Player agency and October Balance Pass

After reading many of the posts regarding the October Balance Pass and the reasoning behind the changes, it looks to me like the driving factor was player agency.

I had never heard of the HIC issue until now, but both the ECM and interceptor nullification seemed to revolve around defenders having little control in an engagement. And even when playstyle changes, like changing ship or fitting, was mentioned it was determined that there was little change in the outcome. And in the end it was deemed, “not fun”.

In the end, CCP and CSM decided that removing the offending feature was the best solution.

While I am not against what I post next, I think it’s fun to throw a can of worms at a hornets nest…

How is this different from HS ganking?

The defender has little ability to change the outcome of a gank. They definately dont have fun while being ganked. And to an extent, even changing ships and fitting dont guarentee you will survive.

So is the next change going to be to remove HS ganking? :rofl:


They do. Only the shitfit, afk or clown value targets get ganked. If they don’t shitfit, don’t afk AP and don’t move moronic value amounts for the ship they use, they won’t get ganked. So I’d say they have a very HIGH influence in them being ganked or not.

Try again.


Like I said, just stirring the pot for fun, but as an example of my experience…

I have mined in a Hulk for a long time, I fit for tank and not yield. I have been unsuccessfully jumped maybe half a dozen times. And in each case, the difference between survival or statistic was 1 extra gank ship.

In all situations I was not near a trade hub, I was not mining ice, I fit my ship “correctly”, but I could have just as easily died doing everything right.

you’re mining in a hulk valued at 350+ mil that at best has some 30k EHP. That’s your mistake.

Again, I think you are missing the satirical comparison of ganking and nullification/ECM.

When others commented that those changes were unneeded because it was the victims fault for not changing thier gameplay style to face the problem, the response was removing it is the best option.

I hate to break this to you, but their were things a player could do, the author of the blog was wrong.

As is the basis of your discussion. There were things a player could do, for example in the case of ECM 5 different modules and 4 skills; a slight oversight.

Same in the case of high sec ganking.

I totally agree, again a post making fun of CCP/CSM decision process.

I see that once you mention it but it reads too serious to be obvious.

The general problem with humor and text, sometimes its difficult to get the inflection across.

So here is my take on the ECM balance pass. I don’t think it was absolutely needed. But it isn’t going to change a whole lot in the low sec meta. People are still going to run an alt in a GNI with ECM, they will just set it up to stay at max range so you CANT hit it. Or they will fit a Raven with ECM and sensor damps and sit out at range and watch you sit blind and unable to lock them back due to range.

The problem with ECM, is most people don’t think about counter EW. If you are in a fleet bring EW and logi. Even the Vigil has a use if in the right fleet.

But people want to be the hero, individual ace pilot and hate when they get out and get trounced by someone who brought more or something they weren’t ready for.

I personally thought the best solution would have been the introduction of HoJ missiles and drones. HoJ = Home on Jam. But in a sense this new system is exactly that. But again, won’t affect much in the grand scheme of things.

Indeed… ^^^

First the lesson of suicide ganking is that you aren’t supposed to be flying a retriever or a hulk in hi sec…period. No there isn’t a “acceptable fit”, because all fits will die or have a pretty good chance to die. This lesson is unfortunately intended, and not applicable to hauling.

As hauling goes you can get well over 400k ehp with the correct hauling ship and fit and that’s not even a freighter. I watched around 10 people try to suicide gank a correctly fit hauler and it didn’t even get 1/3 way through the shield, it was amusing at best to see and was done to a streamer (of course) so everyone could see.

Stop blaming the ganker when you know full well there was a fairly easy way around the problem. Especially when the problem of people auto piloting billions in isk of goods around, making markets worse off, not better, isnt good for everyone either.

On a personal note, when CODE annoys me, I annoy them, and surely complaining on the forums doesn’t annoy them.

To increase player agency in ganks, the gank timer should be several minutes.
Then you can make balance changes to industrials to give them more active tank and options.
But that’s what actually would give player agency.

All the stuff before the gank isnt agency. Because the ganker can get you regardless. It just makes it less likely to be targeted

So it still looks like most people aren’t getting the humorous intent of this post, so I will reiterate in all seriousness.

Choosing one of the balance pass topics, ECM, prior to the balance pass there were several modules and skills already in the game to fight it. CCP/CSM (for now on known as They/Them) stated that even with these counters, it was no fun that you had to fit for ECM counter and if you did not you were unable to defend yourself against ECM. This is basically the core of how Eve works. Every feature has a counter, and if you don’t use it that’s your fault. Instead of accepting this, They decided to completely change ECM to give the victim more control of the situation.

Now if we compare that to the common HS complaint of ganking, you have similar issues. You can defend against gainking if you fit properly and train the corresponding skills. If you choose not to do that, it’s your fault. And of course, the victim of a gank considers it “not fun”. But They have set a precedence that “not fun” activity that removes the victims agency over the encounter can be dramatically altered to give the victim more control. This then implies that as unlikely as it is, it should still be possible for Them to change ganking mechanics so that the victim can control the system, therefore making ganking as “useless” as ECM tanking is now.

1 Like

That assumes you just sit there and do nothing. EVE is most of all a strategy game and most of the deciding stuff happens before the battle even starts. So in the case of the miner ganker you have multiple options and the best of them involve you being not in a Hulk but something tanky to not become a target in the first place.

That being said you still have options when mining in a Hulk. But it requires you to pay attention to the game, I hope that much is clear because we are talking about agency. You could for example warp out if you see the gankers in local or dscan. A Hulk aligns pretty fast or if you are already aligned you warp instantly.

If you have an Orca in your fleet you have even more options. They have a ship bay and if you are attacked you just have a tanky ship ready in there to switch to. The ganker will waste his ships and you just loot his wrecks and say “gf”.

So as you can see, even in your example there is a lot you can do. So it’s not the same as being locked down by an ECM ship.


The NS bears have always cried and gotten their way when they throw a tantrum.

The ECM change was just beyond BS. They just removed an style of solo Pvp with a stroke of a pen.

1 Like


1 Like

Good post :slight_smile:

But no, the next change will be a screen popup in case anyone anywhere attacks you.

You will be presented two buttons, each with their unique and interesting choice.

A - PVP (enter the fight)
B - No PVP (successfully escape)


You made me laugh so much! Thx!

We can only hope.