Actually that’s not true. Some gankers change their locations with some changing more than others. Some hardly change.
zKill will let me know when and where certain gankers are active. For example, lets say GankerX always ganks in System Y but tends to log on only a couple times a month. Well, zKill will let me know he is active, so I can go there and maybe prevent his SECOND gank attempt.
Also, its really easy to claim and believe you know what is going on despite information being hidden. If information is hidden, logically, you don’t know of its existence. For all I know there has been a new unregistered ganker active in Dantbeinn the last month. blowing up unregistered ice miners left and right. How would I know unless I make a trip there and arrive at the right time?
See above. HIstory repeats itself. A lot of these gankers are about as original as a pointy stick, and variable as rock in a cave.
I will have the clear history, both old and recent, of what is happening. Just tracking a known ganker in system can be hard enough, if I don’t even have an idea what system I should be in, then I spend a lot of time just flapping in the breeze.
Another clue regarding how much this would help is how the gankers and their ardent supporters will poo poo or troll the idea. They know it will mean lost kills for them. They know it will make AG more fun for a lot of players. It terrifies them.
But don’t the gank kills already get uploaded? You can already see where ganks happen if the victim or the ganker uploads it and they usually do.
The main thing that doesn’t always show up is when CONCORD kills the ganker. And that’s what you want to be uploaded. But what is there to be gained from that information when you already have the gank info itself?
Ganker kills victim → uploaded to zkillboard by ganker and/or victim
CONCORD kills ganker → usually not uploaded
Is there extra info to be gained for AG from the 2nd type of kills when you already have access to the 1st?
How can you claim “usually” when you know information is hidden from you??? You don’t know what you don’t know.
If Concord is not listed then Concord may not have been involved. That may have been the result of a yellow flashy. Or a war.
Trying to figure out what is going on is taxing. What is worse is that even with what you manage to suss out, you still don’t have the complete picture.
But how does zKill know to fetch data about this player in the first place?
Again, CCP doesn’t push data to anyone - they respond to request for data. As far as I know, CONCORD is not a distinct entity within the ESI that can be queried, so without a change in mechanics to create queryable NPC entities there isn’t a way to arrive at this data.
And that should be its own proposal in a discrete thread, where the folks who actually routinely interface with these ESI endpoints can weigh in on how capable they are of ingesting this proposed data set, since it would not be anchored on player-specific queries.
The victim’s consent is absolutely irrelevant in this case. It would be like spotting you wearing a red dress out in public, and then needing your consent to tell other people that I saw you wearing a red dress. There is no place in the world where I would have to do that. In fact, in most places I could straight-up record you on my phone if I wanted to.
As far as CONCORD goes, CONCORD has no idea what zKillboard is. So CCP manually pushing through specific types of kills to an unaffiliated third-party would in fact be a breach of player privacy. Now, I could understand if CCP pushed all kills through as open-source data that would be scrubbed by external tools like kill boards, which would bypass player ESI settings. But that’s not what you’re proposing here (which would see a lot of pushback from most PvPers in the game due to opsec reasons anyway, so you’d lose that proposal too); you’re proposing targeting a very narrow demographic of players to be handled by a unique rule set that would act to create an artificial handicap against them.
No, I am trying to understand how you are expecting a system that works in X way is supposed to accommodate data tied to Y element that the consuming system has no visibility into as presently formatted. You aren’t talking about something where they just stop requiring permissions (no auth key required for the query) in order for the CONCORD-involved mails to be released, after all - as that wouldn’t make a difference if the ESI operator doesn’t know what player to query.
And how is that a function relevant only to ganking? And why is it being proposed here instead of an actual PF&I thread for an ESI mechanics change, where the people who actual consume the ESI data can weigh in on whether they could reasonably update their services to actually fetch this data if it was made available.
Ridley is just being lazy, he wants zkill to tell him where the gankers are so that he can go whore on their catalyst lossmails, and he doesn’t want to have to actually do the hard part of looking for targets and finding them.
Look. If you want to get into the programming aspect talk to a programmer. I am not. That said that, I seriously doubt this is an utter impossibility. Given some information presented in this thread though, the actual issue might be zKill’s end. I don’t know. But I am sure there is a way to have the info readily available. In fact, it could be available in-game. I don’t care either way.
Because most of Concord’s kills are gankers.
Mostly because I just made a comment as an aside (to someone else’s comment) and SOME PEOPLE keep pestering me for extraneous details.
Right. All I have to do is put the idea in the right place and it will surely get loads of attention from “the right people”. Sure. Right. I will get right on it.
Actually I want to prevent ganks, and I have prevented ganks. I want to prevent ganks because I despise abusive self-righteous jerks and so many gankers are. And that is proven by how some of them post abuse on this forum, even outside of the role-playing areas.
As for lazyness, I think you cannot even comprehend the size of high sec. I cannot be everywhere at once, collecting the data I need to find the best place for AG., considering my own personal situation. Like most people, I want to play EVE, not spend my time combing through incomplete information, trying to fill in holes in it, and spending time trying fill some I later realize cannot be filled.
Tagging people is a thing. 5 minutes of research in the 3rd party developer section gives you several folks to @mention and bring their attention to the subject.
And they listen hard, especially to me, and we can see how popular the idea is right here, so yeah, I am jumping all over that as we speak. Thanks for the support.
Gankers are self-righteous jerks? Don’t get me wrong, gankers can be jerks, but a lot of that likely stems from frustration. I can’t speak for everyone, but I know that I personally get frustrated at all the assholes that would rather lobby for my game play to nerfed into oblivion or removed outright, rather than learn how to stop sucking. Moreover, if anyone is self-righteous, it’s the nerf ganking crowed. They’re the ones who are constantly insisting that gankers are psychopaths and bullies.
Hell, last time I checked, this forum was filled with people of all play styles that think that they have all the answers.
There have actually been guys who have asked for 3rd party dev ideas, and there are more who have offered to make stuff for isk. Plus, you know, there’s that guy who responded to you in this thread about his project that tracks ganking. So, I dunno, seems like you might be able to convince someone to make something that works for the anti-gankers -especially if you grease their palms with some isk.
I said “so many gankers are (jerks)”. I did not say all.
And I will further clarify that I was talking about hi-sec suicide gankers especially.
I will also state that I have issues with people who associate too closely with self-righteous jerks and assist them, which is in itself often a form of being a self-righteous jerk. But when I say “have issues” that is separate from my earlier feeling of “despise”. My view is that many people are just confused and I cannot blame them. The issues with hi-sec suicide ganking in a game are somewhat complex, and there are many voices to sort through. In many ways it mirrors real life attitudes, and even there, self-righteous jerks are too often given the benefit of any doubt…so what can I expect from a game?
If you hate self-righteous jerks, then you’ll also want to prevent about 75% of all mining and mission-running, around 95% of all incursion-running, and more or less the entirety of null-sec PvE.
Time to shed those double standards, Diddly Brohan.
Why not just use locator agents and a travel scout in an interceptor and Ascendancy set like a normal person? You can make a chain of characters sitting in systems with multiple level 3 and level 4 locators. They can even be Alpha accounts.
Guess how gankers and war-deccers look for the lucrative targets when they’re not merely camping a pipe in a well-known spot (an activity for which you don’t even need special tools to find)?
