One Way to Balance High-Security Space 🗡

[Ramona_McCandless]

@Most_Moliko

haulers will still have risk.

What is that risk?

[Most_Moliko]

A single determined ganker who isn’t running a catalyst fleet by himself.

[Scipio_Artelius]

Calm down Naari. It’s not that serious.

Back on rebalancing highsec, breaking down the top 15 systems for ship loss in the last 24 hours, 10 of them are starter/career agrent systems with new players dying to NPCs:

You should be out asking CCP to remove all NPCs from highsec, since they kill more ships than any player does.

NPCs HAVE NO RISK.

[Gix_Firebrand]

@Most_Moliko

I am pro-ganking. I think ganking in high sec should be a part of the game. The issue is the current state of there being ZERO RISK TO GANKERS.

You aren’t actually. It’s plain to see you are not in fact pro ganking.

It is perfectly balanced as it is.

@Most_Moliko

Now moderator, take note, if they continue to use a strawman then i have to continue to say the same thing to redirect the argument back to the original topic of conversation. Strawman arguments are the derailing of the forum.

ROFL, stop crying to daddy CCP. Also you realize it is opinion that I’m using a strawman right?

Look bro, I get you took Intro to Logic 101, and I’m happy for you

But calm down with the modus ponens mmk?

@Most_Moliko

The false equivalency

Bro. I know the semester just started and you wanna show off your shiny new knowledge, but put the truth tables away LOL.

[Most_Moliko]

You know that is not how this works. Harassing the right people in the right systems is how this works. Uedama | System | zKillboard

[Ramona_McCandless]

What is his risk?

How would he gank my orca?

[Most_Moliko]

Do you think of everyone as immature to yourself? That’s some ego you have there.

[Most_Moliko]

So you saying without the concord exploit and a bunch of catalysts controlled by your bot, you can’t gank in high sec?

[Qia_Kare]

Careful. There could be a gaslighting strawman question not a question in there.

[Sasha_Nemtsov]

The Court of Crime and Punishment has directed me to intervene in this exchange.

@Most_Moliko v Sundry Persons of the Community

Although the General Discussion sub-forum lies without the technical jurisdiction of the Court, a request has been received and I have been appointed to review a matter which touches upon that Court’s scope of interest.

The claim is that Highsec ganking presents no risk to the ganker.

The counter claim is that Highsec ganking presents a quantifiable risk to the ganker.

I find that Blockade Runners, which are transport vessels, are unscannable. For this reason, they may be used to carry low-volume high-value cargo, well worth the attention of the ganker. The risk is that the value of the cargo may not cover the costs of the gank (the vessel may, in fact, contain nothing but modules, and may even be lacking some of those if the pilot believes that cloaking and agility offer sufficient protection).

On this point alone, the Accuser’s argument falls.

That being the case, my initial finding is that the assertion that Highsec ganking presents no risk at all to the ganker, is without foundation.

S Ilyich Nemtsov
Investigator
Court of Crime & Punishment (Sub-Forum)

[Ramona_McCandless]

I dont believe I said that.

If I did please quote me.

What risk is that single ganker under?

What risk does he pose my Orca?

[Scipio_Artelius]

@Most_Moliko

You know that is not how this works. Harassing the right people in the right systems is how this works

There’s no harassing. I move through Uedama multiple times a day with no problems. It’s simple. Most of the day there isn’t even any ganking going on there anymore.

It’s become almost boring.

[Gix_Firebrand]

@Most_Moliko

You know that is not how this works. Harassing the right people in the right systems is how this works. Uedama | System | zKillboard

And? The haulers have access to the same info. They can take precautions as well ROFL.

@Most_Moliko

Do you think of everyone as immature to yourself? That’s some ego you have there.

Its ok bro, I know why you dodged all the points

@Most_Moliko

So you saying without the concord exploit and a bunch of catalysts controlled by your bot, you can’t gank in high sec?

It isn’t an exploit. CCP deemed it so. Please cry moar about how you don’t understand game mechanics tho

@Scipio_Artelius

There’s no harassing. I move through Uedama multiple times a day with no problems. It’s simple. Most of the day there isn’t even any ganking going on there anymore.

It’s become almost boring.

This is true. Kinda concerning to be honest.

@Most_Moliko

Yes, there is solutions for experienced players.

So help the nubs

@Most_Moliko

its all BULL.

Actually bro, its quite clear you just don’t want to accept the reality

[Most_Moliko]

Why pick a ship that hard to kill? Why not pick an Avatar?

[Scipio_Artelius]

@Lucas_Kell

His primary function seems to be to provide cherrypicked stats for gankers these days.

What’s cherry picked?

I measure a whole heap of things relevnt to understanding the risk to my own hauling operations and present them as they are. Anyone can go and independently verify them. I’ve tried to puill more data to back up claims that there could be a problem in certain areas and I can’t get the data, so just don’t know one way or the other. But cherry picking isn’t what I do.

Regardless, some data that anyone can independently verify is better than the baseless arguments that are put in the forum all the time as though they are factual. That’s the real shame. Most people don’t even try to verify anything they write.

As for moist mojito here. I’m just having some fun until the thread gets closed.

[Max_Deveron]

@Lucas_Kell

Nonsense

how is that nonsense? what in HS encourages players to not AFK play the game?

[Sasha_Nemtsov]

@Most_Moliko

It is not without foundation and just saying the word “foundation” does not dismiss the argument. You actually have to write in your post the consistency of the “foundation”.

Thank you for your response.

If ganking presents (in your own words) ‘Zero risk to the ganker’, then it does so in all situations (since you leave the assertion unqualified), because you are attaching that assertion both to an activity and to the player who undertakes that activity, and not to a specific instance or to specific instances of that activity.

My finding is that ganking a Blockade Runner (for example) presents a genuine risk to the ganker, which case has been demonstrated to undermine the foundation of your argument that (all) ganking presents zero risk to the ganker.

You are free to lodge an appeal, Mr Moliko, or to have your case reviewed by a different Court Appointee.

My full review will be published in due course. You will be contacted if I require further information about or clarification of your position.

[Gix_Firebrand]

@Most_Moliko

Again the wall of text is a distraction from the original argument.

Not really bro. Although it seems reading is hard for you, which is unfortunate.

I get why you can’t answer the points

[Most_Moliko]

Earlier on we were very specific about the actions of Safety and their use of concord allows them to gank with zero risk. Obviously non-exploitive gankers will experience the proper amount of risk for the play style they are choosing.

[Most_Moliko]

@Gix_Firebrand

@Most_Moliko

Again the wall of text is a distraction from the original argument.

Not really bro. Although it seems reading is hard for you, which is unfortunate.

I get why you can’t answer the points

Yes i am blind, this is why my characters all use sunglasses, thank you for rubbing it in. If you want to help out. Be concise.