Of course it’s preemptively shooting someone. You’ve decided that this person is a criminal despite not having a criminal flag active and you want the ability to shoot them without CONCORD killing you.
I’m not a nolifer with 10 alt accounts ready to suicide gank.
Then maybe you don’t get to kill everyone you want to kill.
First of all, it deters new players from playing the game when people who can’t bully IRL hides behind roleplay trash excuses to do it online. These are not veteran players who are ganked mining in their shitty venture or barge.
There is a thing called empathy which you are obviously lacking.
The “whining” is about HS being a one-sided fight with no way to fight back (not back as IN AN ONGOING FIGHT, because you people are too retarded to understand the difference with your lack of reading comprehension) but RETALIATING against HS gankers. Attacking repeating suicide ganking pirates that can roam around freely with zero consequence unless you yourself are ready to be concorded. And concord protecting pirates makes no sense from a roleplaying perspective either.
All this is explained in the first post, if you had basic reading comprehension.
But now I explained it in minute detail for you, hopefully I used basic english so you can understand it fully.
No. If you bothered to read the first post and you understood basic english, you would understand what lowering the bar of the security standing does.
That makes them a criminal.
Retaliating against a random ganker is NOT “attacking back”, it’s “attacking”.
If I’m cut-off one the way home and I do the same to that car then THAT is retaliation. If I do it to another random driver later on during my commute (or on another day) then that is NOT retaliation.
Actually it doesn’t…CCP has stated that very fact.
Yet again you don’t know what you are talking about…
Nobody is bothering to gank new players unless the new player is RMTing their way into having more value than a legitimate player could have. Suicide gankers don’t care about T1 basic garbage on a T1 ship, and by the time you can legitimately afford anything worth ganking you are no longer a newbie.
There is a thing called empathy which you are obviously lacking.
That’s funny, because you’re the one demanding the ability to preemptively shoot people you don’t like and insulting them for enjoying part of the game that you don’t like.
Attacking repeating suicide ganking pirates that can roam around freely with zero consequence unless you yourself are ready to be concorded.
If you don’t like suicide gankers in highsec then stop giving them targets. It’s virtually impossible to profitably gank a competent player so just be competent and ignore them.
And I’d say there are definitely consequences. You lose the ship you attacked with and you lose sec status that has to be paid for unless you want to go below -5.0 and be a free target for everyone. The fact that you don’t get to preemptively kill anyone with a negative sec status just in case they might be a threat does not mean that no consequences exist.
And concord protecting pirates makes no sense from a roleplaying perspective either.
Nothing about CONCORD makes any sense from a roleplaying perspective, so I’m not sure what your point here is. But if you want realism then fine, CONCORD will stop protecting anyone with a negative sec status but will also be scaled back in power to the level of mission NPCs. Somehow I suspect you won’t be such a fan of realism and roleplaying consistency in that scenario…
It’s only one sided because people don’t take steps to protect their stuff, either through ignorance or laziness.
Make pilots who have low security standings attackable by anyone without being concorded. A -5.0 status as it requires today is ZERO effort to maintain. Make it maybe -1.0.
The last time somebody ran the numbers circa 80% of gankers had a security status of between -5 and -10 and were thus classified as outlaws, in all likelihood that number hasn’t changed by more than a couple of percent; as such you can shoot the majority of them freely without incurring Concordokken.
The majority don’t appear to keep their sec status between 0 and -5; I just checked and the top 10 pilots of the most prolific hisec ganking group are -10, or very very close to it.
Then these bad PvP pilots who can only gank has to actually PvP.
Many gankers also PvP successfully elsewhere, ergo you have no idea what you’re talking about.
It makes no sense that someone with low security status (a pirate) can roam freely in high sec which is supposed to be controlled by the popo.
CCP have stated in the past that they will not stop low security status characters from entering and conducting their activities in high security space; doing so would affect also affect those who have garnered their low security status through activities not related to hisec ganking.
We all see how bad PIRAT is at defending their structures even when they fly blingy ships (hint: they suck at PvP).
They win some, they lose some. :shrug:
So this would be a welcomed change.
By you maybe, you certainly don’t speak for me, or anybody else; and I am one of a ganker’s potential targets.
What is it with this threads from people without a clue about anything asking for stuff that is already in the game lately?
What is it with people on this forum not reading the original post before posting useless troll replies that have zero validity?
Avoidance is not pvp. I am tired of explaining this to every ignorant player. Learn the difference.
Repeating yourself does not make your case more valid. I’m done responding to you because you bring up the same terrible argument which I already crushed. Use “preemptively” again why don’t you. Please try again.
Your post contains so many ignorant and false assumptions, but I really can’t be bothered to reply to them. You are clueless.
Of course it is. Stop being so narrow-minded in what you consider “PvP”.
Oh look, more of the same old carebear bleating about how unfair it is that highsec isn’t 100% safe no matter how stupid and lazy they are.
Yeah, another example of you not knowing what you are talking about. PvP is not only about combat. Most of the deciding factors of a battle happen long before someone shoots and that is where the actual PvP happens in EVE. Avoiding a battle is a big part of that. If you don’t understand that you will always suck at EVE, which isn’t a problem in itself, it’s really just your crying that starts to get annoying.
Maybe you should stop explaining things you don’t understand to people who already know better than you.
Out-thinking, outplaying and outwitting others is most definitely PvP, it’s not our fault that you’re incapable of doing any of those things.
This needs to be expanded because some players not as utterly clueless as the OP might get the impression that he’s actually asking for something meaningful, even though it’s garbage, like everything he says. And also because explaining this properly perfectly illustrates (again) what’s really going on with all these clueless whiners.
When the OP asks for pilots with lower than -1.0 sec status to be attackable in high sec like -5.0 pilots can now, he’s not really asking for more gankers to be legal targets. That’s merely what he pretends he can make others believe he’s asking for.
Everybody knows that the only thing that would change is that pilots that currently bother to keep their sec status above -5.0 would simply adapt and keep their sec status above the new threshold. So what he’s really asking for is merely for it to be harder for the gankers to keep their sec status above the level that would make them legal targets in high sec.
This would change absolutely nothing in regards to actual game content or the ability to fight the gankers, just how much ISK it would cost for the gankers to keep their sec status above that threshold, yet he tries to make it look like this is about making EvE a better game by making fighting the gankers possible or whatever…
because only pirates have -1.0
As opposed to just about anyone who has better things to than mine and rat.
-10. , you got the . in the wrong spot.
No, they got it right. The OP’s proposal is to flag anyone below -1.0, and you stated your support for the idea.
I agree with your sentiment here… but I want to make two small corrections/addendums:
I contend that you are the one in need of a lesson sir.
PvP = player vs player. If player A wants to destroy something belonging to player B, and B finds some way to deny A the opportunity to do so, that’s PvP. If you only consider ships trading blows in space to be PvP then your definition is far to narrow.
Your description of hisec being a “onesided ganking fest” also seems to indicate that you don’t firmly understand ganking mechanics, or more importantly how to counter them. If hisec were truly a ganking free-for-all like you and other alarmists describe, the entire economy would shut down because no goods could make it to market. Last time I checked Jita, Perimeter, and other trade hubs were still booming, so your case for ganking being out of control is pretty weak.
Your perceptions aside, going back to your proposal: it wouldn’t actually change anything. Why not? Because gankers have already mastered operating in hisec as -5 and below with players and NPCs able to shoot at them at will. All upping the security status threshold for free engagement would do is force them to operate under these conditions a little bit earlier than they already do. At best, this would generate a few more targets for station gamers camping the undocks of trade hubs, but it wouldn’t change suicide ganking in the least.
-1