Again, I see your point, though maybe not agree with it.
However, I can only speak for myself, and I am on the receiving end far more than Ive ever been on the giving end.
I guess its a “You do you, Ill do me” kind of thing, I just dont like that phrase much lol
You don’t like the you do me phrase or the shooting fish in a barrel phrase?
If you are on the receiving end of the ganks do you need some tips on how to avoid them or are you just in the play the way your going to play and chalk it up as opportunity cost camp.
I’m in the latter camp myself not that I do much more than pass through high sec these days unless I’m scavenging.
I dont like the phrase “You do you, Ill do me”. Thats not me making a point, I just was saying I dont like saying it.
I just feel that if Ive undocked, Ive written it off, but also I say GF because I appreciate the effort they went to in order to take me down.
Yeah that is what I call the opportunity cost camp.
I used to also post from my alt. Well I still do, but I revealed my main when I returned - the reason I am still posting with this alt is that forum folks remembers me and my stance of things and I didn’t want to start again as “new poster” especially because gank-haters would attack me saying I am using multiple chars to post on forum to like my own posts.
So I can understand you are scared that you will become target. I also used to be. Before I realized, that this makes me weak. So I decided, that if someone wants to mess with me and get into way of what I will do, I will take it as an opportunity to outsmart him and humiliate him and get on top.
If you are weak player and you are bad in pvp and other game mechanics like avoidance. Or if you are doing something illegal like botting. Then I understand you don’t want to reveal your identity. Not everyone have balls.
peapole hoo post frum their alts aare no gud, that sayid ther were ones this guy hoo did haev like twelf alts and they went frum bigg two smal too inbetwean and theyre names where all funny names liek “Joesph fenix” and “garry gritter” butt he got baned for gancking 12 catalisks in a Harmageddonouttahere.
Oh thank you Vokan, for supporting me. I was so scared and gankers with their low-skill multi-box ISBOXER single click to shot would come at me like a wrecking ball. That is why I have kept my main secret is simply out of fear of you mean people… so so scary you have no idea.
Thank you so much for standing with me, and supporting me with your wisdom and insight into the game. It really shows through the thread here how smart you and all your friends are. So very smart.
The MER came out yesterday, and you would think that they would have a page dedicated to gankers prop up to the economy, they do so much out there you know. Really if it wasn’t for gankers the economy would fall…said no one ever.
JJ
In my case I don’t do it because I want to avoid pvp so much as avoid getting popped in the Jita undock. I like a chance to use my ships before I lose them.
The other concern is that others close to me might get targeted by association or because they assume I’m an alt.
I’m terrible at pvp though, so I fly cheap and expect to see more red in my killboard than green. At my age I don’t expect nor have the motivation to get strong and reach the top percentiles. Just out for fun.
Looks like I hit the nail on the head.
VN
Look at the alts coming out of the woodwork to show their depth of deep, considered, well-thought out, rooted in evidence, and against the grain opinions.
Meanwhile I’m sitting here on my main posting shallow, bad, and unsupported-by-evidence mainstream meta ideas like Siege Green hurt small groups which would have been 100x better had I made it with an anonymous alt so I don’t live in fear of every major CSM and Nullbloc coming after me for poo-poo-ing their idea and standing up for the little guy.
Imagine all the really controversial opinions of mine y’all miss out on because I’m not posting with an alt. Make supers have an ISK cost upkeep. Increase sov bills exponentially based on number of systems held. And so on. That’s how it works, right JJ and Geminus?
I don’t think that’s how you explained it works. I understood the alts where the minority that everyone saw through and thought where charlatans?
None of those opinions sound particularly dangerous or controversial though.
Q1- No, we can’t agree. The problem isn’t that ganking is fundamentally broken. I believe the problem is two fold -players who have incompatible tastes, and players who respond to challenge and adversity by lobbying for their enemies to be nerfed, rather than by getting better at the game.
Q2- What exactly are we agreeing on -The need to compromise? I know this might sound unreasonable, there’s the argumentative fallacy known as the argument to moderation. It’s the idea that the truth is supposed to lie in a compromise between two positions. The problem, however, is that gankers have already been forced to compromise… and compromise… and compromise. And the Jedi are never happy. It’s never enough. CCP always needs to go further. And that’s why you sometimes hear gankers complaining about one more nerf. In my honest opinion, ganking is already in a terrible spot, the challenge and risk of highsec is laughable, it is way to easy for players to optimize towards boredom, and some players just straight up have mutually exclusive values and priorities (i.e. see the people that want PvE only zones/servers).
P.S. I am not exclusively a ganker. I am invested in and value both predator and prey play styles. Naturally, I do have preferences when it comes to challenge and player conflict, but I am not biased against PvE or carebearing it up, and I have knowledge and experience on both sides of the blaster. This doesn’t mean that my analysis can’t be wrong. But, I’d like to think that it gives me a little bit more insight into how things are balanced than someone who can only look at things from one particular perspective.
Removing Concord
So, players will frequent propose nerfs to ganking in order to “fix the problems” with it. However, I believe that there solutions fundamentally fail to understand why the game play surrounding ganking is the way it is. Thus, I try explaining to them that nerfs will only serve to narrow ganker engagement profiles and reduce profitability, without actually changing any of ganking’s “peculiarities” (i.e. assymetric game play, predictability, the use of cheap ships to kill more expensive ones). And that, if they actually want to change any of those things, we would need to get rid of concord.
So, no, this is not a suggestion. I’m do not think that gameplay around ganking is horrible, nor think that concord should be removed. In fact, that would just kill Suicide ganking. Don’t get me wrong, lowsec without capitals could be a cool area of space to play in, but that’s not a fix HS or suicide ganking. Look, I participate in and enjoy other forms of hunting. But I also consider suicide ganking to be a fascinating, fun, and unique style of game play that I want to see preserved. Needless to say, I am adamantly opposed to removing concord. Both as a PvE’er, and as a SUICIDE ganker. This won’t “fix” HS or suicide ganking, and instead only serve to dramatically shrink HS, and either effectively kill suicide ganking, or kill it outright, depending on implementation.
Oh, speaking of which, any HS’er with half a brain understands the safety that concord provides, and wouldn’t want to get rid of it.
Freighter Fits
Meh, I think the real problem with freighters right now are their price, but I suppose I’m not opposed to more fitting options. Lord knows, I would kill for the ability to fit an MWD to my freighters. Of course, increased fitting options would need to be balanced, so that it doesn’t result in ganking becoming collateral damage.
Concord Bribes
Not sure how I feel about this, but I’m open to the idea.
Crime Index
I’m open to the idea, but my support would be contingent on it also making it easier to gank in systems with low ganker activity, and it all being balanced in such a way that it doesn’t significantly hurt ganking.
Industrials with Teeth
Well, this would make more of them viable as bait ships, and possible make for some spicy haulers outside of HS, but it would be absolutely terrible for HS. See, haulers would need incredible offensive capabilities given to them in order to start winning DPS races against gankers. So, if you don’t give them that, it’s going to (1) cause a lot of players to compromise their tanks and/or slipperiness to fit ineffectual offensive capabilities, and (2) cause players to get frustrated and think ganking is unbalanced when their offensive capabilities prove themselves ineffectual. Interestingly, this would be an indirect buff to ganking in the short term, but it would ultimately lead to even more dissatisfaction with ganking.
You say that you aren’t against ganking, but between this, the suggestion to kill suicide ganking as we know it, and approaching the issue as if it’s ganking in that is in need of fixing, I can’t help but feel like I’m getting some mixed signals here. Ganking has already received an absolute ton of “fixes” over the years. Maybe it’s time for players to either figure out how to effectively use the strats and tactics that are already available to them, or go play something that doesn’t feature UPvP.
**Oh, and by the way, this exact same conversation is happening in every UPvP game that I looked at (Star Citizen, Albion Online, Sea of Thieves, Elite Dangerous). In fact, many comments are equally at home on any of these game’s forums. And many more would also fit into this category if it weren’t for the esoteric vocabulary.
Look, there are always players who think that UPvP is unbalanced -doesn’t matter the game, nor what changes get made. If there’s UPvP in it, there are players complaining about it. So, either no dev has managed to figure out how to balance UPvP yet, or the problem isn’t balance. The actual problem is players that respond to the challenge and adversity, not by trying to improve knowledge and execution, but by lobbying the devs to nerf their enemies.**
Shiprwreck’s Maxim:
The actual state of UPvP balance is irrelevant. The only thing required for people to vociferously assert that UPvP is unbalanced in favor of player killers is the presence of UPvP in a game.
I like the idea of freighters having modules. I still want them to be slow and lacking in agility. No place for MWDs for instance.
However I think there are some freighter exclusive modules you could use. Some form of armour that provides a ‘thorns’ effect but greatly reduces cargo capacity so that ships shooting them get zapped with lightning or something. Perhaps different race freighters would cause different damage types with these thorns. Still gankable but you have to calculate a little tank with your gank and ensure you understand the value of the cargo is going to be worth it.
A tug module that lets smaller ships Web them and tow them for a speed increase. This would be mutually exclusive to the thorns effect and would mean gankers would have to pop any tugs quickly lest the freighter get pulled back to the gate and escape the gank or put enough webs on the freighter to counter the gank. So again you would need to be sure you understood the fit and tactics the haulers were going for. Plus the hauling fleets would look neat with little fleets of supporting ventures or something.
This one might be controversial but an inferno module. It doesn’t make the freighter any less gankable but when transporting materials you don’t want the enemy to have the freighter will immolate it’s cargo, however this can only be used actively so it’s about the nerve of the freighter pilot. Imagine surviving the gank and having immolated your cargo or holding on too late and giving it all to the enemy corp. the draw back to this one could also be if you don’t immolate the cargo is more likely to drop. (This drawback might make RMT a bit easier so perhaps a bad idea)
I’m sure we could come up with all sorts of interesting mechanics to make hauling a bit deeper and a bit less afk.
Gotta love this idea that there’s respectable people who are not in the game for any status or ego reasons…but just to ‘earn ISK’.
Imagine playing a game for fun and gratification. The moral decay of society knows no limits!
Is it virtuous to be wealthy no matter how those funds were gained?
One would assume they aren’t just earning isk for isks sake. Though there are no guarantees of that. That would seem a route to burning out in the game. You might as well go play cookie clicker and watch the numbers get bigger.
There are lots of kinds of gratification. It’s not the search for gratification I mention as being cheap. It’s how that gratification is bought.
For instance someone might be gratified by running in a marathon or triathlon and putting themselves against their peers and against their own time. That same person might also go to their local sports day and leave a bunch of out of shape parents in the dust over and over.
Everyone draws a line at what they think is cheap and what they think is ok. Some people might gank but think noobie bashing is not ok. Some people might gank but draw the line at ganks that drop less than the value of their ship. Some people might make a point of only engaging ships that can shoot back and some might like dropping super carriers on gnosis out ratting in nul.
It’s not the decay of civilisation. It’s just a discussion on an aspect of the game with people sharing their opinions about where they think the line is.
It depends who you ask. A lot of people throw around a phrase these days ‘virtue signalling’. I’ve always found it to be a bit of nonsense, because just about everyone at some point is signalling a virtue based on their view of what is positive for society. When someone says something is good for the economy they are signalling that they want people to tow the line and engage in this thing but also they feel people should care about the economy.
If you ask someone who has gained their wealth by any means necessary they might tell you ruthlessness is a virtue and charity is a weakness.
Someone else might say that wealth accumulation by any means is not positive for society because they care about the impact it has on those at the bottom of the heap.
There is no single moral guideline that is correct, no absolute evil or absolute good except in the myths people believe in.
For my part the only form of wealth acquisition I think is actively harmful to the game is botting especially when linked with RMTs
You sort of miss the point. In differentiating ‘cheap’ gankers who just kill for the kill from the presumably respectable sort who ‘earn ISK’, you miss that the only reason for those earned ISK is more ganking and thus more kills. ISK is carebear currency…kills are the true currency of Eve.
