I would be cool with having to pay a ‘Docking Permit’ when you’re -10 if you get a mining permit. 
1 Like
If you mean jibes and/or tears I dont really care.
Id rather read posts where people communicate.
1 Like
I can’t claim to have noticed anything different with gankers as compared to all the other groups that react when someone suggests a nerf, or even elimination of their play style, other than perhaps it happens more frequently given how often proposing such is a response by someone who just lost something in-game. There have been plenty of productive discussions over bumping, the faction police, tweaking how security status works, and the like on these forums over the years. The only “shouting down” I see is usually a reaction to a “ban suicide gankers” proposal, which as I say is completely understandable and would get the same if you made a “delete faction warfare” post on the forum.
We have also seen plenty of examples of other groups, some just in the last weeks, raging over a change that affects them. This is completely expected in a competitive game like Eve. But that is different to the metagaming various carebears and safebears engage in to legislate their opponents out of the game by developer fiat.
I see no evidence of a safe space. Gankers lose stuff all the time. When they play on their alts they are at the same risk as everyone else to being ganked.
As for “easy” CCP seems to disagree with you and is spending a lot of time to make Eve easier and more accessible. Regardless, “easy” is very subjective so I will note your opinion and respond with mine which is that suicide ganking, especially profitably, is a much harder activity than most of what goes on in highsec.
They at least have a rationale of why the game would be better with a particular change, or what problem it might fix. Things CCP can consider, or look into their data to see if is a problem. In fact, they did this for the common complaint that new players were being chased out of the game by gankers, presumably with the goal to address it if that were found to be true. Instead, they found the opposite - that more players were being bored out of the the game rather than ganked out of it - and instead spent their development time on revamping the NPE to connect with a new player faster.
Just declaring something “too easy” is your right, but it is just your opinion. You aren’t going to have any success convincing CCP to change the game based on that, nor are you likely to generate much useful forum discussion.
Good then.
This isn’t a real discussion. This is just people yelling their opinions back and forth. Ganking is too easy! No, it’s not! Repeat.
Was there any actual proposal that was shouted down? Perhaps I missed it, in which case my apologies. This thread is nominally about the “right to gank” which I think everyone posting here agrees with, even if there is some debate on how much effort it takes or the morality of the activity.
To risk taking things off topic, I will expand on my thoughts on the ‘right to gank’. I feel despite ganking being rarer than perhaps ever, more of the player base accepts it now as an integral part of the game and important for the future. It seems the player base has matured some and shows how hearts and minds can be won over. Part of this is that the past 6-7 years of nerfs to criminals failed to produce the influx of players the carebear apologist claimed would come if you made the game safer. This carebear experiment has definitively failed and it is now a given for most folks that the nowhere-is-safe element of the game is important, even if the MER numbers suggest any risk in highsec, heck anywhere in the game, is mostly an illusion.
Therefore, the ‘right to gank’ is here to stay, so rest easy OP. And that is fine by me.
I feel though in this thread I need to state a disclaimer to go with these observations: this is my opinion and you do not have to agree with it or share it.
5 Likes
He just wants to cry about how its easy and have the other retards here agree with him
I was stating facts, I know they hurt your fragile feelings
1 Like
The fun part would be making all freighter ganks like JF ganks, so that playing cat and mouse against active gankers is more the thing. Using the gate timers, holding at the gate and aligning back the way you have come all that sort of thing. The bumper just makes all that game play redundant.
It is very difficult to communicate in this environment.
Hope all is well with you, you have that in structures owned by you. I know that there are a number of people who play in AG who would go after Citadels if the gankers could not use NPC stations. I happen to be one such person who would do it too.
Now that I agree with.
Im perfectly open to discussing anything outside of this forum.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ 
To hurt my feelings would require me having respect for your view of me.
I always take it on the point of view that when someone who is pretty worthless in my eyes thinks I am worthless then I take that as a compliment, so thankyou.
Yeah it’s the same thing he did on the old forums. He never actually comes up with anything at all other than the same old tears about how he thinks it is easy, which is funny given that 95% of the gameplay in EVE like mining, missions, ratting, PI, pressing F1 in a fleet, industry, hauling, exploration,… requires approximately 5 active braincells to do and then he comes with the argument that ganking should be nerfed because it is too easy…
4 Likes
I have defined the point which makes it too easy multiple times, I am not going to mention it too much because CCP Falcon will come in and lock the thread, well perhaps he won’t do it here 
Classic emo post. please continue. 
Please detail where I got shat upon by gankers?
LMAO please continue, fascinating…, your anger management issues and ability to just lie and bluster is wonderful to behold, I have a vision of you typing that out by smashing the keys with your nose, don’t know why, but it seems to fit…
Your hundreds of days of nonstop failure in Uedama. Never even stopped one gank
Come back to Uedama and join the other 15 failures there, its always good for a laugh watching you all flail about watching the elite pvp powerhouse CODE. just dunk on kids all day while you fail nonstop
3 Likes
Yeah just coming back after a 3 month break. Time to re-focus. You?
I think allowing booshing would be a neat tactic to use against -10 sitting tethered on a citadel. Ultimately I don’t think gankers can defend their structures against a proper group with the numbers and strength to take them down.
In the end the problem lies in Citadels being too cheap and expendable. They could anchor them faster than they would pop.
Welcome back.
I am pretty focussed, had a fight with BSOD who were high level AT pilots on Saturday, they warped out having lost all of their tackle, they were using tackle to hold and blap with volley’s so keeping transversal and getting the timing right on the ADC was key, was fun to engage people like that. And I just got another Rorqual kill a few minutes ago. On Thursday got two Titans.
Actually I think they can defend them, they can certainly afford to hire mercs to help defend them, but they would also be able to use third party ones, I was hoping that people would then start killing the third party ones they were using. Would cause all manner of wars and mayhem.
So come on gankers think of the wars and destroyed structures from agreeing on -10 not being able to dock in NPC structures 
People would still have things to shoot and get payback…, also logistics would be a pain, so more effort needed.
*sips cacao*
2 Likes
You guys! Lucas Kell is back!
Lucas Kell is one of the people who first got me interested in coming to these forums to harvest tears.
Truly amazing that years go by and he’s still so very butthurt about basic game mechanics.
This is a joyous day! .
4 Likes
You can do that perfectly well now as CODE has several citadels up. And no logistics would not be a pain as you can just move stuff in a neutral Freighter from tether to tether completely risk free in Highsec.
The ONLY issue removing access to NPC stations would introduce is the access to free Noobships for pulling or pulling in general for day tripping miner gankers without a Citadel.
Of course we can work around that pretty easily. Freighter gankers will probably just print shuttles in citadels. I will probably have a stack in my Orca. And in the end we will be where we started and the next clown will ask for freeports to be closed and tether removed to -10 (I think we already had that). Plus some lowsec and FW people will be pissed because they are the collateral damage.
I don’t even care, I don’t stage out of NPC stations in highsec anymore. Feel free to push for it. You have to bring arguments that convince CCP not us.
3 Likes
There is no strategic value in doing it now, with the possible exception of the ones in Niarja as there is no NPC station there. But I have not looked to see if any are there at this point as I am enjoying nullsec too much.
The exclusion of criminals from NPC stations in hisec would result in player lead consequences to those that opened their structures to them as a freeport, it would be down to them.
But are you suggesting that I would suggest that, it is a weird suggestion because players control who can access their citadels. I am assuming that the owners should have the option to exclude people with criminal level security status, do you think that this selection criteria should not be allowed? I would not think so.
You said that there would be no logistical issues, but then detailed some, I think there is a bit more to it than that. But it depends on a couple of things.
The idea has been put in front of CCP from what I have heard.
Surprisingly calm and rational in here.
Makes me wonder who got banned.
I’m watching this.
2 Likes
NOT ME! NOT ME! WOOHOO!!! \o/ 
3 Likes
I’m not sure what this has to do with you? Do you think the nerf will only work if you are around? 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?
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.
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”.
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.
Source?
1 Like