Best kills I ever got in WoW was I came upon two elves in Azhara canoodling. No armor and everything. Ahh the WF procs were so good that day.
1 Like
It seems to me that the larger mining companies just fit a Venture with two lasers and send lots of them out. It’s not hard to perceive a lot of them as AFK as I rarely ever see them respond to attack. Given that a Venture can return several times its cost in a single mining run, I guess they still make a profit even if they lose half of them.
…and not just the larger ones, Cilla. I think there may be quite a few smaller corps in Highsec whose CEO’s fleece their usually ignorant newer members and give them all sorts of poor advice.
Or yennoe, just have fleet sec.
I played wow about 10 years ago. We used to gangk alliance to the point they’d take rezz sickness and have someone in each local Graveyard to kill them and force them to log off.
I was arguing in another thread, and wanted to put some of my points into one post here (and add a few more things).
- Eve is great because of it’s PvP elements, and minimizing or removing them would kill the game, not save it.
- If you don’t want to play a game with such a heavy focus on PvP, go play a game that either doesn’t have PvP, or that has severe PvP restrictions (i.e. designated PvP zones or an opt system).
- I am absolutely befuddled by the arguments that players shouldn’t have to adjust their play styles in order to compete in a PvP-centric game. I mean, no one makes this argument in PvE games or straight PvP games, yet somehow people make it in Eve.
- Speaking of which, gankers in particular have had to go all in on a glass cannon strat because of concord mechanics designed to suppress “non-consensual” PvP in highsec. This resulted in (most) prey having to go all in on a buffer tank strategy. It’s like an evolutionary arms race similar to that between the garter snake and the toxic newt. The newt keeps becoming more and more poisonous, while the garter snake responds with ever increasing levels of of toxin immunity. The difference with Eve, however, is not that they prey gets tougher to kill, but that they keep asking for nerfs to ganking, while gankers have to keep responding with more ships (and ganking becomes harder and less profitable to do).
- Ganking is asymmetric game play. It’s like the asymmetric PvP horror games that has one monster/killer and several human prey. The prey don’t need to be as strong as the monster for the game to be fair or fun. Regardless, many of the nerf ganking crowd advocate that ganking be balanced as if it were symmetric game play -which it is not. Now, if you want things to be balanced as if it were symmetric game play, then we would need to get rid of concord. But that will essentiall turn HS into LS sans capitals.
- PvE’ers have already received a ton of buffs, and ganking has already received a ton of nerfs (yes it also has received some buffs, such as with the surgical strike update). Yet, this has never resulted in the nerf-gankers being happy -why? Because they don’t actually want ganking to be balanced; they want to stop falling victim to it, without actually having get better. And they won’t be happy until it’s dead.
- It is befuddling how many people say that they don’t want to remove risk or ganking, and that they just want to make things more fair, before proceeding to suggest changes that would be overhelmingly oppressive to ganking (i.e. 30s ADC’s for mining ships, the ability to self destruct cargo, the inability for people with low sec status to dock in NPC stations or take gates in HS).
- Ganking is already so heavily balanced in favor of prey that profitable ganking is already contingent upon prey making one or more mistakes. Thus, further buffs to prey, or nerfs to ganking won’t make things more fair, but less fair. Of course, that won’t stop prey from asking for “one more nerf.”
- In fact, gankers are already fighting a unfair fight. I would be a bloodbath if gankers only had to fight a fair fight. And carebear tears would flow like a river.
- P.S. Nerf gankers exist in other games like Albion Online. And their threads have people making the same arguments that we’re making here. But for those that don’t want to read through threads like this one, you’ll see things like:
Same Arguments, Different Game
- Ganking is too easy.
- Ganking is too risk free
- Ganking doesn’t require any skill
- Ganking is not real PvP
- Ganking is ruining the game
- Ganking is pushing new players away from the game
- Ganking is important for the economy
- Nerfs to ganking just incentivize gankers to form larger groups
- Ganking takes a lot of skill and effort
- Ganking makes the game more exciting and rewarding
- Why are you playing a full loot PvP game if you don’t want to play a full loot PvP game?
- Nerf gankers would rather ask for ganking to be nerfed than do the bare minimum to protect themselves
- The people that die to ganking are the people that fail to protect themselves from the threat.
Oh, and Zhalyd linked to a video about what killed New World. Bugs apparently played a large role, but one of the major issues cited was a decision to shift away from PvP at the last second. This meant that the game had stand on the strength of it’s PvE content, which was both boring and short. Kind of sounds like Eve, only the devs made the mistake of catering too much to the care bears. Well, to be fair, the bugs were also much worse. But, I still maintain that Eve would suffer a similar fate if CCP tried to pivot away from PvP.
4 Likes
that Albion online thread lol ,change a few names and it would fit right in here with no problem.
3 Likes
That particular point is a non-argument because gankers already heavily use structures to their advantage. Plus, why should pirates have save havens for all their things when other players are supposed to move all their activities into unsafe structures. Structures make it even easier for them to do their business because they can just stay tethered and in space without problems. They can also be placed in strategically important locations, which makes ganking even easier. STations require them to stay docked or use insta undocks to get away from the station. Stop portraying gankers as victims.
I would say that CCP is worse in this regard. Just one example out of many: While a bug allowed for gold doubling in NW that wrecked the economy, CCP intentionally made it so that massive amounts of minerals flooded the markets that wrecked not only the economy but also lots of gameplay features. Intent is much worse than bugs. And then they killed off that mineral supply to “fix” the economy but wrecked it further.
You should not forget that PVE is the biggest and most important aspect of EVE that generates PVP in the first place. More PVE in the open world means more PVP. CCP is straying away from this basic design principle of EVE more and more with pop-locked open world complexes that don’T allow interference and instanced PVE that you cannot interfere with. And if you believe Rattatata they want to make more and more of this “handcrafted content to experience specific content without interference”.
It’ll just mean more gankers waiting outside the trace 
Well, no, the thing that is truly unbalanced is the ability to gank the gankers. The ability for you to be the prey. Gankers love to go on about PvP…but surely the ability to hit back at gankers is as proper PvP as it gets.
The problem is that in highsec gankers are effectively protected by Concord. That is the truly ‘unbalanced’ bit…not the nerfing of this or that ship. Highsec gankers have a great police protection racket going. They can sit there right under the noses of this alleged ‘police’ force and be protected by them while readying a gank. Quite how relying on this very protection against the AG crowd constitutes PvP baffles me…as a massive PvE force is clearly involved at that stage. Prior to the gank, you don’t just have your 15 Catalysts or whatever…you have the whole Concord force protecting you from anyone who spots that a gank is coming and wants to do anything about it.
That isn’t unbalanced ?
Better not ask for that because changing this “protection” will not result in what you think it would. Removing or changing Concord so that it allows players to “fight back against gankers” will not result in them having a harder time. It will result in quite the opposite. With their massive alt numbers they can hit even harder because now they would not have only 21 seconds to kill you but all the time in the world with much less ship loss.
1 Like
That means 1 of 2 things:
-
you aren’t really going after gankers, because the ones that you’ll find easily are outlaws and have no protection
-
you are just gutless and instead of ganking the gankers, you want to be able to do it without facing the same consequences they face.
Either way, if you want to gank the gankers, then go shoot the ones that can be shot without being afraid of CONCORD visiting you in return.
2 Likes
Yeah…and just how unbalanced is multi-boxing…where a solo ganker can effectively take on 4 or 5 roles including a loot getaway ship that somehow conveniently escapes the attention of Concord.
So the gankers have multi-boxing, no end of squeaky clean other alts, 15 Catalysts, Concord protecting them…and yet somehow their fight against a single defenceless Procurer is in danger !
Well, no…your complaint to which I responded was that ‘profitable ganking’ would become unprofitable. Anything can happen in Eve if nobody cares about ISK. My point is that ganking the gankers is itself even more unprofitable as things currently stand. AG is, as things stand, by definition an ISK losing business…not least because ganker vessels themselves aren’t going to drop any loot worth having.
I didn’t complain about anything, so no clue what you are crying about now.
If you want to shoot them, then go do it. If you shoot the outlaws, then you don’t lose anything (well, you will because incompetent, but not because CONCORD).
The gankers manage to set safety to red and shoot their targets, you if you really wanted to kill the gankers you could do likewise, if you don’t then i guess you don’t really want to kill them you just wish to whore on their loss mail.
And whats profit got to do with it you and the rest of ag are claiming you want to protect the idiots that go afk on ap in a bling fit ship. surely the satisfaction of occasionally succeeding is enough , if you are after isk profit then your intentions become less altruistic and suspect.
So what was this comment then…
“Ganking is already so heavily balanced in favor of prey that profitable ganking is already contingent upon prey making one or more mistakes…”
I never cease to be amazed at the entitled way in which gankers seem to think people are logging in just to play wildebeast for them. If ganking a Proc is ‘PvP’ then it has to be the very lowest form of it.
A comment made by someone else.
It isn’t that hard to figure out.
I don’t give a damn about protecting anyone…they can look out for themselves. ( Or they can pay me to protect them ). But if it is all predator vs prey…then any talk of ‘balance’ should include where gankers are themselves the prey.
so shoot us then .
3 Likes