No, I was specifically talking about HS suicide gank gate camps (whether or not freighters pass through).
Ok⌠I like how you ignore the bit about freighters having had an ehp buff when hull resists got added by default though. So no HP buff just resets it back to the old freighter status quo.
Its not going to make a meaningful difference to freighter ganks because the logistics of 15 or 20 ships isnât seriously different anyway.
1 Like
refresh my memory - what/when is this in reference to?
Also I made an omission: I meant to say âbut not as easyâ - updated original post
March 2016 - every ship received a 33% base hull resist when damage controls were made passive and rebalanced. Freighters cannot fit DCs, but also received the resist increase:
- Damage Controls are now passive modules, and provide reduces hull resistances. This extra hull resistance has been integrated directly into the base ship stats, providing every ship in the game with 33% base hull damage resistances. New faction and officer Damage Controls have been added.
3 Likes
@Scipio_Artelius Thank you for that. 
And yes thanks for the reminder on the DCs - I was thinking about my Occator not my Obelisk 
If you are talking about the changes from 2016, Iâm not going to accept any argument that argues about two proportional changes that largely cancel each other out in maintaining a 4-year status quo relative to the way things were prior to 4 years ago.
Iâm not talking about anything. You asked a question and I provided the detail.
Whether youâll consider or not is irrelevant.
lmao holy â â â â youre a complete retard, are you dracvlad? 
Maybe even dumber and even more dishonest
Lmao, its the same with Niarja and Jita. If you arenât finding freighters to gank there, where else are they? Jumping through wormholes? Taking the 30 jump detours?
Dracvlad or Lucas 100%
Why use alts? You that mad and sad you need to hide?
2 Likes
@Scipio_Artelius you provided useful information - I was using it to continue the conversation with the other guy, the commentary was not directed at you 
Why not. It clearly shows that we had the situation of fewer gankers needed in the past.
Or does it only count if it nerfs gankers.
Note. Iâm not a ganker. You are just taking a very one sided argument here. Especially since some of these nerfs are undoing past buffs where CCP over did things.
1 Like
I am not entirely closed-minded to the idea of changing the status quo. If you feel that the 4-year status quo itself should be changed, then that is an entirely separate argument and I am entirely amenable to hearing it. I just want to point out that CCP explicitly stated they do not want to see this patch make it significantly easier for ganks to occur or see a significant rise in ganks.
For the status quo of freighter ganks to change there needs to be consensus on a change that directly or indirectly makes freighters more gankable and this would have to be desired or acceptable (CCP said they do not want to see a significant raise in ganks in this patch). It would be smarter to buff freighters to scale with the +15% damage increase and therefore maintain the status quo and then remove the buff at a later time than to leave them umbuffed, in which case the status quo is changed for no reason - freighters being more gankable would explicitly go against the desired outcomes set by CCP for this patch, whereas it might be fine in a future patch.
Itâs a conversation worth having - just not for this specific release.
1 Like
Sure⌠But Iâm challenging the idea that leaving freighters alone would cause a significant increase in ganks.
The cost difference isnât signiicant, the logistics involved huge either way.
Yet CCP are ignoring all the other ships where we will see a significant increase due to it going from 2 to 1 ship, or 3 to 2 ships. Which puts a lie to them not wanting to see a significant change in ganking.
1 Like
I am 95% certain CCP is going to have the wisdom to give buffs to other classes of ships as well (especially barges and indys), whether itâs buffs to just certain classes, or more global buffs + extra class-specific buffs. (The purpose of the global buffs would be to account for the fact that the resist module nerf doesnât just hurt EHP, but also the EHP repair multiplier for self/logi-received reps). They might not do it in the initial release but they will likely do it within a short time frame afterward.
What do you think they will do if they look at the state of highsec ganking and find a significant decline in recent years and no effect from this patch? Do you think they are just going to buff everything still?
Iâm not saying there has been a decline or not (itâs been a while since I last looked and there had been a decline more than player number dropping), but there is a lot of assumption being made, when CCP have clearly committed to taking a look at the data.
If the data is counter to popular belief, any changes (if any), might also be counter to popular demand.
Being 95% certain of something, even before the data has been looked at is potentially setting up for disappointment, because until CCP look at the data, we really have no clue what the outcome will be, and any outcome might be totally counter to individual beliefs (that bit is at least guaranteedâŚbuff, nerf or status quo will disappoint some people, no matter how much CCP justifies their decisions).
It would be better to place your faith into something more certain than the whims of CCP.
Trust The Code and get your permit today.
1 Like
Life goes on, I just wish CCP really think this nerf through. I donât want to see everything is disturbed and CCP either roll back the change or tweak everything one by one.
1 Like
I take if you donât play in WH space if you think âspamming more faxes than the other guyâ ever happens outside of someone being evicted.
Mass limits of wormhole connections puts a hard cap on how many faxes, and ships in general, you can get through a connection.
3 Likes
Fair points raised . My main message was just that Neo-CCP⢠has been very promising as of late. I actually think they would take the time to evaluate data and feedback, consider benefits of buff/nerf calibration and intentionally disruptive changes, and apply them in relation to HS ganking (and everything else, honestly). It wonât happen in THIS patch but it will happen. Theyâve been having me say âYESSSâ a lot more often than more than ââ â â â !!1!â over the past two years, so my faith in Neo-CCP⢠is strong. (â â â â points were relatively minor anyway.)
Neo-CCPâ˘
Neo-CCP?
The CCP that introduced Triglavians (with no Concord to deal with) because there werenât enough players filling the role of highsec ganker?
I could write an essay on why I think trigs dropping in mining belts were a good thing in terms of disruptive behaviors leading to desirable emergent behaviors. But I wonât⌠not here and not now anyway 
But yeah, thatâs the CCP Iâm talking about 
.
Good it was caner to begin with now they can actually die.