Probably already does, just isn’t confident enough to tell us about it yet.
I agree
Of course, but that is part of being aligned. 75% of max speed and rotation within 5% of intended destination. That is what aligned means.
1 Like
If we decide to play a game of American football, am I not allowed to tackle someone who hasn’t practiced, hasn’t worked out, hasn’t stayed in shape, and who otherwise refuses to prepare himself for the nature of the game, and instead sits around complaining that I’m a griefer, the game is unfair, and that he just wants to run up and down the field with the ball? Would it be “unethical” to tackle him? Or “un-competitive”?
In fact, did you know that football coaches will intentionally try to create matchups between players in which they know their guys have the advantage? They don’t try to pair up their guys with opponents of equivalent skill/physical ability, make superstars ride the bench, or forbid players from double teaming. Instead, they intentionally try to create situations in which the opposing team can’t hope to compete. Think about it. Even when playing against someone that can, and is prepared to, fight back, they try to create situations in which they can’t. In fact, if you think about it, high level players do this in all competitions, including games that go to great lengths to help ensure “fair fights.”
As far as I’m concerned this is a challenging UPvP sandbox MMO, and it remains so at all times, regardless of what ship I’m currently flying. I must always be prepared to either fight or flee so that I can achieve my goals (preferably with as few setbacks as possible). And, if I don’t want to play a game in which players provide just as much as, or more challenge than the environment, then I’d go play something else. It’s not a matter of ethics -It’s a matter of what type of gaming experience I currently want.
2 Likes
That’s not true at all. D-scan can help you spot combat probes, and even if you see an incoming cat, it can still give you time to get out, depending on your align time, if you’re behind a gate/off a beacon, and whether or not your pre-aligned.
Um, when people say “aligned” in this game, they mean that you are moving in a direction and at sufficient speed in order to meet the requirements for warp. This allows you to immediately enter warp without having to wait for your ship to align. So, yes it does matter, as it can reduce the amount of time it takes for your ship to warp down to as little as a fraction of a second (until the next server tick).
Anyway, some players will mine while aligned (they try to align themselves in such a way that their align will keep them in range of asteroids, and use higgs anchors to slow their max speed, which reduces the speed at which they need to be moving in order to enter warp.) Also, you seem to be forgetting about the mining frigates. Besides, mining while align is but one strat. If that one doesn’t work for your particular circumstances, there are still many, many other things that you can do in order to keep yourself safe.
No, that’s called the water boy. You know what happens when you make the water boy angry.
Yeah, that was explained to me finally. I took align to mean pointing the nose of my ship at the station. They talk about it in rookie chat but they never say anything about this amazing higgs anchor rig or that I have to stay at speed. I can’t think of a single youtube video I have seen that explained any of it either. Either everyone expects new players to know what this specific game language means or they intentionally leave out all the important parts. I’m not sure which, but either way I was set straight today thanks to a lot of very patient people and a gank.
@Uriel_the_Flame you’re safe from me filing paperwork with concord to sue you. I appreciate all your advice and patience when I was being a jerk off again. Same with @Io_Koval , @MB_ThePhotographer , @Ax_l_Thorne , and @Raylan_Yutani ; I have lifted the ancient voodoo curse, and i cringe to say it, but thank you for ganking me and giving me the opportunity to learn.
I’d also like to thank my coach, my parents and God. Without them, this amazing team would never have come together and I wouldn’t have won the championship.
4 Likes
I’m still catching up on the conversation, but I wanted to provide a clearer answer about combat probes. So, there are two types of probes, core and combat. Core can scan down cosmic signatures, while combat probes can scan down signatures, ships, drones, and structures.
Naturally, some hunters (including myself) will use combat probes to quickly get a warp in on things that we want to kill. And, if they’re not watching d-scan, they won’t even know anything is up. However, those that do watch d-scan can see me coming. Not only can they see combat probes are out, but they can also get an idea of if I’m trying to scan them down by paying attention to the number of probes on d-scan*.
*Note that d-scan has limited range, and probes become more accurate if you lower their range and position them over the thing you want to scan. The end result is that the more combat probes you see on d-scan (up to 8), the more likely the thing they are trying to scan down is you.
Now, the next question is, when should you be watching d-scan? Well, that kind of depends on a lot of factors, such as:
- who’s in system with you (i.e. freindlies, neuts you know to be safe, unknown neuts, known gankers)
- how easy you are to gank (i.e. are you well tanked, or yield fit. are you inside a ded space pocket, or sitting in a belt, are you sitting still, or moving with your prop mod on)
- how profitable you are to gank (people will kill unprofitable targets, but generally speaking, they’re going to go for more profitable targets first. You’ll also have more to lose, so it’s more important to err on the side of caution)
for example, I recently was in system with 3 gankers, but paid closer attention to local, than I did to d-scan. And that’s because I had enough tank that 3 gankers wouldn’t have even been able to gank me with 3 polarized taloses. However, if they decided to bring friends, then I would have been in trouble. So, I made local long and thin, clicked on a name, and pressed Ctrl+A to highlight all names in local. That way, if anyone new came into system, they would stand out.
Anyway, I gotta run, but I hope this stuff helps you out. And, if you have any questions, don’t hesitate to ask.
5 Likes
My killboard says what I’m up to. Which is all I say about it here.
Hopefully this exact suggestion wasn’t posted before. Here it goes -
Simply change the kill rights in a way that takes into account the isk worth of kill.
Let’s say you were transporting 200-300 mil in your indy and got ganked by a Tornado. Now instead of lamenting the disbalance of possible retaliation compared to what you lost - because under the current system you get to kill a single ship worth significantly less than your loss - you can go and kill 2-3 of offender’s tools of choice.
Or let’s say your freighter worth around 2 bil gets destroyed by a bunch of Cataclysts. Instead of just raging at the fact that the attacker won’t care about a couple of laughably cheap ships destroyed in retaliation, you now can channel all that rage into some super spicy elite high sec pvp content and keep killing every single of those cataclyst characters over 100 times to get even in isk.
Reason for I think this suggestion is worth to think about:
While revenge is a strong motivator, there isn’t a lot motivating about trying to get revenge when the offender won’t feel it in a meaningful way. Being allowed to destroy a cataclyst or any other similarly cheap vessel ONCE - because that’s what most “professional” gankers seem to fly for 99% of their time in space - after you lost your fat shiny ship is simply extremely demotivating. When Rise was holding his presentation about how getting killed was a motivator to keep playing I think he(and other devs) made a major mistake in interpreting what kind of ships loss would encourage players to keep their accounts running.
Further points to refine my proposal a little bit:
- The kill right initially is limited to one player - ie there is no flagging of the offender to others, it’s just between the former victim and the perpetrator; also possibly no kill right activation needed anymore, unless it was sold to a third party.
- The kill right can be shared with other players(either right away or after selling the kill right to a third party) in a following way:
Let’s say one player shares the kill right with two others and together they now can attack their target penalty free. The kill counts towards the worth of the initial kill that set off the kill right 3 times as much - ie destroying a 100 mil target now counts as 300 mil. One gets his revenge easier but also possibly with less satisfaction.
Why I think this might be an actual solution to complaints and all the drama:
- ganking not outright removed or severely limited like in other proposals, high sec still not 100% secure
- the ganked can now feel like they can actually get some proper revenge
- more pvp, maybe even revival of bounty hunting
- more destruction from all of the pvp
1 Like
I’d love more killrights.
Great idea!
Heck ya!
Great idea!
Moar Kill right baiting. It’ll be glorious!
“Solution to the ganking drama”
The irony.
Not far enough. Let’s make it so that anyone can freely engage most gankers at any time. Perhaps, we could tie it to sec status. Like, if players went below -5 sec status, anyone could engage them. Then I’m sure we’d see lots of people fighting back against gankers.
And now for the non snarky version of my reply… I appreciate that you’re trying to figure out a compromise that doesn’t throw ganking under the bus. The problem, however, is that making it slightly easier for players to fight back won’t make a difference to the nerf gankers, because they are people who are unwilling/unable to make use of the mechanics/strats that are already at their disposal. And, we can see this in fact that many players don’t take advantage of the opportunities to fight back that they already have. I mean, my gankers can be freely engaged at any time, but maybe like 1 in 500 people might actually try killing them. What’s more, I have never been killed by a gank victim (to the best of my knowledge).
Speaking of which, anti-gankers might like this change. Of course, ganking doesn’t need any more nerfs, but I would be fine with buffing AG as long as ganking was buffed in order to compensate. The problem with that however, is that AG’s can’t protect everyone. So, you know it’s just going to result in more people dying, and therefor, more whining.
1 Like
I’m with you on the buffing , if AG needs a buff it can not touch the ganking play style at all, something like loyalty points for getting a high percentage of a kill for example.
That way gankers gank for what they want and we get something and not effecting each others play
People don’t use kr as it is , i looked up one gankers victims, out of 12 kills not one kr was placed on his head. I wrote to them all asking for the kr
1 Like
Now that sounds interesting. You would have to exclude pods and rookie ships, but you could probably make it work given that there’s already something similar for FW.
Can gankers also get loyalty points?
1 Like
Here’s a novel idea. How about people take personal responsibility for their gameplay, use the mechanics at their disposal, fit their ships accordingly.
There wouldn’t be a need for anti-gankers if people actually used and prepped for anti-ganking.
But no. They would rather ■■■■■ and moan and expect other people (antigankers) and agencies (CONCORD, CCP, nerfs, etc) to keep them safe instead of taking steps and measures themselves.
1 Like
You monster.
2 Likes
Oh, don’t get it twisted, I’m absolutely sick of people asking for their enemies to be nerfed because they are unwilling/unable to adapt to competition and/or the threat of PvP in a competitive PvP game. I am, however, supportive of things that encourage fights, player interaction, and players providing content for each other.
Now, would LP for killing gankers achieve that end? Eh, I dunno. But I am open to the idea, and it’s certainly better than 99.9% of the “fixes” that do get suggested.