High Sec Candidate

Council Of Stellar Management CSM Campaigns
62

Please let me clarify.
I am not (just) advocating for a random/artificial chance that ganks succeed or fail… even though a variable CONCORD response time is something that I would find… stimulating.

I mean, at the moment, there is no way to save myself once the gankers are coming for me.
I assume that they have somewhen scanned my ship, and are bringing enough ships to do the job.
Being able to buy security tags, they are able to adjust their sec status so that they are not automatically showing up as criminal in local.
So if they are doing their job properly, the first thing I notice about an incoming gank is when their ships appear on the overview. Admittedly things are better ever since the grid size got bigger… by pre-aligning (remember, people, to keep aligned… and moving!).
But all things being equal I do not stand a chance.

If the gankers are lazy and/or overconfident, then of course they will fail. But what can I do against the ones (or one…) that is not lazy or overconfident? What possibilities do I have? I can fit my ship to be tough, I can make myself uneconomical/not profitable.

But considering I have to sit there and watch my Mackinaw pound away at asteroids for more than 20 minutes whilst not doing anything except waiting for gankers to appear… what can I do when they appear?

Ganking seems to be the most important issue affecting High Sec residents that are active/engaged enough to bother coming to the forums… it’s a shame.

1 Like
63

You keep thinking of suicide ganking as if it was some kind of strange form of PvP that requires some special treatment. It’s not and it doesn’t.

You need to think of suicide ganking in high sec the same way you think of (non-suicide) ganking in low sec, with the only (big) difference that in high sec you just need to survive for a few secs until CONCORD arrives and knowing that there is a lot of ships the gankers won’t be flying to kill you.

Even if this was true, so what? There is even less you would be able to do in low sec, so why do you see this as if there was something about suicide ganking in high sec, but not about ganking in low sec, that needs “fixing”?

You need to deal with this in high sec exactly the same way you would in low sec, i.e. by minimising the risk of being caught in the first place. By the time you’ve got caught it’s too late already, but this is not a suicide ganking issue…

For those who care, yes, but so what? What does this have to do with pretending suicide ganking should have a guaranteed failure rate higher than 50%?

Which is a huge improvement over low sec, where anything may get you, including much more powerful and sneaky ships you don’t have to worry about in high sec… So again, why do you see this as if it was a problem about suicide ganking, but not about ganking in low sec, that needs “fixing”?

What would you do if you were in low sec? Whatever that is, the same would work in high sec too… Except in high sec it’s easier and you have a lot of additional options you don’t have in low sec… So again, what exactly is it that makes you think there is something in this regard that needs “fixing”?

I don’t understand this. What do you mean “have to sit there”? What makes you “have to sit there”?

But regardless, what would you do if you were in low sec? WTF makes you think you should be able to safely sit there for more than 20 mins in high sec if you would not dare to sit there at all in low sec? Or would you?

No, the shame is how many players are unable/unwilling to understand what EvE is about and prefer to waste their and everybody else’s time whining and crying when they could simply spend that time learning to properly play the game instead…

4 Likes
64

Also this:

Is this how you’re suggesting the guaranteed minimum 50% failure rate could be achieved? You realise that would have zero effect on 1-shot Tornado gankers, right?

You cannot guarantee any failure rate for suicide ganking by changing the way CONCORD works. The only way you could achieve that would be by arbitrarily changing the weapons chance to hit, i.e. the chance to hit formula would have to include an arbitrary factor that takes into consideration whether the weapons are used legally or illegally. Does that make sense to you? You haven’t thought this thoroughly, have you?

2 Likes
65

I like running combat sigs in high sec. I dont like people stealing “my” sites.

That’s wrong. In highsec sites are not yours, rats arent, ore isnt. What your idea of justice does it takes sand away from sandbox.

You said yourself there are ways for you to deal with them:

  • You can gank them.
  • You can set up buy orders for the ore, I bet its much more convenient for ninjas to sell on the spot then to haul. Exploit their lazyness. Set you price. You might actually win more this way, wont need to mine yourself.
  • Mine faster. You know when the chunk arrives that is your advantage. If others put in effort to find your moon and calculate arrival time they should get the opportunity to mine.

Appealing to CONCORD or CCP when you cant deal with in-game issues, is so… socialist.

1 Like
66

No. I just find it frustrating sitting 160km away from CONCORD and having it take as long for them to save me as if they had to fly from across the system.

I have thought quite a lot about it actually. But it is not as if I am going to post CCP my notes and tell them “this is how it should be”. And thinking too much about solutions whilst not understanding the programming in the background is also not so useful.

It is one of the issues that I feel quite strongly about, it is the issue that somehow gets talked about most in all the threads I have made over the years, even though it is only a small part of the high sec experience. It is also only one of the things I mention in my opening post.

1 Like
67

It’s my Athanor that blows the rock fragments into space…

Forcing me to commit a crime just to defend the Ore that I blew off a moon is also not so great.

2 Likes
68

It is I who cleared the rats in this site, nobody should take that overseer loot but me…

Its a sandbox, you have the tools.

You don’t want tools though do you? You want themepark? Instanced ore site maybe?

Restrict ninjas from being able to steal, take their tools away.

69

Not at all. Their tools remain the same.
I just get to shoot them without getting a Concord response.

2 Likes
70

So now that the gankers seem to have burned themselves out whilst trying to respond to my thread…

One of the things that concerns me more now than last year is my stance on “social player corporations”

I think CCP might have jumped too far down that rabbit hole.

Being in an NPC Corp used to mean immunity from wardec, and relatively high taxes.
Now being in a “no wardec corp” means… immunity from wardec and potentially no taxes.

Anyone have any relevant ideas? Different from mine (see posts and blog)?

2 Likes
71

Did you get to shoot ninja salvagers, when there was a profession? You think you were supposed to? What about combat site competitors, if I land there first, is it my site then, and everyone else should go suspect?

You mean now that you didnt answer and waited out uncomfortable questions?

For 9 years on and off I’ve been living in highsec in npc corp, finally left for one-man corp last month. I have payed up to 30 billion during those years. ‘War safety’ tax? I’d call noob tax. But its fine, it was my choice. Still I think they’re taxing the wrong crowd.

I think I’m model highsec guy you claim you represent. I know, we all have our playstyles and vision of what highsec should be like. I just think that in that particular case, ie highsec moon mining, you propose non-sandbox solution to a non-issue.

And for the third time, what is the difference between combat site competittion, ninja salvagers and ninja moon miners. Why should your case be an exception?

And you have an advantage of knowing when chunk is coming, advantage of not having to haul far, advantage of setting buy out price, advantage of having gank fleet docked right there.

My overall concern is not about moon mining per se, but the sandbox. Not that much sand left in my opinion, they keep adding non-sand gameplay, and keep killing off sand.

72

Well, I’m pretty confident you’re not going to win, given how dishonest, untrustworthy, and the question dodging you’ve been doing in your own CSM thread. So vOv

Why does this concern you? You say “CCP might have jumped too far down that rabbit hole.” but never really explain anymore. Why is this an issue? What detriment is there to the game while these exist?

You’re doing the whole “raise an issue without actually explaining why it’s an issue” thing that you’ve been doing for your entire thread again.

1 Like
73

Hi Lorelei,

I just stumbled on this section of the forum and read your thread. I have to say I’m really impressed!

Can I still vote?

I’ve been a highsec player for a long time now and also love doing things that help shape the game in a positive way for new players and highsec enterprises.

You might have caught sight of my thread Elite Alpha: Project Haven

With regards to your corporation stance and the war mechanic: I created this thread Should 1 man corps be banned? The general gist was to throw out a few random ideas to try and shake up the way we view the current situation with corps, because it’s kind of stagnant (and I don’t mean with null alliances). I think what my thread was trying to point out but might have failed is that the current ease of opening a corp and keeping your main and a few alts inside for convenience doesn’t bring players together. I’m in no way endorsing the ideas I put in my posts in that thread, however it could be a starting point for general ideas and discussion in the meantime. I hope you like it.

I have no interest in becoming a csm, but I would love to support you in your endeavours in any way I can.

Kindest
Natocha

1 Like
74

Hi!

I do have other things to do atm, I thought I posted about that. And honestly… I actually gave up answering repeated questions about the same theme… well I think it was around about the CSM XII election campaign.

It’s not that I don’t think it is important… I do. But the payout for the continuous (in circles) discussion is low. It’s not like I am going to convert you and convince you (and your 500 man alliance) to vote for me. And it is not like your posts are going to get the people who vote for me to suddenly not vote for me (@Mike_Azariah running again will do that!).

What makes you stealing my ore without me being able to stop you “sandbox”… and my being able to stop you (but you being able to wardec me) not sandbox.
Is you coming and AFK stripping my ore field with an orca fleet… sandbox? Really?

2 Likes
75

Nah, you know I encourage lots of people to run. Any damage I have done to your campaign is unintentional.

honestly

m

76

I am very sure that I am not going to win. But that does not mean not trying.

See what I wrote in the last post. The continual rehashing of questions over the last 5 years with gankers (or people that want to champion gankers without ever having ganked anything… like you) really does not bring me anything. It is nice to keep my thread bumped up… but the fact is that this campaign thread is not going to really change anyone’s mind.

If you were to read through the last years of threads etc… maybe there would be some grounds for discussion…
Or if you were to gank something.

2 Likes
77

More dodging from a CSM candidate who is too afraid to be challenged on his views. :slight_smile:

78

I am glad you are running, and anything that is going to get non-null block to vote is good. There is no chance that I will get elected… it has been that way for years… especially since they reduced CSM size (just in time for me to get to be #14).

I just wanted to get that out there so that the gankers don’t start claiming that my anti-ganking tendencies are what got me less votes this time :slight_smile:

1 Like
79

No.

More senseless posts from someone that can’t be bothered to do his research… :slight_smile:
Why would I waste time answering questions I spent the last 5 years answering. Did you listen to the interview?

2 Likes
80

Hi!

Take a look at the thread of @Mike_Azariah too.

Voting has not yet taken place… there is a dev blog about it if you look!
Once I have recovered from work I will take a look at the threads that you linked!

Remember… voting is the most important thing. Whoever you vote for.

1 Like
81

Well, despite certain players constantly trolling in an attempt to disrupt your candidacy for CSM, you’ve demonstrated great self-control and have maintained a very civil demeanor. I commend you for that.

Since you’re a High Sec candidate, you definitely have my vote.

5 Likes