Suicide ganking has always been “iffy”.
Its existence may very well be blocking a more rational HS PvP model.
1 Like
It may also block low- and null-sec PvP by being a high-sec PvP model, which creates enough adversity if only one lets it. Ganking certainly affects many decisions I make for trading, hauling and mining in high-sec. It even includes flying through low-sec to avoid certain 0.5 systems.
1 Like
Yes, but as I intimated above, suicide ganking as a phenomenon is blocking more rational HS PvP options.
Ive long advocated, for example, for higher NPC Corp tax rate, and that it applies to ALL income to a NPC Corp players wallet, no matter from where. And also that each NPC Corp should be at perpetual war with its diametric opposite.
And why can’t anti-gankers use these? CODE is not hard to join. You can pull NPCs to the gates just before the hauler arrives. You could have Citadels to tether on, multi-box a scout and webbing alt. None of those are limited to gankers only.
1 Like
To be quite honest with you, I’d even vote for a much harsher change. A change which removes NPC corps as we know them, makes corporation skills much longer to train and much more expensive, and one which places new players right into player corporations. It would solve recruiting, makes corporations grow much faster, and removes the hurdle of finding one in the first place. And to top it of, add a market to trade players like football players. When you there don’t like a member as a CEO can you try to sell 'em instead of just kicking them back into the bucket like trash. Why even allow players to be kicked the way it’s done now? It only creates more anti-social behavior. Make ISKs instead…
Just putting it out there. I’m not going to defend it as an idea. 
1 Like
Underrated comment. If highsec is made safe for even the most stupid of miners then there is no advantage to being a smart miner. As for the OP’s friend who supposedly got ganked so frequently that he quit: “Gank me once, shame on you. Gank me twice, shame on me. Gank me a third time, and I’m too stupid for EVE.”
2 Likes
The core of the issue for HS PvP, is NPC corps.
Its too cheap and easy to sit in them.
2 Likes
One does not “come to the game” as an experienced PvP player… it requires quite a bit of time.
I agree that having no friends has nothing to do with game mechanics. It may mean you just suck at making friends though! I’ve joined the occasional corp which went belly up, or parted with corps (on good terms) because they went directions I found boring. You play a bit solo, talk to the people you encounter (shoot, or get shot by) and make new friends and find a new corp. It’s not that hard!
Highsec mining is the simplest profession in EVE. It requires no creativity, effort, or ability. Warp to beacon, aproach rock, lock, and mine. Dock when full and repeat. It’s so easy that it’s frequently automated by bots. To avoid gankers you use a cheap ship with a stiff tank and dock up when local spikes with enough red skulls to kill you. You can also buy a very affordable permit so they’ll stop trying. If you’re greedy and use a Hulk or Mack, or bling it out with faction mining equipment, you’ll lose it. Simple.
I wasn’t arguing. You don’t believe that it’s possible, but I’m telling you it is. You do believe that an open sandbox game allows for many things, don’t you? So you shouldn’t have a problem to believe that it also has downsides created only by those playing it, but not caused by the mechanic itself.
The human race hasn’t suddenly become perfect as a species.
If suicide ganking is causing more player attrition, than retention, that’s a problem that needs addressing.
Oh… So it would be better if people just formed 1 man corps? And then drop corp when decced and form a new one? Because that is all that will happen.
Yes, that would be better.
Is it? Look, EVE is a niche game with a very specific style. I would rather retain 1 player for 2 years that likes the way EVE is and doesn’t demand change than 10 players who only stay for 3 months and constantly demand the game becomes easier or something different.
Player retention is a complicated issue. Yes you want more people to play, but not at the cost of changing the game and alienating your fan base.
Think of it this way… World of Warcraft could probably attract a lot of new players by partnering with Disney to bring Jedi knights into the game. But would such a change be worth it?
2 Likes
Yes, it is.
This applies to noobs and 10yr vets.
Im not arguing for less HS PvP.
I want more HS PvP.
But I dont think suicide ganking is doing that functionally in terms of attrition/retention.
Until it’s impossible for carebears to avoid PvP within the crimewatch mechanics by hiding in NPC corps or corp hopping, suicide ganking is absolutely necessary.
3 Likes
Fun fact I’ve been doing highsec PvP for 2 weeks now and tanking hasn’t hindered me once. Hell it is an obstacle we have to overcome (check kill board). It is one if the unique mechanics in high sec and I just can’t see removing it as a good thing
Yes, so in absence of any evidence you should then just shut up and wait for more numbers I guess.
Also CCP Rise and Quant mentioned in different talks that they have far more data than what was shown in that initial story. If suicide ganking was bad to retention they would know and remove it.
The point really is: They are aware that you carebears are concerned and they looked into it but as far as we can see they found no evidence that suicide ganking causes players to quit. So you can finally calm down and be assured that EVE will not die because of suicide ganking. And if you still think it does then that is your personal problem and you should probably HTFU or go play Hello Kitty Online.
3 Likes
Doesn’t matter whether it causes retention or attrition. There has been high sec ganking since Day 1 and the game is still going after 15 years…
3 Likes
Miners love to affect concern for CCP’s bottom line and for new player retention whenever they’re mad and want suicide ganking nerfed. It’s so laughably transparent. 
2 Likes