I think that largely depends on the type of gank. If we are talking straight mechanics, for most of them I think you are correct, assuming near equal knowledge of the game and a reasonable amount of skill…however, for freighter ganking specificlaly I don’t see it, not in terms of straight mechanics. Of course someone could buy a blockade runner but that assumes they have the ISK. AND it assumes they can be asked to make several trips with all they have to move.
Gankers have things in their favor that are not mechanics related. For example, while targets are either bored or busy, gankers strike at their own leisure. This means its very easy for them to get that vital element of surprise.
But as you know by now, its not really ganking I want to change but mostly have better assurances that players are informed about ganking so as to curb frustration and griefing. Whenever a player is wondering why they got ganked, its just a huge opportunity for grief whether intentionally inflicted or natural. No player should ever wonder why. Every player that gets ganked should be able to say “Of course I got ganked! I was warned about this!”. And then move on.
You can also pay a Red Frog ganker alt to haul your stuff, guaranteeing that it will arrive safe and on time. Always use Red Frog: https://red-frog.org/
Red Frogs can’t be ganker alts because gankers are real-life criminals and mentally-damaged, and there’s no way they can run a respectable, legitimate business because of that.
So, are you saying that balance is off for DST’s? Because if so, I have thoughts.
So, DST’s did indeed get a big nerf with the Surgical Strike update (they primarily rely on tank, and not slipperiness to manage the risk of gankers). However, that doesn’t mean that their balance has been thrown off. It simply means that you can’t haul as much value as you used to. For example, I cut how much value I would haul in my Mastodon by 25%! However, I still use it all the time, and haven’t been ganked (because I follow proper risk management strategies).
Now, it is possible that they might be getting ganked more than they used to, but it would still be the pilots’ fault for failing to use best practices.
Well, that certainly explains all the starving miners trying to cross over into the warm embrace of Safety., and the desperate efforts the AGs will go through in order to try to stop them:
Edit: oops I was thinking the 38th, but the argument still stands.
I am not a fan of the way you use the word “fault”. Its quite separate from the concept of “you could have done something to successfully change the outcome.”
To be honest “balance” is not something I really believe in as I see it as a sort of unacheivable goal by default but also there is the issue of everyone having different critera for what balance is.
I don’t know what all your “best practices” entail, and I don’t want to give anyone here any clues to anything you do, but it does sound like a lot of work to move stuff in a place deemed “high security” if its hi-sec we are talking about. That’s a huge part of my issue. If survival takes that much work, why not lable the place properly and spare pilots the confusion?
And I may be biased because while I have seen a ton of haulers explode and precious few get away, I don’t haul as a playstyle.
The practical answer is that carebears aren’t going to try the game if they read that it doesn’t have a “high-sec” in it. Since the intent is to have a stable stream of revolving-door carebear rubbish acting as content for the game’s actual players (i.e. those who engage in a balanced play style as opposed to logging in to farm gutter-tier PvE for 5 hours every night), certain marketing liberties must be taken in order to ensure that the system continues to function. Note how I’m not saying “outright lie” or “false advertising,” because most people still don’t lose anything to other players in high-sec, but would in any other area of space.
Well that’s your criteria. Mine is the fact that somebody blows up nearly every minute in (cough) hi-sec (and NPC pirates roaming (cough) hi-sec count in my book). But you are perfectly welcome to your opinion. I know I have mine.
I have discussed this at length before and I am pretty sure you were there.
Plus in this very thread JUST ABOVE, which YOU YOURSELF quoted, I said “label the place properly”.
Incidentally I have proposed lots of things regarding this, but have several times indicated that my priority was proper labeling, rather than removal of anything.
Each zone would get a number according to its approximate Concord response time, such as CRZ 19 which is the approximate time for a 0.5 sec system…19 seconds.
Low sec would become SRZ which is for Security gun Response Zone.
Null sec could be NSZ for No Security Zone or even remain as is cause its accurate.
