EVE Search - HighSec Ganking and Appropriate Punishment

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

HighSec Ganking and Appropriate Punishment

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Noragen Neirfallas Dedicated and Dangerous The Marmite Collective 1394	Posted - 2015.07.24 23:50:51 - [421] - Quote Actually I'll throw in here. I think utilizing hangers of any other ship while suspect or criminal should send the hanger ship suspect. The ability to reship under suspect flag or stash goods while suspect is crazy. Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Tyranthian Ms Marvel Corporation 1	Posted - 2015.07.24 23:56:36 - [422] - Quote Globby wrote: Tyranthian wrote: Better to lose a retriever and learn early than lose a charon and lose a lot more. I thrasher gank new players all the time. I send them a welcome evemail, send them ISK, and tell them what happened, and how they're never safe. This is a good introduction to EVE. It's a good learning experience but a harsh one that's what I'm saying even if you give them isk and teach them. I even suggested to AG once that we actually bump miners flying retrievers and other target ships without blowing them up then contact them on what happened and how to prevent it from happening but they said it was to aggressive which yes it is but not nearly as aggressive as you guys.
Tyranthian Ms Marvel Corporation 1	Posted - 2015.07.25 00:03:45 - [423] - Quote Sarah Flynt wrote: Globby wrote: Better to lose a retriever and learn early than lose a charon and lose a lot more. That is very much a matter of perspective. Losing a Retriever in the early days would have been a much bigger loss for me than loosing e.g. a jump freighter nowadays - relatively speaking. I also agree because when it comes to freighter pilots I want to believe that these pilots are sitting on billions of isk and can afford to lose them. I'm not sure if this is honestly true or not but to move around billions and billions of isk they must be making a lot of isk. Whereas the new retriever pilot has invested a large majority of his isk into this ship which is now gone and he's gotta go back to the drawing board which could cause that pilot to quit Eve or even could cause the creation of a monster.
Ima Spyalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.07.25 00:34:43 - [424] - Quote As someone who has been on both ends of ganking, although they failed to kill me gloriously due to bad timing, I can say that the current punishment is a joke. I sometimes will sit there and just take pity on new players who get ganked early on get it worse than someone who has the skills and isk to ignore a gank. As killing a new player who can barely make enough isk to replace the ship in 2 hours of gameplay is harsh while me on the other hand can strip a belt in half an hour so killing my whole fleet just sets me back long enough to replace what I lost, not that I care. I think there should be higher punishment for attacking newer players as the value of ISK is disproportionately higher for them. How this is done I don't care really. PS: obviously a forum alt for safety reasons :p
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13770	Posted - 2015.07.25 01:04:36 - [425] - Quote Ima Spyalt wrote: I think there should be higher punishment for attacking newer players as the value of ISK is disproportionately higher for them. The best part is that you even admit earlier in your post that the disproportionate value of isk to newbies is YOUR FAULT. You're the one stripping belts in half an hour, right? YOU are the one devaluing the effort of new players, not gankers. That's why highsec should be much less safe. So bloated carebears like you can't run up such ridiculous inflation and devalue new player income while cowering behind the disgusting safety of highsec. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Ima Spyalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.07.25 01:09:40 - [426] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: I think there should be higher punishment for attacking newer players as the value of ISK is disproportionately higher for them. The best part is that you even admit earlier in your post that the disproportionate value of isk to newbies is YOUR FAULT. You're the one stripping belts in half an hour, right? YOU are the one devaluing the effort of new players, not gankers. That's why highsec should be much less safe. So bloated carebears like you can't run up such ridiculous inflation and devalue new player income while cowering behind the disgusting safety of highsec. I'm no carebear I'm out to make isk and ruin someone else's day, only difference is I'm willing to spend a few hours to devaluation of everything in game to make it harder for people to turn a profit.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13770	Posted - 2015.07.25 01:13:52 - [427] - Quote Ima Spyalt wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: I think there should be higher punishment for attacking newer players as the value of ISK is disproportionately higher for them. The best part is that you even admit earlier in your post that the disproportionate value of isk to newbies is YOUR FAULT. You're the one stripping belts in half an hour, right? YOU are the one devaluing the effort of new players, not gankers. That's why highsec should be much less safe. So bloated carebears like you can't run up such ridiculous inflation and devalue new player income while cowering behind the disgusting safety of highsec. I'm no carebear I'm out to make isk and ruin someone else's day, only difference is I'm willing to spend a few hours to devaluation of everything in game to make it harder for people to turn a profit. Congratulations, you are more "the problem" than gankers could ever be. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Globby Cohenberg's Ethical Hauling CODE. 150	Posted - 2015.07.25 01:17:05 - [428] - Quote When I thrasher gank I literally give more to new players who I gank than actually spending on my suicide thrashers.
Ima Spyalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.07.25 01:20:17 - [429] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: I think there should be higher punishment for attacking newer players as the value of ISK is disproportionately higher for them. The best part is that you even admit earlier in your post that the disproportionate value of isk to newbies is YOUR FAULT. You're the one stripping belts in half an hour, right? YOU are the one devaluing the effort of new players, not gankers. That's why highsec should be much less safe. So bloated carebears like you can't run up such ridiculous inflation and devalue new player income while cowering behind the disgusting safety of highsec. I'm no carebear I'm out to make isk and ruin someone else's day, only difference is I'm willing to spend a few hours to devaluation of everything in game to make it harder for people to turn a profit. Congratulations, you are more "the problem" than gankers could ever be. So I don't care, it's only a biproduct of how I used to play being removed, I'd rather make the problem worse till they fix it than give a **** about the morals of how I'm trying to get there.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13771	Posted - 2015.07.25 02:57:14 - [430] - Quote Ima Spyalt wrote: So I don't care, it's only a biproduct of how I used to play being removed, I'd rather make the problem worse till they fix it than give a **** about the morals of how I'm trying to get there. I don't believe you. Post with your main, and then tell us what playstyle was removed that hurt you so dearly. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.

Ima Spyalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.07.25 02:59:13 - [431] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: So I don't care, it's only a biproduct of how I used to play being removed, I'd rather make the problem worse till they fix it than give a **** about the morals of how I'm trying to get there. I don't believe you. Post with your main, and then tell us what playstyle was removed that hurt you so dearly. Meh I don't need to.
Carrie-Anne Moss Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 342	Posted - 2015.07.25 03:59:09 - [432] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: So I don't care, it's only a biproduct of how I used to play being removed, I'd rather make the problem worse till they fix it than give a **** about the morals of how I'm trying to get there. I don't believe you. Post with your main, and then tell us what playstyle was removed that hurt you so dearly. Going with ISOboxing 10-20 hulks with freighter and orca support. If was incursions dude would still be printing billions each week. Must be mining. "Playstyle removed" Maybe talking bout you guys, CODE lol. Like CODE. Removing afk mining maybe? Its prob like 20 accoutns in mining op tho. Good riddance. Unsub your other accounts. You are worthless to this video game.
Jonah Gravenstein Machiavellian Space Bastards 24392	Posted - 2015.07.25 04:23:41 - [433] - Quote I never thought I'd say this but there's a definite possibility that CAM has hit the nail on the head. Ima Spyalt, you're a bitter, selfish and hypocritical coward, apparently you're also of repugnant character. People like you are poison. Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business. Nil mortifi sine lucre.
Ima Spyalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.07.25 04:30:03 - [434] - Quote Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: So I don't care, it's only a biproduct of how I used to play being removed, I'd rather make the problem worse till they fix it than give a **** about the morals of how I'm trying to get there. I don't believe you. Post with your main, and then tell us what playstyle was removed that hurt you so dearly. Going with ISOboxing 10-20 hulks with freighter and orca support. If was incursions dude would still be printing billions each week. Must be mining. "Playstyle removed" Maybe talking bout you guys, CODE lol. Like CODE. Removing afk mining maybe? Its prob like 20 accoutns in mining op tho. Good riddance. Unsub your other accounts. You are worthless to this video game. Actually no, more like something that enough people cried about removed and on the note of charter I'm just being as toxic as this forum is most days.
John E Normus The Conference Elite CODE. 613	Posted - 2015.07.25 05:14:47 - [435] - Quote Ima Spyalt wrote: Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Ima Spyalt wrote: So I don't care, it's only a biproduct of how I used to play being removed, I'd rather make the problem worse till they fix it than give a **** about the morals of how I'm trying to get there. I don't believe you. Post with your main, and then tell us what playstyle was removed that hurt you so dearly. Going with ISOboxing 10-20 hulks with freighter and orca support. If was incursions dude would still be printing billions each week. Must be mining. "Playstyle removed" Maybe talking bout you guys, CODE lol. Like CODE. Removing afk mining maybe? Its prob like 20 accoutns in mining op tho. Good riddance. Unsub your other accounts. You are worthless to this video game. Actually no, more like something that enough people cried about removed and on the note of charter I'm just being as toxic as this forum is most days. Bonus rooms? Between Ignorance and Wisdom
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 919	Posted - 2015.07.25 06:25:15 - [436] - Quote I'm guessing it's actually the opposite of CAM's theory. I would say he used to be an incursion multiboxer and the input broadcasting changes "removed" that playstyle for him. Since then he has switched to multibox mining instead since it's much simpler to do without input broadcasting. Also I'm getting a slight urge to invoke Article 11 of the Shadow Proclamation once again. There are all our dominion Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6435	Posted - 2015.07.25 07:08:33 - [437] - Quote Globby wrote: What humongous amount of effort are you talking about? What is AG doing that is so damn hard? The act of finding and landing on the right gank at the right time is tough enough. Unlike ganking, they don't have an infinite amount of time, they've got a very small window of opportunity. Then their whole team has to be on the ball to have a hope of stopping it. It's not "approach, F1, see you back at HQ". Maybe you should give it a try sometime so you can understand it from their point of view. Globby wrote: If you can stop one, you have the potential to stop them all, period. Why would a belief otherwise be logical? I can beat a 5 year old at boxing, I can't beat the world heavyweight champion. Some ganks can be stopped because they may already be pushing their luck trying to pull it off with the team they have. If that group is even remotely competent then AGs are irrelevant. Globby wrote: Rhamnousia Nosferatu consistently provides results, I would've killed tens of billions more if not for him. That's because you hyperdunk though. Hyperdunking is easier to prevent than "standard" ganking because there's less people involved and so less margin for error. Globby wrote: If there was one antiganker that was in logi for every CODE ganker there is, you would never have freighters die. LOL, so for every F1 monkey in a 2m isk ship, if AGs had an awake competent player in a 20-30m isk ship and someone to get those ships on grid with a gank target at just the right time, and they all run their logi at the right time (it's burst logi, it doesn't last forever), then they can stop a gank. Of course all the gankers need to to is fly to an alternate target and the logi ships would warp too slow to arrive on time even if they realise that was happening. And you still don't understand why there's a difference in difficulty between the two sides of the mechanic? Globby wrote: Yeah, go figure five guys in relevant ships can't stop a fifty man fleet. It's not quite been that much of a difference, but you'd expect us to at least acknowledge them and bring more guys or upship where needed. But nope. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 984	Posted - 2015.07.25 08:47:57 - [438] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Very realistic assessment in answer to Globby. So very true your comments, when I started to dabble with AG I did it on the basis of resisting, I was under no illusions in terms of success. Take the last couple of days, the gankers just stacked up with multiple bumpers a large number of targets, there was one I sat with, repped him back up (along with some others) then I was there on my own, with a repper and a catalyst to gank the wreck, they would set up for the warp in, but kept ganking other ships. In the end I had to go pick my wife up, just after I left they ganked it, the loot fairy did the job of my Catalyst thankfully. It is totally stacked against the AG group as you have quite rightly pointed out, the thing is with that number of bumpers they can even afford to stack up for hyperdunking, which while easy to stop will just result in a gank fleet coming in. But often the fun is resisting even though its impossible to make much of a dent, because its such a challenge, all the cards are stacked in the favour of the gankers. In any case what it has done is made me get off my backside and have a long look at industry, I merely dabbled to make T1 stuff I needed in NPC 0.0, but I have started to develop what I need for a limited T2 manufacturing operation to meet my own and my corps needs, one must ride that wave... Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1268	Posted - 2015.07.25 08:54:24 - [439] - Quote Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Actually I'll throw in here. I think utilizing hangers of any other ship while suspect or criminal should send the hanger ship suspect. The ability to reship under suspect flag or stash goods while suspect is crazy. I agree. Making stolen goods take the ship suspect would increase conflict and give more things to fight over. But the reason this isn't the case aside from development time, is the continual bubble wrapping of highsec. This change would allow any fleet member to make you go suspect without your knowledge or control. Therefore, it would make fleet hangers very dangerous to use and break the fool-proof nature of the green safety setting. You could play some tricks linking use of the fleet hanger to the safety setting, but it still won't solve the fundamental problem that the code is unable to track the "stolen" state of the goods so they could just be laundered through a jetcan or mobile depot (or just left in the mobile depot and return 15 minutes later). That change would also make the fleet hanger unusable in say fleet operations without accepting the risk anyone in the fleet could awox you. Sarah Flynt wrote: Globby wrote: Better to lose a retriever and learn early than lose a charon and lose a lot more. That is very much a matter of perspective. Losing a Retriever in the early days would have been a much bigger loss for me than loosing e.g. a jump freighter nowadays - relatively speaking. This "think of the children" argument is a bit of a red herring. A quick glance at the CODE. killboard shows that their primary targets are overloaded haulers and exhumers, ships only piloted by established players. The majority of ships destroyed belong to established players, like Ima Spyalt there who abuse the free security of highsec to run their industrial operations. The few true new players that get caught tend to get special attention in the form of advice and ISK from gankers, just like PvPers do in every space in Eve. One of the (many) problems AG seem to share, is the propensity to classify pretty much any player in highsec as a "noob" no matter how long they have been playing the game. You are not a new player if you have been playing this game for six months, even if you want to claim so because you have never done anything else but mine in highsec. Certainly, on the scale of Eve proficiency you are not much better than a two-week old player who jumped right into faction warfare, but you cannot wrap yourself in a "noob" flag forever just because you don't want to compete. Isolating new players from this core game play of Eve is not healthy nor fair for anyone. As Globby said, eventually they are going to lose a ship - in fact that really is one of the major things Eve is about - so better it be a cheap one early on than one containing multi-months of their effort down the road. Ventures are so cheap they can be replaced in a single load of ore, and even a Retriever loss would only sting if you ignored the "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" mantra and lost it an hour after you bought it. Certainly, such rare edge cases are not what ganking should be balanced around and as we heard from CCP Rise, ganking does not cause new players to quit the game in any significant number. The real problem, and why ganking is in the game, is to provide at least some risk to entitled bears like Ima Spyalt, who use CONCORD to protect their industrial operations at no cost. Without ganking, they could just pour all their capital into industrial ships and use them AFK to completely out-compete the new players. New players should be rewarded for their efforts, while lazy, AFKing established players need to be "discouraged" from griefing the new players in the ice and asteroid belts of highsec via the persuasive power of antimatter.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 67	Posted - 2015.07.25 08:56:03 - [440] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: The problem is that the ratcheting up of NPC-enforced security in highsec has gotten to the point criminals cannot fly any ships of consequence. I guess attack battlecruisers (namely taloses and tornados) fall into this category ?? Black Pedro wrote: You start your post with saying how "ganking should stay in the game" and then go on to say that the things that enable ganking should be removed from the game "just because". To qoute you - 'friend' (which I am not to you) I: a) Made no concrete suggestions, it was just thoughts off the top of my head as suggestions would be much more elaborated b) Made no suggestion which would remove ganking from the game (ability to reship in space or travel through stargates under criminal flag would present a nerf to some aspects of ganking but in no way would remove it from the game). BTW, unlike you I'm open to discussion which aspects of current criminal gameplay should be balanced or if they even should be. Black Pedro wrote: Why do you think it should be made even safer? Because I'd love to soak up on your tears? Would that be an answer you could understand? BTW, you don't have to be a trained psychiatrist to recognize bad behaviour.

Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1268	Posted - 2015.07.25 09:29:58 - [441] - Quote Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: I guess attack battlecruisers (namely taloses and tornados) fall into this category ?? Sure, they can fly a Talos, but they can't fight you in it because of the faction police. So they are not going to. Gankers will only fly disposable ships and them only en route to a gank. Anti-gankers already have a massive advantage to stop them in that situation and do kill them from time-to-time, but you are not going to see gankers in any ship worthy of a bounty hunter tracking and killing because the mechanics do not allow them to fly them. These ever-present NPCs are why there is no room for a bounty hunting profession nor any escalation of fights to the point where gankers risk ships of any significance outside of the minimal amount of time to reach a gank target. Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Black Pedro wrote: You start your post with saying how "ganking should stay in the game" and then go on to say that the things that enable ganking should be removed from the game "just because". To qoute you - 'friend' (which I am not to you) I: a) Made no concrete suggestions, it was just thoughts off the top of my head as suggestions would be much more elaborated b) Made no suggestion which would remove ganking from the game (ability to reship in space or travel through stargates under criminal flag would present a nerf to some aspects of ganking but in no way would remove it from the game). BTW, unlike you I'm open to discussion which aspects of current criminal gameplay should be balanced or if they even should be. I am slightly hurt. We are all friends of a sort here playing a video game for fun. I am very open to discuss criminal game play. You don't have to be so sensitive or protective of your ideas. The reality is criminal game play has be coded into the game by CCP. They spent many person-months of coding time developing the Crimewatch mechanics, CONCORD, the security status system, the faction police and so forth. They are not going to make changes that result in criminals being unable to operate in highsec, certainly not because you claim it "illogical". Further ganking is pretty balanced. There are few things can be tweaked as always, but a person operating in highsec can be 99.9%+ safe from gankers with only a small amount of effort. All ships are now not profitable to gank, unless their owners do something silly like overload them or really bling them out. Highsec has never been safer from suicide gankers, and it is now nearly impossible to accidentally flag yourself. Why should CCP put more artificial hoops for gankers to jump through to participate in game play they have put in the game on purpose? If you have some ideas to promote more conflict I would like to hear them. Preventing gankers from traveling or docking is silly and CCP won't do that, but perhaps there is something with deployables or the like that can encourage gankers to put more on the line. But you run back into that first problem that criminals cannot actually defend their stuff in space because of the facpo meaning you would need some more fundamental changes to the criminal mechanics. If you have some ideas, let's hear them. Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Black Pedro wrote: Why do you think it should be made even safer? Because I'd love to soak up on your tears? Would that be an answer you could understand? BTW, you don't have to be a trained psychiatrist to recognize bad behaviour. That is not a reason likely to convince CCP to make changes. But please, continue to impotently whine about the "pathological" gankers on the forums. I am sure the CCP developers enjoy the taste of your sweet tears as much as the rest of us.
Yuna Reel Veritas Group 0	Posted - 2015.07.25 11:42:37 - [442] - Quote Globby wrote: Haulers are so dumb and bad at the game that they're basically regarded as PvE content by anti-gankers themselves. I tend to agree with this statement... All hail Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I! \o/ \o/ \o/
Rhamnousia Nosferatu Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 67	Posted - 2015.07.25 12:32:02 - [443] - Quote Yuna Reel wrote: Globby wrote: Haulers are so dumb and bad at the game that they're basically regarded as PvE content by anti-gankers themselves. I tend to agree with this statement... All hail Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I! \o/ \o/ \o/ Some certainly are, however - as I've already said, making general statements about any subgroup is usually not a good idea All hail Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I!
Mag's the united 19892	Posted - 2015.07.25 12:44:30 - [444] - Quote Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Some certainly are, however - as I've already said, making general statements about any subgroup is usually not a good idea So why do it? Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 67	Posted - 2015.07.25 13:40:11 - [445] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: Sure, they can fly a Talos, but they can't fight you in it because of the faction police. So they are not going to. Of course they will not, not only because of the faction police but because that's not what they are after. If you want to do some combat-based pvp (in which you opponent is usually at least expected to shoot back at you) there are numerous better options then ganking. Ganking as a play style is not about 'combat' based pvp at all, its about avoiding it as much as possible (since any real combat will deter you from your true target). Any explanation of the notion of ganking I managed to find is centered on using overwhelming force to beat the enemy without him standing a chance of defense. Hence, talking about inability to pvp while being a dedicated ganker is pointless. Ganking is about getting kills which take a considerable amount of work in preparation (logistics, finding targets) but fairly little effort to perform the act iteslf. I'm not saying its no effort but it certainly isn't as intense as finding and fighting a small gang engagement in 'proper' pvp. While I respect soloers and small group gankers (hyperdunkers included) the amount of effort per player goes down extremely in large gank groups (like freighter ganks). It is basically null fleet mentality mirrored into hisec - you have FC and maybe two-three other guys who are actively playing the game and the rest are just "F1+spam local" drones. And don't tell me this is a false view of it as I've watched both Burn Amarr stream and Laz Telraven's noob tuesday on ganking. It really is very low effort thing for the majority of participants. Quote: Anti-gankers already have a massive advantage to stop them in that situation and do kill them from time-to-time...you are not going to see gankers in any ship worthy of a bounty hunter tracking and killing because the mechanics do not allow them to fly them I wouldn't say AG advantage is massive, not with the insta-undocks, fleet warp mechanics as they work atm (looking forward to changes to that I must say), fact that you can't take pre-emptive actions against chars with positive sec status without becoming criminal (not saying you should be able to shoot anyone you wish, to make it clear, just stating a fact) etc. In the current system, you won't see bounty hunters going for folks who had gone criminal in the past or are currently criminals but if the system was to be changed.. who knows. And I've got some ideas about changes regarding both bounties and killrights as well as suspect mechanics and 'player police' all aimed at promoting player interaction without nerfing major aspects of ganking. However, those changes would certainly make ganking harder, so even if I eventually put them here, I'm not sure I'd want to follow the discussion due to all the bloody negativity and spam one gets here instead of healthy discussion. Black Pedro wrote: The reality is criminal game play has be coded into the game by CCP. They spent many person-months of coding time developing the Crimewatch mechanics, CONCORD, the security status system, the faction police and so forth. They are not going to make changes that result in criminals being unable to operate in highsec, certainly not because you claim it "illogical". Everything has to be coded into te game, the fact that manhours have been spent on something does not mean that it is good or bad per se, as we've so often witnessed. Bouty system in its current itteration is completely pointless in terms of driving player content, that has been discussed on numerous occasions both here, on reddit and elswhere. It is not 'illogical' to me, it is illogical to many folks who have given it a bit of thought. Killrights are pretty much a joke too for anyone who understands how they work and/or negative sec characters. On top of all they are prone to exploitation using insurance scam as this example clearly illustrates (platinum insured orca+moderately priced killright by an alt + bored and silly folks = profit). Quote: ganking is pretty balanced. Good parts of it are, some things are not (namely - bumping in its current iteration, as previously discussed both here and in other threads; looting; maybe other things too). However, we can always agree to disagree. Black Pedro wrote: But please, continue to impotently whine about the 'pathological' gankers on the forums. I am sure the CCP developers enjoy the taste of your sweet tears as much as the rest of us. I only used 'tears' narrative since its the trademark of your group (goons/code). I don't think most gankers are pathological, as I clearly stated, only some folks (again - not all) from CODE. Thank you for showing that in the end this is the best you can do (try to insult and provoke an emotional reaction) since that's what a lot of gameplay for some folks is based upon but I don't hink its healthy for the game community or CCP. As for them (CCP) I think they clearly displayed that they can tell good from bad when they reacted to some incidents from the past (CSM removals and permabans come to mind).
Rhamnousia Nosferatu Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 67	Posted - 2015.07.25 13:40:59 - [446] - Quote Mag's wrote: Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Some certainly are, however - as I've already said, making general statements about any subgroup is usually not a good idea So why do it? Please show me where I did it
Noragen Neirfallas Dedicated and Dangerous The Marmite Collective 1400	Posted - 2015.07.25 14:36:48 - [447] - Quote Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Mag's wrote: Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Some certainly are, however - as I've already said, making general statements about any subgroup is usually not a good idea So why do it? Please show me where I did it Quote: Of course they will not, not only because of the faction police but because that's not what they are after Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1268	Posted - 2015.07.25 15:17:37 - [448] - Quote Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Of course they will not, not only because of the faction police but because that's not what they are after. If you want to do some combat-based pvp (in which you opponent is usually at least expected to shoot back at you) there are numerous better options then ganking. Ganking as a play style is not about 'combat' based pvp at all, its about avoiding it as much as possible (since any real combat will deter you from your true target). Any explanation of the notion of ganking I managed to find is centered on using overwhelming force to beat the enemy without him standing a chance of defense. Hence, talking about inability to pvp while being a dedicated ganker is pointless. You presume much my friend. Gankers function as they do because it is really the only way they can. If you somehow engineered the mechanics so the gankers could actually gain something from risking more assets, why would not some of them choose to do so? I am sure some of them would like the battle the anti-gankers on more even terms, or risk more to go after a more juicier target. Right now though, the punitive and predictable mechanics mean you cannot even accept a fight from "law enforcement" even if you want to, nor is there any point in risking more assets than what you have calculated you need. The problem as always is balancing this without letting the gankers completely run wild. It's a Catch-22: in order to make bounty hunters/anti-gankers/law enforcement a real profession, you need to buff gankers so they can and will actually fight back. But doing so puts highsec at even more risk. I'd love a solution to this to foster more meaningful conflict between gankers and anti-gankers, but I don't see one right now. Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Ganking is about getting kills which take a considerable amount of work in preparation (logistics, finding targets) but fairly little effort to perform the act iteslf. I'm not saying its no effort but it certainly isn't as intense as finding and fighting a small gang engagement in 'proper' pvp. While I respect soloers and small group gankers (hyperdunkers included) the amount of effort per player goes down extremely in large gank groups (like freighter ganks). It is basically null fleet mentality mirrored into hisec - you have FC and maybe two-three other guys who are actively playing the game and the rest are just "F1+spam local" drones. And don't tell me this is a false view of it as I've watched both Burn Amarr stream and Laz Telraven's noob tuesday on ganking. It really is very low effort thing for the majority of participants. Meh, honestly who or what you "respect" isn't relevant. Ganking, especially large fleet ganking requires as much effort as pretty much any PvP fleet. Certainly it is more "effort" than AFK mining or hauling. But what does that have to do with anything? Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: And I've got some ideas about changes regarding both bounties and killrights as well as suspect mechanics and 'player police' all aimed at promoting player interaction without nerfing major aspects of ganking. However, those changes would certainly make ganking harder, so even if I eventually put them here, I'm not sure I'd want to follow the discussion due to all the bloody negativity and spam one gets here instead of healthy discussion. We don't need to make ganking harder or more costly. CCP was already worried about the decreasing levels of suicide ganking in the game in 2012 (CSM Minutes; page 59) and highsec has only got safer since then. Any changes you propose have to make the ganker/anti-ganker dynamic more interesting, not just pile more obstacles or costs on gankers. Criminals are suppose to exist in the game. You are not entitled to shut them all down just because you want to. But please, I am always eager to hear new ideas on how to make the game better. Black Pedro wrote: I only used 'tears' narrative since its the trademark of your group (goons/code). I don't think most gankers are pathological, as I clearly stated, only some folks (again - not all) from CODE. Thank you for showing that in the end this is the best you can do (try to insult and provoke an emotional reaction) since that's what a lot of gameplay for some folks is based upon but I don't hink its healthy for the game community or CCP. As for them (CCP) I think they clearly displayed that they can tell good from bad when they reacted to some incidents from the past (CSM removals and permabans come to mind). Friend, when you call out me and my CODE. associates as engaging in "pathogical behaviour" for playing the game as space villains, do not expect it to go unchallenged. I will not presume to diagnose you over in the Internet, but I will observe that you seem to have difficulty separating a fictional, online role-playing game universe from reality. Ganking is intended game play and is designed to produce conflict between our characters in the game. But that conflict should stay in-game. If you want to bring it to the forums by calling other players "pathological" and then tell me that you are advocating changes "[b]ecause I'd love to soak up on your tears", don't expect me to stay silent. I am more than happy to engage in this juvenile sparring that you started.
Anne Dieu-le-veut Natl Assn for the Advancement of Criminal People 193	Posted - 2015.07.25 15:37:10 - [449] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: Of course I am not going to risk my main toons on a sec status and kill rights, I do stuff with them, thats why me and others are busy training ganker toons to go after the Macherials and this takes time. My AG Macherial gank toon is still some way away from being operational. A Macherial fitted for maximum efficiency in terms of bumping is killable by one Talos if the talos pilot is very skilled and is overheating, put a tank module on there and it goes to 2 or 3 depending on the tank modules. Also its a damn mobile target that is hard to pin down Anti-gankers are doing this to get in the way, they do not have people throwing ISK and resources at them like the gankers, so while the gankers can throw 500m at a gank and just laugh at it as its small change, not so the AG's players... I thought High Sec Militia reimbursed you guys?
Rhamnousia Nosferatu Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 67	Posted - 2015.07.25 17:48:57 - [450] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: I only used 'tears' narrative since its the trademark of your group (goons/code). I don't think most gankers are pathological, as I clearly stated, only some folks (again - not all) from CODE. Thank you for showing that in the end this is the best you can do (try to insult and provoke an emotional reaction) since that's what a lot of gameplay for some folks is based upon but I don't hink its healthy for the game community or CCP. As for them (CCP) I think they clearly displayed that they can tell good from bad when they reacted to some incidents from the past (CSM removals and permabans come to mind). Friend, when you call out me and my CODE. associates as engaging in "pathogical behaviour" for playing the game as space villains, do not expect it to go unchallenged. I will not presume to diagnose you over in the Internet, but I will observe that you seem to have difficulty separating a fictional, online role-playing game universe from reality. Ganking is intended game play and is designed to produce conflict between our characters in the game. But that conflict should stay in-game. If you want to bring it to the forums by calling other players "pathological" and then tell me that you are advocating changes "[b]ecause I'd love to soak up on your tears", don't expect me to stay silent. I am more than happy to engage in this juvenile sparring that you started. Oh well, no matter how many times I emphasize that I'm not against ganking, that I think that folks should learn to suck up their losses in game, that I do my best not to generalise my opinion of some out of game actions by certain individuals from certain groups (namely - bonus rooms, websites mixing in-game and RL information to laugh at folk's losses, alliance panel failures etc.) on the complete ganking population or everyone in CODE or Goons for what it matters, you'll just ignore it try to spin it into some 'you hate all gankers and think we're RL criminals' thing. What can I say, I don't think that, I know this is a computer game and I've clearly made my points. The fact that you're constantly trying to spin my words and can't or will not accept what I'm trying to say simply indicates that trying to discuss something with you is a waste of time. Hence I'll stop.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.