Security status effects tethering

You just said “ganking is the game” and then immediately pointed out htat highsec PvP is “part ofthe game”. So ganking is part of highsec PvP, and highsec PvP is part of the game, but somehow ganking is the whole game?

The game actually consistes of multiple varied playstyles, including PvE. Ganking has become too cripplingly overpowered and is now causing more damage than ever.

Don’t changes like this suggest that CCP are looking to alter EVE to make ganking at least more difficult?

You want a tough game but you defend the easiest and most overpowered type of PvP?

They kinda did at Fanfest.
Victory by goal post change.
A sweeter gentler EVE.
See you in the mourning Defi Not Lucas.

What a load of nonsense. You could as well argue that 40 Leshaks zapping a Fortizar is ‘overpowered’. Or half a dozen Tornados zapping a Tristan at a gate camp. That’s not ‘overpowered’ ? Or any n+1 blob battle. Or someone baiting with a Nereus that recharges shield in 60 seconds. Or indeed any of the countless ways people attack because they are confident of winning. I mean…who the hell would attack if they knew they were going to lose ?

‘Overpowered’ is yet another of those cringe-worthy terms like ‘no counter’ that look meaningful but actually mean nothing. Its just another Lucas-ism term designed to obfuscate.

1 Like

You should probably get better corp mates who can cover your silly butt and give boost as well. :roll_eyes:

2 Likes

That’s Eve. Someone will always put up arms to make the area around them dangerous for a bit of time. People that don’t like that can also take up arms to make the space around them dangerous for that bit of time. The two can duke it out and assert dominance.

If either party doesn’t like it, they leave to go where neighbors have smaller guns, are less likely to take up arms, or reach a different understanding (perhaps monetary arrangement). That’s avoidance and for good reason: it’s the “shut up” in “Either put up or shut up”.

But it’s never “I want to both stay and force the neighbors to never take up arms by begging for different game mechanics”. That breaks the fundamental 19 year reality of how the game has been. Either avoid gankers (physically, by moving or timing, or diplomatically, by paying them off) or fight them.

3 Likes

But how can you do that while botting or being afk? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

1 Like

You should learn what cherry picking actually means.

24 h … as I wrote, yes it’s more than what he already played the game for.
So yes it can be catastrophic for a noob to lose 10M, while it can be nothing for a ganker that lost 10M.

Why are you so obtuse in going off topic ? Sounds like you know you are wrong somewhere but can’t admit it.

I guess it’s already that time of a topic where a team of trolls come to waste it with their off topic rants, insults and non sequitur.

1 Like

Can’t you ‘counter’ ganking by getting a permit and following the rules of that permit?

I ask facetiously since I can already predict the responses, but social solutions are being completely ignored. I feel like that’s a large part of what these discussions are really about.

I never did buy a permit from Safety or CODE., but I could have. They are cheap and the rules (at least in the time of CODE. that I remember) are fairly easy to follow and probably in your own best interests.

Bowing to another power is a bitter pill to swallow. I, for one, did not want to take it, but I recognized what I had to pay for it. I knew I’d be hunted and perhaps killed, but it was the price I chose to pay to be defiant, and I tried to align myself with others who chose defiance.

Increasingly, though, the people who were defiant wanted to get their way and not have to pay a price for it. Not in lost ships, nor in vigilance, nor in lost time mining or minutes of Youtube watched in the process. Defiance became not much more than endless complaints about this or that being unfair, or people being terrible people because they deign interfere in a monotonous task.

I am getting old, and I am cranky, but I still try to be nice to everyone I meet as much as is practical. This means that I appreciate having a cordial relationship of some kind with my friends and my enemies, and a lot of the enjoyment I got out of Eve came from these interactions, either for weal or for woe. The difficulty of experiencing these interactions has increased and I began to find less and less of interest to me. Neutering gankers, by whatever means, makes players less attentive. Players solving their problems with pure complaints and trash talk leaves me with no allies to consort with to get some in game payback when someone gets the better of me.

I liked a more social Eve, and that’s what I don’t think I’ll ever see again. It is in our struggles that we find ourselves doing the things we didn’t know we could, and coming together to achieve what we could not. It is a shame that, for some reason, people who lose a venture can’t be inspired to make anything of the experience, if the online sentiment is truly indicative of how new players feel to lose a ship of any kind, how they feel they have to grind for eons to afford to play in any meaningful way, or have to wait forever for skills to train before they can do anything worthwhile.

Perhaps that’s true if all that is worthwhile is in your wallet or hanger. I gave away my stuff, though, and the only thing I miss are the people I used to know, lost to boredom in a static universe that no longer interested them.

4 Likes

My credo after The Great Extinction.

When high sec was much more dangerous 10 years ago, this happened all the time. Someone newer would die to [wardec / can flip / suspect baiting / station camping / duel spam], ask “Why” in local, and all the local corps would immediately pipe up and try to recruit the guy on their side to garner that much more strength to stand on their own two legs without having to pay the local feudal tithe / protection racket.

The decentralized power structures made for way more interesting and dynamic environments with novel situations every day.

2 Likes

Small corps were a much bigger thing back then. :sunglasses:

1 Like

Even if permits were actually honoured (they aren’t) that’s still not a counter, it’s a surrender.

Paying rent for your apartment is surrender?

2 Likes

I get what she’s saying, but what she’s asking for is a perfect hard counter that doesn’t come at a cost of any kind, said cost being viewed as a loss and loss is intolerable because losing anything will cause new people to quit and that’s bad for the game. It also has to be something you can do alone and without skills (in game or otherwise) new players don’t have. Or, if not this, then some kind of ‘reverse god’ counter that always happens to have whatever characteristics are necessary to prove its non-existence.

You can’t argue with someone who sets up criteria like that because any fair proposal will not live up to those criteria. That, or the criteria are not defined and stable enough that putting forth a counter argument is both feasible and effective before the goal posts are moved.

3 Likes

Paying a thug who does not even own the apartment money for not beating you up would be, yes.

The gankers own absolutely nothing in EVE, nobody should pay them anything and they should be shot on sight by anyone who can mount a gun on his ship.

2 Likes

Hence why I said trying to set up safe zones or a safe sisi won’t work. Aside from the fact they will just ask for even more after that.

Ever hear of the mafia? Every country has one.

1 Like

Sure, and as far as I know the mafia doesn’t walk around in town, shooting anyone with a nice car and then hides in a supermarket one of their friends own when the police arrives, claiming they can’t be touched there because “private property!” :rofl:

There are no towns in eve. You miss my point on purpose.

Edit; :rofl: You’re not mining next to the police dept.

1 Like

The mafia absolutely walks around in towns.

Hell, in Japan they own some of the towns.

Someone is rather sheltered :smiley:

But how many new players are? Damm lack of info.