Proposal for Rebalancing of the Suicide Gank

I am being very direct and to the point on this. But which player are you?

Why would I tell you which Aiko I am?

No you are wrong here. This is the idealism that most players have, me included.

CPP clearly made this game to be a multiboxing game. If you don’t multibox you can’t do pretty much anything efficiently. Every single activity in this game is boring as hell with tons of time you just sit on a screen where is nothing happening which further encourages multiboxing.

And it is not just gankers who multiíbox, miners and índustry players often have even more alt accounts than gankers.

Dracvlad doesn’t actually like EvE, so he expects CCP to change the whole game for him.

I would like to propose an additional balancing to ganking:

  • Gankers shouldn’t be allowed to gank while docked at a computer workstation in a safe space. If someone wants to gank, their IP should only be allowed to come from Somalia, North Korea, the Donbass, that place in Mexico where the drug cartels are beheading all those people, or NYC’s Upper East Side.

If you want to gank, you shouldn’t be any more safe than your victims! Time for some realistic consequences, gwankers… :smirk:

1 Like

I am fine with multi-boxing, I am against what I call excessive multi-boxing. Perhaps you should go look at this video in terms of the boring part:

I did notice many gankers get fed up with their endless farming cycle, they were begging AG to contest them, but due to the nerfs to AG no one bothered so they gave up. That is the issue that I refer to.

Because you want to end ganking?

Let me go down the Ganker forum way of things:

Anything anyone says about anything in the game, gets this:

1 Like

It’s just that everything you propose is designed to nerf, limit, reduce, or prevent ganking.

I saw that video and as a game designer of a Neverwinter Nights 1 multiplayer server Arkhalia I totally agree with what is said in that video. I put a like to that post yesterday if you check it.

However the points made in that video are hardly applying to EVE still being the hardest MMO on the market with tons of adversity, ganking being one of them.

And it is absolutely irrelevant to a multiboxing, that wasn’t even mentioned there in that video.

1 Like

The Adversity you talk about in the game in terms of boring is getting enough players together to do the target, which I know from my experience in 0.0 sitting waiting for more numbers, or the pain of maintaining a multi-box fleet. I understand that, still I don’t think excessive multi-boxing is good for the game. Just an opinion…

I don’t think invulnerable freighters are good for the game.

Maybe they should make it so one character can solo gank a freighter?

1 Like

Maybe you should ask CCP for a ship type to do this in hisec?

We can call it the Aikonator.

2 Likes

Head off to features and ideas and make a post then.

Also, if you actually read what I wrote in this thread the very first time, you would know that I am against usage of -10 chars for ganking in highsec. That is simply exploiting the mechanics of security status.

So we are assuming that ´the ganker is keeping those alt at -10 in your table. But do the math, if the ganker would have to fix security status with tags everytime he goes under -4.5 for all the accounts and you will see some interesting values.

Take your own advice, dummy.

Heh, cowardly gankers are too cowardly to use Vindicators to gank because they’re cowards, heh… :smirk:

Here is the thing, tethering makes them able to sit there in Talos’s ready to go and have no issue from their security status. Currently the security status has no impact and there is no reason to do that.

I refer to Talos’s and Destiny changes to Vindicators, Destiny being Destiny again…

Don’t they have to stay tethered? Sounds like an impact, no?

DRACVLAD BEING DRACVLAD