Nerf Ganking Megathread

Communications Center Crime & Punishment
6770

It wouldn’t have to be, but it’s CCP. Come on.

You can’t remove the threshold because the threshold is effectively whatever they are flying. CCP liked to do their whole “gankers don’t drive people out” thing by carefully cherrypicking data for only the first 15 days when most rookies have little to lose.

What actually happens is that new players build up to bigger ships with most of their wealth invested in it then some ganker blaps it. The newbie ragequits because they lost a lot of time invested, the ganker gains a crappy kill on their killboard.

I personally think that simply not worth keeping as a mechanic because it doesn’t add anything useful to the game. I get that you disagree but you’re not going to change my mind by falsely claiming that ganking is the only thing in highsec beside grinding.

Because these things require the target to have done something specific and can’t be farmed with such ease as is the case with ganking.

6771

For commonly ganked and gank ships, it is a reasonable data source.

Comparing some common ships types on zkillboard to the MER data since January 2020:

zkill

The “ganked” tag on zkillboard was never meant to flag all ganks though. It was specifically introduced for the last Burn Jita, to provide a bit of a tracking of that event and has just stayed, however if you cut the data yourself, it’s relatively easy to identify significantly more ganks, including a lot of solo ones.

Ventures through have only around 90% of losses there, and while a lot of the missing data will include things like cynos, etc., if you specifically want to look at new player ganking, there’d be a >10% error margin there to account for (but certainly for other ships, it’s pretty straight forward to compare the victim age at time of death and then just argue ad infinitum on what a new player is or isn’t.

2 Likes
6772

Yes on one hand, Insee but we are talking theoretically anyway, so theoretically Im going with a Dev team with imagination.

I said reduce, not remove. Make the penalty less. Like better Insurance, like in Elite, as a top of head example.

I still dont see why that means they should be less protected than someone that does nothing to protect themselves. Innocent ignorance is the same coin either side.

6773

Why go to all that bother…when one could simply remove the inability to wardec without having a structure.

2 Likes
6774

You know new players will just quit right?
0 self reflection whatsoever kek.

6775

I disagree.

I didn’t say it was, I just pointed out that it can’t be claimed as an “accurate source”.

Well then loads of the game would be different and this be a fairly moot point.

I’m not sure how you would reduce the psychological impact though. Getting most of the cash back won’t matter if they spend a month building up to something which they then lose. And again. this would be different if that gank actually added something to the game, but it doesn’t. Just a killboard stat for one of a very small but aggressively vocal minority.

But those other activities don’t generally involve a significant step back in progress. I get that some people are absolutely infatuated by EVE and thus will still play anyway but the vast majority of people will say “I haven’t really had huge amounts of fun building up to this and now I have to do it all over again, so I’m going to go play something else”.

6776

No one said you did.

That’s nice dear.

1 Like
6777

So what you’re saying is that a sandbox should have glass walls, where you can safely and effortlessly pretend that no other people are in the same box. Talking about weird…
What you’re also saying is that knowledge is not the number one priority when starting this (or any other) game. Which is weird…
What you missed is that “sandbox” in EvE means “shared”, making the social factor quite important - as in “educating and organizing”.

I see your radical standpoint against ganking in hisec, which is problematic, and the inconsistency of your reply. You want the “no absolute safety” aspect to be limited to losses from npc’s, because losses from players are what ? An affront ? A confrontation resulting in the realization that there are a few things to be learned in this game ? That someone may (claim to) be better at something ? That’s all part of the competitive environment, an environment that has been blunted already enough in hisec.

CCP did introduce safe zones, with a full prohibition of ganking. The education there is missing: it should instruct newbies explicitly 1) that it is a safe zone, 2) why it is a safe zone, 3) what “normal” hisec space is in terms of safety. As usual, that is missing in any training or career program, including the NPE. But that would not address your conviction that “gankers” are inherently lowlifes who need to be removed from the game by killing their playstyle.

If they stay in their areas, and do newbie things, they are safe. Loss is a significant training factor, and will occur to anyone at some point. The longer it takes for a meaningful loss to occur the more it will sting. New players can either accept that, learn what the loss really means - how relatively unimportant it is (!) - or find themselves an other game.

The argument that new players are uneducated has been used before, and it’s always been stupid, because it actually advocates that situations need to be created where new players don’t have to learn about risks and safety. Learning that EvE is a pvp centered game should be at the forefront, not an afterthought.

A rookie getting killed by a drifter battleship one jump out of his starter system has very little to learn… but the losses occur regardless and are truly meaningless. Perhaps that would be the next nerf ?

6778

When I lose a ship, I usually gain the knowledge and qualia from the experience. That is progression. Just because “Total Net Worth” stat decreases, does not mean “significant step back in progress”.

Too many people define “progress equals ISK”, which is fine for them, but then that’s their own issue. No one else should bear the burden of their value system chosen.

2 Likes
6779

Don’t get her started about her low sec adventures, just to correct you safety often hunt in low, so if ccp some how moved miners to low they would follow as we would then follow them

6780

It already has these walls, but it’s massive veterans that are protected by them. What I want is for a small, creepy group of veterans to stop being able to use new players as fodder to pump their egos.

Most other games it’s not. Most other MMOs guide you through a learning curve in relative safety and don’t allow veteran players to abuse new players.

Only because it opposes your viewpoint. Any view you don’t agree with is problematic to you.

As I’ve already stated, they are overwhelmingly weighted against new players.

It’s not competitive. Nothing about ganking is competitive. It’s you wanting easy kills so you can sit around pretending you’re not ■■■■ at the game. Ganking takes less effort and skill than highsec mining. It’s the most carebear form of play and it escapes balancing because it’s “emergent”.

And highsec should be that area. Simples.

Ganking isn’t PvP in the same sense as any other PvP in the game. It teaches players nothing other than there are veterans with nothing better to do with their time than abuse new players.

I note that you didn’t explain how a killboard system that thinks there’s no such thing as a solo gank is accurate.

Good for you.

Sure, if you’re an already established player. If you a rookie that has spent a month building up SP and ISK in an inefficent rookie-like fashion then on your first rocks some asshat blows up yourr ships and lobs abuse at you in a a mail, you’re unlikely to stick around.

Sometimes I think people like yourself forget that normal people aren’t inherently bound to EVE, and if they aren’t deriving enjoyment from it - such as when they have to repeat a long portion of the beginning of the game - they simply won’t play. Every single time gankers talk about new players as if the only thing they want to do in life is play EVE.

Ultimately this is a pointless discussion though. CCP won’t ever balance or remove ganking, the same handful of incels will continue to abuse new players and CCP will continuously scratch their heads and wonder why they can’t retain a playerbase. This will repeat until PA pulls the plug, which looking at the financial outlook of the EVE IP probably won’t be too far off.

6781

Ok so games with Ironman mode shouldnt exist? After all if the impact of losing just once or twice in a game is that bad, I guess the genre shouldnt exist at all.

Why is there no responsibility laid on the person who purs their entire worth in one thing anyway? Im sure saying this will be called victim blaming, but if you put all your money in your matress and your house burns down, the fact you lost all your wealth in one go really is your fault when banks exist.

1 Like
6782

Woah that was spicy. This thread to the moon! :laughing:

6783

You have edited that post twice though. You have in fact lost like 50 coolio points for that.

6784

I explicitly oppose your viewpoint that ganking should be removed. On the other hand I advocate for changes that 1) make newbies aware of the nature of the game while 2) respecting the playstyles of others who are NOT in contradiction with how the game is designed.

LOL. Best one in a long time.

Black and white, no room for compromise and attention to other playstyles. Not unexpected.

Nothing will ever teach some putative players on how to address risk, when they don’t accept that they need to ask themselves or others questions, as in understanding how the game is actually played.

I note that you’re trying to make a false claim about what I’m thinking or wrote. You can have that gate camp all to yourself.
On the other hand, these problematic numbers of rookies allegedly getting killed 24/7, the poor things, where does that even happen ? Got any verifiable data ? If they’re true rookies, the value of each loss should be low - so Jita is not a focal point of your argument, is it ?

6785

If a game offered just ironman mode it’d almost certainly have significantly less players than if it had a regular mode too. For the mot part though ironman mode isn’t something people tend to leap into at the start. Most players trying to build up a Diablo 2 hardcore character for example will have already played though a significant portion of the game in normal mode.

Before you start going “well accchtually I played blah blah blah in ironman mode first playthrough”, yes, there will always be outliers but that’s very much not the norm.

And let’s be clear, EVE is not marketed as an ironman mode game, and it’s certainly not of a high enough quality to continue alienating new players by catering to a very small number of veterans. This is the part I find amazing, that they keep ganking in to appease maybe a few dozen nolifers. They literally threw away their promises of no P2W and haemorrhaged players, but for some reason upsetting a few gankers is their red line.

Because… and I know this will be hard for you to comprehend… EVE is a game and the purpose of games is entertainment. Not everything needs to be a punishment, particularly when you’re punishing them for not knowing that a group of incels with nothing better to do with their time but harass rookies exists in the game.

Only for minor typos. I tend to drop in coding typos, so a lot of semicolons where apostrophes should be.

1 Like
6786

Well actually Ironman Mode only was why I started playing EvE, yes.

EvE is marketed far more by word of mouth than adverts, and by far the most commonly said things are “spreadsheets” and “lose everything when you die”. Only a fool listens to the official adverts rather than a peer when judging a product to use.

And not everything entertaining is instawin.

Sports are played competitively, but no one worries about how the side losing must feel.

I guess good sportsmanship is as dead as good manners.

Look, if you dont feel better about getting one over on a bunch of guys waiting to kill you, thats grand, but refusing to see that there’s more fun in risking and winning than just winning seems… Well I dont believe you dont get that. Sorry but at least I think we are down to the insurmountable disagreement here.

And without ad hominem, so yay go us.

Edit: Id also like to point out that Id probably have been an AG if I could fight worth a damn, I actually think the combat system is inherently rubbish.

6787

You, Miss, would be a good addition to CCP’s team, that would be great!

Having such mechanics would also allow a window for you to be a great antiganker, IF YOU WANTED since antiganking would finally be fun and engaging.

1 Like
6788

Of course you do. It’s your easy playstyle and if it were removed you’d need to actually learn how to play the game.

Simple fact.

I tried nuance in the past. Gankers don’t understand it so I’ve gone with the absolutist approach. I no longer care about their playstyle existing and would be entirely happy if CCP purged them from the game. Ultimately I think CCP would gain subscribers if they purged ganking.

In what way is it false? You called zkillboard accurate and you linked to a list of ganks. I pointed out that lit contained zero solo ganks because zkillboard doesn’t count solo kills and ganks, ever. Therefore your “accurate” list was garbage.

Certainly nothing you’d accept.

They will be low for a veteran, but to a rookie who is still learning how to effectively make ISK these losses can still be a significant impact, such as if they lose a fitted barge and a bunch of implants.

It’s not ironman mode though, not even a little bit. If it were you’d restart from scratch whenever you are podded. At no point it its history has it ever been ironman mode, and when most of us veterans joined is was significantly easier.

Yeah, no. Most of the honest word of mouth is “if you don’t already play it there’s no point in starting because it’s a garbage game and your time is better spent elsewhere”.

Strawman. I never suggested it was. And if anything, what gankers are getting is instawin.

If you ever attempted to be an AG you’d realise it’s a completely pointless playstyle. Ganks are generally over before AGs can get on grid. At most AGs can force gankers to swap targets.

6789

So when do we get this poll about ganking CCP? It is clear majority of the players wants ganking removed from game completely, many gankers including. So give us the poll to see who is right, or better just remove all PvP from highsec completely. It is not like highsec pvp was real pvp anyway.

Do it CCP or we quit playing and paying.