It’s not that I have to be right, just that I build my opinions based on the actual facts available. Unless you can provide something that counters those facts there’s no reason for me to change my mind. You’re the one that has been handed a line by gankers and you’re sticking to it even when you openly demonstrate you don’t understand the mechanics you are talking about.
And to be clear it’s not “the entire rest of the forum”. It’s a handful of gankers in a subforum historically dominated by gankers. The vast majority of their comments haven’t even been challenges to my views, just direct attacks on me.
It has nothing to do with why. I can send you the content of the handful of deleted posts if you want.
There won’t be, because if your view isn’t positive for gankers then you’ll just get attacked, and since CCP have clearly stated that ganking new players reduces retention there’s no way you can both have a reasonable discussion without looking at ways to reduce ganking.
“clearly stated that GRIEFING new players reduces retention”
There fixed it for you.
What isn’t possible is trying to have an objective discussion with someone who has an underlying agenda to remove ganking all together and labels any moderate non ganking voice as a closet ganker and Aiko simp or some other thing that they feel would invalidate their position.
I agree, it does become a better experience for both pilots when both want to interact like that.
Are they just now starting to notice this and are looking at ways to change? The Fanfest showed a presentation that suggested pvp in Highsec is going to change. Only time will tell if it was just fluff to keep those Capsuleers by feeding hope.
I think CCP catch a lot of flak for not developing the game from people whose particular areas of the game have been neglected. However they are in a difficult position because whatever they change is going to upset someone so changes have to be made slowly and soberly and even rolled back some times.
I believe we’ll see some changes and when the dust settles high sec will be different and not everyone will be happy but play styles will emerge from the new high sec as surely as they did from the old.
See. You said you wanted a reasonable discussion, yet you’ve immediately misrepresented what CCP stated at fanfest. CCP described part of what is currently called ganking (such as what happens in system like Sobaseki and Isanamo) as griefing. You’re now playing semantics and pretending that they were talking about existing griefing - which would be weird since they clearly stated they are looking at a solution and permabans are already a solution for what is in the EULA as griefing.
How can you possibly claim you want a reasonable discussion when you immediately misrepresent the facts?
Maybe that is the solution though. Any ganker that ganks a new player in a ship that new players fly (what they described as griefing at fanfest) is immediately and permanently banned. They don’t even need GM involvement, the ban could just replace the concord response.
Just to be clear, while my overall view is that ganking is in general bad for the game I’ve been more than willing to compromise. I’ve suggested only a limited subset of ships be essentially safety green when targetting them, such as T1 frigates, and even suggested that those ships should go suspect if you undock them with over a certain value in cargo, in response to people claiming it would be open to abuse.
You can’t honestly sit there claiming that because I don’t immediately abandon my entire position and just nod along with the gankers that somehow I’m the unreasonable one.
That is just not a good way pushing an agenda, surely the game could toggle off the player damage to Brand New Pilots unless there was a duel/wardec/suspect/criminal or Bounty while in Highsec.
Sure, my view is that the unprofitable classes of ship should just effectively be safety green, so modules just won’t activate on them. That way gankers still get to go after marauders, haulers, orcas, all that stuff, just not ships likely to be flown by new pilots.
I think it’d be difficult to tie to the actual age of the pilot as there’s various reasons a new player may have an older character and it would just be a massive pain to have to check every T1 frig (for example) to see if the pilot was a valid before engaging.
Ganking is a very broad play style that covers hunting a wide variety of targets in high sec. They were clear at fanfest that they were referring to griefing yet you want to use ‘semantics’ to have the conversation encompass the whole of ganking.
The whole of ganking doesn’t need review, people breaking the rules in rookie systems has historically and should continue to be punished. The whole of an emergent play style should not be put on trial for the behaviour of a few bad apples.
Watch the video again. They were breaking what we call ganking now into two categories, one of which they called griefing. You’re trying to pretend they were talking about what we call griefing now, which is absolutely false. So either you haven’t watched the video properly or you are deliberately lying.
Again, how can we have a reasonable discussion if you won’t even acknowledge what CCP actually stated? You’ve literally ignored everything Rattati actually said and you’ve just cherry-picked the word “griefing” and presented it out of context.
CCP disagrees. Which is why they said on this post:
Improvements to several other aspects of EVE are also being explored, including balance changes to many different ship classes (including navy ships), adjustments to station jump clone cooldown, improving the readability of maps, and applying a clearer focus on reducing ganking to make PvP gameplay in Highsec more equitable and fun for all players.
It’s not “a few” though. More ganks occur against unprofitable targets (just to be cruel as CCP described it at fanfest) than those against profitable targets (cruel but fair, as CCP described it).
I’d disagree. The current situation really does not allow much interesting, successful or even lucrative counterplay. You cannot really “prevent” ganks and cause only minor disturbances at all because the gankers are currently protected by all highsec-mechanics and just slip from one invulnerability (docked) to the next (tethered) to the next (warping) until they finally open fire and bring their target down within a timeframe of a few seconds. This simple thing needs to change, so players who want to counter gankers can actively track and hunt them BEFORE they arrive at their target. Which basically means CCP should remove all protective mechanics of Highsec for criminals, no docking and no tethering any more. They can still do whatever they want, shoot who ever they want but they need to be active, warping around, hiding on safespots, making sure they are not scanned etc. pp. (FacPol spawning at safespots should be disabled of course).
And no, the argument “but I have positive standings to the station owner!!!” does not count, you can have as many WalmartBonusPoints as you like, if the Police is chasing you they would close their doors for you and would not let you hide inside whil denying the Police entry to catch you. Just doesn’t work this way and CCP should fix that imho.
I can guarantee that gankers will claim that the only way to make counterplay possible is if concord is removed so gankers can gank with even fewer consequences than the nearly zero consequences they already.
It’s the strange paradox of the ganker, they repeatedly point out that antiganking is completely futile and has no effect on ganking but then when you suggest antiganking should be buffed into being a viable playstyle they demand buffs to ganking as a solution, ignoring the fact that for targets of ganks it would overwhelmingly be pretty much a game-breaking nerf. It would effectively make highsec the same as NPC null.
It’s not the most interesting playstyle, I’d agree, but neither is missioning, mining, etc. to say there is no counter play or way to prevent ganks is not true though.
There are loads of basic game mechanics that just aren’t being used which will prevent ganking and if they were used would not only stop a lot of people being ganked but would help move a lot of the people clogging high sec into more lucrative areas of space because they would be confident to fly there.
That is completely subjective. PvE is interesting enough and offers lots of ways to specialize and run whatever content you run very efficiently and lucrative. Interesting enough for many people to play EvE just for PvE, not having any interest in fighting other people.
CCP specifically stated that griefing is the destroying of new players in empty ships. CCP have plenty of times outlined what is a new player by creating protected areas for them.
You are trying to redefine what a new player is with zero back up from CCP if you say this is anything other than the current definition of griefing.
All this says is they are looking at improving the maps with a focus on reducing ganking. So bringing in game the third party tools that have long been available to mitigate the likelihood of being ganked.
Nothing you’ve said suggests CCP is looking at attacking ganking. If you’d watched that video yourself you’d have heard the bit where he specifically says “so gankers, you’re safe”
Marking ganking corps red in your overview.
Using D-scan.
Joining corps.
Using Lowsec instead of high sec pipes.
Setting up pings on gates.
Not using auto-pilot.
Aligning…
You have been provided with masses of counterfactual evidence…which you just casually dismiss as ‘irrelevant’. What kind of a debate is it where you alone get to decide what is or is not relevant ?
Utter nonsense. I’m as liable as anyone else to be ganked by Aiko and her crew. The difference is that I enjoy the cat and mouse and don’t go into apoplectic meltdown over the loss of a ship whose real life cost is about 2p.
Nothing of that is AntiGanking Gameplay that allows players who would want to actively hunt criminals in HighSec to do so. I’d like to hear about efficient mechanics that would allow a gang of Antigankers to put real pressure on a Gankfleet.
So you think that they had a presentation to point out what griefing is, and say that they need to find a solution for it even though it’s already against the EULA?
Again, if you expect a reasonable discussion you have to be remotely reasonable.
Just because maps is the item preceding it in the list does not mean they are linked. Come on guy, you’re not even pretending to be unbiased at this point.
Thankfully you denying reality doesn’t change the fact that CCP are finally looking at ganking.
No, this is not true. I’ve been provided with people like you stating your opinions, but that is not evidence. Even that has been sporadic though, most of the responses from yourself and the rest of the Aiko fanclub have just been attacks against me, because you can’t form a coherent argument against my views, so you have to try to attack and discredit me instead.
Good for you. Plenty of new players don’t hence CCP losing money on their game because they are unable to attract and retain new players. You’re basically saying “I enjoy risk-free, trash-tier PvP therefore anyone who doesn’t share my playstyle preference is wrong!”.
