The Argument for War Declaration Changes

[Proteus_Onzo]

@Annah_Tsero

It is a word commonly used in online video games

Define Suicide Ganking in the context of EVE?

[Dracvlad]

@Ima_Wreckyou

So you have no evidence at all that ganking hurts retention and just assume it to be true and that is where you base your whole reasoning on that the situation will not improve?

I have some evidence, but you will have to ask CCP, like I said if you lot want to go mad in ganking then you are playing with fire. It is your call, it is very stupid, but you do what you want, but if the nerf bat comes swinging in, then I am going to sit there going, I told you so…

So try to deflect from that statement all you want!

[Whitehound]

@Ima_Wreckyou

Don’t feed the troll plz. just ignore him

I’ve giving him a fair warning. I’m already flagging him for spam since he now posted the same statement on “ganking vs. suicide ganking” three times, all while he did the exact same thing in the past as Salvos Rhoska.

[Annah_Tsero]

Stop derailing the thread that’s about war decs

No one cares about your ignorance-filled posts

[Proteus_Onzo]

@Whitehound

@Ima_Wreckyou

Don’t feed the troll plz. just ignore him

I’ve giving him a fair warning. I’m already flagging him for spam since he now posted the same statement on “ganking vs. suicide ganking” three times, all while he did the exact same thing in the past as Salvos Rhoska.

Yes, we are well aware of how you abuse this forum to censure anything and anyone that is against your grouped agenda. Its very transparent and obvious.

[Ima_Wreckyou]

@Dracvlad

I have some evidence, but you will have to ask CCP

What does that even mean? What kind of evidence? Why should I ask CCP for the evidence YOU claim you have? I bet you have non and it’s all based on your white-knight complex.

[Predvodnica_LSG]

@Whitehound

Not only do you not understand this, but you want to use it to antagonise entire groups of players here.

Yea we talk about a group that did not even have to be in the game in the first place. Because that “group” brought more harm than good to CCP and Eve players.

[Dracvlad]

@Black_Pedro

I wouldn’t know your experience. But mechanically, highsec has been made safer and safer since 2009 with the insurance nerf, CrimeWatch 2.0, buffs to industrial EHP and so forth. Objectively, based on real metrics, highsec also has the least amount of ganks since verified killmails appeared on the API:

LOL that does not prove that at all. Especially as many gankers are no longer putting their ganks on the API to hide their activity from others.

@Black_Pedro

But this thread is about wars, not criminals, and there I might agree with you, although I am currently in the process of collecting that data over time to see for myself. It seems like that today you are more likely to receive a wardec than back in 2009 and thus have your free CONCORD safety removed for a week. If there is any problem here at all impacting on player activity, it is this: wars are more common today than in the past and for a combination of reasons, not undocking or not logging in is one of the favoured metas to deal with them.

Yep, glad you got there.

@Black_Pedro

Again, there was no noticeable bump in player numbers after the mining barges we rebalanced in the summer of 2012. I’m not saying that these ships didn’t need a rebalancing, but there is no evidence adding a mining ship with a battleship-sized tank did anything to player activity.

Those people left for good, of course there was no bump… The damage had already been done. And I repeat at this point miner ganking looks pretty much well balanced to me.

@Black_Pedro

Increasing the difficulty to engage in player interactions in this sandbox does not increase player numbers, or at least I see no evidence that it does. Yet, various camps constantly call for it always promising CCP untold new players (and revenue) if they do yet it never materializes.

I don’t see myself claiming anywhere that this will increase numbers as such, though it might improve retention, only CCP can tell you that after a certain period of time.

@Black_Pedro

It’s not an assumption. The data are clear - after the multiple intended buffs to highsec safety there is no detectible bounce in player numbers in the PCU. It’s just data, and you can interpret it as you want, but I see no example of where making highsec safer has increased player numbers. But I will remember your line and use it the next time someone claims without evidence that player retention numbers will skyrocket and CCP will become filthy rich if only they make the game just a little bit safer.

How on earth can you sit there and say the PCU of the entire game can be used to make the assumptions you did in terms of hisec. Seriously that was bad.

[Dracvlad]

@Ima_Wreckyou

What does that even mean? What kind of evidence? Why should I ask CCP for the evidence YOU claim you have? I bet you have non and it’s all based on your white-knight complex.

Back to the white knight insult, CCP will have those numbers in due course, wait and see. I strongly advise you not to do a petulant campaign of ganking over this war dec change, it will cost you.

[Whitehound]

@Predvodnica_LSG

Yea we talk about a group that did not even have to be in the game in the first place. Because that “group” brought more harm than good to CCP and Eve players.

They are EVE players like everyone else is, and I don’t see how one can call it harm when CCP and their aging game have been bought for $425m. Where is the harm in this?

[Proteus_Onzo]

I ask that CCP investigates the player attrition caused by suicide ganks in HS.

[Predvodnica_LSG]

No they are saboteurs, they are here to ruin the game and gameplay for other players. But this is no more “easy” CCP, PA know how to defend his assets

[Ima_Wreckyou]

@Dracvlad

Back to the white knight insult, CCP will have those numbers in due course, wait and see. I strongly advise you not to do a petulant campaign of ganking over this war dec change, it will cost you.

Haha, so it’s true that it is only your white-knight feelings. Oh well, I don’t care. If they remove ganking I will most likely quit and play something else. As long as they don’t I will dunk carebears and most likely will be in a lot of company soon. HTFU LOL

[Dantelion_Shinoni]

Anyone with two bits of sense know that both suicide ganking and ganking have had negative effects on the CPU.

You just have to see the #1 complaints of people who have quitted the game, if Suicide Ganking is not #1, it is not far behind.

[Annah_Tsero]

@Dantelion_Shinoni

You just have to see the #1 complaints of people who have quitted the game

And where can the people actually find that data?
Oh wait
It hasn’t been released

[Dracvlad]

@Ima_Wreckyou

Haha, so it’s true that it is only your white-knight feelings. Oh well, I don’t care. If they remove ganking I will most likely quit and play something else. As long as they don’t I will dunk carebears and most likely will be in a lot of company soon. HTFU LOL

What are white knight feelings? Some sort of mystic CODE babble.

You say that you don’t care, but you have been complaining about nerfs and stuff for ages, you have been complaining now. Just go and gank as I said miner ganking is not an issue.

I am very HTFU’d.

[Dantelion_Shinoni]

To be honest, I think it would be a good move for them to trade your demographics for another.

Between a populace that closes the game to others and cannibalizes itself, and another that has the potential of getting more people in, even if they are more peaceful, the choice is pretty quick.

And as much as it bothers you, constraining of WarDecs/Ganks will bring more players in, not the likes you want but still more.

[Proteus_Onzo]

Wardec changes dont affect Suicide Ganking in HS.

Suicide ganking stats should be investigated and analyzed next regarding how much player attrition they are causing.

I’m quite certain the result will be another “oh ■■■■, how did we not see this before” outcome.

[Savoycabbage]

@Dracvlad

They have not closed down your game play, most of your kills are on nullsec alliances anyway and as far as I can see there is no change there.

But there is as we have already discussed. If a nullsec alliance puts all their citadels (in nullsec or otherwise) into a shell corp, they can no longer be wardecced. This is my whole issue with the changes. It’s not the small corps who benefit most from the change at all.

@Dracvlad

And the balance being such you will then push CCP to nerf ganking.

Well when it’s the choice between moving to ganking or leaving the game, many will choose to move to ganking. If CCP remove ganking from the game completely, they will lose huge amounts of money per month. What’s the average number of characters that a ganker runs? 5-10? That’s between $74 and $149 per month they lose per player. Even if they continue playing doing something else, they won’t sub those extra 8 characters so they still lose out. Even if they plex their accounts (more likely), that plex has to have been bought for RL cash which actually works out more ($19.99 I believe).

The numbers don’t add up for them. They’d have to be confident that they would have a greater level of player retention than they would lose through lost accounts.

[Wavemistress_Moidel]

People in high-sec won’t dec Goons/PL/Test or others, now a single toon is not gonna set up a station for a corp to see it war-decced and all the stuff move to asset safety costing billions. You Insane? they are gonna leave it to the big boys who will charge a low tax rate and give relative safety until a big war starts in NUll and all hell breaks loose in high-sec. High-sec is gonna get busy imo.