So thats the post that we have to take as your definitive opinion on ganking.
So everything leading up to that post has just been bullsh*t?
You do seem a tad emotional about this thread, please calm down and think about whether such personal attack posts are really what you should be doing in this welcoming forum environment.
I havent made a personal attack.
Ive pointed out that you are contradictory. Therefore it is very diffcult to understand your posts.
I ask you to clarify. And i am accussed of deflecting.
But we both know why that is. 
Snide personal attack posts, deflections and odd tangents, there are several above, as I said you need to calm down and re-read the thread.
Im sorry you are taking this as an insult. However i fail to see how asking you to clarify your position given your posts are vague, unclear and contradcitory to me is an attack.
If anything it should be helpful as its alerting you to an issue and giving you an opportunity to set the record straight. Its up to you whether you chose to take that opportunity.
And im not deflecting. Im repeatedly trying to focus you back on topic by asking to clearly state your postion. I really dont understand why its so hard and why you are so offended by the request. Its not like you are under oath.
1 Like
That is an insult because I have clearly stated my postion:
Balanced…….Unbalanced………
A lot can change around here in a few minutes.
Perfectly logical, that is talking about the exception of the fleet of catalysts which if you looked at the cost in Talos on that table you will see that the cost is 1.94bn if you do not pick up the guns, which based on 50% loot drop comes to 4bn. That you cannot understand that is quite telling.
You need to read and understand, seriously, if you can’t get that I don’t know why you even post on this subject.
And it is snide remarks like this on your own misunderstanding or lack of understanding that is an issue:
I find it difficult to believe that you cannot get the link on those posts.
I quoted it just in case.
its like schrodingers gank. Its both balanced and unbalanced until you undock?
1 Like
Let’s dissemble this.
-
Fact: girls don’t play video games.
-
Evidence: Multiple citations from posts on EvE online forums.
-
Therefore, I was channeling my inner Gaston.
1 Like
Yeah sorry I honestly don’t see the problem with telling someone not to use “homophobic words”.
Don’t get me wrong. I think Drac is a toxic narcissist and the forums would be better off without him. But I don’t see how arguing that he was “coaching homophobia” by telling someone not to use “homophobic words” is gonna be a big win.
1 Like
It would be difficult for CCP to buff AG without (in the same act) nerfing ganking.
If any change in mechanics makes it harder for gankers to operate or to be successful, it should quite correctly be regarded as a nerf to ganking. These words are not capable of being misunderstood by the ordinary reader.
The two disciplines are interdependent. Any change to one affects the other.
CCP has been sitting on the fence (in strategic terms - they tinker often with the detail) for a long time. It isn’t difficult to see why.
The two proposals I’ve seen you make - Remote-Repping and some sort of module for freighters (correct me if I’m wrong!) - will surely affect the attractiveness of ganking as a profession in EVE? We’ll likely lose even more of this diminishing community.
Perhaps you genuinely don’t want to see that. However, your stated position (that a couple more tweaks will make the whole thing balanced) is at variance with the likely outcome of any such move.
I think that is why supporters of ganking, and focussed sub-forum readers, have called you out on the substance of your comments. You struggle to take account of the likely consequences of some of your proposals, which might very well make anti-ganking great again, but are equally likely to consign Highsec suicide-ganking to Oblivion.
If gankers disappear from Highsec, so too do anti-gankers, together with all the dedicated accounts we mutually hold.
3 Likes
Freighters should have an invulnerability button, a covert ops cloak, hyperspatial rigs, twice the cargo capacity, thrice the EHP, a spectrum lock breaker, a built in warp stabilizer, an assault damage control, a microwarp drive, a jump drive, an extra drive, and 32000 feet of polarized armor… and it should be illegal to gank in Highsec, and anyone with a negative security status should be barred from docking, jumping gates, tethering, accessing the market, talking in chat, warping, shooting their guns, or logging into the game.
Now that would be FAIR gameplay.
Can the gWankers adapt?
6 Likes
There’s not a $Pack for that yet? 
1 Like
You are incorrectly assuming that I think that is no interdependency, though it is less of greater depending on the actual type of change.
The RR change was a buff to ganking as it removed organised multirole AG fleets that repped the offensive actions against ganker retaliation As was tethering so hunter killers could not impede movement.
RR is basically aimed at bringing back organised multirole AG fleets which is part of the AG related changes.
NPC station access is to create more war dec possibilities.
The module for freighters is to deal with the issue raised by the OP on the cheap gank cost of Catalysts and is not designed to be for AG as such, though it would make it more attractive to AG as there would be bigger ships to shoot. I added another module to give a choice that made some people decide to fit differently so to give a fitting choice so it was not a standard fit and forget, you want people to make a choice on less protection don’t you?
As I said it depends.
Ganking is diminishing along with many other parts of the game, there are less targets and less stupid people, more importantly less whales in terms of freighters and this has an impact on how many gankers can be supported, same with roaming as less targets, same with war decs as less hisec people with structures. In my opinion even if ganking was to largely disappear for a while it would start up again at some point as people got complacent.
I see ganking as part of the game, it is an offensive option, I see it as pirating more than anything else, and while in the past I was more focussed on some of the griefing element of the play that lead which led certain people to triumphantly declare that they did it for ISK when I knew that was always the case was amusing to me.
AG is largely non-existent, very very few people do it and there are good reasons for this.
I think that this is so wrong headed and emotional, I am aware that people will give up, but I am very aware that people will start up and do it especially when there are more targets and more whales running around, it is cyclical by its nature.
Organised AG has largely disappeared from the game, in any case most AG participants did it when they felt like it and very few feel like doing it.
So in answer to your point, I think there will always be people hisec ganking for reasons, like making ISK on those complacent fat whales or driving people away from ice.
Dracvlad. I am rarely emotional in writing, but I am, occasionally, dramatic…
I hope you are right, we’ll see.
That is absolutely false statement. But it is good that you believe that, because if you knew and abuse that mechanics, it would totally ■■■■ up gankers.
What a meaningless and false statement…
At what point does this need to be re-merged to the Nerf Ganking Megathread. I am beginning to have trouble telling them apart.
3 Likes
I felt exactly the same and I very rarely hate someone that quickly , total crap .
That did make me laugh . More to the point how did a ganker get hold of a copy
3 Likes