Because they aren’t on grid till they are shooting because they use neutrals.
And yes yes, You too can have alts helping your hauler…
Except you have to be vigilant 24/7 while the ganker gets to decide when they want to pay any attention.
Quite simply, the Ganking meta is very bad. The fact ships go boom, that bit is fine, I’m not saying less ships need to go boom here. But the manner in which they go boom is very bad and really should change significantly.
My dedicated gank alt is an outlaw and she’s been bumped off tether before now and destroyed.
(despite using techniques to avoid it - the bumper was very good at it)
The other thing I’ve noticed is that many of the killrights against her have never been made public, or when they are, often stupidly high values are set.
They do, and a few of them are effective enough to cause gank failures.
They can’t be on grid otherwise, though, or FacPo will kill them. To put criminals where you can fight them in more active ways, wouldn’t we have to loosen the leash on them enough to give them the freedom to be where they can be fought?
People say there’s no way to fight ganking, but that’s because NPCs do so much of it. It takes a colossal amount of organization and/or numerous characters to take down just one hauler. The procurer makes killing a miner just about impossible with a decent fit.
If someone ignores every threat around them and blissfully carries on taking no precautions, then I would expect that person to lose their ship.
I would like to see changes so that criminals can be fought or opposed in an active sense, but I would want these changes to come with nerfs to the NPCs that do that job too well, and I just don’t see the community ever being on board with that.
We would have to. How would ‘gate guns’ stopping being the auto sentries and instead becoming something like upwell missiles, which then do sig based damage strike you. Get rid of the NPC’s on gates and dramatically slow down (but also intensify) the Fac Police. They take time to get onto you but once they do they really hurt.
And then a lot longer before concord act also so you don’t need 20 ships to do a gank of an AFK target.
And we would also have to give industrials (all of them, miners, haulers, freighters) real fittings, slots, pg, cpu, built in weapons worth a damn (built in as in weapon slots you then have to fit of course). Because we know from Null & freighter escort runs that firstly escorting sucks, and secondly industrials earn less isk than someone ratting, so then having to split that even 50/50 with an escort runs it even worse.
Sure, it’s a bit of a pipe dream. But yes, you would have to loosen the leash, and you would have to buff industrials a lot as well.
20 ships are not necessary.
Wow, way to miss the point of that post. I applaud you in your enthusiasm to leap upon anything you possibly can and savage it.
One thing I know well is that I’m not qualified to make suggestions on very specific changes that affect gankers because I’ve never walked in those shoes. I leave that to more experienced and wise folks than myself.
I’m glad there is at least some willingness to compromise rather than unilaterally strip them of their potency. I think we still have a long way to go, though, before I’d call things fair.
Your opinion. Gankers frequently lament how many people they need when they are deliberately inflating the numbers to make their claims true.
One thing is for sure, though. Making it possible to fight criminals is a stupid suggestion. It does not work and will never work. I see that every day in Delve in 1DQ1, one of the most heavily defended systems. No one really wants to take on the task of guarding the gates there 24/7 because it is boring and unrewarding, just like freighter escorts.
If you wanted to do that, though, loosening NPC retaliation is the wrong way to go. Forcing criminals to use structures as hideouts instead of invulnerable NPC stations is the better way to do it.
The ones that actually are dumb. It wouldn’t and I’m fine with that.
The ones who just seem dumb because the game doesn’t support smarter play in a lot of solo situations. It could help.
And it clearly shows they are expected to protect themselves if they get weapons worth fitting. Which makes it more likely the average player will expect to have to.
It’s about designing by expectations.
Would you? And what is a hauler with small weapons, 60k EHP tank and FacPo/Concord showing up after a minute (random number out of tea leafs) supposed to do against 3 Taloses/Tornados or 3 Vexors out of its weapon range (which are all very common scenarios)? Your theories have just as much holes as CCP’s justifications for doing things lately.
Same goes for gankers: Just one more nerf and people will love EVE again. Ignoring that things have been nerfed in favor of gankers for years now. In Null, in Low and in High sec.
Who said small weapons? And hit their active tank, overheat their correct sized prop mod that would actually fit and drive for the gate. Or warp because none of those situations you dropped have tackle. And if they drop that much on you, probably also laugh as they spend more than you are worth.
I’m sure you can keep pulling scenarios out of your ass at this point though, you aren’t even attempting to engage in good faith here.
And sure, sometimes you will get dunked and lose. That’s EVE sometimes.
@Nicolai_Serkanner So… you missed the whole part where I said I’m good with industrials exploding and also suggested that gankers get a lot more time… This is not about buffing or nerfing gankers. This is about a sideways shift to stop making it a dps race vs npc and making it a longer player to player interaction.
Active tank is useless against nades alpha.
It’s also useless against catalysts, because the mods you need cost more than one of them.
Our potency is the other sides weakness. If everyone cared about protecting their freedom and assets, instead of taking things granted, gankers would have no targets. Any and all people who keep coming up with ideas usually have no experience or clue about why we actually keep winnIng.
The real problem is that gankers are aware that the Laws of Nature apply in EVE, while most of our victims have no idea these Laws exist in the first place. They’re so brainwashedinto believing in imaginary rights, their freedom and their fake individuality, that they take everything for granted and that they shouldn’t be needing to fight, or think, for it.
I don’t need to pull stuff out of my back. These are all real examples of things that are currently happening. You, on the other hand, don’t seem to understand these situations. Vexors tackle you. Tornados have suicide tackle frigs that also decloak you. Taloses tackle you themselves. And you even repeated that you want to give gankers more time, which means they have even more opportunity to use the already existing and proven methods to ensure they get the ship. Although I oftentimes disagree with Anderson, she gets it at least.
I do not need to engage in good faith with someone who just doesn’t want to understand things. Just like Solstice also doesn’t understand these things. He spouts nonsense about haulers taking things for granted, while he as a ganker also takes it for granted that he is the good guy and that he has the right to get a kill.
This.
“I did it so it is right”.
This has turned into an interesting debate with three different directions, the gankers want to keep it as it is which is stale boring play especially for the defender, the less PvP focussed players want more security and there are others such as Nevyn who wants to change the game play. I happen to think that changing the gameplay around ganking would be interesting, because for a long time I have thought that the counter play around preventing ganks is too damn passive.
Anyway please continue.
It has to be boring.
The gankers have to attack when they know they make benefit and so, they need to know the cost and the benefit before hand.
That is, they need to reduce the weakness frame to the minimum and use the most effective strategy. The best way to do so is to only attack when you have close to 100% chance to win (attack is not when you bump in a mach because this does not increase the opportunity for people to kill you).
Make it longer and the gankers will still use the same pattern. They will only have more time to do so, and so will be able to use less expensive ships, while freighters will still need to use ships whose hull costs 100 times more than the fit of a single catalyst and can be attacked for a long time, and that weakness frame can be extended at will by a single bumping mach.
If you want to increase the “gameplay” of ganking, make it so gankers need to have been on grid and suspect for 30s before they can actually become criminals. This way people can fight them. Because right now it’s not a fight, it can’t be a fight : it’s an execution. Which is protected by game mechanisms (stations, structures, concord)
I’d like to remind everyone that those who don’t gank, like the ones above, don’t actually know much about what they’re talking about. They’re just feeling entitled, because they mistakingly believe they’re smart or worth being considered.
I’d like to remind everyone that those who don’t get ganked, like the ones above, don’t actually know much about what they’re talking about. They’re just feeling entitled, because they mistakingly believe they’re smart or worth being considered.
See, such a general blanket statement works both ways.
To the point it’s just useless insults. Every time he posts.