Freighter ganking has gotten mind numbingly easy.

Make no mistake, high sec gankers are just as risk averse as their care bear counter parts.

And they're either guaranteed a payout or they don't lose the ship because the gank never even started.

"Care bears" stand to lose a lot more.

Gankers don't stand to lose anything.

I'm not of the opinion that high sec needs to be ultra safe, but ganking doesn't need to be so ridiculously simple and risk free either.

I have never personally been the victim of a bumper

Punishment for criminals is a joke. Ganking is too easy. There's no risk and no punishment. It takes no skill. etc etc

/general carebear metaquote

But the rules that high sec are supposed to be operating under should not result in self defense causing sec standing loss and Concordokken of your ship(s).

It's a dumb mechanic.

Again, self defense should not result in Concord or sec status loss.

Ah yet another of your comments induced by your hatred of or completely ignoring the facts.

If you cannot align then you cannot warp, like it or not this is a simple fact of warp travel in EvE.

To be aligned in EvE requires you to attain roughly 70% of your ships current non-warp maximum speed as affected by modules, rigs, skills, and of course webs.

Since bumping can and often does prevent a ship from attaining the required speed bumping can and often does prevent a ship from warping because they prevent it from aligning.

Not just repeated bumping. Repeated bumping *with the intent to prevent the ship from warping*, in essence using bumping as a form of tackle.

Those being bumped can adapt, but why should they need to in high sec with a ruleset that is supposed to carry penalties for that sort of unprovoked aggression.

It's like saying robbing banks is illegal, but doing so while riding a zebra isn't specifically cited so it's ok until further notice.]

I specifically mentioned the costs of increased organization. The point was in answer to the contention that they would become more expensive in a concrete manner that takes the price above that which is currently profitable. It will make it less casual, more of a committed endeavor

It's a loophole. Bumping being used as tackle is an emergent use of the physics engine, not an intended feature of the game at release. That makes it interesting, possibly clever, a little funny... But nor necessarily good, balanced, or fun.

Actually, that would make you an accessory, and would put you away with the robbers.

How? It does not stop it. It's a very mild repercussion that almost none would take advantage of. The people ganking always like to scream "but the non-consensual PvP must flow!"... It just allows more PvP. Surely that's not so much risk it would deter a gank?

Regardless of how minor the penalty, self defense from unprovoked aggression should not result in penalties.

You are correct, I don't want you to have a reason to log in and gank someone. I want the game to support you being logged in on your ganking character and being engaged in ganking (the waiting part until a viable target is located). I don't want you ratting guristas for 3 hours and then logging ratter pilot off, logging ganker pilot on while another character in a mach 'holds' the freighter until your crew is assembled.

i suggust you look into the facpo and how they work. Its not hard to bait them off and tank them somewhere else in system leaving others to operate without any issues.

It is extremely easy too figure out how to bump someone in a way that reduces their "speed" in the direction they were trying to warp WITHOUT imparting speed along any other "vector".

You make it seem as if a pilot is doing something sinful if they autopilot at all.

But restoring the balance on moving them around is a real concern for some.

Never said it was easy, I said it was possible.

I think it's more a case that haulers stick to safer areas, as is proper. Your prey would ideally be the logistics headed out to supply null-sec, but those guys aren't the sort to fall for gankbear ambushes.

Though honestly it's not the afk gankbait that has my attention. No suggestion I have made or supported would affect autopiloted freighter ganks at all, with the rare exception of some white knight getting involved. If there was tackle that was only criminal the Afk freighter would still be afk and ganked.

Nah why waste the time, you would not believe even if you saw it.

Besides you are the one that is assuming that when I said bumper that I meant SOLO ship.

However given that our ships can only accelerate on a single vector

and that vector is easily defined by the way the ship is facing

and given how slowly a freighter accelerates a pair of ships should do the trick very nicely, something that any skilled solo player should be able to handle especially since they only need to keep the ship from warping for 30 seconds or so.

I am sorry, but the claim that there are consequences, at least beyond social consequences, to ganking is pure and unadulterated horsefeathers.

But it damn sure isn't unfair that their playstyle still exists, which is what the carebears are really crying about. They want "consequences" that make ganking completely untenable and delete it as a playstyle. That's why they dishonestly claim that the current consequences from ganking are insufficient.

Not really. Some might, but most don't.

The attitude cuts both ways. For some the carebear has no rights at all. Because he does not play the gankbear game he is a nonperson.

There is zero thought of balance

they exist only to provide targets that feel real rage, shed real tears. Even better when they can then turn around and claim it's the victim who is unbalanced and needs help. The ganker could get that exact same level of challenge from NPC freighters

It's not "providing challenge", "seeking challenge" or anything other the perverse satisfaction of sadistic urges at the expense of unconsenting fellow players.

They won't go to areas of space where people look for fights, they want to stay in high sec and harass people who would rather not play that way, and it's funny because to these guys their prey are worth less than they are.

They take pride in finding ways around the rules that are supposed to control that behavior enough to make the game fun for the people they want to hurt, and in turn ensure that victims will be there in the future.

No, what is really being asked for in this case is that the rules high sec is supposed to work under actually do so.

Supposedly if you avoid wars, criminal action, and killing people then when you are attacked (the slotting plain English definition, ffs) Concord will intervene.

The average person does not care about loopholes and gimmicks, they care about end results. The end result is that they were prevented from entering warp for several minutes and then executed.

Personally I don't have a problem with the execution. But the lead up was stupid and not in keeping with the intent of high sec.

Guess what?

Nothing I suggested affects the ability to gank autopiloted freighters, or really even unescorted freighters.

People *beg* for foolish carebears to shoot them when they are suspect.

You aren't afraid of that one in a million guy looking to defend himself actively are you?

I think you should sit down and think about your position here Mike. Where else in your human experience is it acceptable to threaten another person and their family with death, or call them vile homophobic, racial, or misogynistic slurs? I don't care how bad your day at work was, how mad you are at yourself that you weren't paying attention or angry with yourself that you went to make a sandwich with your mining barge in the belt, or how much gloating that ganker did in local, but you have no right to threaten me and my family over a video game. There is not one other interaction or social situation where I have seen rational, otherwise intelligent people, saying it is ok to "not condemn" homophobic slurs or death threats against fellow human beings until I started playing Eve. I find the bad behaviour that the disconnect a monitor and keyboard spawns to provide a fascinating, and a little sad, insight into human behaviour.

This lack of empathy and to be honest, civil behaviour, is at the core of the toxicity that bubbles up from time-to-time from the rabid carebear community. Thankfully, most Eve players get that this is just a video game; a complex, unique virtual world for sure, and one specifically designed to stir up emotions, but it is still just a video game. You are welcome to despise, trash-talk, hate, deride other players in-game, but it is never acceptable to personally insult or threaten the person behind the keyboard.

Mike, you need to stop enabling other players who engage in this toxic behaviour. This is a game we all play for fun. Remind people of that when someone starts with the personal insults and/or threats against gankers or anyone else, instead of just standing back and "not condemning" them because you think that behaviour is justified when a player loses an imaginary spaceship.

And of course, ears so deaf that Black Pedro may as well have been talking to a stone.

When a -10 guy wants to move through HS what is a good way to do it? Via a pod? After all, NPCs wont pod them. A fast moving ship that both aligns fast and warps fast? I contend that both of these things are a result of risk aversion.

People who mitigate risk do so because they are risk averse. Risk averse does not have to mean you take no risks, you are just prudent about the risks you take.

The risk seeker on the other hand would press the button on the right irrespective of their footwear.

For all intents and purposes, the freighter pilot being bumped...was pushing the button on the right while barefoot.

His threats are as imaginary as that spaceship, and both made of nothing but pixels. In fact, the spaceship was worth more because it took time and effort to get it on screen. Welcome to the internet where kids say stuff because they will never back it up.

If you don't like the things people say when you bully them, assault them, or otherwise do mean things to them, maybe you should think about not enjoying making them so angry.

As was pointed out, there are whole other areas of space where people are actually looking for that kind of play that won't be so angry when you blow there stuff up, but I doubt you are interested in such a good natured dynamic.

[Quote]I didn't say high sec should be a no PvP zone. Less nonconsenual than the other 3 areas, as befits the rules, but no one has said anything about eliminating it.

It's a non-question as nothing I have suggested affects the difficulty of ganking an unattended autopiloted freighter.

My sole point is the concern of pilots like the OP who feel that bumping should not be used that way.

They once said man could never fly under his own power, yet there were pioneers and visionaries who refused to believe and they kept trying new ideas until they made it work. A group of engineers and scientist at Motorola in the 60's looked at the communicators from the original Star Trek TV series and said why not and today we have cell phones because of their vision and their willingness to try something that others said was impossible. These people share one common trait, not one of them ever sat back and said show me the video so I can believe that this is possible. No I am not comparing things in a game or myself to these people or their accomplishments. But we do share something in common, we were willing to try something that others said was impossible simply to see if it worked and none of us sat back and said "show me the video or I will not believe".

You can continue to be one of those who says show me the video so I can see that it does work. Or you can go see if you can figure out how to make ti work the same way myself and a few others did, in the end the choice if yours. And to be honest I really do not give a damn if you or anyone else believes me.

Flagged for being incompetent? That's the best idea I've seen in this thread, even though it would mean I was perma-flagged. :-/

If you lose a ship, you made a mistake.

You need to step back, ask what you did wrong, and figure out how to not have it happen again.

One reason I gave ganking a try is because the ganking community in EvE is by far a more friendly and open group than the anti-ganking crowd. Everything I've learned about how to avoid being ganked came from the gankers themselves.

So, to recapitulate, the ganking community is...

• Providing "school of hard knocks" type of lessons to players
• They even show how to avoid ganks.
• They are a decent and welcoming community that will show players how to gank...and avoid them with first hand experience.

But gankers are awful real life psychopaths, so it's okay to send them inappropriate in game messages.

And bumping is bad because it is applied to people who are imprudent when flying a specific type of ship.

Do I understand the issues correctly?

A huge chunk of players perceives a problem, but really it's just them.

Since they are all absolutely wrong and really aren't even really people but just destructible terrain it's ok to not only treat them anyway you want, but to push the envelope on how angry you can make them until they spout off inappropriately, laugh about it, and then use that to shame them further with mock indignation. Even better is the "they were asking for it with the way they were dressed" actually does get to apply to them.

Never mind that the issue at hand can be alleviated with simple changes that would impact your play style in very minimal ways

and further tools have been suggested that would increase the scope of your abilities dramatically in recompense for that minimal restriction.

I don't even champion bad and incompetent play.

I am absolutely fine with popping all the freighters.

But the people getting popped this way do have a legitimate complaint that loopholes are being used that violate the spirit of high secs rules, if not the precise letter of the law.

Precisely what is the difference between killing a freighter on a gate in high sec, or using a tool to misdirected a freighter from high sec into lo sec and killing it there?

What holy creed is being violated by preserving the intended gameplay of high sec by insuring direct action against a ship is met with the penalties those rules impose?

You aren't trying to have an actual discussion.

You just keep repeating your lie over and over again, and expect us to engage you as though that lie were the truth.

It is not. Bumping is not aggression, no matter how many times you say it. There is no "discussion" to be had on that basis, because the entire founding concept is 100% false.

And you claim that people are "trolling" when they refuse to engage your lie. Pure projection. The only troll here is you, even the OP gave up on this asinine concept a while ago.

Conversation stalled at the OP. I was the only one to move forward with any attempt at all. The rest of you said essentially 'no' and never bothered to discuss anything.

3. You are trying to reframe my argument into a strawman of your own design. I never said that imprudent behavior should be protected. In fact, my proposal based on the argument I did make was specifically designed to protect imprudent behavior as little as possible.

That's quite the army of strawmen you are trying to put in the field.