Solution to reduce highsec ganking

Council Of Stellar Management Assembly Hall
, ,
1

Highsec ganking of newbies and noncombat capable ships has been an on going issues for ages. Many ideas given, but nothing works.

CCP has brought it up every now and then, and even said in the last patch the resistance reduction and T2 ammo boost was no intended to benefit gankers and this was a concern area they would look into. (whether this happens or not is another debate on the forums already)

It seems a number of people believe there is no real risk for gankers any more.

Currently CONCORD comes in blows up a cheap ganker ship and gankers m8’s collect gankers wreak and targets wreak and cargo.

With the last patch the risk to isk ratio has now gone even more towards the isk side, thus reducing the risk factor. This appears to be in the form of less ganker ships/firepower required to gank. Hence an increase in gate ganks and station ganks.

One of the best possible options is to reinstate the clone insurance. This worked similar to ship insurance, and depending on level in protect governs the amount of skill points lost.

Many old players will remember this feature from the early 2000’s and love it or hate it, it made player very careful not to loose their clone. And anyone purposely killing clones for no reason tended to become well known and hunted by RPG bounty hunters.

But unlike the original clone insurance of the old days, if you gank and thus killed by CONCORD insurance is nulled , just the same as ship insurance.

I would suggest that instead of normal skill point loose that would be taken from not having insurance if death caused by CONCORD, the skill point loose is doubled.
Those adding risk factor back in the game for gankers and to a lesser degree all other players, making them think twice about doing something possibly stupid.

This adds a cost to ganking in highsec, and hopefully encourage pvp dueling, pvp in lowsec,nullsec and wormholes stays the same,other than players more aware of clone lose due to skill point lose governed by insurance.

This would require adding new code to allow CONCORD to kill player capsules, if player completely destroys other player ship! This ensures only true intent is made, and accidental hit isn’t punished by death of clone.

But once done Gankers will think twice about Poding players and ganking in Highsec, who knows they might decide to actually PVP like real PVP’ers!?

This isn’t a solution to kill ganking, it a method to increase the risk of ganking, by applying a cost that doesn’t effect other areas of gameplay,like rebalancing ships.

8 Likes
2

Why? What? How?
Hmmm…

None of that really makes any sense to me.

If I may suggest something.
Go out and gank 5 ships. Then come back and see how anything you proposed makes any sense.
ty

5 Likes
3

CONCORD doesn’t shoot capsules, only ships.

7 Likes
4

can be fixed, minor code change would fix it

2 Likes
5

I don’t Gank defenseless player/ships, I prefer PVP will some fight back, with the chance of losing as well as winning. Personally have no time for the site.

and don’t bother quoting ZKills, I have no need to see someone trying to prove they PVP by numbers of kills of defenseless players.

4 Likes
6

How do you know this is a minor code change?

2 Likes
7

Ganking is not an issue. No where in Eve should be safe, not even highsec. Also, I’ve had this argument with others before, but I think ganking newbros is a good thing. You do them a disservice by coddling them, as it prevents them from learning what Eve is, and that they need to implement proper risk management strategies, while they are still in cheap, easily replaced ships.

Oh yeah, I agree with Wanda. You should go do some ganking. It will teach you how to harden yourself against ganks, and give you greater insight into the “issue”. Personally, I think it will make you realize that ganking doesn’t need a nerf; but even if you still think it does, you’ll be able to propose a solution based on experience, rather than conjecture.

3 Likes
8

Would you gank some botters? These are characters that are being scripted in their operations. Either to simply cheat the game for wealth, or perhaps for more nefarious purposes I cannot say.

Would you gank someone’s mining ship who is taking all the ore from your favorite mining belt? You know the guy who keeps putting his mining laser and drones on the asteroid in front of you?

Would you gank someone who is about to gank you? Or maybe he is about to gank your friend or teammate?

This is a competitive game at all levels. How you choose to participate is entirely up to you. Just remember that other people will try and take your stuff.

2 Likes
9

I do appreciate your principled attitude, though. You have every right to play the game how you choose. And I will defend your right to discuss things on the forums as well. +1

2 Likes
10

Ganking is not something CCP is trying to “fix”. It is an important part of the risk/reward balance in the game. 7 out of the top 10 regions for destruction are in empire space. If that destruction didn’t happen, no one would need the resources you harvest or the products you build.

If players didn’t destroy stuff, CCP would need to use NPC gankers to do it instead!

2 Likes
11

When you open up with a thread titled as a “solution” to something, usually you need to explain why something is a problem in the first place. CCP has never said that ganking was a “problem”, so we’re starting off with the baseline that ganking is part of the intended gameplay.

Since you’re trying to “solve” this, the burden is now on you to show us why it’s an actual problem. I don’t see anything of the sort here.

1 Like
12

Personally…

…i have no issues mining ore where i mine, i have no issue with someone trying to gank me when i’m in a combat capable ship or if wardec’d.

If i happen to see a bot, instead of ganking, report said bot to CCP and get them to deal with them, normally by account cancellation, which is far more effect in getting rid of bots.

Anyone that ganks from what i see and heard are trying hard to composite for something they don’t have in the realworld.

So they take great joy out of screwing others game time. They tend not to have the nerve to fight a real fight against someone that might bet them, but instead tend to favour targets with no teeth. You could class them as bullies, that feel strong in numbers or beating down someone defenseless, then bousting about it afterwards (like on forums use zkills to prove it), we all know people like once in a real fight backdown, run away or go cry to mum about the bad person that hurt them.

So personally never gank, more a moral highground thing, have no issue with someone try to pvp me, never pod anyone unless they turn toxic and just need to learn to be a good looser.
No issues with those protecting their stations and fleets/corp m8’s.

5 Likes
13

Well it seem a number of people believe there is no real risk for gankers.

Currently CONCORD comes in blows up a cheap ganker ship and gankers m8’s collect gankers wreak and targets wreak and cargo.

Where the last patch the risk to isk ratio has gone even more towards the isk side, thus reducing the risk. This appears to be in the form of less ganker ships/firepower required to gank. Hence an increase in gate ganks and station ganks.

The concept is as CCP are unable to reduce ganking by ship adjustment, then apply a fix var clone risk.

1 Like
14

Ok, since you are making the argument for your proposal “personal” I cannot continue to debate with you. I will however leave what I believe to be a summary of the argument you have presented.

Proposal:
CCP should reduce highsec ganking by applying absurd financial punishment and skillpoint losses for gankers.

Reason:
Highsec ganking is bad and gankers are bad people in real life.

To backup my argument:
My moral highground and personal feelings.
Ad populum about what others believe and say.
Ad hominem about what motivates gankers.
Hasty generalizations about what things used to be.
etc…

Good luck.

8 Likes
15

You can do whatever you want to punish gankers. It will not matter, we will work around the new rules. The only “solution” is to lock all safeties to green… no wait… then we will just pull Triglavian spawns down on you or something.

Ganking is not against the rules, so there is no stopping it.

1 Like
16

never said anything about stopping ganking.

just make it harder, to increase the risk factor in the Risk/ISK ration, which currently is something like 1/100 after the last update.

2 Likes
17

How will you know the correct risk/isk ratio?

18

When ganking stops all together, the right ratio has been reached.

Until then, it’s not balanced correclty.

1 Like
19

We could try 0% loot drops and see what effect that has :slight_smile:

2 Likes
20

Yes. Non-consensual PvP (ganking) is a problem in all MMOs. But: Shooting is a possible and encouraged kind of interaction, and killings ships (or avatars in other games) is a legitimate leisure activity. Also but: Playing along casually, sandboxing, mining, minding one’s own business is legitimate and encouraged as well. All a game developer has to do is balancing those two legitimate desires properly.

Lets look at the situation: Some capsuleers delight in shooting down helpless victims in hisec. These types are, of course, criminals and need to be persecuted and punished. While noble highwaymen (in space) and pirates, shooting down treasure galleons (cargo ships) and feasting on the wreckage and spilled goods are… criminals as well. At least to the authorities involved (the 4 empires and Concord). So these flagbearers of individual liberty will be persecuted and punished, too. Right now persecution comes seconds later at the hands of Concord, and punishment would be the loss of a pirate ship, roughly half of its modules, and some loss of security standing. On proper reconaissance this act of robbery means profit, while Concord silently waits for the next incident.

So robbery is a successful business and nothing can be done about it, right? Unless the authorities (the 4 empires, Concord and CCP) would decide to mark a highwayman, despite their best intentions, as wanted, and shoot them on sight on entering hisec. This would still leave vast opportunities open for said criminals, in Null, that is. This measure would not stop ganking, but reduce it, and add to the risk for robbers. Risk vs reward, you’ve heard of it. It would still be possible to pull a heist and grab all the gold of Jita, to the price of “burning” an avatar and having to raise another one. Speaking of which, are we sure Alphas need battleships? Wouldnt battle cruisers do for all peaceful activities? Of course, professional pirates will not like this idea, but it would give a little to the PvE crowd, and fit into CCPs business plan, by nudging players into making more avatars.

tldr: Proposal: Shoot down someone in highsec, get banned from (killed on sight by concord at entering). Yes?

3 Likes