Lets take a few examples of what people call nerfing ganking, CCP decided to change the DCU II to a passive modules, which you do not switch on, so they adjusted the structures on various ships including freighters that could not use it. And the gankers cried nerf.

Another one, no consequence bumping to hold people in space, there is now going to be a timer, do you call that a nerf to ganking or an adjustment of a poor mechanic.

At the moment they scoop loot by parking a DST next to a wreck and their freighter, incomes a noob ship which scoops the loot into the DST fleet hanger, the freighter pilot scoops that into his hanger, the noob ship goes suspect and can be shot. Would adjusting that be a nerf to ganking or a nerf to loot scooping.

And there you go an example of what I said. He also does some obfuscation on their use of DST's

Watch and learn

https://www.twitch.tv/jason_kusion

You know how this works, stop playing a dumb troll...

Edit: Incase you werent aware , blocade runners are cargo scan immune and get ganked on sight , "blocade runner roulet"

Why not: just have a pop up message that advises the player.

"Cargo Scanned"

This way it keeps with the danger and fun. Players and concord can scan and you never know who.
You have a choice then to get the heart pumping or not.

But, but, but....that takes effort. You know, looking at your overview and seeing who is doing what....

That is simply outrageous! I demand CCP give me something for zero effort!

EDIT: More than postively affected, you destroyed the most effective counter that the AG movement had by this and you knew exactly what you were doing.

You shot them, but were not very good at it.

So you don't like going after fast moving targets that could blow stuff up before you can react, what does this sound like baltec1?

We are talking about the fact that you as gankers could not catch or blow up fast moving targets, which are difficult to stop, so what happens you push for a change that negates that, then try to divert attention on other things. You did stop some wreck ganks, it was actually good developing content, but you could not have AG actually winning could you?

EDIT: I do actually support the EHP change to wrecks by the way and am man enough to say so.

nah

Just make it so the person scanned has a warning show up on his screen identifying who scanned him.

But getting a suspect timer is not really a counter. A counter is something that players should be able to do.

If you want a module that when activate counters scanning, I suppose that might not be too bad. But here is the thing, people will just backwards induct to a strategy of ganking ships using such a module. After all, if you are using it you must not want people to see what you are carrying...and that will likely be highly correlated with ISK value.

#1 You are the now saying explicitly that Dracvlad is correct and CCP increased wreck EHP as a direct buff to ganking?
#2 Wreck EHP doesn't affect safety. By the time you get to the EHP of the wreck, the safety of the ship that made the wreck is already a moot point. Increasing the wreck EHP is just a direct reward to gankers. If anything it makes their profession safer, so it is an example of CCP pandering to people who want the game to be safe and easy for their own play style.


edit:
#3 Shocking as it may seem to you, Gankers got by just fine ganking AND looting their victims with the old, low wreck ehp... Just because people started competing to deny the loot and modern gankers are lazy doesn't mean EVE needed to change to accommodate them...

Ganking is not intended to be profitable. It has even been said so.

Funny you bring up the term "no possibility to counter it". Want to make that the core subject? We can do this all day.

Where?

People have been blowing up titan wrecks loaded with tens of billions of isk in 0.0 space for years - to deny the enemy their loot. I have never yet seen a PL thread whining about this massive loss of profit.

And as I said in my first post on the subject - I have no problem with the change itself.

I took offense at the implication that the reason the change was made and was good was that it somehow made high-sec "less safe"....and at the fact that CCP only bothered to fix it when gankers complained to them - rather than because it has been broken in 0.0 for over a decade...

CCP have already said taht Ganking a T2 fit ship is not ment to be profitable, you know that.

The wrecks had been like that for ages, but as soon as AG start blowing them up you get it changed.

You got that pushed up to a level you knew that the small hisec entities and solo players could not do, it needs a Tornado with a perfect hit

There you go, you had it moved to that level to defend the wreck which you could not do yourself and your answer is go use one, typical baltec1.

The simple fact is that as soon as AG started shooting the wrecks you pushed to have it changed because you are too useless to defend the wreck against people you said were fail. Who is tthe failure, the people who whined to get the rules changed to cover their own weakness which they projected on others.

You could not stop a frigate.

No it was not impossible, it is about as impossible as blowing up Catalysts on the way to ganks, you just decided that you had to get the rules changed and did.

It suddenly got pushed through when AG started ganking wrecks, perhaps that was a strange coincidence, but whatever it destroyed what was developing into fun for AG players.

What like the effort you did not make in shooting small stuff shooting wrecks, you made a different effort.

You had to stop them, get them at the gate, hit them as they undock, hit them as they land and start to target, that is what we are told right, we are fail, just as you are fail.

Now I know that a couple of times Gankers did manage to defend the wreck

EDIT: I forgot something important, because they had only just started, the happy anti ganker wreck gankers had not yet reached -10, but once they were there you could have shot them, where have I heard that before? Sadly because you stopped it so quickly with your CSM flanking move we never got to test you did we?

To be fair, a wreck is now harder to gank than the average mining ship (non skiff/procurer) - since they have to hit it with concord pre-spawned and on a gate.

It essentially takes the same isk investment as ganking a hauler in a 1.0 system - but with a guarantee of 0 isk as a reward. So the gankers/looters do definitely have a significant advantage in this particular scenario after the wreck buff.

Back to your typical trolling, do you ever stop. The one thing that this sorry episode has proved to all Eve players is when the going gets tough the gankers get going to the CSM for mechanic change, so much for your skill and ability...

Said the guy who destroyed fun content by whining to CCP via their CSM representative and destroyed pixels getting blown up by a mechanic change.

You really are trying to hard, your whine on asking for 5 minutes in terms of CCP's still not implemented bumping warp mechanism is up there with the gankers getting a change to wreck EHP. Pure gold both of them, keep whining mate I really enjoy it.

That's the main issue- AG groups are reacting, which is why they're always late to the party. They could of course police the common ganking systems but so far this level of coordination remains unheard of

Such terrible ad-hominem posting. This is at least the second time I've seen you do this, in this thread.

This is not in anyway a refutation of the points above. Baltec is not his CEO.

And yet a few wrecks get ganked by AG players and the rules get changed, funny that...

For years wrecks were at 500 EHP until the Gankers were affected, funny that...

Reddit has Endie replying to Jestertrek there.

This has nothing to do with off grid boosting, this has everything to do with CCP being incompetent and Gankers not being able to defend the wrecks on the same basis as people have to defend freighters, getting all upset at having to actually put effort in and getting the rules changed.