is good too, we provide content
More Consequences for bad decision making? Doesnt get much worse than losing you 10b Nomad and your snake set in the span of 20 seconds.
Actions that should not normally have lead to destruction = Does not apply once you undock

We do it because its fun, because there are prizes, because its content, because it introduces people to emergent gameplay, because it teaches people not to autopilot pods, because it teaches, wait do i really have to keep going here?

Please, step away from the PC before you hurt yourself.

Communal PVE? Incursion bear detected
Automatic permit detection: No permit detected
Automatic Permit Offering: Would you like to buy a permit to keep your shiny from forced decomissioning?
Yours for a mere 10m ISK!

Actually, CCP is.



Since we've already addressed all your "arguments" and you've refused to provide any evidence to support your claims, why shouldn't we point out that Veers is confused about the nature of the game he chooses to play when he suggests that HS is not a place where destruction is expected.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSxNW5dDYEY

After all, killing is just a means of communication.

If you're in america they do then sue the manufacturer when they saw their leg off... Maybe Veers will sue CCP when he finds out Eve is a PVP game?... Wait CCP is in Iceland so no such luck for Veers.

All in all the idea of high sec ganking is fine. My only wish would be that something be done a bit about bumping. No matter how good a pilot you are, once someone starts to bump you, you are kind of toast. Very few counters to it and most involve luck.

I think that would be the part that would frustrate me the most. Try as I might, I couldnt save my ship from being pushed off the gate.

Granted I know nothing will be done about bumping, since really nothing can be done. Just my wishful thinking.

So, I just thought I'd do a smidge of math here.

According to the ticker on this thread, there has be 79,200 views of this thread alone.

Now, if just 1% of those views generated one purchase of New Order stock, the CODE wallet will have expanded by 792,000,000 ISK.

That's 158 Meta 4 fit gank Catalysts, or 52 T2 fit Cats, at current reimbursement rates.

Using a 3:1 ratio for meta fits, and a 1:1 for T2, that rounds out to around ~52 ganks.



So, what all this means is, Veers Belvar and company, thank you for your work keeping CODE's wallet flush with ISK. Every post is another chance to inspire further donations to the cause.

Unfortunately I just see that as being too easy. 60 seconds is along time and a bit OP. I can understand the frustration of being ganked. I am a horrible PVPer, and I hate losing ships, especially expensive ones, however that is the game.

If anything would be done in my mind, it would be to fix how bumping works. Instead of a frigate completely re aligning a freighter when bumping it, the mass of the two ships should be more accurate. A freighter should have enough power in its engines to push a small frigate out of the way, and its mass should be able to compensate for moderate impacts. So a freighter should still be able to reach warp velocity even while being bumps, unless multiple ships are on it.

I realize this is kind of how the current mechanics are but the collision isnt horribly accurate.

Just a random though.

What abuse?
Why would CCP curb the use of legitimate game mechanics and impose bad gameplay on people for no apparent reason?

I have already told you why freighters are bumped once in this thread and it is not to replicate a warp scram.

I still want to hear about how it's not okay to force people to PvP, but how it's just fine to try and force people to PvE.

Care to answer that, either of you two hypocrites?

They can just warp off as their warp drive is still fully functional. All they need is something in front of their ship to warp to.

The police do attack -10 pilots, that's why we need to get the freighters off the gate. The faction navy and gate guns rip apart gank ships

So have one person with you in a fast frigate to provide that warp out point. An interceptor can MWD out far enough to warp to in a matter of seconds.