you only shot unarmed miners, i shot things that shoot back… ive done more pvp than you ever will 
hell mission running is more pvp than you do
1 Like
The only thing you do more is crying on the forums for CCPs help it seems.
i just toted it up, you have killed 40 ships that could fight back, not very impressive for 5 years work
Alright, if you guys are just interested in trading insults, I’ll bow out and let you go at it after this post…
@Tortuga_Reborn Look me up, I’m not a forum alt and I’m not a ganker, in fact the only gank I’ve been involved in was me getting my covetor and pod blown up. You are reading the study wrong and using anecdotes to disprove it. That is not the right way to approach things. The study doesn’t even even really go against your point that there is a subset of players who quit because of ganks and that something could be done for them. You’re the one who claims the study says nobody quits because of ganking.
However, you also make quite a good point that it would be interesting to see what happens later than 15 days, when someone mines in a barge, or may be carrying their ~100M worth of stuff in a T1 industrial to relocate to their new corp’s HQ, then gets ganked. You are definitely at risk of losing more value. At the same time, losing something as a few days old newb might mean losing 100% of what you have, with nothing but a noob ship to fall back on. Relatively speaking, that’s a bigger loss than losing all your assets when you have some isk in the wallet. How would things change? I don’t know but I’d be interested to know. The problem is, CCP is the only entity with the ability to do that study. And given the number of ganks that happen, they definitely do not make everyone (or 6/7 people) quit, otherwise there would be almost no HS mining.
Regardless, what you are advocating for doesn’t depend on either the CCP study or the longer term one you suggest. You want increased protection for the subset of players that get upset by (the potential of) ganks. Keeping those players might well be a good thing since it means more money for CCP.
But first: do we really need to do it? CCP’s answer so far is no. If they had ground to believe that it would keep them extra customers and provide extra income, don’t you think they would be quite keep on doing it? They seem to be all over trying to extract extra money these days and they must consider ways to keep paying customers amongst all the micro-transactions to try. You need risk in HS to prevent prices from crashing for HS ore and ships so miners and industrial players feel it is worth playing to amass riches, you need to be able to kill miners so that gankers will keep playing, and presumably making HS too safe would lose more people than it would keep. I sure wouldn’t keep an ice mining alt if ice became worthless because it is so safe to mine it…
and this here is the correct and tradgic point, you are completly right.
Im not, im just saying the study of what im talking about dosent exist… yes i have anecdotal evidence, but thats why it worry’s me how much of a problem it is causing.
Sort of true, but your discounting played time as an investment.
Sorry to truncate it but its right in both forms.
obviously i would argue that we do, because more players is better, but also because of the effect in industry, e.g. when i started the cost of tritanium was 1.1 isk in rens, its now 4.5 isk at the lowest in highsec that increase is in part because people cant afk mine. and yes theres the code answer, but i liked chattin with corpmates and mining when i started. that lead to lowsec mining with security and eventually pvp and it was fun.
I know its screaming into the void, but had i started now, i wouldn’t play eve. and even after coming back from a 2 year break, its lost something i liked.
So you say competent miners are now earning 4x more than what they did before CODE. started to kill all the AFK non-players?
sorry man but im just not gonna bother with you anymore.
I accept your surrender
1 Like
A very small part, the major part of the mineral basket prices changes are the result of changes to the game itself over many years; for starters there’s changes to industry, changes to build requirements, changes to mining ships, changes to loot reprocessing, changes to nullsec mining etc, etc.
There’s maybe 200 suicide gankers and approximately 1200 systems in hisec, pick one where they are not.
2 Likes
This was in response to your claim that CCP’s study concluded nobody quit because of ganking and that your anecdotes proved it wrong. But we have moved on now, I see, that’s good.
Yeah, I don’t know which is worse. Building your first crappy sandcastle for the bully to kick it down, or getting your 10th, much more elaborate one kicked down. I feel like the first is worst, personally: “I can’t even build anything!” But of course, that’s a personal judgement and will vary. Others may well think: “This was such a nice castle, I won’t make any anymore”, forgetting all they learned (SP but actually player skill wise as well) which will make building another all the easier.
lol It is their game, so eventually all the blame falls on them for things we dislike in it.
If we were sure that those players would stay and nobody else would leave, sure. But I think crashing mineral prices and reduced ganking potential would see a drop of both industrial and ganking subs, which might be a greater number than what would be kept. And those are more active players, not just afk miners.
The code answer? If that’s the higher mineral price is good for miners answers, well… it’s right… I certainly enjoy higher prices.
As for mining with friends, chatting and eventually moving on to more invested things, I feel like more risk in HS actually supports that.
- No risk: no reason to group together or stay at the keyboard. If you’re AFK, you can’t interact with other players.
- “High” risk: it makes sense to seek protection in numbers, you might even have someone run security, you start organizing in HS and eventually, since you’re at the keyboard any ways, you might as well go to LS mine more valuable stuff, etc.
And finally, if you pick a 0.7 system not in a trade-hub region, you can mine quite peacefully. All the more if you mine in an orca or a tanked skiff/procurer. Code “roams” tend to be only a few pilots, if you’re tanked enough, they’re unlikely to bother taking 20+ accounts 20+ jumps to get you when they can get easier targets closer.
your missing the point, personally i already have picked a place where they are not for my alt, but my point is protecting newer players, i dont want to kill ganking, just make it harder for serial gankers, they would have to keep up their sec statuses, there for more work and more enguaging with the game. this would also protect miners more, but not completly, it wouldent kill the ganking mechanic just make it a little harder for those people that dont do anything other than pay to gank…
You are pathetic…
If you want to protect newer players, teach them that Eve is filled with unscrupulous bastards that would sell their own granny’s corpse in Jita if there was a profit in it. Eve is a dystopian universe, protecting new players from that reality does them no favours whatsoever.
Teach them to gank too, knowing how it works is the first step to avoiding it. Know thy enemy and all that jazz.
Gankers would find ways to exploit such a change, just as they have every other time their playstyle has been stabbed in the face by CCP. We even have a law for it.
Malcanis wrote: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of ‘new players’, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
2 Likes
probably true, but given there playstyle hasent changed since prior to the introduction of can flipping, i think its time they got a shake up.
this is what gets me, your right but in the old days it was balenced between the people that would help and those that would hinder. now it just seems everyone is out for them selves and the old spirit of eve is dead.
Which shows just how little you know, ganking is one of the very few ways left of shooting people in the face in hisec, and one that is constantly being nerfed, either directly or indirectly.
Can flipping has been around since pretty much the beginning, as such here’s an incomplete list of changes to ganking, and hisec PvP in general since then.
Concord respond quicker and are invincible, removal of insurance for ships exploded by Concord, hyperdunking outlawed, boomeranging outlawed, Awoxing/ safaris outlawed, canflipping now flags you as suspect and your can as abandoned and has done so since crimewatch 2.0.; which introduced many other changes to hisec PvP.
I’m sure others will list more.
People will still help if approached correctly, most of the people in hisec that will shoot you in the face will also quite happily give you a breakdown of how they got you, and how to avoid it ; a simple GF in local and a polite question reaps its own rewards.
What they don’t respond well to is the stuff that gets posted on minerbumping, this kind of response results in ridicule.
1 Like
the old spirit of eve is dead
Good grief…when you are finished drying your eyes, why not look in the forums for the countless corps out there that are offering lessons, aid and much more to new/returning players.
2 Likes
shows how young you are 
this predates can flipping
a swing a a miss of the point again…
anyway, i thought it was an idea. obviously people dont like it so im out.