# 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:** 23
**Author:** ![Eve\_Griefer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/eve_griefer/32/277788_2.png) [@Eve\_Griefer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Eve_Griefer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 11:49am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/511 "2018-09-28T11:49:03Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > Bumping needs to be adjusted in some way to stop it being used to continuously hold freighters into position. Suggest a module that negates the max speed issue. > > -10 criminals should no longer be allowed to dock in hisec NPC stations > > No more loot scooping through DST’s to avoid going suspect. What do you mean by a module that negates the max speed issue? Are you talking about something to slow down the bumping ship? If timers or other means of allowing the bumped ship go into warp quickly (other than webs of course) then bumping by friendlies could lead to some interesting gameplay with caps. Surely you must know that restricting outlaws to citadels will only affect the small gang and solo gankers. (and Burn Jita, but maybe we’d have Burn Perimeter instead) Trying to stop loot scooping would probably break the usefulness of the fleet hangar in other situations, and depending on how ownership is tracked, may be entirely impossible. ---
**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 28, 2018, 11:52am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/512 "2018-09-28T11:52:27Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > Suggest a module that negates the max speed issue It’s called a warp scrambler and a Webifier… Lol ---
**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 28, 2018, 11:55am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/513 "2018-09-28T11:55:16Z")
First of all thank you for talking about the issues rather than doing personal attack bait posts or posts that are designed to misrepresent like a certain one just above this reply. So many posters on these forums want to attack the person rather than the ideas and can offer only insults and deflections. > [@Eve\_Griefer](#): > > What do you mean by a module that negates the max speed issue? Are you talking about something to slow down the bumping ship? > If timers or other means of allowing the bumped ship go into warp quickly (other than webs of course) then bumping by friendlies could lead to some interesting gameplay with caps. At this point if your speed is above a certain amount you cannot get into warp, your speed has to drop below a certain threshold, what I am suggesting is that there is a specific modules that removes the max speed limit. This is not an instant I win button but allows the freighter to do some counter play and not totally remove bumping. And even better if it keeps getting bumped it keeps speeding up too with the module activated, meaning that a freighter will start to get more and more difficult to bump. Can only be applied to the freighter classes so it does not break other ships. @Faylee_Freir - What do you think of this idea, would not kill bumping as such? > [@Eve\_Griefer](#): > > Surely you must know that restricting outlaws to citadels will only affect the small gang and solo gankers. (and Burn Jita, but maybe we’d have Burn Perimeter instead) Astrahus’s are cheap, most people have alts, in any case I want to see them more restricted by strategic need and give a strategic vulnerability which people can go mess with. > [@Eve\_Griefer](#): > > Trying to stop loot scooping would probably break the usefulness of the fleet hangar in other situations, and depending on how ownership is tracked, may be entirely impossible. The suggestion that I was suggested by Thomas was that the cargo which is suspect will maintain its suspect status until it arrives in a station or is jumped out of system. That does not mean the person who has gone suspect does not lose that suspect status due to session changes by the way, but as normally happens. Does that explain my suggestions. ---
**Author:** ![Eve\_Griefer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/eve_griefer/32/277788_2.png) [@Eve\_Griefer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Eve_Griefer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 12:13pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/514 "2018-09-28T12:13:19Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > The suggestion that I was suggested by Thomas was that the cargo which is suspect will maintain its suspect status until it arrives in a station or is jumped out of system. That does not mean the person who has gone suspect does not lose that suspect status due to session changes by the way, but as normally happens. Is the cargo ever flagged as suspect? Or are there just permission checks carried out which determine wreck colour and whether someone goes suspect? (I need to recheck what happens to shared kills in fleet.) ---
**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 28, 2018, 12:16pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/515 "2018-09-28T12:16:36Z")
In the first scoop yes, but after it is placed within the DST it loses that suspect tag. So the noob ship scoops into the DST and the freighter takes it from the DST So the Noob ship is the only ship to go suspect. At the end of the day it is better that we have the risk of people tricking DST’s and dropping suspect cargo into them if in the same fleet or in corp rather than continue with this advantage which avoids consequences. Another possibility is to do a loot spew with a freighters cargo if the cargo is in containers, putting them out up to 20 km from the wreck. All these ideas are designed to make it less certain and create more content. ---
**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 28, 2018, 12:51pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/516 "2018-09-28T12:51:39Z")
\*_sips water\*_ ---
**Author:** ![Eve\_Griefer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/eve_griefer/32/277788_2.png) [@Eve\_Griefer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Eve_Griefer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:14pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/517 "2018-09-28T13:14:00Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > In the first scoop yes, but after it is placed within the DST it loses that suspect tag. Thinking of treating the loot as items in a database, how does that ‘suspect flag’ on the loot work? Does it even exist? Or is it that each item has an entry for the owner ID and permission settings which determine if the wreck is ‘white’, ‘yellow’ or ‘blue’. It may be quite possible that your suggestion just cannot be implemented. ---
**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 28, 2018, 1:22pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/518 "2018-09-28T13:22:10Z")
> [@Eve\_Griefer](#): > > Thinking of treating the loot as items in a database, how does that ‘suspect flag’ on the loot work? > Does it even exist? > Or is it that each item has an entry for the owner ID and permission settings which determine if the wreck is ‘white’, ‘yellow’ or ‘blue’. > > It may be quite possible that your suggestion just cannot be implemented. The suggestion was made by one of the leading AG’s players when I was lurking in channel. I will have to go ask him how exactly he saw it working, as I did not ask him to define the specific mechanics he had in mind and he is not currently online. But I am sure that CCP could work out a method if they wanted too. ---
**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 28, 2018, 2:49pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/519 "2018-09-28T14:49:09Z")
🍿 > [@Dracvlad](#): > > made by one of the leading AG’s players Hahaha, “leading ag’s players” hahaha, that’s a good one. What exactly is he leading? 😂😂 ---
**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 28, 2018, 2:51pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/520 "2018-09-28T14:51:16Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > At this point if your speed is above a certain amount you cannot get into warp, your speed has to drop below a certain threshold, what I am suggesting is that there is a specific modules that removes the max speed limit. This is not an instant I win button but allows the freighter to do some counter play and not totally remove bumping. > > And even better if it keeps getting bumped it keeps speeding up too with the module activated, meaning that a freighter will start to get more and more difficult to bump. Can only be applied to the freighter classes so it does not break other ships. > > @Faylee_Freir - What do you think of this idea, would not kill bumping as such? I would say that if CCP were to put in a module like this, then it would need some kind of negative or neutral effect to equipping it so that there’s actual fitting decisions to make. ---
**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 28, 2018, 2:59pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/521 "2018-09-28T14:59:39Z")
Well on a freighter that would be less cargo and/or less tank. But the idea itself what do you think? Because the idea is to stop the continuous bumping and give fitting choices. Also the player has to work at it like creating BM’s around each gate or have someone to warp too in the direction of the bump. But finally the speed bump builds up so that it gets more and more difficult. So it keeps bumping to a degree which I would be happy with. ---
**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 28, 2018, 3:43pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/522 "2018-09-28T15:43:40Z")
I think that in today’s ganking meta that the module wouldn’t see much use. Nobody is trying to bump the freighter out of gate gun range anymore. In my opinion it’s all about keeping you from aligning. It requires the bumper to basically move around the freighter to keep him unaligned if the freighter is trying to be sneaky by aligning to different thing to try and catch warp. It can be easy to not notice someone burning out to give the freighter something to warp to and I’ve had a number of them escape by me trying to do too much or not paying attention. So speed is a non-factor to me and I would assume is the same with other bumpers because of how gankers are just dunking on top of the sentry guns now. As a matter of fact speed has never been important to me even when I was hyperdunking and having to most of the time bump freighters 250km off the gate to push across the gate grid line. I’ve always used a nomad set instead of snakes like most other bumpers. The nomads allow me more time to multibox and is easier to bump with imo which is important to me when you do as much as I’ve tried to do. ---
**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 28, 2018, 3:52pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/523 "2018-09-28T15:52:19Z")
I really can’t think of things you can do to make bumping more difficult if that’s your intended goal. I’ve kept a freighter bumped with a T3D before, so it’s not speed that’s the issue. ---
**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 28, 2018, 3:55pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/524 "2018-09-28T15:55:12Z")
Thanks. I think it is also about keeping you from engaging warp due to max speed just as much as it is alignement from what I have seen. The ones I saw warp to a captor often did so because the bumper was not really bumping attentively enough. So for me it was giving the freighter a greater chance to get out by fitting one of these modules and most importantly reward those single account players who had the foresight to set up book marks around key gates a chance. The going too fast to warp is an important mechanic, because I have come across a few people who I had managed to debrief who had safe spots in the direction of the bump and they could not warp to them. The speed idea was added to create an impact from continuous bumping, in other words get the freighter up to such a speed that ganking it was more problematical, forcing the gankers to move quicker than they do now. I wanted to get to the point that a Macherial could no longer effectively bump it any more due to the fact the freighter was going too fast., so that they would have to use longer range DPS such as SB’s. I wanted to make speed an issue. Trying to suggest ideas that would allow bumping to a degree and not be the certainty it is now, is what I am trying to do. One of the most important things to do is to narrow down the strategic advantage that bumping gives in terms of time and location. ---
**Author:** ![Nicolai\_Serkanner](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/nicolai_serkanner/32/358049_2.png) [@Nicolai\_Serkanner](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Nicolai_Serkanner)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 6:33pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/525 "2018-09-28T18:33:45Z")
> [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > Hahaha, “leading ag’s players” hahaha, that’s a good one. What exactly is he leading? 😂😂 I killed a keyboard reading that. ---
**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 28, 2018, 6:43pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/526 "2018-09-28T18:43:26Z")
> [@Ima\_Wreckyou](#): > > What exactly is he leading? The ban button Nothing else 😂 ---
**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 28, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/527 "2018-09-28T20:43:02Z")
Haters are going to hate…, these are fellow Eve players, playing a game, are you that angry and bitter? Flag button overload incoming 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Knowledgeminer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/knowledgeminer/32/422883_2.png) [@Knowledgeminer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Knowledgeminer)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:27am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/528 "2018-09-29T05:27:36Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > I would like to see him taking people from the AG chat channel and developing an effective group I’m not sure what makes you keep making the wrong assumption that I haven’t (tried to) do this already, even after having told you there that this assumption of yours was wrong… > [@Dracvlad](#): > > Sadly we ended up having an argument because I thought he was being too dismissive of new arrivals who were of course eager but ineffective and suggested that he give them a bit more leeway, not be so brutal even if he was correct. I’ve never been dismissive of new arrivals, nor rude in any way to anyone for the mere fact of being ineffective. It’s the stupidity, the reality denial, the unwillingness to learn that I’m brutal against. And I’ve also repeatedly stated there that there is nothing wrong with whoring on CONCORD kills if they do it to practice, for fun, to collect bounties or whatever… as long as they understand what’s going on (or at the very least are willing to), and don’t brag about those kills as if they had any AG meaning… It’s when someone brags that he/she “saved” a victim from 1-shot Tornados (not 2-shot ones, mind you) with ECM, and I explain to him/her there is no way that could be the case, that the ganker must have failed for some other reason, how to discern whether a Tornado is intended to shoot once or twice and hence whether using ECM on it makes sense or not, so he/she may better understand what’s going on and do things better… and then he/she replies I don’t understand how ECM works… it’s then, and only then, that I become brutal and scornful… And I’ve used this example because I had to deal with this exact case precisely the same day the post I’m replying to was written, but I have to deal with bizarre situations like this all the time there… > [@Dracvlad](#): > > I did not help the situation and he got a short term ban from the channel just after that last argument. What? I’ve never been banned from AG channels. That was just another lie that the wishful thinkers and reality denials there spread while I was away from EvE for about 10 days. If you didn’t listen to them or at the very least didn’t believe everything they say just because (they think) they are “anti-gankers”, you’d know better too… > [@Dracvlad](#): > > AG is suffering from a shortage of people AG is suffering from a shortage of people _willing to learn to properly play the game and fight the gankers **in game** _. There is no shortage of players calling themselves “anti-gankers” that are nothing but whiners unwilling to understand what EvE is about and how to properly play it, that simply cannot stand irreversible asset losses and think there has to be something wrong with the game or the players that blew up their ship if that happens to them because of course the problem cannot be something they did wrong in the first place… Or rather there _wasn’t_… There has been a noticeable decrease in the number of those “participants” in the AG channel lately… I’ll let you and everyone else reading this figure why… and whether that’s good for AG or not… ---
**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 29, 2018, 7:25am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/529 "2018-09-29T07:25:59Z")
> [@Knowledgeminer](#): > > I’m not sure what makes you keep making the wrong assumption that I haven’t (tried to) do this already, even after having told you there that this assumption of yours was wrong… I had assumed that you were in fact doing that, but I was not so keen to actually say that you were as I thought it was not my place to do so… > [@Knowledgeminer](#): > > I’ve never been dismissive of new arrivals, nor rude in any way to anyone for the mere fact of being ineffective. It’s the stupidity, the reality denial, the unwillingness to learn that I’m brutal against. > > And I’ve also repeatedly stated there that there is nothing wrong with whoring on CONCORD kills if they do it to practice, for fun, to collect bounties or whatever… as long as they understand what’s going on (or at the very least are willing to), and don’t brag about those kills as if they had any AG meaning… > > It’s when someone brags that he/she “saved” a victim from 1-shot Tornados (not 2-shot ones, mind you) with ECM, and I explain to him/her there is no way that could be the case, that the ganker must have failed for some other reason, how to discern whether a Tornado is intended to shoot once or twice and hence whether using ECM on it makes sense or not, so he/she may better understand what’s going on and do things better… and then he/she replies I don’t understand how ECM works… it’s then, and only then, that I become brutal and scornful… > > And I’ve used this example because I had to deal with this exact case precisely the same day the post I’m replying to was written, but I have to deal with bizarre situations like this all the time there… **I thought** , was the key words here, but I started to note the exchanges more and changed my opinion on what was going on, you might have noticed that. > [@Knowledgeminer](#): > > What? I’ve never been banned from AG channels. That was just another lie that the wishful thinkers and reality denials there spread while I was away from EvE for about 10 days. If you didn’t listen to them or at the very least didn’t believe everything they say just because (they think) they are “anti-gankers”, you’d know better too… OK thanks for putting me right, I had a couple people say you had been banned, glad to see that was not the case as I was a bit miffed to be honest, and I was relieved to see you back. I hope you had a good holiday / break for those ten days. > [@Knowledgeminer](#): > > AG is suffering from a shortage of people _willing to learn to properly play the game and fight the gankers **in game** _ . That is true, but what I said is also true. > [@Knowledgeminer](#): > > There is no shortage of players calling themselves “anti-gankers” that are nothing but whiners unwilling to understand what EvE is about and how to properly play it, that simply cannot stand irreversible asset losses and think there has to be something wrong with the game or the players that blew up their ship if that happens to them because of course the problem cannot be something they did wrong in the first place… There are some people like that definitely, though the issues I have detailed above are mechanic issues that make it too easy in terms of freighter ganking. I would not or will not go anywhere near anti-freighter ganking with those imbalances. I am not currently calling myself an Anti-Ganker though certain people seem to define me as that. I have not gone anywhere near it for the last two years apart from advising a couple of people on what to do a few times. > [@Knowledgeminer](#): > > Or rather there _wasn’t_ … There has been a noticeable decrease in the number of those “participants” in the AG channel lately… I’ll let you and everyone else reading this figure why… and whether that’s good for AG or not… I think you already know my view on that. ---
**Author:** ![Knowledgeminer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/knowledgeminer/32/422883_2.png) [@Knowledgeminer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Knowledgeminer)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 9:21am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482/530 "2018-09-29T09:21:38Z")
> [@Dracvlad](#): > > the issues I have detailed above are mechanic issues that make it too easy in terms of freighter ganking. I would not or will not go anywhere near anti-freighter ganking with those imbalances. I strongly disagree with this “too easy” mantra, but that’s something I’ll leave for another post… if I manage to find the time to write a reply to other posts in this thread before it gets locked, that is… Anyway, I understand how bumping may look like a broken mechanic, but the only “imbalance” I see here in terms of AG is the gankers have much bigger fleets than I can deal with alone, and this is not a game mechanic imbalance, it’s just a matter of me not wanting to have to manage half that many accounts and not knowing that many pilots to fleet with either. I simply don’t feel that attached to the victims to go out of my way and have more accounts than I want to play with just to try to save them. Heck, most of the victims themselves are unwilling to spend time fighting _in game_ the gankers that killed them… But at any rate, if freighter ganking happened in my area of operation and I didn’t have higher priority targets around (that’s a big “if”) I would certainly try things anyway even if I had to do it alone. I can’t imagine myself giving up if I don’t have other targets to go after. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482.md?page=22) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/ganking-or-rather-the-right-to-gank/104482.md?page=24)