# Ganking, or rather the Right to Gank **URL:** \ **Category:** Crime & Punishment\ **Created:** [September 7, 2018, 1:45pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482 "2018-09-07T13:45:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Faylee\_Freir](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/faylee_freir/32/439750_2.png) [@Faylee\_Freir](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Faylee_Freir)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 3:28pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/261 "2018-09-24T15:28:50Z")
So for the sake of actually appeasing both sides and having a discussion about balance, let’s highlight some major points of contention: - **Ganking should cost more / ship ehp should increase:** Anything that increases cost will be offset by being more selective if the ganker is picky about making a profit. Increasing ship ehp just makes gankers counter it with n+1 and doesn’t really add anything interesting or difficult to the gameplay. - **Ganking is “too easy”:** If it was easy, then you’d see more people do it. I think what has happened here is that we’ve seen ganking min-maxed and practiced so much that we have a core set of players that make it look much easier than it is. I’m not saying that it’s necessarilly “hard” but that the effort that goes into it is pretty bleh for the average person. I don’t agree with observing how much ISK someone gets from a freighter drop and using that as a measurement of how easy / hard something is relative to the ISK. I say this because it’s not like shooting rats where you are 100% guaranteed wallet flashes when they die. The ISK you can get from ganking is proportionate to how stupid, ignorant, and/or lazy as the hauler. - **Bumping provides unfair gameplay:** I think out of any argument I’ve ever seen, bumping is probably the only one that I think has some merit. I think that being a good bumper requires a lot of practice and skill and is something that isn’t exclusive to ganking. In most cases it’s used to delay the freighter until the fleet can form / arrive for the gank. It would kill me personally to see this happen, but deep inside I know that if any balance needs to happen this would be the best place to start. In closing I think that ganking for the most part is balanced as far as mechanics go. My question to everyone is this: **Is it fair / right for CCP to balance against people’s seemingly autistic devotion to continue to find ways to play the game within their niche, especially when the game is a sandbox by nature?** My answer is no. CCP isn’t against ganking, and on many occasions has told the community to HTFU. The closest thing to being “against the rules” is pulling CONCORD and that’s CCPs fault for not clearly defining exactly what it is, what it means, and enforcing it equally. ---
**Author:** ![Solstice\_Projekt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solstice_projekt/32/503293_2.png) [@Solstice\_Projekt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solstice_Projekt)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 3:36pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/262 "2018-09-24T15:36:44Z")
> [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > Is it fair / right for CCP to balance against people’s seemingly autistic devotion to continue to find ways to play the game within their niche, especially when the game is a sandbox by nature? I think this can be asked differently too: Is it fair / right when CCP balances the game around those who keep making mistakes/bad decisions, which get them killed? A society that balances everything around the weakest will eventually be a society of weaklings, because its children do not ever get to learn anything beyond being weak. ---
**Author:** ![Dracvlad](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dracvlad/32/444126_2.png) [@Dracvlad](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Dracvlad)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 3:42pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/263 "2018-09-24T15:42:22Z")
> [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > I’m not sure what this has to do with you? It has everything to do with me, because simply put I will be adding an another objective to my list which will be to get a CODE Fort killmail. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Do you think the nerf will only work if you are around? Not sure what you mean by that? > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > It seems the argument was that people would attack the citadel and if that is not the case now why should it be the case in the future if there isn’t even an NPC station present in system right now and nothing would change? Is there a CODE Fortizar in Niarja? There is certainly a value in controlling the citadels in Niarja at this point imo, but not the will, if it is more general perhaps it would develop, am I sure, of that, hell no but I can tell you that an objective will be added to my list of Eve objectives which will be to have a CODE fort on my killboard. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > In Freighter ganking systems maybe, but there the gankers already have their own Citadels so freeports are not an issue. Freeports would mainly be used by miner gankers in my opinion and good luck cleaning up all those Citadels. Highsec is basically littered with freeports and there is simply no monetary incentive to kill them. And they grow simply faster than you can remove them. Add another reason to remove them… > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > I think the owners already have that option I think. At least there are a lot who exclude CODE. specifically in the weirdest of places. Of course you can go around highsec and ask everyone to remove us from the access list. With Citadels going up left and right that will be quite the task. No what I was getting at is that people already suggested that -10 chars don’t get access to freeports per default as the next nerf, because all that “we want to attack the station who harbour them” only lasted until we said “good luck, we don’t care”. Well as it should be a player decision and up to players to enforce it I don’t see any issue. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > What logistical issues? A Citadel has to go trough many phases to get killed and in all that time you can move the stuff. Believe me, if the throw-away Citadel becomes a thing (given some people will actually go trough the trouble of attacking) the logistics will be streamlined and become effortless. Effectively effortless, but not effortless, there is a difference. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Source? Just a comment from a player who sometimes gives me such stuff. > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > Ganking should cost more / ship ehp should increase Not my driver. > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > Ganking is “too easy It depends what you mean about that, I have detailed quite often the issue with bumping and you know what I think. It makes it too certain, if freighter ganking was like JF ganking in tetrms of having the fleet up and catching them at gates with suicide points and stuff I would have no issue with it at all. I find bumping the issue because it makes it too predictable. > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > Bumping provides unfair gameplay At the end of the day the balance is out of kilter, so what are my options when bumped, pretty simple it is gank the bumper, but with what, how many accounts do I have to sub to do that? Well four to be blunt. I could hope that the bumper gets lazy and I can warp to a captor, but that is a balance issue you can only counter with n+3. And this is why I like you as a player: > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > In most cases it’s used to delay the freighter until the fleet can form / arrive for the gank. It would kill me personally to see this happen, but deep inside I know that if any balance needs to happen this would be the best place to start. To me it makes it is too stale and too predictable and I think people would be running around taking more risk with cargo without the predictability of bumping. **There will be more players making bad decisions with this, and those like me that will not. But the gankers will have to be formed up and ready to take advantage of that low hanging fruit.** The only two things I would change are bumping and the inability for criminals to dock in NPC stations, apart from that it looks fine. Well I have to go do RL stuff back later, thanks for keeping it cordial. ---
**Author:** ![Faylee\_Freir](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/faylee_freir/32/439750_2.png) [@Faylee\_Freir](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Faylee_Freir)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 3:43pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/264 "2018-09-24T15:43:30Z")
I completely agree with you 100%. I think players should be rewarded for astonishing amounts of effort that go into certain activities. I am fine with that reward being left alone from the nerf bat. ---
**Author:** ![Solstice\_Projekt](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solstice_projekt/32/503293_2.png) [@Solstice\_Projekt](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solstice_Projekt)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 3:48pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/265 "2018-09-24T15:48:12Z")
The sad part is that people will even argue against the evolutionary principle, which the above is based on. ---
**Author:** ![Ima\_Wreckyou](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ima_wreckyou/32/235531_2.png) [@Ima\_Wreckyou](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ima_Wreckyou)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:28pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/266 "2018-09-24T16:28:15Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > It has everything to do with me, because simply put I will be adding an another objective to my list which will be to get a CODE Fort killmail. > … > Not sure what you mean by that? We where talking about a general nerf to a game mechanic and you somehow managed to make this about you?!? Anyway, let’s move on. > [@Dracvlad](#): > > Is there a CODE Fortizar in Niarja? There is certainly a value in controlling the citadels in Niarja at this point imo, but not the will, if it is more general perhaps it would develop, am I sure, of that, hell no but I can tell you that an objective will be added to my list of Eve objectives which will be to have a CODE fort on my killboard. I just think the argument that this will lead to conflict and people trying to attack us is pretty weak, when the situation as requested already exists and nothing happens other than the guy arguing for it telling us that he may be planing to do something at some point maybe… at least you put it on THE LIST. > [@Dracvlad](#): > > Add another reason to remove them… Does that mean you didn’t even think this trough what effect it would have on all the other gankers beside the 4 who go after Freighters? Don’t tell me this was news for you… > [@Dracvlad](#): > > Well as it should be a player decision and up to players to enforce it I don’t see any issue. I wasn’t talking about player decisions but about the already voiced demand for another nerf to exclude -10 chars per default from freeports. > [@Dracvlad](#): > > Effectively effortless, but not effortless, there is a difference. Yeah ok. It is a huge hassle and we will all cry and falter under the burden of the monumental task to move a couple of Freighters full of stuff to another Citadel in the same system every other week. You do know that we could have the main stock still in an NPC station with an NPC alt right? Just thought I would add that if it wasn’t obvious. > [@Dracvlad](#): > > Just a comment from a player who sometimes gives me such stuff. Lol ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:33pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/267 "2018-09-24T16:33:30Z")
Can I be part of either effort? Pls? ---
**Author:** ![Faylee\_Freir](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/faylee_freir/32/439750_2.png) [@Faylee\_Freir](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Faylee_Freir)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:37pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/268 "2018-09-24T16:37:36Z")
Do you have any interesting qualities? How long can you hold your breath? Do you meme? Can you tell me when in the last 3 years you wore deodorant? ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:39pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/269 "2018-09-24T16:39:18Z")
1. Yes, I know when to stop talking to Salvos 2. a real long time 3. I have more pics of Nic Cage than my own mum if that counts 4. Wore wut? ---
**Author:** ![Faylee\_Freir](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/faylee_freir/32/439750_2.png) [@Faylee\_Freir](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Faylee_Freir)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:44pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/270 "2018-09-24T16:44:30Z")
Congratulations contestant! You qualify to be apart of the “anti-gankers” and join them on their obsessive quest to see ganking removed from the game (BALANCE RIGHT??)! If you accept this post, please reply here with an, “Aye aye”. Upon accepting you will be asked to haul a contract containing worthless trash with a 30m payout and 3b collateral in a triple-expanded freighter through Uedama. Good luck! ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:47pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/271 "2018-09-24T16:47:52Z")
Im about as balanced as anyone in AG who decides Knowledgeminer is clearly a CODE alt! ---
**Author:** ![Ima\_Wreckyou](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ima_wreckyou/32/235531_2.png) [@Ima\_Wreckyou](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ima_Wreckyou)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:48pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/272 "2018-09-24T16:48:20Z")
Yeah but Drac wants to remove the “too stale and too predictable” part from freighter ganking. Since they already have trouble doing something I think they are doomed 😱 ---
**Author:** ![Ima\_Wreckyou](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ima_wreckyou/32/235531_2.png) [@Ima\_Wreckyou](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ima_Wreckyou)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:49pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/273 "2018-09-24T16:49:32Z")
> [@Ramona\_McCandless](#): > > Im about as balanced as anyone in AG who decides Knowledgeminer is clearly a CODE alt! WHO TOLD YOU TH… I mean he clearly isn’t!!! He is our worst enemy!! ---
**Author:** ![Annah\_Tsero](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/annah_tsero/32/96572_2.png) [@Annah\_Tsero](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Annah_Tsero)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:51pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/274 "2018-09-24T16:51:16Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > Just a comment from a player who sometimes gives me such stuff. lmao _a friend told me_ ---
**Author:** ![Faylee\_Freir](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/faylee_freir/32/439750_2.png) [@Faylee\_Freir](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Faylee_Freir)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 4:55pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/275 "2018-09-24T16:55:41Z")
To be honest I can see his point in reference to bumping as it really just rewards groups that depend on formup time rather than having the fleet readily available. It also effects ganks when you keep something bumped to wait out a criminal timer. Other than that it is totally acceptable and reasonable to expect a fleet to be ready to gank. We know that CCPs stance on bumping has changed and that they have thought about a “bump timer”. I only think it’s a matter of time before CCP does what they want. ---
**Author:** ![Solecist\_Project](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solecist_project/32/479741_2.png) [@Solecist\_Project](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solecist_Project)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 6:15pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/276 "2018-09-24T18:15:18Z")
You have more pics of Nicolas Cage than your mom … … or you have more pics than Nicolas Cage than pics of your mom? Please don’t /r/inclusiveor me now. ---
**Author:** ![Annah\_Tsero](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/annah_tsero/32/96572_2.png) [@Annah\_Tsero](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Annah_Tsero)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 6:27pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/277 "2018-09-24T18:27:18Z")
Why not both? /shrugs ---
**Author:** ![Ima\_Wreckyou](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ima_wreckyou/32/235531_2.png) [@Ima\_Wreckyou](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ima_Wreckyou)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 6:46pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/278 "2018-09-24T18:46:07Z")
Bumping is only an issue to big fat slow ships though. There are many many other options to move stuff with ships that are not vulnerable to bumps, the whole industrial t1 and t2 line for example. The vulnerability to bumps is something all capital ships share, it is their natural weakness which compensates for a huge buffer tank and an enormous cargohold. If their vulnerability to bumps is removed, this would be an extremely huge buff to a ship class which is already so secure that the great majority if them flies completely unattended on AP trough highsec and reaches its destination unharmed. I don’t see any reason for them to be even more secure than they already are. The argument that the gameplay is stale is a bit disingenuous in my opinion. First we have to ask stale for whom and how would it improve? For the bumper? Despite what some might say bumping requires quite some skill to do right. It requires constant attention and is one of the few “professions” in EVE that require quite some spacial awareness and pilot skill. So I don’t think it’s stale for the bumper. For the Freighter. Well, if he isn’t AFK which would dodge the question, the longer the bump goes the more time he has to organize a rescue. I would guess if you sit in a Freighter full with your stuff you are about to lose the tension is pretty high and stale is probably the wrong word to use. For the anti-ganker? The longer the bump takes the more time they have to come up with a counter. It is quite ironic that those are the people who seem to moan the most about this when this could be their greatest advantage. If they where any good the ganker team would be in a hurry to get the kill before they can form up and counter it. And seriously if they can’t think of a counter whose problem is that? CCP? anti-ganking is an emergent profession, they chose to do that supposedly because it is fun. There are other professions like that, let’s take for example the common suspect baiter. If I was a suspect baiter camping an ice field and really bad at it and then came to the forums to say that somehow game mechanics have to change because suspect baiting is a stale mechanic would that be a viable request? If I come up with the game-play it is on me to make it viable. So I don’t buy the whole “stale” argument. It is exactly the same as “ganking is too easy” it is the very absence of an actual argument, a cheap excuse so they don’t have to provide an actual reason why a change is required. ---
**Author:** ![Faylee\_Freir](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/faylee_freir/32/439750_2.png) [@Faylee\_Freir](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Faylee_Freir)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 6:57pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/279 "2018-09-24T18:57:43Z")
You’re right about bumping and larger ships such as capitals. I guess where I become in the middle on it is when the fleet has to form out of nowhere with bumps and aggression keeping the freighter there till everyone is ready. I have been watching Australian dunk JFs on the Peri gate in Jita and it’s real fun to see him in action. There’s more variables at play with the timing and precision needed rather than just worrying about getting the initial bump and holding it there indefinitely. I even saw him mess up a gank two days ago where I assume he miss-times his fleet warp. I’m not saying that freighters are being bumped for hours, because you and everyone else here know how much I love bumping. I’m just saying that ganking seems a lot cooler doing what is being done to JFs in Jita. I agree with you on everything though. I don’t think ganking is stale at all. I think that if Kusion or the other big-time gankers went and turned AG that they could stop every gank they showed up to. The whole situation of ganking and bumping not being fair or fun because of how many accounts and resources required for AG to feel effective is BS. Look at all the work and resources that go into making a gank happen. Take that effort and flip it around and you have equal opportunities to screw with a gank fleet. ■■■■, if there were more ganking groups around I can totally picture them going around and essentially stealing gangs from other groups. In the end it’s not unfair if some nerd uses 32 accounts to accomplish the job. Everyone is free to use 32 accounts or make 31 friends. ---
**Author:** ![Dracvlad](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dracvlad/32/444126_2.png) [@Dracvlad](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Dracvlad)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/281 "2018-09-24T19:23:54Z")
> [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > We where talking about a general nerf to a game mechanic and you somehow managed to make this about you?!? Anyway, let’s move on. You said this? > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > I’m not sure what this has to do with you? and this > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Do you think the nerf will only work if you are around? And you replied to me, so god knows what you were trying to say because what ever it was it missed the target completely. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > I just think the argument that this will lead to conflict and people trying to attack us is pretty weak, when the situation as requested already exists and nothing happens other than the guy arguing for it telling us that he may be planing to do something at some point maybe… at least you put it on THE LIST. I picked up on a number of people who wanted to blow up your citadels and there was a number like me who said it was not worth doing at this point, and I did say that Niarja was different. Well let us see what happens if this change was to happen. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Does that mean you didn’t even think this trough what effect it would have on all the other gankers beside the 4 who go after Freighters? Don’t tell me this was news for you… It is supposed to affect all gankers, more skin in the game, though in effect loot scoopers would not have too much of an issue, just the ones who do the shooting, again lets see how it pans out. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > I wasn’t talking about player decisions but about the already voiced demand for another nerf to exclude -10 chars per default from freeports. I never said that, I never raised that and I told you straight that it was down to the player running the citadels who he excluded or not. As far as I am concerned all citadels should default to open to all. It is a non-issue, something only a clown would raise. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Yeah ok. It is a huge hassle and we will all cry and falter under the burden of the monumental task to move a couple of Freighters full of stuff to another Citadel in the same system every other week. > > You do know that we could have the main stock still in an NPC station with an NPC alt right? Just thought I would add that if it wasn’t obvious. Understood but still we are talking about the ones who are -10 and shoot. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Lol He has been wrong, just said that it had been mentioned, I hope he is not pulling my leg, he does sometimes. > [@Ramona\_McCandless](#): > > Im about as balanced as anyone in AG who decides Knowledgeminer is clearly a CODE alt! He is effective and I like his Ag approach, just wish he could be a bit less caustic, though I do understand his frustration at times when you get the same dumb question again. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Yeah but Drac wants to remove the “too stale and too predictable” part from freighter ganking Yes, it makes it stale and boring and too controlled and predictable. > [@Annah\_Tsero](#): > > lmao _a friend told me_ Another bait post from Dom Arkaral 🙄 > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > To be honest I can see his point in reference to bumping as it really just rewards groups that depend on formup time rather than having the fleet readily available. It also effects ganks when you keep something bumped to wait out a criminal timer. Thank you, it is the only point that really matters. > [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Bumping is only an issue to big fat slow ships though. There are many many other options to move stuff with ships that are not vulnerable to bumps, the whole industrial t1 and t2 line for example. Hmm lets move something large like a Fort or a Keepstar…, though I do feel that they deserve a protection fleet with anti-Bumper Talos to do the business… > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > You’re right about bumping and larger ships such as capitals. **I guess where I become in the middle on it is when the fleet has to form out of nowhere with bumps and aggression keeping the freighter there till everyone is ready.** You get it. > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > I have been watching Australian dunk JFs on the Peri gate in Jita and it’s real fun to see him in action. There’s more variables at play with the timing and precision needed rather than just worrying about getting the initial bump and holding it there indefinitely. I even saw him mess up a gank two days ago where I assume he miss-times his fleet warp. I’m not saying that freighters are being bumped for hours, because you and everyone else here know how much I love bumping. I’m just saying that ganking seems a lot cooler doing what is being done to JFs in Jita. And you doubly get it, I have no issue with this at all, he is formed up ready to go, I checked if he was input broadcasting and boy did he get salty at that, checked that and found he was not, so all good. Anyway I think I have made the point yet again ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, damn I much preferred getting those wild Titan kills, that hit and run fight with BSOD in Catch and Curse, hisec can’t compare… Hisec is just boring stale game play…, no way do I want to waste my time doing that rubbish. In fact I should thank you, as the PL type elite players in my alliance were getting on my nerves a bit while Fawlty was having a break, but it is still so much better than hisec. And with that I will leave you guys to it…, but damnit I wish they would stop dropping supers on anything that moves… [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482.md?page=11) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482.md?page=13)