If you put that on evemail to this pilot can file it away after holding a Frostpacker meeting to go over the details..
No it would bring more people, you are opening another door of opportunity that wasn’t open before. You are one of those, the game is great as is burns to the ground.
No lose means loss and victory means victory. You don’t get a trophy for winning a fight in Eve. So yes it is all the same and has meaning. Play call of duty if you suck and lose every match going to beat you don’t play long.
Oh really, is that why there is ship replacement programs because PVP is so profitable in Eve. Or are you one of those types that thinks seal clubbing is a thing, because you suck at everything else in life you need to pick on the weaker only, this is call greifing as well.
Again please go read MER, they have lots of information, and you simply have no idea what you are talking about or how the game works. You don’t understand resource distribution, you don’t understand drop rates and you clearly have no idea how it work together. So don’t come to me like you are some expert.
You are projecting your knowledge to a base of players that may have tried and quite or never had anything in the game. Again you can’t seem to think through this which is no surprise to be honest.
Yes you are the blockbuster store as Netflix hits the market, nope no need to change this model this is what we are made of. This is exactly what idiots say and how businesses fail. I am hoping CCP is smart enough to understand they need to keep the game-changing and moving to what keeps business and profits at their best. For you, well would guess you are owner of a failing business.
JJ
Greetings Commanders,
Since I’m pretty new to the game and it seems there’s a lot of players here with years of experience…
I’d like to ask: what would happen if CCP was going to force “Green Safety” only in 1.0 systems in order to reduce suicide ganking?
1 Like
Why would they want to reduce suicide-ganking?
4 Likes
Logically their statement (as short and vague as it is, anyway) makes no sense. You can’t make something “more equitable” by reducing its amount. If you make pies, and a small number of people eats most of the pies while the rest get very few, reducing pie production wouldn’t make pie consumption “more equitable.” But increasing pie production would.
So it’s quite possible that their solution will be the implementation of a new way to attack players that would make ganking a viable alternative but not the sole available method of high-sec PvP, instead of the straight-up mechanically-enforced decrease like you’re hoping for.
3 Likes
Why would they do that? There is very little ganking happening in 1.0 systems.
Did you even check zkill to see if this is actually an issue before posting? There have been maybe 3 Venture ganks in the last week in 1.0 systems. No barges or exhumers.
1 Like
One thing that would happen is all the AFK miners chewing away at veldspar would descend upon these 1.0 systems so they can have their orcas earn them isk while they do their day jobs.
New players that want to mine would probably then find the belts completely stripped by the time most people log on EU time. US time zone would have no hope. So the new bros you are looking to help would wind up mining outside of the 1.0 systems anyhow.
Would probably have an effect on the price of orcas, mining drones and veldspar.
Would it stop ganking? No. Very little ganking happens in 1.0 systems compared to high sec choke points and level 4 mission hubs. Gankers might blow up the odd venture but high sec pvpers hunting ventures would be like pvpers in low sec hunting industrial cynos. Something of a meaningless and unrewarding pass time. Sure you shoot them if they are there but they aren’t what you are looking for.
We would also probably be having multiple forum posts asking what is CCP going to do about all the afk orcas griefing the new bros by stealing all their ore.
3 Likes
Maybe gankers will have to purchase a ganking permit from CCP’s ca$h shop. 
1 Like
Well… to begin with… my Perimeter ganker would cry day and night for a month and then he would move somewhere else.
Make an alt in a NPC corporation and gank someone at Perimeter and see if any zkillboard about it will show up! 
Well, I have to say that you could end up impressed by the fact that if no antiganker kill whores you then you will not show up on zkill for days and maybe weeks.
That is one more reason I hate kill whores.
Whats in 1.0 systems worth going there for?
They already have a PvP mechanic that’s opt-in; inviting other players to duels.
How many times in the history of EVE has a freighter pilot moving cargo, a miner mining Veldspar in an exhumer, or a mission-runner doing level fours in a faction-fit Golem voluntarily accepted a duel?
Exactly zero times.
As such, ganking being replaced with an opt-in mechanic will amount to a direct reduction/removal of ganking, which won’t “make PvP gameplay in Highsec more equitable” because the effective removal of something can’t make its use/consumption “more equitable,” unless they’re playing fast and loose with the understanding of the term to encompass everyone not having access to that something at all as equality.
So it’s a garbage, incomplete statement (which CCP has a habit of making), and I wouldn’t put any stock in it, let alone use it as a sign of vindication to proselytize for some kind of anti-grief moral agenda.
4 Likes
Counterproposal: What if CCP changed 0.5 systems to be considered lowsec and have lowsec criminal mechanics in order to reduce suicide ganking?
By definition, suicide ganking can only happen in high sec where CONCORD is. If 0.5 is now lowsec and has all the normal rules of lowsec, all those GANK tags you see on zkill for 0.5 systems go away.
You just have pirates per usual.
1 Like
Good point. I was forgetting alpha ganking haulers in Perimeter is still a thing.
Worth CCP’s dev time tho? Doubtful. It would just be abused by multi-boxing miners.
While I’m all for there being more spicy space, I think this is rather unfair to the gankers. New bros can learn and mine and be inducted into the eve community in just about any space, but ganking by the EVE definition can only happen in high sec.
I do sometimes wonder though what would happen if there was a complete removal of ‘Concorde space’ what the universe would look like. I feel like we would see things happen on a much bigger scale. There would be convoys of freighters with whole fleets protecting them moving to the player owned trade hubs that could actually maintain the level of protection needed to keep people in line around the station. Mining fleets would decend on a system with hundreds of barges and security demolishing the roids in minutes before moving on. In amongst this there would be the brave pioneers in cloaky ships darting through space around the big mega corps like a black market, hunted by the corps who want to own all the trade in the universe. The outer reaches of the galaxy would become lawless space where small groups of settlers and bandits would live and prey on eachother.
That is what I imagine anyhow.
Hi,
I maybe got a misleading perception that this was an issue brought to attention by players and that not all players appreciate this kind of gameplay (there’s an entire megathread about it with 7.1k replies, 33.3k views…)
But I see your point, for you this could not be an issue at all.
I don’t appreciate cars that only have two doors instead of four.
Should they stop making cars with only two doors?
1 Like
troll thread to stir up ■■■■ ?
do you even know that the Amarr trade hub is in a 1.0 system ?
1 Like
Hello Raylan,
I was not familiar with this zkillboard website, so thank you for having introduced me to it.
If that’s the case then I guess I have overestimated the issue for 1.0.
I wonder if the same applies to all high sec though.
Truly?
Imagine you phase out 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9 sec space to low sec mechanics over time. What you’ll see are two kinds of pilots congregating in the remaining shrinking parts of high sec: newbros and carebear bittervets. It’ll be quite obvious that the newbro venture is struggling to find rocks in an available belt in a shrinking high sec because carebear bittervets – whose hoovering up with orca fleets+hulk alts, and are usually spread out – is now densified and much more visibly and tangibly in competition, wrecking the new guys.
That’s some of the strongest motivation for:
- gankers receiving sympathy for ganking in the remaining high sec space, because it is the only reliable way for a newbro to be up-leveled and have space carved out for them
- the newbros to develop a better sense of appreciation for a ganker’s role in instilling fear in bittervet carebears trying to just vacuum up ISK, maybe they also become gankers early on to make isk from PVP
- gives ample reasons and opportunities to newbros to venture into lowsec to cross into high sec islands. Who knows, maybe they’ll learn to live out in lowsec and get out of high sec
- gankers now have a very easy time looking for targets.
The kinds of players that think “theyre being harassed” by being on the wrong side of ganking would look at this proposal as an attack on their playstyle, if only because it literally exposes the ugly truth: they are a X-year-old-newbro that hasn’t grown up. That’s who they’re playing alongside with. They’re not actually interested in addressing ganking. They just want a “wealth goes up” game, and the starting space happens to be one of the least risky and least social way to do it.
Actual newbros next to them wouldn’t be shackled by rose tinted glasses of the past and can grab their own Eve life by the horns. It doesn’t matter the “kind” of space they fly in.
That thread is a bit miss leading. The majority of talking is done by a handful of people arguing at cross purposes or in bad faith. It has become a hive of trolling and shitposting.
There are people that have a problem with ganking, however when you listen to their expectations they are wholly unreasonable and unrealistic. One person wanted to be able to run one mission in high sec in a 2billion ship and have it pay for the ship in a single mission! Even the best sites in nul sec won’t pay out 2billion in a single site. Then there is a guy that wants to make all T1 frigates completely immune to ganking and sticks their head in the sand any time someone comes up with completely reasonable responses to how that is open to a lot of abuse.
The core problem seems to be that players who want to stay in high sec and commit expensive ships in the field don’t like ganking because they can lose those ships. They then co-opt an idea that ganking is harming new player retention as though new players are really on the ganker’s radars. The gankers are worried that their play style might get nerfed if they don’t shout just as loud as those calling for nerfs and the whole thing dissolves into pettiness.
3 Likes