Nerf Ganking Megathread

[Jesse_W_James]

@Ramona_McCandless

Im sorry that you are unable or unwilling to answer the question.

However this is the third time one of the pillars of your argument has had no foundation, therefore you are pretty much just making unfounded statements.

I don’t need to cater to your questions that you need to go find answers to. You can go watch YouTube on your own just fine without me typing out life lessons to you.

If you want to ask something of my opinion more than happy to answer away with my opinion. And I don’t expect anything but your opinion in the thread.

This isn’t court people, there is no right or wrong, a conversation on what is or isn’t right, wrong, bad, good for the game.

Don’t we all want to see the game succeed? Maybe I am asking the wrong basic questions and making the wrong basic points.

JJ

[Jesse_W_James]

@Qia_Kare

This still sounds to me like you’re saying a ship should not die purely because it is more expensive than the ship or ships that shot it.

Okay I believe I have thought of a better way to look at.

T2 Miner Ships cost 12M, their lasers can kill ganking ships. Gankers can only kill haulers not miners. Ganking ships cost 250M. Miners are running around everywhere killing gankers with their lasers. Your only source of income is killing the haulers, and you need to kill a lot to pay for basic items in-game.

Translated/Coverted the story back to the original story below so maybe you can see how I am trying to get you to see it. Same story just flipped back to normal Eve.

Ganking ships cost 12M, their guns shoot and kill miner ships. Miners can only kill rocks. Miner ships cost 250M. Gankers are running around everywhere killing miner with their guns. Miners only source of income is killing rocks, and you need to kill a lot of rocks to pay for basic items in-game.

And if you have forgotten this all back to your post about frustrated people with the unbalance of ganking.

JJ

[Sine123]

[Ramona_McCandless]

Given you have no solid basis for any of your… Ideas… Im just left wondering what exactly you think you are acheiving.

But thats for me to ponder.

[Qia_Kare]

Gankers could choose to use 250M isk ships to gank with. Miners can choose to use ships that cost 12M isk to mine with. They just don’t make these choices.

Gankers choose 12M isk catalysts because they’ve done the analysis to determine the tool that will get them the most results for the isk they spend, while a miner who is dying to gankers in a 250M isk ship has obviously not put enough thought into which mining ship and fit will yield the optimal amount of reward for their isk investment.

These inequalities exist because there exists player choice and the possibility of making bad decisions that have significant costs, or good decisions that minimize those costs.

[Jesse_W_James]

No this is normal players progressing through the game. And you have a unbalance that needs to be fixed. This isn’t a choice, it is simple game progression.

I do agree with the risk and reward and it is exactly what I am saying. Ganking risk is too small, they need to invest more into their content just like everyone else has to in-game. Balance isn’t training for a week into a cat, and that is end game. Ship is cheap, the reward is big. This needs to be balanced.

JJ

[Jesse_W_James]

@Ramona_McCandless

Given you have no solid basis for any of your… Ideas… Im just left wondering what exactly you think you are acheiving.

But thats for me to ponder.

Hey Romona, what idea are you referring to? I would love to dive deeper into my thoughts for you, increasing our collaboration to work together.

Teamwork is dream work.

JJ

[Qia_Kare]

It needs to be balanced by players making smarter choices that minimize the rewards of Ganking. The reward of ganking is determined by how much excessive risk their victims choose to take. Other than restricting a player’s freedom to fit their ship however they want and carry whatever cargo they want I don’t see how you can enforce ‘balance’ as long as it remains feasible to shoot a player in highsec while they are under CONCORD protection.

[Zaera_Keena]

@Sine123

ou call it pvp if a alliance 100 ships is ambushing a corp of 5 ships?

If the 5 ships belong to a battle hardened merc corp and the 100, pink fluffy carebears, the 5 will win as the 100 will have walked into a trap.

[Pablo_Carlos_Escobar]

Id like to see highsec COMPLETELY SAFE but the rewards low. Meaning basic minerals in belts,moons and PI, missions up to level 3 only, incursions low sec only etc but id like to see faction warfare be able to spill into highsec

[Destiny_Corrupted]

The problem with that isn’t high-sec income generation (aside from incursions, which never should have been there), but the fact that high-sec is the dominant industrial/trading base in the game. Unless you’re also going to jack up market taxes to like 20% but keep low-sec ones comparatively low as part of your plan, high-sec is going to continue being the place for the game’s oldest and wealthiest players to make unfathomable amounts of money. Most hauler destruction happens in high-sec, because once hauling reaches the non-high-sec phase of the trip, everything goes into a jump freighter and is 100% safe. So making high-sec “completely safe” would create an environment in which transportation/logistics itself becomes completely safe.

[Sine123]

@Zaera_Keena

If the 5 ships belong to a battle hardened merc corp and the 100, pink fluffy carebears, the 5 will win as the 100 will have walked into a trap.

[Ax_l_Thorne]

@Jesse_W_James

I was being a smarta$$ to your onesided post. I should come to the forum with all my homework done? Should I raise my hand to speak as well? Let’s be very clear, I don’t need to bring my homework to be here. As I don’t ask you to bring yours.

You must really like your red herrings

Okay, so now that we’ve established that you’re talking out of your ass, we can move on.

Thank you for your totally biased and uniformed opinions on the state of the game, where it is and and its projected future.

[Shipwreck_Jones]

@Jesse_W_James

but with this many targets, there is little you can do to 5-8 targets in the Concord response time.

Well, you can avoid getting ganked in the first place, and during a gank, you can overheat mods, pull range, and/or up transversal. You don’t need to fight back to win. You only need to survive, and you will win by default. However, let’s assume that you do want to create more opportunities for people to fight back, would nerfing ganking help to achieve that end, or only make the problem worse?

@Jesse_W_James

Allowing a new player to develop skills and understand the game isn’t coddling.

Yes, mechanics are important to learn. And, by “coddling” newbros, you give them more time to learn mechanics. However, you also limit their abilities to develop more advanced skills, and learn PvP avoidance and risk management. What’s more you allow them to pick up bad habits and certain expectations about the game, and accumulate more assets. All of which will just culminate in failure and frustration when they finally do get put into the shark tank. And no, I’m not just pulling this out of my ass. This vid is only six minutes. Pay particular attention to the segment on FOO strats.

Balancing for Skill - The Link from Optimal Power to Strategy - Extra Credits

@Jesse_W_James

But nothing here isn’t already a potential issue today.

So, your complaints are the reason why player numbers are down, but mine have nothing to do with it? I mean, no big deal. Also, it won’t matter if any of these issues get worse… much, much worse?

@Jesse_W_James

People that want to PvP will go try it. People that don’t care for it won’t.

Many players have openly admitted to falling victim to the PvP readiness fallacy. You can’t just handwave that away as a non-issue. Moreover, I’d bet money that this is something that devs are aware of, and that they intentionally try to design for in UPvP games.

@Jesse_W_James

You think ganking has been nerfed. Let me give you two images and pretend they are PvP Battle reports, if this is how the numbers are to stay how many PvP people do you think there would be?

I do not understand your question.

@Jesse_W_James

And I have fixed your HighSec number for Aiko. Here is the formula for your own sheet.

Percentage changes can be represented in more than one way.

@Jesse_W_James

The time is changing, and 2015 is not 2022, we simply have a different crowd,

Agreed. The old crowd was more likely to deal with adversity and failure by trying to learn from their mistakes and grow as players. The new crowd today is more likely to lobby for CCP to nerf their enemies.

[Shipwreck_Jones]

@Jesse_W_James

Naturally, for humans it isn’t to destroy each other, it is to work together, and thus it would be the minority.

Um… I’d advise against watching the news or reading any history books, as it will probably depress you.

Also, many people enjoy competitions, and this is a PvP-focused video game. This causes a selection bias, which results in high percentages of people looking for competitive interactions with other players.

[Shipwreck_Jones]

@Jesse_W_James

but gankers don’t they risk 12M ships fully fitted, which no one cares about.

Your looking at it like a non-ganker, and only considering the one time purchase cost. Ganking ships, however, are single use. Of course, securing your own loot drop will reduce the cost to gank, but you need to multiply the cost of a gank ship, times the number of gankers used, times the number of ganks performed per month to get the actual operating expenses.

And, of course, this doesn’t factor in ships/haulers lost to gankers and opportunists, failed ganks, or the logistic costs of staging ships or having them delivered (which will cost you one way or another).

[Sine123]

This Megathread is just to good!
What would we do without Shipwreck Jones and Jesse W James?
Both spend so much effort into this. The graphs are just to funny. So hilarious.

[Ax_l_Thorne]

@Jesse_W_James

I should come to the forum with all my homework done?

Well, that’s what educated people do.

@Jesse_W_James

Let’s be very clear, I don’t need to bring my homework to be here. As I don’t ask you to bring yours.

Just because you have low standards doesn’t mean I’m going to lower mine to meet yours.

@Jesse_W_James

If you want to bring some real data in the game great

Yes it would be great. But I don’t have such data, and because of that I’m not going to make claims one way or the other and base my entire argument off of it.

That would be uneducated, stupid, and just plain silly

@Jesse_W_James

with the people that left the game and never performed a survey on why.

In your defense, it would be difficult to get a large enough sampling via exit survey. People simply not wanting to take the time to do it, or other interferences.

[Shipwreck_Jones]

Yeah, I’ve talked about before too.

• Few ganking ships used = Not fair, it should take more
• Many ganking ships used = Not fair, how am I supposed to compete with that.

But, that ain’t even the whole story. See, in some UPvP games, gankers will use high skill/high cost builds… which players will complain about, because obviously they can’t compete with that. And then, in games like Eve, where gankers use low cost, low skill builds, players still complain, because that’s obviously evidence of a balance problem.

Doesn’t matter how things are balanced, the people who want to nerf their enemies will always be able to find justifications.

Also, you can’t leave. I can’t hack it in real forum PvP, so I need you to help me gang up on people in unfair internet fights.

[Shipwreck_Jones]

Okay. I can see you’re getting agitated. So, let’s take a breather.

I actually agree with you on some of this stuff. I don’t expect people to spend hours scraping killboard data, doing statistical analysis, player exit surveys, and all that other crap before they can post an opinion to the forums. Hell, even just trying to hunt down a dev quote can be more trouble than it’s worth.

Naturally, providing evidence in support of your argument will make for a more compelling argument. But, this is an internet nerd fight that, in the grand scheme of things, has non-existence stakes.

So, like… whatever man.

Post spreadsheets and GDC lectures and all that crap… or don’t. Just remember that arguments that can be asserted without evidence, can also be dismissed without evidence.

And, not for nothing, but the most important things to me are that you argue in good faith, and try not to be too much of a dick -and I feel like you have been doing that with me. Of course, I think you’re flat out wrong on a lot of stuff, and are obviously suffering from a number of cognitive deficiencies , but you’ve been handling yourself rather well so far -especially considering that you’ve been fighting outnumbered.

Oh, and you should probably be prepared for some hostility whenever you lobby to nuke a play style. I mean, you have been being civil, but that doesn’t change the fact that you’re arguing to move the game in a direction that leaves players behind. Civil or not, that’s gonna piss people off.