So then what would their purpose be? A freighter isn’t going to get zapped with these new modules then just choose to stick around for example, so I’m not sure what these modules would add. I’ll reread your previous comments in case I’ve missed something.
I always discuss in good faith.
I do.
My argument is that new players don’t come into EVE with veteran knowledge of EVE and so allowing them to be destroyed with ease before they learn the game reduces retention - as CCP have stated clearly.
In terms of counterplay, I’m simply stating the fact that the actual counterplay mechanic to ganing (antiganking) is not viable, and change would need to be made if both playstyles are to exist.
Oh look. Yet again you fail to get through a single post without resorting to insults.
But again the argument goes round in circles as it has already been pointed out to you that noobs are PROTECTED in no less than 35 systems where it is a violation of Eve terms to hassle under 30 day old noobs.
Their purpose would be to give the carebears of high sec a way to interact with eachother outside of the ganker gankee dynamic as I said.
If you see an orca sitting in a belt afk mining on your favourite belt, hop into a battle ship and pew pew them. (I envision drones shutting down when all modules do) then their afk play has bought them a 1 billion ship unattended on a belt and you get to keep the rocks for yourself.
If someone is doing all the combat sites in a system that you feel is yours then you can drive them off with a little pew pew.
If you see a suspected ganker alt on a gate you can pew pew them till they have no modules left to warp scramble you before you bring your freighter/marauder/transport ship through.
Arguments don’t go round and round in circles and have to have people point out the same facts again and again and again…if people are discussing in good faith. Hoping that the latest counterfactual point will slip off the page if ignored long enough is most definitely not discussing in good faith.
A situation where you make one comment on Monday and its complete opposite on Tuesday, only to return to Monday’s stance, is not acting in good faith.
A situation where you quote a graph yet deliberately omit half the text that went with it…is not discussing in good faith.
Forcing everyone to accept your dictionary definition that is a complete red herring anyway and evades how people could avoid ganking…is not discussing in good faith.
In fact it would be simpler if you just pointed out in which of your 500 posts you have discussed in good faith…as I’m far from being the only one who cannot see any.
It only goes in circles because you think that’s a solution and aren’t willing to accept that some people disagree. You say it as if that’s the argument resolved. I don’t agree. And clearly based on CCPs claims that retention is still affected they don’t either.
I just don’t see it being used. You can already just go and bump miners out of belts. They’ve even added mining crystals that can deliberately waste ore, and so far I’ve barely seen anyone using them to affect miners, not even on moon ores where arguably you can have a significant impact.
They aren’t just going to sit there though, and since you’ll become suspect they’ll just have a fast-locking, high-alpha alt there to obliterate your ship, and since you’ve got these new modules you’re unlikely to be ready to counter actual combat.
Again though, that’s not what’s happening. I’m stating my view, you’re then stating yours then you’re getting irate and attacking me when I don’t accept your opinion as a fact.
This hasn’t happened. My arguments have been entirely consistent. I oppose ganking entirely, I think it affects new player retention, I think it should be scrapped. If it is not scrapped I think it should be limited and should be balanced along with its counterplay. Those have been my views for years and they have no changed.
The reason you think they have changes is because Aiko and her minions fling unrelated arguments from every possible angle then accuse people of moving goalposts when they respond.
And there’s the other issue Lucas just doesn’t get. Certain corps effectively ‘own’ certain parts of space, and that includes highsec. Lucas acts as if ore is just free manna from heaven that anyone has the right to grab unharmed…and completely misses the fact that a miner may be mining in what is someone else’s belt. Heck, half the reason for highsec wardecs is to demolish other people’s claims to moons, ore, etc.
It is perfectly legitimate for corps that do not want miners mining their ore…to blap the non-corp miners that do mine there. Not least because there is not an infinite supply of ore every day.
In a fight over resources, ganking is quite legitimate.
Easy answer you too can bring alts to the field. The ganker will be left deciding if he blows his load and brings his catalysts to the field to gank your AG ship instead of an actual juicy target.
I’m confused. I’m sure you suggested these modules would make you suspect, in which case all they’d need is a high alpha ship to blap you off the field when you go suspect, and they won’t get concorded for it.
You see, then we have the same motivation. Maybe our opinion what would be steps into a “better” direction just differs.
And yet, when you quoted CCP Rise stats from 2015, you deliberately left out this comment…another example of you ‘arguing in good faith’…eh?..
“We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed. The strongest indicators for a new player staying with EVE are associated with social activity: joining corps, using market and contract systems, pvping, etc. Isolating players away from the actual sandbox seems very contrary to what we would like to accomplish.” ( CCP Rise…Feb 2015 )
Depends how you are fit. Praxis for instance can support both an impressive tank and good DPS. It’s one of the reasons people call for it to be nerfed.
Similarly you can just use your high alpha high sec alt on his when it warps in.
I mention him in passing, to which you had a go at me for using 7 year old data (even though I didn’t actually use the data in any meaningful way). But then you went and read it and now you think 7 year old data is relevant, even though at the 2022 fanfest CCP categorically stated that it does affect retention.
Yet out of the two of us I’m apparently thee one arguing in bad faith.
You can’t use your alt though. If you go suspect then someone shoots you, your alt can’t legally engage the person shooting you. So basically you’d be making a praxis go suspect so you can damage the shields of a disposable scrambler alt.
You can use your alt the same way you can use your praxis.
It’s of course a risk and comparatively your praxis might be worth more than their scrambling maller. However the ship you are trying to bring through is worth ten times as much so you decided if it’s worth while. If he scrambled and ganks the praxis he won’t have catalysts enough left for the marauder or freighter etc.
Aaanyhow, it’s just the kernel of an idea. Something to be kicked about a bit and most probably discarded.
Yeah, I guess we’re getting too caught up in specifics and it would probably need some heavy designing to make it workable. I appreciate that it is an idea intended to give a way to create a meaningful engagement though and it certainly has merit.
I kinda wish the mining crystal change they made had created a similar kind of passive attack design to encourage retaliation. I was hoping to see people fielding a combat fleet with some miners to go zap away moon ores, forcing the owner of the citadel to engage.
Be the change you want to see.
Form up a fleet of aggressive barges to steal someone’s moon ore. Hell you probably wouldn’t even need the special crystals to get a response.
The trouble is that you haven’t really though about what will actually happen if highsec ganking were completely removed. That is the crux.
Sure, you might hang on to a few percent more noobs. But without ganking, you’ve totally changed highsec. Anyone would be able to transport anything anywhere in highsec with zero risk. There’d be no need for haulers to fit any tank at all.
But that in turn would affect the markets. With everyone able to transport stuff in any ship, the market for shields would plummet. The market for ammo would plummet, with gankers no longer buying any. In fact the highsec market for anything associated with attack, tank, or defense would plummet. I’d no longer need to get stuff from Jita in a Gnosis with 15m ISK worth of tank and weapons added. That’s 1/4 of the cost of the ship…no longer necessary.
And that is all made from the very ore that your now increased number of noobs are scrambling for. With demand plummeting, your noobs would get less ISK.
AND…to cap it all off…with Telletubbie Carebear Highsec now a reality, your noobs would be totally unprepared for the sheer cliff edge IF they ever decide to enter lowsec. Nothing they’d experience in carebear highsec would prepare them for it. You’d have endless noobs wailing that ’ I went to lowsec and got blapped by the much larger number of gate camps that are now there since all the gankers moved there '.
In fact it would not surprise me at all if gankers got their revenge by gate camping every 0.4 system in existence ( and there are a lot less 0.4 systems than there are highsec systems the gankers would otherwise have been in ! ).
You really have not thought out the consequences of your proposed changes at all.
I have though. I’ve thought about if for longer than you’ve even been playing the game. The fact that you disagree with my conclusions doesn’t mean I haven’t thought about it.
To some extent, sure. But I don’t think it will be a particularly negative change.
So what? I can already get pretty much anything hauled pretty much anywhere for basically nothing. I can get things hauled to highsec islands for a fraction of a percent of their value, vastly less than brokers fees alone. The risks are easy enough to mitigate to be irrelevant for any veteran.
Again, you’re literally talking to a 15 year veteran trader. The markets would barely be impacted and there are COUNTLESS examples of changes that have impacted the market to far larger degrees.
You drastically overestimate how much ammo is used in ganking and drastically underestimate how much ammo is used in missions alone. There’s a reason that highsec ammo markets are in mission hubs, not Uedama.
Again, so what? If the only purpose of that ship existing is for you to travel to Jita in it then there’s a fundamental design flaw with that ship.
I’m sure they would, and I’m sure they’d have to diversify to balance that back out. Again, this is not something I see as a negative.
I disagree. Not least of which because they’d have something to fall back on.
Again, simply not true. I think the real problem is that you don’t actually understand a lot of the game yet. You’ve been told all these doom-filled prophecies by gankers and you just blindly accept them as fact. You then presume that because I don’t agree with them I must be in the wrong. It doesn’t even seem to cross your mind that maybe they are lying to protect their easy playstyle.
Actually…I’m talking to someone who themselves blapped a one day old noob ( in a hauler ) in highsec. Oh yes…you hoped nobody would see that bit in your killboard.
Does your dictionary have the word ‘hypocrisy’ in it ?
Well, lets see.
Ive said Im never going to quit, but now my Omega has run out it makes very little difference what I do.
I suppose now, on the edge of a 100% safe EvE theres not really anything to do.
So whats everyone else doing once HS is made safe?