Proposal for Rebalancing of the Suicide Gank

Yep, I believe they do.

It’s why I think there is still value in posting anyway. Firstly to show how some people don’t even validate their own view before posting and post from a completely incorrect assumption about the game; and secondly because when CCP do come to making change, if only one part of the community is contributing, then better chance that their view will be taken seriously.


I as well. But their lack of communication back is the problem.

Another merge. Just reopen the megathd. This will never go away…


Well its because people don’t understand the game they are playing.

Flat Earther Lucas wishes that the game wasn’t an open PvP world. It doesn’t change the fact that it is :smiley:


Or maybe it’s because your position on the matter is weak and your argument is poor, at best?


Nope, it’s definitely not that. You guys just see any view that disagrees with your own as weak and poor.

Heh. So all these people agree, and you don’t. But you’re definitely biased.

Interesting eh?

It’s always been the case that a small group of gankers dogpile on anyone that opposes ganking.

Next up: the victim card.

Even that part of the song is repetitive

1 Like

You keep asking…and I keep telling you that people need to be to read your posts.

1 Like

That is the entire substance of it from Lucas. Silly word games. Insisting that in his little universe…‘counterplay’ is soooo important. Never mind that for 99% of everyone else, the word ‘avoid’ is the relevant thing and how there’s entire lists of excellent ways to avoid being ganked.

But Lucas does not want to entertain the word ‘avoid’ because it makes nonsense of his entire thesis. So he’ll spend 547 posts semantically arguing that evasion or avoidance is not ‘counterplay’…never mind that the very word ‘counterplay’ is most common in chess, a game that has counterplay moves such as ‘French defence’ that are entirely evasion moves !

It’s like arguing with a brick wall…and I seriously think a brick wall has a better grasp of things.

1 Like

Mm not really. Just people who want to make EVE not EVE :smiley:

He also stole that from me. It pretty much confirms my theory on who he is tho :smiley:

1 Like

But in fact it is not two sides arguing over a problem. It is one side trying to invent a problem, and the other denying that any problem even exists.

Thus there is no debate over a ‘solution’, as the majority view is that there is no problem to ‘solve’.

More to the point, people are not prepared to discuss a ‘solution’ to an alleged problem for which the side claiming there is a problem never present any hard data or conclusive proof that any problem even exists !


How can you possibly claim to know what the majority view is? Just because a handful of gankers and their alts agree on something does not mean that’s a majority view. Everyone active on the forum could agree and that still wouldn’t be a majority view.

CCP has stated there’s a problem, I take their word over yours any day of the week.

That’s right, there is that possibility (and it was covered by my use of the word “perceived”). Yet, as an accommodating and welcoming community we also have to listen if someone voices concerns, and look into it.

With people like our resident repeater there is of course no debate, not even an argument. He will only allow for perpetual contradiction via copy/pasting the same words over and over again. That forces the hand of people not sharing his views, by repeating their opinions. He has a bullhorn and he’ll make use of it until someone steps in and takes it away, also for the good of the community…

Somehow these threads, since 5 weeks or so, tend to spiral down to the same point of conflict, and it’s centered on the same person, killing any subject and any real debate. It’s a distraction, it’s damaging and it should end.


19 years with the game being alive and ganking gameplay being in the game.

1 Like

That doesn’t show the majority view. All that shows is that it exists.

I would say yes, you’re right, and because it existed every day, those that logged in accepted that the game they just logged into has ganking. If it were a problem, they would not log in because of it. So by definition, people that log in to play the game, log in despite any problems they may have with it.

Conversely, there are numerous reasons why people don’t log in, so you cannot use those missing numbers to assume underlying intent. You can try to approximate it and measure it, but rational folks understand there is no middle ground there to get agreeable numbers to all parties.

So, logically, 100% of the people logged in to the game do not view ganking as a problem. That forms quite a majority of “player-hours” units.

1 Like

No, logging into the game does not mean you support ganking.

I think you did not understand what I said. I did not say “support”:

Please reread what I wrote.

1 Like