Time to ‘fess up. I wrote it for a dare, then flogged it to Dracvlad for a bil’; he republished it with a foreword of his own crafting, mentioning, among (many) other things, Remote-Repping and Oenophilia.
(I’m still waiting for the 'bil…)
3 Likes
@Dracvlad @Githany_Red
Hey, can I get some clarification on how this works?
So, I know that you can rep gank targets after the neutral logi change because I’ve personally done it in an incursion fleet. However, I’m not clear on all the involved mechanics. For example, can’t AG’s still rep neutral gank targets that they aren’t in fleet with? And even if they do pick up/inherent a suspect timer and limited engagement timer by doing so, why would it matter? I mean, a lack of a “you can pew” timer never got in a ganker’s way before. Moreover, cheap logi ships would be extremely difficult to kill if they don’t get tackled, and even the ones that do get blapped would be easy to replace.
I dunno. I’m not an AG. So, I’m not familiar with all the in’s and outs. But, I’m not sure I understand why this is a big deal. And, if you can, please clarify exactly how neutral logi works for my own edification.
All that being said, I’m not strictly opposed to neutral logi (especially if scumbags get to make use of it as well). The main thing for me is that ganking ultimately end up in a healthy state (which it is currently not).
And, I probably shouldn’t bring it up, because it is likely to lead to more bickering and less productive discussion… but Drac, I get the distinct impression that anti-ganking is more than a play style for you. Like, I consider most AG’s to be adversaries, but you feel more like an enemy. It seems personal for you. And I can’t help but feel like you have it out for ganking, as is evident by your tendency to upvote “nuke-ganking” posts.
Yeah, he said similar things to me earlier. Like, I said “cheese and rice” in a post where I made what I thought was a valid point. And, instead of addressing the substance of my argument, he said it was “pure emotion.”
Then later, he called my use of memes and jokes a deflection. Of course, I know that jokes and memes are great for attracting and keeping people’s attention while you deliver your message, and won’t stop doing it because Drac apparently thinks that there’s something wrong with that.
And then there’s his whole interaction with Etch.
Honestly, he’s making me feel more and more like (1) he’s trying to forum PvP, (2) he’s not good at it, and (3) he’s not above arguing in bad faith.
And that’s why we get inconsistent opinions, tone policing argumentative fallacies, and him pitifully trying to convince me that I should stop using effective communication techniques.
Just nasty Dracvlad being nasty Dracvlad…
Tut Tut
1 Like
Mr Sulu, increase Thread Ugly Rating to StinkFactor 5
Captain ?
Yes Mr. Scott
Captain, Eve, she can’ na take anymore…
That’s an order Mr. Sulu…
You can rep as long as the target has no limited engagement timer, which means you can rep any ship that does not fire back or open fire or use any offensive module. This is different to how it was previously because you could rep people who fired on gankers without going suspect, now you go criminal if anyone in your fleet gets a limited engagement timer.
I made it clear that this impacts multirole fleets, with a rep wing, DPS and electronic warfare, they had their logi removed making it a lot easier for gankers.
It is true that these fleets were much reduced before the RR change was applied due to a big reduction in players, but they are pretty much non-existent now.
You are stating pure emotive reactions, I upvoted this one because of the graphs that showed the key issue on the cheapness of ganking with Catalysts which makes it too cheap in terms of freighters and sets the gank point too low. In the thread above I make that clear. If that annoys you then what can I say?
So explaining where the issues are makes it personal for you and defines me as an enemy. If you are talking about the exchange, when people start being nasty I call them out on it, but I can’t help your feelings and how you perceive such things.
As for AG I last did some AG when I was moving all my stuff out of Caldari space from October 2021 until Feb 2022, there was a lot of ganking going on and people were openly saying that ganking was out of control and it was, but now it has reduced a lot from that point, though I am aware that most gankers do not update their killboards at this point so the real level is perhaps higher.
And AG is mainly people doing it for additional content to fight back, most of the time they do other stuff in game. There are a few people who have a primary focus on it, such as Githany Red, but it is not my primary focus, though in the past I did spend some time participating for significant periods in Niarja for example, when I was in Khafis in hisec.
As for using Etch against me, this is why Etch has no idea, he could not work out that this was in fact the issue I was talking about and was going off on tangents because of his own lack of understanding.
Also the forum warfare is aimed at me, and the bad faith is aimed at me, and the insults are aimed at me, and using RL bullshite is aimed at me.
I have seen you get a lot more strident and less coherent as your well written attempts to shift the ground fail, you have even fallen into the they want to end gankling approach with this:
When people call out people like me as wanting to end ganking, they are working on pure emotion. The nastiness is all on the side of gankers.
NB Humour can be used as a weapon, some of the things you link are condescending and nasty, often insulting the intelligence of those that have a different view. The reason I started to point this out is that the moderators stated that this forum was supposed to be a welcoming friendly place, though they did admit that if they found it funny they would let it pass.
1 Like
Okay. So, it’s just a suspect timer. Now, with that clarified…
How exactly does this make it easier for gankers? Gankers never let a lack of timer get in their way before (I mean, that’s why they’re called suicide gankers), and there are definitely ways to make it hard for gankers and third parties to kill you even if you have a suspect timer.
In fact, this shouldn’t impact logi’s ability to their jobs at all, and this really shouldn’t benefit gankers. I mean, I’ve played suspect games before, and found that the biggest problems tend to come from surprise 3rd parties. So, wouldn’t this benefit 3rd party opportunists, and not gankers?
Naturally, suspect timers do result in increased risk. However, it is most certainly a manageable one (as, many, many players can attest to), and it also means more content for more people.
So, perhaps you can understand my confusion. Why are suspect timers for neutral logi a deal breaker?
No it is a criminal act now. I need to add that to my post, I thought you knew that neutral logi in hisec is a criminal act now when you get a limited engagement timer, that surprises me that you don’t?
It removed logi completely for the people who do DPS and electronic warfare and as gankers often go for AG fleets it made being in a fleet hardly worthwhile, so removed group play.
It is going criminal that is the issue.
A freighter, T1 hauler, DST, BR do not go criminal because they either cannot fit or do not use offensive modules in the main, so you can rep them no issue.
So in effect as gankers often went after AG fleets the AG fleets can no longer rep their members. Another example is that I cannot rep Dracvlad with my other account in the same corp if I take any action with offensive modules against the ganker.
No, it’s not always criminal. For example, you can rep someone who doesn’t shoot back (as I said before). However, if repping someone who does shoot back does get you concordokened, then that would definitely be a different story, and something that I would understand.
Okay. So, would changing it to a suspect timer make it better for you? Because I could definitely dig that.
As an alternative could you get away with not applying a limited engagement when shooting a criminal? It seems superfluous at first glance. The criminal was a legal target to begin with, and the criminal can’t exactly go double criminal for shooting back.
3 Likes
CCP needs to do this, better still if the target has a negative security status do not apply the limited engagement to the person shooting them.
1 Like
I can imagine there might be consequences I’m not aware of. Crimewatch is complicated, it changes, and I never did interact with it a whole lot to begin with.
A limited engagement would still happen if a neutral shoots a suspect logistics ship, for instance, and then nobody would be able to repair that logistics ship without being concorded (I think) so a 3rd party fleet could pick off the logi one at a time. If this were indeed the case, I can imagine the logistics pilots would not be satisfied with this outcome. The change would not be worthwhile if it didn’t reduce the number of complaints.
Still, I’m not the best person to analyze this and I could be in error since I don’t have much experience with the subject to know better, so I thought I’d throw the idea out there and see what problems the smart people might see with it.
It is good to see that you acknowledge this problem and it’s impact.
And I was against this entire change to make neutral RR criminal which was applied as part of the war dec changes. To me this was anti-PvP…
Drav says that we’ve got nothing in common
No common ground to start from
And we’re falling apart
Drav will say the world has come between us
Our lives have come between us
Still I know you just don’t care
And I said, “What about neutral logi?”
Dravclad said, “I think I remember that patch.”
And as I recall, I think we both kinda hated it."
And I said “Well, that’s one thing we’ve got.”
2 Likes
lolz.
when everyone is telling you the same thing its probably time to look in the mirror and ask “is it me thats the problem?”
Maybe you arnt some misunderstood hero of the people giving gankers what for on the forums. Maybe you are just a d*ck? 
1 Like
And back to personal attacks because you are unable to understand that once again you were arguing against your own lack of understanding.
not really a personal attack. It was a request for you to consider how you are coming across.
With so many people associating you with “nerf ganking” is it reasonable to suggest that everyone is disregarding what you say and just inventing that whole narrative? Or would it be reasonable to suggest that your own actions and statements contribute to people having those views?
At what point does someone take a step back and say. “oh…… I see how liking the op’s post and saying that CCP should take note of it could be seen as me agreeing that ganking should be nerfed given how the post suggested 4 very speciifc nerfs to ganking”
Wouldnt that be a very reasonable thing to consider?
1 Like
@Beatlise I have no opinion about your question but I have to say, that this is one of the most documented and planned post I ever seen.
Don’t know if the rules will change but congrats for your great post. Lots of works and research involved.
1 Like
The whole engagement timer thing is potty and could do with an overhaul. It even extends to the absurdity where an NPC has only to lock on me ( even if it is well outside firing range ) and I get the yellow ’ can’t log off, yada yada’ timer nonsense that is effectively a ‘no engagement timer’.
It doesn’t matter that they can use cheap throwaway frigates. In his point of view, it is perfectly fine for a gankers to lose their ship because what they do is bad on a morale level or bad for game (which our friend claims he doesn’t think, but what he actually writes shows he does think that) but it is absolutely unreasonable for anyone else to lose ships if they want to stop/hinder gankers or simply win against them.
You certainly can rep anyone doing anything in highsec. You might go either suspect or criminal depending on who are you remote repping. But you can do it. When our friends says you cannot do it what he means with that is that the consequences for doing it are unacceptable for him. He is weak, again, we can lose ships, he mustn’t.
For your information because he won’t explain it to you as he apparently doesn’t know how it works, I will tell you.
Logi will go criminal for repping someone with limited engagement… The rules for this are however not the same as for player who deliberately performs a hostile act against another player who isn’t suspect/wartarget/sparring partner or criminal. If you support someone with limited engagement you will go criminal, but you are not losing any security status at all, and sentry towers around stations and gates won’t shoot you either. Another set of CONCORD ships will spawn if there isn’t enough CONCORD fleets already - which should hint you as to what I meant in my post above that our friend instantly rejected as nonsense. Is it really now huh?
Now is this mechanic great? No it certainly isn’t, but neither are many mechanics around ganking. Gankers can live with those, anti-gankers cannot and demand for CCP to change this. That is the difference between these two player bases and their mentality.
But sure, go ahead and propose that change to not get limited engagement to criminal - I will support it.
3 Likes