What?
I’m not saying you should illegally attack, I’m saying that an escort fleet the size of a ganking fleet would keep gankers at bay.
Can you link me where I “pretended” anything? I don’t get your message, really. If you think they earn too much with their loot, don’t offer them loot. And if you (yourself) already don’t, then why make it your problem what others lose? Teach them. Tell them not to offer loot to the gankers. I really fail to see what your issue with gankers is, if you don’t even get ganked and others are only ganked if they don’t stick to some basic rules…
Star Trek Online is a space-based exploration game the same as Star Wars, Babylon 5, etc. Different game mechanics but basically the same. Eve-Online is a space-exploration game, not a simulator, because you can’t take any experience other than operating a corporation and keeping ledgers, stfu, with the side mouth, associations, into the real world, which you will only get laughed at by real CEO’s.
The idea that gankers are just “better players” gets repeated a lot, but let’s look at what’s actually happening.
• Planning? Camping a 0.5 gate with 15 Catalysts isn’t some tactical masterpiece.
• Ships? They’re using cheap, disposable fits optimized for alpha strikes.
• Intel? They’re scanning haulers on autopilot routes, not breaking new ground.
• Willpower? Grinding tags and multiboxing throwaway alts isn’t elite gameplay.
Ganking, as it exists today, isn’t some high-skill, high-risk playstyle. It’s a streamlined, low-effort system where CONCORD handles most of the consequences.
You almost made a solid point. Ganking could be reimagined as meaningful highsec piracy with real risk and counterplay. But instead, we keep getting told it’s fine because the gankers are just inherently better than their targets. That’s not a healthy framing for game balance.
This often turns into “just fly cheaper ships.” But if the solution to predatory mechanics is to reduce everyone’s gameplay quality, that’s not really a solution.
I didn’t spend years building up wealth in EVE to fly tech 1 cruisers forever. I like using well-fitted, expensive ships to run content efficiently. That’s part of the reward loop.
If someone’s PvP playstyle relies on me gimping myself to avoid them, maybe it’s the mechanic that needs adjusting.
This highlights the problem. The idea that high-value ships “invite” ganks, and therefore shouldn’t be flown, puts all the responsibility on the player being attacked—not on the system that allows risk-free aggression in highsec.
Ganking isn’t always about profit. Many gankers will happily take a loss just to kill a target they see as valuable or entertaining. The profit argument is often a post-justification for something that’s become routine.
Instead of locking down ships or cargo, why not introduce actual counterplay? Let defenders matter. Let piracy be interactive and engaging, not just preying on players who fly alone.
That’s fair in theory—some people see ganking as a deterrent against laziness. But in practice, it’s a mechanic with minimal consequences that mostly punishes solo or casual players.
If we really want to keep highsec from becoming an AFK paradise, why not improve piracy mechanics instead of relying on disposable ship spam and one-sided engagements?
Right now, ganking is just a constant background threat that encourages people to fly less, not more.
Hauling isn’t a fleet op. It’s logistics. The idea that freighter pilots should fly in groups to avoid being deleted in 10 seconds means the balance is off.
If the only safe way to move cargo in highsec is to fly like you’re in a wartime convoy, then something’s broken in the engagement model—not in the hauler’s decision-making.
Let’s have a serious conversation about making highsec piracy more dynamic and balanced, instead of continuing to justify one-sided mechanics with vague ideas about “better players” and “choices.”
1 Like
I’m curious how having dynamic highsec piracy is possible if highsec is 100% safe? This sounds like deflection.
1 Like
Are you saying ganking is not real PvP? 
Sorry, but thats coming from someone who obviously has never done it in an organized fashion nor does even understand how an organized ganking group works.
- they know the game mechanics, timings, resist profiles and eHP of almost any ship by far better than their targets do
- they have a full logistics chain in the background running, providing them with fresh ships & fit. That means buy-orders for their equipment, production lines spitting out ganking ships, people who haul all that stuff to their station (or the mats for that), running the jobs, fitting the ships, filling the hangars
- they actively scout and scan systems for mining groups, they cargoscan such groups for barges/exhumers with blingfits. They scan and watch abyssalrunners to decide whether a gank is lucrative.
- they are heavily multiboxing with multi-monitor-setups and mass-client setups, which alone is pretty high effort to manage quickly without messing up. Try it if you don’t believe it. Thats not klicking 1-time-per minute like multiboxing 5 mackinaws in an icebelt.
- they have bumpers, looters, pre-tacklers, middlemen ready to secure the loot - and they are good at it. I tried several times with a disposable alt to just steal the loot and 9 out of 10 times their looter was faster than I am
Your ideas are pretty much naive and thats one reason they win. You vastly underestimate their professionality and dedication. Which is the whole recipe for their success.
Then with your wealth you should have also developed knowledge and wisdom. Which is 100% enough to avoid being ganked. And for someone who plays this long and has so much wealth, the game should point you out of highsec every single day. If it was up to me, several more mechanics would simply be forbidden in HS, to make sure people leave it once they want to use the “shiny toys”. EVE is big, HS is for starters. Don’t steal their content or outcompete those poor newbros with your veteran chars.
1 Like
Ganking is PvP “lite”. Imagine a care bear - then do the opposite. Gankers would have their a**es handed to them by small gangs in low-sec or any group in wormhole space. And they can’t cope in null-sec, so here we are.
Care bears are not scared of change, because high-sec has already become more dangerous with chokepoints, multiboxing and pirate insurgencies. It’s even business as usual when the loot drop is hiked to 90%.
Gankers are deathly afraid of change - because they’re unable to adapt to any other kind of gameplay. They would like everyone to think they’re providing a public service by keeping card bears “in check”, but the reality is that care bears lose more ships to PvE than gankers.
No one would notice if gankers disappeared; everyone would notice if card bears did.
Some eat rocks, some eat the rock eaters and my characters will continue to eat rocks AND the eaters of rock eaters.
Mostly you are all getting it wrong. Both sides of the usual forum battles on this topic. High sec is fine and for most(militant miners say most not Allways since we are not fools and our propaganda tend to be real!) it is easy to hunt gankers or provoke them to attack.
Also I do love you all! 
Castole, Aargh, Amy and all the Gentlemen!
That is all you get folks. goes poofs never to be seen in this place again
Nope. You missed the key component: balance.
Seriously? If you call that winning, you’re worse off than I thought.
I was born in Null, have spent 95% of my time in Null, and currently live in Null.
Do you recognize the KS?
Just because I think HS is borked, doesn’t mean that I live there.
“Men”, ah yes, men.
Don’t twist words. They win agains their chosen targets, very obviously, since they are the ones leaving the field with the loot. And make big profits while doing so, so obviously they are also “winning” the game they chose to play. Your personal moral concepts about what “winning” in the greater context of EVE or even Online Gaming means, is totally irrelevant and was never adressed by my statement.
Then you obviously can do what you want, fly all the good stuff with the wealth you made. No problem then? What have HS-gankers to do with your ability to use all your SP and ISK as you wish? Just be careful in HS, since you are in their playground and they might know the rules and mechanics better than you do. And if you are confident that they don’t, what do you have to worry about? I really don’t see your problem that would need any fixing.
1 Like
What would happen if high-sec were 100% safe? (no red safety) They’d probably change the border systems on each side to 0.4 low-sec. I honestly don’t know if that would make folks happy or not.
Ah, you have a Master’s degree in Armchair Psychology, I see. Combined with the White-Knight-Backseat-Gamer syndrome, philosophing at lengths about problems that are not yours, judging others from a self-proclaimed moral highground and/or demand general changes that should ‘help’ the poor victims of your invented problems… Ooookay.
Let’s try that doo: I’d say you have just realized at some point that all your wealth and all your experience from nullsec grinding, blobfests and cyno-backup wins still makes you an inferior PvPer compared to the average Catalyst Ganker and all your Killmarks and Killmails and Stats from 100man fleets are totally worthless crap, because you can’t even jump a gate in HS without being afraid to die to a bunch of T1 destroyers. Should summarize it pretty well. Thats probably the reason for posting with an anomyous forum alt as well. Yeah yeah, I know, the mysterious “consequences” if somebody knew. Big strong nullsec PvPer, being afraid to speak freely without a mask. -_-
2 Likes
Seeing that highsec covers roughly 15% of the total universe, why is everyone else so worried about its “impact” on their gameplay?
It seems to me that they’re more interested in trolling and harassing other players.
1 Like
I’d say you started the whole psychology bullshitting game, right? I only fed you your own medicine. Your ‘AI summaries’ reveal your true problem: not having arguments, thus inventing stories and problems, pretending to have ‘good intentions’ and thus claiming a moral highground you simply made up. Thankfully it’s so obvious that you can’t score points in the discussion, so this topic is doomed like all the others to vanish into insignificance and get locked and forgotten at some point, without any impact. 
2 Likes
You can’t hear me. And again you seem to have a bad case of logical fallacy. Why in hell should I be afraid of the idea, that a nonsensical topic gets lost and forgotten? You make no sense at all. But fits the pattern.
1 Like
You’ve now accused me of logical fallacies multiple times without identifying a single one. That suggests you’re using the term rhetorically, not analytically.
If the topic truly lacks merit, your continued engagement contradicts that claim. Choosing to respond at length to something you say “makes no sense” implies that it does, in fact, matter to you, at least enough to try discrediting it.
This pattern of focusing on the person rather than the argument may feel persuasive in the moment, but it doesn’t address the substance. It only sidesteps it.
Oh sure I have. You not able to recognize something doesn’t mean it isn’t there. But nice try. And as far as I know, I have thrown like a truckload more substantial arguments about the actual topic into the discussion than you have. Because besides hollow claims, we have seen absolutely nothing from you that would back up the theory that we have a problem that needs fixing.
You keep calling my points “hollow,” but so far, you’ve responded with hand-waving and assumptions. I’ve cited actual research. You’ve offered personal opinion.
If you disagree with the data, that’s fine, but dismissing it without addressing the substance isn’t an argument. It’s avoidance.
If there’s no problem, then why are so many players quitting after early losses? Why is new player retention in the gutter? Maybe that’s worth fixing, even if it makes some people uncomfortable.